Talk:Bet (letter)

message: Did vehth really exist in biblical hebrew, meaning biblical era Hebrew, or did it come from later vocalization. The v sound did anyways exist in Hebrew?--Standforder (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It might not have been exactly V, might have been like B but with a small opening for air between the lips. I'd like to refer you to this sound file from the Aramaic entry TFighterPilot (talk) 17:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Behth and vehth

message: ::The discussion below does not, unless I am mistaken (I could be), was a private discussion on this page about the name, not one taken through WP:RM. In any case I initiated the Request for Move on 2005-07-23. So... vote here please. Evertype 10:53, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
I think User:Violetriga (t)'s page move of Behth (letter) to ב was a bad idea. For one thing, it can be perceived as even more ethnocentric than IZAK's ideas, given that that's the Unicode glyph for the Hebrew letter, and the article is about the letter in multiple alphabets (in many of which it looks different). For another, it breaks the existing Wikipedia tradition of putting articles at their English names (Aleph (letter), for example), and tries to set up a new precedent of putting articles at the nearest applicable Unicode glyph. Exclamation mark isn't located at !, and for good reason. Let's keep things simple. I repeat my firm conviction that to maintain symmetry, NPOV, and general nice-to-English-speakers-ness, the article on Behth (the letter) should be located at Beth (letter). --Quuxplusone 07:20, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Postscript: For another thing, mixing right-to-left Hebrew text with left-to-right English text is a recipe for disaster in browser edit boxes. That sort of thing should be kept to a minimum. --Quuxplusone 07:20, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree! This article should be IMMEDIATELY moved back to Behth (letter). Evertype 10:17, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
* Support. This should be moved back to "Behth (letter)" ASAP, in keeping with English Wikipedia tradition. Calling it "ב" seems very POV to me. – AxSkov (T) 14:14, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Formal request to Move to "Behth (letter)" initiated 2005-07-23

message: *Here's an idea: Since Wikipedia now tolerates all Unicode characters in page titles, why not just rename the page ב? --Angr/ 29 June 2005 21:15 (UTC)
**Excellent proposal...and Beth (letter) and Bet (letter) can both point to it. Tomer TALK June 29, 2005 22:00 (UTC)
===Move===
#Move. Quuxplusone 20:44, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Move or Retain

message: #Move. Quuxplusone 20:44, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: #Retain as is. Bet is the most common usage for this letter today as part of the living Hebrew language (both in Israel where it's part of the vernacular and abroad since most people use this Sephardi version.) (By the way, this is a very funny "vote"; we are "voting" about how a language is or should be pronounced...what next, a vote if Hebrew is a Jewish language? How about a "vote" to decide the best form for the Arabic alphabet instead?) IZAK 05:39, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Retain

message: I've taken the rather bold decision to move the article to ב.  This solves the argument, I feel, and the vote was rather split (though beth (letter) was just over the 60% mark).  I probably won't monitor this page too much, so if there are any serious objections then please drop me a line on my talk page to direct me over here.  violet/riga (t) 11:06, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Decision

message: If you want to debate the historical development of languages, this is about the worst page to fight this. Just state in which language the letter Bet occurs, and war over the history of Hebrew somewhere else. JFW | T@lk 19:52, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Debating historical development of languages

message: (From User talk:TShilo12#"Bet"(ter dead or alive?))
Shalom Tomer, please see revert history at Bet (letter). Is not the Hebrew language a vibrant living language whereas Phoenicia is a dead civilization and its language is an Extinct language? (As proof, see List of extinct languages#Middle East where the Phoenician languages are in the "extinct" column.) Thanks. IZAK 09:14, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Bet"(ter dead or alive?)

