Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 18:38:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Geoffrey Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL AW: AEL AW: AEL Shipwrecked Sailor Oops, I forgot one other possibility! If it were noun/noun+(qualifying info), then the xpr could be governed by jr.y as a masculine noun, you are quite right. I am saying that it would be mj.t.y.t jr.y xpr.w "a representation of an appertinence which happened". This is very literal, but I think you catch my drift, don't you? It is not the likeness which is the subject of xpr, but the possessor of the likeness which is jr.y, meaning something like "that which pertains". Geoffrey Graham Yale University M.Phil. in Egyptology sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu http://pantheon.yale.edu/~sokar/index.html http://www.netins.net/showcase/ankh/eefmain.html ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 18:30:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Geoffrey Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL AW: AEL AW: AEL Shipwrecked Sailor Dear Stephen, > > Now, there is a problem, anyway. We have > > "mitt iry xpr m-a=i" > > and mitt looks feminine. > > Indeed mitt should be feminine. However in this case xpr is treated as > modifying the whole phrase "mitt iry" which is masculine - the final word in > the phrase is masculine, I believe. Egyptian seems to have contained quite a > number of "compound words" like this. Any way you look at it, it needs to be feminine. If it is noun/noun genitive, the first noun is still the one which should govern xpr. If it were noun/adjective, and the feminine ending were missing on jr.y(.t), it still would not change mjt.y.t into a masculine. Even as a "compound", and I am not sure this one exists per se, it should take the gender of the first element. How does the {r} look in this xpr? Could it conceivably be a {t}? Sometimes, {t} and {r} look identical in hieratic. Then it might be written {xpr}{t} for [xpr.tj]. Yours, Geoff Graham sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu ============================================================================== From: Michael Tilgner To: 'Ancient Egyptian Language List' Subject: Re: AEL Weni L7-8 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:05:51 +0200 Mike Dyall-Smith wrote: > Weni line 8. > I note the translation by Mark for the word 'wAb' (in line 8) is > "innocence". I can't find this definition in Faulkner or Hannig. In Hannig > the meanings are: > Root. > Root of the eye. > Eye-muscles. > > in the expression ' wAb Hr-ib' = "cheering for" (?)*. Must be confused with wab "to be pure, to be innnocent". Hannig, "Handwoerterbuch", p. 172, entry "wAb" in: wAb Hr ib [that is exactly the situation here] "delightful, pleasing for". > *Note: I got the translation from Hannig via a computer program so it may > be wrong. BTW, which computer program? Best wishes, Michael Tilgner mtilgner@baan.nl ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:41:48 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: AEL Weni L13 wpi.w-ir rDi.t wi Hm=f [13] sDm(=i) n iqr(=i) Hr ib n.i Hm=f ir sr=f nb ir saH=f nb ir bAk=f nb "... but his majesty caused me to listen." rDi.t looks like the infinitive, but it would be odd to have an infinitive with both subject and object, particularly with the object being a dependent pronoun. Is this really the infinitive?? Is sDm a prospective verb form (sDm.w=f)? It seems odd to me that both verbs refer to speaker via pronouns. "... because I was more excellent in the heart of his majesty than any of his officials, more than any of his dignitaries, more than any of his servants." The usual modest statements.... ;-) Regards, Mike D-S ************************************* Mike Dyall-Smith, Ph.D. Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, 3052 Australia Tel: +(613) 9344-5693 Fax: +(613) 9347-1540 e-m: m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au web: www.microbiol.unimelb.edu.au/mds/ ************************************* ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 00:35:33 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: AEL Weni L12 I think the next line that needed translation was: Last part of line 12: ni zp pAw mrw.t.w(=i) sDm s-StA n.i ipA.t-n.i-sw.t Dr bAH Never (lit. no time) was there my equal in hearing secrets of the royal harim before. Or, less literally: 'Never before was there one like me, who heared the secret issues of the royal harim.' ni zp (never, at no time) pAw (verb: "to have done in the past"). Used often as an auxilliarly verb before the infinitive (see Hoch, section 172) sDm (verb: to hear. Infinitive) s-StA (secret) n.i (gen. adj., 'of, belonging to')) ipA.t-n.i-sw.t (royal harim) Dr bAH (adverb, 'before, formerly') Can someone give me the syntax of this sentence. It looks decidedly nominal in character. The main verb (sDm) is the infinitive (so is nominal). Is pAw a participle (lit.' one who used to be'). Comments please Mike D-S ******************************** Mike Dyall-Smith, Melbourne, Australia m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ******************************** ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:20:06 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: AEL Weni L12, more Some more comments on the last sentence in L12 ni zp pAw mrw.t.w(=i) sDm s-StA n.i ipA.t-n.i-sw.t Dr bAH I should have mentioned that the tense is relative past since the negative construction is of the form n sDm=f (Gunn's Rule). So I may have to back up and revise this sentence as verbal, pAw being the conjugated verb form. I take the subject as mrw.t.w(=i), "my equal/one like me". Never (ni zp) before (Dr bAH, lit. 