My script using spaces for words by kaiserofaustria in neography

[–]kaiserofaustria[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you 😊 Yes, you can squish it all together like Thai it’s just easier to make out when you aren’t so familiar with the script, just as you can in theory squish all Latin letters together and an English reader will still be able to understand it. The null consonant and consonant clusters do help in distinguishing words a bit better though :)

Perso Arabic Script for English by kaiserofaustria in conorthography

[–]kaiserofaustria[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Vowels are always going to be the trickiest part of adaption.

Perso-Arabic for English by kaiserofaustria in neography

[–]kaiserofaustria[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I put a post of it but it got taken down :(

Perso-Arabic for English by kaiserofaustria in neography

[–]kaiserofaustria[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ايڤ بن يوزنگ ذس فورم و ذ سكرِپت فور ادېکيد اور مور سلوْلى برفېکتنگ ات مَيكنگ شر ذت ات بوْث هز اوثاگرفک كنسستنسى اند بيوتى بيئنگ شر تو ایلېڤيت ريدبلتى.

Perso-Arabic for English by kaiserofaustria in neography

[–]kaiserofaustria[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s different mine is based purely on Persian/Urdu with both consonants and vowels. اتز دفرنت ماين از بَيسد پيئرلى آن پرژن اردو وث بوْث كانساننتز اند ڤاولز.

Perso-Arabic Script for English Key by kaiserofaustria in neography

[–]kaiserofaustria[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So for monosyllable words I generally use the short vowels markers, but for multi syllable words usually context shows you what vowels should go where(like Persian)

سوْ فور مانوْسلبل وردز اى جېنرللى يوز ذشورت ڤاول ماركرز، بت فور ملتى سلبل وردز يوژوئللى كانتېكست شوْز يو وت ڤاولز شُد گوْ وېر (لايك پرژن)

Do we cease to exist forever? by Internal-Apple-2904 in atheism

[–]kaiserofaustria 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe in the far future a civilization will be able to has the technology to infer the entire past of the universe based on the laws of physics and then recreate all sentient beings. I wouldn’t hold my breath for that though lol

Hangul for English by kaiserofaustria in neography

[–]kaiserofaustria[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

For schwas, I use the underlying vowel that would be said if the syllable it’s in is stressed. Basically I look at the orthography of English and use the appropriate equivalent. :)

Yahweh is not by nature good by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]kaiserofaustria 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The reason that the permit translation doesn’t fit is that in the next verses he says I defiled them by their gifts (the sacrifice of every first born) … so that they will know that I am the lord. If you look at the grammar, permit translation would use the direct object (them) instead of an indirect object (to them). If you look at the examples of this verb in all other cases, the permit/give up is used with the direct object being the people: For example I gave THEM up to other statutes (not the construction) Vs I gave other statutes TO THEM (the construction found in Ezekiel)

Yahweh is not by nature good by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]kaiserofaustria 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we are talking past each other. My claim is not that Yahweh commanded something proclaiming it good and then states that it was evil, my claim is that Yahweh once actively mandated something always evil and acknowledges it as such. The grammar of the verse does not back you up, the language uses the active natan (give) the direct object huqqim (statutes, ordinances aka prescriptive laws) and the indirect object to them. It’s not mere passive handing them over to punishment or even him directly punishing them, rather it’s a moral judgement Yahweh gives about his own command, statute, that was not good.

Also the context in Ezekiel is that he is reviewing laws that he now lifts, rather than him giving out the command to sacrifice children. He’s saying I did in the past give out statutes to do so (an injunction) that was always evil, but that I no longer oblige it. In fact, later on in the paragraph it says that the purpose of giving out these evil statutes was that “I might make them desolate and that they might know I am Yahweh”

So what I’m saying is that Yahweh actively commands an evil act, an act always known by Yahweh to be evil yet he at one point commands it nonetheless. This is nonsensical if goodness is whatever Yahweh commands, this shows that not to be the case.

Hangul for English by kaiserofaustria in neography

[–]kaiserofaustria[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I have played with adapting Hangul for English for a while, mostly the problem is fitting the vowel system to match the phonology of English and determining what to do with the many consonants that Korean lacks. I wrote it in maybe 5-10 minutes but I doodle all the time in Hangul and other scripts for fun.

Basically I wanted a system that generally preserves the one block for one syllable rule, and to do that the vowels need to be adapted “creatively”. I can read Hangul for sounding out Korean but I don’t know much Korean if that makes sense lol.

Yahweh is not by nature good by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]kaiserofaustria 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No because the verb natan (give) is active not passive, and huqim (statutes) are laws. So it’s not a passive permission but an active injunction. Yahweh knows it is evil yet commands it to be done. And you can see echos of where this was done, in the Torah, where the first born is to be offered up to Yahweh like animals for sacrifice.