# Arabic: numerical values for letters



## Jannoman

As you all know there is something called Abjadiya/Abjadic alphabet.....which is same as the normal Arabic alphabet but only with different arrangement and numeral value assigned to each letter.....ofcourse i know that the Arabs do not know who made these now Arabic alphabet letters or gave them thier numeral values................. now my questions are: 

The letter Alif ١ أ

1- What does "Alif" mean for it is a word?

2- Why does it look like this or it has been given this particular shape?

3- Why has the letter " Alif" given the numeral value of ١ (1)



The letter Daal                ٤د 

1- What does "Daal" mean ? for as i have stated each letter is a word (that is why when reading the Quran the reader is rewarded for each letter not for every word)

2- Why has it been given this particular shape ?

3- Why has it been assigned the numeral value of ٤ (4)









كما تعلمون جميعًا هناك شيء يسمى الأبجدية / الأبجدية الأبجدية ..... وهو نفس الفبا العربية العادية ولكن بترتيب مختلف وقيمة عددية محددة لكل حرف ..... طبعًا وأنا أعلم أن العرب لا تعرف من صنع هذه الحروف الأبجدية العربية الآن أو أعطاها القيم العددية ................. الآن أسئلتي هي:

١1 أ 

١ -ماذا تعني كلمة "الألف" لأنها كلمة

٢- لماذا تبدو مثل هذا أم أنها أعطيت هذا الشكل بالذات؟

3- لماذا أعطت الحرف "Alif" القيمة العددية لل ١ (١)



٤4 د

١-ماذا تعني كلمة "دال"؟ كما ذكرت كل حرف هو كلمة (وهذا هو السبب عند قراءة القرآن يتم مكافأة القارئ عن كل حرف وليس لكل كلمة)

٣-لماذا أعطيت هذا الشكل بالذات؟

٣- لماذا تم تعيين القيمة العددية لهم٤ )(4)


----------



## berndf

Alif is derived from the the Phoenician letter 'Alep meaning "ox", based on a proto-Sinaic glyph, which depicts an ox' head. Ultimately from an Egyptian Hieroglyph.

Daal is from Phoenician Dalet meaning "door".

Assigning numerals to letters is a Greek invention from where it was borrowed into Aramaic from where Arabic and Hebrew got it.

The shapes of the Arabic letters are, like the shapes of the Hebrew, Greek and Latin letters ultimately based on the Phoenician alphabet. Arabic letters are immediately derived from Nabatean letters, which are derived from the Aramaic alphabet.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> Alif is derived from the the Phoenician letter 'Alep meaning "ox", based on a proto-Sinaic glyph, which depicts an ox' head. Ultimately from an Egyptian Hieroglyph.
> 
> Daal is from Phoenician Dalet meaning "door".
> 
> Assigning numerals to letters is a Greek invention from where it was borrowed into Aramaic from where Arabic and Hebrew got it.
> 
> The shapes of the Arabic letters are, like the shapes of the Hebrew, Greek and Latin letters ultimately based on the Phoenician alphabet. Arabic letters are immediately derived from Nabatean letters, which are derived from the Aramaic alphabet.


If Phoenician alphabet gave letters' names to Greek alphabet, why Phoenicians could not invent numerical value for letters not Greeks? 
If you say Greeks invented numerical value for letters, what was the numerical system before? Was it Roman quinary system with fingers count before?


----------



## berndf

rushalaim said:


> why Phoenicians could not invent numerical value for letters not Greeks?


They could have but they didn't. Assigning numerical values 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, ... to letters and using them to represent numbers was a Greek custom introduced into the Middle East in Hellenistic times. The Romans had their own way to write numbers (M, D, C, L, X, V, I).


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> They could have but they didn't. Assigning numerical values 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, ... to letters and using them to represent numbers was a Greek custom introduced into the Middle East in Hellenistic times. The Romans had their own way to write numbers (M, D, C, L, X, V, I).


Greeks had their letters only for whole numbers like 5, 10, 100 not for 1, 2, 3, and so on.
I think the main goal to invent alphabet by Phoenicians could be only for counting goods, because Phoenicians did not have any sacred text to write down, but had trade.


----------



## berndf

rushalaim said:


> Greeks had their letters only for whole numbers like 5, 10, 100 not for 1, 2, 3, and so on.


That is the older Attic system used in pre-Alexandrian Greece. The Hellenistic system, probably of Ionic origin, is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, ..., as I said.

The Phoenicians had nothing to do with the invention of that system. The Phoenician script is at least 600 years older that this number system.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> That is the older Attic system used in pre-Alexandrian Greece. The Hellenistic system, probably of Ionic origin, is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, ..., as I said.
> 
> The Phoenicians had nothing to do with the invention of that system. The Phoenician script is at least 600 years older that this number system.


So, why Romans did not use Ionic number/letter system? What numerical system were Phoenicians using?


----------



## berndf

A system similar to those of the Egyptians and Mesopotamians. A vertical bar for a one and a horizontal bar for ten. E.g. 27 is |||||||=.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> A system similar to those of the Egyptians and Mesopotamians. A vertical bar for a one and a horizontal bar for ten. E.g. 27 is |||||||=.


Ancient Greek alphabet was borrowed from Phoenicians (it's seen by letters' names). Each letter has its fixed place and cannot be moved (it's seen by letters' numerical value). Later, Greeks' new alphabet threw away a couple of letters and added four more (to count up to number 900. Phoenicians counted just to number 400. Hebrew alphabet also added five final letters' shape to count to number 900, thus Hebrew alphabet is Greeks' alphabet descendant not Phoenicians'), thus letters' order and its numerical value changed in Greek alphabet.
Greek alphabet - Wikipedia
Hebrew alphabet - Wikipedia
Abjad numerals - Wikipedia

a) strict letters' order in Phoenician alphabet proves it has numerical value for every letter (not any two systems: letters for writing and strokes for counting. Egyptians did not have nor alphabet nor order of letters, thus Egyptians had strokes for counting as strict order);
b) Greeks adopted Phoenicians' alphabet with numerical value.


----------



## berndf

rushalaim said:


> b) Greeks adopted Phoenicians' alphabet with numerical value.


I don't know who told you that but it is pure nonsense.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> I don't know who told you that but it is pure nonsense.


So, explain me please the purpose of Phoenician alphabet's strict letters' order?


----------



## berndf

It might have been used for ordering as we still do it today (a. xxxx, b. xxxx, c. xxxx) and that might be the origin of the fixed order or it might just have been as a mnemonic device. There are no sources from where we could deduce that. But the modern numerical assignments Aleph-Tet = 1-9, Yod-Tsadeh=10-90 and Qoph-Taw=100-400 copies the Hellenistic Greek system and came up only after the Greek conquest of the Middle East under Alexander.

It is by, the way wrong to say one can only count to 400 just because 400 is the largest numerical value assigned to any number. The current year of the Jewish calendar, e.g., is 5779 and that is written התשע״ט, i.e. 5000 (written as an enlarged 5)+400+300+70+9 (or, usually, just תשע״ט as the 5000 is understood).


----------



## fdb

berndf said:


> It is by, the way wrong to say one can only count to 400 just because 400 is the largest numerical value assigned to any number.



The Greeks could write very large numbers by using sexagesimal positional notation, and also very small numbers using sexagesimal fractions. Both were adopted by Muslim astronomers and mathematicians.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> But the modern numerical assignments Aleph-Tet = 1-9, Yod-Tsadeh=10-90 and Qoph-Taw=100-400 copies the Hellenistic Greek system and came up only after the Greek conquest of the Middle East under Alexander.


There is Hebrew word מספר [mispar] _"number"_ in Pentateuch (Exodus 16:16) _"This is the thing which the Lord hath commanded, Gather of it every man according to his eating, an omer for every man, according to the *number* of your persons; take ye every man for them which are in his tents."_ 
from the word ספר _"book"_. That is _"number"_ and _"letter"_ are the same. Or do you acknowledge that Greeks wrote Pentateuch?


