Difference between revisions of "Talk:Hieroglyphs"

Revision as of 20:46, March 31, 2009

Suggest rename "hieroglyphs". "hieroglyphics" is incorrect terminology. --Krysg 16:31, 18 February 2009 (EST)

I will be adding content to this page over the next few weeks. Please do not delete the headings. If questions, pls leave not on User_talk:Krysg. Thanks. --Krysg 11:02, 20 March 2009 (EDT)

I do not agree with the move. The topic is Hieroglyphics, even if the individual letters or glyphs are (now?) properly called hieroglyphs. We follow the principle of least surprise here.

On the other hand, we are an educational project. If academics have begun to refer to the shorter form (without ic) then we should let our readers know this. But education via redirect is not something I'd like to try. Better to place a usage note somewhere in the article.

By the way, more important than the spelling issue is how the little pictures correspond to sounds, along with the process by which modern scholars discovered that correspondence. Is the Rosetta Stone relevant here? --Ed Poor ^Talk 09:05, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

Pictograms

I don't know what a pictogram is, but it's curious that each glyph reminds me of an ordinary object or creature: a bird, a worm, a shepherd's crook, a candle. Readers need to be told whether these pictures are meant to represent the thing they depict, or whether they are simply letters in an alphabet.

For example,

• Although many Egyptian hieroglyphs depict familiar things, the Egyptians used them simply as letters. This contrasts with Chinese, where each glyph is a word and the shape of a glyph often provides a hint of the word's meaning. (For example, the horse's hooves at the bottom of horse or the raindrops in rain).

Do you want to write the article this way, Krys? --Ed Poor ^Talk 07:39, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

Where should I put this?

--Jack456 16:46, 31 March 2009 (EDT)