Advanced Search

Author Topic: Jenkim  (Read 4504 times)

09 July , 2009, 02:07:23 pm
Read 4504 times

Offline Admin

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • 1095
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 2

    • Ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ
Jenkim
« on: 09 July , 2009, 02:07:23 pm »
I want to suggest that we don't use the jenkem in our dictionary
as everybody knows jenkem is something recent and it didn't exist in the old manuscripts
my problem with jenkem is that I think it will cause confusion for example
if I search for ⲙⲁ ⲛϣⲁⲓ and it is stored in the dictionary as ⲙⲁ ˋⲛϣⲁⲓ then it will not appear
again if someone is searching for ⲥϧⲁⲓ they might not find it if it was written ˋⲥϧⲁⲓ

16 July , 2009, 03:25:23 am
Reply #1

Offline mariag

  • Newbie

  • *

  • 27
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 0

Re: Jenkim
« Reply #1 on: 16 July , 2009, 03:25:23 am »
is it a new addition, really?! (i learned something new)
i know that in bohairic (at least according to the intro class i took) uses over bars for the same effect (hamza/small e sound sorta thing) is that all new additions?
i agree that it would be problematic if that's the only way a word is referenced- so mayb the main entries shouldn't have a jenkem.. but i feel that since it's pretty common usage it should be shown in the body of the page- as some sort of variation on word spelling, maybe?

16 July , 2009, 01:33:34 pm
Reply #2

Offline Admin

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • 1095
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 2

    • Ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ
Re: Jenkim
« Reply #2 on: 16 July , 2009, 01:33:34 pm »
The over bar you are talking about is ONLY used in Sahidic dialect, and it is used for the reason you mentioned
in bohairic the jenkem is like this ` and is also used for the same reason
but in Sahidic it is important since it frequently replaces the ⲉ
for example ⲙ͞ⲛ for ⲙⲉⲛ (ⲛⲉⲙ in Bohairc), in Bohairic we never do that

Well, I thought everybody knows that jenkem (in bohairic) is a new addition
but when you said that you didn't know, I searched for manuscript (online) to double check
As for Sahidic Dialect, I could confirm that this "bar above" existed even before the 4th century
In Bohairic, I found jenkem in some manuscripts during and after the 10th century
I couldn't find any readable Bohairic manuscripts before the 10th century except this one http://www.biblical-data.org/coptic/926a.jpg which is dated to be in the 4th century
It has no jenkems in it, However I think one manuscript is not enough to prove anything
The manuscripts I found are located here http://www.biblical-data.org/coptic/coptic_MSS.html
Please let me know if you could get more info about this topic

I have no problem with adding the word with jenkem as a variation, it doesn't hurt
But what about the examples?
crum doesn't use/mention this jenkem at all in the examples what do you think?

17 July , 2009, 03:43:09 am
Reply #3

Offline mariag

  • Newbie

  • *

  • 27
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 0

Re: Jenkim
« Reply #3 on: 17 July , 2009, 03:43:09 am »
not knowing is just due to my ignorance of the history.. i'm definitely still learning :)
i found a book reference that discusses the use of jenkems 10th-14th century.. which sort of makes me feel they weren't in use before.. but couldn't find any more info about this book (i also don't know any french)
Djinkim sur tel Grapheme Voyelle de la Langue Copte Bohairique (Fr), by Prof. Rodolphe Kasser. This presentation was about the usage of the Djinkim as a vowel in classic Bohairic of the 10th through the 14th centuries.
i think just including the jenkem as alternate spelling should be fine.. and have sentence examples without it

18 July , 2009, 06:29:01 pm
Reply #4

Offline Admin

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • 1095
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 2

    • Ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ
Re: Jenkim
« Reply #4 on: 18 July , 2009, 06:29:01 pm »
Great, I am pretty amazed that the different points of view get resolved that quick

12 August , 2009, 11:35:24 pm
Reply #5

Offline copticray

  • Newbie

  • *

  • 9
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 0

Re: Jenkim
« Reply #5 on: 12 August , 2009, 11:35:24 pm »
I agree too, It makes sense to have the Djinkim as a variation. besides, most of the people how will look this word up will look for it with a Djinkim, so we should add it for usability purposes.

29 May , 2014, 01:17:10 am
Reply #6

Offline Anok

  • Newbie

  • *

  • 35
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 0

Re: Jenkim
« Reply #6 on: 29 May , 2014, 01:17:10 am »
Should it be a rule to specify that the word begins with a jenkim?

I would think so, because it is the regular spelling... and as someone that doesn't speak a vowel-less language like Arabic as a first language, the jenkim is helpful for knowing that the vowel ⲉ is there.
Ⲁⲛⲟⲕ

29 May , 2014, 06:38:29 pm
Reply #7

Offline Admin

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • 1095
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 2

    • Ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ
Re: Jenkim
« Reply #7 on: 29 May , 2014, 06:38:29 pm »
Jenkim were not written in original Coptic text. only later when the language got weaker they started to add it.
for that reason Jenkim is not standard and you can find same word with many jenkims in one book and with only one or no jenkims in another.
especially with the introduction of new pronunciation by the church many jenkims were added that didn't exist before.

We add the word without jenkim and then add a word variations with jenkims
that way if someone is searching for any word he can find it by writing the word without jenkims
once his find the word he is looking for he can find it with the jenkims inside the page