Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Sod off. I'm not ADOS.
All that grandstand playing to crowd sympathies about all powerful yte masters and doo is for weak minded individuals lacking research and logic skills.
Are your precious better than all other Africans slaves of the Syrians who introduced organized Xianity to Abyssinia?
Play that shih w/someone else.
The Torah is an African document supposedly delivered on African land written in an African language.
Here on ES in this forum we used to dealing in replicable facts not fanciful beliefs.
Now stick to topics and don't discuss me unless you're ready to be sliced up and down. Stay in your lane.
You're not blacker than me by any measure you'd choose.
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts: Plus, do you believe it to be so, because of your belief in the Christian, Islam or Jewish religion? The religion of your enslavers.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
The word religion doesn't exist in ancient Hebrew. Torah is tribal law interspersed with narratives.
Genesis (B*reshiyth) doesn't exist? Yet in the very next post suddenly it does?
Selling a book by contradicting yourself?
Your guesswork sits beside others taht's all.It doesn't trump anything and apparently it's author is unaccepting of criticism from any corner because maybe an infallible god or something.
What non-scientific author is going to admit his book is mistaken in an online forum? If they did, who'd buy their book?
As long as this thread is in Egyptology forum I will check the inaccuracies that I feel like pointing out. I'm not paying 'experts' to agree with me. What good are experts who get money from you to do what you want, like they'll tell you your pot's cracked and not pass go not collect $200.
No one is omniscient or above possible fault. Every hypothesis needs critical review. Scientist demand peer review and not by aid henchmen who dare not do that.
Here's an example of an ancient document that is an accurate translation. It is from the Midrash, and it describes the reason for the Dead Sea scrolls.
Genizah "For all practical purposes, the Dead Sea Scrolls, discovered between the years 1946 and 1956, belonged to a genizah from the 2nd-century BCE." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genizah
"The practice of storing worn-out sacred manuscripts in earthenware vessels buried in the earth or within caves is related to the ancient Jewish custom of Genizah" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls
"Remove into a distant cave, loosened papyrus and worn out papyrus business scrolls. Conserve and prolong them by loading them in jars and placing them in caves."
Jewish people call this genizah, which is actually gan washa/"jar cave".
Etymology "The word genizah comes from the Hebrew triconsonantal root g-n-z, which means 'hiding', and originally meant 'to hide' or 'to put away'. Later, it became a noun for a place where one put things, and is perhaps best translated as 'archive' or 'repository'." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genizah
gan ("large jar") washa ("cave")...
gan (ጋን) large jar (n.) (Amarigna)
washa (ዋሻ) cave (n.) (Amarigna)
According to the Midrash, the documents were business documents... not religious documents.
At this point you're disagreeing with me only because I'm posting the info. No matter what I post, you'll disagree with me, even when the information comes from a Jewish source of info.Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Many thousands of written fragments have been discovered in the Dead Sea area. They represent the remnants of larger manuscripts damaged by natural causes or through human interference, with the vast majority only holding small scraps of text. " https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls
"A genizah (or geniza; Hebrew: גניזה 'storage'; plural: genizot or genizoth or genizahs) is a storage area in a Jewish synagogue or cemetery designated for the temporary storage of worn-out Hebrew-language books and papers on religious topics prior to proper cemetery burial." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genizah
A possible geniza at Masada, eastern IsraelPosts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I disagree with lots of things Get the chip off your shoulder. Stick to topic man You have no idea what my level of Jewish education is but yours is below zero. So stop making pretend you can read Mesechta Aboda Zarah in the Aramaic.
Look at this mess. You got reference citation written backward in your chart. Worse than that the text says nothing about Qumran.
Here's the entire line in context. It's from the R' Moshe Maymun (Maimonides). It's his Mishneh Torah on Talmudic tractate "Strange Service" as in Yemen.
quote:טו [ט] עבודה זרה של ישראל, אינה בטילה לעולם; אפילו היה לגוי בה שותפות, אין ביטולו מועיל כלום, אלא אסורה בהנאה לעולם, וטעונה גניזה. וכן עבודה זרה של גוי שבאת ליד ישראל, ואחר כך ביטלה הגוי--אין ביטולו מועיל כלום, אלא אסורה בהנאה לעולם. ואין ישראל מבטל עבודה זרה, ואפילו ברשות הגוי.
הלכות עבודה זרה פרק ח משנה תורה - ספר המדע - הלכות עבודה זרה וחוקות הגויים
.
Do you think there's only one geniza in the whole world? Cairo has the most famous geniza holding near a half million discarded writings.
Every observant practicing Isra'el knows what a geniza is. Where do you think pasul scrolls go or worn out phylacteries, prayer books, or anything with the Tetra Grammaton written on it?
Stop whining and face reality.
No. It's you who's disagreeing with me only because I'm posting the info. No matter what I post you'll disagree with me, a Jewish source of info.
posted
Actually, I really don't care. Your disagreeing with me has zero impact on my work. If I say the sky is blue, you'll disagree just for the hell of it.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The great thing is I don't have to pay you $50 to $100 per hour for your critique, as I normally have to with actual professionals. I save so much money by you spouting off for free.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Stick with your paid yte flunkies while calling a free blk man the yte man's slave? What is this sickness devouring your soul?
Growing up in USA i learned this about Struggle.
Each one teach one.
Ever hear that you wiseacre? Don't let your ego make you believe you've tricked me into anything. I just got tired of you passing g.. um, your opinions as if they're indisputable facts and damn any and all who don't buy it.
I will teach anyone willing to accept the fact they don't know about what they're asking me or desire some more insight into what they do know (not believe -- belief is for faith, fact is for science).
Don't be a donkey carrying books learn how to learn what's in them.
Hope you stock every library in the world with your books. As long as this thread is in Egyptology forum I'm not sitting here letting you make a travesty of Hebrew culture or misapply Greco-Roman meanings of Aithiopia/Aethiopia to satisfy your ego and your Itiopi Ethiopia supremacist ideologies.
Were the latter parts of this thread in Deshret where it belongs I'd have no need to point out some inaccuracies I've come across. Some of us back in the day put a hella effort into making this Egyptology forum a 5 STAR shop for info suitable for classroom introduction. I refuse to let that go down the drain.
You keep talking trash I'll keep dumpstering it.
You too must wipe your arse after easing yourself. You are above no one. Certainly not above me.
When I contribute facts about Hebrew language you'll disagree just out of plain ignorance.
posted
I participated in the HallOfMaat.com forum for two weeks after publishing my first book, when a moderator there posted my book and invited me. Those Egyptologists were crazy and really hated me. I mean, they really, really hated me and literally called my work junk.
I really wouldn't answer any of their questions, though. And day after day I would take their abuse.
One PhD member DM'ed me, trying to explain that the members were all part of a particular way of thinking and their PhDs would not allow them to consider anything I had written about. She was trying to give me therapy day after day, and I diligently listened to her. She had such sympathy for me.
Until one day, after it began to become irritating (since I wasn't the victim she thought I was), and I told her why I was really there. I told here I am a marketing professional and I was only taking the abuse to gauge the response to my first book, to see what book the second needed to be. Basically, I told her, I'm conducting a consumer survey using them.
She couldn't even find the words to respond, after thinking I needed counseling after all the abuse. And feeling such deep sympathy for me.
She realized I was taking advantage of the opportunity and that I was not a victim, after all. She disappeared without a single word.
Here on EgyptSearch it's different, though, when I interact with The Lioness, because she asks me questions and I like to answer her questions.
We did a thing where she gave me a live challenge, and I replied with a live step-by-step retranslation, which was fun because she made it so difficult for me (hahaha ). The Lioness is always insightful and never abusive to me, without even agreeing with me. In fact I don't think she's ever agreed with me, but she makes being on EgyptSearch fun.
The guys here, on the other hand, are so abusive. More abusive than the professionals and PhDs on HallOfMaat.com. But I understand the need to hate Ethiopians as you do and not even considering Ethiopians to be real Africans.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, if it weren't for the 4.4 million years of Ethiopian DNA, you and the rest of the world wouldn't even exist. So you shouldn't hate your Ethiopian ancestors the way you do. hahaha Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I don't have to click your link. I can read the Hebrew you can't.
Keep listening to yte Jews whose work you don't understand while downing me a blk Jew as the yte man's slave? R u out yr mind?
Sorry, the underlying text just isn't about religion. It is ancient Egyptian business and trade.
Above, the actual translation in the underlying text is that the queen has come from the Nile Valley to the Lower Egypt farms in the east, to buy grain. She's meeting the farm owner at the fortress that's currently being excavated in the Yafo, Tel Aviv harbor, which was the shipping port for the Egyptian Dead Sea farms.
It's all business. No religion.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
An employee complained that by training the sales staff at the farm's granary, their sales trips will cause everyone to prosper.
Business and trade. No religion.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
To an ignoramous who can't read Hebrew now calling his superior Ethiopians "slave to the West".
Like calling a blk man who has his own mind not caring a flying f... a slave co he won't slave to your idiocies and drink your Koolade.
Sod off hhamor.
You haven't the foggiest what you're talking about with your so-called "retranslations" that in fact are no more than trashy attempts to make ancient works say other than what they do.
That's why you go ad hominem You can't attack the scholarship so attack the scholar
The intellectual loser's route everytime. If everything else fails go off on some brothe black bullshit about if you don't follow me blindly to the end then u da yte man's slave.
Get da fuh ...
You admit you don't know linguistics don't know Hebrew can't translate haven't studied history
So why don't you STFU about Hebrew already? You're intentionally spreading disinformation about language relationships and culture all to boost your pride and nothing more. Look at you. You can't even rationally reply to a critique or commentary of your work. SMH.
BTW you slave of a yte man's slave as if Ashkenazim know Hebrew, which they could not mouth until stealing Teimani Hebrew books and learning pristine Hebrew from them (and they still Germanify many phonemes and can't pronounce the `ayin .
Matthew is in Greek not Hebrew and it's sensibilities are Greek not Hebrew. You can go there all you wanna, not my immediate field.
You come back with more bullshit about Hebrew or the Greco-Roman meaning of Aithiopia/Aethiopia and I'm the machete slashing your your morassy arse down to bits and pieces with factual easily replicable informations.
Some people came to me the other day and asked if I want to be part of their religion. I said what religion. They said some religion of the Bible.
But I heard those are really ancient Egyptian farming grain sales reports that were mistranslated 2000 years ago into religion. I don't mean to be rude, but I don't think people on a farm 3400 years ago were writing about religion.
I mean, I was at work and was writing a love letter to my girlfriend and almost got fired. So you're going to get fired if you work on a farm and start writing about religion, right?
So I agree, it could not be about religion. I mean, who wants to get fired, right? Not me. Plus, my girlfriend said if I get fired she's gonna quit me. Oh yeah, the Bible...
Then those people told me a story about an old man who put all these animals on a boat, like two of every kind, but they didn't sound like farm animals. Does a farm have giraffes and lions? I don't think so, that sounds more like a zoo. I think those people are all mixed up.
So I told them, look... I don't want to be part of no farm religion. Plus, animals make too much noise. And I don't like vegetables too much either. So a farm religion doesn't sound too good to me.
Why don't they just have a regular religion? Why does a farm have to be part of it? That don't make any sense to me.
They kept saying it wasn't a farm religion, but if what I read is true, it is. And I think they should not use farm grain sales report for a religion. It's just too confusing. Either have a farm or have a religion.
So if you want to want to be part of their farm religion, it's up to you. But a farm religion is just too complicated for me. So I need help, because they keep knocking on my door.
I could see if they brought me some stuff from the farm that my girlfriend can cook for me... she likes to cook. Even some fruit... fruit grows on a farm, too, right? But they said they don't have a farm and they don't have no fruit.
How can you have a farm religion with no farm or fruit? Geesh.
Like I said, nobody's gonna get fired writing about religion when they're supposed to be working on a farm, so there's no way I can believe in their farm religion.
Okay that's what I wanted to tell you. Now I'm hungry talking about farms and fruit. Where are those farm religion people when you need them? I know they have some fruit. I mean, its a farm religion after all!
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
Hi there. It's me, Jesus. So, I understand you've been told I'm coming back. Yeah, about that... I'm not coming back. So you read that in the Bible, right? Well, sorry. That's not what it really says. Someone from 2000 years ago is fooling you.
Look, that section of the world, the Yafo/Dead Sea region of the Middle East was part of Egypt. Yep. We were Egyptians too! Pretty cool, huh? Bet you wish you were Egyptians. Well, those are actually farming and granary sales records that somebody 2000 years ago intentionally translated into religion. Nope, it's not religion and it's not about me. I'm not coming.
Look, it was great being an Egyptian. We had food, plenty of work farming and we made lots of money selling grain and stuff to the Nile Valley and Nile Delta Egyptians... We were the Tisha Egyptians. That means "countryside."
It was great being Egyptians, especially as Egyptians we had the service of the Egyptian military and our own fortress from which they could protect us. Can you believe that? We had a fortress, right there in Yafo port, today's Tel Aviv.
We had lots of thieves trying to raid our farms, that's why the Egyptian military came... Oh, it's all in these books, Qal Genesis. It’s all there. The farms, the soldiers, the merchants coming in their boats. Yeah, those merchants, they are the only ones coming. Not me.
Oh, and the New Testament... Yeah, sorry, that's farming and granary sales also. You see, whoever mistranslated the farming records into the Old Testament, did the same with other farming records to invent the New Testament.
I guess it was easier to take what was 1400 year old reports and edit them into the Bible, rather than writing the whole thing from scratch. Yeah, that would be a lot of writing, wouldn't it? Those mistranslators must have been pretty lazy.
Oh yeah the New Testament. That story about Eve stealing an apple? I knew her and she wouldn't steal anything. That story was made up from what's actually written in the real text, about a guy thief the military was searching for to capture, and where do you think he was? Yep, that's right, in the farm's apple tree orchard. What a jerk.
That was what they made up for the farming report mistranslated as 1st Timothy 2:9 through 13. Look, I love women and that rubbish they made up for 1st Timothy 2:9 through 13 is trash. Women can't dress beautifully or wear braids and pearls? Come on... I love to see rich women in nice clothes, braids and pearls. And they have to be silent? What??? Who's going to tell me what to do? Really, women need to be able to express themselves. And I don't mind listening to them. I love women and I'm Jesus!
Oh, this music, yeah, that's Egyptian music from the Ethiopian rulers. Look, Ethiopians are cool with me. They came and ruled in a way everyone gets to eat and not starve, like we were before they came. They brought irrigation and this cool music. That ancient Greek historian guy Diodorus wrote about that. That Ethiopian food is good, too. We ate a lot of that. With beer. Yep. Life was good.
But everything has changed, and I don't want to get mixed up in it. Africans were enslaved in my name, our powerful women have been made powerless today, and kids are being stolen from parents in America... Jesus Christ what a mess. I ain't coming back to that.
I may be able to turn water into wine, and fish into a feast, but I can't fix the mess you guys have on Earth. After they made you believe ancient Egyptian farming and grain sales reports are religion. Geesh. Well, good luck with that. But I gotta go. There's a game on between the West Heaven Saints and the East Heaven Angeles. I can't miss it! It's the playoffs.
So remember, I'm not coming back. If you need help with anything, just pray to God. He always has time for you. Bye
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Gee Zeus, I ain't waiting for no Greek scripture deity. Don't pay no attention to no Greek nothing that seeks to take the place of Isra'el anything. And yeah there's plenty Greek Sepharadiym makers of delicious Saloniki.
Me, and others of Isra'el, are actively engaged in Tiqqun `Olam trying to make the world better place than when we inherited it. The Nguzo Saba principle
Kuumba(Creativity): Commitment to do all we can to ensure that we leave our community/world better than when we inherited it.
Go retranslate that you worshipper of white Israeli Ashkenazim.
Shout out to all my Afrikan people. If you Vodoun etc., more power to you. If you Christian, more power to you. If you Isra'el hhazaq ubarukh. If you agnostic more power to you. If you deist more power to you. If you atheist more power to you If you Muslim more power to you. If you don't care more power to you.
You each and all have the right to your own spiritualties and belief systems Osirian Resurrection based or not w/o anybody calling you a yte man's slave cos of your cherished beliefs grounding your morality and world view. It's your personal business and no one else. Let's all try to get along together without bias and recriminations.
I ain't gonna cut you down cos you Xian nor will I knock your absolute agency to await Yesh"u as your Xian faith holds you up. But see who it is who's knocking your religion.
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts: Keep waiting for your Jesus.
posted
Pause... we're not doing that here. Keep it intellectual. The thread is about cultural diffusion in Africa and Egypt, Not about personal beleifs or whatever. We won't be shaming religion of any kind in this section.
//MODPosts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
STFU Dumbass I already told you I don't believe in any Jesus but unlike you I respect blk ppls right of agency to believe in Jesus
What a bitter little man. Damning ppl who disagree. Just who the f... do you think you are?
You can believe all your fantasies in your fantasyland.
You can't ram your kooky beliefs down other peoples throats nor can you bark and expect facts challenging you to disappear.
You ain't got enough money to buy the world off.
Tigga please, take your loser arse over to Deshret if it even belongs there or tL can abide your bullshit.
posted
I got two Mod warnings just now, so I'm finished. Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Don't you dare run!
Actually your retranslation work is pure genius. It's just not Egyptology nor linguistics. It's something that's, well, a totally original paradigm. Try to withstand review though. It's not personal.
Nothing unreasonable about * keep it civil * keep it intellectual * won't be shaming religion of any kind as MOD requests. Common courtesy that. No?
quote:Originally posted by Rain King: When we Ausar, Asset, and Heru that is Nile Valley is it not?
As you can see in my above posts, the titles, Ras, Atse (Atseti), Emebet, and Halawi are still in use in Ethiopia and Eritrea today.
Now this is what I mean man. You attempted to pass off your "your research" as legit to someone who does not study linguistics deeply. Ausar Imhotep on the other hand who does dedicated an entire thread to dismissing your claim above that you attempted to antagonize me with. It's been about two days now, and you haven't even acknowledged this response yet. How can anyone with good sense respect what you say from this point forward man?
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts: I got two Mod warnings just now, so I'm finished.
AncientGebts, real quick, before you go.
The author below is part of a group of scholars who claim to have found words in ancient Egyptian that preserve an older layer of ancient Egyptian that was spoken before the Egyptian script was invented.
Do you recognize the words below? There is a supposedly prehistoric set, and a historic set. Does one set, or maybe both, resemble any Ethiopian language you know?
Finally, we ask whether the Upper Egyptian Proto Dynastic language was the earliest form of Egyptian concerning which we have any evidence. That such earlier forms would be spoken in Egypt is stated by Butzer (1976: 11) who asserts that there is no reason to doubt that the Predynastic peoples of the Egyptian Nile valley spoke Egyptian. He bases this conclusion both on the linguistic separateness of Egyptian within Afroasiatic and the cultural continuity revealed by the archeological record. The Egyptian writing system itself at the earliest time that we find it gives evidence of a fairly long previous development. A blank piece of papyrus has been found in a tomb of the Second Dynasty showing that even at that time hieratic must have existed as a writing system alongside of hieroglyphic. James (1979: 464) argues that this is an indication that long texts could have been written as early as the initial part of the First Dynasty. The most powerful indications, however, derive from the earliest hieroglyphic writing itself. Certain symbols have phonetic values which are different from the ideas they represent as expressed even in the language of the Pyramid texts. That these phonetic readings actually expressed the sounds of words that existed in Predynastic Egyptian is shown by the fact that several of them have cognates in other branches of Afroasiatic. Among these are d 'hand' (Gardiner 1957: D 46) with which we may compare Akkadian idu, Arabic and Hebrew yad, etc., whereas throughout the historic period the word for hand was drt which survives with the usual phonetic changes into Coptic. Another is Gardiner F 21 'ear of ox' with the phonetic value Pdn cognate with Arabic Pudn, Hebrew Pozen, etc. all meaning 'ear' , whereas the historic word is an obvious new derivative formation m.sdr literally 'place of lying down or sleeping' .9 To these and others cited in Vycichl (1934) we may add the symbol for 'foot' (Gardiner D 58) to indicate the sound b, a probable cognate to the root bV 'come' or 'go' found in all other branches of Afroasiatic (Greenberg 1963: 54, no. 20 'to come'). In historic times the Egyptian word for 'foot] is rd. https://copticsounds.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/were-there-egyptian-koines.pdfPosts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reason for the different words are not that they are new or old, but are other ways of expressing something in relationship to the topic. I'll show you some examples.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here you can see that the Egyptologist is wondering i the word means bier, but is not sure...
But here you can see the actual word for qaraeza...
It also shows the importance of not assuming a word means something simply based on the picture alone. The actual word, based on looking at the hieroglyphic spelling, can be anything related to the picture. The form of the word can be further defined by seeing its use in a hieroglyphic sentence.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another example is, "...the symbol for 'foot' (Gardiner D 58) to indicate the sound b, a probable cognate to the root bV 'come' or 'go' found in all other branches of Afroasiatic (Greenberg 1963: 54, no. 20 'to come'). In historic times the Egyptian word for 'foot' is rd."
The word referred to as foot is not actually "foot", but is for all intents and purposes, in fact, the word "foot"...
bat (ባት) calf of leg (n.) (Amarigna)
By itself, [B ] is be, which means "at"...
be (በ) at (prep.) (n.) (Amarigna)
Finally, [R]+[D] is not "foot", but instead is rote, which means "run, jog"...
roT'e (ሮጠ) run, hurry, jog (v.) (Amarigna)
We can see the word rote in the Rosetta Stone, referring to the military infantry who "walk and run"...
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The other, "Among these are d 'hand' (Gardiner 1957: D 46) with which we may compare Akkadian idu, Arabic and Hebrew yad, etc., whereas throughout the historic period the word for hand was drt which survives with the usual phonetic changes into Coptic."
It is true that id does mean "hand"...
id (ኢድ) hand (n.) (Tigrigna)
But, [D]+[R]+[T] does not. The word, tret means "labor, effort"...
T'ret (ጥረት) labor, effort (n.) (Amarigna)
And in Tigrigna, the ending -t is plural form of the noun tse'eri/"effort" (plural tserat)
posted
Just in case anyone notices the [TS] and [CH] relationship, the reason for this between Amarigna and Tigrigna is pronunciation sound change between the two related languages. In Tigrigna a word that uses [TS] can often be in Amarigna [CH]. It's simply sound change over time.
This is reflected in hieroglyphs, as well. The [TS] hieroglyph could also be used to write the [CH] pronunciation and vice-versa.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: AncientGebts, real quick, before you go.
The author below is part of a group of scholars who claim to have found words in ancient Egyptian that preserve an older layer of ancient Egyptian that was spoken before the Egyptian script was invented.
Do you recognize the words below? There is a supposedly prehistoric set, and a historic set. Does one set, or maybe both, resemble any Ethiopian language you know?
Finally, we ask whether the Upper Egyptian Proto Dynastic language was the earliest form of Egyptian concerning which we have any evidence. That such earlier forms would be spoken in Egypt is stated by Butzer (1976: 11) who asserts that there is no reason to doubt that the Predynastic peoples of the Egyptian Nile valley spoke Egyptian. He bases this conclusion both on the linguistic separateness of Egyptian within Afroasiatic and the cultural continuity revealed by the archeological record. The Egyptian writing system itself at the earliest time that we find it gives evidence of a fairly long previous development. A blank piece of papyrus has been found in a tomb of the Second Dynasty showing that even at that time hieratic must have existed as a writing system alongside of hieroglyphic. James (1979: 464) argues that this is an indication that long texts could have been written as early as the initial part of the First Dynasty. The most powerful indications, however, derive from the earliest hieroglyphic writing itself. Certain symbols have phonetic values which are different from the ideas they represent as expressed even in the language of the Pyramid texts. That these phonetic readings actually expressed the sounds of words that existed in Predynastic Egyptian is shown by the fact that several of them have cognates in other branches of Afroasiatic. Among these are d 'hand' (Gardiner 1957: D 46) with which we may compare Akkadian idu, Arabic and Hebrew yad, etc., whereas throughout the historic period the word for hand was drt which survives with the usual phonetic changes into Coptic. Another is Gardiner F 21 'ear of ox' with the phonetic value Pdn cognate with Arabic Pudn, Hebrew Pozen, etc. all meaning 'ear' , whereas the historic word is an obvious new derivative formation m.sdr literally 'place of lying down or sleeping' .9 To these and others cited in Vycichl (1934) we may add the symbol for 'foot' (Gardiner D 58) to indicate the sound b, a probable cognate to the root bV 'come' or 'go' found in all other branches of Afroasiatic (Greenberg 1963: 54, no. 20 'to come'). In historic times the Egyptian word for 'foot] is rd. https://copticsounds.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/were-there-egyptian-koines.pdf
Swenet, perhaps you're barking up the wrong tree.
quote:Originally posted by Asar Imhotep to AncientGebts: You are all over the place and it is clear with you assigning 8 different phonemes to each hieroglyph, which is why you make up meanings to words and can't find consistent matches to the forms. You totally ignore Egyptian grammar and none of your translations make any sense. Neither Middle-Egyptian, New Kingdom Egyptian, Demotic, or Coptic is a Semitic language and no amount internet magicianship is going to make it such. All these years and you still haven't learned the language yet. This is a waste of time.
^ Asar took the words right out of my mind! Gebet's fantasy translation of the Torah/Bible is all based on his faulty linguistics. At least the Torah is written in a Semitic language but what he does is go to the original Mdu-Neter and impose his false translation of that to then transliterate the Torah.
It's a shame. Gebet's is right about Egypt's connections to Ethiopia but he is wrong to use Ethio-Semitic to translate Mdu-Neter and then use that erreneous Mdu-Neter to translate other ancient texts. It's just absurd. You might as well ask Asar Imhotep whose expertise is more verified.
By the way, I think the article you cited shows that there is a substrate within early Egyptian language which preserves Pre-Proto-Semitic if not proto-Boreafrithrean.
Posts: 26249 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Swenet, perhaps you're barking up the wrong tree.
quote:Originally posted by Asar Imhotep to AncientGebts:
You are all over the place and it is clear with you assigning 8 different phonemes to each hieroglyph, which is why you make up meanings to words and can't find consistent matches to the forms. You totally ignore Egyptian grammar and none of your translations make any sense. Neither Middle-Egyptian, New Kingdom Egyptian, Demotic, or Coptic is a Semitic language and no amount internet magicianship is going to make it such. All these years and you still haven't learned the language yet. This is a waste of time.
^ Asar took the words right out of my mind! Gebet's fantasy translation of the Torah/Bible is all based on his faulty linguistics. At least the Torah is written in a Semitic language but what he does is go to the original Mdu-Neter and impose his false translation of that to then transliterate the Torah.
It's a shame. Gebet's is right about Egypt's connections to Ethiopia but he is wrong to use Ethio-Semitic to translate Mdu-Neter and then use that erreneous Mdu-Neter to translate other ancient texts. It's just absurd. You might as well ask Asar Imhotep whose expertise is more verified.
By the way, I think the article you cited shows that there is a substrate within early Egyptian language which preserves Pre-Proto-Semitic if not proto-Boreafrithrean. [/qb]
I was hoping AncientGebts would give Ethiopian cognates for the Egyptian words, but he’s assuming the Egyptian words are already Ethio-Semitic words, so his answer wasn’t what I was looking for.
If you don’t mind the question, why do you give AncientGebts a different treatment compared to Asar? Asar is far worse, IMO, from his deceptive claims about regular correspondences being the universal golden standard of establishing linguistic relationships, to ignoring the fact that not a single Egyptian mummy looks like a Bantu. He's even talking BS about historical presence of Bantus in Sudan, even though the Bantu Y-DNA E-M2 is essentially absent from Sudan (with the exception of the Anuak at the Ethiopian border).
And yeah, those words could reflect a language spoken by the taller, longer faced predynastic folk (Fayum, Merimde) that Cabot Briggs calls Type B, whose bones were found from the Maghreb to Palestine and beyond.
As contrasted with some shorter predynastic peoples who also resembled Type B, but mixed to some extent (Badarians especially). Note the same projecting nose and longish, medium-narrow width face in an Upper Egyptian sculpture. The face would have been thinner and taller in the north (or maybe the face already represents a phenotype more common in the north):
It could be that the latter (ie Upper Egyptians) originally spoke the same language as the northerners but were heavily influenced by other African languages in the way Alain describes:
quote:In particular, the short conceptual vocabulary shared by contemporary Chadic-speakers, Nilotic-speakers and Ancient Egyptian-speakers suggests that the Western Egyptian Sahara was the northern region of this wider contact area that became a zone of linguistic and cultural compression following its desertification (Figure 14).
He's saying Upper Egypt was the northern part of this contact zone, so Lower Egyptians were not involved as much.
See this paper for some information about predynastic stature and facial morphology.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: If you don’t mind the question, why do you give AncientGebts a different treatment compared to Asar? Asar is far worse, IMO, from his deceptive claims about regular correspondences being the universal golden standard of establishing linguistic relationships, to ignoring the fact that not a single Egyptian mummy looks like a Bantu. He's even talking BS about historical presence of Bantus in Sudan, even though the Bantu Y-DNA E-M2 is essentially absent from Sudan (with the exception of the Anuak at the Ethiopian border).
Luckily in science your opinions don’t mean shit. Demonstrations beats conversation. The fact that you made the bolded statement above shows you don’t know jack about historical comparative linguistics and the rules of the field. The regularity of sound-meaning correspondences (i.e., the comparative method) in morphology, phonology, and basic vocabulary IS THE GOLD STANDARD, and the only one respected by linguists, for establishing language families. As discussed in The Handbook of Historical Linguistics (edited by Brian Joseph and Richard Jandra).
quote: In practice the successful methods for establishing distant genetic relationship (henceforth DGR) have not been different from those used to validate any family relationship, near or not. The comparative method has always been the basic tool for establishing genetic relationships. The fact that the methods have not been different may be a principal factor making DGR research so perplexing. The result is a continuum from established and non-controversial families (e.g., Indo-European, Uto-Aztecan, Bantu), through more distant but solidly supported relationships (e.g., Uralic, Siouan-Catawban), to plausible but inconclusive proposals (e.g., Indo-Uralic, Afro-Asiatic, Aztec-Tanoan), to questionable but not implausible ones (e.g., Altaic, Austro-Tai, Maya-Chipayan), to virtually impossible proposals (e.g., Basque-NaDene, Quechua-Turkic, Miwok-Uralic). It is difficult to segment this continuum so that plausible proposals based on legitimate procedures and reasonable supporting evidence fall sharply on one side of a line and are distinguished from clearly unlikely hypotheses clustering on the other side. (Joseph & Janda, 2003: 262-263)
Not only is it the ‘basic’ tool for establishing genetic relationships, it is the ONLY scientific tool in linguistics for doing so.
quote: to ignoring the fact that not a single Egyptian mummy looks like a Bantu. He's even talking BS about historical presence of Bantus in Sudan, even though the Bantu Y-DNA E-M2 is essentially absent from Sudan (with the exception of the Anuak at the Ethiopian border).
That is the dumbest thing I’ve heard to date. Bantu is a label for a language family. There is no correspondence between language (a psychological phenomenon) and genetics or physical morphology. Where did you go to school? Who raised you? Because it was such a stupid comment, I will move on.
quote: And yeah, those words could reflect a language spoken by the taller, longer faced predynastic folk (Fayum, Merimde) that Cabot Briggs calls Type B, whose bones were found from the Maghreb to Palestine and beyond.
Again, because you don’t seem to be educated on linguistics or biology, there is no correlation between phenotypes and language. There is no test you can conduct that will tell what language a person spoke by digging them up in their grave and measuring their limb proportions. Again, where did you go to school and who raised you?
In regards to the article presented in the original post, “Were there Egyptian Koines?”, in relation to the basic vocabulary discussed on page 517, it is clear that this researcher has not done any serious in-depth studies on the nature of the Egyptian language(s), with comparisons to African languages. He is of the ilk that consistently tries to make a connection between Egyptian and Semitic beyond what the evidence allows. This is clear by his argument that the primary unifying language of Egypt came from the Delta, when we know that the ruling populace came from the South, as far as Sudan. By making this argument, it gives way to the notion that an underlying Semitic speaking people migrated from Asia and founded pharaonic Egypt. A few notes are in order.
Firstly, the author tries to connect a few key hieroglyphs to words in Semitic. He starts off with the “hand” sign D46, with the consonant value of /d/. He fails to mention that this very sign also is rendered Dr.t, which is the dominant word for “hand” in Egyptian. What the author also fails to recognize is that the hieroglyphs, and the subsequent sound values, is based on the acrophonic principle. Acrophony is the naming of letters of an alphabetic writing system so that a letter's name begins with the letter itself (e.g., /A/ in English from Greek (A)lpha). Thus, the grapheme {d} cannot be cognate with Akkadian idu, Arabic yad, and Hebrew yad "hand" because the first sound would have been /y/, not /d/.
There are two variations of the word for “hand” in Middle-Egptian: i.e., Dr.t and DA.t “hand” (Gardiner, 1999, p. 455). This is reflected in Sango as tí “hand,” and Zande as ti̹i̹ “arm.” Note that M-E Dr.t also means “trunk of an elephant,” which is significant because it confirms the semantic correlation in Zande ti̹i̹ “arm.”
Secondly, when it comes to the F21 glyph, “ear of ox,” the author is being disingenuous. This hieroglyph has five pronunciations: i.e., anx, DrD, jdn, msDr, sDm. We are going to see in a minute an important pattern.
The Egyptian has four primary suffixes for parts of the body: i.e., -t, -s (← zi), -D, and -A. The form -D is the actual word for “body; limb” in Egyptian, and is why the word is also present in Dr.t/DA.t “hand” and DrD (reduplication), msDr, sDm “ear.” Middle-Egyptian is a CV and CVC monosyllabic agglutinative language. Each “consonant” you see attached to the monosyllabic root is a morpheme. This is clearly visible in the following Egyptian terms:
From the root √D “body, limb” derives words for “serf, phallus, child, subject, servant, people, hand, ear, head, skull.” That the word for “body” can equal words for “parts of the body” can be seen in M-E Ha.w "flesh; limbs; body; self" [Wb 3, 37.5-39.13; KoptHWb 352, 563]; snT "limb" [Wb 4, 180.1] and snT.yt "body" (of the dead) [Wb 4, 180.2; Hornung, Anbetung II, 104, Anm. 47].
The word √D “body, limb” became grammaticalized as a suffix for body parts. It alternates with -d, which serves the same purpose. This is going to be important because it is found in the very word for “foot” he tried to distinguish. The -d (← -D) suffix for body-parts can be seen in the following Egyptian words:
What is Egyptian -D/-d “suffix of body-parts,” is prefixed in ciBantu: PB *ə̆kʷi- → *tʷi- → *di- "body/body-part (i.e., limb)." PB *tʷi- has a variety of forms and is reflected in PB *-jútù "body”; and is the same word for “head” (*-túè), “ear” (*-túì), and even “servant” (*-túà), just like what we see with Egyptian √D/√d. In many Bantu languages, PB *d → l. Thus, in Lingala we have the following forms with the prefix li-/lo- (Kikongo di-) for parts of the body: i.e., lo.boko "arm", li.soko "buttock", li.bale "liver", li.toi "ear", li.no "tooth", lo.lemu "tongue", lo.poso "skin", li.bolo "vagina", li.bumu "belly", etc.
This is important because it is this Bantu prefix that is fossilized in Egyptian ns “tongue,” which Africanist connect with Proto-Semitic (PS) *lišān « tongue » (Akk. lišān.u, Arb. lisān). M-E ns "tongue," (Coptic las "tongue") is cognate with Zande mi.rãsɛ "tongue," Hausa lā̀sā "lick," Somali leef "lick" (semantic shift). The PS *lišān “tongue” corresponds to Bantu *-tʷiŋʷ- → *-dímì "tongue, language"; Kikongo lu.dimi, Lingala lo.lemu, Bemba lu.limi, Bulu o.yem (loss of l-), Chichewa li.limi, Comorien u.lime (loss of l-), Luganda olu.limi, Swahili u.limi (loss of l-) and Sumerian -eme “tongue” (loss of li- prefix and d- in the root). Bantu (tʷi- →) d- ~ Semitic š-; Bantu -m ~ Semitic -n.
It’s these facts, upon many, that we know that Egyptian is NOT Amarigna or Tigrigna. Semitic cannot explain these facts, but Bantu can because Egyptian is a Bantu language. Many of the Semitic forms that people match with Egyptian is not because of inheritance, but because Egyptians loaned them the words in predynastic and dynastic times when Egyptians set up colonies in the Levant (home of West Semitic). It is only through Bantu that this level of details is attainable. This is why demonstration beats conversation and why I don’t waste my time too much with people like Swenet who is not serious about this work.
Posts: 853 | From: Houston | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: Y-DNA E-M2 is essentially absent from Sudan = swenet
and what about the MTDNA's in the Sudan? In addition, do you mean that E-M2 is currently absent from the Sudan? if so does that mean it was NEVER there? What could the possible explanations be for it NOT being there now? I can think of many possible scenarios...
quote: ignoring the fact that not a single Egyptian mummy looks like a Bantu. = swenet
Really?
quote: (photo (c) National Geographic)
You can see the obvious resemblance in all three skulls. Now here's the kicker. The bottom-left mummy is King Tut. The one on the right comes from a scan in 2007 of another mummy found in 2007. That mummy was speculated to be the body of Tut's missing father Akhenaten -- based in large part on the observation that the skull looks roughly alike. From the National Geographic news report:
"The CT scan supports the idea that the mummy is Akhenaten by revealing it as a male between the ages of 25 and 40 who shares many physical similarities with Tut—assuming Akhenaten was Tut's father, as some experts believe. The mystery mummy's strange elongated, egg-shaped skull, called dolichocephalic, is strikingly similar to Tutankhamun's."
Unfortunately, that alone is poor evidence, and here's why. Tut lived 350 years before Neskhons, and yet the skull shape is shared: it was common among the Egyptian royals. Therefore, one cannot draw a meaningful conclusions that two mummies are likely to be father and son simply based on an argument that their skulls look alike! https://www.eagleman.com/blog/a-note-about-head-shape-in-mummies
quote: In 2011, I scanned a 3,000 mummy, as described in my earlier post. This is just a quick note about his perspicuously elongated skull shape, known as dolicocephy (elongated head).
First, here's the profile of Neskhons (the mummy I scanned):
quote:such skulls are called dolichocephalic and are typical of Australian aborigines and native southern Africans. An index of 75 to 80 means that the skull is nearly oval; such skulls are called mesaticephalic and are typical of Europeans and the Chinese https://www.britannica.com/science/dolichocephaly
THE G.O.A.T from Kenya Eliud Kipchoge
clearly dolichocephalic ^^^^^^
This dude looks Beja.. but you ascribed him to Fayum/Mermide.. how do you know this...?
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
I’m going to say it again. Regular correspondences are not cookie cutter tools that can be applied universally and without critical thinking. There are a number of situations textbooks say it gives bogus results.
Your model has Coptic and Middle Egyptian as two different languages (rather than two dialects). Instead of admitting something is wrong with your model, you have invented a mythology around your results. You can’t rationalize bogus results by saying Coptic and Middle Egyptian represent languages spoken by different ethnic groups living in Egypt. And then you show further lack of sophistication by citing Josephus to support that mythology. You’re supposed to use Egyptian skeletal remains to support ethnic heterogeneity, not Josephus. But we all know why you avoid skeletal remains; it would undermine your linguistic model.
Asar, since you always have something slick to say about “the proper way to do science” and how you’re such an embodiment of scientific principles, cite a modern textbook stating that regular correspondences supercede common sense to the point where you would accept Coptic and Middle Egyptian as different languages.
The book you’ve just posted only proves my point:
While [regular correspondences] are a staple of traditional approaches to determining language families, it is important to discuss how their use can be perverted. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics
Asar. Do not think you’re going to befuddle me by posting selective book quotes. I will follow up on your sources to see if you’re telling the truth.
quote: Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: That is the dumbest thing I’ve heard to date. Bantu is a label for a language family. There is no correspondence between language (a psychological phenomenon) and genetics or physical morphology. Where did you go to school? Who raised you? Because it was such a stupid comment, I will move on.
Asar, I did not forget how you stumbled trying post Josephus as a source for "Egyptian Bantus" who lived side by side with Coptic speakers in ancient Egypt. You can run from this subject all you want, but sooner or later you're going to have to face the fact that misreading Josephus (he said Egyptian tribes, not Egyptian ethnic groups) is about the extent you're going to be able to push this "they lived side by side".
Asar, you always have something slick to say to deflect the burden of proof. "Bantu is a language, not a phenotype". Of course it is not a phenotype. But how does that absolve you from giving a detailed account of how a Bantu language reached Egypt? You talked about Bantu Middle Egyptian speakers as a ruling elite. Well, where are their skeletal remains. Don't backtrack now saying "Bantu is not a phenotype". Let's see the skeletal remains of these Bantu "ruling elites".
Everything about your model is vague. No dates, no archaeological correspondences. No haplogroup. It's clear your model does not map onto anything we know about Egypt. It's like an obsolete lego piece that came with the package, but fits nowhere.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic