|
- What follows is a list of Egyptian graphemes and their phonemes:
(The first character between {}s is the proposed ascii writing
for the phoneme which follows in //s.)
- {3} = {Egyptian-vulture} It is still hotly debated exactly which
phoneme {3} represented. For the purposes of learning Egyptian
it is not necessary to have an opinion on the matter, but various
suggestions have been proposed. At first it was believed that
{3} represented /'/, the glottal stop, which is a click in the
back of one's throat made at the beginning of a syllable starting
with a vowel. More recent research has led scholars to recognize
that {3} must have represented some liquid sound, such as /l/
or some quality of /r/, such as a uvular /R/ as in German or French.
My personal view is that it represented /l/, but various European
colleagues might still disagree on this matter.
{j} = {reed-stalk} Its value is also still debated. It either
represented /'/ or /y/, or both of these values. This is why Gardiner
opted for {<i'>} in his transliteration system. (note: any letters
written between <>s indicate that they are to be read as a single
unit, thus <i'> represents an {i} with a glottal stop mark over
it, and <h.> represents {h} with a dot under it. The system proposed
here does not actually involve this usage, but rather it proposes
single characters for each orthographic value.)
{y} = {double-reed-stalk} or {dual-strokes} It seems to have represented
the /y/ or /yy/ sounds, both of which are so close that it is
hardly a distinction worth mentioning.
{<} = {arm} Its value is securely understood to be /</, a voiced
pharyngial as in Hebrew and Arabic {ayin}.
{w} = {quail-chick} or {rope-coil} Their values are /w/.
{b} = {foot} Its value is /b/.
{p} = {box}: /p/.
{f} = {horned-viper}: /f/.
{m} = {owl}: /m/.
{n} = {water}: /n/.
{r} = {mouth}: /r/.
{h} = {room}: /h/.
{H} (dotted-h) = {wick}: /<h.>/ (the emphatic "h" of Arabic as
in the letter {<h.>a} and the original pronunciation of Hebrew
{<h.>eth}).
{x} (contac-lens-h) = {hatched-circle}: /<kh>/ (a voiceless uvular
fricative, like the {<kh>af} of Hebrew and the {<kh>a}) of Arabic
and {ch} in German "ach".
{X} (underscore-h) = {cow-belly}: /<khy>/ (a palatalized /<kh>/,
as {ch} in German "ich")
{z} ("bolt-s") = {door-bolt}: earlier scholars thought it represented
/z/, however more recent scholarship has shown that it must actually
have represented /<th>/ ({th} in "thin") Also, of note is the
fact that in Middle Egyptian this sound had disappeared and coalesced
with the second "s", both being pronounced identically as /s/.
This is the reason that Gardiner does not distinguish {z} from
{s} in his book. However, the student should be aware of the fact
that words with these two sounds have distinct etymologies.
{s} = {cloth-fold}: /s/.
{S} (hacek-s) = {pool}: /<sh>/ (the sound of "sh" in "ship").
{q} (doted-k) = {hillock}: /q/. This was an emphatic /k/ articulated
further back in the throat than the /k/ of English. It is like
the {quf} of Hebrew and the {qaf} of Arabic.
{k} = {handled-basket}: /k/.
{g} = {pot-stand}: /g/.
{t} = {loaf}: /t/.
{T} (underscore-t) = {tether}: /<ty>/ like the sound of {ch}
in "church".
{d} = {hand}: /d/. One should note that there is reason to believe
that this sound actually represented an emphatic {t} (dotted "t")
as in Arabic {<t.>a}, however {d} is a convenient character for
representing it as distinct from {t}.
{D} (underscore-d) = {cobra}: /<dy>/. As in the case of {d}, one
should note that there is reason to believe that it really represented
/<t.j>/ which would be a palatalized /<t.>/ of some sort, i.e.;
an emphatic form of /<ty>/.
|