Talk:List of languages by first written account/Archive 4

Urartian
I decided to look for Urartuan, because the "Before 1000 BC" section called Hurrian an "isolate", and I noticed it's not there. The Wikipedia page on Urartuan says it started to be written in the 9th century BCE, specifically during the reign of Sarduri I (834-828 BCE) and continued until the presumed fall of Urartu in the 6th century BCE, but I don't have the print sources it cites, which which is "Urartu - Page 65 by Boris Borisovich Piotrovskiĭ". (Presumably this is "The Ancient Civilization of Urartu", published in 1969, https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Ancient_Civilization_of_Urartu/oIl8U1tYpQwC?hl=en&kptab=overview ) DubleH (talk) 15:39, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

The page on Urartu, however, says that, "Ispuini was also the first Urartian king to write in the Urartian language (previous kings left records written in Akkadian)." Ispuini reigned c. 820-800 BCE according to the same page very nearby. The source cited this time is "Urartian Material Culture As State Assemblage: An Anomaly in the Archaeology of Empire, Paul Zimansky, Page 103 of 103-115". I will note that it DOES only say he was the first KING to write in Urartian, not the first PERSON, though, so maybe it's just that there are only non-royal texts that date back to Sarduri I's reign. DubleH (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Is this because someone thinks Urartian is a later stage of Hurrian? DubleH (talk) 16:14, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It was just an omission, of which I'm sure there are more. I've added it now. Kanguole 16:42, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Wadi el Hol is still the first written account of semitic proto-abjad
Wadi el Hol in 1800 BCE is not in Sinai but near Luxor; and they are still the first written account of that language and the first appearance of a proto-alphabetical script. They are not recognized as Hebrew but are still the origin of both Canaanite language and Ancient South Arabian script (Geez of Ethiopia). The page should acknowledge the first written account of this alphabet derived from hyeroglyphs and egyptian hieratic : see detail here : https://escholarship.org/content/qt1sd2j49d/qt1sd2j49d.pdf?t=q9q2pr (p. 6-7) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick.N.L (talk • contribs) 04:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your contribution. Darnell mentions "speculative translation attempts in Wimmer and Wimmer-Dweikat" and it seems unclear what language is attested. Are there sources that describe, classify and label the language? Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 05:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for answering, and answering so fast. Here is encyclopedia Britannica depiction of how Proto Sinaitic became North Semitic which became Phoenician and Hebrew : https://www.britannica.com/topic/Sinaitic-inscriptions (although I don't find any source other than that encyclopedia about that alleged North Semitic alphabet and wikipedia only considers that Canaanite and South Arabian are children of Proto-Sinaitic alphabet.) The point is that Proto-Sinaitic is a semitic language that has its first written account in an alphabetical script. The Encyclopedia Britannica believes that there is some branching first to North Semitic after Proto-Sinaitic but that is an old hypothesis; most hypotheses that I have found are that Canaanite came directly from Sinaitic : https://omniglot.com/writing/protosinaitc.htm
 * Patrick.N.L (talk) 06:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This is a list of languages rather than scripts, for which we have articles such as List of writing systems, History of writing, and the ones in Category:History of writing and its subcategories. (What we do not have is a List of writing systems by first attestation.) So to be listed here the language must be identified, and it must be something other than Canaanite because that was first attested c. 2400 BC. See also Proto-Sinaitic script, which doesn't seem very helpful though. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 07:34, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * BTW, is that attestation of "Canaanite" generally accepted in the scholarly community? Firstly, the claim is extraordinary – pushing back the earliest attestation date for North-West Semitic some 1100 years, and secondly the sourcing seems rather scarce. From reviews, it seems the "Canaanite text" is just a few words, not even amounting to a full sentence, and the interpretation of these words as Canaanite seems uncertain at best. Have a look at Morgenstern's review for instance. –Pinnerup (talk) 13:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * @LiliCharlie @Pinnerup : After review, the first written account of Canaanite at Unas is older than the Wadi el Hol inscriptions, as it is from 2400 BC. the inscription at Unas was written in Hieroglyphs but it trumps any proto-abjad when it comes to being the first written account of Canaanite or proto-Canaanite. I am not entirely certain about this, but archeologist seemed to have defined the Unas inscriptions as proto-Canaanite and Wadi-El-Hol inscriptions were defined as proto-Canaanite similarly. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070129100250.htm Patrick.N.L (talk) 09:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The review by Morgenstern linked by Pinnerup seems to indicate that this is another case of a speculative decipherment of a tiny corpus that needs more evidence for broad acceptance. Kanguole 11:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