----------



## berndf

The verbal root ס-פ-ר means _to count_. No problem with that. מספר and ספר are two diferent words derived from the same root. Deriving the word for book from the verbal root _to count_ does indeed show that recoding number was an important purpose of books in early Canaanite languages. But it has nothing to do with the number values of letters. Early Canaanites had different symbols for numbers, which they recorded in _books_. The Hebrew word for letter, אות, is derived from a different root.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> The verbal root ס-פ-ר means _to count_. No problem with that. מספר and ספר are two diferent words derived from the same root. Deriving the word for book from the verbal root _to count_ does indeed show that recoding number was an important purpose of books in early Canaanite languages. But it has nothing to do with the number values of letters. Early Canaanites had different symbols for numbers, which they recorded in _books_. The Hebrew word for letter, אות, is derived from a different root.


Actually, Hebrew ספר means _"to carve on stones; cut hairs; shear"_. That's why Hebrew has מספרים _"scissors"_. Arabic also has that word _"to carve"_. To carve Phoenician letters on stones?


----------



## berndf

The is the kind of things that give rise to semantic shifts like _to carve > to count_. I can't tell you for sure that the two roots are genetically related. But there is certainly nothing implausible about such a shift.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> View attachment 32038
> 
> The is the kind of things that give rise to semantic shifts like _to carve > to count_. I can't tell you for sure that the two roots are genetically related. But there is certainly nothing implausible about such a shift.


I agree with your semantic shift to carve > to count. I read raMbaM of 12th century wrote as if Greek Pentateuch (in Greek letters) is quite sacred for Jews and it is possible to write Tefillin in Greek letters and wear it, but later rabbis forgot Greek language. Thus, is modern rabbinic Hebrew from Greek?


----------



## berndf

Well, Greek and Aramaic were the linguae francae of the region. So, both languages were quite important also in the Jewish communities in Roman times. Later, Greek lost much of its influence in Jewish culture, also because many of centres of Jewish learning were in the Persian (i.e. Parthian and later Sasanian) empires. But the Greek system of numbering came to Hebrew most likely indirectly via Aramaic.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> Well, Greek and Aramaic were the linguae francae of the region. So, both languages were quite important also in the Jewish communities in Roman times. Later, Greek lost much of its influence in Jewish culture, also because many of centres of Jewish learning were in the Persian (i.e. Parthian and later Sasanian) empires. But the Greek system of numbering came to Hebrew most likely indirectly via Aramaic.


Aramaic doesn't have any final forms of letters: Khaf, Mem, Nun, Pei, Tsadei. Those additional letters fulfill Hebrew alphabet from numbers 500 to 1000 (like Arabic alphabet has additional numbers/letters). But new Greek alphabet has additional numbers/letters: Y-psilon (400), Phi (500), Chi (600), Psi (700), O-mega (800), Sampi (900).


----------



## berndf

rushalaim said:


> Those additional letters fulfill Hebrew alphabet from numbers 500 to 1000


Not normally. 700 is, e.g., תש, i.e. 400+300. Where did you find that usage?


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> Not normally. 700 is, e.g., תש, i.e. 400+300. Where did you find that usage?


5 final forms of letters are not used as numbers today but obviously they were supposed for that. 
You say as if letters as numbers were used imitating Greek practice. I'll ask you in the third time: explain, why does Phoenician alphabet has *strict* alphabet letters' order? And Greeks followed it?


----------



## berndf

rushalaim said:


> but obviously they were supposed for that.


No, I don't think so. Those were just variant in the Aramaic alphabet that later became separated in Hebrew according to position in the word.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> No, I don't think so. Those were just variant in the Aramaic alphabet that later became separated in Hebrew according to position in the word.


If Hebrew alphabet has 5 final forms of letters: a) why only 5 forms not 22? b) why does Hebrew need just 5 final forms of letters if Hebrew is using gap between words like all modern languages?


----------



## berndf

rushalaim said:


> If Hebrew alphabet has 5 final forms of letters: a) why only 5 forms not 22? b) why does Hebrew need just 5 final forms of letters if Hebrew is using gap between words like all modern languages?


