Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:27:44 +1100 To: "'Ancient Egyptian Language List'" From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: AEL Gardiner Ex 2 I eventually tracked down a fair bit of discussion in the archives. But if anyone wants to contribute postings that were off list to me then I would greatly appreciate it. I am organising the material to put up on the web (under AEL but at the CCER site). I've even got a nice picture of Sir Al (did he have a nickname?), and some biographical comments (by Faulkner). Any suggestions welcome. Regards, Mike D-S ----------------------------------------------------------- Dr Mike Dyall-Smith, Dept. Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, 3052 Australia Tel: +61 3 9 344 5693 Fax: +61 3 9347 1540 e-mail: m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ----------------------------------------------------------- ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 22:02:29 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner Ex 2 Bob Vigliotti wrote: >Would love to see a picture of "Sir Al" and the biographical comments by >Faulkner that you referred to. Is it possible to download them? I haven't got to the stage of putting it up yet, I'm still checking out the posted material etc., but below is the biographical stuff and attached is a jpeg of Gardiner, at 70 yo. Regards, Mike D-S ------------------------------------------------------ SIR ALAN HENDERSON GARDINER Born 29/3/1879 - Died19/12/1963 He died from a stroke in his 85th year, but had been sick for some time before this. The picture above was taken when he was 70, and still in good health. At that time (1949) he had the following distinctions, offices and affiliations: D.Litt., F.B.A. Hon. Fellow of the Queen's College, Oxford Vice-President of the EES, Hon. Member of the Danish and Bavarian Academies of Science, Corresponding Member of the Berlin Academy of Sciences, The American Philosophical Society, and L'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Membre Associe de L'institu t D'egypte. An early enthusiast of ancient egyptian history and language, he came under the influence of Wallis Budge (Keeper of the Dept. of Egyptian and Assyrian antiquities, British Museum) at the age of 15. He went on to study under Gaston Maspero in the Sorbonne, and then went to Oxford. He had published several articles before the age of 20, and later was one of the founding scholars of the Journal of Egyptian Archaeology (JEA). His steady stream of publications brought recognition from Germany, and he was invited to be a sub-editor of the Worterbuch, where he met Erman and K. Sethe. He was appointed as Reader in Egyptology at Manchester University (1914-18) but did not like teaching, and never again took up a teaching post. He was able to continue his academic pursuits (at his home in Holland Park) because he was fortunate to come from a wealthy family. From his home, he gave weekly classes in egyptian to those whom he thought would benefit (R.O. Faulkner was one such student). Later, as editor of the JEA, he took Battiscombe Gunn as his assistant. Gunn was a brilliant young scholar and their discussions spurred them on to produce some of the most important works in modern egyptology: Gardiner his "Egyptian Grammar" and Gunn his "Studies in Egyptian Syntax". Unfortunately Gunn devoted his later years to teaching and published relatively little. Gardiner maintained a busy schedule and went on to publish numerous papers, acted in most capacities of the EES (Chairman, Vice-President, President), and helped many aspiring egyptologists. His most important monument is his 'Egyptian Grammar' and remains famous amongst egyptologists throughout the english-speaking world. Sources: Obituary by R.O. Faulkner in JEA (1964) 50:170-172; Editorial Foreword, JEA (1949) 35 ---------------------------------------------------- ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 00:45:40 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner Exercise IV Ivo Marinov wrote: > 1. A son is good if he listens to his father when he is a child, and > places this advice in his heart and > remembers it every day; look, one says about him that he > is free from every evil. > nfr sA sDm=f n it=f iw=f m Xrd rdi=f sxr pn > m ib=f sxA=f sw ra nb mk tw Dd.tw r=f Sw sw m Dw.t nb.t This is quite a long piece of text and has a lot of interesting bits. Starts out with a typical 'nfr sw' sentence (bipartite nominal syntax) with adjectival predicate (nfr, good). Now, I always have trouble identifying the subject of these things. Why can't I say that the nominal subject is the entire statement: sA sDm=f it=f iw=f m Xrd rdi=f sxr pn m ib=f sxA=f sw ra nb ie. "A/The son who obeys his father as a child and who places this counsel in his heart, and who remembers it every day" Can someone give an opinion on the verb forms involved here? I take them as aorist/circumstantial forms. The predicate is simply "GOOD". Getting it into reasonable english would be something like: "A good son is one who obeys his father when a child and keeps this rule in his mind and remembers it every day." The