Talk:Wp/cop/Ⲡⲁⲛϩⲱⲥⲓ

I think if we take a name from Arabic it would rather be ⲁⲥⲱⲧⲁⲛ (see ⲁⲥⲁⲉⲓⲧ for al-sayyid or ⲁⲥⲁⲕⲁ al-saqqa). Should i change it? ⲥⲉⲣⲕⲓ (talk) 23:35, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Or maybe we should even use ⲉⲑⲱϣ or ⲑⲉⲛϩⲟⲥ for Sudan? The second one would make more sense maybe. ⲥⲉⲣⲕⲓ (talk) 12:59, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm fine with both ⲑⲉⲛϩⲟⲥ and the Arabic name. The problem with the first is that I'm not 100% sure about the vocalization. Or did you come to the same result? If so, I guess we're right. I would write the Arabic name with double s: There is some variation, but I think it is more common to write double s (ⲁⲥⲥⲱⲧⲁⲛ ⲁⲥⲥⲟⲩⲧⲁⲛ). Sometimes you don't have it, e.g. ⲁϣⲉⲙⲓ, but mostly it is used (e.g. ⲁⲗⲗⲓⲛⲉⲕ, ⲁⲥⲥⲓⲡⲁⲕ). At least according to the data of Richter: https://www.academia.edu/42203204/Arabische_W%C3%B6rter_in_koptischen_Texten_Ein_%C3%9Cberblick

ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 14:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure about ⲑⲉⲛϩⲟⲥ at all. It would be nice to have a Coptic name for Sudan which is linked to it's history. We can't translate it literally because the name of the Egypt itself shares the same "black" etymology. I thought of nhs as a good choice because 1) it's actually attested in Coptic in a personal name ⲡⲓⲛⲉϩⲁⲥ (in Bohairic it has a Greek form ⲫⲓⲛⲉⲉⲥ) and in a toponym ⲧⲁⲫⲛⲁⲥ (Tȝ-ỉḥ.t-n-pȝ-nḥs, Greek Δάφναι, Hebrew Tahpanhes) 2) it has a meaning of "negro", "black person" just like Arabic أسود aswad 3) it's connected to Nubia/Ethiopia which is occupied by modern Sudan. Vycichl gives 3 vocalisations of nhsy – Nehās, Nehes and Nēhēs so i guess using a Sahidic form ⲛⲉϩⲁⲥ is ok. I'm not quite sure how to put it together. I have a strong feeling that a national denomination proper noun can be used as a nation's toponym (although i don't have any strong evidence yet) like ⲑⲟⲩⲉⲓⲛⲓⲛ = Greece, *ⲑⲛⲉϩⲁⲥ = Sudan and so on. We also have a form with a definite plural article as in ⲛⲓⲫⲁⲓⲁⲧ "the Lybians" for a toponym so maybe we could use it as well. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 09:41, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Ah thanks, so the vowel is wrong? The word should be ⲛϩⲁⲥ or ⲛⲉϩⲁⲥ? Then we can use ⲑⲉⲛϩⲁⲥ or ⲑⲉⲛⲉϩⲁⲥ? Is ⲡⲓⲛⲉϩⲁⲥ from Sahidic? Because in case it is Fayyumic or Akhmimic we need to keep the vowel change a > o in mind. ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 14:40, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Vycichl doesn't specify the dialect but i guess given a Hebrew and a Greek forms ⲛⲉϩⲁⲥ is ok? I think I'd rather use ⲛⲓⲛⲉϩⲁⲥ as as-Sudan is also a plural construction and a plural construction is attested as a toponym in Coptic (see above). --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 14:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

The Greek (and even more so Hebrew) words from Egyptian usually show Old Coptic vowels, like Akhmimic, Fayyumic (and Demotic dialects in general). So it depends when the Egyptian word showed up in Greek. If it was early enough, or from a conservative dialect, then it would have a even if Sahidic and Bohairic have o. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 14:58, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I really like using ⲑⲉ(ⲛ)- for toponyms, but I guess if y'all like the plural construction, it is OK for me. So do we know whether it should be a or o? ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 15:10, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Given the fact that it's a name from the Bible it was borrowed pretty early so maybe the Bohairic outcome would be ⲛⲉϩⲟⲥ indeed. Vycichl refers to Heuser's "Personennamen der Kopten" but I can't find it online (maybe Heuser specifies from which dialect ⲡⲓⲛⲉϩⲁⲥ is from). --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 21:29, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I also don't have the book unfortunately, but if it is indeed a bible name, then it was for sure loaned before the change a > o took place in Bohairic and Sahidic. Even if it is a name from the new testament it should be before the change took place. ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 03:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Right. So i guess ⲛⲓⲛⲉϩⲟⲥ is ok. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 09:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

ⲛⲓⲛⲉϩⲟⲥ doesn't sound like an improvement from ⲑⲉⲛϩⲟⲥ. Both forms are equally unattested, and we would give up a name which clearly refers to the place (ⲑⲉⲛϩⲟⲥ) for a word which refers ambiguously to either the people or the place. The discussion should rather be whether it should be ⲑⲉⲛϩⲟⲥ or ⲑⲉⲛⲉϩⲟⲥ ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 19:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

The difference is that ⲛⲓⲛⲉϩⲟⲥ follows an attested toponymic pattern while ⲑⲉⲛⲉϩⲟⲥ is not. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 00:02, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

What? Toponyms with ⲧⲉⲛ-, ⲑⲉⲛ- are plenty. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 18:56, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Please name a few. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

There are ⲡⲧⲉⲛⲉⲧⲱ, ⲡⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩϩⲁⲣ, ⲡⲧⲉⲥⲉⲣⲣⲁϩ. Additionally, other people seemingly liked the use of the word to create lands, like Wp/cop/ⲑⲉϧⲣⲏⲓ which was not written by me. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 22:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

All of these are just the Coptic form of earlier Demotic toponyms. That doesn't mean Copts knew what ⲧⲉⲛ- there stands for. A toponymy has a lot of outdated and lost forms that didn't make it to the real vernacular language (the first thing that comes to mind is ⲕⲉⲣⲕⲏ but there's much more). --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 21:09, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

What i mean is that no Native Coptic speaker would use ⲑⲉⲛ- if asked to create a toponym. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 21:10, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Wrong. Of course, they knew what ⲑⲉ- stands for. The base ⲑⲟ exists in Coptic and didn't just die out. That's like saying they didn't know what ϩⲉⲙ is and couldn't connect it to ϩⲱⲙⲓ. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Firstly, the multitude of forms like ⲡⲧⲉⲛⲉⲡⲉ, ⲡⲉⲧⲉⲛⲥⲱ, ⲧⲉⲧⲉⲛⲧⲱ, ⲡⲧⲉⲛⲁⲧⲱ, ⲡⲧⲉⲛⲉⲧⲱ, ⲡⲧⲉⲛⲉⲡⲉ, ⲡⲧⲉⲛⲧⲉⲧⲱ, ⲡⲧⲓⲛⲉⲧⲟ, ⲧⲁⲛⲁⲧⲱ (Timm) doesn't support the claim they've even realised what the place name stands for etymologically. Secondly, three toponyms given by Crum (from which only one can be identified with certainty) is not "plenty". Thirdly, even if the most educated of Copts realised what ⲧⲉ- stands for, what does it change? As i said, no Native Coptic speaker would use ⲑⲉⲛ- if asked to create a toponym even if there was some old place name that has it. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 22:14, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

You're just so wrong. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 04:48, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry to revive this discussion but it looks like even 2nd century Copts didn't realise what ⲑⲟ stood for in the toponymy. Take a look at the name of Pathros which we can find in Septuagint – a very native name which comes from Demotic "pꜣ tꜣ-rsy", "the Southland" (Jeremiah 44:1 and 15; Isaiah 11:11; and Ezekiel 29:14, 30:14) and which etymology would be very obvious to any Copt if he would use ⲑⲟ on a regular basis as some people here claim. And still Coptic version just takes the Greek form ⲡⲁⲑⲟⲩⲣⲏⲥ (in both Bohairic and Sahidic). Why? Because they just didn't recognize it's etymology and even created a folk one (see ⲡⲁⲡⲓⲑⲟⲩⲣⲏⲥ in Bohairic which is most likely connected to ⲑⲟⲩⲣⲏⲥ "the south wind"). --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 21:10, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

With one thing I want to agree with ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ, it would be good if we distinguish toponym and demonym. ⲑⲉⲛ- is a good way to distinguish them. What would you use instead? Is there any other affix you prefer? ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 03:52, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Given the controversy i'd just use ⲧⲁⲥⲥⲟⲩⲇⲁⲛ/ⲡⲁⲥⲥⲟⲩⲇⲁⲛ. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 09:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Btw, Vergote 1973: 151 (2nd volume) vocalizes nḥsj as naḥāsi, which should give ⲛϩⲱⲥ (in the singular) ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 03:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Why not ⲛⲉϩⲱⲥ? I thought ⲛϩ is rather unusual for Bohairic. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 09:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I think the parasitic vowel is a secondary development and doesn't preserve any pre-Coptic features. So the preform would be ⲛϩⲱⲥ, and then Bohairic would sometimes add ⲉ: ⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ. If it were original, Bohairic should indeed preserve ⲛⲉϩⲱⲥ. The addition of a vowel is not consistent, and often Bohairic has both forms. They seem to get more common in later stages of Bohairic, similar to the djinkim ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 15:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

What about ⲧⲕⲁϩⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ/ⲧⲕⲁϩⲛⲉϩⲱⲥ then? --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 19:31, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

ⲧⲕⲁϩ- is used to denote districts, and I thought we agreed on that here. And ⲑⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ is attested in Egyptian t3 nshy 'Nubian land'. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 20:00, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

ⲕⲁϩⲓ can be used in sense of "country" as well and is equated with ⲭⲱⲣⲁ. A lot of words in different languages mean different things and a native speaker can easily tell the difference by the context. If he sees ⲧⲕⲁϩⲥⲓⲱⲟⲩⲧ he will understand it's the Markaz of Asyut not some kind of "Asyut country". t3 nshy is attested in a previous stage of the language, not Coptic. Besides, it's attested for a different entity - Nubia and we want to create a toponym for the entire Sudan. ⲕⲁϩ- construction is one of the genuine Coptic ways of creating toponyms. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 20:42, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't think we should use ⲑⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ only because it was attested in Egyptian - this should just serve as an additional argument. But even more so, your version isn't attested anywhere so why should we use it. I just generally think ⲑⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ is more appropriate. Again, nobody here in this wikipedia, and if you look at the pages which have been worked on by different users (not only the major contributors, but any single one), nobody except you (and a rando who never contributed) is against using ⲑⲟ. Second, saying we can't use it because it means "Nubia" is ridiculous, come on. For the same reason, we cannot use ANY derivative of ⲛϩⲱⲥ because that's what it meant in Ancient Egypt. Obviously, there was no Sudan 2000 years ago. Words get loaded up with new meaning all the time, and Modern Arabic does it the same way with Classical Arabic words. Third, ⲕⲁϩ- is not just a way to create "toponyms" - it specifically is a prefix with the meaning district. In that sense, it is not even creating a new toponym, just as "City of New York" is not a different toponym from "New York". ⲕⲁϩ- (ϯⲕⲁϩⲓ) specifically refers to a sublevel, and should not be mixed with ⲡⲓⲕⲁϩⲓ. ⲕⲁϩ- is never used for countries, while ⲑⲟ is, even in your highly praised scalas, like ⲧⲟⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ for Spain. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 23:26, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry friend, but compared to Ambrose (ⲡⲓⲥⲁϦⲟ) the only rando is you. ⲧⲟⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ is just ⲧ+ⲓⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ, there's no "ⲑⲟ" there (I guess you're referring to Kircher's Scala Magna which has a number of scribal mistakes compared to original one). "Third, ⲕⲁϩ- is not just a way to create "toponyms" - it specifically is a prefix with the meaning district" – please read my message below. Do you really want me to give you all the examples where ⲕⲁϩⲓ is used as "country"? Or write another passage about how "country" and "district" or "land of ..." are almost undistinguishable until modern times? --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 00:13, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I don't even know where to start. ⲧ+ⲓⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ yields ⲧⲟⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ? Yeah sure, the vowel fits really well. Funny, you're so much into these scalae and one time when it doesn't fit your agenda you dismiss it. And the only person who consistently argues against ⲑⲟ here is you. There is not a single person besides you here who argues against the use of ⲑⲟ in country names. Get over it and don't open up new discussions all the time. And about ⲕⲁϩⲓ: Yes, we had that discussion already. Most people know that ⲕⲁϩⲓ can be used in the sense of country, just like ⲑⲟ and ⲭⲱⲣⲁ, and all these words can also have many other meanings. Like others, ⲕⲁϩⲓ is also earth, and actually very often so, and even your friend Ambrose agreed that this fits well for the "planet", and users have settled on which word to use for what. Numerous anonymous users, User:ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ, ϯⲙⲉⲗⲗⲓⲥⲏⲧ, ⲡⲓⲙⲟⲩⲓ, User:بطرس مرقس, User:ⲁⲥⲥⲉⲛⲁ ⲕⲁⲡⲟⲡⲓ and several users with fewer contributions have been fine with the use here. Why do people here even still argue with you? The thread should be closed. I hope you agree with me that Coptic isn't that impoverished that we need to use the same word for district, country and earth/world. Even more importantly, the question here is about ⲕⲁϩ- specifically (not the independent form ⲕⲁϩⲓ): ⲕⲁϩ- is never used for "country", just for "district" or the like, and belongs to ϯⲕⲁϩⲓ "district", not to ⲡⲓⲕⲁϩⲓ "land, earth". How hard is that to understand? ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 04:48, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Why is it ⲧⲟⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ and not ⲑⲉⲛⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ or something like that then? I thought ⲑⲟ is a usual word for "country" and Copts perfectly knew how to use it :) Try to explain ϯⲫⲣⲩⲕⲓⲁ for "Africa" or ϯϩⲩⲧⲁⲗⲓⲁ for "Italy" the same way. I was fine with it as well, so what? Sometimes you have to admit your mistakes and move on. ⲑⲟ is never used in sense of "country" you haven't given a single argument to prove it and still say it. You're right, ⲧⲕⲁϩ- and ⲡⲓⲕⲁϩⲓ could even possibly come from different sources (although I doubt it) but they've merged their meanings even in Demotic – see "qḥy Km.t" (would be ⲧⲕⲁϩⲭⲏⲙⲓ in Coptic, "country or land of Egypt" not "district of Egypt"). qhy (Coptic ⲕⲁϩⲓ) is not used in sense of "country" in Demotic, only in Coptic. So I guess ⲕⲁϩ was mistaken for the construct participle of ⲕⲁϩⲓ in Coptic or vice versa (ⲕⲁϩⲓ was given a meaning of "land, country"). --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 15:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Btw, the other evidence to this is ⲡⲕⲁϩⲥⲓⲟⲟⲩⲧ (see Timm p.1945). --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 14:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, ⲧⲟⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ most likely is just a scribal mistake for ⲧⲉⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ, if you wonder. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 15:34, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

