Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 20:31:00 -0500 From: Robert Myers To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL PDF Libraries with Hieroglyphic Texts Hi; In my quest for insights into Egyptian art and literature, I'm often on the lookout for websites that point to collections fascicles with hieroglyphic texts. But, I've noticed that a lot of these sites have links to pages that are no longer active, owing to the time constraints of the scholars who posted them. I recently discovered Ning.Com, where the creator of Netscape pulled together several networking tools into an arrangement where one may have forums, web logs, chat rooms, photo collections, etc. at a central address. I thought that those language students who have an interest in Egypt-related comparative anthropology and Art History might benefit from handy texts in the original language, and this resource might help with such a focus. So, I put up a forum where each link to a site with hieroglyphic tomes can appear under its own topic. When a link changes, it would be very easy to correct this information, because visitors may note on the thread where URL needs modification. In this way, beginners could help broaden easy access to pertinent e-publications. The gist of this simple project is to get a quick view of the best PDF libraries and keep the links up to date: http://houseofthoth.ning.com If anyone thinks this idea useful, please pay a visit. And, if time permits, offer constructive criticism or suggestions, either via e-mail or the forum. I would especially encourage those who are interested in digging up pertinent information about the ancient institution of the House of Life, and having a look at the traditional values, beliefs, and knowledge of the literate Egyptians. While the list might supply an effective way to keep an updated list of pristinely academic links, the blogs could let sufficiently interested folk explore other topics like comparative anthropology, Classical works pertinent to Egypt, and things like Hermetic Philosophy or artistic and poetic concerns that (at their best) rely on primary sources. Best wishes, Bob ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:32:18 +0200 From: Serge Rosmorduc To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Version 2.11.5 of JSesh is available Dear all, You can now download release 2.11.5 of my free hieroglyphic processor JSesh at http://jsesh.qenherkhopeshef.org/en/node/1366 New in this version : JSesh version 2.11.5 brings a number of new features : * S. Thomas has sent me complete families for T, U, V... only five more, and JSesh will have an (almost) complete coverage of the manuel de codage. * Menu for "low narrow signs", "tall signs", "low broad signs"... * Better menus for complex shadings (does not change JSesh capabilities, but makes them easier to use). Press the '#' key, and you will get a contextual menu offering shading options. Partial shading can be applied to a whole selection. * In some cases, you can not only copy data from JSesh, but also paste data to JSesh ! This means you can type a text in Mellel or openoffice, and paste back some hieroglyphic texts into JSesh. Now, this only works with *some* picture formats and *some* word processors. A conspicuous absentee is MS/Word (at least Word 2008 on mac). The reason for this is that I hide the *Manuel de codage* encoding for the pictures in a comment. Now, Word transforms the pictures and the comment is lost. Mellel or openoffice keep the picture intact. Full documentation for the new possibilities is available at : http://jsesh.qenherkhopeshef.org/node/1367 Best regards, Serge ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:38:05 -0500 From: Robert Myers To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To Hi; Maybe the grammar-based teaching model works better for classroom study with regular, frequent access to a teacher; while the translation-based model works better for the autodidact trying to make the best use of eclectic resources? With the GlyphStudy group, we see a mixing of the former method into the latter condition, with wonderful results. GlyphStudy is a unique phenomenon, as far as I know. Perhaps with time, we will see more classrooms that introduce connected translation, earlier? This might be facilitated by the new presence of numerous texts on the internet. Best wishes, Bob ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:58:13 -0500 From: Robert Myers To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: AEL Late Egyptian Hi; I don't know if anyone has noted it here, before, but for those whose curiosity compels them to take an early look at texts like _The Doomed Prince_, Prof. Rosmorduc has tutorial: http://webperso.iut.univ-paris8.fr/~rosmord/Qenherkhepeshef/intro1.html I was very happy to find this, only the other day. Sincerely, Bob ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:10:52 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To >Marianne Luban wrote "Gardiner, in his grammar, uses actual texts for examples, to which the authors of newer grammars object because these might contain something unknown to the student at his level. Well...in the end, there is nothing to translate but those actual texts and maybe there is not much point in shielding the student from anything they might contain. Here is a method that really works: Go through a grammar of your choice to the end, do the exercises. Then choose a Middle Egyptian text and make sure it is one that really interests you." >She continues to describe a translation-based approach to learning, rather >than a grammar-based approach. I'm not sure how you conclude that from what I wrote above. I don't know how one is able to translate texts without learning from a grammar and even referring to it while working on the tranlation. >Could this be described as somewhat of a return to the text-based approach >of the Budge generation? [Go through texts, study line by line, translate >yourself instead of relying on experts ...] Why was that the approach of the "Budge generation"? If there was anybody in his time who was trying to learn Egyptian in a non-academic setting, they may have relied upon Budge! He was, after all, considered quite an expert in his day. Gardiner's grammar was not published until 1927 and if one didn't know German.... >Another question I would ask of good teachers of AEL is about the relative >merits of translating from (a) glyph texts or (b) transliterations? I can >see different benefits from the two. How is one supposed to see the invaluable determinatives from transliterations? Marianne Luban http://thetimetravelerreststop.blogspot.com/ ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:55:47 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To > From: >The Doomed Prince is a fairly easy and engaging text, but it >is _not_ written in Middle Egyptian. The language of this >story is often described as "Literary Late Egyptian", which >means it contains a number of features found in Middle >Egyptian (for example, fossilized narrative phrases containing [snip for brevity] I did not say it was written in Middle Egyptian. I said it was fun. None of those things you mention make this a difficult text for someone who has already gone through a grammar. There are no difficult constructions there and I have have seen far harder texts written in the purest Middle Egyptian. Anyway, since I translated it, I am in a good position to recommend it on the basis of being both engaging and not mind-boggling. >The text is not written in the "vernacular" of its time, but >rather in the literary language of the New Kingdom, which was >in fact a mix of current grammatical features and standardized >archaic literary phrases. This really intrigues me. How can anybody know for certain that it is not the vernacular of a certain period--when no one has ever heard anyone from the New Kingdom speak? However, even from the earliest New Kingdom, [and even in the Kamose stele] otherwise Middle Egyptian historical texts contain lines of actual speech no different from what is found throughout the Doomed Prince. In terms of the vernacular, the spoken language, how do we define what are "current grammatical features" and how do we rule out that the same speech did not contain any "archaic literary phrases" or what are assumed to be only "literary"? The Doomed Prince, as we call it, may even be a fairy tale for children. It is even easy enough to be read by a youngster. It is said that the "Tale of the Two Brothers" was written for Prince Seti Merneptah and so I wouldn't be surprised if "Doomed" was written for some literate young prince, still young enough to be captivated by the idea of a "talking dog". Or perhaps even written by such a youngster. In ancient Egypt, stories weren't written for mass consumption. Yes, if they were good, people tended to be copy them--and probably students had to. Because of its simplicity, I feel pretty confident that "Doomed" was written in the vernacular of the 18th Dynasty. >The bottom line is that I would emphatically not recommend >this text for someone who is attempting to grasp the basics of >Middle Egyptian. The Tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor or the >Westcar Papyrus are much better bets if you're looking for a >fun and straightforward literary text in Middle Egyptian. The >Story of Sinuhe is a good solid text, too, but I would say it >is slightly more challenging, or at least a tad more >sophisticated in its style, than some of the other ME literary >texts. Sorry, but "Doomed" is for someone who has already grasped the basics of Middle Egyptian. That's why you go through the grammar. That's where you obtain the basics. If somebody wants to limit themselves to things written in the Middle Kingdom and earlier and monumental texts, then fine. But what, really, is the point in limiting oneself to Middle Egyptian at all? Marianne Luban ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:46:32 -0500 From: Robert Myers To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL flash cards for Egyptian--If You Really Want To Perhaps a dictionary that is more like a thesaurus of Egyptian words to English might be a good tool to contemplate creating. This could facilitate a more "nuanced" grasp of the foreign language by immediately enriching that of the translator. Bob msore@albawaba.com wrote: > I tried for a while, but gave up, to construct some flash cards that > showed me the DIFFERENCES between the translations for the SAME AEL word > as found in the several dictionaries. I found it illuminating to contrast > Gardiner, Allen, Mercer, Budge and even German glosses. ============================================================================== Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:03:51 -0700 Subject: Re: AEL flash cards for Egyptian--If You Really Want To From: Dan Piponi To: Ancient Egyptian Language List I'm a complete beginner but to make learning vocabulary easier I wrote myself a flash card application for the iPhone. I have a text file containing the hieroglyphs, MdC transliteration and English, and add to it each time I learn a new word. I then run it through a script that uses HieroTeX to generate a PDF file which is then used as the database for the application which uses a "Leitner" style strategy to focus on the cards you get wrong. I'd tidy it up and release it but (1) being only a beginner my flash cards are probably full of errors and (2) as the vocabulary has been copied from books and web sites there may be copyright issues in distributing it. The great thing about having it on the iPhone is that any time I have a spare moment I can squeeze in some revision. It was only a month or two before I was pretty familiar with nearly a thousand words. -- Dan ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:13:05 +1200 Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To From: Teresa Ronayne To: Ancient Egyptian Language List While I was at university, knowledge or study of the German language was a requirement for taking Egyptian classes. French was rcommended, but not a co-requisite. I'm not suggesting that this is ideal for everyone, but it really helps you learn your grammar before attempting Egyptian and is also useful for using German-language grammars. So, for anyone starting out, I really recommend it. That is, if you have the time (which I guess is unlikely), so just a thought. Teresa > > < if one didn't know German.... > > ============================================================================== From: Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:34:31 -0500 (CDT) >[snip for brevity] > >I did not say it was written in Middle Egyptian. I said it was fun. None of those things you mention make this a difficult text for someone who has already gone through a grammar. There are no difficult constructions there and I have have seen far harder texts written in the purest Middle Egyptian. >Anyway, since I translated it, I am in a good position to recommend it on the basis of being >both engaging and not mind-boggling. The discussion at hand was specifically about learning to read Middle Egyptian (see the title of this thread). While this text is excellent for learning to read literary Late Egyptian, it is not a good choice for learning Middle Egyptian. The constructions to be found in this text are not "difficult" per se, but many of them simply do not exist in Middle Egyptian and hence will not be found in a Middle Egyptian grammar. If you are working with knowledge obtained from reading a Middle Egyptian grammar book, then you will be at a loss to properly understand a number of the nuances of this text. Having read through your translation, I can see that there are a number of passages where you encountered precisely these kinds of difficulties. I would recommend taking a detailed look at a Late Egyptian grammar, such as Friedrich Junge's, and tackling the text again. >This really intrigues me. How can anybody know for certain that it is not the vernacular >of a certain period--when no one has ever heard anyone from the New Kingdom speak? (snipped) While it is likely that no written text accurately reflects the "vernacular" of any period in the Egyptian language, there are easy methods for determining that literary texts like "Doomed Prince" are relatively archaic. There is a pretty sizable corpus of non-literary texts, meant for private use and written by private individuals, that are roughly contemporary with "Doomed." I would recommend reading some private letters from the early New Kingdom to get a better idea of what the contemporary language would have looked like. You will find it quite different from the language of contemporary literary texts, like "Doomed Prince," "Tale of Two Brothers" and "Horus and Seth" (all of which are fun and easy reads, by the way, if you are interested in tackling Late Egyptian literature). Ed Wente's _Letters from Ancient Egypt_ provides solid translations and references for tracking down the original texts of many of these letters. >Sorry, but “Doomed” is for someone who has already grasped the basics of >Middle Egyptian. That's why you go through the grammar. That's where you obtain the basics. As I said before, "Doomed" would be much better for someone who has grasped the basics of Late Egyptian! Middle Egyptian will be of limited use. >If somebody wants to >limit themselves to things written in the Middle Kingdom and earlier and monumental texts, then fine. >But what, really, is the point in limiting oneself to Middle Egyptian at all? There is no point, I agree! But there are resources for learning Late Egyptian, as well, and I would suggest getting and using some of those before seriously trying to tackle the literature of that language phase. As I said, Junge's _Late Egyptian Grammar_ is good (especially for literary texts). The Czerny-Groll grammar is better for non-literary stuff, like the letters and legal documents (the Turin Strike Papyrus and the tomb robbery papyri are fun beginning texts in non-literary Late Egyptian). There is also an excellent (if somewhat pricey) dictionary of Late Egyptian by Leonard Lesko that will be much more useful than Faulkner for dealing with the distinctive LE vocabulary and peculiar spellings. Megaera Lorenz University of Chicago ============================================================================== To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL flash cards for Egyptian--If You Really Want To - Thesaurus Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:42:33 -0400 From: ahatnakht@aol.com >From: Robert Myers >Perhaps a dictionary that is more like a thesaurus of Egyptian words to English might >be a good tool to contemplate creating. This could facilitate a more "nuanced" grasp >of the foreign language by immediately enriching that of the translator. There is already something available along those lines, namely the Thesaurus Lingua Agyptiae (http://aaew.bbaw.de/tla/) =E2=80" for example if you enter the word =E2=80=9Cgarden=E2=80=9D in the lemma search window (and don't forget to tick the =E2=80=9Ctranslation=E2=80=9D box for English), you will get a list of all words that have a meaning associated with garden. And you can access the slip archive which lies behind the W=C3=B6rterbuch (reference cards!) and contains far more information than ever made it into the W=C3=B6rterbuch. References are also available for each entry. If you enter a root in transliteration then you get a list of words connected to that root (again, don't forget to tick =E2=80=9Ctranslation=E2=80=9D or it will all be in German!). It also tends to list a good number of permutations of meaning as well as references and access to the W=C3=B6rterbuch and its underlying slip archive (the original flash cards!). >From: Teresa Ronayne >While I was at university, knowledge or study of the German language was a >requirement for taking Egyptian classes. French was rcommended, but not a >co-requisite. Indeed - I was about to post that we20do need to add learning academic German and French to the "If you really Want To" thread , as many of the most useful resources(such as theW=C3=B6rterbuch, but also the very useful Hannig Lexica) are simply not available in English. The academic discussion of the language in journals and papers is often not in English either, and even English papers often contain extensive quotes from French or German publications. Besides other European languages contain grammatical constructions which are closer to Egyptian and thus sometimes make it easier to grasp certain Egyptian concepts, such as nisbes and relative forms. On the other hand, of course, there are English constructions that are better suited to mirror certain Egyptian constructions than their German counterparts. The wider the variety of non-English grammar you know, the easier it will become to learn Egyptian (regardless of whether Middle or Late). To go back to the translation of individual words >This could facilitate a more "nuanced" grasp >of the foreign language by immediately enriching that of the translator. there is a German / Egyptian Hannig Lexicon : "Die Sprache der Pharaonen. Gro=C3=9Fes Handw=C3=B6rterbuch Deutsch-=C3=84gyptisch: (2800 - 950 v. Chr.)" (ISBN-10: 3805326092, ISBN-13: 978-3805326094) which, interestingly, really highlights for just how many words we use the same translation into a modern language, making it obvious that our translations are often only an approximation in the first place and that a lot more research is needed into the ocurrence and context of these words to narrow down their precise meaning. I suspect the more modern the dictionary or wordlist you use, the more suggestions for possible translations you will get, as this research is, of course, ongoing. Another very useful Hannig Lexicon is Kulturhandbuch =C3=84gyptens. Wortschatz der Pharaonen in Sachgruppen" which lists vocabulary by topic " eg. food, plants, animals etc. Unfortunately it is out of print and I have so far been unable to hunt down a second-hand copy! The publishers (Philip von Zabern) don't seem to know whether they will re-publish it or not, but perhaps if enough people ask they may be persuaded. Tilly ahatnakht@aol.com ============================================================================== Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:37:50 -0600 Subject: Re: AEL flash cards for Egyptian--If You Really Want To From: Stan Thomas To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Along this same line Michele Moglia and Will Meriic recently released a couple of Java programs to the GlyphStudy mailing list that should make it quite easy to transform Hierowords .csv files into gFlash or Anki flashcard decks. There are some Hierowords files for Gardiner, Allen, Collier & Manley, Mark Vygus' dictionary, etc. http://home.comcast.net/~thot/computerized_hieroglyphics_flash.htm http://www.gwhizmobile.com/ http://ichi2.net/anki/ -Stan ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:57:02 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To ---------- Original Message ---------- From: Teresa Ronayne To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:13:05 +1200 >While I was at university, knowledge or study of the German language was a >requirement for taking Egyptian classes. French was rcommended, but not a >co-requisite. >I'm not suggesting that this is ideal for everyone, but it really helps you >learn your grammar before attempting Egyptian and is also useful for using >German-language grammars. There's no need to know German for grammar because there are good English grammars. But the dictionary is another matter! I don't know any serious student of Egyptian who doesn't use Hannig--in German. Marianne Luban http://thetimetravelerreststop.blogspot.com/ ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:44:09 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To ---------- Original Message ---------- From: >The discussion at hand was specifically about >learning to read Middle Egyptian (see the title of >this thread). While this text is excellent for >learning to read literary Late Egyptian, it is not a >good choice for learning Middle Egyptian. The >constructions to be found in this text are not >"difficult" per se, but many of them simply do not exist >in Middle Egyptian and hence will not be found in a >Middle Egyptian grammar. Although I think it's fair enough to say that someone who only wants to learn Middle Egyptian and restrict himself to those constructions should avoid the "Doomed Prince", I really can't agree with your last statement. So which constructions aren't found in, say, Gardiner? >If you are working with >knowledge obtained from reading a Middle Egyptian >grammar book, then you will be at a loss to properly >understand a number of the nuances of this text. >Having read through your translation, I can see that t>here are a number of passages where you encountered >precisely these kinds of difficulties. I would r>ecommend taking a detailed look at a Late Egyptian >grammar, such as Friedrich Junge's, and tackling the >text again. Well! It didn't strike me that I had any diffuculties at all with the text, but I'd be happy if you would point out where I went wrong. >This really intrigues me. How can >anybody know for certain that it is not the >vernacular of a certain period--when no one has >ever heard anyone from the New Kingdom speak? (snipped) >While it is likely that no written text >accurately reflects the "vernacular" of any period >in the Egyptian language, there are easy methods for >determining that literary texts like "Doomed Prince" >are relatively archaic. There is a pretty sizable >corpus of non-literary texts, meant for private use >and written by private individuals, that are roughly >contemporary with "Doomed." I would recommend >reading some private letters from the early New >Kingdom to get a better idea of what the contemporary language >would have looked like. You will find it quite different from >the language of contemporary literary texts, like "Doomed >Prince," "Tale of Two Brothers" and "Horus and Seth" (all of >which are fun and easy reads, by the way, if you are i>nterested in tackling Late Egyptian literature). Ed Wente's >_Letters from Ancient Egypt_ provides solid translations and >references for tracking down the original texts of many of >these letters. I doubt very much that there is a "large corpus of non-literary texts" [such as letters] from the 18th Dynasty! From Ramesside times, there are more. Look, I know some of the constructions you are referring to, but "Doomed" isn't rife with them. "Doomed" is not "Tale of the Two Brothers" by a long shot. >>Sorry, but "Doomed" is >>for someone who has already grasped the basics of >>Middle Egyptian. That's why you go through the >>grammar. That's where you obtain the basics. = >As I said before, "Doomed" would be much better for someone >who has grasped the basics of Late Egyptian! Middle Egyptian >will be of limited use. Completely disagree. "Doomed" has only a few things peculiar to what I prefer to call "Neo-Egyptian" because "Late Egyptian" is rather misleading. I doubt "Doomed" was written any later than the 18th Dynasty. >If somebody wants to limit themselves to things >written in the Middle Kingdom and earlier and >monumental texts, then fine. But what, really, is t>he point in limiting oneself to Middle Egyptian at >all? = >There is no point, I agree! But there are resources for >learning Late Egyptian, as well, and I would suggest getting >and using some of those before seriously trying to tackle the >literature of that language phase. As I said, Junge's _Late >Egyptian Grammar_ is good (especially for literary texts). The >Czerny-Groll grammar is better for non-literary stuff, like >the letters and legal documents (the Turin Strike Papyrus and >the tomb robbery papyri are fun beginning texts in >non-literary Late Egyptian). There is also an excellent (if >somewhat pricey) dictionary of Late Egyptian by Leonard Lesko >that will be much more useful than Faulkner for dealing with >the distinctive LE vocabulary and peculiar spellings. = I certainly have no objection to anyone using any resource. But can one read Neo-Egyptian without "a "Late Egyptian Grammar"? Yes! I have never consulted one and I have translated many texts that are not in Middle Egyptian. Maegara is leaning a bit too heavily on the differences between these stages of the language because the similarites are far greater. If you can remember a few things that distinguish Neo-Egyptian from Middle--you can do the texts. Now Maegara asserts I had trouble with "Doomed" but she will have to prove that to me! In fact, since I have offered my translation as a resource, I suggest she show me where I went wrong at once. [My guess is she's mistaken.] ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:23:06 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To ---------- Original Message ---------- From: >While it is likely that no written text >accurately reflects the "vernacular" of any period i>n the Egyptian language, there are easy methods for >determining that literary texts like "Doomed Prince" >are relatively archaic. There is a pretty sizable >corpus of non-literary texts, meant for private use >and written by private individuals, that are roughly >contemporary with "Doomed." I would recommend >reading some private letters from the early New >Kingdom to get a better idea of what the contemporary language >would have looked like. You will find it quite different from >the language of contemporary literary texts, like "Doomed >Prince," "Tale of Two Brothers" = Here's a letter, roughly contemporary http://webperso.iut.univ-paris8.fr/~rosmord/hieroglyphes/gurob.gif Do you mind pointing out the differences from the text of "The Doomed Prince"? Marianne Luban http://thetimetravelerreststop.blogspot.com/ ============================================================================== From: Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:10:04 -0500 (CDT) > >Here's a letter, roughly contemporary > >http://webperso.iut.univ-paris8.fr/~rosmord/hieroglyphes/gurob.gif > >Do you mind pointing out the differences from the text of "The Doomed Prince"? > > >Marianne Luban >http://thetimetravelerreststop.blogspot.com/ At a cursory glance, the main difference that I can see is that the letter is more purely Late Egyptian. This looks like a pretty straightforward nonliterary LE text. Do you have a link to the first part of it, or just this page? Megaera Lorenz University of Chicago ============================================================================== From: Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:44:49 -0500 (CDT) >Although I think it's fair enough to say that someone who only wants to learn >Middle Egyptian and restrict himself to those constructions should avoid the "Doomed >Prince", I really can't agree with your last statement. So which constructions aren't >found in, say, Gardiner? To list just a few: The affirmative indicative sDm=f. This form was briefly present in Old Egyptian, but is not to be found in ME. The First Present construction, which consists of a pronominal compound (eg. tw=i) or noun before an infinitive or qualitative (aka stative or old perfective). This is translated as a simple present or past, in cases where the qualitative indicates completed action. The conjunctive and continuative, the two Late Egyptian Non Initial Main Sentences. The former takes the form of mtw=f sDm, while the latter (iw=f (Hr) sDm) strongly resembles the ME pseudoverbal construction. Both are translated sequentially to an initial main clause, continuing the tense of the MC ("And then . . ."). The circumstantial iw. In ME, iw before a sDm=f indicates a main clause. In LE, it is exactly the opposite! >Well! It didn't strike me that I had any diffuculties at all with the >text, but I'd be happy if you would point out where I went wrong. I will be happy to. It will be easier if you can send me a copy of your original notes and transliteration, if you have them. >I doubt very much that there is a "large corpus of non-literary texts" [such as >letters] from the 18th Dynasty! From Ramesside times, there are more. Look, >I know some of the constructions you are referring to, but "Doomed" isn't rife with >them. "Doomed" is not "Tale of the Two Brothers" by a long shot. There are a decent number of early Ramesside letters, which are hardly far enough removed, temporally, from "Doomed" to be viewed as non-contemporary. Once I am home and with my books again, I'll see if I can pull up a few examples (if you're interested). >Completely disagree. "Doomed" has only a few things peculiar to > what I prefer to call "Neo-Egyptian" because "Late Egyptian" is > rather misleading. I doubt "Doomed" was written any later than the 18th Dynasty. "Doomed" was the first text I was assigned in Intro to Late Egyptian. The reason for this is that the text does, in fact, represent a transitional form of writing. It contains many familiar Middle Egyptianisms, but the basic language of the text is Late Egyptian. For this reason, many Egyptologists are actually hesitant to assign it to beginning Late Egyptian students, since it contains many elements of both language phases and could potentially cause confusion for students who are trying to understand the fundamental differences between the two. I agree that there is a danger in creating an artificial divide between Middle and Late Egyptian. _However_, the fact remains that there are some very significant differences which will strongly affect a reader's understanding of the text. Knowing the basics of Middle Egyptian is essential to understand a text like "Doomed." But I (and most Egyptologists) would argue that it is not enough. >Now Maegara asserts >I had trouble with "Doomed" but she will have to prove that to me! In fact, since I have offered my >translation as a resource, I suggest she show me where I went wrong at once. [My guess is she's mistaken.] As I said, happy to oblige! Let me know if you can send me your notes. If not, I'll work with what you have posted. My books are at home at the moment, so it may be a couple days before I can get to it. Megaera Lorenz University of Chicago ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 01:01:53 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To ---------- Original Message ---------- From: To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:44:49 -0500 (CDT) >>Although I think it's fair enough to say that someone who only wants to learn >>Middle Egyptian and restrict himself to those constructions should avoid the "Doomed >>Prince", I really can't agree with your last statement. So which constructions aren't >>found in, say, Gardiner? >To list just a few: >The affirmative indicative sDm=f. This form was briefly >present in Old Egyptian, but is not to be found in ME. = Not applicable >The First Present construction, which consists of a pronominal >compound (eg. tw=i) or noun before an infinitive or >qualitative (aka stative or old perfective). This is >translated as a simple present or past, in cases where the >>qualitative indicates completed action. Gardiner discusses it on page 98, paragraph 124 >The conjunctive and continuative, the two Late Egyptian Non >Initial Main Sentences. The former takes the form of mtw=f >sDm, while the latter (iw=f (Hr) sDm) strongly resembles the >ME pseudoverbal construction. Both are translated sequentially >to an initial main clause, continuing the tense of the MC >("And then . . ."). = Gardiner discusses "iw-f Hr sDm" beginning on page 243 , of course, but mtw=f or mntw=f really is peculiar to LE and "Tale of Two Brothers" is rife with it. But not "Doomed". >The circumstantial iw. In ME, iw before a sDm=f indicates a >main clause. In LE, it is exactly the opposite! = But a clause is still a clause. >"Doomed" was the first text I was assigned in Intro to Late >Egyptian. The reason for this is that the text does, in fact, >represent a transitional form of writing. It contains many >familiar Middle Egyptianisms, but the basic language of the >text is Late Egyptian. For this reason, many Egyptologists are >actually hesitant to assign it to beginning Late Egyptian >students, since it contains many elements of both language >phases and could potentially cause confusion for students who >are trying to understand the fundamental differences between >the two. With that, I think this conversation has come full circle. If you could handle "Doomed" as your first LE text, then there are some others here who can do as well for the very reasons you have stated. And that's why I recommended it in the first place. Those who wish to avoid "confusion" at all costs can stay away from it. Marianne Luban http://thetimetravelerreststop.blogspot.com/ ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:03:28 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To ---------- Original Message ---------- From: To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:44:49 -0500 (CDT) >Now Maegara asserts >>I had trouble with "Doomed" but she will have to prove that >>to me! In fact, since I have offered my >>translation as a resource, I suggest she show me where I went >>wrong at once. [My guess is she's mistaken.] >As I said, happy to oblige! Let me know if you can send me >your notes. If not, I'll work with what you have posted. My >books are at home at the moment, so it may be a couple days >before I can get to it. I have no notes now. The translation has been up there for a couple of years. It has been viewed by people who are experts and nobody has found fault with it yet. The things I put in parenthesis with question marks only indicate lacunae in the text. ============================================================================== From: Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:10:21 -0500 (CDT) >>The affirmative indicative sDm=f. This form was briefly >>present in Old Egyptian, but is not to be found in ME. > >Not applicable I have begun going through the text, and have already found one in the first few lines (skm=s(.t) Abd.w n ms: "She completed the months of childbearing."). >>The First Present construction, which consists of a pronominal >>compound (eg. tw=i) or noun before an infinitive or >>qualitative (aka stative or old perfective). This is >>translated as a simple present or past, in cases where the >>>qualitative indicates completed action. > >Gardiner discusses it on page 98, paragraph 124 I'll check my Gardiner when I get home. >Gardiner discusses "iw-f Hr sDm" beginning on page 243 , of course, There is a iw=f Hr sDm in Middle Egyptian, but the sense is quite different from that in Late Egyptian. Not having my Gardiner at hand, I'm guessing he's talking about the pseudo-verbal. > >>The circumstantial iw. In ME, iw before a sDm=f indicates a >>main clause. In LE, it is exactly the opposite! > >But a clause is still a clause. A circumstantial clause has a very different meaning from a main clause. To confuse the two would be to very badly misunderstand the meaning that the writer was trying to convey. >If you could handle "Doomed" as your first LE text, then there are some others here >who can do as well for the very reasons you have stated. I could handle it because I had access to the appropriate resources and the guidance of an experienced teacher. If I had tried to do it without these things, I would have gotten the gist of it, thanks to my familiarity with basic Egyptian vocabulary and the story itself (having read it in translation many times), but my translation would have been shoddy. Megaera Lorenz University of Chicago ============================================================================== From: Subject: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 13:36:12 -0500 (CDT) As per her request, I have begun a critique of Marianne Luban's translation of "The Doomed Prince." This is a bit of a preliminary run-through, and I'll probably post a more polished translation of my own at some point when I am finished. But here are some of my preliminary observations and revisions: ir ntw=f xr (emend from rx) [=tw] wa ny-sw.t bw pwy.t msy.w n=f sA Tay Marianne's translation: Once upon a time there was a certain king to whom there was born no heir. Suggested revision: It is said (there was) a king. No son had been born to him. “Once upon a time” is the closest English equivalent to the idiom here, but it is pretty different from what the Egyptian actually says. I assume you know that, but since this translation has been put forward as an aid for learners, it is important to make this clear. This is a common phrase at the start of LE stories, and other examples show the rx should be xr. xr is a verb meaning “say.” The basic meaning is “As for it/him, so it is said, (there was) a king.” You have translated the following phrase as a relative clause. Since the would-be subject of this clause is undefined (“a king”), a virtual relative (i.e., a circumstantial) would be needed. In fact, it is a LE negative perfect, which would require the circumstantial converter iw. It is actually an independent clause: “A son had not been born to him.” [iw=f Hr] dbH.t n=f Sri m-a nTr.w n hAw=f iw=sn Hr wD di.t mys.t n=f iw=f Hr sDr Hna tAy=f Hm.t m pA grH is.t [xpr=s?] iwr skm=s Abd.w n ms aHa.n ms wa sA TAy Marianne's translation: He importuned the gods for the son he lacked and they ordained one to be born to him. He lay with his wife in the night and, lo, she became pregnant. When the months of being with child had passed, a son and heir was born. Suggested revision: [Then he] requested for himself a son from the gods of his region. Then they commanded that one be caused to be borne for him. And then he lay with his wife that night, and indeed [she became] pregnant. She completed her months of childbearing. Thereupon a male child was born. Most of the clauses in this section are Late Egyptian continuatives (iw=f Hr sDm), which are non-initial main clauses that continue the tense of an initial MC. skm=s Abd.w n ms is an indicative perfect active sDm=f, the subject being the suffix pronoun s(.t) (i.e. the wife). ii.t pw ir.n nA n Hw.t Hry.wt r SA n=f SAy iw=sn Hr Dd mt=f n pA msH m-rA-pw pA HfAw mitt pA iw aHa.n sDm nA n rmT.w nty r-gs pA xrd wn in sn Hr wxm=sn n Hm=f a. w. s. wn in Hm=f a. w. s. Hr xpr iw ib=f Dww r aA.t wr.t Marianne's translation: Then came the Seven Hathors to foretell his future. They said, “He shall die by the crocodile, the snake, or the dog.” The people near the child heard this and reported it to His Majesty, l.p.h.. Thereupon His Majesty became very heavy in his heart. Suggested revision: The Seven Hathors came to decree for him a fate. Then they said, “He will die by the crocodile, or the snake, or the dog.” Thereupon the people who were with the child heard. So then they reported (it) to His Majesty, l. p. h. Thereupon His Majesty's heart became extremely sad (lit. His Majesty became such that his heart was very greatly sad). This section starts with a familiar Middle Egyptian narrative construction (infin. + pw + relative sDm.n=f – literally, “It is a coming which the Seven Hathor's made”). It sets apart this action from the previous and clearly defines a new thought. It is followed by a continuative. The last sentence makes use of a LE circumstantial clause introduced by the convertor iw, indicating the circumstances of the king's “becoming” (“. . . came to be while his heart was very sad”). wn in Hm=f a. w. s. Hr di.t [Kd=tw n=f wa n pr] n inr Hr HAs.t iw=f apr m rmT m x.t nb.t nfr n pr ny-sw.t a. w. s. iw nn pr pA Xrd r-bnr His Majesty ordered to be built a house of stone in the desert, furnished with people and all sorts of fine things from the palace. The royal child was never to venture outside of it. Suggested revision: Thereupon His Majesty (l. p. h.) caused a house of stone to be built upon the desert, it being furnished with people and every fine thing of the King's House, while the child could never go outside. The building of the prince's remote desert house is modified by two circumstantial clauses (the accoutrements of the house and the prince's inability to go outside). Both are introduced by the LE circumstantial convertor iw. xr ir m-xt pA Xrd aAy.tw iw=f xr Tsy r tAy=f tp-Hw.t iw=f Hr gmH wa n Tsm iw=f m-sA wa n s aA iw=f Hr Sm.t Hr tA mi.t iw=f Hr Dd n pAy=f sDm nty r-gs=f ix pA nty Hr Sm.t m-sA pA s.t (sic!) aA nty m ii.t Hr [tA] mi.t iw=f Dd n=f Tsm pAy iw pA Xrd hr Dd n=f imm in=tw n=i wa n mi Kd=f wn in pA sDm Hr Sm.t Hr wHm=sn n Hm=f a. w. s. wn in Hm=f Hr Dd imm iTt=tw n=f wa n ktkt Sri [nn b]gs HAty=f aHa.n=tw Hr iTt=tw n=f pA Tsm Marianne's translation: After awhile, the prince grew older. He went up to the roof of the house and spied a greyhound that was going behind an adult walking upon a way. He said to his servant, who was with him, “What is that following after the grownup on the road?” It was told to him, “That’s a hound.” Then the prince said, “Let one be brought to me just like it.” The servant went to repeat this to His Majesty. His Majesty said, “Procure a small one for him so that he won’t become rebellious in his heart.” Therefore a hound was procured for him. Suggested revision: Most of this is ok. The first sentence includes a First Present, but you have rightly translated it in the past tense, because the verb (aAy.tw) is a stative. Most of the paragraph consists of continuatives. The phrase “He spied a dog that was walking behind an adult . . .” is constructed with a virtual relative – i.e., a circumstantial First Present (iw + suffix pronoun subject + adverbial phrase). ktkt Sri literally means “a little trembler.” The king is specifically talking about a shaky little puppy. It doesn't change the sense much, but it's a charming detail that it would be a shame to overlook in translation Now things start to get a little more sketchy: xr ir m-xt nA hrw.w swA Hr nn iw pA Xrd Hr tnw m Ha.wt=f nb.t iw=f Hr Hab n pAy=f it m Dd ii.t ix iw(=i) minA Hms.kwi xr mak wi wD.kwi n pA Sayt imm xAa.tw=i iry=i n HAty=i i-ir.t pA nTr ir.t pA nty m ib=f Marianne's translation: When a considerable time had passed, the child reached an age where his body was grown. He sent to his father, saying, “What is the purpose of my staying here? I am bound by my fate, so let me do as my heart desires. God will deal with me as he pleases, anyway.” Suggested revision: Then, afterward, the days passed by these (events), and the child matured in all his limbs. Then he sent to his father, saying, “What will come of this, while I am just sitting around like this (n: this part is difficult, and I'll consult my notes and sources when I can for a better translation.)? Now, look at me: I am commended to this fate. Let me be released, that I might act according to my heart. It is according to what is in his heart that the god will act.” Your translation of this part is very loose, and glosses over most of the nuances of the original Egyptian. Here some more complex LE grammar starts to come into play. There are problems particularly in the second part. Let's start with the section that begins: "I am bound by my (lit. the/this) fate." Ok so far. The first phrase here is a basic stative, familiar ME stuff. However, the sentence that follows this begins with an imperative (“Let me be released”, which is omitted from your translation altogether) followed by a prospective sDm=f (“in order that I might act . . .”). The next sentence begins with a Late Egyptian nominative sDm=f, as signified by the prothetic reed leaf. This is a second tense construction, which places emphasis on the adverbial phrase at the end of the sentence (“according to what is in his heart”). There are some even more serious translational issues in the following section: wn in=tw Hr nHb.t n=f wa n wrry.t apr.ti m xa.w nb.t n ra-xt iw[=tw Hr di.t wa n sDm? m]-sA=f r Smsw iw=tw Hr DAy.t=f r pA rd.t Ab.t iw=tw Hr Dd n=f ix Sm.t=k n Abw=k iw pAy=f Tsm Hna=f Marianne's translation: So he was released. A chariot equipped with weapons was given to him and a groom to run behind it. One ferried him to the east bank of the river. Someone said to him, “What's this your wandering wherever you please?” That was his hound that was with him! Suggested revision: Therupon a chariot equipped with all the weapons of war was procured for him. Then a servant was placed behind him to act as a follower. Then he was ferried to the eastern bank, and he was told, “Please go according to your desire,” while his dog was with him. The first sentence in your translation isn't in the original text at all. The unnamed “someone” in your second-to-the-last sentence is the same impersonal tw that has been providing him with equipment, ferrying him about, etc. ix, although it often serves as an interrogative particle, is frequently used before polite hortatives (a step below an imperative in force), as is the case here. The prince is simply being politely told that he is free now to do whatever he wishes. The presence of the dog is appended as a circumstantial adverbial clause (“Oh, and by the way, his faithful pooch was with him during all this.”). The dog doesn't start talking until later, when it is introduced as an element of surprise and explicitly described as a new development (something along the lines of "Suddently, the dog took up speaking . . ."). iw=f Hr xd m-sA ib=f Hr HAs.t iw anx=f m tp-n-iAw.t nb n HAs.t spr pw [ir.n]=f r pA wr n NAhArnnA ist bw pAy.t msy n pA wr n NAhArnnA Hr wa n Sri.t s.t-Hm.t is.t Kd n=s wa n pr iw pAy=f sSd m wAy 70 n mH r pa iwtn iw=f Hr di.t in=tw Sri nb.t n wr.w nb n pA tA n xAr iw=f Hr Dd n=sn ir pA nty iw=f r pH pA sSd n tAy=i Sri.t iw=s n=f r Hmt Marianne's translation: He was taken by water, according to his pleasure, to the wasteland. There he lived off the game of the desert and completed a journey to the lord of the country of Naharin. There were no children of the lord of Naharin except one daughter, now a woman. A house had been built for her, it being seventy cubits up from the road. It was permitted that all the sons of all the princes of the Levant be brought there. It was said to them, “If one of you can reach the top of the tower of my daughter, she shall be his wife.” Suggested revision: He went north (despite the boat determinative, this verb has a more generic meaning of travel in a northward, i.e. downstream, direction. The following circumstantial is in the same time-frame as the action xd, suggesting he is already moving through the desert), according to his desire, upon the desert, while (circumstantial sDm=f marked with the converter iw) he lived on all the game of the desert. He arrived at the chief of Naharin. Now, (is.t often introduces a parenthetical or explanatory statement) a child had not been born to the chief of Naharin except for a daughter (lit. a woman-child). Now, a house was built for her, its window being (circumstantial adverbial) at a height of 70 cubits from the ground (iwtn, from Middle Egyptian iwdn). And he had all the children of all the chiefs of the land of Syria brought. And he said to them, “As for (ir here is not in the sense of “if”) the one who shall reach (Late Egyptian third future, iw=f r sDm) the window of my daughter, she shall be his wife (lit. she will be to him to be a wife).” Stay tuned for more! Megaera Lorenz University of Chicago ============================================================================== Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:51:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Diane J Donaldson To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, megaera@uchicago.edu wrote: >> If you could handle "Doomed" as your first LE text, then > there are some others here >> who can do as well for the very reasons you have stated. > > I could handle it because I had access to the appropriate > resources and the guidance of an experienced teacher. If I had > tried to do it without these things, I would have gotten the > gist of it, thanks to my familiarity with basic Egyptian > vocabulary and the story itself (having read it in translation > many times), but my translation would have been shoddy. > > Megaera Lorenz > University of Chicago > As a self-taught student of several languages, I appreciate your concern that a translation by an amateur just starting out might not be as definitive as one by someone who has access to better resources as well as a teacher, and that it might even be called "shoddy", but I don't think that's the point. Someone just starting out is not trying to produce a translation that will be accepted by an Egyptological journal -- they just want some practice with the language and perhaps even to have some fun while doing so. "Doomed" appears to be a text that will provide both. As for myself, I don't care whether the Egyptian is Late, Middle, or Early Paleozoic -- I simply appreciate how much easier studying this language has become in the last 15 years, as more and more material makes its way online. Diane Donaldson (No degrees in Egyptology, but I do have one in Mortuary Science -- does that count????) ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:41:01 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To ---------- Original Message ---------- From: > >>>The circumstantial iw. In ME, iw before a sDm=f indicates a >>>main clause. In LE, it is exactly the opposite! > >>But a clause is still a clause. >A circumstantial clause has a very different meaning from a >main clause. To confuse the two would be to very badly >misunderstand the meaning that the writer was trying to convey. Maybe you just don't give people enough credit. >>If you could handle "Doomed" as your first LE text, then >>there are some others here >>who can do as well for the very reasons you have stated. >I could handle it because I had access to the appropriate >resources and the guidance of an experienced teacher. If I had >tried to do it without these things, I would have gotten the >gist of it, thanks to my familiarity with basic Egyptian >vocabulary and the story itself (having read it in translation >many times), but my translation would have been shoddy. There are a number of people here who have had access to the same resources as you and have probably been studying Egyptian even longer. I've been at it for 15 years. And I didn't make a "shoddy translation" of "The Doomed Prince" at all. Oh--wait! You've promised to point out my mistakes! That should have been easy for you to do, having access to my translation and the hieroglylpic text online. Whether you are at home or not--you are obviously still on the computer. You don't need any "notes" from me at all. But so far nothing forthcoming. I started this thread and described a learning method. It involves "doing", that is translating texts, sometimes the same ones over and over until one can read them easily. That's exactly what I have been doing in the last fifteen years and, whether you like it or not, that's given me a lot more than "basic Egyptian vocabulary". If you believe that it's impossible to have a good grasp of Egyptian without having acquired it in an academic setting, you don't know some people who have been in the past and may perhaps still be now, members of this list. As for the rest who may now be very discouraged by Megaera's throwing in all those names for the grammatical constructions--"pseudo-verbal",whatever"--don't worry if you can't memorize them. I haven't either and it hasn't hampered me--despite what Megaera, for reasons best known to her--wants you to believe. The only ones who "have" to memorize all that are the same ones who are going to bore others with the same for a living eventually. The ancient Egyptians didn't give a hoot about any grammatical terminiology, actually. Their scribal students learned by "doing", too, and they certainly didn't have any tomes of grammar, never even dreaming that "Gardiner, Allen, Hoch, etc." would one day exist. ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:53:02 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To ---------- Original Message ---------- From: To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:10:21 -0500 (CDT) >>The affirmative indicative sDm=f. This form was briefly >>present in Old Egyptian, but is not to be found in ME. > Hold on--I remembered something. Why does this dissertation say [citing Depuyt] : "It is my conviction that in Middle Egyptian the Indicative. sDm=f in affirmative use is by no means only a "remnant, archaic" form." Here's the URL for the dissertation, if you want to check it. http://dissertations.ub.rug.nl/FILES/faculties/arts/1997/l.m.j.zonhoven/c5.pdf. See page 5 there. Marianne Luban http://thetimetravelerreststop.blogspot.com/ ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:13:45 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I ---------- Original Message ---------- From: >As per her request, I have begun a critique of Marianne >Luban's translation of "The Doomed Prince." This is a bit of a >preliminary run-through, and I'll probably post a more >polished translation of my own at some point when I am >finished. But here are some of my preliminary observations and >revisions: First of all, what is the point of critising someone's translation because *you" would say it differently? I think my tranlation is a polished one and it doesn't offend the original Egyptian grammar at all. That's the main point. Nobody today *owns* ancient Egyptian stories so they have the right to tell others how to translate them. But I already knew in advance that there was no fault of mine in understanding the Egyptian you would be able to point out. >ir ntw=f xr (emend from rx) [=tw] wa ny-sw.t bw pwy.t msy.w >n=f sA Tay >Marianne's translation: Once upon a time there was a certain >king to whom there