[Editorial note: [...] indicates use of Coptic text. Original
script is available for viewing in the PDF format of this
article.] DIALECTS, GROUPING AND MAJOR GROUPS OF. The discovery
of many Coptic manuscripts in the latter half of the twentieth
century has led to a multiplication in the identification
(sometimes disputed) of Coptic idioms, dialects, and
subdialects, an identification based mainly on phonology, the
most convenient and generally used criterion (see DIALECT,
IMMIGRANT). The most likely working hypothesis that has been
agreed upon is that the phonology of these idioms can be
determined by analysis of their different orthographic systems;
in practice, this is the only viable approach, since Coptic is a
dead language. The increase in the tiumber of known idioms is
quite obvious: Stern (1880) has only three “dialects,” S, B, and
F; Crum (1939) has five, S, B, F, A2 (= L), and A; Kahle (1954)
has six, S, B, F, M, A2 (= L), and A; Kasser (1964) has seven or
eight, S, (G?), B, F, M, A2 (= L), A, and