For the same reason you'd use ⲕⲁϩ- and not ⲕⲁϩⲛ-, and sometimes you see ⲣⲱⲙⲓX instead of ⲣⲉⲙ(ⲛ)X. I don't think we should imitate ⲣⲱⲙⲓX, and go for ⲣⲉⲙ(ⲛ)X, in the same way I don't want to use ⲧⲟⲥⲡⲁⲛⲓⲁ. But it is out there. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

See it as an equivalent of Germanic "land". Can it mean a landmass? Yes. Can it mean a country? Yes – England, Switzerland, Deutschland and so on. Can it mean a "district, province"? Yes – Queensland or German Federal Lands. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 20:58, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I will move it back to ⲁⲥⲥⲟⲩⲇⲁⲛ as no consensus was reached here. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 10:27, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I was mentioned here some days ago. My opinion is: ⲑⲟ for land, including modern country, ⲕⲁϩⲓ for earth. But I said that already. And for Sudan, I like ⲑⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ. The "Greekers" under us need to understand that we Copts would like to use real Egyptian words for our language. We don't want to write like some heavily Hellenized Memphite during the time of the Roman Emperors. This feeling is pervasive among us who practice the language and want to use it for modern purposes. We don't borrow words from Greek, and we also try to avoid Arabic. بطرس مرقس (talk) 11:49, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Are you speaking on behalf of the whole Coptic community? --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 12:06, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I speak on behalf of me and my friends. But I've seen this also among other people with whom I don't have a closer relationship. بطرس مرقس (talk) 12:14, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

And i'm in contact with other members of Coptic community who want to speak Coptic as it was spoken as a living language (although you may call it "Hellenized Memphite"). Should it be an argument? --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 12:29, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA "members of the Coptic community". You mean AB and others who are not Egyptian? Sure. Please go away. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 13:13, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Coptic community = Coptic Egyptian. AB is Coptic Egyptian as well. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 14:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Look, I told you my side of the story, I made my standpoint clear for everybody here. I won't spend my whole afternoon on here. Bye. بطرس مرقس (talk) 12:35, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with your standpoint, saying "we Copts" is wrong. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 12:59, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Seem's we do have a majority here for ⲑⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ, I will move it. If ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ moves it back, I will request him to get blocked for vandalism. ⲁⲛⲉⲯⲓⲟⲩⲥⲓⲣⲓ (talk) 13:13, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Request where lol? --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 14:09, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Jesus, please. Can we please not move everything back and forth. And let's give each other some time to respond before we move stuff? Some of us may be working or have other obligations. And simply don't want to be on here every day. There is no pressure to hurry. Yes, I'm fine with ⲑⲉⲛϩⲱⲥ. Let's stick to it. And as ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ said in another talkpage, let's put our energy into translating interwiki more. ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 13:24, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

The same word is also present in the Greek name Πνασις (P3-nHsj̠) and in the place name Bilhasa - بلهاسة - Παλωσις - Pn-n3-nHsj(.w). Peust writes about it "Als urkoptische Vokalisation dieses Substantivs ist etwa *nHásj (pl. nHásjw) zu rekonstruieren". Should it be ⲛϩⲱⲥⲓ then? --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 19:40, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Or ⲛϩⲟⲥⲓ, because *a wouldn't be in an open syllable if it is really *nHásj, and not *nHási. (I'm thinking of ⲙⲟⲥⲓ which may go back to a similar pattern). What does Peust mean with *jw in *nHásjw - what is the vowel here? ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 02:46, 6 April 2021 (UTC)