...
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 Mystery Solver: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: @ MS It's directed to MS and Djehuti [/QUOTE]Well then, learn to "specify" whom it is that you're addressing, because the depth of issues I've raised herein is not one and same as Djehuti's. If you wish to address me, it is *necessary* that you quote me, and point out what you're addressing, because dodging my points, and then saying that they somehow haven't addressed your claims, is one disingenuousness that'll prove to be very futile. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: Once again, and at this point I am questioning your reading ability,[/QUOTE]You should be more concerned about assessing your own reading ability rather than others, as it is you who continues to dodge questions asked of you, along with specific rebuttals to your claims. You dodge them, and then proclaim nobody has demonstrated your claims to be unfounded and/or shaky. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: I, nor did anyone else make the claim that Mdw Ntr was more "closely" related to Bantu "than" Berber or the now defunct category of Semetic.[/QUOTE]It may not be yourself, but yes, somebody here did say that Egyptic is more related to Niger-Congo superphylum and its Bantu subphylum than either "Berber" or Semitic. Semitic is a defunct language subphylum, according to whom and why? [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: Secondly, you are missing the point because you aren't reading the posts and making poor excuses for rebuttals that are illogical and aren't in alignment with known history.[/QUOTE]Well, point out what specific rebuttals are illogical and why. How can you proclaim that rebuttals don't make sense, when you dodge them? Isn't it you then, who is missing the points by willful ignorance [I hope] out of fear of being quickly discredited? Case in point, there are a whole host of questions I asked you in my last post, but not a whimper of an answer from you addressing its specifics. You've been challenged to establish the etymological and phonological aspects of those Freg Somo Lexical citations, attempting to relate Kiswahali to Egyptic, and you fell flat on answers to that. You've been challenged to demonstrate with objective *evidence* that Bantu speakers were ever in the Sahara, and you come up with none. You've been shown that your idea of "kem" being denoted by "two consonants" is bunk, and your reaction to this, is to not address that challenge, but to open up a new thread that takes you no further than your situation here. My friend, "dodging" isn't called "addressing"; the two actions contrast with one another. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: What I have said is that there are major terms in Mdw Ntr that are also in the Bantu languages. You have yet to rebuttal significantly the information I provide.[/QUOTE]I've already addressed your Freg Somo lexical citations point by point, and where necessary, put challenges to you before we went any further. You made a rash promise to address these, but it was never to be. So yes, the inability to comeback and deliver should be interpreted as something that strongly puts to question, the credibility of your compilations and perhaps, the level to which you even understand your own citations. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: Because of Mdw Ntr's affinities with the lexicon (vocabularies) of the Bantu languages, it further brings evidence that the Egyptian language should be reclassified.[/QUOTE]Language affinities goes beyound superficial similarities that may or may not be tenuous. We can explore this, not only via lexical cognates, which should include the broad spectrum of phonological traits and root-terms, but also an eloborate analysis of grammatic rules languages adhere to. You haven't yet used these comparative methods to demonstrate close relationship between the Bantu subphylum and Egyptic. Your lexical comparisons hasn't been elaborate in any sense to suggest close relationship, as evidence by your inability to reproduce the root terms of the Kemetic terms, as well as their true phonological traits. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: The loan words and major Bantu concepts place them in ancient Egypt at the formation of the written language. It is evidenced by the mere terms in both languages that are not chance resemblences. For instance, the very name "NTU" is in the Egyptian language and means the exact same thing. [QUOTE] [b]Bantu[/b] Ntu = being, that which exist [b]Egyptian[/b] (Budge Hieroglyphic dictionary pg. 399) Ntt = everything which is, that which is, this which Nti = the thing which is, what is Ntiu = those who are, those who exist, the gods who are [/QUOTE]The word /ntu/ in Bantu languages does NOT mean "person" as some ethnographers have erroneously put in books. Ntu means "a being" or "something that exist." It is a noun and you know what type of "being" it is based upon its nominal prefix.[/QUOTE]‘Ntt’ is but the feminine modification of Nty [masculine singular], which represent pronouns such as “which”, “who”, or “What” . The plural feminine form is essentially the same as the feminine singular counterpart of “ntt“, whereas the masculine plural form finds expression as “ntw“ [Collier & Manley 1998], while its been noted elsewhere ‘ntt’ is a conjunction equivalent to “that”, which when paired with a preposition in a compound conjunction, can function as conjunctions of the type: “so that” , “because”, and ‘since” via “r-ntt”, "hr-ntt", and "dr-ntt" respectively; “wnn” is equivalent to “to be” or “exist“, with “wnt“ being the feminine derivative [Antonio Loprieno 1995; Jim Loy 1998]. In another occasion, ‘ntt’ is the equivalent of ‘you’, as the feminine singular form of ‘ntk’ - the plural sense for such, happens to be ‘nttn’ [Jim Loy 1998]. As for “those”, we have ‘nf’ [although it can also represent ’that’ in neuter form] , the feminine version of which has already been noted above, while in its plural format, it becomes ‘nw’ ~ “these”. And from Wally’s citations I suppose, we learn that: [i]...here's some more terms ebien- wretched; poor man eibata- servent; slave esu- light minded; unstable eges.t- vile; wretched behau- coward nti hati- senseless man, fool libe- fool ha-her- foul face tikr- eunich (coptic: skour;siour) seba- devil temum.t- a damned person sha.t- bitch sag- foolish man (coptic: soq=fool) [b]ntiu[/b] - worthless ones; the damned and this is not a derogatory term, but still a bad place to be... nn kat - unemployed [/i] http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003238 Much of these are derived Egyptic terms, whose roots appear to be relatively distinct from the derived term. For instance, we've seen that ’ntt’ in whatever occasion it presented itself, was actually a feminine derivative of either ’nty’, ’ntk’ or ’nf’. The point being, as we attempt to relate any Bantu or proto-Bantu term with Egyptic, the nature of the root of that term has to be well understood first…along with the phonological aspects of the terms of course. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: The nominal prefix tells you what kind of being it is: it's telling you what kind of "thing" exists. The prefix /ba/ makes the human (mu-ntu) plural. So I ask you again, how is it, as according to you that there was no contact of Bantu speaking people in the vicinity of ancient Egypt, that the very word that defines who they are linguistically is found in Mdw Ntr and means the exact same thing?[/QUOTE]Read above, and while you're at it, I ask you again, what *objective* set of evidence do you have that suggests that Bantu speakers ever lived in the Sahara, let alone coastal north African regions like Egypt? 1)Certainly, linguistically none is located there. 2)Archaeologically speaking you've demonstrated nothing. 3)Temporal and spatial lingual history assessment of the Bantu subphylum, does not place it in either the Sahara or the lower Nile Valley. 4)Genetic evidence doesn't support their presence in the Nile Valley, at least to the extent that Bantu speakers are differentiated from other Niger-Congo speaking groups. For instance, why is it that only the Benin Haplotype HbS is noted in Egypt, central and eastern Sahara, but not the Bantu haplotype? [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: If Bantu is as late as the linguist "guesstamate" than that would mean Bantu derives from the same branch Mdw Ntr comes from. This is why you find proto bantu words in Mdw Ntr (such as dUa and Kaa).[/QUOTE]Which branch would that be, and from what language superphylum? Your idea of "Kaa" has already been discredited, and your idea of "dua" was already questioned - which you decided was too complicated of a question to answer. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: I like how you conveniently ignored the quote I presented from the 1912 article that places the Bantu in the Sahara at the end of the Naptian Pluvial period. [/QUOTE]And I like how incapacitated in your reading skills you are, to come to the idea that it was ignored. That claim is no more than heresay; it lacks objective evidence of any kind, that places Bantu speakers in the Sahara - * like pottery and other archaeological items peculiar to Bantu groups, * lacks specifics of where in the Sahara, * lacks accountability in the distribution pattern of Bantu languages, * lacks any insight into a specific temporal and spatial spread of Bantu languages, much less confront the details which tell us about directions in which the language flowed, e.g. Western stream and Eastern streams. * lacks any insight into bio-historical progression of this Bantu movement from their supposed home location in the Sahara to the Nile Valley or anywhere else for that matter. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: Like I said before, the reason you have Bantu lexical terminology in ancient Egypt is because these people were in Ancient Egypt and some of the words became part of the over all lexicon.[/QUOTE]Repeating unsubstantiated claims means nothing; however, if you were to actually answer the questions posed in my last post, you will realize that there is more work cut out for you, in maintaining this claim about Bantu being in the Sahara and lower Nile Valley. The questions haven't gone anywhere, if you care to address them in our lifetime. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: It is no different than what we witness in English with French words as part of our everyday lexicon. Just because we have adopted a high number of French words in our Germanic branch of Indo-European, doesn't mean we should look for the same grammar structure. What's important are the words phonetical value, the consonant matches and the meaning of the words being used. Here is some information per Wikipedia on this very phenomenon: [QUOTE] Word origins Influences in English vocabulary Influences in English vocabulary Main article: Lists of English words of international origin One of the consequences of the French influence is that the vocabulary of English is, to a certain extent, divided between those words which are Germanic (mostly Old English) and those which are "Latinate" (Latin-derived, either directly from Norman French or other Romance languages). Numerous sets of statistics have been proposed to demonstrate the various origins of English vocabulary. None, yet, are considered definitive by a majority of linguists. A computerised survey of about 80,000 words in the old Shorter Oxford Dictionary (3rd ed.) was published in Ordered Profusion by Thomas Finkenstaedt and Dieter Wolff (1973)[35] that estimated the origin of English words as follows: * Langue d'oïl, including French and Old Norman: 28.3% * Latin, including modern scientific and technical Latin: 28.24% * Other Germanic languages (including words directly inherited from Old English): 25% * Greek: 5.32% * No etymology given: 4.03% * Derived from proper names: 3.28% * All other languages contributed less than 1% (e.g. Arabic-English loanwords) A survey by Joseph M. Williams in Origins of the English Language of 10,000 words taken from several thousand business letters gave this set of statistics:[36] * French (langue d'oïl), 41% * "Native" English, 33% * Latin, 15% * Danish, 2% * Dutch, 1% * Other, 10% However, 83% of the 1,000 most-common English words are Anglo-Saxon in origin.[37] [/QUOTE]However, there are other Latinate words that are used normally in everyday speech and do not sound formal; these are mainly words for concepts that no longer have Germanic words, and are generally assimilated better and in many cases do not appear Latinate. For instance, the words mountain, valley, river, aunt, uncle, move, use, push and stay are all Latinate.[/QUOTE]Your using those European languages to equate their situation to that of Bantu-Egyptic is funny, because those folks have interacted over long periods of time; you have yet to demonstrate that Bantu speaking groups were ever anywhere near the ancient Egyptians during predynastic Egypt, dynastic and post dynastic ancient periods, and in the Sahara. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: Just like you have a lot a lot of French terms in English because of the "Elite" introduced them, the same with Mdw Ntr because the Bantu speaking minority were priests in the system (Elite).[/QUOTE]...which I take it, is why you were unable to answer the questions posed in my last post about the historical whereabouts of these Bantu priests, and Mdu Ntr status in ancient Egyptian and Bantu societies? [QUOTE]Originally posted by Asar Imhotep: Your rebuttals are childish and shows you aren't serious about addressing this issue. Arguing from authority does not prove your claim. [/QUOTE]What specific rebuttal is childish and why? Making such claim devoid of specifics, like an emotional brat, shows that you're too intellectually challenged to use common sense, and communicate as a human being & in a mature way. [/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