1

L2/20-246Teethandbellies:aproposedmodelforencodingBookPahlaviRoozbehPournader(WhatsApp)September7,2020

BackgroundInEverson2002,aproposalwasmadetoencodeaunifiedAvestanandPahlaviscriptintheUnicodeStandard.Theproposalwentthroughseveraliterations,eventuallyleadingtoaseparateencodingofAvestanasproposedbyEversonandPournader2007a,inwhichPahlaviwasconsiderednon-unifiablewithAvestanduetoitscursivejoiningproperty.Thenon-cursiveInscriptionalPahlavi(EversonandPournader2007b)andthecursivePsalterPahlavi(EversonandPournader2011)werelaterencodedtoo.ButBookPahlavi,despiteseveralattempts(seetheBookPahlaviTopicalDocumentlistathttps://unicode.org/L2/topical/bookpahlavi/),remainsunencoded.

Everson2002ispeculiaramongearlierproposalsbyproposingsixPahlaviarchigraphemes,includinganear,anelbow,andabelly.IrememberfromconversationswithMichaelEversonthatheintendedthesetobeusedforcaseswhenascribewasjustcopyingsometextwithoutunderstandingtheunderlyingletters,consideringthecomplexityofthescriptandthelossofsomeofitsnuancestolaterscribes.Theycouldalsobeusedwhenmodernscholarswantedtorepresentamanuscriptaswritten,withoutneedingtoover-analyzepotentiallycontroversialreadings.

Meyers2014takessuchagraphicalmodeltoanextreme,tryingtoencodepiecesofthewritingsystem,mostofwhichhavesomecorrespondencetoletters,butwithoccasionalpartialletters(e.g.PARTIALSHINandFINALSADHE-PARTIALPE).Unfortunately,theirproposalrejectsjoiningpropertiesforBookPahlaviandinsiststhat“[t]hejoiningbehaviourofthefinalstemsofthecharactersinBookPahlaviismoresimilartocursivevariantsofLatinthantoArabic”.Thisisdespitetheirdiscussionof“Joiningside[s]”intheirTable2.1(p.11).Assuch,theproposalwasnotacceptable,asitwascleartoUnicode’sexpertsthatthescriptwouldbenefitfromArabic-likejoiningproperties.

ReadingthelatestBookPahlaviproposal,Pandey2018,especiallyitssections5.1aswellasthesectionsdiscussingproposedfixed-formcharacters,6.2and6.4.2,anddiggingdeeperintothematerialpresentedaboutthenuancesofthescriptbyNyberg1964,AmoozgarandTafazzoli1996,andSkjærvø2008ledmetounderstandingthatthesameirregularitiesthatPandeyhastriedtofixbyintroducingfixedformlettersareakeypartofthewritingsystem.TheBookPahlaviwritingsystemisverygraphical.Nyberg,forexample,refersto“[t]heintricateprocessbywhichtheIranianscribestransformedAramaicformsintopurelygraphicsigns[…]”(emphasismine)whendiscussingheterograms(thequoteisfromNybergetal1988.

2

Modernexperts,whentryingtoreproduceBookPahlavimanuscriptsordiscusswords,appeartocareabouttwoaspectsalot:ifabellyisformed,andifthereisacurl.Thefirstdistinctiontendstomakeorbreakaword.Althoughtherearesomecommonpatternsthatcanbediscoveredaboutwhenabellyisformedandwhenit’snot(asdescribedinPandey2018),thereareirregularitiesandexceptionsthattellmeweshouldavoidover-analyzingthescriptfordiscoveringthem.Theformationofabellyappearstobeaspellingconventionthathassomerules,aswellassomeexceptions.Insteadoftryingtohard-codethosespellingconventionsinafontortextshapingsystem,weshouldcomeupwithdifferentcharactersforeachelementofwriting.Certainsequencesoftheseelementsmaybecommon,andcertainsequencesmayberareornon-existent,butallowingthemwouldletthemodernscholarhavetheabilitytochoosetheformtheyneed,insteadoftheirhandbeingforcedbythefontorrestrictionsofthetypesettingsoftware.