message: This article has now been much expanded in respect of pronunciation. I would suggest that rather than going to such lengths, it should merely acknowledge that the dagesh makes a difference in some versions, and then cross-refer to the Hebrew alphabet article which gives considerable more detail for the various types of Hebrew pronunciation over the centuries, for this and for the other Hebrew letters. rossb 13:18, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The move is complete. See Hebrew_phonology#Other_Notes (no.2) [an article I have not edited] for more on my rational. Thanks. El_C 07:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation and transliteration 

message: Any objections if I move the article to Bet? It appears to be the more common —and, significantly, phonetically correct— transliteration. El_C 06:15, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The move is complete. See Hebrew_phonology#Other_Notes (no.2) [an article I have not edited] for more on my rational. Thanks. El_C 07:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move to bet

message: The origin of bēt is from IDE. It's the same word as Latvian būda, būta 'house'. Etymologically bēt < PIE *būtas 'house'. Roberts7 17:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin 

message: User:HD86 recently added the inflectional ending "-un" to the Arabic word "bayt".  This is not the normal scholarly practice for citing an Arabic word in isolation (of course, in discussing noun morphology etc. it would be included). The citation form is normally the pausal form, which does not carry the inflectional endings ('i`rab). This is the practice of the authoritative Encyclopedia of Islam, for example.  Are there any reliable sources where the -un is included?   --macrakis (talk) 19:53, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually you need to cite for me someone saying that it is OK to cut the Arabic word endings, and it'd better be a very reliable citation. HD86 (talk) 20:26, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't consider the Encyclopedia of Islam reliable?? --macrakis (talk) 23:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Sorry, Wikipedia goes by established scholarly consensus. The Encyclopedia of Islam is a good reflection of that consensus. So far, you have offered no sources agreeing with you. --macrakis (talk) 03:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: HD86, you reverted my edits (and accused me of vandalism!) in which I corrected "baytun" to "bayt". I have established that "bayt" (just like Muhammad and Allah) is the standard scholarly convention.  You have found no sources for your position, but insist on your personal point of view.  That's not the way we do things on WP.  And you also put back in a sentence on the preposition "bi" which is out of place in this article. --macrakis (talk) 04:50, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

text: No one claimed that Arabic is a dead language.  And we are not talking about anyone's "personal judgement", but the consensus of scholars writing in English. What the Arabic academies try to make Arabic speakers do is not the issue here.  It is simply how to cite Arabic words in an English-language encyclopedia. --macrakis (talk) 23:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Which part of "Wikipedia must follow scholarly convention for citation forms used by >99.9% publications" do you not understand? --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 11:00, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Well, unless you have some serious evidence (e.g. citing sources that use your inventive scheme) against the usual lemmatization norm, as has already been asked from you several times on this talkpage, please stop replacing bayt with baytun. Thanks --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 22:34, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

text: "...would leave the encyclopedia liable to litigation..." Very funny. --macrakis (talk) 14:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Look up in the dictionary the concepts called lemma and citation form. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 11:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Tell me, is in your English<->Arabic dictionary Arabic word for house descending from Proto-Semtic *bayt- lemmatized as triconsonantal root? --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 19:57, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bayt ''vs.'' baytun

message: I don't know where you have got this beyt from, but you clearly (along with your source) have no clue about Arabic. I've been hopelessly trying to make you understand the meaning of a transliteration and that the conventions they used to teach you the very little bit you know about Arabic do not constitute an alternative to a real transliteration that you can force on everybody transliterating an Arabic word. I also warned you that providing these shortened "educational transliterations" as real transliterations is an obvious falsification. You just don't seem to be capable of understanding.
I'm going to leave the "beyt" lol ... But if somebody changed it back to "bayt," I am going to correct it again .... HD86 (talk) 05:39, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Look up in the dictionary the concepts called lemma and citation form. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 11:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Tell me, is in your English<->Arabic dictionary Arabic word for house descending from Proto-Semtic *bayt- lemmatized as triconsonantal root? --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 19:57, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Arabic ''beyt''?!

message: All of the bet letters come from the "pr" (house) hieroglyph.
Shaped like:
 ____
|_  _|
Would someone add it and some background?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.253.190 (talk) 09:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add the source hieroglyph 

message: (Talk:Dalet says to post here.)
In section Dalet#Significance, we have a piped link "Names of God in Judaism" to "Name of God". However we have an article Names of God in Judaism. Would that be a better target? It was a bit of a WP:SURPRISE to me. Si Trew (talk) 09:23, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names of God in Judaism (Dalet#Significance) 

message: Shouldn't the Inscriptional Pahlavi (Middle Persian) letters be added to this article? For this case, Bet is 𐭡 in the Inscriptional Pahlavi Alphabet. Oğuzlar 00:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add persian letters