Actually, Aldebaran, your comment didn’t then and it doesn’t now. What it does is show your absolute ignorance about English.
Koran is the transliteration that has been generally used in English only in the last few decades has Qur’an been popularly used as an alternative transliteration, though I’ve noticed it’s the more popular of the two in media outlets (I suspect this is because it’s a better transliteration). Even my translation of the Koran is titled the ‘Koran’ though.
I’m not sure if there are any standard systems for transliterating Arabic into English like there are for Chinese (this is why we say Beijing instead Peking nowdays as Peking comes from a different transliteration system than the one that is now used as standard these days).
Interesting. Can you give some more info about it (you can send it on my mail of course) It would be interesting to dicuss your translation.
Salaam. A
Personally I like Alcoran too.
Given that Koran comes from the 1600s, while Alcoran likely dates from the even earlier clashes between the Ottomans and Europeans I think we can safely say that the word is an established entity within English, regardless of your views on the original translator’s competence.
I commented on the use of the words " RIDICULOUS EXOTIC spelling".
Still waiting for the writer to explain what there is to be found RIDICULOUS and EXOTIC about writing a word how it should be written when translating it from the original language.
Salaam. A
Grey,
By the way: the syllabication and the pronounciation your dictionary gives is completely wrong at that.
It should be :
al-kur-an, pronounced : lkur - aan.
It is not because short vowels usually aren’t written (yet, in the text of Al Qur’an they are all written) that they aren’t pronounced in Modern Standard Arabic. And the A of Qur’an is long = it is written and certainly pronounced.
Thus their etymology is also completely wrong.
Salaam. A
Aldebaran: YOU are not the arbiter of how an English word should be written in English. Grey has tried to explain that to you. I have tried to explain that to you. Given your incredibly stupid rant in your last posting, I noticed that you have completely ignored what Grey told you, along with his references. English did not get the word English uses for the scriptures of Islam from Modern Standard Arabic. It got it, as Grey’s citations show, from Arabic quite some time ago.
WHY IS IT SO FREAKING DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT FREAKING ENGLISH IS NOT FREAKING ARABIC?
As to the OP (y’all do remember that?): I believe it is incredibly safe to say that those who believe the Koran to be the word of their deity believe it to be so. Quite simple, hey?
p.s. The syllibification in Grey’s references refer to the way the word is pronounced IN ENGLISH.
Monty,
Now pay attention to this:
Arabic of “quite some time ago” was -in particular- in this case " the Quranic Arabic of quite some time ago which is the Quranic Arabic of today." (the well known evolution of the written form excluded from the debate here, since in this case that has no influence at all)
This language, part of the Classical Arabic Language forms, didn’t change miraculously to suit the interpretations of syllabication, pronounciation and ethymology of some non Arabic - yet claiming to be authoritive on this issue- editor of an English dictionary today.
What is “so freaking” difficult to understand that?
Salaam. A
Monty,
Ah, then you have a case.
Yet I never heard anyone pronounce the word as “lk-rn” in English either. Must be a rare variation or is it normal when one gives instructions for pronunciation in an English dictionary that you leave out the vowels?
Salaam. A
You pay attention to facts for once in your life:
Fact #1: What you just posted is demonstrably false. It is some myth you imagine to be true. If you have had ANY training in Linguistics, you would know this.
Fact #2: The syllibification Grey’s references gave is that for the word’s pronunciation in English. In case this has escaped your notice, English does not employ the identical sound inventory as Arabic.
Fact #3: Those who wrote that dictionary of English employed Linguistic knowledge (that knowledge which you lack) to give the word’s history, not the history of its pronunciation in another language.
You’ll forgive me if I take an English dictionary’s word over that of a faceless, unknown, credential-less poster on a message board.
Grey,
I’m sorry but I take myself, being Arab, born Arab, having Arabic as my first language -and not only that: having a doctorate in the Arabic language- above the twisted interpretation of any possible foreign language dictionary on the globe.
If you want to discuss my language, how it is written and pronounced, then please first start with studying it. Good luck.
Salaam. A
Monty,
You obviously didn’t read my last post. Try it… maybe the light goes on.
Salaam. A
Monty,
You obviously didn’t read my last post, before posting your completely unrelated “answer”. Try it… maybe the light goes on.
By the way: You obviously devellop a bit of an obsession to post nothing else then some pointless irrelevant attacks.
You have a whole board especially made for these Children’s Games, remember?
Salaam. A
You have needlessly taken offense; I am simply pointing out the obvious.
I do not know you, I know nothing of your credentials, and I know nothing of your ability to speak, write or dream in Arabic. Unless you plan on providing such information to us with actual cites to back up the claims that’s the way it will remain. Until you can establish that you have sufficient credentials to overturn accepted pronunciation of English words, your opinion carries no weight.
The point is that Koran is a perfectly legitimate English word. The fact that it was coined in the 1600’s using the then current phonetics within the English language means it may not phonetically coincide with how an Arabic, or Qur’anic Arabic at that, speaker would pronounce it now. That is completely irrelevant.
Qur’an as an English word is most definitely a new term unfamiliar to most. The rudeness of the original poster aside, you could have easily pointed out that it is a legitimate English word, likely truer to the original Arabic pronunciation, and that the poster’s unfamiliarity with it only made it seem exotic.
Now if you care to get bent out of shape over the Alcoran phonetics please note that it was Robert of Keaton is 1143 that first translated the book into Latin and from there it progressively evolved from there into English.
You know, someone with a doctorate wouldn’t have much trouble providing a citiation to support his views, it seems to me.
Aldebaran: It’s obviously escaped your notice that this particular forum is for proveable assertions, not for spouting your unsubstantiated (and also proveabley wrong) opinions. The forum for that is IMHO. Additionally, this site’s reason for being is to eradicate ignorance, not perpetuate it.
As to my not having read:
it posted after I had hit submit for my last posting.
As to your comment to Grey about studying a language: That’s incredibly ironic. Grey was telling you how English does something English does. It’s completely irrelevant how Arabic accomplishes that thing.
You continue to say you have credentials and yet you never post them. I’d say that’s the childish stunt being pulled here.
papermache,
My post is my citation. And I’m sorry, I can’t change the Arabic language just to please you.
By the way: Do you read the language, do you write it, do you speak it, do you understand it.
Obviously you do not.
So what are you in fact arguing about?
Salaam. A
“My post is my citation.”? Come now, you can’t be serious. What school would accept that as a citation? I don’t have to have any knowledge of Arabic to know that much. I have the feeling that, rather than establishing your bona fides, you’ll only act indignant and offended. But here’s the perfect chance to make me look the fool - just provide those credentials.