'since the beginning') did one like me hear the secrets of the royal harim. OK, I'll leave it there. Regards, Mike D-S ******************************** Mike Dyall-Smith, Melbourne, Australia m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ******************************** ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:54:15 -0400 (EDT) To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk From: Ogden Goelet Subject: AEL Shipwreck Dear Listers, The trouble that many have with mitt iry Xpr . . . might easily be resolved by remembering that mitt might simply be a "writing," i.e. a mostly epigraphic (as opposed to an orhtographic) feature, of the masculine word mity "a similarity, a like (thing)." The masuline singular (and plural) occasionally are used instead of the more usual feminine singular in expressing the neuter sense of a word. There are many times when it might be better to interpret a "-tt" in Egyptian as "-ty". Ogden Goelet ============================================================================== From: "Rohan Fenwick" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL AEL Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 16:37:53 PDT Hi everyone out there. What I would like to know is: Is the sDm.f form of suffix conjugation the ONLY verb conjugation? And what does the verb rDm.i mean? If anyone has a decent Ancient Egyptian dictionary or vocabulary, I'd like to hear from you. Thanks! A 14-year-old Egyptian Language freak Rohan Fenwick (rfenwick18@hotmail.com) Brisbane, Australia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ============================================================================== From: To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 09:06:52 +0200 Subject: Re: AEL Hieroglyphic translation question Dear Mr. Graham, > I am familiar with the Borghuts grammar of Late Egyptian which was not yet > published at the time that I had access to a photocopy used in a class > many years ago. Has this now been published? Perhaps you are refering to > a different book, though, because this one was written in English. The books I have are written in Dutch and contain two volumes: one with the grammar and one with exercises. The copyright notice is from 1993 and in the introduction there is a reference to an English book from him: 'Introduction to Middle Egyptian' which is in preparation, according to my book. It is possible that this book is now published. Maybe is this the book you mean. > Actually it would be 3w.t nfr.t in both cases, because the word You are so right! I use the demo version of Winglyph 1.2 for typesetting and, stupid me, just copied the text to my mail program without checking. thanks for pointing out. regards, Marc van Kollenburg m.v.kollenburg@kbi.nl Marc van Kollenburg e-mail: m.v.kollenburg@kbi.nl ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:40:55 -0700 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: preta@earthlink.net Subject: Re: AEL Needed: A Thorough Workbook! > Are any of you out there involved in writing such a workbook for non-geniuses >such as myself? Perhaps Dr. Hoch has a supplementary volume in the making? Just a thought, from an amateur...you might try Egyptian Hieroglyphs, an Easy Introduction for History and Art Students by Patrick F. O'Mara. Mainly wall carvings and drills of standardized texts with quizes for each chapter. Triszna Leszczyc preta@earthlink.net ============================================================================== From: To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:23:57 +0200 Subject: Re: AEL Hieroglyphic translation question Dear Geoff, Geoff wrote: > Actually it would be 3w.t nfr.t in both cases, because the word for > "gift" is feminine, ragardless of the gender of the child. After a re-reading your comment I have a question: Am I right, if I use this as a 'title', I must use the male or female determinative to indicate it's a male or a female 'title'? kind regards, > > Yours, Geoff Graham > sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu > > Marc van Kollenburg e-mail: m.v.kollenburg@kbi.nl ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:37:09 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: Re: AEL AEL Dear Rohan, The egyptian verb is a rather complex issue as only