posted
Ancient Egypt, like all other great African civilizations, was not the sole creation of a single ethnic group, but rather a collective collaboration of many African peoples, held together by a central government; at times ethnic tensions would plunge the nation into chaos, on other occasions, chaos would be due to other social tensions. Yet it remains the longest historical civilization in human history.
But the history of civilizations is always told as the history of its ruling class or its founders; in Ancient Egypt we have the Anu and later the Mesnitu ruling class obscuring the reality that Ancient Egypt was no different in its ethnic composition than modern Nigeria or Ethiopia, except perhaps with a greater sense of identity as a nationality.
Asiatic myths trumps African reality
It is a given that peoples emigrate from their homelands for a myriad of reasons. Emigrations out of historic Egypt into Asia, based almost entirely on biblical mythology, are readily accepted as historical fact - The Hebrews were enslaved in Egypt for four hundred years, were led out of there by this guy with an Egyptian name, who had a magical stick that parted the "Red" Sea...
On the reality side, of Africans emigrating from historic Egypt back into Africa, based upon tons of historical, cultural, linguistic, ad infinitum, evidence; this natural phenomena becomes "controversial"
Now look at the following quote, one that places the origin of the Fulani safely in the 'upper Nile region,' which ignores the historical reality that the Fulani were Egyptian nationals prior to their emigration into the upper Nile region,
quote: Fulani history Some historians believe the Fulani emerged from a prehistoric pastoral group that originated in the upper Nile region around 3500 B.C. As the climate of the Sahara grew increasingly harsh, population pressures drove them to migrate slowly west and south in search of better grazing lands. By the eleventh century the Fulani emerged as a distinct people group in the Sénégambia Valley. Over the next 400 years they journeyed back east, but south of the Sahara, which had become an inhospitable desert. Traditionally most Fulani are shepherds or cattle herders, but over time some settled down and, by the nineteenth century, had established a series of kingdoms between Sénégal and Cameroon. The Fulani have myths about how the nomads and settled rulers emerged...
...for starters here's some linguistic data comparing Fulani / Mdu Ntr...
I - mi / ni you - on / un we - en / un they - be / bu (people) to be bad - bonude / boone bad - boni / bon death; to die - maayde;maayude / maati, moute, moout, mouti last year - rawanen / snouf; ronpe eye - yitere / eirti blessing - barka / baraka cow - nagge / naga father - baaba / baba ... the evidence is inexhaustible...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seems this subject is remeniscent of the Dogon and "Po tollo". Africans themselves can say it for hundreds of years, but it won't be believed until foreigners give the green light.
quote:Some 12,000 years ago, the only place to live along the eastern Sahara Desert was the Nile Valley . Being so crowded, prime real estate in the Nile Valley was difficult to come by. Disputes over land were often settled with the fist, as evidenced by the cemetery of Jebel Sahaba where many of the buried individuals had died a violent death.
But around 10,500 years ago, a sudden burst of monsoon rains over the vast desert transformed the region into habitable land.
This opened the door for humans to move into the area, as evidenced by the researcher's 500 new radiocarbon dates of human and animal remains from more than 150 excavation sites
Posts: 455 | From: Tharsis Montes | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
...for starters here's some linguistic data comparing Fulani / Mdu Ntr...
I - mi / ni you - on / un we - en / un they - be / bu (people) to be bad - bonude / boone bad - boni / bon death; to die - maayde;maayude / maati, moute, moout, mouti last year - rawanen / snouf; ronpe eye - yitere / eirti blessing - barka / baraka cow - nagge / naga father - baaba / baba ... the evidence is inexhaustible...
Just to punch a hole in your rationale, I'll just demonstrate a few examples.
Let's take say, "you" in ancient Egyptian.
A number of words can mean "you" in ancient Egyptian: e.g.-- tn (m, dep.), ntk (m, indep.), tn (f or p, dep.), ntt (f, indep.) or nttn (p, indep.); not to leave out affixed counterparts like -- '-k' (m), '-t' (f), or '-tn' (p).
As one can see, it is more complex than presented in the so-called "Fulani/Mdu ntr" list cited above. None of these are taken into account in Wally's "selective" list.
Another example, let's take "I".
Here too, number of derivatives come to attention:
'Wi/wy' (m, dep.), 'ink' (m, indep.), and affixed -- '-i'.
The same can be demonstrated for several of the other terms listed.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Just to punch a hole in your rationale, I'll just demonstrate a few examples. Let's take say, "you" in ancient Egyptian...
(sigh) obviously doesn't understand the concept of correspondence in language - agreement: compatibility. Thinks that "exhaustive"(include every possible element) is a way to punch a hole in "correspondence."
Let us give an example by comparing the word "you" in three languages of the Romance family - Spanish, Portuguese, and French:
You - Tu, Voce, Tu tu / voce / tu vosotros / voce / te vosotras / voces / vous usted / tu / tu ustedes / te / toi Ud / ti / on Vd / Vos / - uno / senhor / - la / senhores / - le / senhora / - ti / senhoras / - les / ihe / - os / ihes / - te / o / - vds / os / - uds / a / -
an example of correspondence between the three related languages would then be;
you: tu / tu / tu you: tu / voce / tu you: vosotras / voces / vous
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Just to punch a hole in your rationale, I'll just demonstrate a few examples. Let's take say, "you" in ancient Egyptian...
(sigh) obviously doesn't understand the concept of correspondence in language - agreement: compatibility. Thinks that "exhaustive"(include every possible element) is a way to punch a hole in "correspondence."
Let us give an example by comparing the word "you" in three languages of the Romance family - Spanish, Portuguese, and French:
You - Tu, Voce, Tu tu / voce / tu vosotros / voce / te vosotras / voces / vous usted / tu / tu ustedes / te / toi Ud / ti / on Vd / Vos / - uno / senhor / - la / senhores / - le / senhora / - ti / senhoras / - les / ihe / - os / ihes / - te / o / - vds / os / - uds / a / -
an example of correspondence between the three related languages would then be;
you: tu / tu / tu you: tu / voce / tu you: vosotras / voces / vous
You can learn more about comparative linguistics in relation to African and Egyptian languages here .
posted
Although, only the religious take every part of the Exodus story as historical, most relegate it to the rank of legend. All legends have a historical core.
Unlike the daydream of Egyptian origins for Fulani no one seriously disputes that the Israelites became a national entity in KM.t and left it either voluntarily or forcefully in New Kingdom times (circa 14th cent. BCE) from the Eastern Delta.
How's that? The Egyptians never contested the existence of an Egyptian named leader of A3mw who was an iconoclast and seceded a multitude of Egyptian nationals and resident aliens moving them to the Levant.
What? Sounds fantastic? Well it's documented by two Egyptian scribes, Cheremon and Manetho (yeah, the guy we owe the king list to, among other things). And the first documented written historic mention of Israel is an AEL ethnonym inscribed on orders from none other than Pharaoh Merneptah himself.
Daydreamers of Egyptian origins for Fulani or other non-Egyptian ethnies can produce not a single ethnonymous use of Tutsi, Akan, Fulani, etc., in any primary Rn Mdw document.
All they can do is bewail the fact that such exists for Israel. Envy is such a terrible resource wasting thing, ain't it Wally.
quote:Originally posted by Wally:
Asiatic myths trumps African reality
It is a given that peoples emigrate from their homelands for a myriad of reasons. Emigrations out of historic Egypt into Asia, based almost entirely on biblical mythology, are readily accepted as historical fact - The Hebrews were enslaved in Egypt for [210] years, were led out of there by this guy with an Egyptian name, who had a magical stick that parted the "Red" Sea...
On the reality side, of Africans emigrating from historic Egypt back into Africa, based upon [a feather of non-]evidence; this natural phenomena becomes "controversial"
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't been here that long, so I usually take what akoben says about others with a grain of salt. However, now I have to ask given what you just posted and how it's very much out of place in this thread... The below represent you Al?
quote:alTakruri writes: Although, only the religious take every part of the Exodus story as historical, most relegate it to the rank of legend. All legends have a historical core. Unlike the daydream of Egyptian origins for Fulani no one seriously disputes that the Israelites...
The Fulani legends of origins in the east and specifically Egypt is exempt from having a historical core and is thus relegated to a daydream...how quaint and utterly contradictory...
quote:
...Daydreamers of Egyptian origins for Fulani or other non-Egyptian ethnies can produce not a single ethnonymous use of Tutsi, Akan, Fulani, etc., in any primary Rn Mdw document.
You continue to insist on misunderstanding the meaning of these religious terms and gods, and the fact of these names existing in the culture of Ancient Egypt. I'll try and give an example of how one should interpret this:
If you are strolling casually in some nondescript place and run into some kids wearing various garb; one sports a baseball cap with "NY" as a logo, another wears a tee-shirt with a silk-screen painting of the Golden Gate Bridge, another sports a "Lakers" jersey - your first impression is that these kids are either Americans or are heavily influenced by American culture...
The existence of major ethnic groups throughout Africa, who just happen to have self-described ethnic names that are exact replicas of the names of Ancient Egyptian gods is not something that one casually casts aside. This is factual evidence and not legend. I think that most people here got this the first time around...
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Just to punch a hole in your rationale, I'll just demonstrate a few examples. Let's take say, "you" in ancient Egyptian...
(sigh) obviously doesn't understand the concept of correspondence in language - agreement: compatibility. Thinks that "exhaustive"(include every possible element) is a way to punch a hole in "correspondence."
And I take it that your better understanding of basic rules of language has allowed you to miss the simple message in my last post?...which no doubt went right over your head. You are simply selecting some random words that you imagine are phonologically similar, but you are not taking into account the actual nature of the words; whether they are derived forms or the neuter form, whether they are simply alternatives amongst a number of lexicon that describe the same concept, which lexicon for an idea came first amongst the variety that express the same idea and so forth, not to leave out the grammatical rules of languages under pairwise comparison -- whether said languages share one. This is the same ignorance you greeted the challenge I put before you [which you run away from for a year or so now], with regards to your supposed Wolof-Mdu Ntr connections:
Originally posted by Wally:
5) Prove that the following expressions are NOT genetically/linguistically related:
EGYPTIAN:Bu nafret su em bu bon, "a state of good has become a state of evil" WOLOF :Bu rafet mel ni bu bon, "a state of good has become a state of evil"
EGYPTIAN:mer on ef, "he loved" WOLOF :maar on ef, "he loved passionately"
EGYPTIAN:mer on es, "she loved" WOLOF :maar on es, "she loved passionately"
EGYPTIAN:mer on sen, "they loved" WOLOF :maar on sen, "they loved passionately"
My reply:
You have to understand the either “neuter” or “genderless” terms, to be able to recognize their counterparts when they appear in gender suffixed or prefixed pronoun forms, as is the case above, with the term “nfr” - which becomes “nfr.t” [as feminine singular]. While some phonological similarity is obviously invoked in certain terms, like the case is between ‘bw” [Egyptian] and “bu” [Wolof], the “underived” or original application of terms must be examined to see if terms like “bw” [Egyptian], which appear to have multiple meanings, were reinvented multiple times [meaning - phonologically similar terms written in the same letters but without any relationship whatsoever] or simply took upon different disguises, with all ultimately converging on a common ancestral basic theme.
I am aware of ’n’ being used as a preposition, an adjective, a suffixed or dependent pronoun amongst its different applications, but not sure how or whether it relates to the term ‘on‘ used in the examples above, given that we are both familiar with the pronoun Egyptian terms [he, she, they] and the verb [loved] in question. If ‘n’ here does relate to ‘on’, then please clarify its grammatical application in the Wolof counterpart, and also please account for “passionately”, which doesn’t appear in the Mdu Ntr counterpart; for instance, is it denoted by some prefix or suffix [perhaps in the term ‘maar‘] or a lone-standing term [as in ‘on‘]. Whatever the case may be, I have a good hunch that it will weaken the seemingly smooth parallelism in the examples, by not repeating that level of parallelism in the substance behind the terms.
While one cannot rule out some level of relationship between the major African super-language phylums [be it through distant common origins or through historic contacts via immigration, trade networks or conflict], which should at any rate be expected and may well explain some similar terms appearing here and there, such links may or may not be strong when the languages in question are *elaborately* studied.
Your M.O. is to evade challenges you cannot cope with in one topic, wait for a year or so later, and bring the same topic again, hoping the challenges you were put to were forgotten.
Other topics wherein your total lack of knowledge of language had time and again been revealed include:
In these links, your irrelevance or lack of presence are telling; you are either marginalized to the sideline as petty cheerleader, a mute upon being challenged, or else altogether absent. In a few words: you are merely a copy & paste masta who is adept at simply copying & pasting from books, things which he fundamentally doesn't understand. You simply copy & paste Mdu Ntr lexicons, which any idiot with the same books that you have can do...but hardly actually understand language rules, which is why whenever you are tested, you simply breakdown with "sighs" and other such emotional gestures, and cop-out.
quote:
Let us give an example by comparing the word "you" in three languages of the Romance family - Spanish, Portuguese, and French:
You - Tu, Voce, Tu tu / voce / tu vosotros / voce / te vosotras / voces / vous usted / tu / tu ustedes / te / toi Ud / ti / on Vd / Vos / - uno / senhor / - la / senhores / - le / senhora / - ti / senhoras / - les / ihe / - os / ihes / - te / o / - vds / os / - uds / a / -
an example of correspondence between the three related languages would then be;
you: tu / tu / tu you: tu / voce / tu you: vosotras / voces / vous
1) If you weren't living under the rock all these years, it would have hit you immediately that it is no secret that the three languages you are supposedly comparing belong to the same language super-phylum, a non-issue. It seems to be a newsflash to you. LOL.
Fula and Ancient Egyptian belong to two different language phylums. The burden is all your's to support your fringe idea that they belong to a single one, *elaborately* from a language standpoint, not merely cherry-picking certain lexicon you imagine to be phonologically related, without even understanding either the basic nature of said terms or the basic language rules of the languages they respectively belong.
2) Your example is just rubbish that has no relevance to the topic you yourself brought up. You are a disgrace.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Futhermore, you are undoubtedly a crackpot who seems to think that ancient Egypt is essentially the origin point of modern humanity. Everyone from Wolof, Dogon, Fula to Bantu speaking groups came recently from Ancient Egypt as far as you are concerned. Talk about a wacko. LOL.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Futhermore, you are undoubtedly a crackpot who seems to think that ancient Egypt is essentially the origin point of modern humanity. Everyone from Wolof, Dogon, Fula to Bantu speaking groups came recently from Ancient Egypt as far as you are concerned. Talk about a wacko. LOL.
The linguistic and anthropological evidence make it clear that these people are related.
No one claims that all Africans originated in Egypt. No one claimed the pgymies and Bushman are from Egypt.
The Fula, Dogon and etc. all belong to the same language family. The evidence makes it clear these people originated in Highlands of the Sahara. After the area became arid these people migrated down into Nubia where they existed as the Niger-Congo Superfamily and went up the Nile to conquer the Anu and found Dynastic Egypt.
You have presented no evidence disputing these facts. All you provide is venom and insult. Material only the ignorant accept as valid and reliable. You sad angrey white boy pretending to be African.
posted
The Fula speak a language that is part of the Niger-Congo group.There is controversy surrounding the homeland of Niger-Congo.But most linguist place the homeland for this linguistic group in the Nile Valley. An origin of the Niger-Congo people in the Nile Valley would explain the close relationship between the Fulani and Egyptian languages; and place Fulani in East Africa.
For example, Jaja, J. M. 2008 “Interdisciplinary Methods for the Writing of “African History: A Reappraisal,” European Journal of Social Sciences 5(4): 55-65
quote:
(2) Niger – Kordofanian homeland The West African region is largely made up of the Niger-Kordofanian language family. The block of course excludes the 100 or 50 languages classified as Afro-Asiatic and the Songhai and Kanuri languages which belong to the Nile -–Saharan group. The Niger – Kordofanian family is composed of three large blocks called the Mande, Niger – Congo and Kordofanian. Niger – Congo occupies the eastern section of West Africa, Mande the Western section and Kordofanian the area to the south west of Sudan. The present geographical location of these three language blocks forms a fanlike structure, which suggests that their homeland is at the south-western Sahara where the boundaries of each group converge. The Mande group does not have the same degree of internal diversity as the Niger – Congo and Kordofanian. But Niger-Congo and Kordofanian have the same degree of diversity. (Dalby 1965). A combination of this fact and the fan-shaped arrangement of the three language blocks suggests that they belong to the same main language family. Besides, the unfavourable ecological situation north of the homeland, and the possibility of only moving southwards explains the fan-shaped nature of the dispersal to the area of southwestern Sahara.
Jaja discusses the present location of the speakers of these languages, but like Welmers he situates there homeland in the Sahara near Nubia.
McIntosh, R. J. 1998 The Peoples of the Middle Niger: the Island of Gold Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
quote:
Thus, we have a curious—and complex—pattern of prehistoric occupation in the Méma. There are a few sites demonstrably earlier than c. 4500-4000 BP [3.3-2.5 KBC]. There is a flourit of stone-using communities around 3500-3300 BP [1.9-1.6KBC] (with population injections from the Hodh and the Azawad). Then the region suffers an apparent sharp fall-off of population at c. 800-500 BC (despite a final infusion of Tichitt folk at mid-millennium)..
Does not contradict Welmer’s, all it says is that people from Dar Tichitt entered the area around 800-500 BC, this was hundreds of years after the Mande had established settlement in the Dar Tichitt region.
Roger Blench, Is Niger-Congo simply a branch of Nilo-Saharan, Nilo-Saharan ,(1995) 10:83-128, like Welmer’s noted that :
"Previous writers, noting the concentration of families in West Africa, have tended to assume a location somewhere near the headwaters of the Niger and explained Kordofanian by the migration of a single group. If the present classification is accepted, it becomes far more likely that the homeland was in in the centre of present-daySudan and the Kordofanian represents the Niger-Congo speakers who stayed at home (p.98)."
Roger Blench. 2006. Archaeology, Language, and the African Past New York: Altamira Press
quote:
pp. 132-133. With some misgivings, Table 3.4 puts forward dates and possible motives for expansion for the families of Niger-Congo. The dates are arranged in order of antiquity, not in the hypothetical order suggested by the genetic tree, and, in many cases the two are strongly at variance. There is no necessary correlation between the age of a family estimated from its apparent internal diversity and the date at which it appears to split from the Niger-Congo tree.. . . . .
MANDE 6000 BP Mande languages have spread from north to south with scattered outliers in Nigeria and Cote d’Ivoire. Mande shares the common Niger-Congo roots for cow and goat, and perhaps the Proto-Mande were an isolated livestock-keeping population at the edge of the desert, which expanded southward as habitat change created potential space for livestock keeping. Reconstructions implying cropping are not present in the protolanguage.
Christopher Ehret. 2000 “Language and History,” in B. Heine and D. Nurse, eds. African Languages.An Introduction pp. 274-297 Canbridge: Cambridge University Press
quote:
p. 294 A second, but still early and important stage in Niger-Congo history was the proto-Mande-Congo era. At this period, or so it appears from the evidence of word histories, the cultivation of the guinea yam and possibly other crops, such as the oil palm, began among at least the peoples of the Atlantic and Ijo-Congo branches of the family (Williamson 1993 proposes the early words for these crops; Greenberg 1964 identifies an Atlantic and Ijo-Congo verb for cultivation, •-lim-). Between possibly about 8000 and 6000 BC, these people spread across the woodland savannahs of West Africa, the natural environment of the Guinea yams. At that time, woodland savannah environments extended several hundred kilometers farther north into the Sudan belt than they do today.
The Blench hypothesis of the Mande living in the Sahara and moving southward does not conflict with my theory of a Saharan origin for the Mande speakers.
The term lim, is not the Mande term to cultivate.
In al-Imfeld, Decolonizing: African Agricultural History (2007) , claims that in relation to African agriculture the cultivation of yam began 10,000 years ago and rice cultivation in Africa by 6000 BC.
The major cultivated crop of the Mande speakers was millet not the yam. The term for cultivation among the Mande was not lim is Proto-Paleo-Afro-Dravidian *be . Millet was probably cultivated over 5000 years ago.
The earliest sites for the cultivation of millet lie in the Sahara . Here the earliest archaeological evidence has been found for African millets.
