From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 20.27 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 00:40:38 -0500 20.27 rdjt Szp Xrd, tm.f snqw rdjt: infinitive of the verb rdj 'to give', (here: 'to cause') See Allen 14.9 for the use of the infinitive in captions. * Szp: verb, 'to accept', 'to receive' * Xrd: noun, 'child'. Here, it's the object of the verb 'to cause'. Literal translation of the first part of the sentence: "to-make to-receive (a) child", or "To make a child (to) receive/accept" - - - - - - - The rest of the sentence is a dependent clause, specifying WHEN you're going to cause the child to take or receive something ... it's when he's refusing to nurse. Allen 20.27 points out that the imperfective is used in dependent clauses such as this to express concomitant action (WHILE the child is being difficult and balky, THIS is how you're going to deal with it, and get him/her to start suckling.) But since the dependent clause is negative (while he's NOT suckling), you have to negate the verb. And in section 20.15, Allen states that a dependent clause is negated by using the imperfective of the negative verb 'tm' followed by the negatival complement. (See Allen 14.16-18 to review this construction.) tm: negative verb which can be followed by a negatival complement * tm.f: 3ms imperfective form of the above * snq: verb (3-lit), 'to nurse, suckle' * tm.f snqw: verbal clause, 'he-not-suckle', 'him-not-suckling' Translation: "(How) to-make a child receive (the breast), (when) he's not suckling." 20.27 rdjt Szp Xrd tm.f snqw How to make a boy accept (the breast) when he doesn't nurse. rdjt - infinitive of the anom. verb rdj "give, cause" Szp - 3-lit. verb "receive, accept" Xrd - noun "child" as subject tm.f - negative verb tm with 3MS suffix pronoun as subject snqw - is this the stative snq.w of the 3-lit verb "nurse"? The gloss says this is a heading, with the initial infinitive followed by two unmarked dependent clauses. "Giving (that) a child accepts (when) he does not nurse." QUESTION: I'd guess Szp is the imperfect, but I'm not sure how to tell here. The initial translation at the top is Allen's solution, which translates the heading more freely. 20.27 rdjt Szp Xrd tm.f snqw (How) to make a child who does not suckle accept (the breast). rdjt = "making / to make", infinitive (a heading) Szp = "accept", subjunctive Xrd = "a child", the subject of Szp tm.f snqw = "(who) does not suckle", imperfective of 'tm' + negatival complement This is from a medical papyrus. The main clause is 'rdjt Szp Xrd'. This isan example of the causative rdj + subjunctive construction. The verb 'rdjt' is an infinitive, because it is being used in a heading. So "making a child accept". The remainder of the sentence is the negative construction 'tm.f snqw', where 'tm.f' is either subjunctive or imperfective and 'snqw' is the negatival complement of the 3-lit verb 'snq'. This sort of construction is only used in dependent clauses. If 'tm.f' is subjunctive then it is an adverb clause of purpose or result. Such a clause does not fit here. Hence 'tm.f' is the imperfective (§20.15). This could be a relative clause with 'Xrd' as the antecedent and '.f' as the coreferrent: "who does not suckle". It could equally be an adverb clause: "when he does not suckle" (cf. 2nd example in §20.15). 20.27 rdjt Szp Xrd tm.f snqw rdjt = infinitive of the verb 'to give', having causative meaning Szp = to receive, accept Xrd = child, boy tm.f = negation of imperfective (concomitant action) in dependent clause snq = suck, suckle, nurse NOTES: This is a heading. TRANSLATION: Causing a child to accept [a breast], when he does not nurse. ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 20.26 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 00:38:33 -0500 20.26 from a medical text read from right to left (jr dA tp n zA, xr.k wAH.k Drt.k Hr tp.f) (jr) particle = if (dA) verb, 2-lit., subjunctive = shake verb (tp) noun = head subject (n) preposition = of (zA) noun = man (n zA) is the indirect genitive = If the head of a man shakes, (xr.k) proclitic particle plus 2MS suffix pronoun, shows sequential action, = then you (wAH.k) verb, 3-lit., plus 2MS suffix pronoun, subjunctive =you will put verb + subject (Drt.k) noun plus 2MS suffix pronoun =your hand direct object (Hr) preposition =upon (tp.f) noun +3MS suffix pronoun =his head = then you will put your hand upon his head. 20.26 transliteration: jr dA tp n z(j) xr.k wAH.k Drt.k Hr tp.f translation: If the head of a man shakes, you must place your hand on his head. This is a conditional sentence. It start with the protasis which is introduced by 'jr'. The verb in this clause is 'dA' which is the subjunctive form of the 2-lit. verb 'dA' which means "shake". The subject of the clause is the noun phrase 'tp n zj'. 'tp' means "head". This is followed by the indirect genitive 'n zj'. 'n' is the genitival adjective; it agrees in number (singular) and gender (masculine) with 'tp'. 'zj' means "man". Thus the subject of the clause is "head of a man". The apodosis of this conditional sentence is 'xr.k wAH.k Drt.k Hr tp.f' and involves the SUBJECT-imperfective construction. This clause begins with the proclitic particle 'xr'. The 2MS suffix pronoun 'k' attached to this particle is the subject ("you") of this sentence. This is followed by 'wAH' which is the imperfective form of the 3-lit. verb 'wAH' which can mean "set, place". When used with the particle 'xr', the SUBJECT-imperfective expresses necessity; thus, 'xr.k wAH.k' means "you must place". Note that the subjunctive of 'wAH' would have the same form, but here we can rule out the subjunctive for two reasons. First, the appearance of the subject ('k' attached to 'xr') before the verb form. Possibly this could be interpreted as a topicalized subject, but this seems unusual for such a simple (pronominal) subject. With 'wAH' as the imperfective, however, we can construe this as an example of the SUBJECT-imperfective construction which is not uncommon after 'xr'. Secondly, 'xr' followed by the subjunctive denotes inevitably, but this doesn't quite make sense: a man's head shaking does not inevitably result in one placing his hand on that head. On the other hand, 'xr' Followed by the SUBJECT-imperfective denotes necessity so that 'xr.k wAH.k' means "you must place ... [in order to properly treat the man for his ailment]". The object of the verb is 'Drt.k' which means "your hand". Finally, we have the prepositional phrase 'Hr tp.f'. The object of the preposition is 'tp.f' which means "his head". This phrase is used to indicate where the hand should be placed, so the natural translation for 'Hr' here is "on". 20.6 jr dA tp n z(j), xr.k wAH.k Drt.k Hr tp.f words: jr = if dA = `shake' 2-lit; form could be perfective, imperfective or subjunctive, but following jr probably subjunctive, so jr dA = if shake/will shake/should shake tp n zj = head of a/the man xr.k = then you QUESTION: can't find reference to xr + suffix pronoun elsewhere in Allen Drt.k = your hand wAH = verb 3-lit `set, place; add; stop; remain, last'; form could be perf, imperf, or subjunctive, but following xr probably is subjunctive indicating inevitable result/consequence of preceding phrase (man shaking his head) i.e. then you will (inevitably) put/set etc your hand or, since this is a medical text, `then you should place your hand' Hr tp.f = on his head literally: if shakes the head of a man, then you will/should place your hand on his head or: if the head of the man shakes, then you have to put your hand on his head ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 20.23 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 00:33:41 -0500 Exercise 20.23 transliteration: xp r.f sw ntrt tn jw.f dj.f HAt n S(j) translation: So, this goddess met him as he was heading towards the lake This main clause of this sentence is 'xp r.f sw ntrt tn'. The prepositional phrase 'r.f' is used here in its enclitic particle role to relate the current statement to a preceding one; it is frequently translated "so". Without being introduced by any proclitic particles, this clause begins with the verb. This is 'xp,' which is the perfective form of the 3ae-inf. verb 'xpj' ("walk, meet"). The subject of the clause is the phrase 'ntrt tn,' which consists of the noun 'ntrt', "goddess" (using a later spelling where the second consonant it 't' instead of 'T'), followed by the demonstrative pronoun 'tn'. The 3MS dependent pronoun 'sw' is the object ("him") of the pronoun; since it is pronominal, it precedes the nominal subject. Since the verb is being used transitively here, the perfective form is being used to denote past action. Thus, the clause is translated as "So, this goddess met him". The rest of the sentence, 'jw.f dj.f HAt n S(j)', is an unmarked adverb clause. It contains the SUBJECT-imperfective construction. The subject ("he") is given by the 3MS suffix pronoun 'f'. 'dj' is the imperfective form of the anomalous 3ae-inf. verb 'rdj'; the suffix pronoun 'f' attached to 'dj' resumes the subject. The clause is completed by the prepositional phrase 'HAt n Sj'. According to the dictionary at the back of the book, 'rdj HAt n' is an idiom for "head toward". The noun 'Sj' means "lake". The imperfective (including, as here, the SUBJECT-imperfective construction) is used in adverb clauses to express concomitant action; in this case, action going on in the past when the goddess met the traveller. So using the English past progressive, this unmarked adverb clause is translated here as "[while/as] he was heading toward the lake". 20.23 xp r.f sw ntrt tn jw.f dj.f Hat n Sj xpj = verb 3ae-inf = walk, meet xp = perfective = walked/met (perfective in main clause S20.4) r.f = enclitic particle = so sw = 3MS dependent pronoun = him ntrt = noun = goddess tn = 1FS demonstrative pronoun = this/that xp r.f sw ntrt tn = so this goddess met him jw.f = particle + suffix pronoun rdj Hat n = head towards dj.f = imperfective + suffix pronoun jw.f dj Hat n = when he was heading towards (Adverb clause S20.10 + Subject-imperfective construction S20.8) Sj = noun = lake xp r.f sw ntrt tn jw.f dj.f Hat n Sj = So this goddess met him when he was heading towards the lake 20.23 Transliteration: xp r.f sw ntrt tn jw.f dj.f HAt n S(j) Dissection: 1) xp = from xpj (verb 3ae-inf) "walk, meet"; perfective "walked, met" 2) r.f = "to him" (dative) 3) sw = dependent 3MS pronoun (he, she, it) 4) ntrt = "goddess" (includes cobra determinative I12, amplifying that this is a goddess. Being a cobra, it could refer to Wadjet who protected the king of Lower Egypt.) 5) tn = "this" 6) jw.f dj.f HAt n = an imperfective construction, "He was heading toward..." 7) S(j) = "lake" NOTE: jw.f dj.f HAt n S(j) is a relative phrase expressing concomintant action. Translation: The goddess met him as he was walking toward the lake. ________________________________________________________________________ 20.23 Orientation: right to left, horizontal, normal Transliterations: Aa1:Q3-D54-D21:I9-M23-Z7-R8-X1:D21:X1-I12-X1:N35-M17-Z7:I9-D36:I9- F4:X1-Z1-N35:N37:N23 xp r.f sw ntrt tn jw.f dj.f HAt n S(j) Translation: "Concerning this, this goddess met him as he was heading toward the lake/precinct" Vocabulary: xpj = verb, 3ai = "walk, meet" r = preposition f = suffix pronoun, 3rd sing masc sw = dependent pronoun, 3rd sing masc ntrt/nTrt = noun, fem = "goddess" jw = introductory particle rdj HAt n = expression = "head toward" S(j) = noun = "lake, precinct" Grammar: xp sw ntrt = sentence paradigm VoS r.f = enclitic particle 16.7.2 18n2 ntrt tn = noun + demonstrative adjective jw.f = introductory particle (really verb + subject) dj = imperfective form of rdj n s(j) = prepositional phrase Aa1:Q3-D54 x-p- Det MOTION D21:I9 r.f M23-Z7 sw-complement R8-X1:D21:X1-I12 nTr-complement-complement-complement- Det in jart "uraeus" and names of goddesses X1:N35 t-n M17-Z7:I9 j-w-f D36:I9 Var for D37, dj-f F4:X1-Z1 HAt-complement- Used as ideogr of signs meant to be read as ideograms rather than phonograms N35 n N37:N23 Sj- Det LAND ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 20.25 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 00:39:18 -0500 20.25 Description of a builder from the instruction of Khety read from right to left (wnn.f m rwtj n sbHw, j.qd.f nn dAjw) (wnn.f) verb, 2ae-gem. it is geminated - imperfective plus 3MS suffix pronoun = He is/was constantly/continually/always (m) preposition = in (rwtj) nisbe = outside (n) preposition = of the above 3 together, (m rwtj n) = out in (sbHw) noun = howling wind =Hw was continually out in the wind (j.qd.f) the j. is a prefix (see 26.9.4) it marks for gender, verb, 2-lit. plus 3MS suffix pronoun - imperfective active participle (23.6) =he was building (nn) enclitic particle of negation = without (dAjw) noun = cloak = building without a cloak. COMMENT: - this one drove me crazy until I found the prefix explained. Then I have to say I felt pretty good that I had looked and finally found it!! 20.25 wnn.f m rwtj n sbHw j.qd.f nn dAjw words: wnn = `exist' 2ae-gem - imperfective form, expressing ongoing action or habitual wnn.f = he was existing, used to exist, he always existed, he constantly existed etc rwtj = outside (nisbe); m rwtj n = compound preposition = in the outside of, out in (given) sbHw = howling wind qd = `build' 2-lit - j.qd - subjunctive or imperfective form; prob imperf. here, balancing first half of sentence j.qd.f = he was building/used to build/always building etc nn = negator dAjw = cloak nn dAjw = nn A pattern - denies existence of A, so: there is/being no coat, with implication `without cloak' literally: he always existed in the outside of the howling wind, he was building, there being no cloak better: He was constantly out in the howling wind, building without a cloak 20.25 Allen: description of a builder, from the Instruction of Khety: m rwtj n "out in" (literally, "in the outside of") Orientation: right to left, horizontal, normal Transliteration: E34:N35-N35:I9-G17-D21:Z7-X1:Z4-N1:N35-S29-D58-V28-Z7-P5-Z5-Z3A-M17- Aa28-D46:W24-A35-Y1-A24-I9-D35:N35:D46-G1-M17-Z7-N17:Z1-V6 wnn.f m rwtj n sbHw j-qdnw.f nn dAjw Translation: "He is always outside in the howling wind, building. There is no cloak." Vocabulary: wnn = verb, 2 gem = "be" f = suffix pronoun, 3rd sing masc m rwtj n = expression = "out in" sbHw = noun = "howling wind" qd = verb, 2 lit = "build"; j-qd, prefixed form nn = negative particle dAjw = noun = "cloak" Grammar: wnn.f = imperfective indicating continuing action + subject m rwty = prepositional phrase n sbHw = prepositional phrase j-qd.f = imperfective indicating continuing action + subject nn dAjw = nn A construction, denying the existence of A Gardiner Codes: E34:N35-N35:I9 wn-n-complement-f G17 m D21:Z7-X1:Z4-N1 r-w-t-j- Det SKY, ABOVE N35 n S29-D58-V28-Z7-P5-Z5-Z23A s-b-H-w- mast with sail- Replacement for complex or dangerous signs- Used with words plural in meaning and with false plurals ending in w or wt Z5-Z3A-M17-Aa28-D46:W24-A35-Y1-A24-I9 j-qd-complement-nw- Det in qd "build"-Det ABSTRACT, CONCEPTS- Det. FORCE, EFFORT-f D35:N35 nn-complement D46-G1-M17-Z7-N17:Z1-V6 d-A-j-w-perhaps N17 fis for the sound tA- Used as ideogr of signs meant to be read as ideograms rather than phonograms - Ideogr for Ssrw/Ss "linen" ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATIN 20.24 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 00:35:56 -0500 20.24 jj.n.s HA.s m Hbsw.s txtx.s Snw.s She came, undressing from her clothes and messing up her hair. jj.n.s = "she came", perfect HA.s = "(she was) undressing", imperfective expressing concomitant action m Hbsw.s = "from her clothes", prepositional phrase txtx.s = "(she was) messing up", imperfective expressing concomitant action Snw.s = "her hair", object of txtx.s This exercise has a main clause followed by two unmarked adverb clauses. The main verb is the perfect 'jj.n.s', "she came / she has come". This is from a story so a simple past tense makes sense in translation. The adverb clauses are 'HA.s m Hbsw.s' and 'txtx.s Snw.s'. These verbs do not have distinctive forms, but they can be understood most successfully as imperfectives expressing concomitant action. 20.24 jy.n.s Ha.s m Hbsw.s txtx.s Snw.s jy.n.s = perfect of the verb 'to come' Haj (adj verb 3ae-inf) = naked, undressed m = preposition 'from' Hbsw = clothing, clothes txtx (verb 4-lit) = mess up, disorder Snw = hair NOTES: Here the verbs Haj and txtx are both imperfective in adverb clauses and thus express action, concomitant with the main clause 'she came'. SO: She came, undressing from her clothes and disordering her hair. Exercise 20.24 jj.n.s HA.s m Hbsw.s txtx.s Snw.s jj.n.s - perfect of anom. verb jj "come, return" with 3FS suffix pronoun as subject. "She came" HA.s - imperfective of the 3ae-inf. adj-verb HAj "naked, undress" with 3FS suffix pronoun as subject. This indicates continuing action. The new verb starts a new, unmarked dependent clause, describing how "she came". m Hbsw.s - adverbial prepositional phrase "of her clothes" txtx.s - another imperfective, starting another dependent clause. This time the verb is the 4-lit. txtx "mess up, disorder", again with 3FS suffix pronoun as subject. Snw.s - noun phrase "her hair" as object of txtx. The whole clause is "She was messing up her hair." Putting it together, with the two dependent clauses describing continuing action during the time the completed action of the main clause takes place, we have: "She came, undressing of her clothes, messing up her hair." ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 20.22 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 00:32:39 -0500 20.22 read right to left Snwy.j Ddf(w), mAA.j st My hair stood on end when I saw it. Snwy noun hair .j personal pronoun my Ddf verb 3-lit stand on end (of hair) mAA verb 2ae-gem see .j personal pronoun I st 3n personal pronoun dependent it 20.22 Snwy.j Ddf.(w) mAA.j st Snwy.j = noun + suffix pronoun = my hair Ddf = verb 3-lit = stand on end Ddf = perfective = stood on end Snwy.j Ddf.(w) = my hair stood on end mAA.j = imperfective + suffix pronoun = I saw st = dependent pronoun = it mAA.j st = when I saw it (modifies the first clause S.20.10) Snwy.j Ddf.(w) mAA.j st = My hair stood on end when I saw it QUESTION: NB I do not see why Allen uses the stative Ddf.(w) - surely 'stand on end' in this context is the action of 'standing on end' not a state of being? 20.22 Snwy.j Ddf.(w), mAA.j st This is a complex sentence, with a stative verb in the main clause, and the imperfective in the (dependent) adverbial clause. Main clause Snwy.j: noun, 'my hair' Ddf: verb (3-lit), 'to have goosebumps / hair stand on end' Ddf.(w): stative of the above. See Allen 17.6; the stative of an intransitive verb can be used to describe an action that took place in the past. Translation: 'My hair stood on end.' Subordinate clause mAA.j: 1st person singular imperfective, 'I see' st: dependent pronoun, object of the verb (Allen, 5.4) This clause functions as an adverb, describing WHEN the action in the main clause is taking place. The actions are concomitant - they're happening at the same time. "My hair stood on end while I saw it." "My hair stood on end as I saw it." ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL ALLEN GLYPHSTUDY COLLATION 20.28 Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 00:41:52 -0500 20.28 read right to left nn ms wn r(m)t m st nb Surely, people do not exist in any place. nn proclitic particle 16.6.8 no ms enclitic particle 16.7.7 surely wn perfective was rmt noun people m preposition in st phonogram for place nb adjective any Surely, there are no people anyplace. _____________________________________- 20.28 Transliteration: nn ms wn r(m)T m st nb Dissection: 1) nn = negation 2) ms = "surely, indeed" (16.7.7) 3) wn = "exist", perfective (20.16) 4) r(m)T = "people" 5) m = "in" 6) st = "place" 7) nb = "any, every" Translation: Literal: Surely, people do not exist in any place. Paraphrase: Surely, there are no people anywhere. QUESTION: Allen gives the source of this as "Adm. 3, 2". I would be curious what the context is if anyone knows to what Adm. 3,2 refers. ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: RE: AEL DHwt.y and da'ath? Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 20:37:40 -0700 >From: "Daniel Hunt" >Could there be a connection (perhaps as some early cognate or borrowing?) >between the name DHwt.y and Hebrew da'ath (dah'-ath), "knowledge, >perception, skill, discernment, understanding, wisdom"? I don't know but, in addition to some confusion over the etymology of the name "DHwty", the same can be applied to the name "David" [Arabic "Daoud"]. This may come under the heading of "weirdness", but I once saw it suggested on the Internet that the appellation "David" and "DHwty" were one and the same. At the time, I laughed it off, but...who knows for sure? Some have maintained that "David" comes from "dod" [beloved] and others have said it was not actually a personal name but a designation for a certain type of "commander". The funny thing is, in modern Israel, the nickname for "David" is "Dudu"--just as a hypocoristicon for an Egyptian theophoric name containing "DHwty" was "Tutu". Everybody knows that the father of King David was a Bethlehemite name Jesse. But the Bible gives no name for David's mother--which is a bit odd. The Talmud, Tractate Bava Batra 91a, gives the mother as being Nitzevet daughter of Adael. At the same time it supplies the names of the mothers of Abraham and Haman! But how could all that possibly be known? David's mother could have been an Egyptian woman. There is nothing to preclude it. He was said to have had beautiful eyes, was handsome and "ruddy"--whatever that means. A reddish skin--like an Egyptian? Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 17:26:55 +0200 From: "Luka Trkanjec" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL DHwt.y and da'ath? On 5/29/07, Marianne Luban wrote: > > >From: "Daniel Hunt" > > >Could there be a connection (perhaps as some early cognate or borrowing?) > >between the name DHwt.y and Hebrew da'ath (dah'-ath), "knowledge, > >perception, skill, discernment, understanding, wisdom"? > > I don't know but, in addition to some confusion over the etymology of the > name "DHwty", the same can be applied to the name "David" [Arabic "Daoud"]. > This may come under the heading of "weirdness", but I once saw it suggested > on the Internet that the appellation "David" and "DHwty" were one and the > same. At the time, I laughed it off, but...who knows for sure? > Some have maintained that "David" comes from "dod" [beloved] and others have > said it was not actually a personal name but a designation for a certain > type of "commander". The funny thing is, in modern Israel, the nickname for > "David" is "Dudu"--just as a hypocoristicon for an Egyptian theophoric name > containing "DHwty" was "Tutu". > > Everybody knows that the father of King David was a Bethlehemite name Jesse. > But the Bible gives no name for David's mother--which is a bit odd. The > Talmud, Tractate Bava Batra 91a, gives the mother as being Nitzevet daughter > of Adael. At the same time it supplies the names of the mothers of Abraham > and Haman! But how could all that possibly be known? David's mother could > have been an Egyptian woman. There is nothing to preclude it. He was said > to have had beautiful eyes, was handsome and "ruddy"--whatever that means. > A reddish skin--like an Egyptian? > > Marianne Luban > > This is an interesting proposal - not that Biblical King David was half-Egyptian, but perhaps the idea that the names David and Thoth/DHwty are ona an the same. Now, I'm no expert on languages, and certainly not on afro-asiatic group of languages, but according to article on wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoth#Etymology) DHwty was originally pronounced as *?i?aut?. Apperently, the main vowel was 'a', which by the time of Greeks came to be pronounced as 'o'. It seems Ancient Egyptian 'a'-s tended to evolve into 'o'-s in Coptic, compare New Egyptian pronunciation of nfr as nap which, in Coptic becomes nopu, or Greek Horus for hieroglyphic Hr, but which was perserved as Har in compound names such as Harpocrates, Harendotes, etc. And it is also a question how David was exactly pronounced 3 000 years ago or more. But it might have been that these two names, DHwty and David, sounded very much alike in those days, perhaps due to a common origin, or it might have been that David is even a straightforward borrowing of the DHwty. best regards, Luka Trkanjec ============================================================================== From: "Nicole B. Hansen" Subject: AEL Discounts on Glyphdoctors' hieroglyphs course To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 18:06:51 -0500 (CDT) For those who have a dedicated interest in learning Egyptian hieroglyphs thoroughly, I am now offering a 20% discount on enrollment in the Glyphdoctors online Middle Egyptian course to students who sign up for all 3 units at once. The 3 units cover exactly the same material as a full year university course in hieroglyphs. You can choose this option or enroll in a single unit here: http://www.glyphdoctors.com/course/category.php?id=12 I also am offering a summer discount of $50 off enrollment in a single unit of the hieroglyphs course for high school and university students. For this option, you will need to contact me directly to get the discount. We have a couple other courses/publications/tours (and discounts!) coming up, about which you can read more here: http://www.glyphdoctors.com/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=1721 The first students in the online hieroglyphs course are nearing the completion of unit 3 and I am starting to think about subject matter for a follow-up reading course. This course would also be open to students who completed a year-long course at a university or an equivalent (such as the OI's snail mail course). If any of you would be interested in enrolling in such a course, I am open to suggestions on the types of texts to be read. Please feel free to send me your suggestions. Nicole Hansen, Ph.D. Study hieroglyphs and Egyptology online at http://www.glyphdoctors.com Chicago, USA ============================================================================== From: "Thomas Sima" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL DHwt.y and da'ath? Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 00:59:16 -0400 The idea that Thoth has a connection with David ignores traditional etymology and also the proposition forwarded by Albright that the word occurs in the Hebrew Bible in Job 38:36 - "Who put wisdom in THwt? Or who gave understanding to Skwy?" (capitalized T and H are Teth and Cheth, and capitalized S is Shin). Albright points out, not only that the second obscure word was translated in the Septuagint as a type of bird, leading to a conclusion that it refers to the ibis of Thoth. The first obscure word is translated as "sophia" (wisdom) in the Septuagint. Again at Psalm 51:8 (51:6 in English), Albright posits an alternate pointing to the Masoretic pointing to get "Truly thou takest no pleasure in esoteric lore", with "esoteric lore" again being "TaHut". He also points out that the Phoenicians had adopted Thoth as Taauth, the god of wisdom. Although not everyone agrees on the interpretation, enough scholars agree with Albright's interpretation that a connection with David would be highly speculative at best considering that the word for Thoth is used and spelled with different letters, even retaining the medial H. Of course, the theory posited below also presumes a great deal about the historical accuracy of the Bible, but that is a debate outside the scope of this forum. As for Da'ath, it is a standard feminine substantive from the Semitic root YD', to know. Given the incidence of THwt in the Hebrew Bible, it is less likely that Da'ath would be from Thoth. However, the two could ultimately share a common ancestor. - Tom Sima ============================================================================== From: Tokapu@aol.com Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 00:07:56 EDT Subject: Re: AEL DHwt.y and da'ath? To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk In a message dated 5/29/2007 12:47:53 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, luka.trkanjec@gmail.com writes: > And it is also > a question how David was exactly pronounced 3 000 years ago or more. But it > might have > been that these two names, DHwty and David, sounded very much alike in those > days, perhaps due to a common origin, or it might have been that David is > even a straightforward borrowing of the DHwty. best regards, Luka Trkanjec I cannot help but note that you have clearly had a lifetime focusing on precise pronunciations of less-than-perfect phonetic renderings of spoken phonemes! A valuable contribution -- and how would you compare the modern spelling of your name to its ancient phonetic roots, just as an exercise to the group? Ramona Wheeler Author of Walk Like An Egyptian: A Modern Guide To The Ancient Religion And Philosophy Of Ancient Egypt ==============================================================================