Talk:Fus'ha (language)

Why is this a seperate entry?
This more properly belongs with Modern Standard or perhaps with Varieties of Arabic. (Collounsbury 21:53, 31 January 2006 (UTC)).

My Guess
I believe this is a separate entry because the "Modern Standard Arabic" page has one perspective on the language, i.e. that of stressing the differences between "Modern Standard Arabic" and "Classical Arabic". To most Arabs the difference does not exist. Therefore this page shows that view, while the "Modern Standard Arabic" page supports the other view. This page is also more appropriate for how non-orientalists view the varieties of the Arabic language. --24.78.98.231 00:52, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * "Non Orientalists" is pure idiotic bollocks. Save it for your Uni classes. Being well-aware of the Arab ideological conceit with respect to no differences existing, that doesn't have much to do with an objective, scholarly view of the language. Partisan national(istic) views on langauge should hardly have their own page in a real encyclopedia (leaving aside the quesiton of Wikipedia as an "encyclopedia" --by a person who got too angry, and uses the word "Uni" to mean something unconventional

leave a paragraph and put anyhting worthwhile in MSA or CA?
Even though I reverted a major edit (because it was done without discussion), I think most of this can be deleted or transferred to the articles on Modern Standard Arabic or Classical Arabic. Leave a paragraph explaining the term and may be some links. Your thoughts? --Drmaik 06:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Transliteration?
What's the point in a transliteration system if one just creates another? The Standard transliteration, Fus'ha, should be used in any general reference. The Strict transliteration, Fuṣ'ḥa, should be used in conjunction with the Arabic text. Please refer to Manual of Style (Arabic). Madeinsane 19:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)