Commentary page 11

[Home] [Commentary p. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11] [Hieroglyph P11]

Commentary for pWestcar, AEL Page 11, Lines 1 - 20


Go to Line: 1-4 5-6 7-10 11-12 13-15 16-17 18-20

**under discussion**

Lines 1-4 [next] [top] [prev]

iri.w is irr.t pA-ii.t tp-im=i
iw=i Hr snsn wTz.w.t
aHa.n TAi.n=f mHy SAi r=s
aHa.n iri.n=f r=s sxt bin.t
Lines 1 - 2 appear particularly difficult and attracted considerable discussion. I have only given only the first few opinions. Click here to read the full discussion.
[Hans van Haarst, 25/12/97; AEL Westcar P11 L1-L10]

L1: "What do you do ? To me do you come
[This] starts with a passive sDm=f used impersonally. Then follows the interrogatory particle is. So literally this means something like : "Is there being acted ?"
Next follows a new sentence that consists of a nominal/emphatic sDm=f : irr=T ,the object : pA iy.t and the adverbial adjunct/vedette : Hr-im=i.

L2: "... and now I am getting involved in treason !"
[This] is a circumstantial subclause, which normally would function as the vedette/pilot term. iw is an important particle. It is a marker of time ('now' I am getting involved in treason) as well as a marker of the adverbial nature of the sentence.
In iw sDm.n=f, sDm.n=f represents a circumstantial verb form with relative past tense ( relative with respect to the time of the speaker or the main sentence ). But in combination with iw it represents an absolute past tense. In relation to 'now' he has heard (relative past tense)=> he has heard (absolute past tense)
Also according to the theory of Polotsky, a bare sDm.n=f is the nominal/emphatic sDm.n=f. However in iw sDm.n=f the verb form is circumstantial. So iw is also a marker of 'adverbialness'. Here the construction iw=i Hr snsn wTs.t is used to indicate an action that is going on (progressive aspect).
[additional comments by Hans on 4/1/98; Re: AEL Westcar P11 L1-2, in response to questions by MDS on 1/198]

The passive sDm=f can be used in 2 ways.
1. As an initial verbal verb form just like the indicative sDm=f.
2. As a circumstantial verb form
- after certain particles (eg. aHa.n or iw);
- or as a substitute for the circumstantial *sDm.n.tw=f

I think we are dealing here with case 1, so there is no need for a initial
particle. Furthermore the passive sDm=f is very often used impersonally :
eg. Sin. B247 : Sbb.w atx.w tp-mAa=i "Next to me one kneaded [bread] and brewed [beer]."
A distinctive mark of the passive sDm=f is the morpheme .w . That is why I wrote iri.w .

The Hr-im is a mistake, I meant tp-im . The subject of irr I wrote T and not t, because T is M.E. 2.s.f. The difficulty which I have with these 2 sentences

irr=T pA iy.t tp-im=i
iw=i Hr snsn wTs.t

- is that iw=i Hr snsn wTs.t means 'while I am ...' and not 'so that I am ..', a prospective sDm=f would have been used then : snsn=i wTs.t. Therefore I considered tp-im=i to be the vedette. However in the Blackman edition I found : irt=t, still another possibility ? I hope that someone else in this group can clarify these 2 lines.
[G.Graham, 31/12/97; Re: AEL Westcar P11 L1-2]

aHa.n Dd.n n=s pAy=s-sn iri.w is irr.T pA-ii.t tp-jm=i
Then her brother said to her: Is your action of coming to me
iw=i Hr snsn wTz.w.t
"... so that I am implicated in accusations, what is (properly) done?"

[To rephrase this:] "Is it indeed done (in all propriety), your making a coming to me and I am (now) implicated in accusations?"
I think what he is trying to say is: "is it RIGHT for you to come and get me involved in this mess?" Now, grammatically, how does it say this?

jrj.w - passive sDm.w=f (?)
js - enclitic particle
jrr.t - nominanlized form of the auxiliary verb, possessed by =t
p3-jj.t - infinitive with the definite article, probably for some kind of emphasis, almost, "this coming of yours", but with the "yours" expressed on the previous auxiliary jrr.t(?) Maybe the two words stand in a genitival relationship, since both are technically nouns?
tp-jm=j - preposition and pronominal object
jw=j - jw used like Late Egyptian, making what follows somehow circumstantial to what came before?
Hr snsn - pseudoverbal construction, snsn means "partake/participate/share"
wTz.w.t - "accusations", i.e. something which is" raised up" in a court.

L3: Then he took a bundle of flax against her
Here again we see the combination aHa.n+circumstantial sDm.n=f, which is a typical narrative verb form.