There is no hindi or Urdu in list
Do any one have info on Urdu or hindi which can be added in this list 223.230.81.54 (talk) 04:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Vietnamese
The inscription from the Báo Ân temple in Tháp Miếu does not meet the criteria for this list, because the Vietnamese element consists of lists of names of villages and people – it does not contain a Vietnamese sentence. Kanguole 22:36, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 August 2022
The article says that Arabic earliest inscription is an namara in the 4th century AD, but thats wrong, there are older inscriptions dated back to 1th century BCE (‘en avdat inscription for example and Qariat al faw inscription in the 1th century BCE)and there are even older Arabic inscription dated back to the 6th-2th centuries BCE but written in different alphabet than the Arabic alphabet that we know today (for example ancient North Arabian scripts, Aramaic script Nabatean script and even Greek script), so its wrong to list Arabic in the first millennium AD considering an namara to be the earliest Arabic inscription but rather in the first millennium BCE ( 6th century BCE) note: Arabic inscriptions that Are dated to the 6th century BCE consist mostly of proper names so we don’t know what the language was like, the earliest inscriptions in Arabic that contains written Arabic and not just names are dated back to at least the 3th-1th centuries BCE Sources:1.A manual of the historical grammar of Arabic by Ahmed ajalad, Ph.D., Harvard University, Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations.

2.https://www.academia.edu/1847030

3.http://www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/faw.html

2A02:ED0:528D:EB00:6125:656E:B239:B849 (talk) 18:39, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I have added an Old Arabic entry for the Qaryat al-Faw inscription, which Macdonald says is the "earliest document that is indisputably in Old Arabic". Kanguole 11:10, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Adding Sinhala/Sinhalese to the languages with written records by 250 BC
I see no mention of Sinhala here, but both primary and secondary references indicate that written Sinhala appeared by 250 BC.

Reliable Secondary source:

Sinhalese language | Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Sinhalese-language (accessed 2022-08-22).

“The earliest inscriptions in Sinhalese, written on rock in Brāhmī characters, date from about 200 bc”

Primary source:

Nandasara, S. T.; Mikami, Y. Bridging the Digital Divide in Sri Lanka: Some Challenges and Opportunities in Using Sinhala in ICT. International Journal on Advances in ICT for Emerging Regions (ICTer) 2016, 8 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.4038/icter.v8i1.7162.

“The oldest writing of Sinhala can be traced back to about 3rd century B.C. These are inscriptions mainly marked by either cave or rock2 found in almost all part of the Island.”

Even the Parkit mentioned from Anuradhapura in the table might be Sinhala Parkit rather than Ashoka Parkit as indicated.

Please let me know your suggestion before adding this to the table. Lipwe (talk) 03:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I also found this secondary sources as a blog post

THE SCRIPT OF THE SINHALESE. Ancient Sri Lankan coins, 2012.(https://sirimunasiha.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/the-script-of-sri-lanka/)

"In Sri Lanka, the earliest dated form of writing was on inscribed  pottery found the strata,  C4 dated to 500-600 BC, some even to 750 BC."