the consonants were written. There are several recognised verb forms, each with their particular usage and meaning. The sDm=f is but one of them. I would recommend you look at a recent grammar book (eg. Hoch). The more widely available grammar by Gardiner is also a good start. Feel free to ask any further questions. I looked up rDm and couldn't find anything in the dictionaries by Faulkner or Hannig. Perhaps you could state exactly where you got this word from (book, page and line) and we may be able to look at it. Regards, Mike D-S --------------------------- >Hi everyone out there. What I would like to know is: Is the sDm.f form >of suffix conjugation the ONLY verb conjugation? And what does the verb >rDm.i mean? If anyone has a decent Ancient Egyptian dictionary or >vocabulary, I'd like to hear from you. >Thanks! >A 14-year-old Egyptian Language freak >Rohan Fenwick (rfenwick18@hotmail.com) ------------------------------ ************************************* Mike Dyall-Smith, Ph.D. Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, 3052 Australia Tel: +(613) 9344-5693 Fax: +(613) 9347-1540 e-m: m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au web: www.microbiol.unimelb.edu.au/mds/ ************************************* ============================================================================== From: Hans van Haarst To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Hieroglyphic translation question Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 16:20:07 +0200 Beste Marc, De grammatica van Borghouts is uitstekend, maar niet eenvoudig. Een andere Nederlandse grammatica is die van L. Zonhoven. Deze is wat eenvoudiger en heeft bovendien veel oefeningen + de oplossingen. Daarnaast bevat het bekende teksten zoals de Schipbreukeling. Ook daarvan is een transliteratie en vertaling aanwezig. Als je geinteresseerd bent, laat het me weten. Ik kan je dan het adres geven, waar je het kunt kopen. Zelf heb ik Borghouts en Zonhoven doorgewerkt en ook alle oefeningen gemaakt. Hartelijke groeten, Hans van Haarst, email : hans@knor.demon.nl ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 20:57:12 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL AW: AEL AE/OK phonology Aayko Eyma wrote: > A. Egberts (Talanta 28/29), when tackling Bernal's > claim of Athena < H.t-n.t, collects examples > of _h.t_ ("house") in Greek and Coptic names and compositions. > As we would expect, the female .t drops away in most cases > (Coptic_ho_ etc.), but with a few exceptions, and these > share this 'law': > > _.t_ + _H_ (laryngeal spirant) => th (aspirated dental) > > like in: > H.t-Hry-jb -> Coptic Athrebe, Greek Athribis > H.t-Hr ->Coptic Hathor, Greek Athur (Athyr) > Nb.t-H.t -> Coptic Nebtho, Greek Nephthus (Nephthys) I was going to comment on this, but forgot. However no-one else seems to have responded since. Concerning the names you mention, where the final t is retained. Note that these are compounds, and that it is the first word of the compound that retains its final t. This is pointed up very well by the contrast of what happened to the word Hw.t ("estate") in Hw.t-Hr (t kept -> hathor) as opposed to nb.t-Hw.t (t lost -> nebtho). I would propose that these were not, since an early period, separated into words, but formed a single compound word. In many languages which form compounds there is a joining vowel when the first word ends in a consonant. Perhaps that is what is happening here. So instead of *Ha:wat_Ha:ru there was (something like) HawtiHa:ru And for ni:bat_Ha:wat there was *nibtHa:wat -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 07:52:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Geoffrey Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL AEL: Retention of Final /t/ Dear Stephen, > Concerning the names you mention, where the final t is retained. Note that > these are compounds, and that it is the first word of the compound that > retains its final t. This is pointed up very well by the contrast of what > happened to the word Hw.t ("estate") in Hw.t-Hr (t kept -> hathor) as opposed > to nb.t-Hw.t (t lost -> nebtho). > > I would propose that these were not, since an early period, separated into > words, but formed a single compound word. In many languages which form > compounds there is a joining vowel when the first word ends in a consonant. > Perhaps that is what is happening here. > > So instead of *Ha:wat_Ha:ru there was (something like) HawtiHa:ru > And for ni:bat_Ha:wat there was *nibtHa:wat This is very interesting. Do you have a theory about why names like Mut (as in the Greek version of p3-dj-mw.t => Petemouthis) and Neith (nEi) seem to have retained their final /t/s? If I am not mistaken the /t/ is also retained in Nut's name as well. I would tend to think that this indicates that these names may have had final weak consonants on them, which were not written. Note that the similar words mw.t and mwt meaning "mother" and "death" also come out differently in Coptic. mw.t "mother" becomes {maau} (*ma'u), whereas mwt "death" becomes {mou} (*mu:). One still has to wonder upon which word the Goddess Mut's name was based, since they seem to be separate words. One reconstruction for how the final /t/s remained intact on these three names is the following: Mut *mw.t.y.t *ma:watiyyat > *mawtiyya > *mu:ti > *mu:t? Nut *nw.t.y.t *na:watiyyat > *nawtiyya > *nu:ti > *nu:t? Neith *nj.t.y.t *nu:yatiyyat > *n:yetiyya > *ne:yeti > *ne:yit? This would be parallel to Bast's name, which, although only one {t} is often written, had to have had two of them. The Greek name was {bastis} and the modern toponym Tell Basta also preserves this name. Bast *b3s.t.y.t *ba:lsatiyyat > *ba:satiyya > *ba:sati > *basti? Yours, Geoff Graham sokar@minerva.cis.yale.edu ============================================================================== From: Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 15:53:45 EDT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL One Less Queen In the Harem? The reason I have not been doing too much work on "Weni", even though it is a nice, challenging text is that I got stuck early in the game on a certain passage. I couldn't get this business of the supposedly naughty queen, "wr.t-i3mt-s" out of my mind. To me, this just doesn't ring like crystal as the name of a queen here. Perhaps I just stared at the passage long enough until an idea came to me. Here's what I am thinking and some of you can perhaps tell me if it flies: In a translation of a passage just before this intriguing "name", it seems to say "I performed my duties in such a way as to secure His Majesty's approval, both when the Court was in residence and when it was travelling..." Then it struck me--perhaps what we have here is a traveling harem! I know, for example, that Ramesses II took his new foreign queen on a trip with him. I thought it was strange in a text from this period to have the feminine ending missing twice in both "Hm" and "wr" when these seemed to be well-remembered in the rest of the text. Also, I thought the determinative after the name to be rather an odd one for a queen's name. This det. is sometimes used to denote "the holy dead" and it has made some scholars feel the scribe was trying to indicate the "queen" had been killed because of some treachery. In that case, she would have been the "infamous dead" and may not have merited such a det., sometimes also used for "Sps". I am talking about the little bald-headed person holding what looks like a flail. Now I don't think it is a determinative in this section. What I think it might be is something to do with what is shown in the vocabulary in Budge's "An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Reading Book" on page 531 as the term "s-nDm" (to sit, to dwell, to make to sit, to encamp) with the exact same signs, the /s/ and the little bald person holding a flail as we have in the "name" in Weni! Also, we have the word "i3m.t" as a tent or some sort of building. Meanwhile, we have "i3m.t" as "graciousness, pleasantness, pleasure, things which please". In short, everything agreable that we might expect in a harem--when the king was visiting there, at least. Or maybe the "i3m.t" refers to some sort of tree. I also wouldn't be surprised if it had something to do with "shade" because that surely is the element implied in "i3m.t" as "tent". (see the "Battle of Kadesh") How do we put all these things together to make a dwelling? I'm not sure. If it is "i3m.t s-nDm"--this would be the name--or perhaps "wr i3m.t s-nDm", if that were possible. I have seen, in a title or name like this, the "wr" before a feminine noun. Of course, the "Hm nsw" would be the "royal harem". Or perhaps it is the "great royal harem", the "Hm nsw wr". So we have could have Snt xt m ipt-nsw r Hm nsw " Wr i3m.t s-nDm" m sSt3 Maybe the "m sSt3" even belongs to the name, itself. On this I have no opinion. It's doubtful, I suppose, probably pertaining to the secret "inquiry". So perhaps this is some kind of tent or pavillion or something we have and not a specific lady at all. Another funny thought has ocurred to me. What if the "Hm nsw" is a servant of the king, a eunuch, and his title is "Wr i3m.t s- nDm"? Could such a thing be remotely possible? Anybody have any idea what feasible name my ideas could translate to in English--if any? Marianne Luban ============================================================================== From: "Mark Vygus" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: AEL Weni L14-L16 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:12:33 +0100 L14 iri.n Hm=f mSa n.i Dba.w aSA.w His majesty made an army of many tens of thousands m Sma.w mrw-qd=f xnt.i m Abw mH.w.t m mdn.i.t from all of Upper Egypt, south to Yebu, north to Medenit m tA-mH.w m gs.wi prw mrw-qd=sni from Lower Egypt, to "Two-sides-of-the-House" (the Delta) L15 m sDr m Xnw -sDr.w from Sedjer to Khen-sediru m nHs.i.w irT.t nHs.i.w mDA nHs.i.w iAm from the Irtjet-Nubians, the Medja-Nubians, the Yam-Nubians L16 m nHs.i.w wAwA.t m nHs.i.w