L4: and gave her a fierce beating.
Any ideas why r=s is before sx.t bin.t ? I don't understand it because normally r=s, an adverbial adjunct comes last in a sentence. Maybe it has to be n=s ? A dative always shifts to the front of the sentence.
Lines 5-6 [next] [top] [prev]

SAs pw iri.n tA-wbA.y.t r ini.t n=s ikn n.y mw

[Hans van Haarst, 25/12/97; AEL Westcar P11 L1-L10]

L5: The maid went
The construction sDm pw ir.n=f is the equivalent of aHa.n sDm.n=f. It is used here because verbs of movement like iy, Sm, SAs etc. don't have a circumstantial sDm.n=f. This construction is also used to lay stress on the dynamics of the verbal action.

L6: to fetch for herself a bucket of water.
r+ini.t is r+infinitive of ini. Instead of the preposition Hr, r is used here. The preposition r+inf. is often used to express the purpose of the verbal action (Gardiner p. 228). Do not confuse this with the pseudo-verbal construction with r+inf (Gardiner p. 253).
The dative n=s is shifted to the front of the sentence (compare L4).

Lines 7-10 [next] [top] [prev]

aHa.n iTi.n sy mzH
SAs pw iri.y r Dd st n rd-Dd.t in pAy=s sn
gmi.n=f rd-Dd.t Hmsi.ti

tp=s Hr m-As.t=s ib=s Dwi.w r ix.t nb.t

[Hans van Haarst, 25/12/97; AEL Westcar P11 L1-L10]

L7: Then a crocodile seized her.
The word order is here Verb Object Subject, and not the usual Verb Subject Object (VSO) because independent pronouns that are object shift to the front.

L8: A going was done to tell this to Rededjedet by her brother
This is the passive variant of SAs pw ir.n=f (Gardiner p.312). The preposition in is used to express the agens (Gardiner p. 42) In better english : Her brother went to tell it to R.

L9-10: That he found Rededjedet was, while she sat with her head on her lap, while her heart more angry than anything.
The sentence starts with a nominal/emphatic sDm.n=f form. This is followed by the object (rdDd.t).
Next there are 3 adverbial adjuncts to Rededjedet :
1. Hms.ti , stative (or old perfective, pseudo-participle) 3. s. f. (Gardiner p. 234)
2. tp=s Hr mAs.t=s , pseudo-verbal construction without introductory word (Gardiner p.246)
3. ib=s Dw(.w) r x.t nb.t , pseudo-verbal construction without introductory word (Gardiner p.246)
When a pseudo-verbal sentence starts with a nominal subject (here tp=s and ib=s) no introductory particle (such as iw) is needed.
In this case the last adjunct shoul be the vedette. However If there are more than 1 adjunct you can often get a better translation by : "making a subordinate clause of the initial verbform and turning the clauses of circumstance into main sentences".( Polotsky, Egyptian Tenses, p. 8 )
So by applying this rule-of-thumb we get the translation :

When he found Redjedet she sat with her head in her lap, while her heart
was more angry then anything.
Lines 11-12 [next] [top] [prev]

aHa.n Dd.n=f n=s
Hnw.t=i irr=T pA-ib Hr-mi
aHa.n Dd.n=s
tA-pw kti.t xpr.t m pA-pr

L11.
[M. Vygus, 1/1/98, AEL Westcar P11/L11-] aHa.n Dd.n=f n=s Hnw.t=i irr=T pA-ib Hr-mi Then he said to her, "My mistress, why is the heart acting like this ?"
[MDS, 3/1/98, Re>AEL Westcar P11/L11-]

O my mistress, why (hr-m, "on what") are you in this mood (irr=T pA ib "you make this heart").
This sentence is used as an example by A. Loprieno in his book, Ancient Egyptian (see p.192). The sentence, "Why are you in this mood" exemplifies a topicalised verbal predicate that is placed in clause initial position. In this particular case the verb is in the aorist tense, so the unmarked sDm=f is converted to the nominal/emphatic/second tense form, characterised by reduplication (or gemination) of the second consonant in 3rd weak verbs, so we have irr beginning the sentence instead of iri.
The second tense verb form shifts the focus to the circumstances of the action (the 'how, where, when and why' as James Hoch describes it in section 148 of his grammar). In this example I suppose it is emphasising the adverbial phrase Hr-mi, 'on what'), so the speaker is really pleading for a reason as to why she is so downcast.
L12
[M. Vygus, 1/1/98, AEL Westcar P11/L11-] aHa.n Dd.n=s tA-pw kti.t xpr.t m pA-pr Then she said it is (because of ) the girl who lived in this house
[MDS, 3/1/98, Re>AEL Westcar P11/L11-]

