Talk:ﷲ

Cleanup discussion
Someone asserts that this is a preposition. It is not a preposition. —Stephen 08:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * And no, it is not just an alternative spelling of الله. The term ﷲ is a prepositional phrase, consisting of a preposition and a noun. I got tired of arguing with editors who don’t know anything about Arabic, so I leave it to them to decide the headings, etc. —Stephen 20:48, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * How would it be used in a sentence, please? &#x200b;— msh210 ℠ 20:54, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * For instance, "I do this for Allah". Or "I give this unto Allah". —Stephen 21:21, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Good now? (We call such things "adverbs": e.g., to the gills, after the fact.) &#x200b;— msh210 ℠ 00:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me, and Stephen says he's leaving it to those of us who don't know anything about Arabic, so. :-)  —Ruakh TALK 00:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


 * This is الله not لله, in some fonts the alef is omitted but the carachter is actually Allah. Compare the two: serif: ﷲ monospace: ﷲ --Z 11:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, it’s an issue with fonts. This is the ligature form, being a single character instead of several letters. —Stephen (Talk) 12:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The definition is incorrect. The ligature alone, without the initial alif is the form of merging the preposition لـ ("to") with where the initial elidable alif is dropped. So,  should be romanised as "li-'llāh(i)" or "li-llāh(i)". The most common example of the form is  "praise to God" Anatoli (обсудить) 23:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I just noticed but I don't see its difference with  (visually). --Anatoli (обсудить) 23:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I don’t either. It depends on your fonts. I did some checking and it seems that different font manufacturers have differing opinions of this glyph. Some of them think it should be the ligature of the full word, while others think it should only be for , and that you should add the alif separately. So it appears differently depending on the font. It is not safe to use this glyph in a text, because it might appear incorrectly. —Stephen (Talk) 05:49, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, it's a strange character. This Unicode utility says it's Allah ligature but if I search on the web, it's used as the other ligature:, not as a full word. The utility doesn't recognise as one character, though. As the alif is not visible on  , I agree it wouldn't be correct or safe to use this character instead of the full word - . Anyway, to summarise, in my opinion, only  should be used for the full word (starting with  and the last three letters ,  and  are joined automatically to produce the ligature: ). Like this guy here says, the character is used on systems, which don't produce the ligature but it should be combined with an initial alif to mean "Allah". The entry is incorrect as it is but we need a better source. Sorry if I sound confusing. Perhaps we could number the entry, so we know, which one we are talking about. --Anatoli (обсудить) 06:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)