The major grain exploited by Saharan populations was rice ,the yam and pennisetum. McIntosh and McIntosh (1988) has shown that the principal domesticate in the southern Sahara was bulrush millet (pennisetum). Millet impressions have been found on Mande ceramics from both Karkarchinkat in the Tilemsi Valley of Mali, and Dar Tichitt in Mauritania between 4000 and 3000 BP. (McIntosh & McIntosh 1983a,1988; Winters 1986b; Andah 1981)
The linguistic evidence indicates that the Mande and Dravidian speakers formerly lived in intimate contact , in the Sahara. The speakers of these languages share many terms for agriculture.
Given the archaeological evidence for millets in the Sahara, leads to the corollary theory that if the Dravidians originated in Africa, they would share analogous terms for millet with African groups that formerly lived in the Sahara.
One of the principal groups to use millet in Africa are the Northern Mande speaking people . The Mande speaking people belong to the Niger-Congo group. Most linguist agree that the Mande speakers were the first Niger-Congo group to leave the original Nile Valley and Saharan highland primary homeands of the Niger-Congo speakers.
The Northern Mande speakers are divided into the Soninke and Malinke-Bambara groups. Holl (1985,1989) believes that the founders of the Dhar Tichitt site where millet was cultivated in the 2nd millenium B.C., were northern Mande speakers. To test this theory we will compare Dravidian and Black African agricultural terms, especially Northern Mande. The linguistic evidence suggest that the Proto-Dravidians belonged to an ancient sedentary culture which existed in Saharan Africa. We will call the ancestor of this group Paleo-Dravido-Africans.
The Dravidian terms for millet are listed in the Dravidian Etymological Dictionary at 2359, 4300 and 2671. A cursory review of the linguistic examples provided below from the Dravidian (Kol, Tamil ,Kannanda, & Malayalam ) , Mande and Wolof languages show a close relationship between these language. These terms are outlined below:
code:
Kol sonna --- --- ---- Wolof (AF.) suna --- ---- --- Mande (AF) suna bara, baga de-n, doro koro Tamil connal varaga tinai kural Malayalam colam varaku tina --- Kannanda --- baraga, baragu tene korale,korle *sona *baraga *tenä *kora
Below we will compare other Dravidian and African agricultural terms. These terms come from the Mande languages (Malinke, Kpelle, Bambara, Azer, Soninke), West Atlantic (Wolof, Fulani), Afro-Asiatic (Oromo, Galla), Somali, Nubian and the ancient Egyptian. The Paleo-Dravido-Africans came from a sedentary culture that domesticated cattle and grew numerous crops including wheat and millet. The Egyptian term for cultivation is Ř b j(w) #. Egyptian Ř b j(w) # corresponds to many African terms for cultivation:
code:
Galla baji 'cultivated field' Tulu (Dravidian language) bey, benni Nubian ba, bat 'hoe up ground' Malinke be Somali beer Wolof mbey, ambey, bey Egyptian b j(w) Sumerian buru, bur 'to root up'
These terms for cultivate suggest that the Paleo-African term for cultivate was *be.
The Egyptian term for grain is 0 sa #. This corresponds to many African terms for seed,grain:
code:
Galla senyi Malinke se , si Sumerian se Egyptian sen 'granary' Kannanda cigur
Bozo sii Bambara sii Daba sisin Somali sinni Loma sii Susu sansi Oromo sanyi Dime siimu Egyptian ssr 'corn' id. ssn 'lotus plant' id. sm 'herb, plant' id. isw 'weeds'
The identification of a s>Ř/#_________e pattern for 'seed,grain' in the above languages suggest that these groups were familiar with seeds at the time they separated into distinct Supersets. The fact that Sumerian Ř se # and Egyptian Ř sen #, and Malinke Ř se # are all separated both in time and geographical area highlight the early use of seeds * se , by Paleo-Dravido-Africans.
code:
Rice Soninke dugo Vai ko'o Manding malo Dravidian mala-kurula Mende molo, konu Kpelle moloy Boko mole Bisa muhi Busa mole Sa mela Bambara kini
Yam Bozo ku, kunan Vai jambi Malinke ku Dravidian kui, kuna, ku Bambara ku
It would appear that all the Proto-Dravidians were familiar with the cultivation of rice, yams and millet. This is not surprising because Weber (1998) made it clear that millet cultivation in ancient South Asia was associated with rice cultivation.
The linguistic evidence clearly show similarities in the Afican and Dravidian terms for plant domesticates. This suggest that these groups early adopted agriculture and made animal domestication secondary to the cultivation of millet, rice and yams. The analogy for the Malinke-Bambara and Dravidians terms for rice, millet and yams suggest a very early date for the domestication of these crops.
In summary, population pressure in the Sahara during a period of increasing hyperaridity forced hunter/gather/fisher Proto-Dravido-African people to first domesticate animals and then crops. The linguistic evidence discussed above indicate that the Proto-Dravido-African people migrated out of the Nile Valley to West African and Harappan sites with millet, yam and rice already recognized as principal domesticated crop.
This comparison of Mande agricultural terms make it clear, that just like the Egyptian term for dog uher , the speakers of these languages share the terms for cultivate, and seed. It also shows that before the Dravidians separated from the Mande speakers these groups were cultivating also cultivating rice and the yam.
The Niger-Congo speakers which include the Fula, Mande and Wolof originated in the Nile Valley—not West Africa. They migrated from East to West. The oral traditions of these people make it clear that when they arrived on the scene pygmy people were already settled in many areas they occupied.
quote: Wm. E. Welmers. 1971 "Niger-Congo, Mande" in T.A. Sebeok, et al. eds. Linguistics in sub-Saharan Africa (Current Trends in Linguistics, 7), pp. 113-140 The Hague: Mouton
P 119-120. By way of conclusion to this general overview of the Mande languages, a a bit of judicious speculation about Mande origins and migrations may not be out of order. It has already been stated that the Mande languages clearly represent the earliest offshoot from the parent Niger-Congo stock—not counting Kordofanian, which Greenberg considers parallel to all of the Niger-Congo, forming a Niger-Kordofanian macrofamily. An original Niger-Congo homeland in the general vicinity of the upper Nile valley is probably as good a hypothesis as any. From such a homeland, a westward Mande migration may have begun well over 5000 years ago. Perhaps the earliest division within this group resulted in the isolation of what is now represented only by Bobo-fing. Somewhat later— perhaps 3500 to 4500 years ago, and possibly from a new homeland around northern Dahomey [now Benin]— the ancestors of the present Northern-western Mande peoples began pushing farther west, ultimately reaching their present homeland in the grasslands and forests of West Africa. This was followed by a gradual spread of the Southern-Eastern division, culminating perhaps 2000 years ago in the separation of its to branches and the ultimate movement of Southern Mande peoples southeast and westward until Mano and Kpelle, long separated, became once more contiguous.
This reconstruction of Mande prehistory receives striking support from a most unexpected source— dogs. Back in the presumed Niger-Congo homeland—the southern Sudan and northern Uganda of modern times— is found the unique barkless, worried-looking, fleet Basenji, who also appears on ancient Egyptian monuments with the typical bee that compensates for his natural silence. Among the Kpelle and Loma people of Liberia, a breed of dogs is found which is so closely identical to the Basenji that it now recognized as the ‘Liberian Basenji’. In all of the Sudan belt of Africa from the Nile Valley to the Liberian forest, the dogs are somewhat similar in appearance, but very obviously mongrelized. It would appear that the Mande peoples originally took their Basenji dogs with them in their westward migration. At that time, the present Sahara desert was capable of sustaining a substantial population, and was presumably the homeland of the Nilo-Saharan peoples. The early Mande moment thus may have been through uninhabited land, and their dogs were spared any cross-breeding. The farthest westward Mande movement—that of the Southwestern group—was virtually complete before contact with dogs of other breeds. With the gradual drying of the Sahara and the southward movement of the Nilo-Saharan peoples, the remaining Mande peoples, as well as later waves of Niger-Congo migration made contact with other people and other dogs. The present canine population of the Liberian forests thus reflects the very early departure of the Mande peoples from their original homeland, and the subsequent early movement of the Southwestern group towards its present location, without contacting substantial number of unrelated people or dogs.
Liberian Basenji
Egyptian Basenji Egyptian Basenji Dog Hieroglyph
. Trade might account for the presence of Basenji dogs in both places. But, from the sense of the article, Welmers claims that speakers of other African languages surrounding the Kpelle have different dogs.
The term for Basenji may be uher. In Egyptian uher also means house, so some people claim the Egyptians placed a dog size after uher to denote the term dog.
Niger-Congo hunters probably early domesticated the dog. Hunters used dogs to catch their prey .
Egyptian Hieroglyph
.
Egyptian term for dog corresponds to many African, and Dravidian terms for dog:
Egptian uher
Azer wulle
Bozo kongoro
Guro bere
Vai wuru, ulu
Bo[Bambara] -ulu
Wassulunka wulu
Konyanka wulu
Malinke wuli, wuru, wulu
Dravidian ori
.
The above data indicates that there is contrast between Paleo-Afican l =/= r. The Egyptian Ř uher # , Azer Ř wulle # and Manding Ř wuru # suggest that the r > l in Paleo-African.
There is also vowel alternation in the terms for dog o =/= u. The predominance of the vowel /u/ in the terms for dog, make it clear that o<u. This evidence suggest that there are two Paleo-African terms for dog: Paleo-African [PA] *uru and *oro.
Futhermore, this comparison of the term for dog within and among Niger-Congo languages and Egyptian supports Welmers view that the dog was domesticated in the Nile Valley before the speakers of these languages separated, and migrated to other parts of Africa.
The key to science, is that control is used to test the cause of a hypothesis, layman rarely use control, they accept a hypothesis gased on belief and biases.
Finally scientists test relationships to determine their validity. Science is concerned only with things that can be tested and observed.
Let's look at Welmers hypothesis. All research begins with a research question.
Research Question: Where did the Niger Congo speakers originate?
Null hypothesis: There is no relationship between the present location of the Niger-Congo speakers and the original homeland of the speakers of these languages.
Result: The Niger Congo speakers probably originated in the Nile Valley because the Kpelle , who speak a Mande language, have the basanji dog, which was the domesticated dog of the Egyptians and other Nile Valley people.
The hypothesis was further supported by a most interesting finding, that was that the basanji dog is not the hunting dog of other ethnic groups inhabiting areas between the Nile Valley and where the Mande speakers live.
Welmers hypothesis was confirmed. To disconfirm this hypothesis you have to present evidence that nullifies the findings of Welmers.
To test Welmers hypothesis, I compared the Egyptian term for dog and the Mande term for dog. The linguistic evidence supports the physical evidence discussed by Welmer. Wm. E. Welmers identified the Niger Congo home land. Welmers in "Niger-Congo Mande", Current trends in Linguistics 7 (1971), pp.113-140,explained that the Niger-Congo homeland was in the vicinity of the upper Nile valley (p.119). He believes that the Westward migration began 5000 years ago.
In support of this theory he discusses the dogs of the Niger-Congo speakers. This is the unique barkless Basenji dogs which live in the Sudan and Uganda today, but were formerly recorded on Egyptian monuments (Wlemers,p.119). According to Welmers the Basanji, is related to the Liberian Basenji breed of the Kpelle and Loma people of Liberia. Welmers believes that the Mande took these dogs with them on their migration westward. The Kpelle and Loma speak Mande languages.
He believes that the region was unoccupied when the Mande migrated westward. In support of this theory Welmers' notes that the Liberian Banji dogs ,show no cross-breeding with dogs kept by other African groups in West Africa, and point to the early introduction of this cannine population after the separation of the Mande from the other Niger-Congo speakers in the original upper Nile homeland for this population. As a result, he claims that the Mande migration occured before these groups entered the region.
Linguistic research make it clear that there is a close relationship between the Niger-Congo Superlanguage family and the Nilo-Saharan languages spoken in the Sudan. Heine and Nurse (Eds.), in African languages: An introduction , Cambridge University Press, 2000, discuss the Nilo-Saharan connection. They note that when Westerman (1911) described African languages he used lexical evidence to include the Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo languages into a Superfamily he called "Sudanic" (p.16). Using Morphological and lexical similarities Gregerson (1972) indicated that these languages belonged to a macrophylum he named " Kongo-Saharan" (p.16). Research by Blench (1995) reached the same conclusion, and he named this Superfamily: "Niger-Saharan".
Genetic evidence supports the upper Nile origin for the Niger-Congo speakers. Rosa et al, in Y-Chromosomal diversity in the population of Guinea-Bissau (2007), noted that while most Mande & Balanta carry the E3a-M2 gene, there are a number of Felupe-Djola, Papel, Fulbe and Mande carry the M3b*-M35 gene the same as many people in the Sudan.
In conclusion, Welmers proposed an upper Nile (Sudan-Uganda) homeland for the Niger-Congo speakers. He claims that they remained intact until 5000 years ago. This view is supported by linguistic and genetics evidence. The linguistic evidence makes it clear that the Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo languages are related. The genetic evidence indicates that Nilo-Saharan and Niger-Congo speakers carry the M3b*-M35 gene, an indicator for the earlier presence of speakers of this language in an original Nile Valley homeland.
In summary Welmer’s makes two key points: 1) the Mande migration began around 3000BC out of the Nile Valley; and 2)Welmers proposed migration from Benin around 1500BC, 1500 years after the initial migration of the Mande from the Nile Valley.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gaul , Wally thanks for trying to keep this discussion intelligent. It is clear that Explorer is attempting to make real concepts he accept because he believe what ever Europeans say is correct. First the founders of the first Dynasty of Egypt came from the south. They originally lived in the highland regions like Tassili before the are became arid.
As I have noted in previous post and discussed by Diop in relation to Egypt three things exist.
First, the original power in Egypt was the Anu. The Anu were conquered by Narmar.
Secondly, the Berbers did not originate in Africa they are the result of the Vandels and populations from Arabia and only recently arrived on the scene.
Thirdly, the civilization of Egypt came from the South.
Let's begin the discussion
A comparison of Egyptian, Niger-Kordofanian-Mande, Elamite,Dravidian and Sumerian indicates that they diverged from a common ancestor. The Dravidian examples discussed below are taken from Tamil. All of these languages share pronouns and demonstrative bases. (Winters 1989a) This is proven by a compari-son of three terms: chief, city and black.
TABLE 1 _________________________________________________________________ Language Chief city,village black/burnt Dravidian cira,ca uru kam Elamite salu Sumerian sar ur Manding sa furu kami 'Charcoal' Nubian sirgi amr uru-me Semitic sarr ham Ubaid sar ur Egyptian sr mer kemit 'blackland' Hausa sarki birni Paleo-African *Sar *uru *kam
The above examples from languages spoken by blacks validates Diop's theory that there were cognate black civilizations in Africa and Asia, before the expansion of the Indo-European speaking peoples after 1500 BC. This linguistic data which is outlined in further detail elsewhere (Winters 1985b,1989a) illustrates that a common cultural macrostructure is shared by these speakers, which subsequently evolved along separate lines. Given the genetic unity of these languages we should call this group B(lack) Af(rican), Su(merian), Draa(vidian), (E)lam or Bafsudraalam Superset of languages. This supports Diop's use of the comparative method to illuminate the African past.
Yurco (1989,p.29) also falsely states that the Berber speakers were Libyans. This is false, as proven by Diop (1977). Diop (1977) illustrates that the Berber genealogies place their origin in Saudi Arabia, and point to a very recent settlement (2000 years ago) in the Central Sahara. Diop (1977) believes that the Berbers are the result of the early mixture of Africans and Germanic speaking Vandals. (Diop 1986) This would explain the evident close relationship between the Berber and German languages.
The original inhabitants of the Sahara where the Kemetic civilization originated were Blacks not Berbers or Indo-European speakers. These Blacks formerly lived in the highland regions of the Fezzan and Hoggar until after 4000 BC. This ancient homeland of the Dravidians, Egyptians, Sumerians, Niger-Kordofanian-Mande and Elamite speakers is called the Fertile African Crescent. (Anselin, 1989, p.16; Winters, 1981,1985b,1991). We call these people the Proto-Saharans (Winters 1985b,1991). The generic term for this group is Kushite. This explains the analogy between the Bafsudraalam languages outlined briefly above. These Proto-Saharans were called Ta-Seti and Tehenu by the Egyptians. Farid(1985,p.82) noted that "We can notice that the beginning of the Neolithic stage in Egypt on the edge of the Western Desert corresponds with the expansion of the Saharian Neolithic culture and the growth of its population". (emphasis that of author).
Kemetic (Egyptian) civilization came from the south not the North as alleged by Yurco (1989). Martel (1992) does admit that Kemetic civilization came from the Saharan Highlands:The Mountains of the Moon, but he failed to admit that Diop's (1974) hypothesis that Kemetic civilization and writing came from the south was proven by the excavations at Qustul. (Williams 1987; Anselin 1989)
The inhabitants of ancient Nubia and Kush are called A-Group, C-Group and etc. by archaeologists. The artifacts found in the A-Group royal cemetery of the Nubians in Ta-Seti at Qustul were the founders of Kem. Bruce Williams (1987,p.173) of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago has made it clear that the Qustul pharaohs are the Egyptian rulers referred to as the "Red Crown Rulers".
There are similarities between Egyptian and Saharan motifs (Farid,1985). It was in the Sahara that we find the first evidence of agriculture, animal domestication and weaving (Farid , 1985, p.82). This highland region is the Kemites "Mountain of the Moons " region, the area from which the civilization and goods of Kem, originated.
The rock art of the Saharan Highlands support the Egyptian traditions that in ancient times they lived in the Mountains of the Moon. The Predynastic Egyptian mobiliar art and the Saharan rock art share many common themes including, characteristic boats (Farid 1985,p. 82), men with feathers on their head (Petrie ,1921,pl. xvlll,fig.74; Raphael, 1947, pl.xxiv, fig.10; Vandier , 1952, p.285, fig. 192), false tail hanging from the waist (Vandier, 1952, p.353; Farid, 1985,p.83; Winkler 1938,I, pl.xxlll) and the phallic sheath (Vandier, 1952, p.353; Winkler , 1938,I , pl.xvlll,xx, xxlll).
Due to the appearance of aridity in the Mountains of the Moon the Proto-Saharans migrated first into Nubia and thence into Kem. The Proto-Saharan origin of the Kemites explain the fact that the Kushites were known for maintaining the most ancient traditions of the Kemites as proven when the XXVth Dynasty or Kushite Dynasty ruled ancient Egypt. Farid (1985, p.85) wrote that "To conclude, it seems that among Predynastic foreign relations, the [Proto-]Saharians were the first to have significant contact with the Nile Valley, and even formed a part of the Predynastic population" (emphasis author).
This means that the Nomes probably represent different "states" incorporated into ancient Egypt. It is quite possible that each nome represented a different ethnic group.
If this is true the Egyptian language was probably a lingua franca used to provide a means of communication for the diverse people who lived in ancient Egypt. This would explain why Egyptian was used to write Kushite text until Egyptians migrated into Meroitic lands once Egypt was under the control of the Romans.
Alain Anselin La Question Peule, makes it clear that the Fula originated in Egypt. He supports this theory with the obvious similarity between the words for cattle and milk shared by the Egyptians, Fula and Dravidians (Tamil). He believes that by the 12 Dynasty of Egypt Fula were settled in Egypt.
The Egyptians had many gods. They had these gods because as new ethnicities formed nomes in Egypt they brought their gods with them.
A good example of this amalgamation of various African ethnicities into Egypt is the followers of the god Ra. Some of the first rulers of Egypt saw Ra as the main god.
Later the Egyptians worshipped Aman/Amun which was a Saharan god. ). By the 2nd millennium BC Kushites at kerma were already worshippers of Amon/Amun and they used a distinctive black-and-red ware (Bonnet 1986; Winters 1985b,1991). Amon, later became a major god of the Egyptians during the 18th Dynasty.
A majority of Fula may have remained nomadic, but settled Fula probaly form a major ethnic group in an Egyptian Nome, as did Wolof and Mande speaking people. This is the best way to explain the close genetic linguistic relationship between these groups.
Granted, some Wolof, Mande and Fula made their way to West Africa, but many speakers of these languages remained in Egypt and made up one of the various nomes associated with Egypt.
DNA can tells us little about this period unless they recover DNA from the people living at that time. DNA from living individuals only tell us abou the contemporary group. Not the original people.
posted
This doesn't relate directly with the "Egyptian origin of the Fulani" but is a clarification of an idiot's - the explorer's - irrelevant input: This list is for those who would like the information but who are not inclined to look it up - my bad?
"You" in Mdu Ntr ten - 2nd singular. feminine tenou - 2nd plural teuten - you tewi, tu, tut - absolute pronoun.2nd singular tini un - you.they.them.their _ntuten - 2nd person.plural ntu - those who
"I" in Mdu Ntr _i - I.me.my anok un - we.us ni - I.me.my nwi - I.me --- twn - our
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Alain Anselin La Question Peule, makes it clear that the Fula originated in Egypt. He supports this theory with the obvious similarity between the words for cattle and milk shared by the Egyptians, Fula and Dravidians (Tamil). He believes that by the 12 Dynasty of Egypt Fula were settled in Egypt.
The Egyptians had many gods. They had these gods because as new ethnicities formed nomes in Egypt they brought their gods with them.
quote:Originally posted by a heritageless piece of shyt:
This doesn't relate directly with the "Egyptian origin of the Fulani" but is a clarification of an idiot's - the explorer's - irrelevant input.
This list is for those who would like the information but who are not inclined to look it up - my bad?
"You" in Mdu Ntr ten - 2nd singular. feminine tenou - 2nd plural teuten - you tewi, tu, tut - absolute pronoun.2nd singular tini un - you.they.them.their _ntuten - 2nd person.plural ntu - those who
"I" in Mdu Ntr _i - I.me.my anok un - we.us ni - I.me.my nwi - I.me --- twn - our
It is mighty good of you to recite what your ass had already been told just several posts ago, which you no less ignored earlier...and even then, still managed to bungle the lexicon ensemble up in your copy & paste effort.
Had you not been a brainless sap and taken note, when I gave you a quick reference to pretty much the same terms you are supposedly listing up above, which you now imagine some imaginary person supposedly asked for, you would have avoided needlessly re-assembling the lexicon in question; now read, pay close attention this time, and learn:
Originally posted by The Explorer:
Just to punch a hole in your rationale, I'll just demonstrate a few examples.
Let's take say, "you" in ancient Egyptian.
A number of words can mean "you" in ancient Egyptian: e.g.-- tw (m, dep.), ntk (m, indep.), tn (f or p, dep.), ntt (f, indep.) or nttn (p, indep.); not to leave out affixed counterparts like -- '-k' (m), '-t' (f), or '-tn' (p).
As one can see, it is more complex than presented in the so-called "Fulani/Mdu ntr" list cited above. None of these are taken into account in Wally's "selective" list.
Another example, let's take "I".
Here too, number of derivatives come to attention:
'Wi/wy' (m, dep.), 'ink' (m, indep.), and affixed -- '-i'.
The same can be demonstrated for several of the other terms listed.
This in fact, is relevant to the topic, and now that you yourself have essentially repeated the list after me, you've discredited your attempt to use your idealistically "selective" singular "derivative" of a lexicon that is the ancient Egyptian equivalent of "you" and "I" respectively, so as to draw a familial link between Fula and ancient Egyptian, even though "You" and "I" in ancient Egyptian are respectively represented by a variety of lexicon with constituent lexicon that don't remotely resemble the initial ones you dogmatically used to make the "Fula - ancient Egyptian comparison". This is the point I was hammering into your head, when it went ignored. And as I noted, those ones I presented were mere examples; similar treatment could be applied to several of the other lexicon in your earlier so-called "Fula-ancient Egyptian" comparison.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
This in fact, is relevant to the topic, and now that you yourself have essentially repeated the list after me, you've discredited your attempt to use your idealistically "selective" singular "derivative" of a lexicon that is the ancient Egyptian equivalent of "you" and "I" respectively, so as to draw a familial link between Fula and ancient Egyptian, even though "You" and "I" in ancient Egyptian are respectively represented by a variety of lexicon with constituent lexicon that don't remotely resemble the initial ones you dogmatically used to make the "Fula - ancient Egyptian comparison". This is the point I was hammering into your head, when it went ignored. And as I noted, those ones I presented were mere examples; similar treatment could be applied to several of the other lexicon in your earlier so-called "Fula-ancient Egyptian" comparison.
You are being ignored because your example of 'you' is irrelevant to this discussion of comparative linguistics. For example in English we can say / you/ in many different ways: Thou, Thee, You, etc. Eventhough /you/, appears to be unrelated to French 'vous'= you they are related.
As a result, when you attempt to use the varying forms of Egyptian that are not related to Fula for the same lexical item 'you' prove nothing because Wally presented examples that show cognation between Egyptian and Fula.
posted
Do you truly suppose this idle rambling will obfuscate the fact that primary Egyptian and Hebrew documents record the ethnonym Israel and place that ethnic group in Ancient Egypt while no primary document(s) support a Fulani ethny either known by AEs or residing in AE?
Well, think again. We're not that slow.
quote:Originally posted by Wally:
quote:alTakruri writes: Although, only the religious take every part of the Exodus story as historical, most relegate it to the rank of legend. All legends have a historical core. Unlike the daydream of Egyptian origins for Fulani no one seriously disputes that the Israelites...
The Fulani legends of origins in the east and specifically Egypt is exempt from having a historical core and is thus relegated to a daydream...how quaint and utterly contradictory...
quote:
...Daydreamers of Egyptian origins for Fulani or other non-Egyptian ethnies can produce not a single ethnonymous use of Tutsi, Akan, Fulani, etc., in any primary Rn Mdw document.
You continue to insist on misunderstanding the meaning of these religious terms and gods, and the fact of these names existing in the culture of Ancient Egypt. I'll try and give an example of how one should interpret this:
If you are strolling casually in some nondescript place and run into some kids wearing various garb; one sports a baseball cap with "NY" as a logo, another wears a tee-shirt with a silk-screen painting of the Golden Gate Bridge, another sports a "Lakers" jersey - your first impression is that these kids are either Americans or are heavily influenced by American culture...
The existence of major ethnic groups throughout Africa, who just happen to have self-described ethnic names that are exact replicas of the names of Ancient Egyptian gods is not something that one casually casts aside. This is factual evidence and not legend. I think that most people here got this the first time around...
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is all well and true about the ultimate affinity and single birthing locale for the non-"Khoisan" languages of Africa in their proto forms, but would not that mean that there were neither Egyptians nor Fulani nor not many other recent African ethnies at that far remote place and time in the history of our people?
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: There is controversy surrounding the homeland of Niger-Congo. But most linguist place the homeland for this linguistic group in the Nile Valley. An origin of the Niger-Congo people in the Nile Valley would explain the close relationship between the Fulani and Egyptian languages; and place Fulani in East Africa.
[further references left out in deference to storage and bandwidth but can be accessed in Dr. Winters' original post above]
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: This is all well and true about the ultimate affinity and single birthing locale for the non-"Khoisan" languages of Africa in their proto forms, but would not that mean that there were neither Egyptians nor Fulani nor not many other recent African ethnies at that far remote place and time in the history of our people?
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: There is controversy surrounding the homeland of Niger-Congo. But most linguist place the homeland for this linguistic group in the Nile Valley. An origin of the Niger-Congo people in the Nile Valley would explain the close relationship between the Fulani and Egyptian languages; and place Fulani in East Africa.
[further references left out in deference to storage and bandwidth but can be accessed in Dr. Winters' original post above]
I think we allow ourselves to fall into a trap set forth mainly by non-Africans, i.e. Explorer, in erroneously believing that showing a link to the NV somehow relegates all of our other African kingdoms and societies to "doormat" status in comparison to AE. Completely mis-guided and a falsehood.
The central point is to show the interrelatedness and affinites of many, if not ALL African people in which one of the points of high concentration, at one point in time, was the Nile Valley. Despite the well documaneted diversity of Africa and Africans, the Nile Valley is one area where similarities can be highlighted to show that we are "one". This is what has been well documented by our African scholars and is the central point being put forth here, specifically with Fulani in this thread.
This does NOT stretch so far back in time as it would pre-date man leaving Africa to populate the rest of the world, and does NOT suggest all africans left the Nile Valley or highlands of the Sahara at the same time, as Dhar Tichitt is an prime example with the Mande.
Posts: 455 | From: Tharsis Montes | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
You are being ignored because your example of 'you' is irrelevant to this discussion of comparative linguistics.
You seem to be mistranslating my reference to Wally's cowardice as my supposed anxiety over "being ignored". You're funny, but get a clue.
And no, "my example" of "you" is quite relevant for reasons stated. Any idiot knows what I said, and so, I don't intend to repeat for those beyond said idiocy.
quote:
For example in English we can say / you/ in many different ways: Thou, Thee, You, etc. Eventhough /you/, appears to be unrelated to French 'vous'= you they are related.
The burden lies on you, to point out from the "variety" of lexicons out there for the ancient Egyptian equivalent of "you", how Wally's initial *highly idealistic* cherry-picking of just one supposed term for "you" [when there are obviously many others to examine] is the "authentic" ancient Egyptian term for "you" whereas the others, that I listed which Wally himself repeated after me, are less "authentic", and hence irrelevant, along with the point I made in tandem with listing them. Talk is cheap.
Note: And if you can read at all, you'll notice that there are at least three different independent pronoun manifestations of "you" in ancient Egyptian, all of which differ markedly from Wally's "choice" lexicon for the so-called Fula-ancient Egyptian comparison. Dare I ask you, what that means?
quote:
As a result, when you attempt to use the varying forms of Egyptian that are not related to Fula for the same lexical item 'you' prove nothing because Wally presented examples that show cognation between Egyptian and Fula.
Well, I prove "nothing" only to morons who cannot read, and hence, miss the point; but for those who can read, oh absolutely, my point is concise, loud and clear. Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
...for starters here's some linguistic data comparing Fulani / Mdu Ntr...
I - mi / ni you - on / un we - en / un they - be / bu (people) to be bad - bonude / boone bad - boni / bon death; to die - maayde;maayude / maati, moute, moout, mouti last year - rawanen / snouf; ronpe eye - yitere / eirti blessing - barka / baraka cow - nagge / naga father - baaba / baba ... the evidence is inexhaustible...