TeethandbelliesLet’sstartwithanexample.Thewordgēhān<gyhʾnˈ>accordingtomyfourmajorsources,aswellasPandey2018,iswrittenasfollows:

Nyberg1964(withdisambiguatingdots,sortedundergimel-daleth-

yodh)

MacKenzie1986(sortedundersamekh)

AmoozgarandTafazzoli1996(sortedundersamekh)

Skjærvø2008

Pandey2018(missingafinalstroke)

Ifsomeoneseestheformin,say,MacKenzie1986orSkjærvø2008outofcontext,theywillnotknowifthefirsttwostrokesaretwogimel-daleth-yodhs, or a single samekh. MacKenzie1986andAmoozgarandTafazzoli1996acknowledgethisbyevenputtingthewordintheirwordlistundersamekh.Furtherinsidetheword,it’sjustteethandbellies:somebodyfamiliarwiththewordwouldknowthattherearetwolettershere:thefirststraighttoothandthefirstbellyrepresentingthefirstaleph-heth,andthefinaltwostraightteethrepresentinganotheraleph-heth.Buttheycouldtheoreticallybeanythingelse:forexample,

3

thebellyandthetwostraightteethafteritmayhaverepresentedshin.There’sbasicallynowayofknowingbylookingatthespelling:oneneedstocheckthetransliterationsprovidedbyexperts. Forthisspecificword,whatisclearfromtheshapesisthatthenumberofteethandtheexistenceofcurlsdoesn’tchange.Whatisunclearisiftheright-mostgimelhasabellyornot.ItappearstoformabellyinNybergandMacKenzie,althoughnotinAmoozgarandTafazzoli.Infact,AmoozgarandTafazzolimaybelistingaslightlydifferentspelling.TheissuemaybefurtherglancedfromtheletterpairchartsinNyberg1964(p.133),aswellasAmoozgarandTafazzoli1996(p.56).Here’swhattheylistforasequenceoftwogimel-daleth-yodhs:

Nyberg AmoozgarandTafazzoli

Ireadthistomeanthefirstlettermayformabellyornot,andmayloseitscurlyhead,butprobablynotboth(whichwouldmakethecombinationlooktoomuchlikethebeginningofshin).Iassumethesecondletter’sshapeisnotsetinstoneandmaystillgetaffectedbytheletterorlettersthatcomeafterit.Butallthisdoesnotappeartobecompletelyarbitrary.Weprobablycan’treplaceoneofthethreeformsforanotherandhavethesameword.Anotherwaytolookatthisisthatthereisabsolutelynowaytodistinguishanaleph-hetorasamekhfromasequenceoftwogimel-daleth-yodhswithoutknowingtheword.Thismayhavebeenfineifanyoftheseconfusablecaseswererare.ButtheyaresomeofthemostcommonlettersandsequencesinBookPahlavi!Therearesomepatternsintheorthography,ofcourse.Forexample,acarefulanalysisofwordlistsappearstoindicatethattwocurl-lessbelliescannotimmediatelyfolloweachother.Butlookingdeeper,itappearsthatmanuscriptsindeedcontainthem.HerearetwoexamplesfromSkjærvø2008,p.9:

FromtheseandseveralotherexamplesIhaveconcludedthatthebestmodelforencodingBookPahlavimaybeclosertoMeyers2014thanwehadexpected.ItshouldbenotedthatneitherMeyers’snorPandey’smodelareabletorepresentthetwoSkjærvøexamplesabove.Butasimplerteethandbelliesmodelwould.

4

ThefundamentalelementsofthemodelIproposearefourbasiccharacters,whichEverson2002calledarchigraphemes(thesenamesarenotformalcharacternames,thosecanbedecidedlater):

Tooth CurledTooth Belly CurledBelly

- g/d/y - 1st or 2nd half of a/h - 2ndor3rdthirdsofš-2ndhalfofbelliedformofs

- g/d/y -1stor2ndhalfofnon-belliedformofs

-bellied form of g/d/y -2ndhalfofbelliedformofa/h-1stthirdofšinIranianMSS-thetoothandbellybeforefinalp

-bellied form of g/d/y -1sthalfofbelliedformofs-1stthirdofšinIndianMSS

Allthecharacterswouldbedual-joining.Teethappearinallpositionalforms,whilebelliestendtoappearonlyininitialandmedialforms:theyalwaystendtobefollowedbyanothercharacter.Theezafesignwouldberepresentedbytheisolatedformof<tooth>,whosestemwouldbeelongatedalittleinfinalandisolatedforms.Here’showthelettersmadeofteethandbelliesarerepresentedinthismodel:

