Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:07:25 +0100 From: grym@trybunal.gov.pl (Rymaszewska Grazyna) To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL Weni L9/10 As usual I thank Andre Renouf for his inestimable help. Now, once again at L9. I have such proposition now: nS(=i) n pr-aA imi-r xn.t.i-Si 4 wni wi im = I expeled from the palace four of overseers of the Royal Domain when I was there. iri=k(wi) r Hs.ti Hm=f m iri.t stp-sA m iri.t wA.t nsw m iri.t aHa.w = I performed my duties in order to please His Majesty as making palace and making king's road and ??? iri.k(wi) mi-qd r Hs.ti Hm=f Hr=s r x.t nb.t = I performed this all in order to become pleased His Majesty with it more then any other thing. Forgive me my poor English, please. But, what do you think about it? Regards Grazyna Rymaszewska ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 15:12:14 -0500 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Gerald Kadish Subject: Re: AEL hoch's book I believe it is a co-publication of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities (Toronto) and Benben Publications, Mississauga, Ontario. Gerald E. Kadish Professor of History and Near Eastern Studies Department of History Binghamton University Binghamton, NY 13902-6000 (607) 777-2488 e-mail address: kadishg@binghamton.edu ============================================================================== To: 'Ancient Egyptian Language List' From: David Sheby Subject: AEL What is the AEL word for "grasshoppers"? To the AEL: I need to know the AEL word for "grasshoppers". In Faulkner, R. O. "The Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead", University of Texas Press, revised edition, 1985, ISBN 0-292-70425-9, Spell #125 (Faulkner, p. 33) there is a reference to the afterworld as "The Field of the Grasshoppers". (the text of the entire spell begins on page 29). My question is 3-fold: 1) Would someone please check the original hieroglyphics for me and tell me if Faulkner's translation of the original AEL into the word "grasshoppers" is correct. 2) Whether or not (1) is true, is there an unambiguous word in AEL for "grasshoppers", at the time Spell #125 was written, or does the text use a word that generically refers to the insects that look like grasshoppers, locusts, etc? 3) Have other scholars translated Spell #125 using "grasshoppers" or do they translate the AEL word (from (1)) into some other word? Thank you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely, David Sheby hosp@voicenet.com ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 09:24:13 EST To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Weni L9/10 In a message dated 98-03-30 19:38:23 EST, you write: Hi, Grazyna << Now, once again at L9. I have such proposition now: nS(=i) n pr-aA imi-r xn.t.i-Si 4 wni wi im = I expeled from the palace four of overseers of the Royal Domain when I was there.>> Yes, our Weni was a new broom making a clean sweep. But it was the overseers "who were there" >> iri=k(wi) r Hs.ti Hm=f m iri.t stp-sA m iri.t wA.t nsw m iri.t aHa.w = I performed my duties in order to please His Majesty as making palace and making king's road and ???>> Well, this is a tricky one. Yes, Weni did everything to secure His Majesty's approval. I looked this up in Lichtheim, who has "guarding, escorting the king and attending"--these being three ceremonial functions, the second literally "making the king's way" >> iri.k(wi) mi-qd r Hs.ti Hm=f Hr=s r x.t nb.t = I performed this all in order to become pleased His Majesty with it more then any other thing.>> Yes, His Majesty praised Weni's work above all things. Forgive me my poor English, please. >> What poor English? You are mistress of several, as I see it here. Now--is anybody going to do the next Gardiner Excercise? ============================================================================== From: "Nicholas,Patrizia Myall" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3 Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 13:06:40 +0200 Dear Andre,thankyou for your help! Now I write here my exercises and I have a few questions to ask. 1 iw msH m itrw 2 rS i To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL RE: new to AEL Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 13:10:58 +0200 Dear JN I am a beginner as well I started to learn the ancient egyptian language on the web a few months ago. At this address http://hosting.netvision.be/egyptologica you will find 7 beginner lessons.Then I continued at http://www.rostau.demon.co.uk/AEgyptian-L/exercises/ posting the exercises to this marvellous list where I have always found help and advice. A month ago I bought the "EGYPTIAN GRAMMAR" by GARDINER (Griffit institute) and the "A CONCISE DICTIONARY OF MIDDLE EGYPTIAN" by FAULKNER so I am studyng on my own with the help of these books and this list. Good luck! Patrizia Di Paolo ============================================================================== From: Aayko Eyma To: "AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk" Subject: AEL AW: AEL Weni L9/10 Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 20:30:26 +-200 >Now, once again at L9. >iri=k(wi) r Hs.ti Hm=f m iri.t stp-sA m iri.t wA.t nsw m iri.t aHa.w = I performed my duties in order to please His Majesty as making palace and making king's road and ??? Dear Grazyna, stp-sA indeed means palace too, but with house det., which is here lacking. So it is likely (see Faulkner) stp-sA "protect, do escort duty", which I presume is meant here: "do guard duty, do escort duty"? Standing at the door and/or next to the throne?? This then also makes it likely that the next thing is not about building activities either. wA.t can also be figuratively "way, side". So "making the royal way" - in combination with the above: announcing the king entering, cf. 'make way for the Lord!' (Or seeing the many possibilities of iri perhaps "perform/attend/conduct the royal way" which could be some vague general assisting/supporting duties when the court is in session??) aHa.w means likely "stations, positions, attendances, services" (with the striding man instead of the legs in Faulkner)? Which makes the title even more vague as the previous one if it means "performing services". If it means "appoint positions" he would have real power, but I guess this is unlikely? With all the above, it seems more he was a ceremonial bussybody: overseer of whether everyone was there and at he right spot when the court was in session, announcing the entry of the king, and taking care nobody came too close to the throne. But perhaps my fantasy is running away with me :) The Dutch yearly session of parliament also has a 'commission of leading in and out' for the queen entering and leaving the hall, you see. kind regards, Aayko Eyma ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 31 Mar 98 21:10:01 UT From: "Michael Mac Donagh" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: RE: AEL cartouches Hi ! Peter Clayton's book "Chronicle of the Pharaohs" is a recent publication, is readily available and has most of the cartouches. Regards, Mike. ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 12:00:23 -0800 From: Kasia Szpakowska To: Ancient Egyptian Language List CC: rojblods@uwc.edu Subject: Re: AEL cartouches Hi! Have you tried the following two books? Chronicle of the Pharaohs : The Reign-By-Reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt With 350 Illustratons 130 in Color by Peter A. Clayton List: $29.95 Our Price: $20.97 You Save: $8.98 (30%) Availability: This title usually ships within 2-3 days. Hardcover, 224 pages Published by Thames & Hudson Publication date: December 1994 Dimensions (in inches): 0.90 x 10.26 x 7.88 ISBN: 0500050740 OR Who Were the Pharaohs? a History of Their Names With a List of Cartouches by Stephen Quirke List: $8.95 Our Price: $7.16 You Save: $1.79 (20%) Availability: This title usually ships within 24 hours. Paperback, 80 pages Published by Dover Pubns Publication date: February 1991 Dimensions (in inches): 0.30 x 9.41 x 6.70 ISBN: 0486265862 Good luck! --Kasia ROBERT BLODGETT wrote: > > Dear Anyone, > > I am in need of help in finding any information or images of cartouches > of any or all of the Pharaohs of Ancient Egypt. My search for this kind of > information or images have come with no luck, this suprises me very much. > If anyone can direct me or provide with these it would be greatly appreciated. > > Thank You very much. > > Robert J. Blodgett > rojblods@uwc.edu ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 17:17:06 EST To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Weni L9/10 In a message dated 98-03-31 13:20:44 EST, you write: << Forgive me my poor English, please. And I wrote: >>What poor English? You are mistress of several, as I see it here. Now--is anybody going to do the next Gardiner Excercise? >> Pardon me, dear Grazyna. The word "languages" belongs after "several", but I stupidly omitted it. Blimey! Andre Renouf ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 31 Mar 98 21:30:08 UT From: "Michael Mac Donagh" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: RE: AEL Weni L9/10 Hi ! Using the transcription system of Gadiner's Grammar the line 9/10 reads nS.n(.i) imy-r xnt(yw)-S pr-aA 4 wnw im ir.kwi r Hst (wi) Hm.f m irt ztp-sA m irt wAt nzw m irt aHaw ir.kwi mi qd r Hst wi Hm.f Hr.s r xt nbt In line 9 the words imy-r xnt(yw)-S pr-aA are in honorific inversion. A reasonable translation is: (Because) I acted so that His Majesty praised me, in performing escort duty, in conducting the king and in attending (the king) I displaced four overseers of tenants of the palace who were there. I acted in all respects so that His Majesty praised me on account of it more than anything. Regards, Mike. ============================================================================== From: MWhealton Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 17:55:01 EST To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL AW: AEL Still looking for a vocab list In a message dated 98-03-29 13:04:37 EST, you write: << Is this book still available, and if, where? I just got it through the Oriental Institute of Chicago Suq. 1155 E. 58th Street Chicago, Illinois 60637 773-702-9509 But (just as a warning !) it took them 4 months to get me a copy. Maybe the supply is better now. Regards, Matt > -----Ursprngliche Nachricht----- > Von: MWhealton [SMTP:MWhealton@aol.com] > Gesendet am: Freitag, 27. Mrz 1998 14:22 > An: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk > Betreff: Re: AEL Still looking for a vocab list > > In a message dated 98-03-27 03:29:11 EST, you write: > > << Can anyone help with a non heiroglyphic based vocab list? >> > Try this one: > David Shennum > English-Egyptian Index of Faulkner's Concise Dictionary of Middle > Egyptian > Undena Publications > Malibu, 1977 > >> ============================================================================== From: "Mark Vygus" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL cartouches Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:12:38 +0100 > I am in need of help in finding any information or images of cartouches >of any or all of the Pharaohs of Ancient Egypt. I can recommend "The Sons of Re" - Cartouches of the Kings of Egypt by John Rose Published by 1985 JR-T Croft, Warrington, Cheshire ISBN 0-9510432-0-X It covers all periods of AE Mark V nsw-bit@msn.com ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 19:06:09 -0800 From: Don Ferruggia To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL cartouches The shareware version of the WinGlyph 1.2 hieroglyphic-typesetting program, which is available free from CCER at http://www.ccer.ggl.ruu.nl/ccer/default.html contains a "King List" complete with cartouches from Archaic to Roman times. ROBERT BLODGETT wrote: > I am in need of help in finding any information or images of cartouches > of any or all of the Pharaohs of Ancient Egypt. My search for this kind of > information or images have come with no luck, this suprises me very much. ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:52:49 -0800 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3 Nicholas,Patrizia Myall wrote: > 1 iw msH m itrw > 2 rS i 3 ix sDm.tw rn=k in tAty The transliteration of the last word should be TAty - the first consonant is the "underscore-t" > 4 iw sS pn m xA=f m hrw m grH > 5 hA 6 hAb sS dp.t tn DA=n im You need the pronoun on the last word: im=s ("in it") > 7 rS=f Hr r=T > 8 iw tA pn m rSw.t iw=k m p.t > 9 xd=f r niw.t tn sA.t=f Hn<=f > > You wrote: > 2 rS i Could you explain to me why you start the circumstantial clause "when the > sun is on its" with "iw"? Middle Egyptian starts a subordinate clause with "iw" ONLY if it is needed to support a suffix pronoun as subject. You could use it in the case of: rS ra iw=f m Ax.t=f Re rejoices when he is in his horizon. Otherwise "iw" introduces a main clause. > > 3 ix sDm rn=k in Taty > Could you explain more in detail why you omitted "tw"? To me seems to be > sDm=f passive. The verb here should indeed be sDm.tw > 6 I have a question: is it possible in the transliteration to omit the last > suffix pronoun "s"? No. Egyptian uses a resumptive pronoun after prepositions even when English can dispense with it - and here even English uses it. About the only time you will find "im" without a pronoun is when it mean "there" or "over there" > 8 Could I transliterate the first clause "rS tA pn"? The English indicates that you should translate it by "... m rSwt" - in fact I believe that Egyptian preferred the construction "iw ... m rSwt" Using "rS tA" would not contain the idea of an on-going action as well. -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 22:05:18 -0800 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL RE: new to AEL > A month ago I bought the "EGYPTIAN GRAMMAR" by GARDINER (Griffit institute) > and the "A CONCISE DICTIONARY OF MIDDLE EGYPTIAN" by FAULKNER so I am > studyng on my own with the help of these books and this list. I'm afraid that working from Gardiner is rather difficult, at least once you get past the first ten chapters or so - the rest is more of a reference book, even if it is divided into "Lessons". But apart from that, I see from messages on the list that using Gardiner is causing a lot of problems over the use of verb tenses, and "iw" This is not surprising, since Gardiner himself is quite clear that he did't really understand these things. And remember that Gardiner's grammar was written in 1927 (latest, somewhat revised, edition in 1956) - a lot of research has happened since then, giving a clearer understanding. By far the best book in English which is (fairly) easy to learn from, and (reasonably) current on grammar, is _Middle Egytian Grammar_ by James Hoch. I would strongly recommend that anyone who seriously wants to lear to read Egyptian on their own should use this book. There have been some messages recently concerning how to get a copy - the best is probably to write Dr. Hoch himself: James_Hoch@mail.campuslife.utoronto.ca -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 1 Apr 1998 17:27:26 +0200 (GMT) To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: mikeyb Subject: Re: AEL cartouches Hi Robert, > I am in need of help in finding any information or images of cartouches >of any or all of the Pharaohs of Ancient Egypt. My search for this kind of >information or images have come with no luck, this suprises me very much. >If anyone can direct me or provide with these it would be greatly appreciated. Stephen Quirke; Who were the Pharaohs? - A history of their names with a list of cartouches; British Museum Press. All the pharaohs listed. Cheers, Michael Brass Chairman, University of Cape Town Archaeology Field Club ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 1 Apr 1998 10:30:41 -0600 (CST) From: "Greg Davidson from Math Computer Lab (RLM 8.136)" To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL s Gardiner makes reference to the bolt and folded colth as having origanlly been two distinct sounds: z and s[accent aigu (I forget the English name)]. Could someone describe the latter to me in IPA? Thanks in advance. Greg Davidson greg@math.utexas.edu ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Wed, 1 Apr 1998 12:44:55 EST To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3 In a message dated 98-03-31 19:37:21 EST, you write: Now I write here my exercises and I have a few questions to ask. >>1 iw msH m itrw 2 rS i> I would put "iw" before "r<" >>3 ix sDm.tw rn=k in tAty Gardiner WOULD put in this tricky phrase when I can't remember if it should be as you write it above or "ix sDm.tw r rn.k" or "ix sDm.tw-f rn-k" Someone else will have to explain this one. 4 iw sS pn m xA=f m hrw m grH 5 hA > Perhaps I should ask why no "im-s"? >>7 rS=f Hr r=T Notice patrizia has "him" rejoicing because of the utterance of a female 8 iw tA pn m rSw.t iw=k m p.t >>9xd=f r niw.t tn sA.t=f Hn<=f I wouldn't use "Hn<" with a suffix, although someone else might disagree. It doesn't strike me as right. I would choose "xr-f". ->>You wrote: 2 rS i> Because it is a subordinate clause but still an independent assertion. See Gardiner paragraph 37 >>3 ix sDm rn=k in Taty Could you explain more in detail why you omitted "tw"? To me seems to be sDm=f passive.>> You are absolutely right. >>6 I have a question: is it possible in the transliteration to omit the last suffix pronoun "s"? >> It wouldn't make sense to me to omit it. It goes with the preposition. >>8 Could I transliterate the first clause "rS tA pn"? >> I would definitely begin that way. Andre Renouf ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 20:22:12 -0800 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL s Greg Davidson from Math Computer Lab (RLM 8.136) wrote: > > Gardiner makes reference to the bolt and folded colth as having origanlly > been two distinct sounds: z and s[accent aigu (I forget the English > name)]. Could someone describe the latter to me in IPA? Thanks in > advance. The short answer is "No." Unfortunately there is no real agreement on the exact pronunciation of many of the consonants in Old Egyptian. The conventional transcription is just that - a convention. They may have actually been z and s respectively, but I doubt it. I know some people consider the bolt ("z") to have been closer to "th". You can find a summary of what at least one school of thought is on this topic in Loprieno, _Ancient Egyptian: A Linguistic Introduction_, p.34. -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 20:45:06 -0800 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3 Andren4585 wrote: >> 2 rS i> > > I would put "iw" before "r<" Never - see below. If you want an iw it should go in front of the main clause. >>3 ix sDm.tw rn=k in tAty > > Gardiner WOULD put in this tricky phrase when > I can't remember if it should be as you write it > above or "ix sDm.tw r rn.k" or "ix sDm.tw-f rn-k" > Someone else will have to explain this one. It is a fairly straightforward sentence: the passive sDm.tw followed by the "subject" rn=k and then the agent introduced by in. You could also almost regard it (there is some indication the Egyptians thought of it this way) as sDm tw rn=k (very literally Hears one name=your) with the in TAty being an explanatory phrase giving the specific meaning of the impersonal tw ("one"). However you look at it, the above translation is right. > 8 iw tA pn m rSw.t iw=k m p.t > > >>9xd=f r niw.t tn sA.t=f Hn<=f > > I wouldn't use "Hn<" with a suffix, > although someone else might disagree. > It doesn't strike me as right. I would > choose "xr-f". Hna=f is perfectly all right. > ->>You wrote: > 2 rS i Could you explain to me why you start the circumstantial clause "when the > sun is on its"with "iw"?>> > > Because it is a subordinate clause but still an independent assertion. See > Gardiner paragraph 37 If you read para.37 you'll see that this usage applies ONLY when the particle is required to support a suffix pronoun subject of the subordinate clause. Otherwise it is found introducing only an initial main clause. The EXACT significance of iw is still not settled, but seems a lot clearer than when Gardiner wrote his book. See prior discussion of this topic in the list archives. -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 09:02:56 EST To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3 I wrote: << >> 2 rS i> > > I would put "iw" before "r<" You say: >> Never - see below. If you want an iw it should go in front of the main clause >> I don't think this is right. "iw" should go before the clause that is emphasized, such as in the example Gardiner uses in paragraph 37 "rS sS, iw-n m pr-f " (which is a slightly different case because of the suffix "n") and in his example on page 37 "h3 dp.t tn r S, iw niwt m rSwt" I know how this works, even though I would have difficulty explaining why. Verbs like "rS" and "h3" don't depend on "iw" when they begin a phrase. In a sense, one must think of "iw" as being part of the verb "to be"--at least that's how I was taught. And I was also taught that even the ancients misused "iw" sometimes. So you see, in English we might say "the scribe is rejoicing"--but that gives a false impression. In Egyptian "the scribe rejoices"--no need for "iw". But in the clause "iw-n m pr-f" some form of "to be" is indicated--"(when) we will be". Same with "iw niwt m rSwt" --the town "will be" rejoicing. It is a future consequence, indicated by the presence of "iw". However, in phrases with only one clause, anything seems to go. But I think this is the correct way: "wbn r< m pt" (the sun shines in the sky) No "iw" necessary because "wbn" doesn't depend on "iw" in the present tense. But, write it "iw wbn r< m pt" In my opininion NOW this becomes a future event or one from the past: "the sun will shine in the sky when my lover returns to me" or "the sun was shining in the sky when the boat sailed downstream" "iw r< m pt" (the sun is in the sky) This is correct for the present. Notice how "iw" represents here the "is". There is NO OTHER VERB now. Gardiner has it that "r< m pt" can be "the sun is in the sky", but, IMO, that is not right. That would be "the sun being in the sky" as in "the sun being in the sky, the lady decided to hang out her wash". Circumstantial. It can also be used "r< m pt" for "when the sun is (was, will be) in the sky" and even for the past , "the sun was in the sky". So, when Gardiner writes: "wbn r<, iw t3 m rSwt" (when) the sun rises, the earth is in joy the actual Egyptian being "rises the sun, the earth IS in joy" he is perfectly correct. Do you see why now? Andre Renouf ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 12:27:41 EST To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3 Sometimes I think it is true that, just when one tries to make some sort of definite statement regarding Egyptian grammar, one finds some example which flies in the face of same. "iw" is one of the most confusing aspects of this language, but I think it worth discussing some more. As I said before, the only time we, as students, need to worry about "iw" is when we do the exercises. Otherwise, we need only recognize it in the texts, which is easy enough to do, and try to understand whether it indicates something taking place in the present, past or future. Here are some examples of the use of "iw" taken from Egyptian sources: "ir rx S To: 'Ancient Egyptian Language List' Subject: RE: AEL Gardiner's exercises Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 12:01:37 -0700 Em hotep; Has anyone done 9 and up yet? I have been havining a great deal of = trouble with several of them and would love to have something to check = them with. Thanks L ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 19:16:15 -0800 From: Don Ferruggia To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Notes on iw and time (Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3) Please remember that the Egyptian language was spoken over a period of 3,000 years, and usage changed quite a bit over that time. At any one point, usage of something like "iw" would have been pretty constant, although it was vastly different from period to period. Later writers could also use earlier forms (correctly or incorrectly) to give their works a certain formality, just as we do. Mr. Renouf has collected an interesting collection of uses of "iw" from different periods and mostly outside the scope of Middle Egyptian. Study of Egyptian begins with classical Middle Egyptian because it is fairly uniform, and any beginning student will do well to limit himself or herself to Gardiner and texts from the middle period until a certain fluency is achieved. It really will make sense in the end! As time progressed, the conjugated forms sDm-f, sDm.n-f, etc. became less and less used and were replaced by various combinations of iw and iri alone or with prepositions, such as ir-f sDm, iw-f r sDm, iw-f Hr sDm, and more. By Coptic times, the stem of most verbs was never conjugated and all the personal "suffixes" have moved to the beginning: the normal present sDm-f is replaced by af-sotm. Even when forms didn't change, the force of tenses did. In Middle Egyptian, iw-f Hr sDm is a "progressive" tense, meaning "I am hearing". In late Egyptian it became a "sequential" tense, meaning "and then I heard". Also, the "iw" quoted in some of these examples is not the verb, but a particle often used to mark a main clause (which usually needn't be translated). You can generally recognize this particle when it is followed by a conjugated verb: iw sDm-f. sDm-f by itself can indicate a wish or a future tense. In examples like iw-f pr-f, the "pr-f" is often a participle ("his going out") rather than a verb. iw-i sDm-kwi is a common variant of the "perfective" tense sDm-kwi, "I have been heard". Finally, in cases where "iw" seems to be used to introduce a main clause in one place, and then not in another similar main clause immediately after it, remember that we can't really tell where some Egyptian sentences ended. Consider this English sentence: "The pen is here, the pencil there, and the cat somewhere else." If you didn't have the commas to guide you, you might think it was three sentences with different constructions. ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 20:17:31 EST To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercises In a message dated 98-04-02 16:07:16 EST, you write: << Em hotep; Has anyone done 9 and up yet? I have been havining a great deal of = trouble with several of them and would love to have something to check = them with. Thanks >> Send in yours and we'll struggle with it together. Later on, we can do it again for someone else. Not everyone here can wait for us to slowly progress from the beginning. Andr Renouf ============================================================================== From: Michael Tilgner To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL AW: AEL What is the AEL word for "grasshoppers"? Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 11:58:35 +0200 Dear David, you seem to doubt that there is a word "grasshopper" in Ancient Egyptian, but, however, "grasshopper" is well-known. (1) Is Faulkner's translation correct? (a) You will find the original text in de Buck, Egyptian Readingbook, Leiden, 1970, p. 119, line 16 (=3D last line), written as m sxt zHnmw [this word written as: zA-n:N41-w-L4:Z2, pl.] "field of grasshoppers" (2) Is there an unambiguous word in AEL for "grasshoppers"? (b) Gardiner's sign-list has a hieroglyph L4 "grasshopper" = (schistocerca peregrina) used as a determinative in the word znHm "grasshopper". (c) Rainer Hannig, "Grosses Handwoerterbuch Aegyptisch-Deutsch (2800 - 950 v. Chr.)", Mainz, 1995, p. 722, entry "grashopper" with following writings z:n-N41-m-W-zA z:n-H-m-L4 zA-n:N41-m-L4 He cites the following phrase: tti Dd.w: iw tA pn r-Dr=3Df xpr.w m znHm = m wD wa m xd ky m xnt [y =3D M17A] translation: "Teti says: the whole country became a swarm of grasshoppers at *departure, one (person wants to go) to the north, another one to the south." (* =3D meaning is unclear, doubtful) (d) The "Lexikon der Aegyptologie, Vol. II, columns 1179-1180, entry "Heuschrecke" (grasshopper) remarks that even in the pyramid texts "grasshoppers" are mentioned: =A7 891d: "I have reached the sky as a locust, which hides(?) the sun." (the dead pharao speaks) =A7 1772b: the king "has ascended in the body of a locust among these children of hornet(?)" (translations by Faulkner) (3) How did other scholars translated this text/word? (e) I have the German translation of Erik Hornung, "Das Totenbuch der Aegypter", Zuerich, Muenchen, 1979, p. 241: "ich habe mich niedergelassen in der noerdlichen Siedlung, im _Heuschrecken_-Gefilde, in dem sich die Mannschaft des RE reinigt ..." (Faulkner, p. 33: "I = have rested in the Northern City, in the pure Field of Grasshoppers, in = which is the crew of Re") [by the way, Faulkner understood "pure" as = adjective for the field of grasshoppers, whereas Hornung interpreted it as a verb "to purify" for the crew of Re]. Best wishes, Michael Tilgner mtilgner@baan.nl ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 09:14:01 EST To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Notes on iw and time (Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3) In a message dated 98-04-03 02:13:19 EST, you write: >>. Mr. Renouf has collected an interesting collection of uses of "iw" from different periods and mostly outside the scope of Middle Egyptian. >> Speaking of which, I forgot to mention the text some people here are working on, the VI th Dynasty "The Autobiography of Weni". "iw" is not used in it. Not necessary, anway. There is no question in this text of mood or tense. It is somebody's autobiography--all in the past. Andre Renouf ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 08:35:20 EST To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Notes on iw and time (Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3) In a message dated 98-04-03 02:13:19 EST, you write: << Please remember that the Egyptian language was spoken over a period of 3,000 years, and usage changed quite a bit over that time. At any one point, usage of something like "iw" would have been pretty constant, although it was vastly different from period to period. Later writers could also use earlier forms (correctly or incorrectly) to give their works a certain formality, just as we do. Mr. Renouf has collected an interesting collection of uses of "iw" from different periods and mostly outside the scope of Middle Egyptian.>> I thought we were addressing "iw" and not just "iw" in Middle Egyptian. Is there some reason, on this list, why people should be shielded from other stages of the language? >> Study of Egyptian begins with classical Middle Egyptian because it is fairly uniform, and any beginning student will do well to limit himself or herself to Gardiner and texts from the middle period until a certain fluency is achieved. It really will make sense in the end!>> True, but even persons who are not raw beginners are wondering about "iw". It's not an easy topic and not really a discussion theme for beginners. >> As time progressed, the conjugated forms sDm-f, sDm.n-f, etc. became less and less used and were replaced by various combinations of iw and iri alone or with prepositions, such as ir-f sDm, iw-f r sDm, iw-f Hr sDm, and more. By Coptic times, the stem of most verbs was never conjugated and all the personal "suffixes" have moved to the beginning: the normal present sDm-f is replaced by af-sotm.>> Yes, this is a good point. >> Even when forms didn't change, the force of tenses did. In Middle Egyptian, iw-f Hr sDm is a "progressive" tense, meaning "I am hearing". In late Egyptian it became a "sequential" tense, meaning "and then I heard". Also, the "iw" quoted in some of these examples is not the verb, but a particle often used to mark a main clause (which usually needn't be translated). You can generally recognize this particle when it is followed by a conjugated verb: iw sDm-f.>> Yes, obviously "iw" is used as a particle to mark a main clause, but, so that some here did not get the impression that that was its only function and that one can just arbitrarily stick "iw" onto the beginning of every phrase regradless of past, present or future mood, I tried to show that there is some order to this --or is supposed to be. >> sDm-f by itself can indicate a wish or a future tense. In examples like iw-f pr-f, the "pr-f" is often a participle ("his going out") rather than a verb. iw-i sDm-kwi is a common variant of the "perfective" tense sDm-kwi, "I have been heard". >> Thank you for your comments. Andre Renouf ============================================================================== Date: Sat, 04 Apr 1998 07:40:14 -0800 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Notes on iw and time (Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3) Andren4585 wrote: > I thought we were addressing "iw" and not just "iw" in Middle Egyptian. Is > there some reason, on this list, why people should be shielded from other > stages of the language? Remember, you have been addressing eople who are just beginning to learn the language. While it is probably valuable to make them aware of the development of Egyptian through the milennia, trying to learn all stages of the language at once is just going to cause total confusion and chaos. Rather like if I tried to teach a novice English using examples from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Canterbury Tales, The Tempest and Finnegan's Wake. You'd have people trying to fathom what the grammatical rule was for choosing "thou dost" rather than "You do" or "he does" instead of "he doth." You have been dealing with exercises from Gardiner's Grammar, which addresses Middle Egyptian not Old Egyptian or Late Egyptian, so stick to that stage of the language. For those who want an in-depth analysis of the usage of "iw" in Middle Egyptian, and with comments on how and why it developed from Old Egyptian and into Late Egyptian, see James P. Allen, "Tense in Classical Egyptian," in _Essays on Egyptian Grammar_ (Yale EGyptological Studies 1) - available from Eisenbraun's for $12. -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== From: "Nicholas,Patrizia Myall" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL Gardiner's exercise 4 Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 00:31:21 +0200 Thankyou for the response regarding "iw"it has been really interisting: this is my contribute I hope it is the source of other fruitful discussion. 1 nfr sA sDm=f n it=f iw=f m Xrd di=f sxr pn m ib=f sxA=f sw r< nb mk tw Dd tw r=f Sw sw m Dw.t nb.t The son is good if he heard his father when he was(as) a child.He placed this counsel in his heart and remenber it every day ;look one says about him that he is free from every evil. 2 x< r< m Ax.t wbn=f m p.t nfr ib nb mAA=sn sw When the sun appears on the horizon and rises in the sky every heart is happy when they see it 3 bin.wy itrw Sw m mw How miserable is the empty river of water! 4 Dd=k st n ity ix Dd=f n bAk=f m mit.t If you speak about them to the monarch then he will speak to his man-servant likewise (it is not very clear to me how to translate "st" in all of its different uses. Could some one help me please?) 5 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3 Andren4585 wrote: > I don't think this is right. "iw" should go before the clause that is > emphasized, Except as a support for a suffix pronoun, "iw" in Middle Egyptian is never used to start a subordinate clause. So the two possibilities for where to put iw have different meanings: iw rS iaH ra m Axt=f : The Moon rejoices when the Sun is in his horizon. rS iaH iw ra m Axt=f : When the Moon rejoices, the Sun is in his horizon. Which one do you prefer as the circumstantial (ie subordinate) clause? > such as in the example Gardiner uses in paragraph 37 > "rS sS, iw-n m pr-f " (which is a slightly different case because of the > suffix "n") In fact this follows exactly what I have said. > and in his example on page 37 "h3 dp.t tn r S, iw niwt > m rSwt" I know how this works, even though I would have difficulty > explaining why. How this sentence works is: the main clause is "iw niwt m rSwt" (The city is in rejoicing). The first part of the sentence is actually a circumstantial (subordinate) clause: hA dpt tn r S (When this boat goes down to the lake). Gardiner gives a few sentences with similar order, although he doesn't give any references for them (unlike most other examples) which makes me suspect that they are ones he made up. The order of clauses is rather unusual: normal order is [Main]-[Subordinate], although it was not unkown to switch things around for emphasis. So starting the sentence with the circumstantial clause would have placed considerable emphasis on it. A more normal and less emphatic order would be "iw niwt m rSwt hA dpt tn r S" (The city rejoices when this boat goes down to the lake.) > Same with "iw niwt m rSwt" --the town "will be" rejoicing. It is a future > consequence, indicated by the presence of "iw". It is NOT a future consequence; it is a simple statement of fact: "The city is in rejoicing," a general indication of truth without regard to time. Sentences without a verb give no indication of time - that has to come from the context. > "wbn r< m pt" (the sun shines in the sky) > > No "iw" necessary because "wbn" doesn't depend on "iw" in the present tense. > But, write it > > "iw wbn r< m pt" > > In my opininion NOW this becomes a future event or one from the past: Actually the function of "iw" with the verb is to create absolute tenses, relative to the speaker rather than the usual relative tenses where the time of the verb is related to the other verbs around it. So we have: iw sDm=f he hears iw sDm.n=f he heard just like the English tenses. Whereas the verb forms without iw are much more vague about time - sDm=f is generally an action that is regarded not finished at the time of the words around it ("imperfect"); sDm.n=f is something that is viewed as completed or prior to the other actions around it. > "iw r< m pt" (the sun is in the sky) > > This is correct for the present. Notice how "iw" represents here the "is". > There is NO OTHER VERB now. Gardiner has it that "r< m pt" can be "the sun > is in the > sky", but, IMO, that is not right. That would be "the sun being in the sky" > as > in "the sun being in the sky, the lady decided to hang out her wash". > Circumstantial. It can also be used "r< m pt" for "when the sun is (was, will > be) in the sky" and even for the past , "the sun was in the sky". I think you are presenting my argument for me here: iw in front of a main clause, not in front of a circumstantial clause. > "wbn r<, iw t3 m rSwt" (when) the sun rises, the earth is in joy > the actual Egyptian being "rises the sun, the earth IS in joy" > he is perfectly correct. Do you see why now? This is perfectly true here, but the order of clauses is different from the question in the Exercise, where the circumstantial clause follows the main clause. You don't HAVE to put iw at the beginning of the main clause - you could write "rS iAh ra m Axt=f," though the Egyptians would probably have put it there if this was a statement of general truth (gnomic present). But as I said above, putting the iw at the beginning of the second clause makes it the main clause, and the first one becomes the circumstantial clause - with very strange results for the meaning of the sentence! -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 09:28:21 EDT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Notes on iw and time (Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3) In a message dated 98-04-05 07:48:49 EDT, you write: << Andren4585 wrote: > I thought we were addressing "iw" and not just "iw" in Middle Egyptian. Is > there some reason, on this list, why people should be shielded from other > stages of the language? >> Remember, you have been addressing eople who are just beginning to learn the language. >> Actually, in the business of "iw", I was primarily addressing you, because of a statement you made with which I disagreed. I was not under the impression that you are a beginner. >>You have been dealing with exercises from Gardiner's Grammar, which addresses Middle Egyptian not Old Egyptian or Late Egyptian, so stick to that stage of the language> Why have I been relegated to the Gardiner's exercises because I have tried to help some people in whatever way I can? I am new to this list, but I was told it was called "The Ancient Egyptian Language List"--not "The Middle Egyptian List". True, we all begin by studying Middle Egyptian, but I am interested in all stages of the language--even Coptic. Andre Renouf ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 09:59:25 EDT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3 In a message dated 98-04-05 07:48:50 EDT, you write: << rS iaH iw ra m Axt=f : When the Moon rejoices, the Sun is in his horizon. Which one do you prefer as the circumstantial (ie subordinate) clause?>> The above is correct, as I said it should be, but you have changed the English sentence. I believe it was "The moon rejoices, when the sun is in his horizon". That makes the first clause the subordinate. (snip) >> A more normal and less emphatic order would be "iw niwt m rSwt hA dpt tn r S" (The city rejoices when this boat goes down to the lake.)>> Why is this more normal? > Same with "iw niwt m rSwt" --the town "will be" rejoicing. It is a future > consequence, indicated by the presence of "iw". >> It is NOT a future consequence; it is a simple statement of fact: "The city is in rejoicing," a general indication of truth without regard to time. Sentences without a verb give no indication of time - that has to come from the context.>> In the post to which you are responding, I gave the entire phrase just before as "h3 dp.t tn r S, iw niwt m rSwt" --which is to say "(When) this boat goes down to the lake, the city is in joy". That is a future consequence, because, really, the phrase is saying "when this boat "will" go down to the lake the city "will be" in joy. It is not a statement in the present. That would have to be something like "This city is in joy because the boat has come down to the lake". > "wbn r< m pt" (the sun shines in the sky) > > No "iw" necessary because "wbn" doesn't depend on "iw" in the present tense. > But, write it > > "iw wbn r< m pt" > > In my opininion NOW this becomes a future event or one from the past: Actually the function of "iw" with the verb is to create absolute tenses, relative to the speaker rather than the usual relative tenses where the time of the verb is related to the other verbs around it. So we have: iw sDm=f he hears iw sDm.n=f he heard just like the English tenses. Whereas the verb forms without iw are much more vague about time - sDm=f is generally an action that is regarded not finished at the time of the words around it ("imperfect"); sDm.n=f is something that is viewed as completed or prior to the other actions around it. > "iw r< m pt" (the sun is in the sky) > > This is correct for the present. Notice how "iw" represents here the "is". > There is NO OTHER VERB now. Gardiner has it that "r< m pt" can be "the sun > is in the > sky", but, IMO, that is not right. That would be "the sun being in the sky" > as > in "the sun being in the sky, the lady decided to hang out her wash". > Circumstantial. It can also be used "r< m pt" for "when the sun is (was, will > be) in the sky" and even for the past , "the sun was in the sky". I think you are presenting my argument for me here: iw in front of a main clause, not in front of a circumstantial clause.>> Well, if I am presenting your argument for you, then I think I am saying it in a way people can better understand ;-) From the first argument you gave me, which was when I said: << >> 2 rS i> > > I would put "iw" before "r<" You say: >> Never - see below. If you want an iw it should go in front of the main clause >> I thought you meant that this "iw" should always go in the beginning of the phrase, that being the main clause. As I think you are wrong about the above phrase, this may have confused me as to your intent, so perhaps we are mostly in agreement and are arguing for nothing. Andre Renouf ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:43:01 +0200 From: Serge Rosmorduc To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Gardiner's exercise 4 Nicholas,Patrizia Myall 'ecrit : > Thankyou for the response regarding "iw"it has been really interisting: > this is my contribute I hope it is the source of other fruitful discussion. > > 1 nfr sA sDm=f n it=f iw=f m Xrd di=f sxr pn m ib=f sxA=f > sw r< nb mk tw Dd tw r=f Sw sw m Dw.t nb.t > The son is good if he heard his father when he was(as) a child.He placed > this counsel in his heart and remenber it every day ;look one says about > him that he is free from every evil. "may he place this counsel...". It would be iw di.n=f or di.n=f. Otherwise, good translation. Notice that 'mk tw Dd=tw' is very close from iw=tw Dd=tw. The writter of Ptahotep chosed to use mk because of its rhetorical value. > > 2 x< r< m Ax.t wbn=f m p.t nfr ib nb mAA=sn sw > When the sun appears on the horizon and rises in the sky every heart is > happy when they see it > good ! > 3 bin.wy itrw Sw m mw > How miserable is the empty river of water! > > 4 Dd=k st n ity ix Dd=f n bAk=f m mit.t > If you speak about them to the monarch then he will speak to his > man-servant likewise > (it is not very clear to me how to translate "st" in all of its different > uses. Could some one help me please?) here, it's "IT" : You shall say it to monarch, and he will say likewise to his servant. > > 5 How great is your house when it is rich of every good thing > these are two adjectival sentences. I would preferabily translate : how great is your house : it is rich in every good thing. > 6 xm=f sxr pn iqr > He is ignorant of this excellent plan Yes. In this case, however, we have to suppose this sentence doesn't start a text, because an initial sDm=f form can't have the value of a general present. > > 7 hAb=sn dp.t r niw.t DA=f Tw im=s > When they will send the boat to the city he will ferry you across in it As subordinate sentence have a tendency to be after the principal one, I would rather translate : They will send a boat to the town so that he ferries you across in it. > > > Patrizia Di Paolo > ============================================================================== From: Andren4585 Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 19:17:05 EDT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 4 In a message dated 98-04-05 07:48:58 EDT, you write: Hello again, Signorina Patrizia! >>1 nfr sA sDm=f n it=f iw=f m Xrd di=f sxr pn m ib=f sxA=f sw r< nb mk tw Dd tw r=f Sw sw m Dw.t nb.t The son is good if he heard his father when he was(as) a child.He placed this counsel in his heart and remenber it every day ;look one says about him that he is free from every evil.>> Right. >>2 x< r< m Ax.t wbn=f m p.t nfr ib nb mAA=sn sw When the sun appears on the horizon and rises in the sky every heart is happy when they see it>> Correct. >>3 bin.wy itrw Sw m mw How miserable is the empty river of water! >> Well, you are basically right here, too, but say rather "How evil (miserable, bad) is a river empty of water!" Do you understand why I am putting this in a general sense? Not just "the" river, but any river is miserable in this state. >>4 Dd=k st n ity ix Dd=f n bAk=f m mit.t If you speak about them to the monarch then he will speak to his man-servant likewise (it is not very clear to me how to translate "st" in all of its different uses. Could some one help me please?)>> "Say it to the sovereign and he will say it to his servant, likewise. " >>5 > Yes. Or you could have split this into two separate phrases. >>6 xm=f sxr pn iqr He is ignorant of this excellent plan>> Yes. >>7 hAb=sn dp.t r niw.t DA=f Tw im=s When they will send the boat to the city he will ferry you across in it> Here is my opinion about this last phrase: I would tend to translate this "They send the boat to the city so that one may ferry across in it". For my money, (and no doubt someone will disagree) in order to imply "when they will send the boat", you should use "iw h3b-sn dp.t r niwt". Really, Patrizia, you are cracking good at these sentences! Andre Renouf ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 07:27:05 -0700 From: Don Ferruggia To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL English Grammar (Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3) I fear we are giving Patrizia a lot of bad advice. Gardiner assumed that his readers had an understanding of English grammar and did not stop to explain simple terms such as "main clause" and "subordinate clause". Apparently not all posters to this list understand these terms, as shown by such statements as: > I believe it was "The moon rejoices, when the sun is in > his horizon". That makes the first clause the subordinate. and: > Because it is a subordinate clause but still an independent assertion. A main clause is, by definition, an independent assertion. A subordinate clause is one that is "subordinate" to and therefore "dependent" on, another. A subordinate clause is never an independent assertion. A main clause can stand alone as a meaningful sentence. "The moon rejoices" is a meaningful sentence, and is therefore the main clause. "When the sun is in his horizon" is NOT a meaningful sentence and cannot be a main clause. A subordinate clause modifies the meaning of another clause in some way. "When the sun is in his horizon" modifies "The moon rejoices" by telling us when this happens. In English grammar, it is called an "Adverbial Phrase". In English, subordinate clauses usually begin with a connecting word, such as "when", "while", "because", "which". This will help you identify them. Keep up the good work, Patrizia! ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 22:41:17 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 4 Nicholas,Patrizia Myall wrote: > 1 nfr sA sDm=f n it=f iw=f m Xrd di=f sxr pn m ib=f sxA=f > sw r< nb mk tw Dd tw r=f Sw sw m Dw.t nb.t > The son is good if he heard his father when he was(as) a child.He placed > this counsel in his heart and remenber it every day ;look one says about > him that he is free from every evil. There are two sentences here. The first is rather complex, with many subordinate clauses. Let's take them one at a time. The overall meaning is one of general, timeless wisdom, so we translate it into English present tense, which is used the same way. "nfr sA" is the main clause and means "A son is good" "sDm=f n it=f iw=f m Xrd" is a subordintate clause, which itself consists of two clauses. We can start out by treating it as if it were a separate sentence, so the main part is "sDm=f n it=f" meaning "He listens to his father" and "iw=f m Xrd" is a clause describing the circumstances and means something like "when he is a child" or "while he is a child." Relating it to the main clause as a circumstantial clause we could have "when he listens...," or "who listens..." (By the way the construction "sDm n N" means "listen to N " or "obey N") "di=f sxr pn m ib=f" means "who puts this advice in his heart," or "when he puts..." "sxA=f sw ra nb" means "who remembers it every day," or "when he remembers..." Repetition of the same conjunction ("who" or "while" or "when" or "if") signals that we have parallel clauses, which we can (at least in English) connect with "and" after the first one. So the whole sentence comes out as: "A son is good when he listens to his father and puts this advice in his heart and remembers it every day." The next part starts a new sentence, as signalled by the particle "mk." It also contains a common Egyptian device - treating something as a direct quotation: "mk tw Dd tw r=f" means "Look! one says of him:" You could treat the verb here as passive ("Dd.tw" = "is said") or impersonal ("Dd tw" = "one says"). "Sw sw m Dw.t nb.t" is actually aslo an independent sentence, treated as a direct quotation of what people will say about him: "He is empty of all evil" So this part comes out as: "Look! They say about him: 'He is free of any evil!'" Which is pretty much what you came up with, of course. I just thought it might be good to take it apart to see exactly how it fits together. A couple of things to remember: 1) You should translate "sDm=f" verb forms as present tense ("he hears"), and sDm.n=f forms as past tense ("he heard"). 2) The Egyptians used very few explicit conjunctions to introduce subordinate clauses, whereas English (and European languages in general) require these to be stated eplicitly. In order to pick out the right conjunction you have to think carefully about what the author was trying to say - not always easy. > > 2 x< r< m Ax.t wbn=f m p.t nfr ib nb mAA=sn sw > When the sun appears on the horizon and rises in the sky every heart is > happy when they see it This is good. > 3 bin.wy itrw Sw m mw > How miserable is the empty river of water! Minor adjustment here - "Sw m" can mean "without" or "lacking" so this would go better as "How evil is a river without water!" > 4 Dd=k st n ity ix Dd=f n bAk=f m mit.t > If you speak about them to the monarch then he will speak to his > man-servant likewise > (it is not very clear to me how to translate "st" in all of its different > uses. Could some one help me please?) The word "st" is either "her" or "it" used as object of a verb. By the way, Gardiner doesn't cover this, but starting a main clause with a sDm=f form has a different meaning than starting it with "iw" or "mk" followed by a sDm=f. "Iw sdm=f" is simply "he hears"; "sDm=f" is more like "If he hears" or "may he hear". You got it right here of course! > > 5 How great is your house when it is rich of every good thing A translation of "x.t nb.t nfr.t" which I like is "all kinds of good things." Remember that "m" means "in" > > 6 xm=f sxr pn iqr > He is ignorant of this excellent plan > > 7 hAb=sn dp.t r niw.t DA=f Tw im=s > When they will send the boat to the city he will ferry you across in it Another possibility here: "May they send a boat to the city so he can ferry you across in it." (The second clause could be describing the result of the first.) -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 22:38:54 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner's exercise 3 Andren4585 wrote: > > In a message dated 98-04-05 07:48:50 EDT, you write: > > << rS iaH iw ra m Axt=f : When the Moon rejoices, the Sun is in his horizon. > > Which one do you prefer as the circumstantial (ie subordinate) clause?>> > > The above is correct, as I said it should be, but you have changed the > English sentence. I believe it was "The moon rejoices, when the sun is in > his horizon". That makes the first clause the subordinate. I think we have part of the problem here - your understanding of main (or independent) clauses and subordinate clauses. The main clause in a sentence is the part that can stand alone as a complete sentence. A subordinate clause cannot stand by itself, and in English is introduced by conjunction or uses a non-finite verb form (infinitive or participle). In the sentence above "The moon rejoices" is the main clause, because it could stand by itself as a complete sentence, whereas "When the sun is in his horizon," does not make sense by itself (it is incomplete). This has nothing to do with the degree of importance or interest of the information in the two clauses (in fact subordinate clauses frequently contain the more interesting information). This is a purely structural, grammatical matter. And Middle Egyptian was probably the most structurally based and rigid phase of the language. In European languages, subordinate clauses are almost always introduced by conjunctions specifying their precise realtion to the rest of the sentence. In Egyptian (or Biblical Hebrew) this is not the case - there is generally no conjunction, and the relation is left rather vague. It does make translation "interesting!" -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have **************************************************