Module talk:fa-ira-translit/testcases

Test cases

@Benwing2, Wikitiki89, ZxxZxxZ Hi. Do you mind reviewing the test cases, please? Should the Persian module be closer to Arabic? E.g. normally, the short vowels are not added before ‎ا, ‎و and ‎ی in the full vocalisation, sukuns are also omitted. I've added transliteration for ۀ as "-ye", not sure if "-" is standard but it makes more readable. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:32, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

I would say that it should be able to handle text both with or without sukuuns and vowel marks before long vowels. I do agree that the -ye and -e may be separated by hyphens. --WikiTiki89 16:20, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

ضَمِّه

It must be the old WikiMedia bug. I can't add a test case in the right order - kasra should follow shadda. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:54, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

diff and diff

@Guldrelokk: Hi. I don't mind you working on the module and even encourage you, if you know what you're doing but you seem to misunderstand Persian diacritics. They work somewhat differently from Arabic, if you're using it as a reference. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:51, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Atitarev: In some modern Irâni practice, probably. If you open any classic work, like Phillott’s grammar, you will see that wasn’t at all the case, although he also was describing the contemporary language and specified e.g. the pronunciation of fatha-waw as ow; but especially I don’t see, say, a person from Afghanistan who pronounces it [aw] to write it with damma. It also causes much less problems with transliteration. Here is a short discussion with speakers that touches the spelling of diphthongs (they say they are written with fatha) and the final Irâni -e (writing it with kasra is called a mispractice). Guldrelokk (talk) 13:09, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Guldrelokk: You're touching a sensitive topic here. WT:FA TR is the current transliteration policy here, even if it's Irani-centric. Iran IS the centre for Persian but Dari is considered as well. By the current rule, zamme (=Arabic ḍamma) + vâv gives "ou" (aka "ow"), so "کُرُوز" is "korouz", not "korawz". You wouldn't make the Russian pronunciation module based on Krasnodar accent, would you, (even if I lived there for a few years, LOL)--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:22, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Atitarev: aw is also in the table at WT:FA TR, but fatha-waw can be translated as ow just as well; on the other hand, the damma-waw notation is ambiguous because it is equivalent to waw in the traditional system. Guldrelokk (talk) 13:27, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Guldrelokk: To get "aw", you need a fathe + vâv, e.g. "کُرَوز" (making it up). WT:FA TR doesn't describe the transliteration on the diacritic level. zamme-vâv is only "ou" in Persian, which makes it different from Arabic "ū" and kasre + ye is "ey", which is different from Arabic ī. With a consonant "b" (ب) as an example, these are the transliteration rules for fully vocalised Iranian Persian: بَ - ba, با - bâ, بی - bi, بِ - be, بِی - bey, بُ - bo, بو bu, ببُو - bou. You see, diacritics are not used at all if long vowels are used as long vowels and not for making diphthongs. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:57, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Atitarev: See Phillott and others and the link; ow is traditionally written as fatha-waw. ow and aw are regional variants of the same phoneme, the do not co-occur. Damma-waw is used for u or ô in the traditional system. Guldrelokk (talk) 14:14, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Dehkhoda dictionary also uses fatha for diphthongs. How exactly widespread is this new ‘Irani phonetic’ system in authoritative sources? Guldrelokk (talk) 15:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@ZxxZxxZ: Hello. Would you know how better to represent diphthongs ey and ow in vocalised Persian? I only see fatha-ya and fatha-waw in older works, like Phillott’s grammar and Steingass’ dictionary. Dehkhoda has both, for example, نو [ ن َ / نُو ] and می [ م َ / م ِ ]. Guldrelokk (talk) 12:24, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, Dehkhoda Dictionary mentions both forms, e.g. for ey/ay[1]. Though for ow/aw it uses only fatha, as far as I see, e.g. [2], but this may be because using dhamma could be ambiguous, as these dictionaries also use it to represent [o] when it is written with vav, for example, in the case of loanwords such as توکیو (tokiyo).[3] Mo'in Dictionary mentions two forms for both diphthongs.

On the other hand, there is a dialect-neutral practice to represent the ey/ay diphthong: simply by adding a sukun over the ya (ی), but this practice is much less common.

Regarding xana/xane for خانه, Dehkhoda mentions both fatha and kasra. Mo'in mentions kasra only. --Z 13:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

By the way, I did not mention Farhang-e Farsi-e Amid dictionary, because it is centered on modern Iranian Persian.

Overall, I think if we are going to use vocalization for Persian, we should mention both. --Z 13:47, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Using sokun for diphthongs

For diphtongs in Persian writing, it is more common (and less ambiguous) to use sokun, especially for ی y, instead of using kasreh on the previous letter. So it would be *طنیْن taneyn/tanayn instead of *طنِین. Another way would be writing it as *طنِیْن taneyn or *طنَیْن tanayn of course, but the writers in Persian have always preferred to use diacritics as least as possible. It is actually a good practice, because, in this way, the pronunciations would have the exact right amount of ambiguity to suit all those Persian-speaking readers with all their different accents. @Atitarev --Z 10:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)