kAAw mtA-TmH hAb wi Hm=f Xr.i-HAt mSa pn from the Wawat-Nubians, from the Kaau-Nubians,from Tjemeh-land. His majesty sent me at the head of this army Mark V nsw-bit@msn.com ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:02:51 +0100 From: grym@trybunal.gov.pl (Rymaszewska Grazyna) To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Weni L13 Dear Mike, let me know, please, why there is 1) in L12: _mrw.t.w(=i)_ instead of _mi.tw_ (Faulkner) 2) in L13: _rDi.t_ instead of -rdi.t_ Is it deliberately? Yours sincerely, Grazyna Mike Dyall-Smith wrote: > > wpi.w-ir rDi.t wi Hm=f [13] sDm(=i) n iqr(=i) Hr ib n.i Hm=f > ir sr=f nb ir saH=f nb ir bAk=f nb > > "... but his majesty caused me to listen." > rDi.t looks like the infinitive, but it would be odd to have an infinitive > with both subject and object, particularly with the object being a > dependent pronoun. Is this really the infinitive?? Is sDm a prospective > verb form (sDm.w=f)? It seems odd to me that both verbs refer to speaker > via pronouns. > > "... because I was more excellent in the heart of his majesty than any of > his officials, more than any of his dignitaries, more than any of his > servants." > > The usual modest statements.... ;-) > > Regards, Mike D-S > > ************************************* > Mike Dyall-Smith, Ph.D. > Department of Microbiology and Immunology, > University of Melbourne, > 3052 Australia > > Tel: +(613) 9344-5693 > Fax: +(613) 9347-1540 > e-m: m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au > web: www.microbiol.unimelb.edu.au/mds/ > ************************************* ============================================================================== From: Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:21:44 EDT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL Other recommended books? While we're on the subject of books for learning hieroglyphs, what are the basic materials in addition to the Hoch or Gardiner? What I mean is, is there a standard corpus of literature used by all serious learners of AE? For example: serious Bible students use the Bible + Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. Jews use the Torah + the Talmud. Muslims use the Qur'an + the Hadith. *Egyptologists use the Hoch (or Gardiner) + the _____________ [please fill in the blank : ) ]. A Toute A l'Heure! Michael Akard Modesto, California ============================================================================== From: Aayko Eyma To: 'Ancient Egyptian Language List' Subject: AEL Shipwrecked Sailor lines 3-6 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 20:17:09 +-200 Hi all, There were some irregular determinatives, but most words could be recognized in Faulkner anyhow: (3-6) Ssp xrpw Hwj mnj.t H3.t.t rdj.t Hr t3 rdj Hknw dw3 nTr s-nb Hr Hpt snw=f = There is taking (of)(the) mallet, there is hitting (the) mooring post, the bow-warp is being given at land, There is giving praise, there is worshipping (the) god, while everyone embraces his companion. -- the technical terms likely must be translated a bit differently, just did it literally again. What's a mallet (wooden hammer) in this context - serves as bell to announce the ship arriving?? strike the post - cf. our 'hit the shore'? :) the ship's ropes being given to the people standing at the docks to tie them to a pole, I guess. Hr before an infinitive means "on, while" Is the case here? How would the last line (pseudoverbal construction I believe) be literally? "every man (is) in embrasing (mode)"? :) The verbs as usual puzzle me. No endings and then suddenly that rdj.t, which only matches Old Perfective .t(j) I guess. I first had rdj=t ("one", impersonal affix =t(w) ) but that would not fit the word order, right? The other verbs are impersonal, so something like "there is... -ing", I think to understand. Let it come :) Aayko Eyma ============================================================================== From: Aayko Eyma To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Shipwrecked Sailor line 1-3 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 20:17:04 +-200 Dear all, As most problems were in lines 21-27, I leave that till then, and continue in the regular order. > line 1-3a > Dd.jn Sms.w jqr wD3 jb=k H3t.j-' m=k pH.n=n Xnw Which gave [comments of others added]: > Thereupon [then] the excellent follower [skilled courtier] said > May your heart be well, prince [mayor] - Look, we >have reached home!" Stephen wrote: >Dd.in=f is a past tense form which implies continuation from something else (I tend to think of it as being similar in meaning to the Hebrew waw-consecutive) - "And he said". Whether there is an implication that something had preceded this in the story, I'm not sure. Perhaps the story teller wanted to give the feeling that something had happened previously, but wasn't going to elaborate. Any thoughts on this? ***Borghouts says something like this: - sDm.in=f becomes via the particle .in a form that indicates a new action, with emphasis on the newness of the subject (rather than the verb). A 'continuation-action'. "then/thereupon HE heard/hears" - Often used in narrative contexts[*], especially in contexts where events and subjects alternate, and then it normally expresses past. [*] so very often used for Dd Does the first point mean this particle is derived from preposition (i)n "by"? So "And (then) said by X..... and (then) said by Y.....etc."? But in our case there is nothing happening previously, like Stephen says. Hmm. Apparantly it is presumed that the prince has addressed the guy first, as it would be unthinkable the lesser in rank would make his speach without permission? "And now HE had his say" Brunner only says: "sDmjnf: result or sequel, particularly in the past; outstanding incident in narrative: "thereupon". Only in main clauses. " Dd.in is "said by" in Faulkner p.325. kind regards, Aayko Eyma ============================================================================== From: Aayko Eyma To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL AW: AEL AE/OK phonology Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 20:17:16 +-200 Thanks for the answer Stephen. Yes I agree it's the 'compoundness' that prevents the .t from dropping 'normally' (contrary to when it stands at the end). But the puzzle I addressed was rather why it remains in some compounds and not in others compounds. Watch it drop in: AE -> Coptic -> Greek H.t-w'r.t - Avaris Hr-wr > H(w).t-wr Houor Hur (a city) H(w).t-sxmt >Hw.t Hou Hu (Arab: Hiw) t3-H.t-nbwnn - Thunabounoun (a funerary temple) H.t-nn-nsw Hnes (Arab: Ahnas el-Medinah) H.t-nTr (temple) henete (monastry) H.t-Snfrw > Hsfn - Asphunis (Arab: Asfun) H.t-k3-PtH - Aikuptos, Aigyptos H.t-t3-rpyt Atripe Triphion (>H(w).t-rpt ?) Some of these may be debatable, like Hu (short form does have .t at end) and Triphion (second component has t at start). So how to explain the difference with the compounds below, that do loose the .t at the end of the first component? 1) The compounds below are compounds formed when the .t in general was not yet dropped, and hence the t survived in the compound also, got 'frozen' in time; the compounds above were formed after the .t became dropped in the single words, hence it also was not present in the compound either. And attractive explanation IMO. However, labelling one old and another young would be an arbitrary prepropostion, or not? Would HtnTr not be very old f.e.? Hence another option: 2) They were all old compounds, and also in compounds the t dropped, unless some special rule prevented that. And as all the exceptions below happen to have an H at the beginning of the second component - is that coincidence? So what I wondered about is which explanation seems most likely to you all, and whether there are other such examples. Aayko Eyma > A. Egberts (Talanta 28/29), when tackling Bernal's > claim of Athena < H.t-n.t, collects examples > of _h.t_ ("house") in Greek and Coptic names and compositions. > As we would expect, the female .t drops away in most cases > (Coptic_ho_ etc.), but with a few exceptions, and these > share this 'law': > > _.t_ + _H_ (laryngeal spirant) => th (aspirated dental) > > like in: > H.t-Hry-jb -> Coptic Athrebe, Greek Athribis > H.t-Hr ->Coptic Hathor, Greek Athur (Athyr) > Nb.t-H.t -> Coptic Nebtho, Greek Nephthus (Nephthys) I was going to comment on this, but forgot. However no-one else seems to have responded since. Concerning the names you mention, where the final t is retained. Note that these are compounds, and that it is the first word of the compound that retains its final t. This is pointed up very well by the contrast of what happened to the word Hw.t ("estate") in Hw.t-Hr (t kept -> hathor) as opposed to nb.t-Hw.t (t lost -> nebtho). I would propose that these were not, since an early period, separated into words, but formed a single compound word. In many languages which form compounds there is a joining vowel when the first word ends in a consonant. Perhaps that is what is happening here. So instead of *Ha:wat_Ha:ru there was (something like) HawtiHa:ru And for ni:bat_Ha:wat there was *nibtHa:wat -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 20:37:14 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Shipwrecked Sailor line 1-3 Aayko Eyma wrote: > > line 1-3a > > Dd.jn Sms.w jqr wD3 jb=k H3t.j-' m=k pH.n=n Xnw > > Which gave [comments of others added]: > > > Thereupon [then] the excellent follower [skilled courtier] said > > May your heart be well, prince [mayor] - Look, we > >have reached home!" > ***Borghouts says something like this: > - sDm.in=f becomes via the particle .in a form that > indicates a new action, with emphasis on the newness > of the subject (rather than the verb). A 'continuation-action'. > "then/thereupon HE heard/hears" > - Often used in narrative contexts[*], especially in contexts > where events and subjects alternate, and then it > normally expresses past. [*] so very often used for Dd According to Hoch, Dd.in is used in cases where there is a change of speaker: Then [SPEAKER1] said...... Then [SPEAKER2] said... In the case of this story, this doesn't seem to work very well, since there isn't really an alternation of speakers. In any case this form is used only here and in line 111 (which is not rubricated). > Does the first point mean this particle is derived > from preposition (i)n "by"? So "And (then) said by X..... > and (then) said by Y.....etc."? I think it is probably more related to the "ergative" particle in, which Loprieno discusses in _Ancient Egyptian_. > But in our case there is nothing happening previously, like > Stephen says. Hmm. Apparantly it is presumed that > the prince has addressed the guy first, as it would > be unthinkable the lesser in rank would make his speach > without permission? "And now HE had his say" Well, how certain are we that there was nothing else preceding the story as we know it? > Dd.in is "said by" in Faulkner p.325. I'm not sure which part of that you are referring to. He has 'r Dd in' meaning "spoken by" used at the beginning of letters. And he has 'Dd mdw in' which actually means "Words (to be) spoken by..." In either case, that is not the construction here. By the way, the only other verb which commonly occurs in this form is wn. -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 22:03:02 -0700 From: Stephen Fryer To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Shipwrecked Sailor lines 3-6 Aayko Eyma wrote: > (3-6) > Ssp xrpw > Hwj mnj.t > H3.t.t rdj.t Hr t3 > rdj Hknw dw3 nTr > s-nb Hr Hpt snw=f > There is taking (of)(the) mallet, > there is hitting (the) mooring post, > the bow-warp is being given at land, > There is giving praise, there is worshipping (the) god, > while everyone embraces his companion. > > -- > the technical terms likely must be > translated a bit differently, just did it literally again. > What's a mallet (wooden hammer) in this > context - serves as bell to announce the ship > arriving?? > strike the post - cf. our 'hit the shore'? :) > the ship's ropes being given to the people standing > at the docks to tie them to a pole, I guess. The image is of a "Viking landing" - You take a hammer and a post from the ship onto the shore and pound the post into the ground, then tie the mooring rope to that. (Of course in the Viking case, they usually had to drill a hole in a rock for a mooring spike - leaving clues to their travels for diligent archaeologists.) > > Hr before an infinitive means "on, while" > Is the case here? How would the last line > (pseudoverbal construction I believe) be literally? > "every man (is) in embrasing (mode)"? :) > > The verbs as usual puzzle me. > No endings and then suddenly that > rdj.t, which only matches Old Perfective .t(j) > I guess. > I first had rdj=t ("one", impersonal affix =t(w) ) > but that would not fit the word order, right? > The other verbs are impersonal, so something > like "there is... -ing", I think to understand. Well, let's try a slightly different transliteration, with those first two verbs a passive past tenses (sDm.w form) Ssp(w) xrpw The hammer has been taken up Hw(w) mnit The mooring post has been struck The next sentence switches to the stative form (feminine to match HAt.t "bow rope") HAt.t rdi.t(i) Hr tA The bow rope has been placed on land Note the difference in word order - both are passive past tenses, but the word order is reversed for the two forms: Perf. Passive [VERB] [NOUN] Stative [NOUN] [VERB] Then back to perfect passive for dwA nTr God has been thanked Then from things which are finished, to something on-going as he speaks s nb Hr Hpt sn-nw=f Every man is hugging his companion The word sn-nw means literally "second" and reminds me rather of the Greek saying "O philos estin allos autos," (A friend is another - or second - self). Remember that the "Hr sDm" form is the present progressive tense (is hearing). -- Stephen Fryer Lund Computer Services ************************************************** The more answers I find, the more questions I have ************************************************** ============================================================================== Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 22:10:20 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: Re: AEL Weni L13 Grazyna wrote: >let me know, please, why there is >1) in L12: _mrw.t.w(=i)_ instead of _mi.tw_ (Faulkner) >2) in L13: _rDi.t_ instead of -rdi.t_ >Is it deliberately? The transliterations were Geoff's and according to Hannig (er, and Geoff!) these writings correspond to the early egyptian forms of the words. They changed somewhat over time until the middle egyptian forms (as given in Faulkner). Regards, Mike D-S ******************************** Mike Dyall-Smith, Melbourne, Australia m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ******************************** ============================================================================== Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:29:54 -0400 (EDT) From: Geoffrey Graham To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Shipwrecked Sailor lines 3-6 Dear Aayko, I have small modifications to your translation. > (3-6) > Ssp xrpw Szp.w xrp.w > Hwj mnj.t Hwj.w mjnj.t > H3.t.t rdj.t Hr t3 H3t.y.t rdj.tj Hr t3 > rdj Hknw dw3 nTr rdj.w Hkn.w dw3.w nTr > s-nb Hr Hpt snw=f zj nb Hr Hpt snw.w=f > There is taking (of)(the) mallet, The mallet has been taken, > there is hitting (the) mooring post, the mooring post has been struck, > the bow-warp is being given at land, the bow-line is put to shore, > There is giving praise, there is worshipping (the) god, praises are given, and the god is adored, > while everyone embraces his companion. and every man is embracing his peers. > the technical terms likely must be > translated a bit differently, just did it literally again. > What's a mallet (wooden hammer) in this > context - serves as bell to announce the ship > arriving?? No, to drive in the mooring post, most likely. > strike the post - cf. our 'hit the shore'? :) No, literatly to drive in the mooring post, so you can tie the ship to it. > the ship's ropes being given to the people standing > at the docks to tie them to a pole, I guess. Yes. > Hr before an infinitive means "on, while" > Is the case here? How would the last line > (pseudoverbal construction I believe) be literally? > "every man (is) in embrasing (mode)"? :) Yes, I think the situation is all set up and the result of all these past actions referred to in the passive sDm.w=f and with Old Perfectives is that the people are now in the process of rejoicing at being home. The narrator of the story is trying to emphaize why the captain should be joyful just like everyone else. > The verbs as usual puzzle me. > No endings and then suddenly that > rdj.t, which only matches Old Perfective .t(j) > I guess. The verbs are almost all pssive forms, and the w ending was not written often because it was a weak consonant. rdj.t is, as you have noticed, really rdj.tj. > I first had rdj=t ("one", impersonal affix =t(w) ) > but that would not fit the word order, right? > The other verbs are impersonal, so something > like "there is... -ing", I think to understand. Right, the Old Perfective comes after its subject. The sDm=f comes before it. THe verbs are sDm.w=f passives and an Old Perfective. Yours, Geoff ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:37:26 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: Re: AEL Weni L14-L16 Thanks Mark for your translation:- >L14 >iri.n Hm=f mSa n.i Dba.w aSA.w >His majesty made an army of many tens of thousands The meaning is plain, regardless of what school of grammar you follow. A verbal sentence, past tense. Weni is narrating a story (of his life). a) The initial verb form is bare, and appears to be the simple sDm.n=f. It could be a 'second tense' form: this never shows gemination in the sDm.n=f and begins sentences without particles. In the latter case it would give emphasis to an adverbial comment (the where, how, why, when of the situation), but I can't see anything adverbial (eg. beginnng with a preposition), so I will stick with the sDm.n=f. b) Subject is nominal (Hm=f), 'his majesty' c) Predicate is verbal: "made (/marshalled, prepared) and army of ... etc" The next sentence begins with a bare verbal form again. >L16 >hAb wi Hm=f Xr.i-HAt mSa pn >His majesty sent me at the head of this army The verb form I take as the indicative sDm=f, a commonly used past tense form in old egyptian. Loprieno states that the sDm.n=f is a present perfect form (or originally with that connotation), and the indicative sDm=f as a real preterite. a) Subject is nominal (Hm=f), 'his majesty' b) Direct object is pronominal (wi), 'me'. c) Verbal predicate ("sent me at the head of this army"), which includes an adverbial phrase. So can anyone comment on the alternation between sDm.n=f and indicative sDm=f ??? Regards, Mike D-S ******************************** Mike Dyall-Smith, Melbourne, Australia m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ******************************** ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:39:33 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: AEL german translation Dear M. Tilgner, >> *Note: I got the translation from Hannig via a computer program so it may >> be wrong. >BTW, which computer program? I use 'German Assistant' by MicroTac for the Mac, but it runs like it was converted from a PC version by an assault with a large blunt instrument. It is cheap but pretty terrible. The AltaVista translation service on the web is about as good if not better. I find that 'egyptological german' is almost impenetrable. I even showed a piece of recent 'egyptological german' to a german university student and she had great difficulty understanding it! Perhaps I should spend time learning german, but I have so little time anyway it is a problem.... ;-) Regards, Mike ******************************** Mike Dyall-Smith, Melbourne, Australia m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ********************************