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
You are being ignored because your example of 'you' is irrelevant to this discussion of comparative linguistics.
You seem to be mistranslating my reference to Wally's cowardice as my supposed anxiety over "being ignored". You're funny, but get a clue.
And no, "my example" of "you" is quite relevant for reasons stated. Any idiot knows what I said, and so, I don't intend to repeat for those beyond said idiocy.
quote:
For example in English we can say / you/ in many different ways: Thou, Thee, You, etc. Eventhough /you/, appears to be unrelated to French 'vous'= you they are related.
The burden lies on you, to point out from the "variety" of lexicons out there for the ancient Egyptian equivalent of "you", how Wally's initial *highly idealistic* cherry-picking of just one supposed term for "you" [when there are obviously many others to examine] is the "authentic" ancient Egyptian term for "you" whereas the others, that I listed which Wally himself repeated after me, are less "authentic", and hence irrelevant, along with the point I made in tandem with listing them. Talk is cheap.
Note: And if you can read at all, you'll notice that there are at least three different independent pronoun manifestations of "you" in ancient Egyptian, all of which differ markedly from Wally's "choice" lexicon for the so-called Fula-ancient Egyptian comparison. Dare I ask you, what that means?
quote:
As a result, when you attempt to use the varying forms of Egyptian that are not related to Fula for the same lexical item 'you' prove nothing because Wally presented examples that show cognation between Egyptian and Fula.
Well, I prove "nothing" only to morons who cannot read, and hence, miss the point; but for those who can read, oh absolutely, my point is concise, loud and clear.
your example of 'you' is irrelevant to this discussion of comparative linguistics. For example in English we can say / you/ in many different ways: Thou, Thee, You, etc. Eventhough /you/, appears to be unrelated to French 'vous'= you they are related.
As a result, when you attempt to use the varying forms of Egyptian that are not related to Fula for the same lexical item 'you' prove nothing because Wally presented examples that show cognation between Egyptian and Fula.
You have presented no evidence disputing these facts. All you provide is venom and insult. Material only the ignorant accept as valid and reliable. You sad angrey white boy pretending to be African.
posted
Those of us long conversant with the facts know the major phyla of Africa did not develop until long after the Out-of-Africa events that populated the non-African world.
Thus it is pointless to mention "This does NOT stretch so far back in time as it would pre-date man leaving Africa to populate the rest of the world," because, really, who doesn't know that already?
The fact remains it was a far remote time and place when and where the great trunk that branched the proto forms of the non-"Khoisan" phyla. Their genesis in the Middle Nile Valley predates Egyptian civilization by as much as 15,000 years thus resemblances of languages on opposite sides of the continent are not explainable by near recent demic diffusion unless there exists an historic or genetic register of the event.
Despite the ethno-archaeological fact of Fulani cultural attributes first appearing in Late Stone Age south east Algeria, some continue to posit an Ancient Egyptian origin as late as the 12th or even the 18th dynasty. Now how anachronistic can an argument be then that?
In general the current Sahara, sahel, savannah and most woodland West African ethnies were resident in the Green Sahara from which they moved south and southwest to where they are now found.
No matter how tempered down from the original premise, that all West Africans and their languages originate in Ancient Egyptian migrations, to just now saying a select few did so, it remains a false premise.
Everything we historically know about the Fulani leads us to the conclusion of a Green Saharan origin followed by nature generated southwest drift over the millenia to the Hodh and the Senegal, from whence in recent written historic times they consciously migrated eastward settling in the Nile Valley no more that 200 years ago at best.
We have a non-African, Lilias Homburger, to thank for the first proclamation of non-"Khoisan" languages being all related. So being African or non-African has no bearing on facts. Facts stand regardless of the ethnicity, nationality, continental origin, or skin colour of the bearer of the facts.
Appeal to racial solidarity does not strengthen an argument. Cultural ideology will and does make history. Cultural ideology cannot and does not replace history.
This is why Europe's cultural ideology on Africa no longer matters, because it is over ruled by facts which are now much more readily available to the general public than before.
Likewise an offbase African cultural ideology cannot stand because readily available facts will undermine it. Offbase African cultural ideology only blinds and deafens those little exposed to African reality when they discover the errors and wrongly assume African studies is a house of cards.
This is a disservice to valid African cultural ideologies based on valid and reputable information. This is the greatest task that now faces our people, to shun a fanciful African history just as we rejected the deragatory European history of Africa.
Yes there are bold propositions to be made. Before accepting them they must be bound by a cable stranded from cold hard facts.
Our African cultural ideology must be onbase, a base of unassailable fact.
quote:Originally posted by The Gaul:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: This is all well and true about the ultimate affinity and single birthing locale for the non-"Khoisan" languages of Africa in their proto forms, but would not that mean that there were neither Egyptians nor Fulani nor not many other recent African ethnies at that far remote place and time in the history of our people?
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: There is controversy surrounding the homeland of Niger-Congo. But most linguist place the homeland for this linguistic group in the Nile Valley. An origin of the Niger-Congo people in the Nile Valley would explain the close relationship between the Fulani and Egyptian languages; and place Fulani in East Africa.
[further references left out in deference to storage and bandwidth but can be accessed in Dr. Winters' original post above]
I think we allow ourselves to fall into a trap set forth mainly by non-Africans, i.e. Explorer, in erroneously believing that showing a link to the NV somehow relegates all of our other African kingdoms and societies to "doormat" status in comparison to AE. Completely mis-guided and a falsehood.
This does NOT stretch so far back in time as it would pre-date man leaving Africa to populate the rest of the world, and does NOT suggest all africans left the Nile Valley or highlands of the Sahara at the same time, as Dhar Tichitt is an prime example with the Mande.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
In far less space and probably time than your exhaustive response, a more concise and erudite analysis of the topic of this post was presented by The Gaul:
quote:I think we allow ourselves to fall into a trap set forth mainly by non-Africans, i.e. Explorer, in erroneously believing that showing a link to the NV somehow relegates all of our other African kingdoms and societies to "doormat" status in comparison to AE. Completely mis-guided and a falsehood.
The central point is to show the interrelatedness and affinites of many, if not ALL African people in which one of the points of high concentration, at one point in time, was the Nile Valley. Despite the well documented diversity of Africa and Africans, the Nile Valley is one area where similarities can be highlighted to show that we are "one". This is what has been well documented by our African scholars and is the central point being put forth here, specifically with Fulani in this thread.
This does NOT stretch so far back in time as it would pre-date man leaving Africa to populate the rest of the world, and does NOT suggest all africans left the Nile Valley or highlands of the Sahara at the same time, as Dhar Tichitt is an prime example with the Mande.
...to which your response added essentially nothing, man; except perhaps to suggest that the ancestors of West Africans were mono-directional or just simple-minded:
quote: In general the current Sahara, sahel, savannah and most woodland West African ethnies were resident in the Green Sahara from which they moved south and southwest to where they are now found.
You are trying to convince us that of all the directions of the compass available to them, they only knew to travel towards the Atlantic seaboard, that they were too simple to realize that the fertile Nile Valley regions were right down the hill aways...unlike the crusty Aamu folks from Asia who crossed the harsh deserts in order to live in the fetid marsh-lands of the Delta under the shadows of Kememou forts built to keep them out...perhaps it was there dream as well to eventually find the Atlantic seaboard of West Africa...Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Those of us long conversant with the facts know the major phyla of Africa did not develop until long after the Out-of-Africa events that populated the non-African world.
Thus it is pointless to mention "This does NOT stretch so far back in time as it would pre-date man leaving Africa to populate the rest of the world," because, really, who doesn't know that already?
The fact remains it was a far remote time and place when and where the great trunk that branched the proto forms of the non-"Khoisan" phyla. Their genesis in the Middle Nile Valley predates Egyptian civilization by as much as 15,000 years thus resemblances of languages on opposite sides of the continent are not explainable by near recent demic diffusion unless there exists an historic or genetic register of the event.
Despite the ethno-archaeological fact of Fulani cultural attributes first appearing in Late Stone Age south east Algeria, some continue to posit an Ancient Egyptian origin as late as the 12th or even the 18th dynasty. Now how anachronistic can an argument be then that?
In general the current Sahara, sahel, savannah and most woodland West African ethnies were resident in the Green Sahara from which they moved south and southwest to where they are now found.
No matter how tempered down from the original premise, that all West Africans and their languages originate in Ancient Egyptian migrations, to just now saying a select few did so, it remains a false premise.
Everything we historically know about the Fulani leads us to the conclusion of a Green Saharan origin followed by nature generated southwest drift over the millenia to the Hodh and the Senegal, from whence in recent written historic times they consciously migrated eastward settling in the Nile Valley no more that 200 years ago at best.
We have a non-African, Lilias Homburger, to thank for the first proclamation of non-"Khoisan" languages being all related. So being African or non-African has no bearing on facts. Facts stand regardless of the ethnicity, nationality, continental origin, or skin colour of the bearer of the facts.
Appeal to racial solidarity does not strengthen an argument. Cultural ideology will and does make history. Cultural ideology cannot and does not replace history.
This is why Europe's cultural ideology on Africa no longer matters, because it is over ruled by facts which are now much more readily available to the general public than before.
Likewise an offbase African cultural ideology cannot stand because readily available facts will undermine it. Offbase African cultural ideology only blinds and deafens those little exposed to African reality when they discover the errors and wrongly assume African studies is a house of cards.
This is a disservice to valid African cultural ideologies based on valid and reputable information. This is the greatest task that now faces our people, to shun a fanciful African history just as we rejected the deragatory European history of Africa.
Yes there are bold propositions to be made. Before accepting them they must be bound by a cable stranded from cold hard facts.
Our African cultural ideology must be onbase, a base of unassailable fact.
[/QB][/QUOTE]
That is why we know the people went into Nubia first, then up the Nile into Egypt and then westward.
You have presented no evidence showing an immediate westward migration of the Niger-Congo speakers, including the Fula.