• gimel-daleth-yeh:<tooth>,<curledtooth>,<belly>,or<curledbelly>• aleph-heth:<tooth,tooth>or<tooth,belly>• samekh:<curledtooth,curledtooth>,<curledtooth,curledbelly>,<curledbelly,

tooth>,or<curledbelly,curledbelly>• shin:<belly,tooth,tooth>inIranianmanuscripts,<curledbelly,tooth,tooth>in

Indianmanuscripts

5

Here’saproposedencodingforthefourslightlydifferentspellingsofgēhān.Notethatthislevelofdistinctionmaybeunnecessaryorundesiredforthisspecificword,butitcomesinhandyforotherwords:

Nyberg1964

curledbelly,twodotsabove,curledbelly,twodotsbelow,tooth,belly,

tooth,tooth,w/n/r,w/n/r

MacKenzie1986

curledbelly,curledbelly,tooth,belly,tooth,tooth,w/n/r,w/n/r

AmoozgarandTafazzoli1996

curledtooth,curledbelly,tooth,belly,tooth,tooth,w/n/r,w/n/r

Skjærvø2008 curledbelly,curledbelly,tooth,belly,

tooth,tooth,w/n/r,w/n/rSimilarly,theexamplegiveninPandey2018,pp.8–9, <šʾhʾn>šāhān,wouldberepresentedas<belly,tooth,belly,tooth,belly,tooth,belly,tooth,tooth,waw-nun-ayin-resh>withnoneedtoanalyzeitsletters.Notethattheexperts’conceptualizationsdon’tnecessarilycompletelyagreewitheachotheroruseallourcharacters.Forexample,inallofSkjærvø2008’stypesetBookPahlaviexamplestheredoesn’tseemtobeanycurledtooth.Thismaybealimitationofhisfont,sinceinsomeoftheexamplesincludedfrommanuscripts,suchadistinctionappearstoexist(oritmaybethecasethatSkjærvødoesn’tbelievethedistinctionisimportant):

Intheabovetext,fromBundahišn(Skjærvø2008,p.152),theblueovalsindicatetwonormalteeth,whiletheredovalindicatesacurledtooth.

6

Onthecontrary,Nyberg1964clearlyhasadistinctionbetweencurledandstraightteethinhisconceptualization.Forexample,here’stheword<LYLYʾ-1> from its page 1:

Thecharactersequencerepresentingtheabovewordinourproposedmodelwouldbe<lamedh,curledtooth,lamedh,curledbelly,tooth,tooth,beth/1>.Forthesakeofcomparison,hereisthesameword(minusthe<-beth/1>suffix)intheotherthreesources:

MacKenzie1986

lamedh,tooth,lamedh,belly/curledbelly?,tooth,tooth

AmoozgarandTafazzoli1996

lamedh,curledtooth,lamedh,curledbelly,tooth,tooth

Skjærvø2008

lamedh,tooth,lamedh,curledbelly,tooth,tooth

InMacKenzie1986andAmoozgarandTafazzoli1996it’ssometimesthelinebetweencurledtoothandcurledbellythatisnotveryclear.Consideringthatboththesesourcesarehandwritten,Iwouldexceptthatachoicewouldhavebeenmadeeverytimeiftheywerecommittingittotype.Asasidenote,certainnuancesofthewritingsystemmayalsobecomerepresentableifwechoosethismodel.Forexample,athree-waydistinctionofthevariousshapesofthepair<gimel-daleth-yeh,kaph>,asseeninNyberg1964(p.132)andAmoozgarandTafazzoli1996(p.55)canberepresentedasfollows:

<curledtooth,kaph><tooth,kaph><belly,kaph>

ItshouldbenotedthattheexpertsalreadymakesimilarchoicestoourmodelincollatingBookPahlaviwords,astheyareforcedtobythenatureofthescript.Forexample,hereiswhatNyberg1964saysatthebeginningofitswordlist(AmoozgarandTafazzoli1996containsastructurallysimilarintroductiontotheirwordlist):

7

Theteethandbelliestakecareofaleph-het,gimel-daleth-yodh,samekh,andshin.Mostotherlettersarestraight-forwardandcanmostlyfollowthemodelofPournader2013andPandey2018,exceptforpeandsadhewhichshareafinalform.

8

PeandsadheTorepresentpeandsadhe,wecan:

1. Limitsadhetoanon-joiningform,onlytobeusedwhennotjoiningtothepreviousletter.

2. Makeperightjoiningwithnoextrateethinitsfinalform.Thesewouldbethefinalandisolatedformsofpe:

isolated final

Whenthereisanextratoothorbellybeforeafinalpe,anexplicittoothorbellycharacterwouldbeusedtorepresentthesequence.Butinwordswherepeisuseddisconnectedfromitspreviousletter,notoothorbellycharacterwouldbeused.Thesequence<belly,pe>wherethebellywouldbeininitialpositionalform,shouldbeavoided.Thisisnottheonlymodelimaginableforpeandsadhe.Icanimaginetwoothermodels,foratotalofthree:

A) Themodelpresentedabove,withperight-joiningandsadhenon-joining.Thishastheproblemof<initialbelly,finalpe>beingindistinguishablefrom<isolatedpe>.

B) Keepingperight-joiningandsadhenon-joining,butdefiningnoisolatedformforpe,requiring<belly,pe>tobeusedforanisolatedpe.ThisissomehowsimilartowhatMeyers2014proposes.Thishastheproblemofpebecomingafinal-onlycharacter,aswellasacounter-intuitiverequirementforenteringisolatedpe.Butitavoidsdifferentwaystorepresentsomewords.

C) Makingbothpeandsadheright-joining,withfinalpehavinganextratooth/bellycomparedtothefinalsadhe.Thisisclosetotheperceptionofusersofthewritingsystem.Inthismodel,whenthereisnoextratooth/belly,sadhewouldbeusedinthespelling,eveniftheletterpeispronounced.Thishastheproblemof<belly,finalsadhe>beingindistinguishablefrom<finalpe>.

9

HereisanexcerptfromtheletterpairtableinAmoozgarandTafazzoli1996withproposedcharactersequencespermodelsAandBabove: sadhe pe

sadhetooth,belly,pecurledbelly,pezayin,pelamedh,pemem-qoph,pecurledtooth,curledbelly,pebelly,tooth,belly,pe

pe(modelA)belly,pe(modelB)tooth,tooth,belly,petooth,belly,pecurledtooth,belly,pecurledbelly,pezayin,belly,pezayin,pelamedh,belly,pelamedh,pemem-qoph,belly,pecurledtooth,curledtooth,belly,pecurledbelly,curledbelly,pebelly,tooth,tooth,belly,pebelly,tooth,belly,pe

10

Here’sthesametablefromNyberg1964permodelsAandBabove,withslightlydifferentspellings(italicized): sadhe pe

sadhetooth,belly,pecurledbelly,pezayin,pelamedh,pemem-qoph,pecurledtooth,curledtooth,pebelly,tooth,belly,pe

pe(modelA)tooth,pe(modelB)tooth,tooth,belly,petooth,belly,pecurledtooth,belly,pecurledbelly,pezayin,belly,pezayin,pelamedh,belly,pelamedh,pemem-qoph,belly,pecurledtooth,curledtooth,tooth,pecurledtooth,curledtooth,pebelly,tooth,tooth,belly,pebelly,tooth,belly,pe

TheexamplesfromSkjærvø2008cannowberepresentedtoo:

Theleftoneis<tooth,belly,belly,pe>(modelAorB),whiletherightoneis<tooth,belly,belly,tooth,tooth>.

11

Otherletters1. Allsourcesagreethatthefinalstrokeisindistinguishablefromwaw-nun-ayin-resh.

Theyshouldbeunifiedasonecharacter.2. Allsourcesappeartoagreethattheletterhe ,onlyusedinheterograms,is

indistinguishablefromthesequence<mem-qoph,waw-nun-ayin-resh>.Thatsequenceshouldbeusedtorepresenthe.Its“graphicalside-form”,asexplainedbelow(Nyberg1964,p.130),shouldberepresentedas<mem-qoph,mem-qoph,waw-nun-ayin-resh>:

3. Thehookedlamedh andtheoldlamedh ,asproposedbyPandey2018,both

appeartobeusedonlyinheterograms.Theyprobablyareglyphalternatives.ButforthesakeofmoreaccuraterepresentationofBookPahlavitextsandhelpingthescholarlycommunity,theyshouldbothbeencoded.(Pandey2018,p.26,claimsthat“theyoccurconcurrently”.Itwouldbegreattoseeevidenceofthat,whichwouldprovidefurtherjustificationforencodingboth).HerearetwoexampleswheretheyappearonthesamepageinSkjærvø2008(p.128)andNyberg1964(p.131):

4. Asweareapproachingamoregrapheticalencodingmodel,weshouldprobablyencodeaseparateloopedlamedh torepresent[l]inIndianmanuscriptstoo.

5. Nyberg1964p.135,talksaboutahookedmem-qoph.Itshouldbeencoded.Weneedtofindoutiftheformonlyappearsatendofwordsorcanbeusedmedially:

12

6. Itappearsthattheligaturex2,typicallyusedattheendofwords,canconnecttoaletterafterit.So,dependingonifitcanconnecttoitspreviousletterornot,thecharactershouldbeencodedaseitherdual-joiningorleft-joining.Here’stheexamplefromNyberg1964,p.136:

Itshouldalsobenotedthatthecharactercantakeacombininghatabove,asseeninSkjærvø2008,p.103:

7. Nyberg1964,p.134,saysthatkaphcanoccasionallyjointhefollowingletter:

Thisneedstobeinvestigatedmoreandcomparedwithmanuscriptsandothersources.Weneedtounderstandifthemid-wordkaphinthesuffix-īkānisjustacurledbellyoritisindeedagraphicalkaph.Ifit’sthelatter,wewouldneedtomakekaphdual-joininginsteadofright-joining.

8. Nyberg1964,p.131,talksaboutanoldformofnun:

Skjærvø2008,p.104seemstoconfirmthis:

AsimilarshapealsoappearsinthePahlavialphabetslistedattheendoftwomanuscriptsofFrahangiPahlavīk,appearingtocorrespondtoAvestanń(U+10B26AVESTANLETTERNYE).HerearetheimagesfromNybergetal1988:

13

Thisarchaicnun,aswellasothershapesmentionedinSkjærvø2008,needtobeinvestigatedfurther,toseeifadditionalcharactersneedtobeencoded.

9. OntheotherendofthespectrumaresomeformsfoundinthePahlavipapyri.AsthereisverylimitedanalysisofthePahlavipapyriavailabletome,Ican’tmakeaconclusioneitherwayifthescriptofthePahlavipapyrishouldbeunifiedwithBookPahlaviornot.Iftheyaretobeunified,weneedtomakedecisionsaboutcertainformonlyfoundinthepapyri,asmentionedbyNyberg1964,p.133:

NumbersBookPahlavinumbershavebecomeunifiedwithlettersandareindeedsometimesindistinguishablefromthem.Theyhavejoiningproperties,andappeartobemadeofthesameelementsofwriting:

• Thenumberone,whichlooksidenticaltotheletterbethandisalsousedattheendofwordstorepresentthesuffix-ē,shouldberepresentedbytheletterbeth.

• Thenumbers2-9shouldberepresentedbyasequenceofteethand<beth>s.• Thenumber10looksliketheletterkaphaswellastheolddaleth(olddaleth

appearstobeabettercandidate).Weneedtoinvestigatewhichoneisthebestcandidatetounifyitwith.Notethatthenumber10occasionallyconnectstothefollowingcharactertoo,sothecharacterusedforitshouldbemadeleft-joiningordual-joining.Acombinghataboveseemstobefrequentlyusedwiththenumber.

• Thenumber20shouldberepresentedbytheletterlamedh.• Thenumber40,60,and80shouldberepresentedbyasequenceofteethandbellies.• Thenumbers30,50,70,and90shouldberepresentedby20,40,60,or80followed

by10.• Thenumber100shouldberepresentedby<tooth/curlytooth,lamedh,zayin>or

<lamedh,zayin>whenthetoothismissing.• Thenumber200,dependingonthespelling,shouldberepresentedby<tooth,beth,

lamedh,zayin>or<tooth,tooth,lamedh,zayin>

14

• Thenumber1000shouldberepresentedby<lamedh,oldkaph>.FollowingisalistofnumbersfromNyberg1964,p.173.Othersourcescontainasimilarlistofnumbers,butarenotasexhaustiveasNyberg:

15

RarecombiningmarksFivecombiningdotpatternsinBookPahlaviarewellknownandwereproposedinEverson2002andPournader2013.Meyers2014broughtourattentiontothreemorecombiningmarkswehadpreviouslymissed.TheyarerepeatedinPandey2018withsomedifferencesbutnoattestation.Theyappeartobeusedinan1842CEmanuscriptcalledMU29(seeJamaspAsaandNawabi1976forareproductionandMazdapour1999andKönig2008fortranslationandanalysis).König2008,whichdoesn’tappeartobeacompletetranslation,acknowledgesinpp.127–130acombiningdotabove,usedovernun,pe,heth,daleth,andsamekh,aswellasothercombiningmarksusedwithotherletters,butnotacaron/hatbeloworthreedotsbelow.Zeini2020confirmsthethree-dots-belowmark,whichcanbeseenhereusedunderpeorsadhetorepresentoremphasizeporčsounds,similartothePerso-Arabicscriptuseofthreedotsbelowforپandچ:

Mazdapour1999

p.124,footnote11

p. 34, line -1

JamaspAsaandNawabi1976

p.5,line2

p. 11, line 5 Ibelievethisisenoughevidenceforencodingacombiningdotaboveandacombiningthreedotsbelow,andtheMU29manuscriptanditsscholarlyanalysisjustifyencodingtwocharacterstorepresentitsorthography.NotethatJoneidi1981,inhisBookPahlavi-basedwritingsystem,whichhasfoundsomeamateurfanfollowing,alsousesacombiningdotabove.SomeofhislettersevencoincidewiththeMU29orthography:

16

AsforMeyers2014’scaron-belowandPandey2018’shat-below,IagreewithZeini2020’sanalysisthatatleastasfarasMU29goes,it’sjustaquickwaytowritetwodotsbelow.Mazdapour1999,pp.34–35discussesallthediacriticsinMU29.There,whendiscussingtheshape,shetalksabout“asmallcrescent-shapedline”( یکچوک یللاه طخ )thatcangoaboveorbelowletters.Butalmosteverytimeit’smentioned,itismentionedasanalternativetotwodots.Hereitisonpage34:

Andonceagainonpage35:

HerearesomeofthePahlaviwordsmentionedbyMazdapour1999fromthemanuscriptitself(JamaspAsaandNawabi1976)wherethe“crescent”formisused(notethedifferenceinsizeandsharpnesswiththecombining-hat-above,circledinblue,andthatthecrescentlooksverymuchlikethebottomtwodotsinthethree-dots-abovemarkusedovershin,circledingreen,aswellasthetoptwodotsinthethree-dots-belowmarkshowninthemanuscriptsamplesinpreviouspage):

p. 8, line 5

p. 8, line 6

p. 8, line 14

p.53,line15

17

p.90,line16

p.90,line17

Andherearesomeexamplesofthe“crescent”formappearingundersomeletters:

p. 2, line 12

p. 55, line 8

Itisclearfromthecomparisonwiththree-dots-above,three-dots-below,andhat-above,aswellasanalysisbyMazdapour1999,König2008,andZeini2020,thatcontrarytoMeyers2014andPandey2018,thisisnotahat-likecharacter,butasimplequickwaytowritetwodots,eitheraboveorbelowaletter.AndfromMazdapour1999’sanalysis,itisclearthattheyareindeedorthographicallyidentical.Encodingthecrescent-likecharacter(s)wouldonlybeusefulinrepresentingthetypesettextofMazdapour’sbook(suchnicheapplicationsmayuseU+0306COMBININGBREVEandU+032ECOMBININGBREVEBELOW).DigitizationeffortsofMU29wouldbebetterservedbyusingthetwo-dots-aboveandtwo-dots-belowcharacters.Altogether,basedontheevidenceI’veseen,IrecommendsevencombiningmarksforBookPahlavi.Ahatabove,single-dotaboveandbelow,two-dotsaboveandbelow,andthree-dotsaboveandbelow.ThesearethefivecommoncombiningmarksproposedinPournader2013thatarementionedineveryBookPahlavireference,plusdot-aboveandthree-dots-belowusedbyMU29(andJoneidi).Bibliography

1. J.AmoozgarandA.Tafazzoli.1996.PahlaviLanguage:Literature,GrammaticalSketch,TextsandGlossary( نآ روتسد و تایبدا :یولهپ نابز ).2ndrevisededition.Moin,Tehran.

