...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Mdu Ntr and Bantu
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by oadsnd_mf: [qb] Who's contention? Is it stated.[/qb][/QUOTE] :rolleyes: Obviously the thread author who stated that Bantu languages come from the Nile Valley, or do you have poor reading comprehension? [QUOTE][qb]Your reflexive emotional responses (as evident in your strange dependency on emoticons) should be tempered with a qualitive calmness. This would help you avoid such rash displays of comprehension misques. [/qb][/QUOTE]I don't need emoticons to express the obvious that you and other are caught up in pseudo-historical nonsense in order to validate African history. Such a method is no different from the Eurocentrics who've plauged African history. [QUOTE]Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: [qb] At least the member you target presents demonstrations to back up his points. Rather than attacks, wouldn't it be more constructive to prove counter demonstrations? [/qb][/QUOTE][b]LOL[/b] The demonstrations Clyde gives are nothing more than silly typological ones than anyone replicate with [i]any[/i] language! Which is why you seem to forget that Clyde shows similar demonstrations between Mande, Tamil, Mandarin, and Japanese! You obviously have a poor understanding of linguistics to fall for this little ruse. [QUOTE][qb]There is no such thing as "Afriasian". It doesn't exist. The highlighted Greenberg based classification was based, as corrected by Dr. Theophile Obenga, is actually "Negro-Egyptian". [/qb][/QUOTE]And the flaws of such a linguistic construct were explained to you [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=005645]before[/URL], or do you not remember?? Even the very name "negro" is insulting. You do realize that Eurocentrics tried doing the same with not only European languages but other languages outside of Europe whom they associated with "caucasians". They called it 'Nostratic' which was a construct actually worse than Negro-Egyptien with a greater amount of flaws especially since it inculded Egyptian and other Afrasian languages. But at least the name wasn't Leuco(white)-Greek! [b]LOL[/b] [QUOTE]Originally posted by rasol: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Mystery Solver: [qb] Cotonou's compilations of Obenga's comparative grammatic analysis was far from showing that ancient Egyptian was not related to other Afrasan languages. In fact, while he makes light of it, Obenga notes grammatic correlations between certain languages from different sub-Afrasan families. Obenga mainly hangs onto the idea that there are some grammatic differences between languages from different sub-Afrasan families, which should be obvious, because they were placed into distinct sub-families for a reason to begin with. That though, doesn't preclude the basic language affinities shared across the superfamily. I have demonstrated strong *grammatic* correlations between certain languages from distinct sub-Afrasan languages, not merely lexicons whose connections may or may not be tentative. At the end of the day, request for Obenga's *exhaustive* grammatic and lexical comparative analysis to obtain *genetic* [linguistically] justification for his typological construct of Negro-African superfamily, separate from Tamazight, Semitic, and perhaps Khoisan was never followed up with. [/qb][/QUOTE]^ This is correct. Nor were they able to resolve the internal contradiction inherent in acknowleding the African origion of Semitic, Khoisan and Berber.... only to turn around and classify them as *non negro* languages. Credit is due for the subtle dissembling necessary to mask this contradiction. But....didn't work. [/qb][/QUOTE]Correct, and correct. But what do you expect from folks like Kemsonreloaded, Wally, and Clyde who are too consumed their own ideology that they refuse facts. :o [/qb][/QUOTE]You're such a hypocrite. You failed to mention Cotonou who demonstrated with linguistic evidence that the Afrasian languages do not exist. . [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by KemsonReloaded: [qb] There is no such thing as "Afriasian". It doesn't exist. The highlighted Greenberg based classification was based, as corrected by Dr. Theophile Obenga, is actually "Negro-Egyptian". [/qb][/QUOTE]You are right. This point was recently proven in another ES Thread. [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=005645;p=3]web page[/URL] [QUOTE]Originally posted by COTONOU_BY_NIGHT: [qb] Chap VII pp.94-96 (final part of the chapter) http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/1237/p1010109uq8.jpg http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/4303/p1010110lv5.jpg Obviously inherited lexical items clearly show the irreality of "Hamito-Semitic", since Berber, Semitic have no common lexical structure with Egyptian: [CODE]glose Semitic Egyptian Berber sun shmsh (common Semitic) r’, re tafukt year sn (Lihyanitic) rnpt rompE rompi asggas shaanaa (Hebrew) sanat (Arabic) place macom (Phoenician) +maqam bw, ma ida night Arabic layl grH, D3w iD Ethiopian leelit Hebrew luun, liin Ugaritic lyn name +sumum, samum rn, ran, ren, lAn, lEn ism, isEm take ! Sabat ! (Akkadian) m, mi, mo ameZ ear sinn (Arabic) msDr ameZZugh sEn (Ethiopian) teeth Akkadian uzun Tst axs Assyrian uzan Hebrew ‘ozen Arabic ‘uDn Ethiopian ‘Ezn brother Akkadian axu sn, son g-ma, ait-ma (pl.) Ugaritic ax Hebrew ‘aaH Syriac ‘aHaa Arabic ‘ax Epigraphic South Arabian ‘x Ethiopian ‘Exw (labialized x) to enter Akkadian ‘rb ‘q, 3q, ook ekSem Hebrew ‘rb Syriac ‘rb Arabic Grb Epigraphic South Arabian Grb black ‘aswad (Arabic) km, kamE, kEmi isgin, isggan, istif, dlu, bexxen blood dam (common Semitic) snf, snfw, snof idammen beautiful Hasan (Arabic) nfr, nofre, nofri iga shbab, iga zzin, fulki eternity ‘almiin (Eastern Syriac) D.t, nHH, EnEh god il (Ugaritic) nTr, nutE, nuti, noutE rEbbi (Arabic Allah) soul Hebrew nepesh b3, bai RroH, laRuaH (pl.) Syriac napsha Arabic nafs Ethiopian nafs river naaru (Akkadian) itrw asif hand yd, yad (common Semitic) Dr.t, ‘ (« arm ») ufus, afus house bayit (Hebrew) pr tigemmi head +ra’sh common Semitic tp, apE, afE agayyu, ixf reeshu Akkadian roosh Hebrew ra’s Arabic [/CODE]In conclusion, the results of a strict linguistic analysis are the following : -There are no parallels between Semitic, Berber and Egyptian regarding consonantic structure, grammatical gender, formation of dual and plural, declination, casual morphologies, personal and relative pronouns. -About verbal themes, the use of reduplication does not have the same extension in Egyptian and in Semitic. -Also, Egyptian doesn’t have the prefixal conjugation found and the derived compound verbal themes found in Semitic. -The verbal forms sDm.f and sDm.n.f don’t exist in Semitic. -Egyptian prepositions and conjunctions are not found in Semitic : Egyptian m « as, like » vs Akkadian ki(ma), Ugaritic k, Hebrew kE(moo), Syriac ‘ak, Arabic kaa, Ethiopian kEmaa « as, like » ; Egyptian xr « upon, above », vs Akkadian ‘l, Ugaritic ‘l, Syriac ‘al, Hebrew ‘al, Arabic ‘ala, Ethiopian la’la « upon, above ». Berber has zud~zund « as , like », and iggi « upon » -Inherited lexical that can hardly be borrowed from a language to another (see examples above) even in a situation of cultural linguistic dominance are different in Semitic, Egyptian and Berber. Cardinal numbers (1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 20, 100, 1000) are also much different in the three language groups. Hence, « Hamito-Semitic » or « Afro-Asiatic » is an illusion, a myth. [/qb][/QUOTE][/qb][/QUOTE] [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3