Over 1300 short inscriptions of 3rd, 2nd and 1st Cent BC has been studied by Scholars, who have identified that the letters in which Sinhala or Hela was written was arranged into seven groups the Guttrals, the Palatals, the Cerebrals, the Dentals, the Labials, Semi-vowels and the Vowels. Lipwe (talk) 04:28, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

According to the book title: Palaeographical Development of The Brahmi Script in Ceylon From 3rd Century B.C To 7th Century A.D. - Fernando, P.E.E, which, describes the evolution and development of the Sinhala Brahmi script, the first Sinhala brahmin text deciphered with certainty is from around 2 CE BC. Lipwe (talk) 04:59, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

https://sirimunasiha.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/img1.jpg "The Script found on cave inscription from the 2nd Cent BC to 7 Cent AD, published by Dr Saddhamangala Karunaratne in Epighraphia Zeylanica Special Volume VII,1984, is given next." https://sirimunasiha.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/vallipuram-gold-plates.jpg "A gold plate from Vallipuram of the Minister Isigiri of King Vahaba who was governing at Naka-diva along with a Tissa who caused a Temple to be built in the script of 1 Cent AD." Lipwe (talk) 05:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I have added an entry, which Fernando says is the oldest that can be dated with reasonable certainty. Kanguole 07:47, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Tamil
It says Tamil was in the "early 2nd century BCE", however in another article (Economy of ancient Tamil country) it says 500 BCE, so can I change this article to match the Economy article? 104.5.57.10 (talk) 22:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * This list has precise criteria for inclusion, given in the opening paragraph. The notes next to the Tamil entry explain why the proposed earlier examples do not meet these criteria. Kanguole 23:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Comb with oldest written account
Hello. There is one article on the internet, that oldest written account is on the one comb. There are seven words written down in proto canaanite language. It is comb from the bronze age. Could You include It to the article? Thank You. Cassa342 (talk) 11:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Italian
As has already been pointed out, the entry for Italian is anachronistic. Placiti Cassinesi are from the territory of Neapolitan, the Veronese Riddle is from the territory of Venetian, and the language nowadays called Italian is a descendant of Tuscan. 195.187.108.130 (talk) 13:46, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Adichanallur
I have removed the reference to the Adichanallur site. Of the references cited: This is a long way from a record of Tamil. Kanguole 14:18, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Kingwell-Banham does not touch on the claim of Tamil-Brahmi script on burial urns, saying only that a motif from a pot fragment appears to depict sugarcane.
 * Murty mentions bones from urn burials, but nothing on dates or graffiti.
 * The excavation report says there are isolated graffiti marks on urns from Layer 2, some resembling Asokan Brahmi or Tamil Brahmi ma.


 * source 1 and 2 were mainly for the urines. I might have misplaced the citations. source 3 was talking about marks that were speculated to be Asokan Brahmi or Tamil Brahmi.
 * since this only a speciation or resemblance, I included this in the notes category and didn't change any dates. If Keezhadi is included in the notes, we should also include Adichanallur 2600:8806:403:5100:C4FA:6233:14F:43F1 (talk) 18:34, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The only thing in those citations suggesting language is the bit in the excavation report saying some of the graffiti marks resemble Asokan Brahmi or Tamil Brahmi ma. For Keeladi there are strings of symbols that give Tamil names – not enough for the list criteria, but certainly suggesting language. Kanguole 18:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Both it these sites are Megalithic graffiti symbols which resemble Tamil Brahmi script as both have not been confirmed as Brahmi. I think this enough to mention them as at least some archeologists suggest that the marks resemble Tamil. —— — Preceding unsigned comment added by User23445 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * They are not the same. The Keezhadi inscriptions contain Tamil names, but their dating is disputed (and they are just names, not complete sentences). The Adichanallur marks do not occur in strings, but as isolated symbols, and only one (Tamil) Brahmi letter is claimed. Kanguole 21:16, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Extra columns
I have reverted an edit adding columns for language families and branches, because it makes the tables unwieldy. The key pieces of information are the attestation of the language and notes explaining why other candidate attestations do not meet the criteria of the list. Both of those can require a short piece of text to explain. Several attributes of the language could be added, such as language family, where it was spoken, what script was used, etc, but doing so would crowd the key information on many displays. Kanguole 08:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)