posted
The vowels are arbitrarily chosen to ease pronunciation during speech. Everyone in Egyptology knows that /e/ is not the real vowel. It's just a convention because when we speak we don't simply speak with consonants.
Posts: 853 | From: Houston | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
No. There is no way to reconstruct the vowels of say Middle Egyptian. The best you can do is to reconstruct the parent language, in addition to daughter languages of the parent, and insert the vowels for the common words that dominate in your comparative set. Coptic does not help us much because it is clear that it is an entirely different language (as the presence of diphthongs attests). Coptic lacks the noun-classes, which helped to shape the sound changes in Middle-Egyptian. So for now, /e/ is just fine when we're trying to vocalize for academic sake Egyptian words. If one is trying to recover vowels, it's impossible without the writings; so the best you can do is a historical comparative linguistic process, as well as some internal reconstructions to decide on original forms.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: yes but is their any system to pick which vowel will be artificially added ?
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: So the written language does not include vowels
KMt
_
translators insert some "e"s and we get "Kemet"
Is that vowel choice of "e" entirely random?
could it have been
Kamat or Komit etc?
.
E usually stands in as a default, but not always. Coptic has been used as a suggestive vowel guide. Hebrew and Greek works with Egy names were considered too. Egy terms in Amharic texts sometimes help.
Whether right or wrong the above (and other methods) have in fact been used in transciptions by translators.
The Coptic equivalent spellings of KM.t are KAME, KEMI, KMME, and KHME.
Know that Coptic H is Êta. KM.t, as a country name, is used and pronounced keh-may in Coptic. So the vowel choices in KM.t isn't the random/default E. They are Coptic H (Êta) and E (Ei). Coptic has a e ê i o ô u and y vowels. Based on that, Kamat or Komit don't seem likely for KM.t. Also notice the t is silent and unused in the Coptic spelling KHME. There is KMOM in Coptic equivalent of AE kmm.
quote:Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: No. There is no way to reconstruct the vowels of say Middle Egyptian. The best you can do is to reconstruct the parent language, in addition to daughter languages of the parent, and insert the vowels for the common words that dominate in your comparative set. Coptic does not help us much because it is clear that it is an entirely different language (as the presence of diphthongs attests). Coptic lacks the noun-classes, which helped to shape the sound changes in Middle-Egyptian. So for now, /e/ is just fine when we're trying to vocalize for academic sake Egyptian words. If one is trying to recover vowels, it's impossible without the writings; so the best you can do is a historical comparative linguistic process, as well as some internal reconstructions to decide on original forms.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: yes but is their any system to pick which vowel will be artificially added ?
When did Coptic diverge? Is a it a descendant of a Lower Egyptian language?
Is NTR and Note an example of instances when Coptic isn't used. I noticed that while Coptic and ME transliterations share plenty cognates they don't seem to be anything close to the same language.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
You can't date languages unless there is writing to back it up. With that said, one cannot say for sure when a language diverged from its parent. If you are asking when did Coptic diverge from, say, Middle-Egyptian, our argument is that Coptic and Middle Egyptian are two totally separate languages. They both diverged from the parent language, which I call "Cyena-Ntu" and who Mboli calls "Post-Classic Negro-Egyptian." (Negro-Egyptian being the label of Obenga 1993)
The word /nTr/ is a good example. Middle-Egyptian is an agglutinative language and it has a morphology similar to Bantu. The n- is a prefix of agent. The root is T-r. In most cognates for the term, there is no vowel between n- and T-r (although historically there probably was). The fact that Coptic has diphthongs (two vowels in sequence representing a single sound), shows its difference from Middle-Egyptian, which is a CVCV language. Coptic is CVVC and you see this in the form NOUTE. The cognate in ciLuba-Bantu is NKOLE. A matter of fact, the very word /Hr.w/ "Horus" is cognate with /nTr/, without the prefix of agent.
But in Nsw.t Bjt.j (King) in Ancient Egyptian (2016), I go into some of the details in the Introduction.
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: When did Coptic diverge? Is a it a descendant of a Lower Egyptian language?
Is NTR and Note an example of instances when Coptic isn't used. I noticed that while Coptic and ME transliterations share plenty cognates they don't seem to be anything close to the same language.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: So the written language does not include vowels
KMt
___________________
translators insert some "e"s and we get "Kemet"
Is that vowel choice of "e" entirely random?
could it have been
Kamat or Komit etc?
Vowels were NOT random since it is the vowels that distinguish one word from another even if the consonants were the same.
Thus kem was a different word from kom.
Based on modern Coptic but also ancient Egyptian transliterations of other languages there is an excellent primer on how to pronounce Egyptian words here: https://www.friesian.com/egypt.htm
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: No. There is no way to reconstruct the vowels of say Middle Egyptian. The best you can do is to reconstruct the parent language, in addition to daughter languages of the parent, and insert the vowels for the common words that dominate in your comparative set. Coptic does not help us much because it is clear that it is an entirely different language (as the presence of diphthongs attests). Coptic lacks the noun-classes, which helped to shape the sound changes in Middle-Egyptian. So for now, /e/ is just fine when we're trying to vocalize for academic sake Egyptian words. If one is trying to recover vowels, it's impossible without the writings; so the best you can do is a historical comparative linguistic process, as well as some internal reconstructions to decide on original forms.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: yes but is their any system to pick which vowel will be artificially added ?
When did Coptic diverge? Is a it a descendant of a Lower Egyptian language?
Is NTR and Note an example of instances when Coptic isn't used. I noticed that while Coptic and ME transliterations share plenty cognates they don't seem to be anything close to the same language.
Egypt was a Pan-African state made up of numerous African ethnic groups, that is why each nome or sepat had its own gods. Bantu speakers may have formed one of the nomes, but they were not the dominate population.
Coptic and Middle Egyptian are not two different languages. Don't forget that we used Coptic to read Egyptian. I believe they should be recognized as dialects of the same language.
Anyway, ancient Egyptian was a lingua franca that is why it is cognate to so many different African languages. Naturally, as a new group took control of Egypt, ancient Egyptian would have adopted new terms to accomodate the new population that assumed control of the Egyptian State.
Most of the translators of Egyptian had to learn Arabic or Hebrew, so they may read Egyptian terms using Semitic "cognates".This would explain the "new terms" used to interpret some Egyptian hieroglyphs.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I see it's complicated and speculative
There is a speculative aspect but fortunately we have modern Coptic which is a direct descendant of ancient Egyptian language.
In Afroasiatic languages, vowels tend to be the more stable and conservative than compared to other languages due to the change in meanings with different consonant roots.
That said, there may have been dialectal variation as seen in Semitic languages where certain vowels can be interchanged especially based on dialect. For example o and u and e and i.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
O & U aren't interchangeable in Hebrew O or U can be represented by the semivowel W in Hebrew
E & I aren't interchangeable in Hebrew The semivowel Y can represent E or I in Hebrew
Hebrew's nonconsonantal O U E I are diacritic markers
O hholam U qubbuss shuruq E sseyreh seghol I hhiyriq
These, and others, in use since ~750CE "Modern" Hebrew common writings don't use them
Unsure about O/U usage in JudeoArabic English xlated Arabic used to sub O for U & E for I Moslem Muslim
posted
^ I appreciate the info, but I wasn't referring to Hebrew but rather the various Arabic dialects or rather Arabic derived languages as well as South Semitic languages including Ethio-Semitic. The triliteral roots they share with Hebrew often use totally different vowels.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: O & U aren't interchangeable in Hebrew O or U can be represented by the semivowel W in Hebrew
E & I aren't interchangeable in Hebrew The semivowel Y can represent E or I in Hebrew
Hebrew's nonconsonantal O U E I are diacritic markers
O hholam U qubbuss shuruq E sseyreh seghol I hhiyriq
These, and others, in use since ~750CE "Modern" Hebrew common writings don't use them
Unsure about O/U usage in JudeoArabic English xlated Arabic used to sub O for U & E for I Moslem Muslim
& @Djehuti Arabic is pretty much similar. مسلم Which is Muslim in written form lacks any vowel or semivowel but the sounds for u/o can be denoted by و (w) and E/I by ي (y). In more nuanced scripture accents over some consonants and Alef أ are used to get specific vowel sounds.
But for consonant strings that lack vowels, the vowel sounds aren’t fixed they’re just used in translation to aid pronounciation. For instance كتب which is literally just “ktb” will be kutib, but كتاب (ktab) will be kitab. Because alef (a) is used between the last two consonants the stress causes a “U” sound to adopt a sound most similar to “I”. So there’s not necessarily any rule of interchangeability for voweless strings. However, certain consonants tends to be followed by a fixed vowel-like sound like for م (M) you’ll get a u/o sound. For example: إسلام which is basically “Islam” is pronounced Islamu.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Oh boy is this fun let's keep the ball rolling
Ein lo O sound, nor letter, in Arabic
Ethiopic and Amharic ain't gotta alphabet They got syllabaries Each consonant's got 7 syllabic forms
O & U can't interchange (sâbi' vs kâ'ib syllables)
E & I got different syllables (hâmis vs sâlis)
But the sådis syllable can support • a consonant only • a different I sound than sâlis • a different E sound than hâmis
In Hebrew
Aleph is a glottal stop w/no sound (think of the h in honor) All vowel sounds including shwa can follow aleph
Ngayin is a rough throaty breathing sound (it's the 1st consonant in Gomorrah) All vowel sounds can follow it too
Aleph, ngayin, and heh (H) frequently close a syllable You'd just hear the preceding vowel if aleph or heh close a syllable When ngayin closes a syllable you can hear it after the vowel sound (not the same but think of NG in song or thing or clang)
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Everything you say above is the same with Mdu Neter as well! Is this due to Egyptian influence in Hebrew OR some common Afrisian pattern??
Me no know
I just know knowing Hebrew made Egyptian hieroglyphic consonants easier to learn when I applied that knowledge to Budge(1910) Egy Lang pp31-2. Nevermind Gesenius(1833:1846:1949) Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon pp.xi-xii tables of 'alphabets'.
posted
Translators decide on ancient Egyptian vowels by guessing. Good thing that Sewasew (Seshat), the woman who invented ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic writing, was smarter than that.
posted
Ancient written Greek did not reflect spoken ancient Greek, but reflected... 1. The imitation of ancient Egyptian written characters (consonants and vowels) 2. The use of the ancient Egyptian vocabulary
In the three graphics below, you can see a comparison of consonants and vowels in ancient written Greek and ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic text, including... A. The use of written Greek letters imitating consonants and vowels of the hieroglyphs, in the underlying text of the 700 BC Hesiod Theogony (supposed genesis of the Greek gods) B. The use of consonants and vowels in the Egyptian writing style of the Yafo/Dead Sea region of Lower Egypt, where the ancient Egyptian "Jaffa" fortress is being excavated in the Yafo, Tel Aviv harbor, from the underlying text of the Bible's Genesis 1 - 4 (supposed genesis of the world)
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts: Translators decide on ancient Egyptian vowels by guessing. Good thing that Sewasew (Seshat), the woman who invented ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic writing, was smarter than that.
Thanks for posting this. I am researching the older civilizations and the elevated status of women before the age of imperialism. How Egypt changed from its early periods shows aspects of this transition to patriarchal social structure, increased class oppression, etc.
Even earlier writing than Egyptian is known from Old Europe, in which societies women were preeminent. Clearly Sumerian writing was affected by that script. There was trade with predynastic Egypt, but it is unknown if Vincan writing had an effect on the development of writing in Egypt.
-------------------- Nican Tlaca Posts: 139 | From: Piedmont, Virginia | Registered: Jan 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts: Translators decide on ancient Egyptian vowels by guessing. Good thing that Sewasew (Seshat), the woman who invented ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic writing, was smarter than that.
Thanks for posting this. I am researching the older civilizations and the elevated status of women before the age of imperialism. How Egypt changed from its early periods shows aspects of this transition to patriarchal social structure, increased class oppression, etc.
Even earlier writing than Egyptian is known from Old Europe, in which societies women were preeminent. Clearly Sumerian writing was affected by that script. There was trade with predynastic Egypt, but it is unknown if Vincan writing had an effect on the development of writing in Egypt.
Interesting looking book! It seems to affirm the theory that I and many scholars have that writing was likely invented by women. This is shown in the earliest legends of the early major civilizations. The Egyptians attribute the invention of writing to the goddess Seshat, while the Sumerians attribute writing to the goddess Nisaba, and the Chinese to the goddess Nuwa, yet in all three cases later versions give credit to male deities.---Seshat's husband Djehuti, Nisaba's brother Ninurta, and Nuwa's brother/husband Fuxi.
The archaeological evidence comes in the form of ceramics and textiles especially pottery and tapestry markings which were traditionally women's work. In predynastic Egypt, the earliest hieroglyphs which were not rock epigraphs were in the form of pottery marks and in a tapestry in Nekhen. In the case of North Africa today, Berber glyphs which were the basis of the Tifinagh script are still preserved in pottery and clothing works of Berber women.
Seshat's symbol is the 7 pointed star glyph meaning 'instruction' surmounted on a stick crowned with a bow like object.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Oh boy is this fun let's keep the ball rolling
Ein lo O sound, nor letter, in Arabic
Ethiopic and Amharic ain't gotta alphabet They got syllabaries Each consonant's got 7 syllabic forms
O & U can't interchange (sâbi' vs kâ'ib syllables)
E & I got different syllables (hâmis vs sâlis)
But the sådis syllable can support • a consonant only • a different I sound than sâlis • a different E sound than hâmis
I stand corrected, and good to know. I noticed some South Semitic dialects tend to exchange o & u so I assumed that Ethio-Semitic did the same.
quote:In Hebrew
Aleph is a glottal stop w/no sound (think of the h in honor) All vowel sounds including shwa can follow aleph
Ngayin is a rough throaty breathing sound (it's the 1st consonant in Gomorrah) All vowel sounds can follow it too
Aleph, ngayin, and heh (H) frequently close a syllable You'd just hear the preceding vowel if aleph or heh close a syllable When ngayin closes a syllable you can hear it after the vowel sound (not the same but think of NG in song or thing or clang)
In Egyptian language the vowel u is represented by the following glyph:
The u becomes a w when another vowel is attached so u-a or ua can be pronounced wa, while u-e or ue is pronounced we as in 'wed'. Originally both u and o were represented by the same glyph indicating the probability that the two vowels were interchangeable though in later hieroglyphs the two became distinguished.
The letter i is represented by the following glyph:
Interestingly enough the letter y is represented by a doubling of the glyph for i as shown:
This seems to indicate a distinction in say 'iu' (ee-oo) vs. 'yu'.
And though not as common the vowel a is also expressed in the following glyph:
I notice the a is expressed when that vowel happens to be stressed. Speaking of which I also notice a grammar rule that is shared with Semitic in the form of vowel contractions.
For example an Egyptian word for much or great is 'aa' or a-a with consecutive As though this can be shortened to 'ah' with a glottal fricative h sound following the a as in the Egyptian name Ahmose or Arabic name Ahmed. The word ia (ee-a) can become 'yah'. Thus two syllable vowel words become one syllable words with fricative sound at the end.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is very simple. Learn Amharic and Tigrigna and all your questions are answered. If nothing else, use Amharic and Tigrigna online dictionaries. It is no longer necessary to guess.
is not a /u/ sound, but a /w/ and can be seen by the fact that in intervocalic position, it's allophone is /m/. For example, mnmn "to move about, to shift" > wnwn "to move to and fro; to traverse."
The sound-law is m > w /V__V. In other words, a process of lenition occurs when /m/ is inbetween two vowels. Thus, we know the original word was VmVn-VmVn > VwVn-VwVn, where V is any (V)owel. This is one clue to know why M-E is different from Coptic.
Secondly, is not a vowel, it is a consonant. It is the nasalized uvular trill [ʀ], which explains its interchange with both [r] and [n]. You need to learn the transliteration system of Egyptology as we transliterate [ʀ] as <A>. The <a> (lowercase) grapheme is a totally different sound.
Posts: 853 | From: Houston | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Asar, what is your opinion of Amharic and Tigrigna relation or lack of to Egyptian?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
Interestingly enough the letter y is represented by a doubling of the glyph for i ... :
This seems to indicate a distinction in say 'iu' (ee-oo) vs. 'yu'.
And though not as common the vowel a is also expressed ... :
I notice the a is expressed when that vowel happens to be stressed. Speaking of which I also notice a grammar rule that is shared with Semitic in the form of vowel contractions.
For example an Egyptian word for much or great is 'aa' or a-a with consecutive As though this can be shortened to 'ah' with a glottal fricative h sound following the a as in the Egyptian name Ahmose or Arabic name Ahmed.
The word ia (ee-a) can become 'yah'.
Thus two syllable vowel words become one syllable words with fricative sound at the end.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Asar, what is your opinion of Amharic and Tigrigna relation or lack of to Egyptian?
They are not related. For example, Middle-Egyptian is 1) monosyllabic (i.e., CV, CVC), for which Amharic or Tigrigna is not. 2) different morphology. 3) Word formation forms are vastly different. He confuses many loanwords into Semitic as genuine cognates and has yet to establish regular sound-meaning correspondences (or even the laws that govern sound change). All over the place with his alleged correspondences.
Posts: 853 | From: Houston | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
I know Ancient Gebs is probably going to respond but I hope one of you before getting into details will provide for us some of the foundations of proper methodology in Comparative Linguistics first, like an introduction that would establish how what is related and what is not related is properly determined
Or maybe a new thread on Comparative Linguistics instead of us going on for years arguing details maybe their could first be agreement on the rules ? It could simply be a copy and paste of some text as to steps taken
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Comparative Linguistics in the scientific sense is really Asar's expertise.
But as for my method of retranslation (for example, see my Hesiod Theogony/Genesis comparison above), here is a description of my method of retranslating the underlying text of the Bible, as analyzed and written from a Harvard-trained Biblical Hebrew expert:
Process Introduction Interpreting the individual written characters and resulting matches to the hieroglyphic language, and thus Amarigna and Tigrigna words – pronunciation and meanings – can be difficult, if not entirely confusing. The degree of difficulty involves many elements:
A. One would need to know the correct way to read hieroglyphs and understand the complex linguistic elements they employ;
B. One would have to know or have a source of Amarigna and Tigrigna words (of which the hieroglyphic language is a precise combination of the vocabulary of the two);
C. One would need to know or have a source of Hebrew words;
D. Finally, all of that needs to be reverse-engineered, to dig through the layers like an archaeologist, to uncover the mystery below in the underlying word and its message.
In doing so, there are many roadblocks to get around. In some cases, for example, some letters that look similar can be confused. For instance, the ancient form of Hebrew qof ( ק') and waw (ו) look similar, but most often represent the [Q], [K] or related pronunciations. So in some cases, it can be easy to mistake one letter for the other because of their similarity.
Also, the meanings of words can subtly be changed based on such seemingly inconsequential features such as vowel changes or the addition of prefixes and/or suffixes.
As an example, metse means “to come” whereas adding the a- prefix makes the word ametse, or “bring something.”
Or another example is where the noun ekhli is “grain,” it would be a mistake to try to add a verb m- verb prefix to the noun in attempt to match it as “eat,” although mekal does mean “middle” but that does not imply in the “middle” of the mouth as in “eat.”
Only through the proper matching of the written related pronunciation of a word to its related Hebrew meaning is it possible to uncover each word’s mystery.
Process for Ancient Hebrew Text According to only a few of the many pitfalls referenced above, it is important first to be able to see the ancient shapes of the letters in terms of their relation to their Egyptian hieroglyphic match. This first step has been made easy due to the conversion of Modern Hebrew text to Proto-Sinaitic glyphs accomplished by Jeff Benner of the Ancient Hebrew Resource Center (www.ancient-hebrew.org).
And while hieroglyphic text can be written both right-to-left and left-to-right, referenced hieroglyphic words (such as those by Wallis Budge in “An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary,” “The Rosetta Stone,” and The Book of the Dead” published by Dover Publications) are all shown as left-to-right. This is also the same direction that Amarigna, Tigrigna and English words are written and read. Because of this, and to facilitate the word matching with all words in the same direction, Jeff Benner’s Proto-Sinaitic text was reversed using several computer programs.
Then, referencing mechanical translations (also called a Concordant Hebrew English Sublinear or CHES for short), each word is divided and a basic accepted meaning for the hosted Hebrew word. One such mechanical translation is on the Scripture4All.org website (www.scripture4all.org).
It is important to note that all matching resources are “accepted” sources, meaning that each “source” is a reliable provider of matching elements. Every effort is made to verify the veracity and reliableness of each element's source. This means that:
Amarigna (Amharic) words are matched to a reliable online Amarigna dictionary (www.amharicdictionary.com);
Tigrigna (Tigrinya) words are match to a reliable online Tigrigna dictionary (http://memhr.org/dic/index.php?a=index& ... D%E1%8A%9B);
Hebrew words are matched to a reliable online Hebrew translator (www.morfix.co.il/en).
With the underlying hieroglyphic word and the hosted Hebrew word in hand, it is then necessary to match it to its actual Amarigna and/or Tigrigna word. The field is first limited by the word’s form, as follows:
1. Each glyph of the underlying hieroglyphic word is placed upon the grid of the phonemic pattern of Amarigna and Tigrigna words, based on standard phonemic principles of common place or manner of articulation;
2. A search is then carried out for every possible pronunciation sound combination that matches that which is written out in glyphs, taking also into consideration the context of the word in the sentence;
3. Having narrowed the field by form, the field is then further narrowed by meaning, the meaning in the Amarigna and/or Tigrigna must have been related in some way to the Hebrew word hosted by the underlying word ;
4. Since the hieroglyph language records Amarigna and Tigrigna vocabulary and grammar, it is necessary to find the word as it was spelled in ancient hieroglyphs as well using Budge’s "An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary."
The above process provides a clear path of development of the each actual underlying word and its meaning. Once this word-by-word analysis is complete for a given sentence, it is then a matter of analyzing the sentence to come up with a translation that makes sense, because each completed sentence aids with subsequent sentences.
Free digital copies of my books related to the above: My Rosetta Stone retranslation link
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts: [QB] Comparative Linguistics in the scientific sense is really Asar's expertise.
But as for my method of retranslation (for example, see my Hesiod Theogony/Genesis comparison above), here is a description of my method of retranslating the underlying text of the Bible, as analyzed and written from a Harvard-trained Biblical Hebrew expert
Thanks for posting that, what is the name of the Harvard-trained Biblical Hebrew expert, thanks
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Thanks for posting that, what is the name of the Harvard-trained Biblical Hebrew expert, thanks
Of the many people around the world who work with me and who have the desire to contribute to my work in a general sense, some are afraid of having their names out there in the public in connection with my work unraveling the underlying texts of religious books such as the Bible and the Rig Veda (which are not actually about religion at all -- see the above retranslation of the Hesiod Theogony/Genesis comparison).
He is one of the ones contributing, yet who has decided to have me keep his name private.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's more important is how the resulting retranslations of ancient texts can match archaeology, such as the underlying text of
The 700BC Hesiod Theogony (supposedly ancient Greek Zeus religion)
The 600BC Rig Veda (supposedly Buddhism religion)
The Bible (supposedly ancient Middle East religion)
The underlying texts of these three documents in reality match the archaeology of the Yafo/Dead Sea region of ancient Egypt, as is reported in UCLA Professor Aaron Burke's paper on the excavation of the Bronze age ancient Egyptian fortress in the Yafo, Tel Aviv harbor (link).
This fortress is mentioned throughout the underlying texts of the three fake religions (see the above retranslation of the Hesiod Theogony/Genesis comparison).
This is a primary benefit of translating ancient texts with a real language.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts: What's more important is how the resulting retranslations of ancient texts can match archaeology, such as the underlying text of
The 700BC Hesiod Theogony (supposedly ancient Greek Zeus religion)
The 600BC Rig Veda (supposedly Buddhism religion)
The Bible (supposedly ancient Middle East religion)
The underlying texts of these three documents in reality match the archaeology of the Yafo/Dead Sea region of ancient Egypt, as is reported in UCLA Professor Aaron Burke's paper on the excavation of the Bronze age ancient Egyptian fortress in the Yafo, Tel Aviv harbor (link).
This fortress is mentioned throughout the underlying texts of the three fake religions (see the above retranslation of the Hesiod Theogony/Genesis comparison).
what are some examples of real religions?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: what are some examples of real religions?
AFRICAN TRADITIONAL RELIGION From the Nigerian book, "Essential Topics In African Traditional Religion," by Dr. M. Y. Nabofa, B.A., Ph. D. Ibadan, and lecturer in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria...
Religion is found in every human society in the world. In all the established human societies it is one of the most important institutional structures that make up the total social system... Because religion is concerned with the divine its institutions have been the most viable forms of human association.
Religion concerns itself with the most sublime of human aspirations; it is regarded as the source of morality and public order and the inner peace of the individual persons. It is also regarded as a civilizing element... However, it is capable of changing or revolutionizing an already established system...
In the West African context religion is regarded as one of the cohesive factors in the society. Its major aim is to bring peace and harmony among men. No traditional society in Africa can do away with [its] religion because it permeates all the activities of life
...God is the Source or Ground of all existence, power and harmonious living among men. Peace, prosperity and harmony can only come through pious life and religious rites...
...in traditional Africa there was no religious conflict, it was the [Western Europeans] who introduced conflict into religion but not religion that introduced conflicts into men. Religion per se which is always pure always seeks to unite men rather than divide them.
Before... missionary activities[beginning in Africa as early as the 1500s], African religion [lived] as an absolute truth and undisputed belief... The church taught the Africans that their religion was a false one without convincing them of the truth of Christianity. The missionaries failed to understand that African traditional religion reaches far beyond the rational and intellectual sphere... They failed to understand also that the traditional African religion is a life to be lived rather than obeying dogmatic laws which are in themselves burdens. As Idowu succinctly put it "Where a religion becomes cramped with the framework of dogma and thus becomes a law to be obeyed and not a life to be lived, such religion has become an aberration, it ceases, in fact, to be religion, and thus has become a mere system, a yoke upon the neck'
...When individuals accept religious values and the beliefs about human nature and destiny associated with them, they develop important aspects of their own an self-understanding self-definition. Secondly, as they participate in religious and worship, they act out significant elements of their own identity. In these various ways religion affects the individuals' understanding of 'who they are' and 'what they are'... religion gives the individual a sense of identity with the distant past and the limitless future.
... The Various rites of passage of life: birth, naming ceremonies, puberty, circumcision, initiation, marriage and burial rites in Africa have religious significance. They all help to integrate man fully into the society to which he belongs.
In concluding this theoretical section we may say that religion integrates or links the individual with his group, supports him in uncertainty, consoles him in disappointment, attaches him to society's goals, promotes his morale and thus makes him feel that he is truly a human being. It helps to enforce the unity and stability of the society. It may also play a prophetic role and prove itself a disturbing or even subversive influence in any particular society. The contribution of religion to society may be either positive or negative; they may support the continued existence, or may play a part in undermining the continued existence...
(i) The following are the elements that makeup the structure of West African Traditional Religion. (a) There is a strong belief in the Supreme Being who is "Wholly Other' than otheres. He is not of the same rank and file with the other objects of worship. (b) Belief in the Divinities who are regarded as God's ministers and intermediaries between God and man. (c) Belief in spirits. There are good ones and bad ones... (d) Belief in ancestors and relationship with the Supreme Being. (e) There is also the belief in the practice of magic and medicine.
(ii) (a) All the above are interrelated, because it is the strong belief that the world is under the unitary control of the Supreme Being. (b) The structure links man with the Supreme Being. The divinities are God's immediate representatives. They are near or close to man and they are functional, and as such they could be approached directly by man. (c) the spirits manifest the whole spiritual universe. It is the general belief that all the divinities and even the [African people's actual] Ancestors are all spirits. Sometimes they act between men and the Supreme Being. (d) The ancestors are personal Beings with intimate relationship to man. They are therefore intercessors between the living and the dead, and the Supreme being and all the divinities. (e) Magic and medicine help to align man with the Deity. They are man's means of utilizing the forces of the Universe for his well-being. Magicians and [traditional doctors] rely upon God, divinities, spirits and ancestors for their successful functioning. (f) All the elements in the structure emphasize the Supreme Being's sovereign rule over the whole universe and man. Without Him other elements in the structure have no life, meaning and successful operation."
1. Belief in God "We can speak of a multi-sided concept of God in Africa. That is because in each locality, the concept of God usually takes its emphasis and complexion from the sociological structure and climate. It is therefore necessary to understand the variations in the sociological patterns in order to see clearly the reasons for certain emphasis and tendencies. In societies which are well organised into a hierarchical order [for example] the Yoruba, Edo and Ashanti God is concieved as the king at the top of the hierchy, while in stateless, or less organised societies such as the Igbo and Urhobo God is not so regarded. Also whereas in most places in Africa, God is concieved in masculine terms, there are localities where he is regarded as feminine. Among the Ijo and some Ewe speaking people Tamuno and Mawu, or in particular Nana Buluku - ancient Deity respectively God is thought of in feminine terms. In societies in which the woman is the breadwinner for the family and also in societies where women do a lot of moulding Deity is conceived as a female. e.g the Ijo.
While the local variations in the African concept of God should be appreciated and given due recognition, and in spite of variations, and unmistakable basic pattern stands out. These features are the ones which Idowu examines under four main comprehensive attributes.
GOD IS REAL TO THE AFRICANS In each society, the people have a local name for God and theses various names of God clearly show His character and emphatic of the fact that he is a reality and that he is not an abstract concept or Being. These names also convey the purest expression of the Africans' religious thinking and religious experience. The various African names of God result from the total experience of the people about Deity.
...African names of Deity... reveal to us that they are not mere labels, but they are descriptive of His nature and the experience of Africans about him and their belief in him. ...Apart from names, Africa is very rich in attributes of God which show clearly that to them Deity is the Living One who is the ever-present, ever-active, and ever-acting reality in the world.
(b) GOD IS UNIQUE To the Africans God is unique; he cannot be compared with any being. There is none like him... The [uniqeness] of Deity is one of the reasons why there are no images - graven or in drawing or in painting of Him in Africa. We have symbols of his attributes but not of his images.
(c) GOD IS THE ABSOLUTE CONTROLLER OF THE UNIVERSE The Africans believe that God is the absolute controller of the Universe...
(d) GOD IS ONE, THE ONLY GOD OF THE WHOLE UNIVERSE The Africans have no belief in a world created by many Gods but One. Hence all over Africa, there are places each of which is considered to be the sacred city, the sacred grove, or the sacred spot, especially because it is believed, according to the people's cosmology, that the place is the centre of the world, the place where creation began, where the human race has its cradle, and from where the race dispersed to all over the earth.
(e) HE IS THE CREATOR In this respect we are going to give a careful and critical account of Yoruba myth of creation as told by E.B. Idowu in his book Olodumare God In Yoruba Belief pages 18 - 28; and 39 - 40.
2. Belief in the Divinities: The other element in the structure of [African traditional religion] is the belief in divinities. Divinities are believed to be being or powers brought into being by Deity and they have no absolute existence of their own...
What is their relationship to God and what is their place in the... world.
(i) They were brought into being by God and they are generally regarded as sons and daughters of God. (ii) They have no absolute existence apart from God. Their powers and authorities are meaningless apart from deity. (iii) Each divinity has his own local name in the local language, which is descriptive either of his allotted functions... (iv) They are ministers in [God's] government (v) They are regarded as intermediaries between Deity and men. They are conventional channels through which man believes that he should normally approach Deity. They are only a half-way house which is not meant to be the permanent rest for man's soul. Thus technically, the divinities are only a means to an end and not ends in themselves. although the Africans pray... to the divinities, they believe that the ultimate approval belongs to the supreme Being.
3. Belief in Spirits These are apparitional entities which form separate category of beings from those described as divinities and ancestors - which could be described as "domesticated' spirits. These spirits are ubiquitous, dangerous and harmless.
Spirits are of various categories: to wit ghosts... i.e., born-to-die children. The traditional explanation is that there is a company of spirits whose members are under an agreement to take in turn this errand of mischief. Before those who are thus assigned leave the group temporarily, they enter into a pact that they will return, i.e., die at certain named dates and times. Protection is usually sought against this category of spirits especially when women are pregnant. It is believed that a child who is an incarnation of one of such spirits may be detected through divination and steps by medicine or magic, often combined with maltreatment to prevent it from going back.
We also have the spirits of witches. The witch with her pervertedly strong will-power always operates psychologically and psychically to cause, first psychial and then physical disasters to men.
We also have guardian -spirits or man's double. This is known as Ehi, Ezi and Erhi among the Edo Beni, Isoko and Urhobo respectively, it is known as Chi among the Igbo and Ori or Enikeji among the Yoruba. Spirits ar believed to posses man and put him under a state of ecstasy.
4. Belief in Ancestors This springs from the idea that death does not mean the end of human life among the Africans. Thus there is the general belief that communion and communication are possible between the living and the dead.
According to the African belief the deceased are truly members of the family on earth; but they are no longer of the same fleshly order as those who are still actually living in the flesh on earth. They are closely related to this world; but are no longer ordinary mortals. They have become spirits and are therefore not restricted by time and space.
They are factors of cohesion in African society. They can protect and punish evil doers. They are guardians of morality.
It is not every person that dies [that] becomes an ancestor. Only good people become ancestors after they have received the "Well-done' judgement of Deity...
Generally, it is only those who have offspring and become old before their departure and properly buried who become ancestors.
5. The Practice of Magic and Medicine This a general practice all over Africa in order to meet up with the most immediate needs of man. Man believes that there is a power "Wholly Other' than himself. In order to make use of this force man resorts to the practice of magic and medicine. Magic is an attempt on the part of man to tap and control the supernatural resources of the universe for his own benefits. While the motto of Religion is "Let thy will be done' that of magic is "Mine will be done'...
ANCESTORS i. (a) The ancestors are regarded as or believed to be the past heroes of a community.
(b) They are believed to be still present in life and are the guardians of the family property, traditions, and customs. They are the the custodians of the tribal laws and morality. They are the unseen presidents of the family meetings, and they are believed to be still in communion with the living and the intercessors between the living and the Supreme Being. They are not affected by space and time, therefore they could operate easily as they like. Because space and time are no barriers to them they can easily contact or deal with anyone who is even in distant places at any time.
(c) They can punish the living and inflict disasters on them. Therefore they must be given befitting burials to avert evil and their anger...
ii. (a) They are given significant [recognition] in rituals (... marriage, birth, festivals, naming ceremonies, etc.)...
iii. Yet the Africans do not take place their ancestors on the same level with the Supreme Being and the divinities. However, some ancestors have been deified and thus have become Divinities, and so passed on into the Pantheon... The Divinities are not so closely related to the world.
The Ancestors are the spiritual superintendents of the family of which they remain members. This idea is based on the strong belief that death is not the end to life, they can reincarnate in new born children...
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
[*]The 700BC Hesiod Theogony (supposedly ancient Greek Zeus religion) [*]The 600BC Rig Veda (supposedly Buddhism religion) [*]The Bible (supposedly ancient Middle East religion)....
the three fake religions (see the above retranslation of the Hesiod Theogony/Genesis comparison).
what do you mean by "fake"
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts:
AFRICAN TRADITIONAL RELIGION From the Nigerian book, "Essential Topics In African Traditional Religion," by Dr. M. Y. Nabofa, B.A., Ph. D. Ibadan, and lecturer in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria...
Before... missionary activities[beginning in Africa as early as the 1500s], African religion [lived] as an absolute truth and undisputed belief... The church taught the Africans that their religion was a false one without convincing them of the truth of Christianity. [/QUOTE]
I read that Dr. M. Y. Nabofa was a devout "Christian of the Anglican Communion" It doesn't seem like he would be saying the Bible is fake
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts: [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: I read that Dr. M. Y. Nabofa was a devout "Christian of the Anglican Communion" It doesn't seem like he would be saying the Bible is fake
He wrote that it was the church that claimed African religion was a fake one "without convincing them of the truth of Christianity."
The points he made in criticism of what he understood about Bible religion were...
1. "Before... missionary activities[beginning in Africa as early as the 1500s], African religion [lived] as an absolute truth and undisputed belief... "
2. "The church taught the Africans that their religion was a false one without convincing them of the truth of Christianity"
3. "The missionaries failed to understand that African traditional religion reaches far beyond the rational and intellectual sphere..."
4. "They failed to understand also that the traditional African religion is a life to be lived rather than obeying dogmatic laws which are in themselves burdens."
"As Idowu succinctly put it 'Where a religion becomes cramped with the framework of dogma and thus becomes a law to be obeyed and not a life to be lived, such religion has become an aberration, it ceases, in fact, to be religion, and thus has become a mere system, a yoke upon the neck'"
Therefore, it is Christianity Dr. Nabofa is saying is an "aberration" and "a mere system" by quoting Idowu.
What people do not understand about continental Africans who practice Bible religions, is that they do it on a part time basis. Their Ancestors still form the foundation of their daily life and spirituality, before and after church and the synagogue on Sunday.
Africans in general have never given up the belief in their Ancestors.
What claiming Bible religion does do for Africans is allow them to do business with the West. Because the West wants to do business with Christians, just as Arabs want to do business with Muslims.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
How the underlying text of the Hesiod Theogony, of Buddhism's Rig Veda and of the Bible were intentionally mistranslated into three distinct fake religions by the ancient Greeks...
Comparative Linguistics in the scientific sense is really Asar's expertise.
Shouldn't comparative linguistics in the scientific sense show if there are strong connections or not between Amharic or Tigrigna and ancient Egyptian language?
He says that Egyptian has a connection to Bantu language. That is what Obenga said. Assuming that is correct and can be shown by comparative linguistics when why can't Amharic or Tigrigna?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: He says that Egyptian has a connection to Bantu language.
I am not competing with anybody. Whatever he claims are his claims. My claims are my own.
I hire and work together with linguists. I don't claim to be one.
My work is based on retranslations... actual work. Application of my theory on ancient texts, which to date has included retranslations of...
Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics
Ancient written Greek
Ancient Hebrew
Ancient written Latin
Ancient written Aramaic
Cuneiform
Ancient written Sanskrit
and more
I am retranslating ancient texts from across the ancient world. I am not stuck on a single ancient text. I don't simply publish lists of words.
As Egyptologists in the HallOfMaat.com forum told me after the publication of my first book, of nearly 700 individual word matches, "Words mean nothing. Show the words in sentences." Now I see what they were saying.
I take a very practical approach to my research, which must result in the actual application of my theory. Sometimes I am retranslating entire ancient texts, applying my method. I am not all talk.
As an example, I retranslated the entire hieroglyphic portion of the Rosetta Stone, applying my method to it. Who else has done this?
I also applied my method to the entire underlying text of Genesis 1, Genesis 2, Genesis 3 and Genesis 4.
Likewise, I applied my method to the entire text of section 1 of the Papyrus of Ani.
I don't need to go on. Nobody else has done this, yet everybody opens their mouth to me, without showing me which of my published words are incorrect. I have likely published thousands of word matches in sentences from across the ancient world, so doing so to every word I have published will obviously take a lot of time. I've published 23 books now.
I find that a lot of concentration on ancient Egypt is merely cosmetic. In saying that, I mean focusing on aspects of the culture that are either obvious or on the other hand not in the realm of reality. And another percentage is people arguing for the sake of arguing.
I don't like politics and so I don't engage in it when it comes to my work, I will not spend time in frivolous discussions online, for example, that have no end point, other than someone trying to force me to agree with their biased point of view.
There are so much more important matters related to ancient texts, than focusing on otherwise meaningless and argumentative issues.
I began identifying the living ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic language. From there I went to either prove or disprove my theory by retranslating the Greek 196BC Rosetta Stone and seeing what language the ancient Greeks translated their message into.
Next, I set my sights on showing that 50,000 years ago people left Africa with language. As a result, I devoted 8 books to show a basic set of 100 Amarigna and Tigrigna words exists in English, Spanish, German, Russian, Hindi, Hebrew, Japanese and Chinese language.
I continued publishing in cooperation with publishers, including Dover Publications (NY) and Doug Harper and his Online Etymology Dictionary (www.etymonline.com). I reached out to Social Studies School Service (www.socialstudies.com), whose editor, Will Slattery, suggested and guided me in publishing books that readers as young as middle schoolers could read, which resulted in the 3-book series, "The Ethiopian Culture of Ancient Egypt."
From there I published in cooperation with Jeff Benner of the Ancient Hebrew Resource Center (www.ancient-hebrew.org), to retranslate and publish retranslations of the underlying text of Genesis and Exodus.
After that, I began working with a historian in Hungary with several PhDs to retranslate the underlying text of ancient Greek texts, to prove or disprove my theory that ancient Greek writing does not represent native spoken ancient Greek, but instead is merely the Greek form of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic writing, including the written characters and vocabulary. The results so far is the retranslation of portions of the underlying text of the 700BC Hesiod Theogony and retranslations of portions of the 600BC Rig Veda of Buddhism.
And I'm not finished yet. But who has worked in cooperation with so many publishers and published so many retranslations of complete and partial ancient texts?
The best way to test a method is by applying the theory to actual retranslations of ancient texts. My primary profession is as a business consultant, specializing in new product development, marketing and research. We call this "proof of concept"...
quote:Proof of concept (PoC) is a realization of a certain method or idea in order to demonstrate its feasibility, or a demonstration in principle with the aim of verifying that some concept or theory has practical potential. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_concept
Now I am also working with an Ethiopian village girl who has received her PhD from a UK university in food stability. We are showing that 5100 years ago is not ancient culture, but is instead recorded women's African farming culture from up to 4.4 million years ago, simply first recorded 5100 years ago and continued in women's African village farming culture today.
Being stuck on single words, relatively unimportant concepts, or limited ancient written languages is not in my interest.
I have a limited time on Earth and I must retranslate as many ancient texts as possible.
Tunnel vision does me no good.
There is too much exciting knowledge waiting to be gained, understood and discovered than to waste my time just talking.
Anyone who wants to be serious with me must retranslate ancient texts, at least the ones I have, and show the world how their method and identified living language is more compatible with ancient texts than the living language I have identified.
Not just lists of words, but entire ancient texts, word-by-word.
Talk is cheap.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
is not a /u/ sound, but a /w/ and can be seen by the fact that in intervocalic position, it's allophone is /m/. For example, mnmn "to move about, to shift" > wnwn "to move to and fro; to traverse."
From what I understand the w sound is made when u is attached to another vowel, but what is the connection to the consonant m?
quote:The sound-law is m > w /V__V. In other words, a process of lenition occurs when /m/ is inbetween two vowels. Thus, we know the original word was VmVn-VmVn > VwVn-VwVn, where V is any (V)owel. This is one clue to know why M-E is different from Coptic.
Yes v is phonetically close to w as is shown in sound shifts in Indo-European languages, but I am still confused as to where the m comes in.
quote:Secondly, is not a vowel, it is a consonant. It is the nasalized uvular trill [ʀ], which explains its interchange with both [r] and [n]. You need to learn the transliteration system of Egyptology as we transliterate [ʀ] as <A>. The <a> (lowercase) grapheme is a totally different sound.
Where did you get this?
r is represented by this:
and n is represented by this:
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Asar, what is your opinion of Amharic and Tigrigna relation or lack of to Egyptian?
They are not related. For example, Middle-Egyptian is 1) monosyllabic (i.e., CV, CVC), for which Amharic or Tigrigna is not. 2) different morphology. 3) Word formation forms are vastly different. He confuses many loanwords into Semitic as genuine cognates and has yet to establish regular sound-meaning correspondences (or even the laws that govern sound change). All over the place with his alleged correspondences.
Egyptian language in general even going back to Old Egyptian is monosyllabic based. Words can be built on single syllables. Semitic is triliteral based meaning that the majority of words are based on three consonants roots with each root being conjugated into varieties depending on the vowels attached to the consonants. Amharic and Tigrinya are Semitic languages.
I am curious about the To-Bedawi language of the Beja which many linguists say is close to Egyptian next to Coptic.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AncientGebts: What's more important is how the resulting retranslations of ancient texts can match archaeology, such as the underlying text of
The 700BC Hesiod Theogony (supposedly ancient Greek Zeus religion)
The 600BC Rig Veda (supposedly Buddhism religion)
The Bible (supposedly ancient Middle East religion)
The underlying texts of these three documents in reality match the archaeology of the Yafo/Dead Sea region of ancient Egypt, as is reported in UCLA Professor Aaron Burke's paper on the excavation of the Bronze age ancient Egyptian fortress in the Yafo, Tel Aviv harbor (link).
This fortress is mentioned throughout the underlying texts of the three fake religions (see the above retranslation of the Hesiod Theogony/Genesis comparison).
This is a primary benefit of translating ancient texts with a real language.
Hesiod's Theogony is one of the sacred hymns attributed to the sacred poet Hesiod and represents only one variety or sect of ancient Greek belief. There were others like the Homeric Hymns or sect and the Orphic Hymns and sect etc. What do any have to do with Egypt?
The Rig Veda is the oldest of the 4 Vedas which are the basis of the Hindu religion, and though Buddhism is based on Hinduism, they do not follow the Vedas at all but rather their own independent texts. Again what do the Vedas have to do with Egypt?
The Bible is a book based on tribal traditions of the Israelites a Levantine people though with connections to Mesopotamia their alleged origins as well as significant influence from Egypt their alleged dwelling for a time.
Other than the Bible what do the other texts have to do with Egyptian language?
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Other than the Bible what do the other texts have to do with Egyptian language?
The underlying text of all three have been misinterpreted into their current translations and the underlying text of all three have the same source.
The source of all three is the history of the ancient Egyptian Dead Sea region farms (see my comparison above of the underlying text of the Hesiod Theogony and the Bible).
First, in order to understand my viewpoint, it is necessary to believe that ancient texts can be mistranslated by scholars.
If one cannot believe scholars are able to mistranslate ancient texts, either innocently or intentionally, then it is impossible to understand my point.
Second, it is necessary to read ancient written Greek, ancient written Sanskrit and the ancient written Dead Sea region script as simply hieroglyphs.
Third, it is necessary to match each word of the underlying text of the Hesiod Theogony, the Rig Veda, and the Bible to the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic language (Amarigna and Tigrigna).
If you are able to do all this, it is possible to then see that none of the three are about religion.
Added to that, it is necessary to read UCLA Professor Aaron Burke's papers on "Jaffa" (the Arab pronunciation of "Yafo" that is today's Yafo, Tel Aviv, Israel). There are many important points he makes, as the lead archaeologist of the Yafo ancient Egyptian Bronze age fortress and the region, which had been part of Lower Egypt and therefore ancient Egyptian Bronze age farms...
A. The fortress is an ancient Egyptian fortress B. The granaries (grain storage facilities) are "pharaonic granaries" C. Details involving the jars, especially the "flowerpots" In direct response to your question, though, what do they have to do with Egypt?
The underlying text of all three are about ancient Egypt, not the religions they purport to be about or related to. Therefore...
1. The underlying text of the 700BC Hesiod Theogony is not about religion (not poems) --- the underlying text is the history of the ancient Egyptian Dead Sea region farms
2. The underlying text of the 600BC Rig Veda is not about religion (not poems) --- the underlying text is the history of the ancient Egyptian Dead Sea region farms
3. The underlying text of the Bible is not about religion (not verses) --- the underlying text is the history of the ancient Egyptian Dead Sea region farms
Again, to understand my point, without necessarily agreeing with me, you first have to examine each word as I retranslate them in the comparison I posted above between the underlying text of the Hesiod Theogony and the Bible.
Let me give you an example. We will compare a word that is properly translated in the Hesiod Theogony.
καί This word in ancient Greek writing is the Tigrigna word ከኣ/kea which means "and"...
A. It is written as in hieroglyphs in the Rosetta Stone as ከኣ/kea/"and"
B. It is written as καί in the underlying text of the Hesiod Theogony as ከኣ/kea/"and"
C. It is written as य॒ in the underlying text of the Rig Veda as ከኣ/kea/"and"
D. It is written as וי in the underlying text of the Bible as ከኣ/kea/"and"
If you can see this example in a simple word as kea, which is properly translated in all three, then we can examine more complex words and see each of the words that are mistranslations in all three ancient texts.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
The ciLuba example informs us that Middle-Egyptian mw.t "mother" is not pronounced "mut", but closer to ciLuba maawu.ci > ci.maawu. The [m] in ci.maamu in the second consonant position weakens due to its location between two vowels. Thus why in ciLuba you have both forms ci.maawu and ci.maamu "mother." This is just an example and you can find dozens of such in Egyptian.
And as far as the graphem <A> being a trill, this is the standard interpretation based on internal and external comparative data. If you have Loprieno's ancient egyptian a linguistic introduction, he discusses it there. I go with Mboli's argument that it is a nasalived uvular trill because of the internal interchange of <A> with /n/ and /r/ in Egyptian. You are going to have to sit down and study the language and the up-to-date material on it.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: @ Djhuti
is not a /u/ sound, but a /w/ and can be seen by the fact that in intervocalic position, it's allophone is /m/. For example, mnmn "to move about, to shift" > wnwn "to move to and fro; to traverse."
From what I understand the w sound is made when u is attached to another vowel, but what is the connection to the consonant m?
quote:The sound-law is m > w /V__V. In other words, a process of lenition occurs when /m/ is inbetween two vowels. Thus, we know the original word was VmVn-VmVn > VwVn-VwVn, where V is any (V)owel. This is one clue to know why M-E is different from Coptic.
Yes v is phonetically close to w as is shown in sound shifts in Indo-European languages, but I am still confused as to where the m comes in.
quote:Secondly, is not a vowel, it is a consonant. It is the nasalized uvular trill [ʀ], which explains its interchange with both [r] and [n]. You need to learn the transliteration system of Egyptology as we transliterate [ʀ] as <A>. The <a> (lowercase) grapheme is a totally different sound.
posted
We see the usage of vowels in the names of the days of the week, as they were written in hieroglyphs. Keep in mind that different scribes were free to spell however they chose to, as there were no standardized spellings yet.
In the underlying text of Genesis 1, we can see the days of the week, "Sunday" through "Thursday" (which were misinterpreted as "one" through "five" in the intentional mistranslation that became the "Bible")...
So-called ancient Hebrew writing is not Hebrew writing at all, but simply the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic writing characters. The ancient Egyptian fortress being excavated in the Yafo, Tel Aviv harbor lets us know the region was part of Lower Egypt. So-called Modern Hebrew simply reflects a modern version of the Dead Sea scroll-style Egyptian hieroglyphic characters.
Uncommon Vowel Pronunciation Sounds In the use of uncommon vowels, notice Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday all use a vowel for the [U] (oo) pronunciation sound...
Monday = שני = ሰኑይ = senuy ני = nu
Tuesday = שלישי = ሰሉስ = selus לי = lu
Wednesday = רביעי = ረቡዕ = rebuE' בי = bu
Thursday = חמישי = ሓሙስ = hamus מי = mu
The reason for this is that the [U] (oo) sound is not common. Therefore the vowel is normally written (we can see this with the ancient Greek version of Egyptian hieroglyphic writing, as well).
But also notice Sunday does not use a written vowel for the [U] (oo) sound...
Sunday = אחד = እሑድ = ihud ח = hu
Common Vowel Pronunciation Sounds Since the [A] and [E] vowel sounds are common, it is not necessary to write them out. We can see this in the first syllables of Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday...
Monday = שני = ሰኑይ = senuy ש = se
Tuesday = שלישי = ሰሉስ = selus ש = se
Wednesday = רביעי = ረቡዕ = rebuE' ר = re
Thursday = חמישי = ሓሙስ = hamus ח = ha
Optionally Writing Vowel Pronunciation Sounds But notice, as well, there is an unnecessary ending written vowel for Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday...
Tuesday = שלישי = ሰሉስ = selus שי = s
Wednesday = רביעי = ረቡዕ = rebuE' עי - E (capitalized vowels are pronounced deep in the back of the throat)
Thursday = חמישי = ሓሙስ = hamus שי = s
Vowel Pronunciation Sound Order The reason a silent-sounding vowel pronunciation sound can optionally be written is because in Ethiopian language, every consonant has a vowel, even when they sound silent. Ethiopian vowels follow the following order (from the Ethiopian book "Amharic for Foreigners" by Semere Woldegabir)...
1st order: he = ሐ (e as in "pleasure") 2nd order: hu = ሑ (u as in "Luke") 3rd order: hee = ሒ (ee as in "deep") 4th order: ha = ሓ (a as in "father") 5th order: hae = ሔ (ae as in "late") 6th order: hi = ሕ (i as in "ship") 7th order: ho = ሖ (o as in "no")
When writing out Ethiopian pronunciations with Latin letters, only the 6th order is not necessary to write the vowel pronunciation sound...
Tuesday = שלישי = ሰሉስ = selus 1st order - ስ = se 6th order - ስ = s
So, it is possible that while today it is not necessary to write the 6th order vowel, but in ancient times it was optional. Because sometimes certain scribes wrote out the 6th order pronunciation, although probably most ancient Egyptian scribes did not.
Posts: 751 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Oh boy is this fun let's keep the ball rolling 
in hieroglyphs in the Rosetta Stone as ከኣ/kea/"and"
Printer-friendly view of this topic