What we do know is that ancient Egypt was divided into nomes and each nome had its own god. The gods of some of these nomes illustrated by Wally are contemporary ethnonyms. This suggest that the people living in these nomes were original West Africans. This is most simple and congruent fact to explain the genetic unity between Egyptian and black African languages. Granted, some Fula probably remained in Algeria and the Fezzan at Oasis and even moved westward. But at least as late as the 12th Dynasty many Fula were still in Egypt, and during the Roman period the Fula probably expanded westward and eastward in search of pastures for their cattle and families.
posted
There are no cultural-archaeological traits such as existed in LSA SEA. The next place the sam traits do appear is in the historic Western Sudan. In between the display of said traits we have northern Mande epic poetry describing Fulani.
I have wrote this several times and it cannot be blown away and it serves to show drifting southwest movement from the Green Sahara to the Hodh and the Senegal over the millenia, gradually.
No one has presented cultural-archaeological evidence for either purposeful migration or unintentional drift eastward from LSA SEA of Fulani. There is no such set of evidence and even if there were it would still show origination in LSA SEA not Egypt thus disspelling the topic header, The Egyptian Origin of the Fulani.
Even the cited quotes you produced earlier, ones not from Welmer, all speak to a Saharan starting place not a Nile Valley one. And sticking to the subject header, The Egyptian Origin of the Fulani, the Upper Nile Valley is not Egypt. The Upper Nile Valley is Rwanda, Uganda, Congo and far south Sudan.
But please produce records from 12th dynasty Egypt of a wholescale migration westward of people bearing Fulani cultural traits. This is the only thing that will prove Fulani were in 12th dynasty Egypt. You know, of course, they could not have originated in 12th dynasty Egypt when the first record of anything like Fulani debuts 1800 miles away and roughly 3000 years earlier.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
If they were original West Africans how could have an Egyptian origin?
Origin starts in one place.
If they remained in Algeria then they did not originate in Egypt. If they were in a nome in Egypt then they were cattle ranchers not transhumants in search of pasturage.
The hole is getting deeper and deeper.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
... the people living in these nomes were original West Africans.
... some Fula probably remained in Algeria
... during the Roman period the Fula probably expanded westward and eastward in search of pastures ...
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jaja does not "situate[ their] homeland in the Sahara near Nubia" as was said. For his three blocks of Niger-Kordofanian I quote Jaja saying "their homeland is at the south-western Sahara where the boundaries of each group converge."
Jaja nowhere posits a Niger-Kordofanian homeland in Nubia. Kordofanian, perhaps the oldest language in Sudan, is spoken in the Nuba Mountains 700 miles far upriver from Nubia.
But let us now examine Jaja on West African languages and Egypt.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Jaja, J. M. 2008 “Interdisciplinary Methods for the Writing of “African History: A Reappraisal,” European Journal of Social Sciences 5(4): 55-65
quote:
(2) Niger – Kordofanian homeland The West African region is largely made up of the Niger-Kordofanian language family. The block of course excludes the 100 or 50 languages classified as Afro-Asiatic and the Songhai and Kanuri languages which belong to the Nile -–Saharan group.
The Niger – Kordofanian family is composed of three large blocks called the * Mande, * Niger – Congo and * Kordofanian.
* Niger – Congo occupies the eastern section of West Africa, * Mande the Western section and * Kordofanian the area to the south west of Sudan.
quote: The Contribution of Linguistics to the Study of Origins in West Africa
. . . .
Linguistic evidence was also significant in determining the origin of the Yoruba people. Popular writings from the 1920s to the present suggest that the Yorubas originated from Egypt or from Arabia. However, with the help of linguistic techniques we are now aware that;
There is virtually little or no similarity in the basic core vocabulary of Yoruba and Ancient Egyptian or between Yoruba and Arabic.
There is rather a very high degree of similarity between Yoruba and Igala
There is a fairly high degree of similarity in the basic vocabulary between Yoruba, Edo, Igbo, Idoma, Igbira and Nupe.
From these three results we can conclude that the origin of the Yorubas i.e. not in Egypt or in the Middle East, but rather within the vicinity of the languages that are similar to the Yoruba language. This vicinity is in Southern and South Central Nigeria.
Jones M. Jaja Interdisciplinary Methods for the Writing of African History: A Reappraisal European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 5, Number 4 (2008) p.58
Let's go on to see what he has to say about Fulani.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Linguistic evidence has also been used to refute the tradition that the Fulani people originated from Arabia. There is virtually zero similarity between Fulfulde and Arabic. On the contrary Fulfulde is closely related to Wolof and Serer both of which belong to the West Atlantic language family which is a branch of Niger – Kordofanian. Thus the Fulani people should trace their origin to the Senegal valley rather than to the Middle East.
op. cit. pp.58-59
Jaja fails to back the thread header The Egyptian Origin of the Fulani. Jaja supports local origins.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: If they were original West Africans how could have an Egyptian origin?
Origin starts in one place.
If they remained in Algeria then they did not originate in Egypt. If they were in a nome in Egypt then they were cattle ranchers not transhumants in search of pasturage.
The hole is getting deeper and deeper.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
... the people living in these nomes were original West Africans.
... some Fula probably remained in Algeria
... during the Roman period the Fula probably expanded westward and eastward in search of pastures ...
They are the original West Africans because they lived in Egypt and now dominate West Africa.
This is a stupid comment. As you know none of the Dynastic Egyptians originated in "Egypt" the archaeology makes it clear the Egyptians came from the highlands, migrated into Kush and move from the south into the area we call Dynastic Egypt.
Testimony of this Kushite origin is the Ta Seti Incense burner
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: This is a stupid comment. As you know none of the Dynastic Egyptians originated in "Egypt" the archaeology makes it clear the Egyptians came from the highlands, migrated into Kush and move from the south into the area we call Dynastic Egypt.
^ good point.
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Jaja does not "situate[ their] homeland in the Sahara near Nubia" as was said. For his three blocks of Niger-Kordofanian I quote Jaja saying "their homeland is at the south-western Sahara where the boundaries of each group converge."
Jaja nowhere posits a Niger-Kordofanian homeland in Nubia. Kordofanian, perhaps the oldest language in Sudan, is spoken in the Nuba Mountains 700 miles far upriver from Nubia.
But let us now examine Jaja on West African languages and Egypt.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Jaja, J. M. 2008 “Interdisciplinary Methods for the Writing of “African History: A Reappraisal,” European Journal of Social Sciences 5(4): 55-65
quote:
(2) Niger – Kordofanian homeland The West African region is largely made up of the Niger-Kordofanian language family. The block of course excludes the 100 or 50 languages classified as Afro-Asiatic and the Songhai and Kanuri languages which belong to the Nile -–Saharan group.
The Niger – Kordofanian family is composed of three large blocks called the * Mande, * Niger – Congo and * Kordofanian.
* Niger – Congo occupies the eastern section of West Africa, * Mande the Western section and * Kordofanian the area to the south west of Sudan.
Jaja discusses the present location of the speakers of these languages, but like Welmers he situates there homeland in the Sahara near Nubia.
The present location of the Mande says little about their original home. For example we see them moving into the Niger Valley from Mauretania. This does little to deny a Nubia origin for the Mande, just like the people who founded Egypt.
quote: The Contribution of Linguistics to the Study of Origins in West Africa
. . . .
Linguistic evidence was also significant in determining the origin of the Yoruba people. Popular writings from the 1920s to the present suggest that the Yorubas originated from Egypt or from Arabia. However, with the help of linguistic techniques we are now aware that;
There is virtually little or no similarity in the basic core vocabulary of Yoruba and Ancient Egyptian or between Yoruba and Arabic.
There is rather a very high degree of similarity between Yoruba and Igala
There is a fairly high degree of similarity in the basic vocabulary between Yoruba, Edo, Igbo, Idoma, Igbira and Nupe.
From these three results we can conclude that the origin of the Yorubas i.e. not in Egypt or in the Middle East, but rather within the vicinity of the languages that are similar to the Yoruba language. This vicinity is in Southern and South Central Nigeria.
Jones M. Jaja Interdisciplinary Methods for the Writing of African History: A Reappraisal European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 5, Number 4 (2008) p.58
Let's go on to see what he has to say about Fulani.
Please answer these questions:
What linguistic evidence does JaJa present which led him to reach this conclusion?
Did he provide evidence that Egyptian and Yoruba lack cognate terms?
If he did please provide examples of the terms he used to make this determination.
If he provides no evidence this is just another example of an African writing material attacking Afrocentrism so they can be published. Wally provides linguistic evidence supporting his claim.
To counter this claim you must provide counter linguistic evidence--not opinions.
quote: Linguistic evidence has also been used to refute the tradition that the Fulani people originated from Arabia. There is virtually zero similarity between Fulfulde and Arabic. On the contrary Fulfulde is closely related to Wolof and Serer both of which belong to the West Atlantic language family which is a branch of Niger – Kordofanian. Thus the Fulani people should trace their origin to the Senegal valley rather than to the Middle East.
op. cit. pp.58-59
Jaja fails to back the thread header The Egyptian Origin of the Fulani. Jaja supports local origins.
What linguistic evidence does Jaja provide to support this view?
This is circular reasoning. You admit that Diop has presented hundreds of Wolof terms that are related to Egyptian. If we use Jaja's reasoning we must declare that since Fula is related to Wolof, and Wolof is related to Egyptian, Fula is related to Egyptian.
In this thread we have not made this silly argument. We have presented linguistic and other data supporting the Egyptian origin of the Fula and that the Fula did not originate in West Africa. In fact, none of the West Atlantic languages originated in West Africa.
Come on here and make your 'discredited" self useful for a moment: Can I get an *elaborate* grammatical and syntax correspondence between Fula and Ancient Egyptian?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
a-dua / dua or tua = "prayer" a-gu-ta(n) / ha-khu-ptah a-ke / qe-h = "axe" a-ru-gbo / ru-ba = "evening of ba i.e. later stage of life" abo / ab = "female" ade / ate-f = "crown/plumes" ako / ak = "male" ala / ala = "boundary - obatala==king of nile" amon / amon = "to hide/concealed" apoti / apoti = "pot; cup" bu buru / bu huru = "evil" enen / enen = "no" fahaka / fahaka = "silvery fish" hen / hen = "yes; nod head" hor / hor = "elevated" i-re / re = "that which is good, goodness" ibatan / bahtan = "compatriot" inoki / noki-t = "fabulous beast" ko / qo-t = "build" miri / miri = "water" dazzle(of water) naprit / naprit = "seed" nu (noo) / nu (noo) = = "to wipe, erase" o-ni / au-nu = = "crocodile" oba = king / oba = "to direct, captain" oni = king / oni = "osiris' ethnic name" ran / ran = "name" riri / ririt = "dirty (like a hippo)" sadu / zaddu = "abode of the dead" saluga / salug = "god of wealth" wombia / nubia = "you, a nubian" - derogatory - "a covetous person" wu / uu = "swell"
The Yoruba phrase "apa amu sua", which means "an unthrifty person" is derived from three Ancient Egyptian words:
Apa - "he who belongs to the house i.e. servant"
Amu - one of the Asiatic tribes engaged in domestic service in Ancient Egypt
Sua (Sua-nit), a nome in Ancient Egypt.