second sentence begins with the particle mk ('see'), and is followed by:- tw, 2nd person dep. pronoun, masc. I don't think it is the passive 'one'. What do others think? Dd.tw, I take this as a passive form of the (present tense) aorist/circumstantial sDm=f form. r=f, concerning him A sentence showing bipartite nominal syntax, with sw being the subject and Sw..m Dw.t being the predicate (?). Sw sw m Dw.t, "he is free of evil". Dw.t is a nominal form of the adjective Dw (evil, bad), so means badness, evil. Well, that is only the first one and it has taken me about an hour to puzzle through. Hope this prompts some discussion. Regards, Mike D-S ******************************** Mike Dyall-Smith, Melbourne, Australia m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ******************************** ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 20:08:49 -0700 From: Patrick De Smet - Rodrigues To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL "The Glyph" Abu Elisha wrote: > > What is "The Glyph?" > > Michael Dear Michael, Could you be referring to the hieroglyphic text processing software called "Glyph (for Windows)"? In that case, have a look at the "CCER" website (Center for Computer-aided Egyptological Research at the University of Utrecht, Holland): http://www.ccer.ggl.ruu.nl/ccer/ Search for "Glyph". Otherwise, please give more details. Yours, Patrick De Smet - Rodrigues udjat@skynet.be Udjat, Eye in the Sky ============================================================================== Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 13:34:38 -0700 From: Ron Fellows To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL "The Glyph" Correction to itinerary page: http://www.web-sculptors.com/glyph/itin.html Ron Fellows wrote: > > Greetings, Abu: > > The Glyph is a quarterly publication of the Archaeological Institute of > America, San Diego Society and also the name of our web-site. The > web-site is now being updated to include a pictorial itinerary of our > trip to Egypt in January, 1998. We'll go again in November 1998. See it > at http://www.web-sculptors.com/glyph/open.html and come back soon to > see Assignment: Egypt if that page link is not yet added. OR, check the > incomplete page at http://www.web-scuptors.com/glyph/itin.html > Hey, and come along with us in November. > Ron Fellows, CM, Editor > > Abu Elisha wrote: > > > > What is "The Glyph?" > > > > Michael ============================================================================== From: "Mark Wilson" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 23:19:50 +0000 Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner Exercise IV Hi Mike, I think you've come up with some interesting questions here! > This is quite a long piece of text and has a lot of interesting bits. > > Starts out with a typical 'nfr sw' sentence (bipartite nominal syntax) with > adjectival predicate (nfr, good). Now, I always have trouble identifying > the subject of these things. Why can't I say that the nominal subject is > the entire statement: sA sDm=f it=f iw=f m Xrd rdi=f sxr pn m ib=f sxA=f sw > ra nb I'm not sure, but can this clause stand on its own as a nominal clause? It seems a bit strange to start with a noun (sA) in this way. Could it be more likely that sA is the subject, but that it is modified by a relative clause beginning with sDm=f it=f ... etc.? That would make all the verbs in the sentence circumstantial, if I am not mistaken. ;-) > The second sentence begins with the particle mk ('see'), and is followed by:- > tw, 2nd person dep. pronoun, masc. I don't think it is the passive 'one'. > What do others think? This is a very interesting question. I hadn't noticed this the first time I did this exercise. In section 47 of his grammar, Gardiner suggests "behold one, one says" for mk tw Dd=tw, but it seems to me that there are 3 pronouns here, not two, given that mk itself contains the 2nd masc. sing. suffix pronoun. I wonder if it means "See him, one says concerning him that he is free from every evil" or more literally "See thou him, one says concerning him... " > Dd.tw, I take this as a passive form of the (present tense) > aorist/circumstantial sDm=f form. > r=f, concerning him > A sentence showing bipartite nominal syntax, with sw being the subject > and Sw..m Dw.t being the predicate (?). Sw sw m Dw.t, "he is free of evil". > Dw.t is a nominal form of the adjective Dw (evil, bad), so means badness, > evil. This sounds reasonable, unless anyone else has something to add. It's amazing what interesting goodies you can find in these exercises! Best wishes, -- Mark Wilson weneg@rostau.demon.co.uk http://www.rostau.demon.co.uk/AEgyptian-L/index.html ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 22:41:26 +0200 From: Serge Rosmorduc To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner Exercise IV Mike Dyall-Smith 'ecrit : > Ivo Marinov wrote: > > 1. A son is good if he listens to his father when he is a child, and > > places this advice in his heart and > > remembers it every day; look, one says about him that he > > is free from every evil. > > nfr sA sDm=f n it=f iw=f m Xrd rdi=f sxr pn > > m ib=f sxA=f sw ra nb mk tw Dd.tw r=f Sw sw m Dw.t nb.t > > This is quite a long piece of text and has a lot of interesting bits. > > Starts out with a typical 'nfr sw' sentence (bipartite nominal syntax) with > adjectival predicate (nfr, good). Now, I always have trouble identifying > the subject of these things. Why can't I say that the nominal subject is > the entire statement: sA sDm=f it=f iw=f m Xrd rdi=f sxr pn m ib=f sxA=f sw > ra nb > ie. "A/The son who obeys his father as a child and who places this counsel > in his heart, and who remembers it every day" Can someone give an opinion > on the verb forms involved here? I take them as aorist/circumstantial > forms. As far as strict grammar is concerned, sDm=f is not "who obeys". You would have a relative form : * "nfr sA sDm it=f...." You are right about sDm : it is a very likely a circumstantial form. Hence a translation "when he obeys...." is likely. "if he obeys" is also a possible choice, and, at last, "a son who obeys" is also a possible translation. Please note the following : a) The grammar is the same in the three cases above. The difference is mostly in the choice of English rendition. b) the rendition "a son who obeys" correspond to what Gardiner calls "virtual relative clauses", which is the way the egyptian made relative clauses when the subject was undefined. I would transliterate the following sentence : di=f sxr pn m ib=f, sxA=f sw ra nb because the 'r' is not written. In which case, you have a prospective sDm=f. The translation can be : "A son is good... full stop. May he place this advice in his heart, and remember it every day. Lo, ..." > > The predicate is simply "GOOD". > Getting it into reasonable english would be something like: > "A good son is one who obeys his father when a child and keeps this rule in > his mind and remembers it every day." > > The second sentence begins with the particle mk ('see'), and is followed by:- > tw, 2nd person dep. pronoun, masc. I don't think it is the passive 'one'. > What do others think? It must be "one", because of the "tw" which follows Dd. It is the form iw=f sDm=f with "tw" as subject : Lo, one (usually) says ... > Dd.tw, I take this as a passive form of the (present tense) > aorist/circumstantial sDm=f form. > r=f, concerning him > A sentence showing bipartite nominal syntax, with sw being the subject > and Sw..m Dw.t being the predicate (?). Sw sw m Dw.t, "he is free of evil". > Dw.t is a nominal form of the adjective Dw (evil, bad), so means badness, > evil. (A note to people working chiefly from Gardiner : All of the translations proposed here by the various mailers are "Gardinerly correct". If you are a beginner and found one of them, that's quite good.) regards, Serge Rosmorduc ============================================================================== From: Nubkhas Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 17:44:07 EDT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL Re: Emperor names (Late Egyptian constructions?) Aayko Eyma wrote: >>I think you basically would need confirmation of the chnum ram and the cheper beetle; the rest could be put down in your paper as a fairly good bluff.... :P....not much choise with a deadline like yours...? :) Aayko just having fun>> I have no idea what the ram and the kheper beetle mean in the context of the Emperor names without seeing the actual glyphs, but I came across something in Antonio Loprieno's "Ancient Egyptian" (page 24) along these same lines. It has to do with Ptolemaic "cryptography" and involves the sequence *the beetle, an odd lizard, the feather, seated Khum ram*. Loprieno says: "Here the scarab, which is usually read 'xpr', is used with the acrophonic value 'h (underlined)', the lizard (unusual in this shape in the classical system) with the value 'n' and the feather, originally 'm3' ', with the acrophonic value 'm'; at the same time this combination of signs evokes special qualities of the god: his assimillation to the sun god Re through the scarab, through the funerary god Nehebkau through the reptile, and to the principle of Maat (truth, justice) through the feather." Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 11:48:04 +1100 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner Exercise IV From Mark and Serge's comments we seem to have a problem. If we take Gardiner's questions as they stand then we have to do a lot of explaining! A simpler route would be to alter them slightly so that they are reasonable for the level they are aimed at. It would be easier for everyone concerned. In later chapters we could cite sections of Hoch (perhaps give summaries) and explain Gardiners examples (without any changes) in terms of modern theory. Just a suggestion. Regards, Mike ----------------------------------------------------------- Dr Mike Dyall-Smith, Dept. Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, 3052 Australia Tel: +61 3 9 344 5693 Fax: +61 3 9347 1540 e-mail: m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ----------------------------------------------------------- ============================================================================== From: ApeLucy Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 08:47:42 EDT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL AEL: AE/OK phonology I am a new listmember & I am interested in finding out more resources (by that, I mean "beyond Loprieno's _Ancient Egyptian_") regarding recent work on the reconstruction of Archaic and Old Kingdom Egyptian - ie., not the grammar, but the phonology (understanding, of course, that you can't learn one without the other, particularly in Afroasiatic verbs...). I was thrilled and irritated bu Loprieno's approach, which was the first one I was exposed to that dealt with the theorised underlying sounds... now I want MORE! please respond either to the AEL list or privately to urnammak@aol.com. -the Hound of Namma ============================================================================== From: Aayko Eyma To: "AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk" Subject: AEL AW: AEL Re: Emperor names (Late Egyptian constructions?) Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 21:09:17 +-200 >I have no idea what the ram and the kheper beetle mean in the context of the Emperor names without seeing the actual glyphs, but I came across something in Antonio Loprieno's "Ancient Egyptian" (page 24) along these same lines. It has to do with Ptolemaic "cryptography" and involves the sequence *the beetle, an odd lizard, the feather, seated Khum ram*. Loprieno says: "Here the scarab, which is usually read 'xpr', is used with the acrophonic value 'h (underlined)', the lizard (unusual in this shape in the classical system) with the value 'n' and the feather, originally 'm3' ', with the acrophonic value 'm'; at the same time this combination of signs evokes special qualities of the god: his assimillation to the sun god Re through the scarab, through the funerary god Nehebkau through the reptile, and to the principle of Maat (truth, justice) through the feather." Marianne Luban ***Thank you Marianne! As you may remember this acrophonic principle was behind most of my transcription suggestions. (With one mistake: the red crown n.t. already earlier had the value n, so that was not a Greek-Roman thing, apparantly). However, this principle did/does not fit for the beetle, it being the first sign of ?-rjynz 3trynz = Traianus Hadrianus. But as Baines and Malek noted, at that time one sign could have many values (f.e. N37 - s,S,X,x,n,n,jnr) and one sound could be expressed by many signs (f.e. m by more than 25 signs!). So the script had lost all its economical use, and became a cryptographic game. Your example makes that even more clear. No wonder the Classical writers had such esoteric ideas about the hieroglyphs, which hampered the decypherment for centuries! Let's drink to Champollion! kind regards, Aayko ============================================================================== Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 20:46:30 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: Re: AEL AEL: AE/OK phonology Dear urnammak (?), I'm impressed you managed to get through Antonio's small but (to me) difficult book. Can you describe your irritations about his efforts (not too technical please). It is an area that is decribed in the trade as one of "scholarly debate". Antonio posted to the AEL last year and stated that people who really wanted to know about phonology should consult the standard works: which are all in german. Stephen Fryer has an interest in this aspect and has some material on his web-site (link via the 'other links' page at the AEL site). Perhaps he could give you some recent references. I would certainly welcome a serious discussion on the current state of knowledge in this area. Regards, Mike D-S ******************************** Mike Dyall-Smith, Melbourne, Australia m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ******************************** ============================================================================== From: USHorus Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 09:15:12 EDT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL Re: AE/OK phonology The Hound of Namma wrote in 98-05-08 19:16:57 EDT, >I am interested in finding out more resources (by that, I mean "beyond Loprieno's 'Ancient Egyptian') regarding recent work on the reconstruction of Archaic and Old Kingdom Egyptian - ie., not the grammar, but the phonology (understanding, of course, that you can't learn one without the other, particularly in Afroasiatic verbs). >> I am an independent Egyptologist, and a native Egyptian, and I can't agree with you more about the importance of phonology. I was most dismayed when I returned from Egypt last March, to find out that an exiled Egyptian, who lives (in hiding) in Africa, offered guidance on this subject on the AEL, and was 'dismissed' by other AEL members. My wife and I are forming the Tehuti Research Foundation (T.R.F.), a non- profit organization, geared towards the TRUE study of ancient Egypt, and naturally its language. T.R.F. will begin its operation on June 21, which is the new year in ancient Egypt. T.R.F. will retrace the Egyptians that left Egypt after the nomadic Arab/Moslem invasion of Egypt in 640 AD. T.R.F. will reconstruct some of the AE language still contained in the colloquial language spoken in Egypt. T.R.F. will retrace the traditions, etc. of the secretive societies in Egypt, such as the Sufis and El Daraweesh. T.R.F. will try to study the four meanings of each symbol of the hieroglyphs. Each symbol has physical, spiritual, and soulful meanings. The fourth (and total) meaning comes as a result of combining the above three meanings. T.R.F. is on fire. Whoever is interested in this hard but exciting mission, please check our website at http://members.aol.com/TehutiRF, and/or write to me at USHorus@aol.com. I am the Egyptian Heru (Horus) who is determined to resurrect his father (Auser). Moustafa Gadalla http://members.aol.com/ushorus ============================================================================== From: "Mark Wilson" To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 15:02:22 +0000 Subject: Re: AEL Re: AE/OK phonology Dear Moustafa, On 9 May 98 at 9:15, USHorus wrote: > Each symbol has > physical, spiritual, and soulful meanings. The fourth (and total) meaning > comes as a result of combining the above three meanings. These are all very general concepts. Could you be a bit more specific about what you mean? Do you not think that the grammatical and linguistic units of meaning represented by the glyphs should also be taken into consideration? Be careful here, though. Let me just remind the list of a paragraph from the list rules which seems relevant here: Some topics that are not appropriate for discussion include ufology and modern occult readings of the texts, personal visionary and revelatory experiences, modern sectarian and political agendas, personal messages and commercial advertisements. Last time we had a discussion that went in this direction, very little evidence was presented in support of the opinions expressed. I know that some members of this list have views which are very personal to those individuals, but the rest of us need evidence and clear explanations of how this relates to the ancient texts. Regards, -- Mark Wilson AEL-Owner weneg@rostau.demon.co.uk http://www.rostau.demon.co.uk/AEgyptian-L/index.html ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 01:47:23 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: AEL Gardiner Exercise II Can I just go over problem II, b, 9: Translate into hieroglyphs: 'A man in there in the house'. The sentence can be taken a couple of ways: " A man is therein(within) the house"; or" A man is there, in the house." The answer suggested before was 'iw s im pr' using the adverb 'im'. My attempt (from my old note books) was 'iw s im m pr'. So, can you use an adverb like 'im' as a preposition, as in 'therein the house'? The forms of 'm' are a bit confusing because the adverb (im) is derived from the preposition (m), and the preposition can also take on an initial i-prefix when a suffix pronoun is attached. Can someone quote me a real example where the adverb 'im' is used in the same manner as suggested above, ie. 'iw s im pr' ??? Perhaps my reading of the example could have been better translated into egyptian as: 'iw s im iw=f m pr' Regards, Mike ******************************** Mike Dyall-Smith, Melbourne, Australia m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ******************************** ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 02:22:23 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner Exercise IV Serge Rosmorduc wrote: >I would transliterate the following sentence : > di=f sxr pn m ib=f, sxA=f sw ra nb >because the 'r' is not written. In which case, you have a prospective >sDm=f. The translation can be : > >"A son is good... full stop. May he place this advice in his heart, and > remember it every day. Lo, ..." Thanks Serge, you've got me thinking about this in a new light. This makes Gardiner's example quite complicated. It means that students attempting this chapter should be made aware of the prospective verb form (and how to recognise it!). > > The second sentence begins with the particle mk ('see'), and is >followed by:- > > tw, 2nd person dep. pronoun, masc. I don't think it is the passive 'one'. > > What do others think? > >It must be "one", because of the "tw" which follows Dd. It is the form >iw=f sDm=f with "tw" as subject : >Lo, one (usually) says ... OK, I understand. So the verb (sDm) is not in the passive form (with infix .tw), it uses as subject the passive pronoun 'tw' meaning 'one'. Regards, Mike D-S ******************************** Mike Dyall-Smith, Melbourne, Australia m.dyall-smith@microbiology.unimelb.edu.au ******************************** ============================================================================== From: Abu Elisha Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 13:15:57 EDT To: weneg@rostau.demon.co.uk, owner-AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk, AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: AEL Re: Re: AEL Re: AE/OK phonology Regarding the metaphysical meanings of hieroglyphic symbols: Historically speaking, while a typical member of the ancient priestly class would undoubtedly have been acquainted with the various "levels" of meaning for many, perhaps most, symbols (though probably not for all, since the Greek pharoahs greatly inflated the number of signs [historians, please confirm/correct me]), not all literate Egyptians were priests. I mean, after all, other religions/ethnicities have attached mystic significance to graphic symbols (Runes, Hebrew letters), but most users were/are not aware of this semantic. Would the typical Egyptian accountant/lawyer/author/normal educated person have actually known the spiritual meanings? Michael Akard Modesto, California P.S. I loved the CCER web-site! ============================================================================== Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 02:57:07 +1000 To: Ancient Egyptian Language List From: Mike Dyall-Smith Subject: Re: AEL Gardiner Exercise IV Ivo wrote: 2. The sun appears on the horizon and it shines in the sky. Happy are all hearts when they see it. xai ra m Ax.t wbn=3Df m p.t ib nb m rSw.t mAA=3Dsn sw Following on from what Serge said on the first problem, you have here a bare sDm=f, ie. there is nothing preceding the verb in this sentence. That means it is not circumstantial/aorist. You could use a prospective verb form and go: "Ra shall appear/shine...." The next verb, wbn, could be taken as a circumstantial form as it begins a subordinate clause. "... when he rises in the sky. The next sentence begins with a 'nfr sw' type of construction (nominal syntax; adjectival predicate). "All hearts/minds are happy...." And you could take the next verb as beginning a subordinate clause, so a circumstantial verb form. "...when they see it." as Ivo has given it. I am thinking about the next problem. It looks to me as if the verb 'Sw' (empty) should be a circumstantial form. If so, then it should have a resumptive pronoun to reflect the subject, 'itrw', river. "How bad is the river WHEN it is empty of water". Could 'Sw' also be in the stative form: "How bad is the river (in a state of) empty of water." Very good Ivo, 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: Sun, 10 May 1998 16:46:56 -0400 From: WbnRaMPt To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL To Mike D-S Re: Methodology You're doing a great service by collecting the Gardiner exercises, but the recent messages with musings on prospective and stative verbs in Lessons II - IV brings up an important question: What is the purpose of collecting the answers to Gardiner's exercises? If it is, as I suspect, to help students working through Gardiner by themselves, why bring in suggestions about forms that Gardiner has not introduced by the Lessons in question? Every teacher introduces his material in a certain sequence for good reasons. You can't expect a student on Lesson II to know all the forms of the verb, and I believe you only confuse him by discussing them. For example, to complete the exercises in Lesson II, all you need is the material Gardiner has presented in Lessons I and II. Using only this, there is *only* one way to translate problem II, b, 9: 'iw s im m pr'. The same is true for Lesson IV. By this time, Gardiner has introduced *only* the basic bare sDm-f form and told students they can translate it by and tense or mood. Gardiner wanted students on this Lesson to concentrate on pronouns on adjectives, not on verb forms not yet introduced. Would we not serve beginning students of Gardiner best if we restrict our suggestions to the "knowlege domain" created by Gardiner for each Lesson? Similarly, if we were to discuss answers to Hoch's exercises, should we not restrict ourselves to the "knowledge domain" created by Hoch? ============================================================================== From: Nubkhas Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 14:47:06 EDT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: AEL AE/OK phonology In a message dated 98-05-09 07:15:33 EDT, you write: << I'm impressed you managed to get through Antonio's small but (to me) difficult book. Can you describe your irritations about his efforts (not too technical please). >> I would agree that Loprieno's book is difficult for anybody who is not an expert linguist and knows the Egyptian language at the same time. So that makes it rather tough going for just about everyone. However, I found it fascinating even though I was not able to read it with very much speed or uniform comprehension. Aside from his comments on phonology, an area that interests me greatly, I appreciated Loprieno's examples of phrases from various stages of Egyptian, including Coptic and sometimes making comparisons of them, noting the changes. Very instructive to us autodidacts. To someone like myself, who stands firm in agreeing with Egyptian philologists of old that this language is not wholly separate from IE, getting through to the last page before the Epilogue was worth the effort , if for no other reason, than to discover this example: y3 (sic) j.jr=j gmj(.t) jw dj=f jw w' tsm r t3y=j Indeed, (y3) I found out that he had caused a boat to come to take me Marianne Luban ==============================================================================