was born no heir. >Suggested revision: It is said (there was) a king. No son had >been born to him. >"Once upon a time" is the closest English equivalent to the >idiom here, but it is pretty different from what the Egyptian >actually says. I assume you know that, but since this >translation has been put forward as an aid for learners, it is >important to make this clear. This is a common phrase at the >start of LE stories, and other examples show the rx should be >xr. xr is a verb meaning "say." The basic meaning is "As for >it/him, so it is said, (there was) a king." But nobody would put that in a translation. >You have translated the following phrase as a relative clause. >Since the would-be subject of this clause is undefined ("a >king"), a virtual relative (i.e., a circumstantial) would be >needed. In fact, it is a LE negative perfect, which would >require the circumstantial converter iw. It is actually an >independent clause: "A son had not been born to him." Actually it's "bwpwyt msy n=f sA" is what's there. Or literally "not was born to him son". Because "bwpwyt" actually means "not". It may be an independent clause, but I wouldn't put a series of choppy little phrases in any translation of mine. [snip of a lot of unnecessary nit-picking and grammatical explanations. I don't object to the last, but how do they address your contention that I had "trouble with the text"? I don't think there's anybody here who believes that Egyptian says things the way English does so one *needs* to take license with the original text in order to render a translation that is no worse than the best English. >Now things start to get a little more sketchy: >xr ir m-xt nA hrw.w swA Hr nn iw pA Xrd Hr tnw m Ha.wt=f nb.t i>w=f Hr Hab n pAy=f it m Dd ii.t ix iw(=i) minA Hms.kwi xr mak >wi wD.kwi n pA Sayt imm xAa.tw=i iry=i n HAty=i i-ir.t pA nTr i>r.t pA nty m ib=f >Marianne's translation: When a considerable time had passed, >the child reached an age where his body was grown. He sent to >his father, saying, "What is the purpose of my staying here? >I am bound by my fate, so let me do as my heart desires. God >will deal with me as he pleases, anyway." >Suggested revision: Then, afterward, the days passed by these >(events), and the child matured in all his limbs. Then he sent >to his father, saying, "What will come of this, while I am >just sitting around like this (n: this part is difficult, and >I'll consult my notes and sources when I can for a better >translation.)? Now, look at me: I am commended to this fate. >Let me be released, that I might act according to my heart. It >s according to what is in his heart that the god will act." >Your translation of this part is very loose, and glosses over >most of the nuances of the original Egyptian. No it doesn't--and you know it. So you think it really says "I am commended to this fate??" Or "now look at me"?? The first doesn't even deserve comment and --well-- where does it say "now look at me"? I don't see any glyphs for that. >There are some even more serious translational issues in the >following section: >wn in=tw Hr nHb.t n=f wa n wrry.t apr.ti m xa.w nb.t n ra-xt >iw[=tw Hr di.t wa n sDm? m]-sA=f r Smsw iw=tw Hr DAy.t=f r pA >rd.t Ab.t iw=tw Hr Dd n=f ix Sm.t=k n Abw=k iw pAy=f Tsm Hna=f >Marianne's translation: So he was released. A chariot equipped >with weapons was given to him and a groom to run behind it. >One ferried him to the east bank of the river. Someone said to >him, "What's this your wandering wherever you please?" That >was his hound that was with him! >Suggested revision: Therupon a chariot equipped with all the >>weapons of war was procured for him. Then a servant was placed >behind him to act as a follower. Then he was ferried to the >eastern bank, and he was told, "Please go according to your >desire," while his dog was with him. >The first sentence in your translation isn't in the original >text at all. That's true. But a necessary literary expedient. >The unnamed "someone" in your second-to-the-last >sentence is the same impersonal tw that has been providing him >with equipment, ferrying him about, etc. ix, although it often >serves as an interrogative particle, is frequently used before >polite hortatives (a step below an imperative in force), as is >the case here. The prince is simply being politely told that >he is free now to do whatever he wishes. That's merely your opinion. It isn't necessarily polite at all to say "ix Sm.t=k n iAbw=k" [was Ramesses II being polite when he asked the spies for the Hittites "ntwtn ix?"--I doubt it.] and the same person who has been providing the prince with the equipment certainly isn't there--the king. Is there supposed to be some boatman who has license to ask questions of a grown king's son--or to tell him he is free to do whatever he wishes? It doesn't make sense. And, since the next phrase is "iw pAyf Tsm Hna=f" --the dog talking is the only alternative. It really does say "It was his dog who was with him!" [exclamation point mine, of course,] and there is not a single thing grammatically preventing the dog being the speaker. >The presence of the >dog is appended as a circumstantial adverbial clause ("Oh, and >by the way, his faithful pooch was with him during all >this."). The dog doesn't start talking until later, when it is >introduced as an element of surprise and explicitly described >as a new development (something along the lines of "Suddently, >the dog took up speaking . . ."). I don't agree. Isn't that kind of a loose translation--"Oh, and by the way, his faithful pooch was with him during all this" of a simple statement like "iw pAyf Tsm Hna=f"? And nowhere does it later say "Suddenly the dog took up speaking". Actually, that part starts out with nothing but "wn In", which literally has nothing to do with "suddenly"--although I did render it as "All of a sudden" but not with the meaning it can't have happened before. All there is left of the text is "All of a sudden that dog of his took to talking, [in order to=85?] He ran away from him and reached the lake." It doesn't even say why the prince ran away because that's lost and, of course, the text is full of lacunae after that until it breaks off. Previously, when he was asked "What's this your wandering wherever you please?", the prince made no answer. So he may not have even heard the question. >Stay tuned for more! If you give any more of your own translation, I suggest you work on polishing it so it won't be as clumsy as the examples you've shown so far. Or are you the only one who is supposed to be giving the advice? ;- ) ============================================================================== From: Subject: Re: AEL How To Learn Middle Egyptian--If You Really Want To To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:20:53 -0500 (CDT) Diane J Donaldson wrote: >As a self-taught student of several languages, I appreciate your concern >that a translation by an amateur just starting out might not be as >definitive as one by someone who has access to better resources as well as >a teacher, and that it might even be called "shoddy", but I don't think >that's the point. My point was not at all to diminish the efforts of those who are attempting to learn Egyptian outside of an academic setting, and I truly apologize for giving that impression. Doing it without a teacher is difficult but entirely possible, for people with the motivation. I truly admire people who are able to self-teach languages. I also imagine most are, like me, interested in a) learning the language well and b) making things easier on themselves! Understanding the language period you are dealing with and using the correct translational aids is crucial to both these things. As far as the resources I mentioned -- i.e., a basic Late Egyptian grammar and a dictionary with LE vocab -- these are no more difficult to come by than the resources that most people on this list are already using (Gardiner, Allen, Faulkner, etc.). For a literary text like "Doomed," I recommend Junge's _Late Egyptian Grammar_. It runs about the same price as a new copy Gardiner's grammar on Amazon. The Woerterbuch der Aegyptischen Sprache will have most of the vocab that you won't find in, say, Faulkner, and can be found online here: http://www.egyptology.ru/lang.htm . The main thing to keep in mind is that there are some really weird spellings in LE that can make it hard to look things up. Megaera Lorenz University of Chicago ============================================================================== Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:26:31 +0200 From: Serge Rosmorduc To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I A few grammatical remarks in this (a bit too heated for my taste) discussion: > xr ir m-xt pA Xrd aAy.tw iw=f xr Tsy r tAy=f tp-Hw.t iw=f Hr > gmH wa n Tsm iw=f m-sA wa n s aA iw=f Hr Sm.t Hr tA mi.t iw=f > Hr Dd n pAy=f sDm nty r-gs=f ix pA nty Hr Sm.t m-sA pA s.t > (sic!) aA nty m ii.t Hr [tA] mi.t iw=f Dd n=f Tsm pAy iw pA > Xrd hr Dd n=f imm in=tw n=i wa n mi Kd=f wn in pA sDm Hr Sm.t > Hr wHm=sn n Hm=f a. w. s. wn in Hm=f Hr Dd imm iTt=tw n=f wa n > ktkt Sri [nn b]gs HAty=f aHa.n=tw Hr iTt=tw n=f pA Tsm > > Marianne's translation: After awhile, the prince grew older. > He went up to the roof of the house and spied a greyhound that > was going behind an adult walking upon a way. He said to his > servant, who was with him, “What is that following after the > grownup on the road?” It was told to him, “That’s a hound.” > Then the prince said, “Let one be brought to me just like it.” > The servant went to repeat this to His Majesty. His Majesty > said, “Procure a small one for him so that he won’t become > rebellious in his heart.” Therefore a hound was procured for > him. > > > Suggested revision: Most of this is ok. The first sentence > includes a First Present, but you have rightly translated it > in the past tense, because the verb (aAy.tw) is a stative. > Most of the paragraph consists of continuatives. The phrase > “He spied a dog that was walking behind an adult . . .” is > constructed with a virtual relative – i.e., a circumstantial > First Present (iw + suffix pronoun subject + adverbial phrase). > > Grammatically speaking, "ir" is used in this case of constructs to introduce a subordinate in front of the main clause. the first present "pA Xrd aAy.0" (the final "t" is not significant here) is part of this subordinate, as the main clause for this form is normally the continuative (so, iw=f Hr Tsi...). Neveu, "La langue des Ramsès", p. 173 and following has a very thorough discussion of the subject. So the grammar gives : And then, as the child had grown up, he went up to his terrace , and he saw a dog ... > Now things start to get a little more sketchy: > > xr ir m-xt nA hrw.w swA Hr nn iw pA Xrd Hr tnw m Ha.wt=f nb.t > iw=f Hr Hab n pAy=f it m Dd ii.t ix iw(=i) minA Hms.kwi xr mak > wi wD.kwi n pA Sayt imm xAa.tw=i iry=i n HAty=i i-ir.t pA nTr > ir.t pA nty m ib=f > > ... > (“in order that I might act . . .”). The next sentence begins > with a Late Egyptian nominative sDm=f, as signified by the > prothetic reed leaf. This is a second tense construction, > which places emphasis on the adverbial phrase at the end of > the sentence (“according to what is in his heart”). > The i.ir.t pA nTr ir.t pA nty m ib=f is not the nominal form. It's the i.ir.t=f sDm form, that is, the late Egyptian equivalent of Middle Egyptian "r sDm.t=f" so it simply translates "until the god has done according to his will". This being said, I suggest to the members of the list who feel they can handle middle Egyptian to study also late Egyptian. There are two beginner's grammar available, Junge and Neveu (the second one is in French). You will have access to a world of very lively texts. Best regards, S. Rosmorduc ============================================================================== From: Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:01:12 -0500 (CDT) Serge Rosmorduc wrote: >The i.ir.t pA nTr ir.t pA nty m ib=f is not the nominal form. >It's the i.ir.t=f sDm form, that is, the late Egyptian equivalent of >Middle Egyptian "r sDm.t=f" >so it simply translates "until the god has done according to his will". Ah, yes, thank you! I had a nagging feeling I was missing something there. That's the hazard of trying to do something like this so hastily and sans resources. Thanks for your notes. -Megaera Lorenz University of Chicago ============================================================================== Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 01:13:05 +0200 From: Zbigniew Szczudlik To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I I don't really know what your point is in trying to denounce Marianne's translation efforts. Even though I am quite an amateur as far as AEL is concerned, I do know a thing or two about translation (as a study) and teaching, and IMHO, she did a great job with the text. First and foremost, her translation wasn't meant to serve as a grammar reference. You have totally missed this point. She has a clear understanding that a word-for-word translation must be a poor one. Her version reads nicely and has the natural flow - yours doesn't. You can't see a writer behind the text - all you can see is grammar and structures. You don't get it that a purpose of translation is to get the meaning across, so that it will be understood with as little effort as possible. The reader can't be forced to stop in the middle and think "This wording right here is really awkward! Did Egyptians really thought and talked like this?" (see your version). Sorry to put it bluntly, Magaera, but you seem to be obsessed with hypercorrectness. Moreover, you have no monopoly on choosing right means (i.e. texts) and interpreting them. Have you, as an university faculty, ever said a nice word to a learner? Zbigniew ============================================================================== From: Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:25:16 -0500 (CDT) Marianne, Most of your response to my critique has to do with my level of detail and the literal nature of my translation, which is an entirely different discussion. I'll just address this one specific concern for now: >So you think it really says "I am commended to this fate??" Or "now look at me"?? >The first doesn't even deserve comment and --well-- where does it say "now look at me"? >I don't see any glyphs for that. wD=kwi n pA SAy wD means to command, hand over, commend to. In the stative, it is best translated with a passive sense. wD=kwi n= "I am handed over to/commended to", pA="the/this", SAy="fate". The immediately preceding phrase, xr mak wi, means, very literally, "Now see/behold me." "Look here" is probably a more idiomatic translation. I get the sense that you are not particularly interested in what I have to offer by way of analysis, so I think I'll stop for now. In the meantime, I think we've both made our respective points and should probably stop before this discussion deteriorates any further. Let's agree to disagree on this subject. If anyone else is interested, I'd still be happy to write up a translation and/or grammatical commentary of my own, and I am also happy to get input/criticisms/revisions on what I've done so far. Thanks to Serge Rosmorduc for his commentary, corrections, and further input on resources. Megaera Lorenz University of Chicago ============================================================================== From: Ahatnakht@aol.com Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 05:31:50 EDT Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk >>Sorry to put it bluntly, Magaera, but you seem to be obsessed with >>hypercorrectness. Moreover, you have no monopoly on choosing right means >>(i.e. texts) and interpreting them. Have you, as an university faculty, >>ever said a nice word to a learner? I think everybody should try and calm down a bit here - the sort of personal attacks that have started creeping into this thread do surely not belong onto this List! >>First and foremost, her translation wasn't meant to serve as a grammar >>reference. You have totally missed this point. I think Zbigniew has missed the point, too, to quote his own words. As I understand Magaera, the point is whether a polished translation can serve as a study aide. In my opinion, it can only do so in a limited fashion, particularly when it comes to an ancient language, because a) any polished translation (whether of an ancient or modern text) is the translator's re-interpretation of the original, trying to preserve what the original tries to express to the best of his/her abilities. Of course, this can never be done by literal, or even close translation, since grammar, usage and idioms rarely have a precise equivalent in another language (hence the virtual intranslatability of jokes!). In order to pick out nuances in the language we can, in our mother tongue or any modern language we are thoroughly familar with, rely on our "instinct" - in other words, we can distinguish nuances of meaning between two grammatically correct sentence that on the surface seem to be expressing the same thing. In other words, the grammar rules of a modern language can be internalised and then "forgotten" as we become fluent. However, here we are concerned with learning an Ancient language, of which only a skeleton is preserved and only a small part of the various registers, and, very importantly, which was not concerned with recording spoken language in the first place - i.e. we don't know the spoken everyday language, we don't know dialects, we don't have a complete morphological picture of the grammar before Coptic, and we can only work out nuances by content, context and comparison of instances of the phrase, construction, etc in as many texts as possible. A polished translation will help the beginner by giving him/her a sense of the content of the text and a sense of the beauty of the text, no more. Speaking from personal experience, it does not greatly help with the actual understanding of the grammatical structure of the text which you need in order to make your own translation. In order to learn the Ancient Egyptian language well and to be able to pick out precise meaning, we have to rely on grammatical analysis (even though experience will, of course, eventually bring a certain amount of "instinct"). The wide divergence in the translation of difficult text passages in published translations illustrates this point - they are educated guesses at what fits the words and grammatical structure in the passage and the context. And even when you read these published "beautiful" translation you will find plenty of footnotes where the translator explains the scientific reason for their choice - so the translation was by no means "instinctual", There is nothing wrong with this, but I think the point Magaera is making, is that if you want to use a translation to help the beginner learn the language, you need a more literal translation as well as grammatical nit-picking. I am afraid that I agree with this! When I trained as a translator, we first had to learn to analyse grammar and style in great detail, even in a modern language, as well as memorising idioms and common usage in different "levels" of language (eg. colloquial, literary, legal, newspaper usage...) - and then we could go and do free and beautiful translations that evoke the same "feelings" in the reader as the original did. There is a particular passage in the Eloquent Peasant I am currently trying to figure out, and none of the published translations seems to match the original text very closely, even though they all make perfect sense in context. However, they are of no use to me in analysing the actual grammatical structure of the original sentence and therefore not really that helpful to furthering my understanding of Middle Egyptian. Even though I am a trained translator and delight in well crafted translation, I am not yet sufficiently certain of my understanding of all the nuances of Middle Egyptian to attempt "beautiful" translations very often - at the moment I am more concerned with understanding exactly what the original text is trying to convey and by what means. Therefore I don't just read grammar books but scientific texts as well (and thank you, Marianne, for the link to Zonhoven's thesis!) A great resource for "scientific" rather than literary translations of a number of Middle Egyptian texts is "Egyptian Literature 1800 BC: Questions and Readings" by Stephen Quirke. As for polished translation, to me no-one surpasses Miriam Lichtheim for sheer readibility, although I am also very fond of Erik Hornung's translations! Tilly ahatnakht@aol.com ============================================================================== From: "Jenny Carrington" To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 21:51:28 +1000 Hi Megaera, This sort of critical analysis is just what has been lacking on this forum for some time now. I would be interested in your translation and commentary. Perhaps it's time for interested persons on the list to decide upon another Middle Egyptian text to translate. Any suggestions? m Htp Jenny Carrington ============================================================================== From: Carl Edlund Anderson To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 09:46:32 -0500 On 25 Sep 2009, at 18:25 , wrote: > If anyone else is interested, I'd still be happy to write up a > translation and/or grammatical commentary of my own I think that would provide a valuable reference! Cheers, Carl -- Carl Edlund Anderson http://www.carlaz.com/ ============================================================================== From: David New Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 01:44:10 +0800 Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Jenny, Absolutely! There are clearly many talented people here with much to contribute. ============================================================================== From: Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: To: "Ancient Egyptian Language List" Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:48:52 -0500 (CDT) Tilly, Thank you. You put my point considerably more eloquently than I managed to. Polished translations like Lichtheim's are published specifically for people who do not know the original language and are interested in reading the text in their own while getting an idea of what it "felt" like to the original reader or listener. Such translations provide a wonderful introduction to the ancient texts, but they make very frustrating language study aids, especially if they come with limited notes (or none at all). (Compound that with trying to use a grammar that doesn't cover or fully explain a lot of what you are going to find in a particular text, and you have a recipe for confusion and frustration - hence my original concern about trying to translate "The Doomed Prince" armed with only a Middle Egyptian grammar!) Translations that are published in more "scholarly" venues, like Egyptological journals, tend to look pretty different. They are usually accompanied with images of the original text, a transliteration, and detailed notes on any linguistic problems present in the text. The translations themselves look more like the one I just provided. This is because these translations are intended for people who are interested in reading the original language and understanding the exact process that the translator used to reach his or her conclusions. Translations of this type are much more helpful and less frustrating to students who are trying to learn the language. (I understand that people who don't have university affiliations or at least access to an academic library often have limited access to such publications, which is truly aggravating. I feel that this information should be available to anyone who is interested in it.) In every translation class I have taken, the format has been essentially the same: First the student is asked to read aloud a few lines in transliteration, then provide a fairly literal translation. The professor then grills the student about various grammatical aspects of the lines just read and translated. Some professors will follow this up by asking the student to put what they have just read into "idiomatic English." This process ensures that the student fully understands what they are reading. I haven't been on this list long enough to see how group translation efforts are usually carried out here, but I wonder if a format similar to the one outlined above might be useful. Perhaps something along the lines of a transliteration, followed by a close (I think literal is not exactly the right word for what is usually produced at this stage) translation with detailed grammatical analysis, discussion and commentary, followed ultimately by a group-produced polished translation? If the entire process were then published in some accessible place, it could provide an amazingly useful study aid for future students. (Of course, if something like this already exists and I just don't know about it, let me know!) Megaera Lorenz University of Chicago ============================================================================== Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 22:48:33 -0500 From: Robert Myers To: Ancient Egyptian Language List Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I How about the first section of PtahHotep? The strongest reason I ask is that it seems to me from the differences in the versions that this was a memorized text (at least at certain times). The cadence of the first section in P. Prisse seems off, and after several years of looking at it, I think a better arrangement of the lines could be achieved. Bob == Jenny Carrington wrote: > > Hi Megaera, > > This sort of critical analysis is just what has been lacking on this > forum for some time now. I would be interested in your translation and > commentary. > > Perhaps it's time for interested persons on the list to decide upon > another Middle Egyptian text to translate. Any suggestions? > > m Htp > Jenny Carrington ============================================================================== To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Part I Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 07:34:18 -0400 From: ahatnakht@aol.com >This sort of critical analysis is just what has been lacking on this forum for some time now. >I would be interested in your translation and commentary.? Indeed! Even though I don't feel ready to embark on studying Late Egyptian quite yet, this would make an excellent first "taster"! ============================================================================== From: "Marianne Luban" Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:43:25 GMT To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: ---------- Original Message ---------- From: Ahatnakht@aol.com [snip] >I think Zbigniew has missed the point, too, to quote his own words. >As I understand Magaera, the point is whether a polished translation can >serve as a study aide. As I understand it, Megaera at first stated that, if she hadn't had the advantage of her academic training she would have, in her own words, been able to come up with no better than a "shoddy" translation--which pretty much assumes a priori that many of us here would be able to do no better than that. During her analysis of my translation of "Doomed" she didn't really disagee with my reading of the text [except in one place where she contends that a dog wasn' t the speaker but someone else]. Then she suggested changes to a more literal translation. Zbigniew, as I understand him, saw no point to that and I think he's right for the reason we, as translators, owe something to the original author. Since Egyptian and English are not that compatible in expression, we have the obligation to make his text as readable and interesting as possible. "Polished" is one way of putting it and Megaera, herself, said she would try to offer such a translation of her own. Is a more literal one more helpful *here*? Probably. But not for publication, even on a website. You say you like Lichtheim's translations and I do, too, but you may be sure hers in her books will be a polished version. The same goes for the other translators and, if you check Lichtheim's version of "Doomed" against, say, William Kelly Simpson's--both philologists are going to vary quite a bit, at times, in their ways of expressing certain passages. We all have gone to portrait galleries. We do not expect that the artists should have painted every muscle, vein and sinew under the skin of the face--and would be appalled if that were the case [even though I know of at least one artist who specializes in that]. Writing is an art, too, and has to be approached that way--by each as well as he can. That includes translators, who must deal with rendering something readable in a certain language without offending the intent of the original author. I am sorry that such a charming tale as "The Doomed Prince" has led to any acrimony here--but if we don't come in with guns blazing and give one another the benefit of the doubt we'll all be better off. In my experience, attitude usually engenders more of the same. We all share a love for Egyptian, so let's view one another in that light. Marianne Luban http://thetimetravelerreststop.blogspot.com/ ============================================================================== From: Ahatnakht@aol.com Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 15:43:33 EDT Subject: Re: AEL Annotated Group Translations To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk In a message dated 27/09/2009 19:11:09 GMT Daylight Time, megaera@uchicago.edu writes: > I haven't been on this list long enough to see how group > translation efforts are usually carried out here, but I wonder > if a format similar to the one outlined above might be useful. > Perhaps something along the lines of a transliteration, > followed by a close (I think literal is not exactly the right > word for what is usually produced at this stage) translation > with detailed grammatical analysis, discussion and commentary, > followed ultimately by a group-produced polished translation? There are some texts which were done in a similar manner in the past - you'll find them on the website of the List. They are invaluable study aids - I used the group's Westcar translation extensively, mostly after I finished my own, but sometimes also when I was well and truly stuck, and I have learned a great deal from the line-by-line discussions - which even transgressed into fascinating new threads engendered by the content of the text, such as, e.g., a thread on rites surrounding childbearing in Ancient times. Tilly Mechthild Burton ahatnakht@aol.com ============================================================================== From: Ahatnakht@aol.com Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 15:37:03 EDT Subject: Re: AEL "The Doomed Prince" Translation Critique: Let's Move On! To: AEgyptian-L@rostau.org.uk In a message dated 27/09/2009 19:10:55 GMT Daylight Time, mluban@netzero.net writes: >>You say you like Lichtheim's translations and I do, too, >>but you may be sure hers in her books will be a polished version. >>The same goes for the other translators and, if you check >>Lichtheim's version of "Doomed" against, say, >>William Kelly Simpson's--both philologists are going to vary >>quite a bit, at times, in their ways of expressing certain passages. I think that was precisely my point. And I also completely agree everything you say about the translator's obligations - for the purpose of published literary translations. I am simply saying, "polished" translations aren't terribly good study aids for someone trying to learn the original language of the text. And since the more "literal" and commentated translation don't get published very often where they are accessible to the amateur student, a commentated translation on a place like this list is very useful. >>I am sorry that such a charming tale as "The Doomed Prince" >>has led to any acrimony here--but if we don't come in with >>guns blazing and give one another the benefit of the doubt we'll >>all be better off. In my experience, attitude usually engenders >>more of the same. We all share a love for Egyptian, so let's view >>one another in that light. I am sure that most of us would learn a lot if you and Magaera would conduct an on-list discussion of various aspects of the Doomed Prince -if a little less heated :-) - cordial academic disagreement is interesting and leads to new insights! After all you clearly don't base your opinions just on "translation instinct" either, judging by the most useful resources you cite in your posts, which again is something incredibly helpful to amateurs who don't have access to specialist libraries or even extensive bibiliographies to find out what background reading there is available in the first place. ...and as it happens, I am most interested in the notion of an indicative sDm=f in Middle Egyptian which you mentioned in one of your posts and happily now have another scent to follow ... (life's too short for all the things that there are to read and study: I shall need library and internet access in the afterlife - somebody care to compose the appropriate addendum to the Books of Going Forth... "polished" of course! ?) Tilly Mechthild Burton ahatnakht@aol.com ==============================================================================