An interesting construction. I think it is a bipartite nominal sentence. The paradigm for these is the sentence consisting of two nouns, representing the predicate and subject, rmT pw, 'It is a man'. However when the first noun is not simply one word, but a phrase, then the pw tends to jump up to near the beginning of the sentence, generally taking up the 2nd position if possible. So we see in the pWestcar example, there are two nominal phrases;
a) The subject, the demonstrative pronoun pw, 'it is'
b) The predicate, 'the girl who was in the house'
The dem. pron. pw has slipped in to the second word position in the sentence, so disrupting the predicate. The clue here is that tA is not generally a lone word, and the it looks very much like tA and kti.t should be together (can you see why?).


Lines 13-15 [next] [top] [prev]

m.k ms sy Smi.ti r Dd

iw=i r Smi.t wTz=i

aHa.n rdi.n=f tp=f (m) m-Xr.w
[M. Vygus, 1/1/98, AEL Westcar P11/L11-] "Behold Indeed, she has set out saying, ..." "I am setting out to inform against (you)." "Then he put his head downwards."
Lines 16-17 [next] [top] [prev]

aHa.n Dd.n=f
Hnw.t=i xni sy ii.ti r Dd n=i ///r///=i

iri.y=s A r gs=i
[M. Vygus, 1/1/98, AEL Westcar P11/L11-] "Then he said, "My mistress, she spoke as she was passing in order to say to me ///////// " ???she went off at my side ???
[MDS, 4/1/98; Re: AEL Westcar P11/L17]

xni is cited by Faulkner as a non-enclitic particle in Westcar. It is normally a noun ('speech, utterance, matter, affair'). In this example, it supports a dependent pronoun (not a suffix pronoun). The dep. pron. sy is the subject of the following stative (fem. suffix ending, ti) ii.ti. Under these conditions, xni I think would be considered a non-enclitic (ie. can stand alone at the start of a sentence) particle. Another non-enclitic particle that could have been used would be mk ('see!'). So why use this one? Can anyone suggest a meaning? Mark has given a verbal translation ('she spoke'), but I think it should conform more to some kind of exclamatory tone, eg. '*Say*, she came to speak to me...."
Is ir.y a prospective verb form? The meaning could be something like "[and she asked if] she could make tracks beside me." There is that rare word A again, which is probably a verb ("tread, make tracks") and was used earlier in pWestcar, but there are so few instances of its use it is difficult to get a full idea of its meaning. This highlights the way egyptian has been deciphered: using all instances of words in the various texts and interpreting their meaning from context (and determinatives, etc.).
So my analysis would be for this section: a prospective verb form (ir.y), suffix pronoun (=s), infinitive (of A ?, 'a treading'), prepositional phrase ("beside me").
[Hans van Haarst, 5/1/98; AEL (Fwd by M. Wilson) Re: AEL Westcar P11/L17]

The stative iy.ti is used, because verbs of motion cannot use the circumstantial sDm.n=f. In this option xni has to be a particle : particle+personal pronoun+stative. There is another occurrence of xni in the wisdom text of Anii, but I don't have that text, so I don't really know what xni means. A meaning like actually seems to fit : "Mylady, actually she came to tell me ..."
Another translation I read, was :
"Mylady, the case is : she came to tell me ... "
Here xni is considered to be a noun meaning 'case, matter' ( W III, 289 ) In Egyptian : Hnwt=i xni is <pw> sy iy.ti r Dd n=i /// . The particle is is used to lay an emphasis on xni. In that case sometimes pw is left out. So perhaps the text was written xni is sy ... and the scribe overlooked the particle is. But I doubt if : xni is sy iy.ti ... is correct Egyptian.
I agree with you about iry=s being a prospective sDm=f. It is used here in a subclause : 'so that' (subjunctive use). Then follows the enclitic particle 'A', even. The determinative of the following 'war' suggest a meaning of land or location. The verb ' war' means to flee, so perhaps 'war' means refuge here. The Woerterbuch only has war.t, quarters (of craftsmen).
Line 18-20 [next] [top] [prev]

aHa.n iri.n=i n=s sxt bin.t
aHa.n=s Smi.ti r ikn n=s nhy n.y mw

aHa.n iTi.n sy mzH
[M. Vygus, 1/1/98, AEL Westcar P11/L11-] "Then I gave her a severe beating." "Then she went to draw for herself a little water." "Then a crocodile seized her." << Prev Page

*** THE END ***


Up to line: 1-4 5-6 7-10 11-14 15-17 18-20
[Home] [Commentary p. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11] [Hieroglyph P11] [top]