| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the C article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 Archives | |
Index
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2020
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Mandarin Pinyin utilizes <c> for /tsʰ/, not /tɕʰ/. Omoutuazn (talk) 14:09, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Done. Is Arabic Ǧīm Really An Ancestor Of Latin's C/G?
Under the History panel, on the right, it says that Greek Gamma derives directly from Arabic Ǧīm (and thus Latin C/G would also derive from it). However, it seems to me that Greek Gamma is a sister of Arabic Ǧīm; I mean, isn't Greek Gamma derived directly from Phoenician Gaml?. In fact, according to "Nabataean Alphabet" articlereally , Arabic alphabet developed around 4th century BCE, while according to "History of the Greek alphabet", the Greek adopted the Phoenician alphabet around the 8th century BCE.
Therefore, it seems unlikely to me that Greek Gamma derived from Arabic Ǧīm. Yea, I know using Misplaced Pages articles as reference for other Misplaced Pages articles is bad, but these references are for discussion purposes only. I'm sure we can get actual references if we end up needing them. I am not sure about my position though, it is just really weird that this is not mentioned in the whole article, except for the History panel, besides everything I said before, so I am opening this discussion.
Another issue is that Latin "G" Misplaced Pages article does not list Arabic Ǧīm as its ancestor, but Latin G derives from Latin C, and so, if Ǧīm really were an ancestor of C, we should list it as an ancestor of G as well. It seems to me, however, that reality is the other way around: we should remove Ǧīm from C's ancestorship, because it does not seem to be C/G ancestor at all, only a sister sign. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunoczim (talk • contribs) 18:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
palatalization in CE
The following paragraph on the palatalization of C in CE sound in the digraph ci when this precedes a vowel, as in the words 'delicious', etc., and also in the word "ocean" and its derivatives.] should be edited to include . Katarina Harlan (talk) 19:37, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
- Feel free to add them. Erinius (talk) 11:41, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
no source for claim in body of "later use"
" The Old English Latin-based writing system was learned from the Celts, apparently of Ireland;" should have a source attached? 2.28.49.129 (talk) 16:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
"usage period" / "time period"
Why it defentely never have "usage period" / "time period" for "C"? It have that for all of every single letters "A", "B", "D", "E", "F", "G", "H", "I", "J", "K", "L", "M", "N", "O", "P", "Q", "R", "S", "T", "U", "V", "W", "X", "Y", "Z"; except "C".
Categories: