This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Actually, for Semitic transcription, I would argue that S1, S2, and S3 (and S.) are more useful than IPA. In large part this is because it makes the relationship between S^ in Ugaritic (for instance) and S in Arabic more obvious in that both (this is a controversial example, I know) are inextricably linked in the word "soul" (NFS^ and NFS respectively) but that the former is S2 and the latter is S1. Likewise, some of the information on this page is inimical to the truth. Both S and S^ (sin and shin/S1 and S2) are orthographically separate but also highly unstable (as in that previous example). Therefore, at a certain point of convergence, the word for Moses in Arabic and Hebrew was pronounced the same (Musha) because the Arabic sin was pronounced as S^ until a fairly late point. This information comes from a conglomeration of sources, most prominently Woodward's (ed.) book (2008). I've given up on Wiki. Nevertheless, I find it repeatedly amusing to point out how poorly these articles are written. Cheers! Michael Sheflin (talk) 06:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Also, I'd like to repeat my objection of how offensive it is that the "Semitic" alphabet is a Judaism-WikiProject (whose modern successors survive only as the multitude of languages in Ethiopia, Eritrea, and to a certain extent Sudan and Chad; Arabic, Hebrew, and Assyrian (I am not intentionally omitting anything, there are probably others I am forgetting)). I find it as offensive as if Beowulf or the Latin alphabet were WikiProject-Christianity; although actually Beowulf has greater relevance than these alphabets (to Judaism). Awful organization. Michael Sheflin (talk) 06:45, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Michael, WikiProjects decide independently whether a particular article is within their scope. It's not like someone came down from on high and said "this shall be yours and yours alone". If ANY other WikiProject wanted to be involved, all they'd have to do is put their template in the talk page, just like Writing Systems (of which I am a member) did. Do you actually believe that this doesn't deserve any attention from WikiProject Judaism? That's the only criteria, not what other WikiProjects should, in your opinion, also be involved. VIWStalk 05:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
The shin is also apparently used by satanists to symbolize their god lucifer. Can someone confirm this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 07:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
"Satanism" is 98% pop culture. Even if this might have been said at some point by somebody doesn't make it "real" in any meaningful sense. If you have a good reference, fair enough, but such things are made up on the go all the time. --dab(𒁳) 10:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
i saw here in Wikipedia in a different article that the Arabic letter ش and the Hebrew letter Sin (שׂ) were one's pronounced as a voiceless alveolar lateral fricative. first of all its clearly that the Ancient Arabic didn't had a voiceless palato-alveolar sibilant, for example in Hebrew language Moses, saturday, five, seven and nine are pronouced moʃe, ʃaːbat, χaːmiʃa, ʃivʕaː, tiʃʕaː and in Arabic they are pronouced musa, sabt, χamsa, saːbaʕa, tisaʕa. now about the Voiceless alveolar lateral fricative, the Hebrew letter sin (שׂ) was pronouced as [ɬ] and later as [s], and in Arabic the letter ش was pronouced as [ɬ] and later as [ʃ]. for example the word Ten in Hebrew is pronouced ʕaːsara (עשׂרה) and in Arabic its pronouced ʕaːʃara (عشرة). in Ancient times they were both pronouced ʕaːɬara. i think more details about this should be mentioned in this article.