The phrase is a comtemptuous term which preserves the idea of the wastefulness of foreign domestic servants in Ancient Egypt who hardly knew the value of crockery and other articles they sometimes smashed to pieces.
The word "bu" in AE means "place". This word survives in Yoruba vocabulary:
"ki bu e e" means "what place are you going?" "ibudo" means "a place to settle" "ibusun" means "a place to sleep" "ibu-joko" means "a place to sit" "ibu-so" means "a station" "a-bu-le" means "premises"
The connection bewteen the two languages is so close that it is quite possible for one to help in determining the siginifcance of words whose meanings have not yet been definitely ascertained or have become obscure in the other!
There is a survival of customs
- Religious beliefs. Most of the prinicpal gods are well known: Osiris, Isis, Horus, Shu, Sut, Thoth, Kepera, Amon, Anu, Khonsu, Khnum, Khopri, Hathor, Sokaris, Ra, Seb, the 4 elmental deities etc.
-- Ra survives in name only, but the words Irawo (star), rara (swear by Ra), rara (dwarfs - Ancient Egyptian mythological Tanka dwarfs that hailed the daily arrival of the sun-god) preserve the idea.
-- The idea of a future life and that of judgement after death
-- The deification of Kings.
-- The importance attached to names. A man's name is supposed to have a real force in determining his character. Names are not given haphazardly, but acording to prevailing circumstances at the time of birth.
-- Strong belief in a future life. The Ancient Egyptian and Yoruba ideas are identical. The Yoruba word for the verb "too die" is Ku, i.e. to become a luminous spirit. The Egyptian word Khu, or the luminous part of a man, "is a spark of that divine intelligence which pervades the world and to which it must return"
-- Polygamy - similarity in the position of the first wife and her rights and privileges
-- Burial customs. Previous to burial the corpse in Yorubaland is dressed like the Egyptian mummy. In the case of the burial of the king, the king slaves must be buried with him, and his Chief Officers and wives must die on the day of the burial. The king will require the services of his dependents in the next world. The British influence has put an end to such practices. Ushebti figures are now substitued for living persons.
Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amazing! Jaja was fine without a background check when you incorrectly used him but now that we see clearly that Jaja disfavors diffusion you doubt his scholarship.
Remember it was you who erected Jaja as a champion of diffusion. Had you carefully and entirely read what he wrote maybe you wouldn't now be spreading propaganda over his name.
Can't attack the ideas? Then attack the man holding them.
Nowhere does Jaja so much as mention any Afri-eccentricism.
Jaja explicitly attacked European cultural idelogy applied to Africana. A strange way to go about "just to get published" especially in a journal with Europe in its title. Sorry, your grandstanding was misapplied, but your anti-African bias remains as strong as ever.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Please answer these questions:
What linguistic evidence does JaJa present which led him to reach this conclusion?
Did he provide evidence that Egyptian and Yoruba lack cognate terms?
If he did please provide examples of the terms he used to make this determination.
The Need for Interdisciplinary Techniques 3)(a) The foreign texts, apart from being too recent, are sometimes too biased because they were written by Arab and European Imperialists who used them to justify their political activities in Africa.
Summary and Conclusion It is now crystal clear that interdisciplinary techniques are indispensable for the writing of African history. The poverty of relying only on one or two methods (i.e. written and recently oral sources) has reached a disturbing situation because of the enormous historical information/data in the continent, left untapped. Our historical approach has uncovered inertia on the part of historians on the new methods for reconstructing and analyzing human affairs. We are aware that before the 1960s the goal of African historians had been nationalistic, that is an attempt to correct the negative account of European scholars and expose the achievements of Africans in notion building and statecraft (Jaja, 2005b)[11].
In reconstructing the monumental distortions of European scholars, it became obvious that the blatant and overt prejudice may be based on ignorance, informed by their inability to utilize various other sources rich in history of these traditional societies. There is no doubt that the interdisciplinary methods identified above increasingly subjected European accounts into scrutiny, their activities became unfashionable subjects for research as a means of monitoring European and African reactions. But more importantly interdisciplinary methods had helped Africans discover themselves more, their homeland, their language and material culture.
[11] Jaja, J.M. (2005b) The Challenge of change: The Nigerian Historian and Nigerian’s Transformation in Sophia: An African Journal of Philosophy vol. 6 No.1.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: ... this is just another example of an African writing material attacking Afrocentrism so they can be published.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ You're so full of sh!t. Why didn't you just answer the questions put forward by Dr. Winters instead of diversions above? Can you be truly satisfied with your source because Winters misread him initially as you claim?
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let Dr. Winters answer them himself in regards to support of what he OKed from Jones. Evidently he felt confident of Jones scholarship without so much as doing then what he asks me to do now.
If you really want to know more, send Jaja an email.
posted
Let Dr. Winters answer them himself in regards to support of what he OKed from Jaja. Evidently, he felt confident of Jaja's researches without so much as doing then what he asks me to do now.
If you really want to know more, send Jaja an email.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Amazing! Jaja was fine without a background check when you incorrectly used him but now that we see clearly that Jaja disfavors diffusion you doubt his scholarship.
Remember it was you who erected Jaja as a champion of diffusion. Had you carefully and entirely read what he wrote maybe you wouldn't now be spreading propaganda over his name.
Can't attack the ideas? Then attack the man holding them.
Nowhere does Jaja so much as mention any Afri-eccentricism.
Jaja explicitly attacked European cultural idelogy applied to Africana. A strange way to go about "just to get published" especially in a journal with Europe in its title. Sorry, your grandstanding was misapplied, but your anti-African bias remains as strong as ever.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Please answer these questions:
What linguistic evidence does JaJa present which led him to reach this conclusion?
Did he provide evidence that Egyptian and Yoruba lack cognate terms?
If he did please provide examples of the terms he used to make this determination.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: As I await your verification for what you quoted from Jaja.
I have not disputed your interpretation of Jaja I just want you discuss the evidence he uses to support his claim. If there was no linguistic evidence provided why should we accept his claim that there was no relationship?
posted
Great Jew is obviously stalling. He has no answers to your questions as his position is epistemologically unsound: since, in his view, Dr. Winters misread Jaja then Jaja's claims must be "true" in debunking Winters' claim. lol
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I want you to do the same. After all, he's your witness, you summoned him to this court so it should be you who recalls him to the stand.
Now go ahead and impeach your witness, for if he has no stuffing in the one case then he has none in the other either, meaning that everything you relied on him for is just based on "no linguistic evidence provided."
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: As I await your verification for what you quoted from Jaja.
I have not disputed your interpretation of Jaja I just want you discuss the evidence he uses to support his claim. If there was no linguistic evidence provided why should we accept his claim that there was no relationship?
.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I want you to do the same. After all, he's your witness, you summoned him to this court so it should be you who recalls him to the stand.
Now go ahead and impeach your witness, for if he has no stuffing in the one case then he has none in the other either, meaning that everything you relied on him for is just based on "no linguistic evidence provided."
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: As I await your verification for what you quoted from Jaja.
I have not disputed your interpretation of Jaja I just want you discuss the evidence he uses to support his claim. If there was no linguistic evidence provided why should we accept his claim that there was no relationship?
.
This is what I wrote:
For example, Jaja, J. M. 2008 “Interdisciplinary Methods for the Writing of “African History: A Reappraisal,” European Journal of Social Sciences 5(4): 55-65
quote:
(2) Niger – Kordofanian homeland The West African region is largely made up of the Niger-Kordofanian language family. The block of course excludes the 100 or 50 languages classified as Afro-Asiatic and the Songhai and Kanuri languages which belong to the Nile -–Saharan group. The Niger – Kordofanian family is composed of three large blocks called the Mande, Niger – Congo and Kordofanian. Niger – Congo occupies the eastern section of West Africa, Mande the Western section and Kordofanian the area to the south west of Sudan. The present geographical location of these three language blocks forms a fanlike structure, which suggests that their homeland is at the south-western Sahara where the boundaries of each group converge. The Mande group does not have the same degree of internal diversity as the Niger – Congo and Kordofanian. But Niger-Congo and Kordofanian have the same degree of diversity. (Dalby 1965). A combination of this fact and the fan-shaped arrangement of the three language blocks suggests that they belong to the same main language family. Besides, the unfavourable ecological situation north of the homeland, and the possibility of only moving southwards explains the fan-shaped nature of the dispersal to the area of southwestern Sahara.
Jaja discusses the present location of the speakers of these languages, but like Welmers he situates there homeland in the Sahara near Nubia.
This statement is what I have been claiming all along that these people came from the Sahara.
You have done additional research on Jaja, now you can answer my questions about his work.
posted
I have done no additional anything withh Jaja. I have done no more than read the article you your self directed us to.
The points is not whether I agree or disagree with Jaja. The point is Jaja does not support diffusionist views. You cannot use Jaja to support your position. Jaja opposes your position.
There is no statement from Jaja that their homeland is "in the Sahara near Nubia." Above, in your bolded sentence, Jaja states "their homeland is at the south-western Sahara."
Here's a bit of simple geography. Divide the Sahara lengthwise and breadthwise. This will yield four quadrants.
Upper right quadrant = northeast Sahara Upper left quadrant = northwest Sahara Lower left quadrant = southwest Sahara Lower right quadrant = southeast Sahara
List the countries in the lower left or southwest. Is Nubia near any of those countries? Is West Africa near any of those countries?
Again note that Kordofanian is spoken in the Nuba Mountains near the southeast of the Sahara not in the Nubian Desert.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Egyptian Basenji Dog Hieroglyph
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic