From: "A.K. Eyma" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL Coptic word for "eye" Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:28:39 +0200 ~Katherine wrote: >I'm wondering if anyone knows of a Coptic word for "eye" which >might be descended from the word jrt. The attesttations (st. abs.) in Coptic are limited (in Lycopolitan: yire), but it is also attested in a Greek transcription (in Plutarch: iri). >To see if I have this right, the possible syllabic division for this word >would be: >jv-rVt >jV-rvt >jv:-rVt >jV:-rvt >Where V is a stressed vowel, v an unstressed vowel, and : a long vowel. **No, please see my post of May 4. Basically: only stressed vowels can be long, and only if in an open syllable. So the only options are jv-rVt and jV:-rvt (as with the jrp case) The Coptic and Greek forms above show that the last one applies: *yi:rvt kind regards, Aayko Eyma ============================================================================== From: "KMOTC" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL re: James Hoch's Key Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 22:00:52 -0500 m Htp All, I was unable to contact Dr. Hoch about us posting the key to his exercises as the address I had for him is no longer working. Does anyone here have a way to contact him? best, Karen the moderator at GlyphStudy ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:38:00 +0200 (CEST) From: Ugo Bessi To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: AEL transliteration of scribe I have a very stupid question on the egyptian word for scribe. For Budge, scribe is "ani"; for Gardiner and Faulkner, scribe is "ssh" (well, with the transliteration allowed by the computer...); for Allen and Hannig, scribe is "zha"; rather perplexed, I look up Champollion and find that scribe is "zha" for him too; it has come full circle! Now scribe is almost never written with alphabetical characters; with my limited reading, I found the alphabetical characters only in a stela in an anthology of Budge, where they were "ssh". None of these people explain the reason for their transliteration, at least in the books I have. This is as mysterious as the "n" in "hnkt", beer. Perhaps some of you has found, in the works of past egyptologist, some argument supporting their choices. Kind regards, Ugo. ============================================================================== From: "Ned Ramm" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL transliteration of scribe Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 21:29:18 +0100 Just a thought on Ani. I've got a copy of 'The Book of the Dead' commissioned by a scribe called 'Ani'. I wonder if this is the source of Budge's name. Kind regards, Ned Ramm ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:58:58 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List , kmotc@swbell.net Subject: Re: AEL re: James Hoch's Key KMOTC wrote: > I was unable to contact Dr. Hoch about us posting the key to his > exercises as the address I had for him is no longer working. > > Does anyone here have a way to contact him? I believe he is now at the University of Alberta. Try james.hoch@telus.net. Stephen Fryer ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:56:56 -0400 From: "Aurelio LaRotta" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL transliteration of scribe OK, I guess I get it ... how's this: To get /sxu:j/, you need some sort of consonant at the end of the word which I'll call 'K' (could be a /w/), so z-H-K, as the bare minimum. With a 3-consonant structure like this, you'd get *['za:xvK] which would become /'so:he/ or something of that sort in Coptic (assuming the 'K' consonant does not survive) - no easy way to make it into Bohairic /sax/ :-) Ergo, you need one more consonant, zH3.w to get a consistent syllable structure with a short vowel in the stressed first syllable - still not quite sure why it has to be /3/, but we're getting closer ;-) Best regards, Aurelio ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:21:34 -0400 From: "Aurelio LaRotta" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL transliteration of scribe Hi Ugo, Could 'ani' be a misunderstanding from the papyrus of the 'Scribe Ani' (as Ned points out)? I am only aware of two versions: sS and zX3.w. My copy Budge's *Egypt. Hier. Dict.* has 'sesh' as transliteration. It also gives a few examples were the word is indeed written out like that. Interestingly enough, they include Pepi (6th Dyn.) and *'Rechnungen aus der Zeit Seti I*" (19th Dyn). That means the data points are 1,000 years apart and the sS phonetic complement existed already in the Old Kingdom - a pretty strong case for sS :-) Budge gives, however, the Coptic /sxaj/ - now, if the second consonant was really a /S/, you shouldn't see an /x/ in Coptic. I don't know much about Old Kingdom spelling, but Peust has a section on how OK writing lacked a sign for X until Dyn 3 and substituted S for it, sometimes until Dyn 6. sS being one of the most important titles, I could imagine how they would use the historical orthography, just like we write *knight* with a whole bunch of letters that aren't there :-) So, that solves the X <--> S and explains the /x/ in Coptic and as the written versions have a /z/ and not an /s/ for the first consonant, it is only fair to make it zX. Now, for the rest (3 and w), I can only guess that it rests on calculations concerning the syllable structure, but I have not seen the details worked out anywhere. Maybe somebody else could add more information? The closest I have is Loprieno's reconstructions based on Bohairic /sax/ and /sxu:j/ (sg./pl.), from which he proposes */'zacraw/ and */z@c'?a:j(vw)/ (sorry, had to change the transcription a bit, /@/ is shwa and /?/ is the glottal stop). Please chime in if you have more details on that :-) Best regards, Aurelio ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:24:32 -0400 From: "Aurelio LaRotta" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL transliteration of scribe Never write e-mails past 11 PM :-) Correction: "My copy *of* Budge's *Egypt. Hier. Dict.* has 'sesh' as transliteration. It also gives a few examples *where [...]* Sorry about that :-) Aurelio ============================================================================== From: "gilbert" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: RE: AEL transliteration of scribe Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 06:17:11 +0800 Here is Allen's AEL's archived explanation on this issue. Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 10:21:03 +0100 From: Grazyna Rymaszewska To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL J.P.Allen: ME Dear Listeners, I have just recieve J.P.Allen: Middle Egyptian. It is something which one ought to have: excellent, and wonderfull, and smashing (and very comfortable - in my cat opinion). Everything in there is so simple and easy to learn that when I reach the end I will be an expert in ME for sure! But in the meantime (p.42) I would like to know why Sir. Allen's transliteration for word _scribe_ is _zHAw_ (not sS) ??? I can't find word _zHAw_ in my dictionaries (Faulkner,Hannig). Can anybody help? Thanks in advance, Grazyna Hello, Dr. Allen is on AEL, but to save him some time: I once asked him this very same question and he replied that the word you find in Gardiner and the dictionaries as sS is actually zXA: the reading sS is based on a rare OK instance where Y3/4 is spelled out with zS; in Old Egyptian, S was used both for S and for X; in this case it's for X, since the Coptic for "write" is sxai (< *ziXi', where '=A) and for "scribe," sax (< *ziX'aw). HTH Aayko Eyma From: "James P. Allen" To: Subject: AEL zXAw "Scribe" Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 18:14:38 -0500 Thank you for the nice review. I'm glad you find the book useful. The Egyptian word for "scribe" should be transcribed zXAw rather than sS. In Coptic the word "write" is sxai and the word "scribe" is sax, showing that the root was zXA: infinitive *zi-XiA' > sxai, noun of agent *ziX'-Au > sax (the * means a theoretical reconstruction; the stressed syllable is marked by ' at its end). The reading sS is based on two early examples with the phonetic complements z and S, but in early Egyptian S was used for X (4th h) as well as S, and Coptic shows that the consonant was X, not S. James P. Allen, Curator Department of Egyptian Art Metropolitan Museum of Art P.S. Gardiner was a "Sir" but I'm only a plain American "Mr." (or "Dr." professionally). ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 12:37:44 +0200 (CEST) From: Ugo Bessi To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL transliteration of scribe I gave another look at my book of Budge (Egyptian for Beginners) and at the end there is a small dictionary where scribe is "an", with the letter "ayn", i. e. the small arm. ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 21:41:03 -0400 From: "Aurelio LaRotta" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL transliteration of scribe Hi Ugo, Yes, I see what you mean, in *"Egyptian Language - Early Lessons in Egyptian Hieroglyphics"* he lists the sign and gives both: 9n (*an*) and sS as readings. In his dictionary, he lists 9n as a separate word with the meaning 'to paint', indicating that the sign could be used in isolation with that reading. Erman/Grapow has the same word (with phonetic complement, though) as a tentative entry for a verb (meaning not given) ... unfortunately, that's all I have on it, nothing more recent. Now, that's all pretty * ancient* Egyptology, though - could somebody with access to a newer dictionary help out? Best regards, Aurelio ============================================================================== From: "A.K. Eyma" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL transliteration of scribe Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 18:19:55 +0200 >>>I have a very stupid question on the egyptian word for scribe. For Budge, scribe is "ani"; for Gardiner and Faulkner, scribe is "ssh" (well, with the transliteration allowed by the computer...);<<< ** For those exist MdC codes: S = s with roof (sh) x = h with bow (kh) X = h with stroke (kh) a = ayin A = aleph >> for Allen and Hannig, scribe is "zha"; rather perplexed, I look up Champollion and find that scribe is "zha" for him too; it has come full circle! Now scribe is almost never written with alphabetical characters; with my limited reading, I found the alphabetical characters only in a stela in an anthology of Budge, where they were "ssh". None of these people explain the reason for their transliteration, at least in the books I have. This is as mysterious as the "n" in "hnkt", beer. Perhaps some of you has found, in the works of past egyptologist, some argument supporting their choices.<< **Not a stupid question at all. 1) s and z were originally used for different sounds, but since the MK they are used interchangably -- so you need not worry about the occassional use of s- in the word for scribe; but z- is the more common writing. 2) The sign N37 normally stands for S (hence older authors had read the word as sS). However, at the start of the OK, this sign N37 stood for X; but after the 3rd dyn., there was a palatatlization of X in many instances into S. So from now on, N37 stood for the new value S, and for the old value X a new sign was used, namely F32. 3) The word survives in Coptic (sax), showing that the word cannot be sS but has to be zH(Aw). As you can see in Hannig (p. 756 and 757) there is even a very rare hieroglyphic spelling with explicit X. 4) As it logically is an agent formation with .w, another consonant is needed, otherwise the first vowel would have ended up long. So *zvXCvw 5) That this consonant must be aleph seems to be attested in the goddess' name Seshat (sSAt). (Q: why is this name already written with s- in PT?). Also, as you can see in Hannig (p. 756 and 757) there is even a very rare writing with A spelled out. So: *zvXAvw ==> *záXAvw vowel based on the Coptic & vowel development rules. [Normally the á would have become Coptic o, but not so before X. See Schenkel.] And indeed, Vycichl and Loprino have the á. Why Allen prefers the í is not clear to me (*zíXAvw), seeing that the Akhmimic also has an _a_. That Champollion had it right is likely because he based himself on the Coptic? As to Budge's form "ani" -- my guess would be it has to do with any_ "writing board" (Faulkner p. 43)?? Aayko ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 23:20:40 +0100 From: "Mark-Jan Nederhof" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL re: James Hoch's Key I trust I will hear more about this. For now, I tested my (very old, to be revised) software on the key as far as it was made public by James Hoch himself, in his grammar and on the internet. http://www.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~mjn/egyptian/grammars/Hoch.html Look at Lesson I to see whether the current format is acceptable. (MdC for transliterations.) Hoch's key includes about half of the exercises, which shows he is very considerate of those doing self-study, like many of us poor souls, and if he objects to publication of a key to the other half, we should respect that, as I think we agree. We could well restrict ourselves to the first half of the exercises, and see whether further clarifications are in order. Mark-Jan ============================================================================== From: Ahatnakht@aol.com Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 03:19:14 EDT Subject: Re: AEL transliteration of scribe - and dictionaries! To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Hi Aurelio A suggestion for those of you who only seem to have access to Budge's dictionary - try the Thesaurus Linguae Aegyptiae http://aaew.bbaw.de/tla/index.html for a much more reliable, and on-line, dictionary. You have to register but that is free. The TLA is based on the Woerterbuch, although a German site (University of Berlin) it has largely been translated into English and you can search for words (just tick the box "translation" if you want it in English). And if you read German you also can access extensive and in-context references (with whole text passages), the digitized Woerterbuch and even the slip archive on which it is based (the latter often gives you variants on spelling and where they occurr). regards Mechthild Burton ahatnakht@aol.com ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 11:33:19 -0400 From: "Aurelio LaRotta" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL transliteration of scribe - and dictionaries! Hi Mechthild, Thanks a lot for posting this! I lost the link a while ago when my old laptop died and couldn't find it again :-( And, yes, Deutsch ist kein Problem ;-) Let me ask a follow-up question: I heard about plans to integrate reconstructed vocalizations into the TLA - that was a few years ago. Does anybody have news on that project? Best regards, Aurelio Regards from NJOn Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 3:19 AM, wrote: > Hi Aurelio > > A suggestion for those of you who only seem to have access to Budge's > dictionary - try the Thesaurus Linguae Aegyptiae > http://aaew.bbaw.de/tla/index.html for a much more reliable, and > on-line, dictionary. You have to register but that is free. > > The TLA is based on the Woerterbuch, although a German site (University of > Berlin) it has largely been translated into English and you can search for > words (just tick the box "translation" if you want it in English). And if > you > read German you also can access extensive and in-context references (with > whole text passages), the digitized Woerterbuch and even the slip archive > on > which it is based (the latter often gives you variants on spelling and > where they > occurr). > > regards > > Mechthild Burton > ahatnakht@aol.com > ==============================================================================