2. MichaelEverson.2002. “RevisedproposaltoencodetheAvestanandPahlaviscriptintheUCS.”UTCDocumentRegisterL2/02-449.TheUnicodeConsortium.https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2002/02449-n2556-avestan.pdf

3. MichaelEversonandRoozbehPournader.2007a.“RevisedproposaltoencodetheAvestanscriptintheSMPoftheUCS.”UTCDocumentRegisterL2/07-006R.TheUnicodeConsortium.https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2007/07006r-n3197r-avestan.pdf

4. MichaelEversonandRoozbehPournader.2007b.“ProposalforencodingtheInscriptionalParthian,InscriptionalPahlavi,andPsalterPahlaviscriptsintheSMPoftheUCS.”UTCDocumentRegisterL2/07-207R2.TheUnicodeConsortium.https://www.unicode.org/wg2/docs/n3286.pdf

18

5. MichaelEversonandRoozbehPournader.2011.“ProposalforencodingthePsalterPahlaviscriptintheSMPoftheUCS.”UTCDocumentRegisterL2/11-147.TheUnicodeConsortium.https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2011/11147-n4040-psalter-pahlavi.pdf

6. Kh.M.JamaspAsaandMahyarNawabi.1976.MS.MU29:StoriesofKersāsp,Tahmurasp&Jamshed,Gelshah&OtherTexts( ،بساشرگ ناتساد :۲۹ وا ما سیونتسد

رگید یاهتنم و هاشلگِ ،دیشمج و سرومهت ).AsiaInstituteofPahlaviUniversity.Shiraz.https://archive.org/details/fereydoun_MU29

7. FereydounJoneidi.1981.Nāme-yePahlevāni:Khodāmuz-eKhatvaZabān-ePahlavi-eAškāni,Sāsāni( یناساس ،یناکشا یولهپ نابز و طخ زومآدوخ :یناولهپ هٔمان ).Balkh.Tehran.https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NPrg.pdf

8. GötzKönig.2008.DieErzählungvonṬahmuras̱undǦamšid:EditiondesneupersischenTextesinPahlavi-Schrift(MU29)nebstzweierParallelfassungen.HarrassowitzVerlag.Wiesbaden.ISBN978-3-447-05694-6.

9. D.N.MacKenzie.1986.AConcisePahlaviDictionary.OxfordUniversityPress.London.ISBN0-19-713559-5.http://www.rabbinics.org/pahlavi/MacKenzie-PahlDict.pdf

10. KatayunMazdapour.1999(=1378AP).Barresi-eDastnevis-eM.U29:Dāstān-eGaršāsb,TahmurasvaJamšid,GelšāhvaMatn-hāyeDigar( ناتساد :٢٩ وا .م سیونتسد یسررب

رگی د یاھ نتم و داشلگ ،دیشمج ساشرگ و سرومھت ،ب ).Agah.Tehran.https://archive.org/details/MU29KatayounMazdapour

11. AbeMeyers.2014.“ProposalforEncodingBookPahlaviintheUnicodeStandard.Version1.2.”UTCDocumentRegisterL2/14-077R.TheUnicodeConsortium.https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2014/14077r-book-pahlavi.pdf

12. HenrikSamuelNyberg.1964.AManualofPahlavi.VolumeI:Texts,Alphabets,Index,Paradigms,Notes,andanIntroduction.OttoHarrassowitz,Wiesbaden.ReprintedbyAsatir,Tehran,2003.ISBN964-331-131-7.

13. HenrikSamuelNyberg,BoUtas,andChristopherToll.1988.FrahangiPahlavīk.OttoHarrassowitz,Wiesbaden.ISBN3-447-02671-5.https://bayanbox.ir/view/1235209569370403369/frahang-i-pahlavik.pdf

14. AnshumanPandey.2018.“PreliminaryproposaltoencodeBookPahlaviinUnicode.”UTCDocumentRegisterL2/18-276.TheUnicodeConsortium.https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2018/18276-book-pahlavi.pdf

15. RoozbehPournader.2013.“PreliminaryproposaltoencodetheBookPahlaviscriptintheUnicodeStandard.”UTCDocumentRegisterL2/13-141.TheUnicodeConsortium.https://unicode.org/L2/L2013/13141-book-pahlavi.pdf

16. ProdsOktorSkjærvø.2008.“IntroductiontoPahlavi”.Cambridge,Mass.https://bayanbox.ir/view/8882150498859088732/Pahlavi-Primer-Prods-Oktor-Skjaerv.pdf

17. ArashZeini.2020.“Responseto‘NextstepsonBookPahlavi’(L2/20-135).”UTCDocumentRegisterL2/20-141.TheUnicodeConsortium.https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2020/20141-book-pahlavi-resp.pdf