...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Theophile Obenga's "Negro-Egyptian" linguistic phylum
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] ^ My point exactly. The general consensus among linguists is that Semitic or rather its ancestor originated in Africa among Africans before migrating to Asia. I don't see how that view is somehow anti-African when it is the opposite! [QUOTE]Originally posted by Amun-Ra The Ultimate: [qb] Certainly not what the linguistic evidences from this thread suggest as the so-called Afro-Asiatic phylum has been debunked by people like Obenga and a few others. [/qb][/QUOTE]Yet as Swenet has pointed out, since when has the linguistic work of Obenga and those 'few other' scholars been taken seriously enough by the linguistic community?? [QUOTE][qb] ^^ This drivel by Djehuti is completely baseless. For one, which is the most important thing, it's not base on any linguistic arguments; just fluff and emotions. I don't think Djehuti or his companion Swenet even read Obenga's work or other such books cited above.[/qb][/QUOTE]You're accusing me of "fluff and emotions" when there is nothing emotional about my claims whatsoever. My claims are rooted in what scholarship says plain and simple. I've actually read Obenga's works, and while they do a lot to reaffirm Egypt's African identity and roots the only thing I disagree with are his diffusionist claims as well as his linguistics. [QUOTE][qb]That's rich for somebody who's hell bent on showing us commonalities between Africans and Semites [aka the Hamito-Semitic/Afro-Asiatic language family].[/qb][/QUOTE][b]LOL[/b] You do realize that technically speaking 'Semite' is a linguistic group the same way 'Latino' or 'Hispanic' is, and that Semite also includes African groups in Ethiopia. Again, I'm not hellbent on anything. The linguistic evidence is as plain as day. [QUOTE][qb]For one,the Negro-Egyptian phylum like the Indo-European phylum doesn't comprise ALL the languages of Africa either. African languages such as Berber languages are not included, nor are the Khoisan African languages or African languages such as Ge'ez or Amharic. So that point is moot, even if it was moot to begin with since it's not based on any linguistic arguments.[/qb][/QUOTE]Strawman. I never said the Negro-Egyptian phylum included all African languages, all I'm saying is that for Clyde Winters at least, he wants that phylum to be the major phylum for Africa as Indo-European is for Europe. But again Europe is a small subcontinent while Africa is a large continent with the oldest and most diverse populations. That Obenga's phylum includes Egyptian but excludes its relatives Berber and Semitic such as Geez and Amharic is just one of the various reasons that makes his phylum faulty. [QUOTE][qb]That's ridiculous. Obenga's Negro-Egyptian phylum like the Indo-European phylum was a language spoken by African people a very long time ago. Since then, African languages had time to evolve into their current diversity.[/qb][/QUOTE]Yet we are talking about a genetic basis for relativity. What exactly is the genetic basis for including Niger-Congo with Egyptian but excluding Berber and Semitic?? One may argue that Semitic originated in Southwest Asia but what about Berber which is spoken exclusively in Africa?? [QUOTE][qb]For example, the Indo-European phylum is comprised of: Spanish, English, Hindi, Portuguese, Bengali, Russian, German, Marathi, French, Italian, Punjabi, and Urdu. Language such as English, Urdu, Russian and Italian are considered to be from the same family! It doesn't mean that it's not diverse. They are just genetically related from a long time ago. Similar case with African languages such as Bantu languages (already proven to be related), Ancient Egyptian, Yoruba, Kanuri, Afar, Dogon, Wolof which are genetically related. It doesn't negate their diversity in any way since they had a lot of time to evolve into their current form since the Negro-Egyptian/Afro-Egyptian days. [/qb][/QUOTE]My answer is the same. Indo-European is divided into the extent subfamilies namely: Celtic, Italic, Germanic, Baltic, Slavic, Albanian, Greek, Armenian, and Indo-Iranian. The commonality becomes more apparent the farther back you go in time that is, the when the older ancestral languages are reconstructed. Tell me what is the ancestral or proto-language that is ancestral to Egyptian and Bantu but is not ancestral to Semitic?? The Key word is [b]genetic[/b]. In order to prove a genetic relation one must find the ancestral mother tongue that is common to sister languages. You can't say that Bantu and Egyptian are genetically related based on some similarities here and there. There has to be very close syntax, vocabulary, and grammar and these features must be stronger the farther back you go in time. [/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