Talk:Khom script (Ong Kommadam)

Khom is the old khmer script.

Jejune article reporting mythology
This is a bit like saying that King Arthur invented the letters of the English alphabet.

The authors are obviously confused by two different meanings of the word "Khom", and are reporting a Southern Lao variant on Khom script as if it were a totally new invention.

Southern Laos, Isan, etc., have always been home to a variety of orthographic systems (there's a least one for every river valley!) modified to suit the local dialect --including some Mon-Khmer languages (though, obviously, Tai languages are now predominant in the region).

Many of these use a different form for final consonants than initial consonants: many of the so-called "Tai Noi" systems of writing have this feature, and even type-written Lao used this feature for some letters up until the communist period (i.e., to make it easier to read: final "t" was not the same as initial "t", etc. --this is true in all the French-colonial Lao publications). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.74.197.34 (talk) 03:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The description and history is very reminiscent of another, more recent script of Laos, Pahawh_Hmong that is also a sort of inverse abugida - RichardW57 (talk) 23:13, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * To answer the Anon who commented over two years ago: Having looked at one of the sources used in this article (Pascale, 2001), it seems pretty clear that what he is talking about is something quite different from the 'usual' Tai/Lao scripts. Oftentimes, Thai/Lao scripts (e.g. the Lao Tham script) use a subscript letter for the final consonant of a syllable, giving a syllabic structure C+vowel diacritic+subscript consonant.
 * The system, as outlined by Pascale is very different from that, as it has no vowel diacritics, but instead uses a single character for the initial consonant (or consonant cluster) and a separate character for the rime, i.e. vowel and final consonant. Unlike Tai scripts where there usually is a relationship between the normal form and the subscript form (the subscript has the same shape, but is smaller), there seems to be no, relationship between the character given to a consonant when it is word initial and word final. (And in my humble opinion, most of the look like doodles done during a boring meeting.)
 * I think it would be difficult to put this system of writing in the same family as Thai/Lao script, or any similar scripts, simply because they are so different, both in the way the script is set up, and in how the letters are shaped.
 * To respond to Richard's comment of a year ago: I agree that the history and set-up seem similar, given how they are described in their wiki article's. However, there are two things that make them differ: First of all, their forms are completely different, there doesn't seem to be many, if any, similar letters between the two scripts. Secondly, the way Pahawh is described, it places the initial consonant last in the syllable, whereas Khom as described by Pascale (2001) writes the phonemes in phonemic order, i.e. initial consonant (or cluster) first, then the rime. Another major difference is that Pahawh is still in use, whereas Khom is not. Another article by Pascale I read, focusing on creating a formalised writing system for the Jruq language states that using Khom would be unsuitable for this purpose as, in addition to being incredibly complex, very few, if any speakers knew how to read it. V85 (talk) 18:20, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I can understand why some have been skeptical about this script. However, if your read Sidwell's article, I think it will show you this is something more than just another local variant. If you can't access it, e-mail me. My address consists of my first name, then an underscore, then my last name, at gial.edu. Pete unseth (talk) 19:03, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Question about "unique"
There has been a question about whether the Khom script is unique in the way it divides syllables. The Khom script regularly divides syllables by representing an initial consonant by itself. Then the following symbol can represent a vowel and consonant of the same syllable. If this is not unique, then I request a list of other scripts that represent divisions of the syllable in this way. Pete unseth (talk) 21:49, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Article title
Maybe this article should be renamed to something more specific, since, looking briefly at some Google Books and Scholar results, it doesn't seem that "Khom script" is more likely to refer to this one than Khom Thai script (which has recently been created)? Not quite sure what would be a good disambiguator though. --Paul_012 (talk) 22:13, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree, but I don't know which name would be best instead. Perhaps "Khom script (secret script)", "Khom script (Ong Kommadam)" or "Khom script (Kommadam Rebellion)". --Glennznl (talk) 22:35, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Neither suggestion is really concise, but that's probably unavoidable due to the specificity of the topic. Khom script (Ong Kommadam) seems the most natural, I think. If no one objects in a few days I think the page can be moved there. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:34, 1 August 2021 (UTC)