It doesn't "need" them. They just exist. For four of those five letters, the original form is closer to the long (final) forms and the non-finals are the modified forms. Those four letters have descenders. People probably didn't like descenders within a word and "squeeze" them vertically. The qoph is the only letter with descender that does not have a "squeezed" form. The mem is special. There is no real explanation for the closed final form. The original form was open. Here is a comparison of the square forms of the Aramaic alphabet as it is used for Hebrew today and the Imperial Aramaic alphabet form which it is derived.

Aramaic language and alphabet


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> It doesn't "need" them. They just exist. For four of those five letters, the original form is closer to the long (final) forms and the non-finals are the modified forms. Those four letters have descenders. People probably didn't like descenders within a word and "squeeze" them vertically. The qoph is the only letter with descender that does not have a "squeezed" form. The mem is special. There is no real explanation for the closed final form. The original form was open. Here is a comparison of the square forms of the Aramaic alphabet as it is used for Hebrew today and the Imperial Aramaic alphabet form which it is derived.
> 
> Aramaic language and alphabet


It doesn't explain why does modern Hebrew alphabet has as usual letters' forms as just 5 final letters' forms?


----------



## berndf

rushalaim said:


> It doesn't explain why does modern Hebrew alphabet has as usual letters' forms as just 5 final letters' forms?


Only those five letters have developed variants. Greek, e.g., has only one letter with a different final shape. Medieval/Early Modern Latin script also has only one letter with a position dependent variants. Not much logic to it.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> Only those five letters have developed variants. Greek, e.g., has only one letter with a different final shape. Medieval/Early Modern Latin script also has only one letter with a position dependent variants. Not much logic to it.


Ancient Greek doesn't have any letters' final forms at all! If you'll see old Greek texts you'll see there is even no any gap between words. Phoenician stone inscriptions also don't have any letters' final forms.


----------



## berndf

rushalaim said:


> Ancient Greek doesn't have any letters' final forms at all!


No, that was a medieval development.


----------



## rushalaim

berndf said:


> No, that was a medieval development.


Your words prove that Hebrew Torah with letters' final forms was invented just in Medieval.


----------



## berndf

rushalaim said:


> Your words prove that Hebrew Torah with letters' final forms was invented just in Medieval.


Don't be silly. The comment is about the final lower case sigma in Greek. And small calligraphic variations have nothing to do with the age of the text.


----------



## Abu Rashid

Jannoman said:


> The letter Alif ١ أ
> 
> 1- What does "Alif" mean for it is a word?


Alif in the Semitic languages refers to being tame, domesticated. The original proto-Sinaitic form of this letter was an ox head. The ox being one of the early domesticated animals.



Jannoman said:


> 2- Why does it look like this or it has been given this particular shape?


The Arabic form appears to come from the Syriac form, a straight vertical line, attached at the base to the preceding joining letter. Nabataean forms cannot explain this like Syriac can.


----------



## berndf

Abu Rashid said:


> The Arabic form appears to come from the Syriac form, a straight vertical line, attached at the base to the preceding joining letter. Nabataean forms cannot explain this like Syriac can.


This is the Syriac Aleph: ܐ. I am not quite sure what you mean.


----------



## fdb

The West Syriac aleph is a vertical stroke, quite like the corresponding Arabic letter.


----------



## berndf

Right, thanks.


----------



## Abu Rashid

berndf said:


> This is the Syriac Aleph: ܐ. I am not quite sure what you mean.


I mean this one: 



The base line joins with the preceding letter, just like it does in Arabic, when it's word final.

It is in the *Maḏnḥāyā* script.

Syriac alphabet - Wikipedia


----------



## berndf

Abu Rashid said:


> I mean this one:
> 
> 
> 
> The base line joins with the preceding letter, just like it does in Arabic, when it's word final.
> 
> It is in the *Maḏnḥāyā* script.
> 
> Syriac alphabet - Wikipedia


Thanks.


----------

