Talk:Wp/cop/ⲑⲙⲟⲩⲛⲁⲕⲱⲛ (ⲑⲱϣ)

Ibn Kabar rendered ⲛⲁⲑⲱⲡⲓ as صهرجت (Vat.Copt.71 f.86v); Kircher, unreliable as elsewhere, printed ⲡⲁⲑⲱⲡⲓ (p.209). Ibn Kabar also spelled ⲕⲁⲗⲗⲓⲛ (ibidem) whereas Kircher printed ⲕⲁⲗⲓⲛ (ibidem). --176.14.183.127 15:02, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

It’s a little tricky. So Mutubis previous name is Nutubis (Ramzi and his Geographical dictionary). An interesting thing that in life of Saint Hadid Nutubis is also called Butus (Coptic ⲡⲟⲩⲧⲱ) although the site of anicent Buto is quite far away from modern Mutubis. Butus itself is also called Nutu in Arabic (ⲛⲁⲑⲱ, ⲛⲑⲟ in Coptic) which is the same as ancient Natho (modern Sahragt) but Timm says that there are two Natho, so we can assume that the other one is Butu-Nutu-Nutubis. Timm also gives form ⲛⲁⲑⲱⲟ ⲡⲉ or ⲛⲑⲟ ⲡⲓ for Natho and although Scalaes equate it with Natho-Sahragt he says it’s wrong because Sahragt’s name in Coptic is also preserved (ⲥⲁϩⲣⲁϣⲧ) and Leontopolis-Natho bears another name in Arabic – Bana or Banay. So with a pinch of salt we can assume that this form ⲛⲁⲱⲟ ⲡⲉ (maybe via Greek because of «s» at the end) is a source of Nutubis and then Mutubis.

I've changed ⲕⲁⲗⲗⲓⲛ to ⲕⲉⲗⲗⲓⲛ because it better corresponds to tradition of transcribing Arabic with Coptic letters (although I'm not sure if name is Arabic). We can change it back to ⲕⲁⲗⲗⲓⲛ though. ⲥⲉⲣⲕⲓ (talk) 16:13, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that both Butu & Nutu are the same once at least as both are written similarly both in Coptic and Arabic. Kircher sometimes misreads such letters as can be seen supra. I think the best decision is the latest version of the Scalae as more easily consulted by the majority.--176.14.183.127 18:28, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But I didn't use Scalae in this conclusion. It's mostly a logical one, built on info from quite modern (Ramzi, Timm) and older (Life of Saint Hadid) sources as well as whole logic of the transition of Coptic place names into Arabic. Also, while we can assume that Butu-Nutu is just a scribal mistake (ب-ن), Coptic names (ⲡⲟⲩⲧⲱ-ⲛⲁⲑⲱ) suggest that it's not the case here. Also see info about two different towns called Natho (Timm, Das christlich-koptische Agypten in arabischer Zeit (Teil 4 M-P) p.1743). ⲥⲉⲣⲕⲓ (talk) 20:15, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas about Baltim? Peust says that according to Gauthier the last syllable may be Tm.t "the end (of Egypt)". What do you think? --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 23:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure. In light of the mediaeval ملطيم, it could be a ⲙⲁⲛⲑⲓⲙ, or maybe rather ⲙⲁⲛⲑⲓⲙⲓ, given the second part of the Egyptian word? I don't know why Gauthier (according to Peust) translates tm.t as "end", I don't know such a word. Or, because Balkim seems to be close to Baltim, whose second part may be ⲭⲏⲙⲓ, and we know that Balkim is ⲡⲉⲗⲭⲏⲙⲓ, maybe Baltim is ⲡⲉⲗⲑⲏⲙⲓ (or ⲡⲉⲗⲑⲓⲙⲓ). I don't know what ⲡⲉⲗ- is, but as it shows up in the one name, I think it is not a problem to suppose it for the other too. ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 13:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I actually came to the same conclusion (ⲡⲉⲗⲧⲏⲙⲓ but it's almost the same, Czapkiewicz says that Arabic ط is always ⲧ in his research) based on ⲡⲉⲗⲭⲏⲙⲓ. I guess ⲡⲉⲗ- could be just a lambicism of ⲡⲉⲣ- "house, place" so "place of tm.t (end?)". There's also a place name Biltan which Czapkiewicz gives the etymology of ⲡⲉⲗⲧⲏⲛⲉ/ⲡⲉⲣⲧⲏⲛⲉ p-rdny "anti-flood dam" but I doubt it's relevant in case with Baltim. Does ⲛ ever become ل (ⲙⲁⲛⲑⲓⲙⲓ-ملطيم)?. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 17:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think of lambdacism like in Fayyumic? Or just occasional lambdacism? Because I don't think there is evidence that the original Coptic dialect of Baltim had lambdacism.

I doesn't seem like Coptic N becomes Arabic lam often; I would not be suprised if it happens, but I didn't look for any examples. The reason why I supposed ⲑ is because of tm.t, because I thought t at the beginning of a stressed syllable would show up as ⲑ in Bohairic, but I don't know the word tm.t, and if it may in fact come from, e.g., older dm.t, than ⲧ would be better. ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 03:06, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lambdacism is likely a common feature in Egyptian Arabic toponymy as it shows up in a lot of modern pre-Arabic toponyms Egyptian toponyms. I can't tell if it happened before or after (most likely) the conquest. And I've suggested ⲧ only because of the Arabic ط in the modern name as it's the only evidence we can rely on. --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 02:25, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What would ⲑ show up as? ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 15:18, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent mistake[edit source]

The entry under ⲡⲓⲕⲁⲫⲁⲣ ⲙ̀ⲡϧⲉⲗⲗⲟ is written falsely <ϯⲫⲣⲉ (ⲙ̀ⲙⲉⲧⲁⲣⲁⲃⲟⲥ: دفرية)>, but the Coptic word is for another town in Tanta municipality, known in Egyptian Arabic, دفرة.

It supposed to be under the page ⲧⲁⲛⲧⲁⲑⲟ (ⲑⲱϣ), perhaps. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 20:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also think it should be spelled ⲕⲁⲫⲣ, rather than ⲕⲁⲫⲁⲣ, maybe even with ⲕⲁϥⲣ, as this is how Egyptians pronounce it, to ensure no one is pronouncing it /kɑbɾ/ or /kɑpɾ/ and since it is a loanword not from Greek. --20:07, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

You're right about Difra, i've just assumed both toponyms share the same etymology. Concerning ⲕⲁⲫⲁⲣ - it's just attested in Coptic. Overall, i believe the old name's etymology Duminqun could be reconstructed as something like ϯⲙⲓⲛⲕⲱⲛⲓ (ϯⲙⲓ-ⲛⲕⲁ-ⲱⲛⲓ) --ⲫⲁϯⲟⲩⲉⲣϣⲓ (talk) 20:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]