Psalms in proto-semitic

[Arnaud Fournet]

Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

What an ignorant question. First of all, "the Psalms" is not a uniform corpus
but includes texts composed at least 1000, probably more, years apart,
exhibiting numerous linguistic strata.

Any study of Classical Hebrew takes into account all ancient epigraphy and
reconstructs the probable historic forms that led to the attested corpus.

The most celebrated Ugaritic approach to Psalms is Mitchell Dahood's, in the
Anchor Bible.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What an ignorant question.

Sorry if you can't understand the question, and fail to answer it.
A.


First of all, "the Psalms" is not a uniform corpus

Post by Peter T. Daniels
but includes texts composed at least 1000, probably more, years apart,
exhibiting numerous linguistic strata.

ah, any proof of such a claim?
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Any study of Classical Hebrew takes into account all ancient epigraphy and
reconstructs the probable historic forms that led to the attested corpus.

Reference for example?

Post by Peter T. Daniels
The most celebrated Ugaritic approach to Psalms is Mitchell Dahood's, in the
Anchor Bible.

I'm afraid this is again off the mark.
A.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What an ignorant question.

Sorry if you can't understand the question, and fail to answer it.
A.
First of all, "the Psalms" is not a uniform corpus

Post by Peter T. Daniels
but includes texts composed at least 1000, probably more, years apart,
exhibiting numerous linguistic strata.

ah, any proof of such a claim?
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Any study of Classical Hebrew takes into account all ancient epigraphy and
reconstructs the probable historic forms that led to the attested corpus.

Reference for example?

Post by Peter T. Daniels
The most celebrated Ugaritic approach to Psalms is Mitchell Dahood's, in the
Anchor Bible.

I'm afraid this is again off the mark.
A.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

No, Ugaritic is not *very conservative*, not even *conservative*.
Maybe, you don't know much of Ugaritic. Just have a look, and you'll know.
Arabic is to a large extent more conservative than Ugaritic, though younger by two millennia.
A.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

No, Ugaritic is not *very conservative*, not even *conservative*.
Maybe, you don't know much of Ugaritic. Just have a look, and you'll know.
Arabic is to a large extent more conservative than Ugaritic, though younger by two millennia.

I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

Post by Arnaud Fournet
A.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

No, Ugaritic is not *very conservative*, not even *conservative*.
Maybe, you don't know much of Ugaritic. Just have a look, and you'll know.
Arabic is to a large extent more conservative than Ugaritic, though younger by two millennia.

I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

Ugaritic is more evolved than that.
Reduction of z d_ to one phoneme, s t_ to one, s'. c. and s. to one,
ay > e: aw > u:
Eblaite is fairly conservative, but Ugaritic is not especially conservative.
A.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

No, Ugaritic is not *very conservative*, not even *conservative*.
Maybe, you don't know much of Ugaritic. Just have a look, and you'll know.
Arabic is to a large extent more conservative than Ugaritic, though younger by two millennia.

I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

Ugaritic is more evolved than that.
Reduction of z d_ to one phoneme, s t_ to one, s'. c. and s. to one,

One has to wonder where he gets his "information."

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Eblaite is fairly conservative, but Ugaritic is not especially conservative.

One wonders how he imagines Eblaite (East Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

No, Ugaritic is not *very conservative*, not even *conservative*.
Maybe, you don't know much of Ugaritic. Just have a look, and you'll know.
Arabic is to a large extent more conservative than Ugaritic, though younger by two millennia.

I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

Ugaritic is more evolved than that.
Reduction of z d_ to one phoneme, s t_ to one, s'. c. and s. to one,

One has to wonder where he gets his "information."

house just being written bt when y exists suggests that house is *be:t or maybe *bi:t
Try to learn something, senile.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Eblaite is fairly conservative, but Ugaritic is not especially conservative.

One wonders how he imagines Eblaite (East Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed.

Eblaite is rather to the north-west, idiot.
A.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

No, Ugaritic is not *very conservative*, not even *conservative*.
Maybe, you don't know much of Ugaritic. Just have a look, and you'll know.
Arabic is to a large extent more conservative than Ugaritic, though younger by two millennia.

I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

Ugaritic is more evolved than that.
Reduction of z d_ to one phoneme, s t_ to one, s'. c. and s. to one,

One has to wonder where he gets his "information."

house just being written bt when y exists suggests that house is *be:t or maybe *bi:t
Try to learn something, senile.

What does that have to do with the false statements "Reduction of z d_ to one phoneme, s t_ to one, s'. c. and s."? I don't know what "c." could refer to.

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Eblaite is fairly conservative, but Ugaritic is not especially conservative.

One wonders how he imagines Eblaite (East Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed.

Eblaite is rather to the north-west, idiot.

Yes, that was a mistake. I've mentioned before that having lived in two places
where the big water was to the east -- New York and Chicago -- it's hard to remember that there, the big water is to the west. I was often disoriented in
Israel. (Not to mention the lack of surf in the "ocean.")

However, that remark does not answer the question: How do you think Eblaite
(West Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed?

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
However, that remark does not answer the question: How do you think Eblaite
(West Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed?

My own question is: why should we consider Eblaite a form of Akkadian in the first place?
A.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
However, that remark does not answer the question: How do you think Eblaite
(West Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed?

My own question is: why should we consider Eblaite a form of Akkadian in the first place?

Oh, fer Christ's sake. This was settled by 1980. They had stopped calling
it "Proto-Hebrew" by then.

I think a discussion is found in the Albright Centennial volume (called something
like "biblical archeology into the 21st century), but if you can't be bothered
to know anything about the field you claim to have a dilettantish interest in,
I'm not even going to get up and look at the shelf directly across from me.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
However, that remark does not answer the question: How do you think Eblaite
(West Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed?

My own question is: why should we consider Eblaite a form of Akkadian in the first place?

Oh, fer Christ's sake. This was settled by 1980. They had stopped calling
it "Proto-Hebrew" by then.
I think a discussion is found in the Albright Centennial volume (called something
like "biblical archeology into the 21st century), but if you can't be bothered
to know anything about the field you claim to have a dilettantish interest in,
I'm not even going to get up and look at the shelf directly across from me.

as usual, you claim something, and cannot prove it.
As far as I'm concerned, I cannot see a single phonetic innovation shared by Eblaite and Akkadian.
Can you show me one?
A.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
However, that remark does not answer the question: How do you think Eblaite
(West Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed?

My own question is: why should we consider Eblaite a form of Akkadian in the first place?

Oh, fer Christ's sake. This was settled by 1980. They had stopped calling
it "Proto-Hebrew" by then.
I think a discussion is found in the Albright Centennial volume (called something
like "biblical archeology into the 21st century), but if you can't be bothered
to know anything about the field you claim to have a dilettantish interest in,
I'm not even going to get up and look at the shelf directly across from me.

as usual, you claim something, and cannot prove it.
As far as I'm concerned, I cannot see a single phonetic innovation shared by Eblaite and Akkadian.
Can you show me one?

Have I ever claimed to be an Assyrioloogist or an Eblaologist or a Sumerologist?

Unlike you, I look to experts in a field for information about that field.

But we'll have to assume you can't read German, or all your questions about
Eblaite would be answered.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
However, that remark does not answer the question: How do you think Eblaite
(West Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed?

This question is quite oddly worded.

Besides, why are you asking? Did you not decree I'm incompetent in principio?

If you're asking for my own PoV about the phonology of Eblaite, then I would say that this issue is intimately linked with the way archaic Sumerian values for signs are postulated or deduced.
Eblaite looks both very archaic in many respects and innovative in a few others.
Typically, Eblaite seems to change PS *r to l, then PS *l and *y seem to have fused with PS *h. (heth). The other consonants of PS seem to be kept quite faithfully.
Eblaite is very informative about what Sumerian really sounded like.
Incidentally, a number of Hurrian words of Semitic origin have Eblaite phonetic features.
A.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
However, that remark does not answer the question: How do you think Eblaite
(West Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed?

This question is quite oddly worded.

It didn't come out of nowhere.

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Besides, why are you asking? Did you not decree I'm incompetent in principio?
If you're asking for my own PoV about the phonology of Eblaite, then I would say that this issue is intimately linked with the way archaic Sumerian values for signs are postulated or deduced.
Eblaite looks both very archaic in many respects and innovative in a few others.
Typically, Eblaite seems to change PS *r to l, then PS *l and *y seem to have fused with PS *h. (heth). The other consonants of PS seem to be kept quite faithfully.
Eblaite is very informative about what Sumerian really sounded like.
Incidentally, a number of Hurrian words of Semitic origin have Eblaite phonetic features.

I guess you're not aware of Manfred Krebernik's very long two-part article in
ZA setting forth the Eblaite syllabary, IIRC from the early 1980s.

Can you even read German?

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
However, that remark does not answer the question: How do you think Eblaite
(West Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed?

This question is quite oddly worded.

It didn't come out of nowhere.

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Besides, why are you asking? Did you not decree I'm incompetent in principio?
If you're asking for my own PoV about the phonology of Eblaite, then I would say that this issue is intimately linked with the way archaic Sumerian values for signs are postulated or deduced.
Eblaite looks both very archaic in many respects and innovative in a few others.
Typically, Eblaite seems to change PS *r to l, then PS *l and *y seem to have fused with PS *h. (heth). The other consonants of PS seem to be kept quite faithfully.
Eblaite is very informative about what Sumerian really sounded like.
Incidentally, a number of Hurrian words of Semitic origin have Eblaite phonetic features.

I guess you're not aware of Manfred Krebernik's very long two-part article in
ZA setting forth the Eblaite syllabary, IIRC from the early 1980s.
Can you even read German?

ok, so you stick to your policy of abuse, and remain unable to bring anything positive and informative. So be it.
A.

[Frank Zeeb]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I guess you're not aware of Manfred Krebernik's very long two-part article in
ZA setting forth the Eblaite syllabary, IIRC from the early 1980s.

M. Krebernik, Zu Syllabar und Orthographie der lexikalischen Texte aus
Ebla. Teil I, ZA 72 (1982) 178-236; Teil II: Glossar, ZA 73 (1983) 1-47.

Greetings
Frank

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Frank Zeeb

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I guess you're not aware of Manfred Krebernik's very long two-part article in
ZA setting forth the Eblaite syllabary, IIRC from the early 1980s.

M. Krebernik, Zu Syllabar und Orthographie der lexikalischen Texte aus
Ebla. Teil I, ZA 72 (1982) 178-236; Teil II: Glossar, ZA 73 (1983) 1-47.
Greetings
Frank

The papers can be downloaded here:
http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/propylaeumdok/1124/
http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/propylaeumdok/1126/
Enjoy !

[Ruud Harmsen]

Wed, 16 Aug 2017 13:42:59 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Yes, that was a mistake. I've mentioned before that having lived in two places
where the big water was to the east -- New York and Chicago -- it's hard to remember that there, the big water is to the west. I was often disoriented in
Israel. (Not to mention the lack of surf in the "ocean.")

I had that two. In NL the water is to the West, therefore I often feel
New York is westcoast and The Angels and Holy Frankie east.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
One wonders how he imagines Eblaite (East Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed.

Hoping to make this thread a little more civilized. When I mention Magdalenian
you can unite against me, and I am waterproof. Well, Ebla is Minnit in the
Bible, Akkaddian mu-nu-ti-um, akin to MiNuThe on Linear A tablet Hagia Triada
95, given as head of a bull for Mi, as visual pun of a bull leaper standing
on his feet hands feet for Nu, and as an abstract Tree of Life for The.
Now the Magdalenian reading gives MUC NOS SAI, MUC for bull, NOS for mind,
and SAI for life - the Minoan bull leaper having been an emblem for the
astronomer who overcomes the moon bull or lunar cycle and Baal rising as
golden sun calf from the tree of life: the astronomer who secured the life
of the Minoans who depended on seafaring and thus on astronomy. Minos and
Knossos are derivatives of the same formula

MUC NOS SAI Mi NOS Minos

MUC NOS SAI C NOS SAI Knossos

In order to find the phonology of the Psalms you have to go back to, sorry,
Magdalenian, and then proceed forward in time.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Peter T. Daniels
One wonders how he imagines Eblaite (East Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed.

Hoping to make this thread a little more civilized. When I mention Magdalenian
you can unite against me, and I am waterproof. Well, Ebla is Minnit in the
Bible,

Where did you get _that_ from???

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Where did you get _that_ from???

We had this many times, and you always participated in the long discussions.
Cyrus H. Gordon identified the language of Linear A as a Northwest Semitic
language, and was ridiculed for this (at least punished with deadly silence
at a conference). However, Robert Stieglitz and Jan Best followed him,
and in their wake Walther Hinz deciphered Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95
which enumerates the amounts of cereals given to (the priests and piestesses
of) Adu (Hadad Baal who was later identified with Zeus) and Dadumatha,
she loved by the master. Among the cereals is wheat from Minnit (Ebla)
where the best wheat came from (Ezekiel), Akkadian mu-nu-ti-um (2200 BC)
Minoan MiNuThe Minos. Also Ebla worshipped a minotaur. The Minoans came from
Ebla and maintained contact with their old home. The signs used in scribing
MiNuThe are practically the same in hieroglyphic Minoan, Linear A and
Linear B (we had also this). Knossos of the Minoans was New Minnit in
the West, comparable to New York, a not unimportant city somewhere in the
West (for the moment I don't recall the country).

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Where did you get _that_ from???

We had this many times, and you always participated in the long discussions.
Cyrus H. Gordon identified the language of Linear A

We're not talking about Linear A or failed attempts at deciphering it.

You claimed that some name was a name for Ebla.

Oh, there it is, "Minnit."

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
as a Northwest Semitic
language, and was ridiculed for this (at least punished with deadly silence
at a conference). However, Robert Stieglitz and Jan Best followed him,
and in their wake Walther Hinz deciphered Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95
which enumerates the amounts of cereals given to (the priests and piestesses
of) Adu (Hadad Baal who was later identified with Zeus) and Dadumatha,
she loved by the master. Among the cereals is wheat from Minnit (Ebla)
where the best wheat came from (Ezekiel), Akkadian mu-nu-ti-um (2200 BC)
Minoan MiNuThe Minos. Also Ebla worshipped a minotaur. The Minoans came from
Ebla and maintained contact with their old home. The signs used in scribing
MiNuThe are practically the same in hieroglyphic Minoan, Linear A and
Linear B (we had also this). Knossos of the Minoans was New Minnit in
the West, comparable to New York, a not unimportant city somewhere in the
West (for the moment I don't recall the country).

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
We had this many times, and you always participated in the long discussions.
Cyrus H. Gordon identified the language of Linear A as a Northwest Semitic
language, and was ridiculed for this (at least punished with deadly silence
at a conference). However, Robert Stieglitz and Jan Best followed him,
and in their wake Walther Hinz deciphered Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95
which enumerates the amounts of cereals given to (the priests and piestesses
of) Adu (Hadad Baal who was later identified with Zeus) and Dadumatha,
she loved by the master. Among the cereals is wheat from Minnit (Ebla)
where the best wheat came from (Ezekiel), Akkadian mu-nu-ti-um (2200 BC)
Minoan MiNuThe Minos. Also Ebla worshipped a minotaur. The Minoans came from
Ebla and maintained contact with their old home. The signs used in scribing
MiNuThe are practically the same in hieroglyphic Minoan, Linear A and
Linear B (we had also this). Knossos of the Minoans was New Minnit in
the West, comparable to New York, a not unimportant city somewhere in the
West (for the moment I don't recall the country).

Ebla in the 23rd century BC already had cuneiform signs for r and l (rho
and lambda) but exchanged them arbitrarily, for example writing bz-ka-lu
for bu-ka-ru 'first born'. Or they wrote gi-na-rum and gi-na-lum for lyra.
This mix-up of r and l (res and lamedh), Walther Hinz says, was confined
in the Mediterranean and Asia Minor to Eblaite and Minoan.

Having only a short and summary paper by Hinz the equation of Minnit (Hebrew)
Minnith (King's Bible) mnt (Ugaritic) with Ebla, modern Tell Mardikh in
Syria, sixty kilometers south of Aleppo, poses a problem. Ezekiel 27:17
mentions that merchants of Judah and Israel sold wheat from Minnit to Tyros.
Minnit in Judges 11:33 hints at a place near Hisbon in Transjordania
(south of Ammon, opposite of Jericho). That region, which once marked the
southeastern corner of Israel, had sufficient rain to grow cereals without
artificial irrigation - but enough to serve as granary for Asia Minor,
so it was known as mnt as far north as Ugarit?

Following Hinz I look out for another explanation. Hypothesis: Ebla was
the original Minnit. After the sacking of the Royal Palace in 2250 BC
an Ebla tribe left for the region of Hesbon, another sailed westward to
a colony of Ebla on Crete and became the Minoans. Now there had been
temporary tensions between Ebla and Tyros, whereupon merchants of Judah
and Israel bought wheat from Ebla and sold it to Tyros ... In another
case I'd reject such a winded explanation, but everything else fits
perfectly ( http://www.seshat.ch/home/lascaux9.htm )

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Ebla in the 23rd century BC already had cuneiform signs for r and l (rho
and lambda) but exchanged them arbitrarily, for example writing bz-ka-lu
for bu-ka-ru 'first born'. Or they wrote gi-na-rum and gi-na-lum for lyra.
This mix-up of r and l (res and lamedh), Walther Hinz says, was confined
in the Mediterranean and Asia Minor to Eblaite and Minoan.

We have no idea what any "Minoan" language was or sounded like. "Minoan" is a
name Sir Arthur Evans plucked out of mythology because he found extensive
construction in the place where legend placed the Labyrinth of the Minotaur.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Having only a short and summary paper by Hinz the equation of Minnit (Hebrew)
Minnith (King's Bible) mnt (Ugaritic) with Ebla, modern Tell Mardikh in
Syria, sixty kilometers south of Aleppo, poses a problem.

Then stop saying that Minnit is Ebla.

? Ezekiel 27:17

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
mentions that merchants of Judah and Israel sold wheat from Minnit to Tyros.
Minnit in Judges 11:33 hints at a place near Hisbon in Transjordania
(south of Ammon, opposite of Jericho). That region, which once marked the
southeastern corner of Israel, had sufficient rain to grow cereals without
artificial irrigation - but enough to serve as granary for Asia Minor,
so it was known as mnt as far north as Ugarit?

And it's nowhere near Ebla.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Following Hinz I look out for another explanation. Hypothesis: Ebla was
the original Minnit. After the sacking of the Royal Palace in 2250 BC
an Ebla tribe left for the region of Hesbon, another sailed westward to

What on earth is "an Ebla tribe" and "another"?

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
a colony of Ebla on Crete and became the Minoans. Now there had been
temporary tensions between Ebla and Tyros, whereupon merchants of Judah
and Israel bought wheat from Ebla and sold it to Tyros ... In another
case I'd reject such a winded explanation, but everything else fits
perfectly ( http://www.seshat.ch/home/lascaux9.htm )

When have you ever "rejected" anything?

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Then stop saying that Minnit is Ebla.

Apparently I am the only fool on the WWWW (Whole World Wide Web) what
warmly welcomes Walther Hinz' equation Ebla = mu-nu-ti-um (Eblaite, 2200 BC)
mnt (Ugaritic) Minnit (Hebrew) Minnith (King's Bible) MiNuThe (Linear A).
But if a fool then in a manly manner, fooll speed. I go on believing that
MiNuThe was Ebla, and Knossos a subsidiary of mu-nu-ti-um or Ebla, as would
have been Minnith on the altiplano of Ammon (see my message posted minizago).

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Ebla in the 23rd century BC already had cuneiform signs for r and l (rho
and lambda) but exchanged them arbitrarily, for example writing bz-ka-lu
for bu-ka-ru 'first born'. Or they wrote gi-na-rum and gi-na-lum for lyra.
This mix-up of r and l (res and lamedh), Walther Hinz says, was confined
in the Mediterranean and Asia Minor to Eblaite and Minoan.
Having only a short and summary paper by Hinz the equation of Minnit (Hebrew)
Minnith (King's Bible) mnt (Ugaritic) with Ebla, modern Tell Mardikh in
Syria, sixty kilometers south of Aleppo, poses a problem. Ezekiel 27:17
mentions that merchants of Judah and Israel sold wheat from Minnit to Tyros.
Minnit in Judges 11:33 hints at a place near Hisbon in Transjordania
(south of Ammon, opposite of Jericho). That region, which once marked the
southeastern corner of Israel, had sufficient rain to grow cereals without
artificial irrigation - but enough to serve as granary for Asia Minor,
so it was known as mnt as far north as Ugarit?
Following Hinz I look out for another explanation. Hypothesis: Ebla was
the original Minnit. After the sacking of the Royal Palace in 2250 BC
an Ebla tribe left for the region of Hesbon, another sailed westward to
a colony of Ebla on Crete and became the Minoans. Now there had been
temporary tensions between Ebla and Tyros, whereupon merchants of Judah
and Israel bought wheat from Ebla and sold it to Tyros ... In another
case I'd reject such a winded explanation, but everything else fits
perfectly ( http://www.seshat.ch/home/lascaux9.htm )

Heshbon and nearby Minnith (not yet located) lie on the altiplano in the
middle of Ammon. The altiplano was "very fertile" and produced considerable
amounts of cereals. 2 Chronicles 27:5 tells us that Jotham fought the king
of Ammon and prevailed. Hereupon the Ammonites payed Jotham one hundred
talents of silver, 10,000 measures of wheat, and 10,000 measures of barley;
the same again in the second year; and again in the third year. However,
the number 10,000 must be symbolical. 2 Chronicles 25:11,12 says that
Amuzyad smote 10,000 dwellers of Seir, and the Judaeans cast 10,000 captured
Edomites from the top of a rock. Power propaganda making victories bigger.

But the altiplano of Ammon w a s fertile. And maybe this was the reason
why a hypothetical tribe from Ebla, forced to leave the fertile alluvial
plain north of their home, to settle on the fertile altiplano of Ammon ?
Ezekiel 27:17 - "wheat from Minnith" - would then refer to the subsidiary
of the original mu-nu-ti-um (Eblaite, 2200 BC) mnt (Ugaritic) Minnit (Hebrew)
Minnith (King's Bible) MiNuTe (Linear A).

This version is simpler than the winded explanation of last time. Place names in Transjordania are confusing because they were often changed, and little
archaeology was done there. I hope Minnith on the altiplano of Ammon will
one day be discovered, so the above hypothesis of Minnith as a subsidiary
of Ebla can be tested.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Heshbon and nearby Minnith (not yet located) lie on the altiplano in the
middle of Ammon. The altiplano was "very fertile" and produced considerable
amounts of cereals. 2 Chronicles 27:5 tells us that Jotham fought the king
of Ammon and prevailed. Hereupon the Ammonites payed Jotham one hundred
talents of silver, 10,000 measures of wheat, and 10,000 measures of barley;
the same again in the second year; and again in the third year. However,
the number 10,000 must be symbolical. 2 Chronicles 25:11,12 says that
Amuzyad smote 10,000 dwellers of Seir, and the Judaeans cast 10,000 captured
Edomites from the top of a rock. Power propaganda making victories bigger.
But the altiplano of Ammon w a s fertile. And maybe this was the reason
why a hypothetical tribe from Ebla, forced to leave the fertile alluvial
plain north of their home, to settle on the fertile altiplano of Ammon ?
Ezekiel 27:17 - "wheat from Minnith" - would then refer to the subsidiary
of the original mu-nu-ti-um (Eblaite, 2200 BC) mnt (Ugaritic) Minnit (Hebrew)
Minnith (King's Bible) MiNuTe (Linear A).
This version is simpler than the winded explanation of last time. Place names > in Transjordania are confusing because they were often changed, and little
archaeology was done there. I hope Minnith on the altiplano of Ammon will
one day be discovered, so the above hypothesis of Minnith as a subsidiary
of Ebla can be tested.

Time table of Ebla

ca 2400 BC Ebla founded in a fertile alluvial plain in Northwestern Syria
(some 60 km south of Aleppo)

ca 2300 BC hieroglyphic Minoan, developed in a Cretan colony of Ebla ?

ca 2250 BC Royal Palace of Ebla sacked by Sargon, immediately rebuilt

ca 2200 BC mu-nu-ti-um mentioned in Ebla

ca 2000 BC Ebla sacked again, rebuilt again, followed by a golden age

shortly before 1500 BC Ebla destroyed by Hittites and Hurrites


Hypothesis

When Sargon menaced Ebla, a group of people including high ranking
astronomers left Syria, sailed westward, founded a colony on Crete,
or increased an already existing colony of Ebla there. Mythical Minos
had been a dynasty of astronomer kings. Astronomy had been crucial
for navigating the Syrian desert, and became even more crucial
for the seafaring Minoans.

Another group of people, among them farmers, left the fertile alluvial
plain of Ebla for the equally fertile altiplano of Ammon in Transjordania,
naming their place Minnit or Minnith, in reference to Eblaite mu-nu-ti-um
and Ugaritic mnt.

MiNuThe on Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95 (final decipherment by Walther
Hinz in the wake of Cyrus H. Gordon, Jan Best and Robert Stieglitz) refers
to Ebla in the form of mu-nu-ti-um, while "wheat from Minnith" in Ezekiel
27:17 refers to the minor ableger 'offshoot or subsidiary or colony or
whatever' on the altiplano of Ammon. In this point I revise the equation
Minnith = Ebla by Hinz.

Minoan chapter on my website

http://www.seshat.ch/home/lascaux9.htm

among the topics (in a different order): Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95
as deciphered by Walther Hinz / MiNuThe mu-nu-ti-um mnt Minnit (Minnith) /
MUC NOS SAI Minos Knossos / astronomer kings / legend of Minotaur encoding
a lunisolar calendar / alternative lunisolar calendar of Mallia / Europa
personified astronomy. Illustrations: MiNuThe on another Linear A tablet /
double Europa as patroness of astronomy in a beautiful fresco from the
court of Knossos (now in the museum of Heraclion), the bull leaper in
action a symbol of astronomy, calculating the trajectory of a celestial
body = leaping over a bull that both hovers and runs before a blue sky,
calculations being acrobatics of the mind.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Heshbon and nearby Minnith (not yet located) lie on the altiplano in the
middle of Ammon. The altiplano was "very fertile" and produced considerable
amounts of cereals. 2 Chronicles 27:5 tells us that Jotham fought the king
of Ammon and prevailed. Hereupon the Ammonites payed Jotham one hundred
talents of silver, 10,000 measures of wheat, and 10,000 measures of barley;
the same again in the second year; and again in the third year. However,
the number 10,000 must be symbolical. 2 Chronicles 25:11,12 says that
Amuzyad smote 10,000 dwellers of Seir, and the Judaeans cast 10,000 captured
Edomites from the top of a rock. Power propaganda making victories bigger.
But the altiplano of Ammon w a s fertile. And maybe this was the reason
why a hypothetical tribe from Ebla, forced to leave the fertile alluvial
plain north of their home, to settle on the fertile altiplano of Ammon ?
Ezekiel 27:17 - "wheat from Minnith" - would then refer to the subsidiary
of the original mu-nu-ti-um (Eblaite, 2200 BC) mnt (Ugaritic) Minnit (Hebrew)
Minnith (King's Bible) MiNuTe (Linear A).
This version is simpler than the winded explanation of last time. Place names > in Transjordania are confusing because they were often changed, and little
archaeology was done there. I hope Minnith on the altiplano of Ammon will
one day be discovered, so the above hypothesis of Minnith as a subsidiary
of Ebla can be tested.

Time table of Ebla
ca 2400 BC Ebla founded in a fertile alluvial plain in Northwestern Syria
(some 60 km south of Aleppo)
ca 2300 BC hieroglyphic Minoan, developed in a Cretan colony of Ebla ?
ca 2250 BC Royal Palace of Ebla sacked by Sargon, immediately rebuilt
ca 2200 BC mu-nu-ti-um mentioned in Ebla
ca 2000 BC Ebla sacked again, rebuilt again, followed by a golden age
shortly before 1500 BC Ebla destroyed by Hittites and Hurrites
Hypothesis

This is the first time I see the words "time table" and "hypothesis" in a post by Franz!
This happened on the day of the great solar eclipsis.
A.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
When Sargon menaced Ebla, a group of people including high ranking
astronomers left Syria, sailed westward, founded a colony on Crete,
or increased an already existing colony of Ebla there. Mythical Minos
had been a dynasty of astronomer kings. Astronomy had been crucial
for navigating the Syrian desert, and became even more crucial
for the seafaring Minoans.
Another group of people, among them farmers, left the fertile alluvial
plain of Ebla for the equally fertile altiplano of Ammon in Transjordania,
naming their place Minnit or Minnith, in reference to Eblaite mu-nu-ti-um
and Ugaritic mnt.
MiNuThe on Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95 (final decipherment by Walther
Hinz in the wake of Cyrus H. Gordon, Jan Best and Robert Stieglitz) refers
to Ebla in the form of mu-nu-ti-um, while "wheat from Minnith" in Ezekiel
27:17 refers to the minor ableger 'offshoot or subsidiary or colony or
whatever' on the altiplano of Ammon. In this point I revise the equation
Minnith = Ebla by Hinz.
Minoan chapter on my website
http://www.seshat.ch/home/lascaux9.htm
among the topics (in a different order): Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95
as deciphered by Walther Hinz / MiNuThe mu-nu-ti-um mnt Minnit (Minnith) /
MUC NOS SAI Minos Knossos / astronomer kings / legend of Minotaur encoding
a lunisolar calendar / alternative lunisolar calendar of Mallia / Europa
personified astronomy. Illustrations: MiNuThe on another Linear A tablet /
double Europa as patroness of astronomy in a beautiful fresco from the
court of Knossos (now in the museum of Heraclion), the bull leaper in
action a symbol of astronomy, calculating the trajectory of a celestial
body = leaping over a bull that both hovers and runs before a blue sky,
calculations being acrobatics of the mind.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Hypothesis
When Sargon menaced Ebla, a group of people including high ranking
astronomers left Syria, sailed westward, founded a colony on Crete,
or increased an already existing colony of Ebla there. Mythical Minos
had been a dynasty of astronomer kings. Astronomy had been crucial
for navigating the Syrian desert, and became even more crucial
for the seafaring Minoans.
Another group of people, among them farmers, left the fertile alluvial
plain of Ebla for the equally fertile altiplano of Ammon in Transjordania,
naming their place Minnit or Minnith, in reference to Eblaite mu-nu-ti-um
and Ugaritic mnt.
MiNuThe on Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95 (final decipherment by Walther
Hinz in the wake of Cyrus H. Gordon, Jan Best and Robert Stieglitz) refers
to Ebla in the form of mu-nu-ti-um, while "wheat from Minnith" in Ezekiel
27:17 refers to the minor ableger 'offshoot or subsidiary or colony or
whatever' on the altiplano of Ammon. In this point I revise the equation
Minnith = Ebla by Hinz.
Minoan chapter on my website
http://www.seshat.ch/home/lascaux9.htm
among the topics (in a different order): Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95
as deciphered by Walther Hinz / MiNuThe mu-nu-ti-um mnt Minnit (Minnith) /
MUC NOS SAI Minos Knossos / astronomer kings / legend of Minotaur encoding
a lunisolar calendar / alternative lunisolar calendar of Mallia / Europa
personified astronomy. Illustrations: MiNuThe on another Linear A tablet /
double Europa as patroness of astronomy in a beautiful fresco from the
court of Knossos (now in the museum of Heraclion), the bull leaper in
action a symbol of astronomy, calculating the trajectory of a celestial
body = leaping over a bull that both hovers and runs before a blue sky,
calculations being acrobatics of the mind.

Among the treasures of Ebla is a hymn to Shamash, of Sumerian origin,
praising the sun that travels across the sea on the back of a bull with
the bearded head of a man. A further association of bull and celestial
body, in this case the sun.

By the way, I often use conjunctives and the term hypothesis, and, when
they are ripe enough, convey them in form of a story that works as an
overall conjunctive, sparing me and the readers a lot of could-have-beens
and might-have-beens and we-can-imagine-that and other cumbersome
formulations. But my story telling is always made fun of.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Hypothesis
When Sargon menaced Ebla, a group of people including high ranking
astronomers left Syria, sailed westward, founded a colony on Crete,
or increased an already existing colony of Ebla there. Mythical Minos
had been a dynasty of astronomer kings. Astronomy had been crucial
for navigating the Syrian desert, and became even more crucial
for the seafaring Minoans.
Another group of people, among them farmers, left the fertile alluvial
plain of Ebla for the equally fertile altiplano of Ammon in Transjordania,
naming their place Minnit or Minnith, in reference to Eblaite mu-nu-ti-um
and Ugaritic mnt.
MiNuThe on Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95 (final decipherment by Walther
Hinz in the wake of Cyrus H. Gordon, Jan Best and Robert Stieglitz) refers
to Ebla in the form of mu-nu-ti-um, while "wheat from Minnith" in Ezekiel
27:17 refers to the minor ableger 'offshoot or subsidiary or colony or
whatever' on the altiplano of Ammon. In this point I revise the equation
Minnith = Ebla by Hinz.
Minoan chapter on my website
http://www.seshat.ch/home/lascaux9.htm
among the topics (in a different order): Linear A tablet Hagia Triada 95
as deciphered by Walther Hinz / MiNuThe mu-nu-ti-um mnt Minnit (Minnith) /
MUC NOS SAI Minos Knossos / astronomer kings / legend of Minotaur encoding
a lunisolar calendar / alternative lunisolar calendar of Mallia / Europa
personified astronomy. Illustrations: MiNuThe on another Linear A tablet /
double Europa as patroness of astronomy in a beautiful fresco from the
court of Knossos (now in the museum of Heraclion), the bull leaper in
action a symbol of astronomy, calculating the trajectory of a celestial
body = leaping over a bull that both hovers and runs before a blue sky,
calculations being acrobatics of the mind.

Among the treasures of Ebla is a hymn to Shamash, of Sumerian origin,
praising the sun that travels across the sea on the back of a bull with
the bearded head of a man. A further association of bull and celestial
body, in this case the sun.
By the way, I often use conjunctives

As a grammatical term, the English for that is "subjunctives."

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
and the term hypothesis, and, when
they are ripe enough, convey them in form of a story that works as an
overall conjunctive,

I suspect that might mean 'guess'.

? sparing me and the readers a lot of could-have-beens

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
and might-have-beens and we-can-imagine-that and other cumbersome
formulations. But my story telling is always made fun of.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Among the treasures of Ebla is a hymn to Shamash, of Sumerian origin,
praising the sun that travels across the sea on the back of a bull with
the bearded head of a man. A further association of bull and celestial
body, in this case the sun.
By the way, I often use conjunctives and the term hypothesis, and, when
they are ripe enough, convey them in form of a story that works as an
overall conjunctive, sparing me and the readers a lot of could-have-beens
and might-have-beens and we-can-imagine-that and other cumbersome
formulations. But my story telling is always made fun of.

As for Chaim, I knew the name, for example Chaim Weizmann, but is it Hebrew
or Yiddish or maybe Russian? where does it come from? what does it mean?
can it really be associated to hypothetical SAI meaning life as proposed
by Daud Deden? and what is the official etymology? Those were my implicit
questions when I asked for the language.

In the light of Magdalenian I can imagine ChAI meaning fine weather, sunshine,
metaphorically cheerful, of a sunny disposition, sunny boy (an expression
used in Switzerland), vital and lively, thus in the vicinity of SAI for life.

Another possibility is an emphatic doubling, KAI DOM, to build a good camp
KAI a camp DOM. Kai is a German name for a man (meaning what?) and the German
form of quay, sort of a camp for ships. While Greek domos and Latin domus
both mean house. KAI DOM would account for Proto-Indo-European *koimos
'household, village'

KAI DOM KAI M KAI M os *koimos

wherefrom English home and German Heim, present in village names ending on
-heim, for example Mannheim. Possibly also for Greek kamara Latin camera
French chambre English chamber German Kammer and Zimmer. Then Cham, a Swiss
town on Lake Zug, as I claim the head of a Mesolithic mini-mini-culture in
a part of the Reuss Valley, Reuss from REO for river, Rha Volga, Rhenus
Rhine, Rhodanus Rhone.

KAI DOM KAI M Chaim ??

If KAI DOM also named Chaim, then it was originally a title of honor for
the builder of a good camp, later of a house hamlet (!) village town,
in a lesser form a carpenter German Zimmermann. By the way, SAI an KAI
belong to the same group of 72 words, based on DAI for a protected area
and the comparative form SAI for life, existence.

Will have to check the official meaning of Chaim. Normally I do the checking
before I go public. Here you can see how an idea forms - intuition in slow
motion. Then comes the reality check. I will try to find a reliable etymology
of the name Chaim online.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Thu, 24 Aug 2017 00:41:07 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
As for Chaim, I knew the name, for example Chaim Weizmann, but is it Hebrew
or Yiddish or maybe Russian? where does it come from? what does it mean?

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chaim#English
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D#Hebrew

Seeing that the root is H-y, I suspect Arabic Hayaat (same meaning) is
cognate? Also used as a persons name and also meaning 'life'.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Another possibility is an emphatic doubling, KAI DOM, to build a good camp
KAI a camp DOM. Kai is a German name for a man (meaning what?) and the German
form of quay, sort of a camp for ships.

H, h, k and q are distinct in (older) Hebrew, Arabic and
Proto-Semitic, so anything that has a H could only be associated
atymology with something else that has H, but never K.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chaim#English
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D#Hebrew
Seeing that the root is H-y, I suspect Arabic Hayaat (same meaning) is
cognate? Also used as a persons name and also meaning 'life'.
H, h, k and q are distinct in (older) Hebrew, Arabic and
Proto-Semitic, so anything that has a H could only be associated
atymology with something else that has H, but never K.

What about khayem, a softened k ?

חיים • (khayem) m (especially in religious contexts) life

The sound rules of the comparative method are valid for some 6,000 years,
but here we are speaking of 18,000 years. I will see into the root H-y.
Pleased about North Germanic Kai meaning lord, keeper of the keys. A lord
can build a mansion and then holds the keys. I pondered Greek kai 'and'
which might also derive from building a camp, for building consists of
adding matherials, one material and (kai) another material.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Ruud Harmsen
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chaim#English
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D#Hebrew
Seeing that the root is H-y, I suspect Arabic Hayaat (same meaning) is
cognate? Also used as a persons name and also meaning 'life'.
H, h, k and q are distinct in (older) Hebrew, Arabic and
Proto-Semitic, so anything that has a H could only be associated
atymology with something else that has H, but never K.

What about khayem, a softened k ?
חיים • (khayem) m (especially in religious contexts) life

That is what Ruud is calling "H".

It is not "a softened k".

[Ruud Harmsen]

Fri, 25 Aug 2017 00:03:50 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Ruud Harmsen
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chaim#English
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D#Hebrew
Seeing that the root is H-y, I suspect Arabic Hayaat (same meaning) is
cognate? Also used as a persons name and also meaning 'life'.
H, h, k and q are distinct in (older) Hebrew, Arabic and
Proto-Semitic, so anything that has a H could only be associated
atymology with something else that has H, but never K.

What about khayem, a softened k ?

[X] can be a variant op /k/ in Hebrew and Aramaic, but the faryngal H
is completely distinct from that mechanism, even in modern Israeli
Hebrew, they sound alike. So a etymological connection of Haim with
anything starting with K of Kh is utterly impossible.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
???? • (khayem) m (especially in religious contexts) life

The kh is a misleading spelling.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
The sound rules of the comparative method are valid for some 6,000 years,

But you know far to little about them to be able to apply them, also
because you constantly mix-up unrelated language families like Semitic
and Indo-European.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
but here we are speaking of 18,000 years.

Which means they everything becomes so unreliable that conclusions are
impossible.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
I will see into the root H-y.
Pleased about North Germanic Kai meaning lord, keeper of the keys. A lord
can build a mansion and then holds the keys. I pondered Greek kai 'and'

A k in Greek cannot correspond to a k in German. Unless it is a loan,
perhaps via Latin Caius.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
which might also derive from building a camp, for building consists of
adding matherials, one material and (kai) another material.

[DKleinecke]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Fri, 25 Aug 2017 00:03:50 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Ruud Harmsen
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chaim#English
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D#Hebrew
Seeing that the root is H-y, I suspect Arabic Hayaat (same meaning) is
cognate? Also used as a persons name and also meaning 'life'.
H, h, k and q are distinct in (older) Hebrew, Arabic and
Proto-Semitic, so anything that has a H could only be associated
atymology with something else that has H, but never K.

What about khayem, a softened k ?

[X] can be a variant op /k/ in Hebrew and Aramaic, but the faryngal H
is completely distinct from that mechanism, even in modern Israeli
Hebrew, they sound alike. So a etymological connection of Haim with
anything starting with K of Kh is utterly impossible.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
???? • (khayem) m (especially in religious contexts) life

The kh is a misleading spelling.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
The sound rules of the comparative method are valid for some 6,000 years,

But you know far to little about them to be able to apply them, also
because you constantly mix-up unrelated language families like Semitic
and Indo-European.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
but here we are speaking of 18,000 years.

Which means they everything becomes so unreliable that conclusions are
impossible.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
I will see into the root H-y.
Pleased about North Germanic Kai meaning lord, keeper of the keys. A lord
can build a mansion and then holds the keys. I pondered Greek kai 'and'

A k in Greek cannot correspond to a k in German. Unless it is a loan,
perhaps via Latin Caius.

There is the Arthurian hero (at least originally) Kay. I see
no reason to doubt that Kay is Latin Caius in Welsh form.
Considering the popularity of the Arthurian stories in the
Middle Ages I would imagine Kay to be the source of Kai. Kay
was not the disparaged knight that Mallory painted in every
tradition.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by DKleinecke
There is the Arthurian hero (at least originally) Kay. I see
no reason to doubt that Kay is Latin Caius in Welsh form.
Considering the popularity of the Arthurian stories in the
Middle Ages I would imagine Kay to be the source of Kai. Kay
was not the disparaged knight that Mallory painted in every
tradition.

Thank you for this comment. Kai was a formidable ally (Mabinogion, collection
of early Welsh tales) and had all the powers needed in building a camp of
tents and huts. He was a tall man - very useful for that purpose. He could
hold his breath for nine days and nine nights - useful when building a lake
dwelling or palafitte, also when digging a well or cleaning a cistern.
He could go without sleep for the same amount of time - useful in a crucial
phase of the building process. No physician can heal a wound made by his
sword - camps needed defense. When he wished he could make himself as tall
as a tree - reference to cranes made for uplifting stones, for example the
outer ring of Stonehenge. Whatever he carried during a rainstorm would remain
perfectly dry - he knew how to make tents and huts waterproof. So dry that
it could even be used to make fire - he knew how to keep tinder dry so he
could make fire even during a rainstorm. And he dug a trench. (Features of
Kai taken from: Chronicles of the Celts, by Iain Zaczek, Collins London 1996,
one of my favorite books on the Celts.)

As for Caius, my Latin dictionary calls it a bad spelling of Gaius. A mistake
or maybe an oscillation, a shifted word returning to an older form? I might
look into the case of Gaius Caius at another time.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Which means they everything becomes so unreliable that conclusions are
impossible.

No, looking at things from a different vantage point (in the given case
looking forward in time instead of backward in time) makes them clearer.
The comparative method has a problem bringing words together; it can't
see the tree, instead it sees thousands of twiglets which are supposed
to have a root of their own each. Latin habere 'have' habent 'they have'
is not compatible with German haben 'have' sie haben 'they have' while
they are well compatible in Magdalenian, deriving from a very ancient word.
Then there is the problem of the six homonyms *bher- and *bher- and *bher-
and *bher- and *bher- and *bher- that have different meanings and can't be
traced back to a single word. In Magdalenian they can. Apes and human beings
are not related, no Sir, and you Darwin are a fool ... Just recently a skull
of a small ape or monkey has been found, some thirteen million years old,
a complete skull - big sensation - that shows features of an ape but also
of human beings. Ape and human being can be brought together, but you must
go back in time far enough.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Which means they everything becomes so unreliable that conclusions are
impossible.

No, looking at things from a different vantage point (in the given case
looking forward in time instead of backward in time) makes them clearer.

And where do you get that "vantage point"?

Your only explanation is that you "dream them" or "hum them."

[Ruud Harmsen]

Sat, 26 Aug 2017 01:30:59 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Which means they everything becomes so unreliable that conclusions are
impossible.

No, looking at things from a different vantage point (in the given case
looking forward in time instead of backward in time) makes them clearer.

Yes, like what you: equating the same sounds in languages from
completely unrelated language families, of remote branches of the same
family, or from distant periods in history, then assuming there has
never been any sound change, so K remains K etc.

That is not etymology, that is not science, that is fantasy.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
The comparative method has a problem bringing words together;

Of course. Because science accepts that some things are not (yet)
known. You don't, so fill up that ignorance with fantasy.

That is not etymology, that is not science, that is fantasy.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
it can't
see the tree, instead it sees thousands of twiglets which are supposed
to have a root of their own each. Latin habere 'have' habent 'they have'
is not compatible with German haben 'have' sie haben 'they have'

Right.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
while
they are well compatible in Magdalenian, deriving from a very ancient word.

That is not etymology, that is not science, that is fantasy.

So to say it more bluntly, it is nonsense.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Thu, 24 Aug 2017 00:41:07 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
As for Chaim, I knew the name, for example Chaim Weizmann, but is it Hebrew
or Yiddish or maybe Russian? where does it come from? what does it mean?

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Chaim#English
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D#Hebrew
Seeing that the root is H-y, I suspect Arabic Hayaat (same meaning) is
cognate? Also used as a persons name and also meaning 'life'.

Yes

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Another possibility is an emphatic doubling, KAI DOM, to build a good camp
KAI a camp DOM. Kai is a German name for a man (meaning what?) and the German
form of quay, sort of a camp for ships.

H, h, k and q are distinct in (older) Hebrew, Arabic and
Proto-Semitic, so anything that has a H could only be associated
atymology with something else that has H, but never K.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

[Ruud Harmsen]

Thu, 24 Aug 2017 00:41:07 -0700 (PDT): Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Kai is a German name for a man (meaning what?) and the German
form of quay, sort of a camp for ships.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kai_(name)>
«"In North Germanic languages, kai means "lord", "keeper of the keys"
or "earth".[citation needed] In Germanic languages, kai means "quay"
or "safe harbor"»

Not very plausible?

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
As for Chaim, I knew the name, for example Chaim Weizmann, but is it Hebrew
or Yiddish or maybe Russian? where does it come from? what does it mean?
can it really be associated to hypothetical SAI meaning life as proposed
by Daud Deden? and what is the official etymology? Those were my implicit
questions when I asked for the language.
In the light of Magdalenian I can imagine ChAI meaning fine weather, sunshine,
metaphorically cheerful, of a sunny disposition, sunny boy (an expression
used in Switzerland), vital and lively, thus in the vicinity of SAI for life.
Another possibility is an emphatic doubling, KAI DOM, to build a good camp
KAI a camp DOM. Kai is a German name for a man (meaning what?) and the German
form of quay, sort of a camp for ships. While Greek domos and Latin domus
both mean house. KAI DOM would account for Proto-Indo-European *koimos
'household, village'
KAI DOM KAI M KAI M os *koimos
wherefrom English home and German Heim, present in village names ending on
-heim, for example Mannheim. Possibly also for Greek kamara Latin camera
French chambre English chamber German Kammer and Zimmer. Then Cham, a Swiss
town on Lake Zug, as I claim the head of a Mesolithic mini-mini-culture in
a part of the Reuss Valley, Reuss from REO for river, Rha Volga, Rhenus
Rhine, Rhodanus Rhone.
KAI DOM KAI M Chaim ??
If KAI DOM also named Chaim, then it was originally a title of honor for
the builder of a good camp, later of a house hamlet (!) village town,
in a lesser form a carpenter German Zimmermann. By the way, SAI an KAI
belong to the same group of 72 words, based on DAI for a protected area
and the comparative form SAI for life, existence.
Will have to check the official meaning of Chaim. Normally I do the checking
before I go public. Here you can see how an idea forms - intuition in slow
motion. Then comes the reality check. I will try to find a reliable etymology
of the name Chaim online.

Chayyim, Chaim for short, means life, alive, implying health. The Hebrew word
appeared in the Middle Ages. This makes an overforming of an early word or
compound possible, even probable.

I return to KAI DOM in the previous message. The dropped DO would have been
replaced by yy

KAI DOM KAI ..M KAI yyM KAyyIM (metathesis)

Building and life are connected. Magdalenian DAI for a protected area
(consider Daidalos), given as tectiform signs in cave art, has a comparative
form in SAI for life, given as red ocher dots on cave walls.

'The White House says' means the president and his ministers making an
announcement. 'The Church says' means the pope and his cardinals interpreting
the Bible. German Frauenzimmer 'woman's chamber' means woman. Altes Haus
'old house' is a greeting for a trusted friend you know since a long time.

In the same manner a compound referring to a good camp ensuring life and
health of the inhabitants could have become a word for life

good camp ensuring life and health
overformed by life, alive, healthy

Jesus was a carpenter. Later on, as a preacher, he dubbed himself life and
love. Another connection between a good builder (Magdalenian KAI) of a
domicil (Magdalenian DOM) and life. Is there a study on the influence of
his learned profession on his later teachings? I'd say they are well composed
and solid.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Chayyim, Chaim for short, means life, alive, implying health. The Hebrew word
appeared in the Middle Ages.

What on earth does that mean?

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Chayyim, Chaim for short, means life, alive, implying health. The Hebrew word
appeared in the Middle Ages. This makes an overforming of an early word or
compound possible, even probable.
I return to KAI DOM in the previous message. The dropped DO would have been
replaced by yy
KAI DOM KAI ..M KAI yyM KAyyIM (metathesis)
Building and life are connected. Magdalenian DAI for a protected area
(consider Daidalos), given as tectiform signs in cave art, has a comparative
form in SAI for life, given as red ocher dots on cave walls.
'The White House says' means the president and his ministers making an
announcement. 'The Church says' means the pope and his cardinals interpreting
the Bible. German Frauenzimmer 'woman's chamber' means woman. Altes Haus
'old house' is a greeting for a trusted friend you know since a long time.
In the same manner a compound referring to a good camp ensuring life and
health of the inhabitants could have become a word for life
good camp ensuring life and health
overformed by life, alive, healthy
Jesus was a carpenter. Later on, as a preacher, he dubbed himself life and
love. Another connection between a good builder (Magdalenian KAI) of a
domicil (Magdalenian DOM) and life. Is there a study on the influence of
his learned profession on his later teachings? I'd say they are well composed
and solid.

origin of psalms (a double formula)

The origin of psalms might have been Magdalenian double formulae, for example
this one

SAI IAS
KAI DOM

SAI for life, existence
IAS for healing, also health and salvation
KAI for building a good camp
DOM for camp, here an emphatic doubling

About life SAI and health IAS
cares the builder of a good camp KAI,
a camp serving as home DOM

Life can flourish in a good camp, the inhabitants are save, a well chosen
sunny place in the vicinity of running water or a spring or a well keeps
them healthy.

The first line SAI IAS may account for Hebrew hayah 'exist, I am', Urdu
and Persian haya 'life' and Arabic hayaat 'life'. Hebrew hayah is part
of the answer God gave Moses in Exodus 3:14

I am that I am

In the light of SAI IAS we get a more informative answer. God is the one
providing life and health and salvation. Life and health, all in all,
prevail over death and illness.

David, quotes from the psalms 16:11 and 6:2 and 20:5

Thou wilt shew me the path of life

O Lord, heal me

We will rejoice in thy salvation

Turning SAI IAS around we get another line

IAS SAI

which, in a shortened form, may have named Isa, better known as Jesus,
life and love, healer of people on his mission of saving humankind.

KAI DOM, the second line of the double formula, may have accounted for
Chayyim Chaim Haim 'life, alive (and healthy)' via an overforming that
would have survived in oral traditions until it was fixed in writing
in the Middle Ages

KAI DOM KAI ..M KAI yyM KAyyIM (metathesis) ...

DOM accounts for Greek domos and Latin domus that both mean house, also for
German Dom 'cathedral, a big church wherein one can pray for a long life in
good health, for salvation and a place in heaven. Full quote of psalm 16:11

Thou wilt shew me the path of life:
in thy presence is fullness of joy;
at thy right hand there are pleasures
for evermore.

While the words got softer, maybe along the line

SAI.IAS KAI.DOM hayah kheyem

the worldly double formula, burgeoning in early psalms, implored help from
above, turning the former builder of a good camp into God, a divine presence
felt or experienced in life and health and salvation.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
origin of psalms (a double formula)
The origin of psalms might have been Magdalenian double formulae, for example
this one
SAI IAS
KAI DOM
SAI for life, existence
IAS for healing, also health and salvation
KAI for building a good camp
DOM for camp, here an emphatic doubling
About life SAI and health IAS
cares the builder of a good camp KAI,
a camp serving as home DOM
Life can flourish in a good camp, the inhabitants are save, a well chosen
sunny place in the vicinity of running water or a spring or a well keeps
them healthy.
The first line SAI IAS may account for Hebrew hayah 'exist, I am', Urdu
and Persian haya 'life' and Arabic hayaat 'life'. Hebrew hayah is part
of the answer God gave Moses in Exodus 3:14
I am that I am

You prove yourself, as you once said, unlearnable.

The h in "hayah" (a nonexistent form) meaning 'be' is NOT the H in Hayim 'life'.

They are TWO DIFFERENT LETTERS. They are NOT INTERCHANGEABLE.

I don't care about the nonsense you say about Indo-European. But I will not
accept your nonsense about Semitic.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Sat, 26 Aug 2017 04:45:35 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels
The h in "hayah" (a nonexistent form) meaning 'be' is NOT the H in Hayim 'life'.
They are TWO DIFFERENT LETTERS. They are NOT INTERCHANGEABLE.

Right.

More so, from what I've seen in Wikipedia so far (which isn't
everything, of course), there isn't and hasn't been ANY Semitic, or
even any Afro-Asiatic language, in which the two have merged. They are
and always were distinct everywhere.

[Daud Deden]

No, but they seem to have diverged, rather.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
origin of psalms (a double formula)
The origin of psalms might have been Magdalenian double formulae, for example
this one
SAI IAS
KAI DOM
SAI for life, existence
IAS for healing, also health and salvation
KAI for building a good camp
DOM for camp, here an emphatic doubling
About life SAI and health IAS
cares the builder of a good camp KAI,
a camp serving as home DOM
Life can flourish in a good camp, the inhabitants are save, a well chosen
sunny place in the vicinity of running water or a spring or a well keeps
them healthy.
The first line SAI IAS may account for Hebrew hayah 'exist, I am', Urdu
and Persian haya 'life' and Arabic hayaat 'life'. Hebrew hayah is part
of the answer God gave Moses in Exodus 3:14
I am that I am
In the light of SAI IAS we get a more informative answer. God is the one
providing life and health and salvation. Life and health, all in all,
prevail over death and illness.
David, quotes from the psalms 16:11 and 6:2 and 20:5
Thou wilt shew me the path of life
O Lord, heal me
We will rejoice in thy salvation
Turning SAI IAS around we get another line
IAS SAI
which, in a shortened form, may have named Isa, better known as Jesus,
life and love, healer of people on his mission of saving humankind.
KAI DOM, the second line of the double formula, may have accounted for
Chayyim Chaim Haim 'life, alive (and healthy)' via an overforming that
would have survived in oral traditions until it was fixed in writing
in the Middle Ages
KAI DOM KAI ..M KAI yyM KAyyIM (metathesis) ...
DOM accounts for Greek domos and Latin domus that both mean house, also for
German Dom 'cathedral, a big church wherein one can pray for a long life in
good health, for salvation and a place in heaven. Full quote of psalm 16:11
in thy presence is fullness of joy;
at thy right hand there are pleasures
for evermore.
While the words got softer, maybe along the line
SAI.IAS KAI.DOM hayah kheyem
the worldly double formula, burgeoning in early psalms, implored help from
above, turning the former builder of a good camp into God, a divine presence
felt or experienced in life and health and salvation.

Wikipedia query for hayah

In appearance, it is possible to render YHWH (יהוה) as an archaic third person singular imperfect form of the verb ahyah (אהיה) "to be" meaning, therefore, "he is".[citation needed] This interpretation agrees with the meaning of the name given in Exodus 3:14, where God is represented as speaking, and hence as using the first person — AahYah "I am". Other scholars regard the triconsonantal root of hawah (הוה) as a more likely origin for the name Yahweh.[citation needed] It is notably distinct from the root El, which can be used as a simple noun to refer to the creator deity in general, as in Elohim, meaning simply "God" (or gods).

The comparative method has a problem. It can't see the tree. Instead it sees
thousands of twiglets, each one supposed to have a root of its own. Fixing
each and every minute aspect of a sound is the wrong way of getting more
clarity. What is required are flexible sounds and a clear idea of early
language. What if there have not been roots but compounds in an earlier
language? My claim: Arabic hayaat 'life' did not evolve from the root H-y
but from the compound SAI IAS. The comparative method had never been
challenged that way, and the result is mere aggression. Because there is
no proof that there had been roots. From my vantage point, roots are
compounds viewed through milky glass. Shadowy and blurred representations
of Magdalenian words and compounds.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
origin of psalms (a double formula)
The origin of psalms might have been Magdalenian double formulae, for example
this one
SAI IAS
KAI DOM
SAI for life, existence
IAS for healing, also health and salvation
KAI for building a good camp
DOM for camp, here an emphatic doubling
About life SAI and health IAS
cares the builder of a good camp KAI,
a camp serving as home DOM
Life can flourish in a good camp, the inhabitants are save, a well chosen
sunny place in the vicinity of running water or a spring or a well keeps
them healthy.
The first line SAI IAS may account for Hebrew hayah 'exist, I am', Urdu
and Persian haya 'life' and Arabic hayaat 'life'. Hebrew hayah is part
of the answer God gave Moses in Exodus 3:14
I am that I am
In the light of SAI IAS we get a more informative answer. God is the one
providing life and health and salvation. Life and health, all in all,
prevail over death and illness.
David, quotes from the psalms 16:11 and 6:2 and 20:5
Thou wilt shew me the path of life
O Lord, heal me
We will rejoice in thy salvation
Turning SAI IAS around we get another line
IAS SAI
which, in a shortened form, may have named Isa, better known as Jesus,
life and love, healer of people on his mission of saving humankind.
KAI DOM, the second line of the double formula, may have accounted for
Chayyim Chaim Haim 'life, alive (and healthy)' via an overforming that
would have survived in oral traditions until it was fixed in writing
in the Middle Ages
KAI DOM KAI ..M KAI yyM KAyyIM (metathesis) ...
DOM accounts for Greek domos and Latin domus that both mean house, also for
German Dom 'cathedral, a big church wherein one can pray for a long life in
good health, for salvation and a place in heaven. Full quote of psalm 16:11
in thy presence is fullness of joy;
at thy right hand there are pleasures
for evermore.
While the words got softer, maybe along the line
SAI.IAS KAI.DOM hayah kheyem
the worldly double formula, burgeoning in early psalms, implored help from
above, turning the former builder of a good camp into God, a divine presence
felt or experienced in life and health and salvation.

Wikipedia query for hayah

This is with the unvoiced pulmonary fricative "regular" [h]

Arabic Haya:(t) and Classical Hebrew Hayyim is with
the unvoiced pharyngeal fricative [H], rare outside
Afro-Asiatic (AFAIK found in NE and NW Caucasian).

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
In appearance, it is possible to render YHWH (יהוה) as an archaic third person singular imperfect form of the verb ahyah (אהיה) "to be" meaning, therefore, "he is".[citation needed] This interpretation agrees with the meaning of the name given in Exodus 3:14, where God is represented as speaking, and hence as using the first person — AahYah "I am". Other scholars regard the triconsonantal root of hawah (הוה) as a more likely origin for the name Yahweh.[citation needed] It is notably distinct from the root El, which can be used as a simple noun to refer to the creator deity in general, as in Elohim, meaning simply "God" (or gods).

Yahweh seems to be a deity imported from NW Arabia. It's Medianite
origin mentioned in the Bible and confirmed from Egyptian
inscriptions mentioning "the Shasu (nomadic warriors) of Yahu"
in the region. The Bible also associates the deity with volcanoes
and that region did have volcanoes. El was the supreme (unnamed)
deity of the Canaanites. The religious movement leading to Judaism
equated the two.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
The comparative method has a problem. It can't see the tree. Instead it sees
thousands of twiglets, each one supposed to have a root of its own. Fixing
each and every minute aspect of a sound is the wrong way of getting more
clarity. What is required are flexible sounds and a clear idea of early
language. What if there have not been roots but compounds in an earlier
language? My claim: Arabic hayaat 'life' did not evolve from the root H-y
but from the compound SAI IAS. The comparative method had never been
challenged that way, and the result is mere aggression. Because there is
no proof that there had been roots. From my vantage point, roots are
compounds viewed through milky glass. Shadowy and blurred representations
of Magdalenian words and compounds.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Wikipedia query for hayah
In appearance, it is possible to render YHWH (יהוה) as an archaic third person singular imperfect form of the verb ahyah (אהיה) "to be" meaning, therefore, "he is".[citation needed] This interpretation agrees with the meaning of the name given in Exodus 3:14, where God is represented as speaking, and hence as using the first person — AahYah "I am". Other scholars regard the triconsonantal root of hawah (הוה) as a more likely origin for the name Yahweh.[citation needed] It is notably distinct from the root El, which can be used as a simple noun to refer to the creator deity in general, as in Elohim, meaning simply "God" (or gods).
The comparative method has a problem. It can't see the tree. Instead it sees
thousands of twiglets, each one supposed to have a root of its own. Fixing
each and every minute aspect of a sound is the wrong way of getting more
clarity. What is required are flexible sounds and a clear idea of early
language. What if there have not been roots but compounds in an earlier
language? My claim: Arabic hayaat 'life' did not evolve from the root H-y
but from the compound SAI IAS. The comparative method had never been
challenged that way, and the result is mere aggression. Because there is
no proof that there had been roots. From my vantage point, roots are
compounds viewed through milky glass. Shadowy and blurred representations
of Magdalenian words and compounds.

Hebrew hayah is believed by some to account for Jahwe. In my opinion hayah
derives form SAI IAS, and Jahwe from a Magdalenian double formula naming
the supreme sky and weather god of the Chalcolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age

ShA PAD TYR AS CA
DhAG PAD TYR AS CA

ShA for ruler
PAD for the activity of feet
TYR for to overcome in the double sense of rule and give
AS for upward
CA for sky
DhAG for able, good in the sense of able

The ruler ShA goes ahead PAD and overcomes in the double sense
of rule and give TYR up above AS in the sky CA,
the able one DhAG ... (repetition)

The double formula named for example ShA PAD TYR Jupitter Jupiter Jovis Giove,
DhAG PAD TYR Dis pater, byname of Jupiter. TYR emphatic Middle Helladic Sseyr
(Phaistos Disc, Derk Ohlenroth) Doric Sseus (Wilhelm Larfeld) Homeric Zeus.
ShA PAD Shiva and the TYR CA Durga emanation of his wife. Then also

ShA ... CA
DhAG ... CA

wherefrom Jahwe, rider of clouds from Mount Seir (!) in the Negev:

the ruler ShA in the sky CA, the able one DhAG in the sky CA

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 2:25:17 AM UTC-4, Franz Gnaedinger wrote:

These belong in the "Magdalenian" thread.

[Daud Deden]

The word for 'am, be, is' is yawe in Potawatomi AmerIndian.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Wikipedia query for hayah
In appearance, it is possible to render YHWH (יהוה) as an archaic third person singular imperfect form of the verb ahyah (אהיה) "to be" meaning, therefore, "he is".[citation needed] This interpretation agrees with the meaning of the name given in Exodus 3:14, where God is represented as speaking, and hence as using the first person — AahYah "I am". Other scholars regard the triconsonantal root of hawah (הוה) as a more likely origin for the name Yahweh.[citation needed] It is notably distinct from the root El, which can be used as a simple noun to refer to the creator deity in general, as in Elohim, meaning simply "God" (or gods).
The comparative method has a problem. It can't see the tree. Instead it sees
thousands of twiglets, each one supposed to have a root of its own. Fixing
each and every minute aspect of a sound is the wrong way of getting more
clarity. What is required are flexible sounds and a clear idea of early
language. What if there have not been roots but compounds in an earlier
language? My claim: Arabic hayaat 'life' did not evolve from the root H-y
but from the compound SAI IAS. The comparative method had never been
challenged that way, and the result is mere aggression. Because there is
no proof that there had been roots. From my vantage point, roots are
compounds viewed through milky glass. Shadowy and blurred representations
of Magdalenian words and compounds.

Hebrew hayah is believed by some to account for Jahwe. In my opinion hayah
derives form SAI IAS, and Jahwe from a Magdalenian double formula naming
the supreme sky and weather god of the Chalcolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age
ShA PAD TYR AS CA
DhAG PAD TYR AS CA
ShA for ruler
PAD for the activity of feet
TYR for to overcome in the double sense of rule and give
AS for upward
CA for sky
DhAG for able, good in the sense of able
The ruler ShA goes ahead PAD and overcomes in the double sense
of rule and give TYR up above AS in the sky CA,
the able one DhAG ... (repetition)
The double formula named for example ShA PAD TYR Jupitter Jupiter Jovis Giove,
DhAG PAD TYR Dis pater, byname of Jupiter. TYR emphatic Middle Helladic Sseyr
(Phaistos Disc, Derk Ohlenroth) Doric Sseus (Wilhelm Larfeld) Homeric Zeus.
ShA PAD Shiva and the TYR CA Durga emanation of his wife. Then also
ShA ... CA
DhAG ... CA
the ruler ShA in the sky CA, the able one DhAG in the sky CA

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Daud Deden
The word for 'am, be, is' is yawe in Potawatomi AmerIndian.

Wise people !

[Mścisław Wojna-Bojewski]

Post by Daud Deden
The word for 'am, be, is' is yawe in Potawatomi AmerIndian.

Calling it "Potawatomi AmerIndian" suggests that there is a language or a linguistic phylum called "AmerIndian", of which "Potawatomi AmerIndian" is a dialect. This is obviously wrong, because there is no language, or linguistic phylum, called "AmerIndian". Potawatomi is an Algonquian language related to Ojibway. "Potawatomi Algonquian" might make linguistic sense.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Hebrew hayah is believed by some to account for Jahwe. In my opinion hayah
derives form SAI IAS, and Jahwe from a Magdalenian double formula naming
the supreme sky and weather god of the Chalcolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age
ShA PAD TYR AS CA
DhAG PAD TYR AS CA
ShA for ruler
PAD for the activity of feet
TYR for to overcome in the double sense of rule and give
AS for upward
CA for sky
DhAG for able, good in the sense of able
The ruler ShA goes ahead PAD and overcomes in the double sense
of rule and give TYR up above AS in the sky CA,
the able one DhAG ... (repetition)
The double formula named for example ShA PAD TYR Jupitter Jupiter Jovis Giove,
DhAG PAD TYR Dis pater, byname of Jupiter. TYR emphatic Middle Helladic Sseyr
(Phaistos Disc, Derk Ohlenroth) Doric Sseus (Wilhelm Larfeld) Homeric Zeus.
ShA PAD Shiva and the TYR CA Durga emanation of his wife. Then also
ShA ... CA
DhAG ... CA
the ruler ShA in the sky CA, the able one DhAG in the sky CA

DhAG in the ShA.CA DhAG.CA Jahwe formula also named Dagan (a-a), lord of
the land, father of Baal, main god of Tuttul (east of Ebla), fertility god
of Northwest Syria. The longer form Daganu may perhaps go back to DhAG NOS,
able DhAG mind NOS, Daganu then the able-minded one. Jahwe was not only
a storm god and god of war, he also was the fertility god, like Dagan(u).
DhAG is also present in Dagon (a-o), the old weather god of the Philistines,
later replaced by Marnas.

DhAG meaning able, good in the sense of able, is the Magdalenian word of
the most and most varied derivatives, among them Greek theos and Latin deus
(incompatible for the comparative method but well compatible in Magdaleian);
Dis of Dis pater, byname of Jupiter; Dios, genitive of Zeus (while the
nominative belongs to the line TYR Sseyr Sseus Zeus); Dagan(u) and Dagon;
Sumerian dingir (with a nasal infix) announcing deities, the oldest ones
having come from the sacred Du-ku mountain of Sumerian mythology, identified
with the Göbekli Tepe by Klaus Schmidt, and if also Duku goes back to DhAG
it was the hill of the able ones; the name of the supreme Celtic god Dagda,
from the emphatic doubling DhAG DhAG able able, the good god in the sense
of the able god (Barry Cunliffe); then English deity and divine.

The tetragram YHVH goes along with the structure of the above Jahwe formula

ShA -- Y
CA -- H
DhAG -- V
CA -- H

which is encoded in the mercy seat - placed on the ark of the covenant
in Solomon's temple on the Mount of Jerusalem - via the Hebrew numerals
Y 10, H 5, V 6

length of mercy seat 2.5 cubits (l)
wings of one cherub 1.25 cubits (w)
breadth of mercy seat 1.5 cubits (b)
wings of other cherub 1.25 cubits (w)

l:w:b:w = 2.5 : 1.25 : 1.5 : 1.25 = 10 : 5 : 6 : 5 = Y : H : V : H

ShA -- Y -- length of mercy seat
CA -- H -- wings of one cherub
DhAG -- V -- breadth of mercy seat
CA -- H -- wings of other cherub

Note the correlation between the wings of the cherubs and the sky CA.
The cherubs invited the rider of clouds to come down from the heavens,
take place on the mercy seat on top of the ark of the covenant, and
forgive the sins of the pious pilgrims, having mercy with them.

Magdalenian is far from trivial, and has a right of being further developed
in sci.lang, also here in a thread on the origin of psalms. Consider that
psalms invoked Jahwe, asked him for a long life and health and salvation.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Peter T. Daniels
One wonders how he imagines Eblaite (East Akkadian) phonology is reconstructed.

Hoping to make this thread a little more civilized. When I mention Magdalenian

You mean more idiotic.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Hoping to make this thread a little more civilized. When I mention Magdalenian
you can unite against me, and I am waterproof. Well, Ebla is Minnit in the
Bible, Akkaddian mu-nu-ti-um, akin to MiNuThe on Linear A tablet Hagia Triada
95, given as head of a bull for Mi, as visual pun of a bull leaper standing
on his feet hands feet for Nu, and as an abstract Tree of Life for The.
Now the Magdalenian reading gives MUC NOS SAI, MUC for bull, NOS for mind,
and SAI for life - the Minoan bull leaper having been an emblem for the
astronomer who overcomes the moon bull or lunar cycle and Baal rising as
golden sun calf from the tree of life: the astronomer who secured the life
of the Minoans who depended on seafaring and thus on astronomy. Minos and
Knossos are derivatives of the same formula
MUC NOS SAI Mi NOS Minos
MUC NOS SAI C NOS SAI Knossos
In order to find the phonology of the Psalms you have to go back to, sorry,
Magdalenian, and then proceed forward in time.

Templates for the psalms of David might be found among the some 25,000
documents from Mari (we had this recently). Next time I go to the Central
Library I look whether I can find something. A link to Magdalenian is also
given. The statue of a goddess found in the palace of Mari shows a woman
holding a vessel before her out of which flew water (actual water provided
by a hidden source). If she personified Mari her name might go back to
AMA REO, mother AMA river REO, patroness of rivers and the very many
irrigation channels that made the avantgarde city state so fertile.
And there was a tin road to Hazor and further through Palestine to Egypt.

David, Psalm 1:3

And he (the godly one) shall be like a tree
planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth
his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall
not wither; and whatever he doeth shall prosper.

These lines, for me, have the ring of a Mari formula.

[Daud Deden]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Hoping to make this thread a little more civilized. When I mention Magdalenian
you can unite against me, and I am waterproof. Well, Ebla is Minnit in the
Bible, Akkaddian mu-nu-ti-um, akin to MiNuThe on Linear A tablet Hagia Triada
95, given as head of a bull for Mi, as visual pun of a bull leaper standing
on his feet hands feet for Nu, and as an abstract Tree of Life for The.
Now the Magdalenian reading gives MUC NOS SAI, MUC for bull, NOS for mind,
and SAI for life - the Minoan bull leaper having been an emblem for the
astronomer who overcomes the moon bull or lunar cycle and Baal rising as
golden sun calf from the tree of life: the astronomer who secured the life
of the Minoans who depended on seafaring and thus on astronomy. Minos and
Knossos are derivatives of the same formula
MUC NOS SAI Mi NOS Minos
MUC NOS SAI C NOS SAI Knossos
In order to find the phonology of the Psalms you have to go back to, sorry,
Magdalenian, and then proceed forward in time.

Templates for the psalms of David might be found among the some 25,000
documents from Mari (we had this recently). Next time I go to the Central
Library I look whether I can find something. A link to Magdalenian is also
given. The statue of a goddess found in the palace of Mari shows a woman
holding a vessel before her out of which flew water (actual water provided
by a hidden source). If she personified Mari her name might go back to
AMA REO, mother AMA river REO, patroness of rivers and the very many
irrigation channels that made the avantgarde city state so fertile.
And there was a tin road to Hazor and further through Palestine to Egypt.
David, Psalm 1:3
And he (the godly one) shall be like a tree
planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth
his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall
not wither; and whatever he doeth shall prosper.
These lines, for me, have the ring of a Mari formula.

"SAI = life"
Chaim = life, etz chaim = tree of life, le chaim = to life!

Xya = shine
Xyambu = jambu = attract
cyan = blue sky/sea/ocean
zion = high on

"Akkaddian mu-nu-ti-um"
mu-ni-ci-pal, com-mu-ni-ty, xyu-ambu-atlay-a = sievings = shav-ings/shabb't?

"AMA REO" Ibe-ria/ieu-li emak/ibu/mbo/motla/mother iembuoatl/yam-bottle
***@Hebrew: pool... water bottle?
***@Mongol: intercoastal postal message delivery service
- - -
zombievoodoo/xyambuatla/zionbara/(voo)doo=tiw/dzeu.s

[Franz Gnaedinger]

Post by Daud Deden
"SAI = life"
Chaim = life, etz chaim = tree of life, le chaim = to life!

What language is Chaim? I link hypothetical SAI for life, existence, with
Greek zaeo 'I live, flourish, am strong and vital', MUC for bull with Greek
mega English much and might Italian mucca 'cow', and Swiss Mocke for something
(also comparatively) big and round(ish), for example the late opera singer
Luciano Pavarotti was a classical Mocke. The word can also be used for
a toddler, miin süuesse chliine Mocke, my sweet little chubby one. And it is
present in Föifermocke, a bonbon in form of a lollipop for five cents we
used to buy at the kiosk when we went swimming in the lake. NOS means mind,
Greek nous. MUC NOS accounts for Mykonos and Mycene, island and stronghold
of those who follow the Zeus bull's mind. Mycene as mushroom (mycelium)
is an etymological short cut, for MUC named round and compact things,
which most mushrooms are (see Mocke above). MiNuThe in Linear A goes then
back to MUC NOS SAI, in the way explained before.

MUC NOS SAI Mi NOS Minos

MUC NOS SAI C NOS SAI Knossos

Bull leaping was a symbol for astronomy and the labyrinth of Minotaur for
calendar calculations and the legend of Minotaur encoded a lunisolar
calendar. Astronomy was used for navigating through the deserts of Syria,
and again for navigating the seas.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Daud Deden
"SAI = life"
Chaim = life, etz chaim = tree of life, le chaim = to life!

What language is Chaim? I link hypothetical SAI for life, existence, with

Ashkenazi / Israeli pronunciation of Hebrew.

Post by Franz Gnaedinger
Greek zaeo 'I live, flourish, am strong and vital', MUC for bull with Greek
mega English much and might Italian mucca 'cow', and Swiss Mocke for something
(also comparatively) big and round(ish), for example the late opera singer
Luciano Pavarotti was a classical Mocke. The word can also be used for
a toddler, miin süuesse chliine Mocke, my sweet little chubby one. And it is
present in Föifermocke, a bonbon in form of a lollipop for five cents we
used to buy at the kiosk when we went swimming in the lake. NOS means mind,
Greek nous. MUC NOS accounts for Mykonos and Mycene, island and stronghold
of those who follow the Zeus bull's mind. Mycene as mushroom (mycelium)
is an etymological short cut, for MUC named round and compact things,
which most mushrooms are (see Mocke above). MiNuThe in Linear A goes then
back to MUC NOS SAI, in the way explained before.
MUC NOS SAI Mi NOS Minos
MUC NOS SAI C NOS SAI Knossos
Bull leaping was a symbol for astronomy and the labyrinth of Minotaur for
calendar calculations and the legend of Minotaur encoded a lunisolar
calendar. Astronomy was used for navigating through the deserts of Syria,
and again for navigating the seas.

[Mścisław Wojna-Bojewski]

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Daud Deden
"SAI = life"
Chaim = life, etz chaim = tree of life, le chaim = to life!

What language is Chaim? I link hypothetical SAI for life, existence, with

Ashkenazi / Israeli pronunciation of Hebrew.

Oh my! Why did you spoil his pristine ignorance?

[Mścisław Wojna-Bojewski]

Post by Franz Gnaedinger

Post by Daud Deden
"SAI = life"
Chaim = life, etz chaim = tree of life, le chaim = to life!

What language is Chaim?

The fact that Franz does not even know what language Chaim is and still poses as a linguist is something even more spectacular than the ignorance he has previously exhibited.

[Daud Deden]

***@Hebrew:life/living

[Ruud Harmsen]

Tue, 15 Aug 2017 20:26:22 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Ugaritic is more evolved than that.
Reduction of z d_ to one phoneme, s t_ to one, s'. c. and s. to one,

I don't know what exactly you mean with your symbol, but even so I can
see that Wiki contradicts it. So it cannot be true. :)

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

No, Ugaritic is not *very conservative*, not even *conservative*.
Maybe, you don't know much of Ugaritic. Just have a look, and you'll know.
Arabic is to a large extent more conservative than Ugaritic, though younger by two millennia.

I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

Ugaritic is more evolved than that.
Reduction of z d_ to one phoneme, s t_ to one, s'. c. and s. to one,

Graphic distinctions were available for these, I don't know about
actual practice.

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Eblaite is fairly conservative, but Ugaritic is not especially conservative.
A.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Tue, 15 Aug 2017 06:20:14 -0700 (PDT): Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Yusuf B Gursey
I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

How it sounded.
What it sounded like.

No? This is probably a mistake many Americans also make, so it
displays how good Yusuf's English is? (Taking over natives' mistakes
is often a sign of very high level command.)
Or do only non-native speakers do this? Some Dutch do.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Tue, 15 Aug 2017 06:20:14 -0700 (PDT): Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Yusuf B Gursey
I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

How it sounded.
What it sounded like.
No? This is probably a mistake many Americans also make, so it
displays how good Yusuf's English is? (Taking over natives' mistakes
is often a sign of very high level command.)
Or do only non-native speakers do this? Some Dutch do.

No, "how it sounded like" is odd in AmE as well.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Tue, 15 Aug 2017 06:20:14 -0700 (PDT): Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Yusuf B Gursey
I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

How it sounded.
What it sounded like.
No? This is probably a mistake many Americans also make, so it
displays how good Yusuf's English is? (Taking over natives' mistakes
is often a sign of very high level command.)

I may have been translating from Turkish in this case.
But I was first brought to the US with my parents when I
was three. We spoke Turkish at home but I had part of
my elementary school, junior high and high school education
in the US, part in Turkey (we went back and forth from Turkey
to the States). I went to college at Yale and graduate school
at Brown. But I was either at home (New Haven) or frequently
visiting home. My SO spoke only Turkish and she was never
comfortable in English.

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Or do only non-native speakers do this? Some

Dutch do.

Post by Ruud Harmsen
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Tue, 15 Aug 2017 06:20:14 -0700 (PDT): Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Yusuf B Gursey
I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

How it sounded.
What it sounded like.
No? This is probably a mistake many Americans also make, so it
displays how good Yusuf's English is? (Taking over natives' mistakes
is often a sign of very high level command.)

I may have been translating from Turkish in this case.

I should have said "What it sounded like" or "How it
sounded". But then, it was late and I was sleepy.

Post by Yusuf B Gursey
But I was first brought to the US with my parents when I
was three. We spoke Turkish at home but I had part of
my elementary school, junior high and high school education
in the US, part in Turkey (we went back and forth from Turkey
to the States). I went to college at Yale and graduate school
at Brown. But I was either at home (New Haven) or frequently
visiting home. My SO spoke only Turkish and she was never
comfortable in English.

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Or do only non-native speakers do this? Some

Dutch do.

Post by Ruud Harmsen
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

[Ruud Harmsen]

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Yusuf B Gursey
I said as regards to the phonemic inventory. All Proto-Semtic
consonants except Dad are represented. You were asking about how
it sounded like.

How it sounded.
What it sounded like.
No? This is probably a mistake many Americans also make, so it
displays how good Yusuf's English is? (Taking over natives' mistakes
is often a sign of very high level command.)

I may have been translating from Turkish in this case.

I should have said "What it sounded like" or "How it
sounded". But then, it was late and I was sleepy.

OK, that settles it. I forgive you. :)

[Ruud Harmsen]

Tue, 15 Aug 2017 05:29:08 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

No, Ugaritic is not *very conservative*, not even *conservative*.

Well, in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugaritic#Phonology I see very
little difference between the first and second column. Do you see
more? Is Wikipedia wrong about this?

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Maybe, you don't know much of Ugaritic.

True in my case. I rely solely on the Wikipedia.

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Just have a look, and you'll know.

You said it, I did it.

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Arabic is to a large extent more conservative than Ugaritic, though younger by two millennia.

The table I referred to above contradicts that, with regards to
phonology anyway.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Tue, 15 Aug 2017 04:24:13 -0400 (EDT): Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

But vowels were not written, if I understand the Wiki page correctly.
So what's that talk about 'vocalism'?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Tue, 15 Aug 2017 04:24:13 -0400 (EDT): Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

But vowels were not written, if I understand the Wiki page correctly.
So what's that talk about 'vocalism'?

The Semitic languages were spoken languages. All of the subfamilies except
Akkadian have modern-day spoken descendants, and all of them (including
Akkadian) except South Arabian and Phoenician had ways of indicating vowels,
in full detail after the middle of the 1st millennium CE (AD). (Akkadian,
of course, was extinct by then but had always been written with a syllabary.)

[Ruud Harmsen]

Wed, 16 Aug 2017 04:30:33 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet
This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

But vowels were not written, if I understand the Wiki page correctly.
So what's that talk about 'vocalism'?

The Semitic languages were spoken languages. All of the subfamilies except
Akkadian have modern-day spoken descendants, and all of them (including
Akkadian) except South Arabian and Phoenician had ways of indicating vowels,
in full detail after the middle of the 1st millennium CE (AD). (Akkadian,
of course, was extinct by then but had always been written with a syllabary.)

Having ways to indicate them doesn't mean these ways are also employed
in all or in many surviving texts?

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Wed, 16 Aug 2017 04:30:33 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet
This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

But vowels were not written, if I understand the Wiki page correctly.
So what's that talk about 'vocalism'?

The Semitic languages were spoken languages. All of the subfamilies except
Akkadian have modern-day spoken descendants, and all of them (including
Akkadian) except South Arabian and Phoenician had ways of indicating vowels,
in full detail after the middle of the 1st millennium CE (AD). (Akkadian,
of course, was extinct by then but had always been written with a syllabary.)

Having ways to indicate them doesn't mean these ways are also employed
in all or in many surviving texts?

Long vowels were frequently indicated in Hebrew and Aramaic.
Akkadian was always written in a syllabary. The earliest
Arabic texts don't regularly indicate long /a:/ but
consistently indicate /u:/ and /i:/ but after the 1st cent. AH,
7th cent CE long /a:/ is indicated as a rule, except in a few
words. For Arabic we have detailed philological works concerning
the articulation of the phonemes, though one cou;d argue as to
what was meant.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Wed, 16 Aug 2017 04:30:33 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Ruud Harmsen

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet
This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

But vowels were not written, if I understand the Wiki page correctly.
So what's that talk about 'vocalism'?

The Semitic languages were spoken languages. All of the subfamilies except
Akkadian have modern-day spoken descendants, and all of them (including
Akkadian) except South Arabian and Phoenician had ways of indicating vowels,
in full detail after the middle of the 1st millennium CE (AD). (Akkadian,
of course, was extinct by then but had always been written with a syllabary.)

Having ways to indicate them doesn't mean these ways are also employed
in all or in many surviving texts?

Bible and Qur'an are fully vocalized. Both are extensive enough texts that
little of the grammar is unknown. All cuneiform documents are ipso facto
vocalized. Semitic is such a young and closely related family that every
language illuminates every other one. (Just look at an post-1940 commentary
to see how greatly the discovery of Ugaritic revolutionized biblical studies.)

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Tue, 15 Aug 2017 04:24:13 -0400 (EDT): Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.
A.

Ugaritic is very conservative in regards to the PS phonemic inventory

But vowels were not written, if I understand the Wiki page correctly.
So what's that talk about 'vocalism'?

The glottal stop was represented separately as 'a , 'i , 'u

Post by Ruud Harmsen
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What an ignorant question.

Sorry if you can't understand the question, and fail to answer it.
First of all, "the Psalms" is not a uniform corpus

Post by Peter T. Daniels
but includes texts composed at least 1000, probably more, years apart,
exhibiting numerous linguistic strata.

ah, any proof of such a claim?

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Any study of Classical Hebrew takes into account all ancient epigraphy and
reconstructs the probable historic forms that led to the attested corpus.

Reference for example?

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
The most celebrated Ugaritic approach to Psalms is Mitchell Dahood's, in the
Anchor Bible.

I'm afraid this is again off the mark.

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

It's called "Ugaritic."

This is not my question.
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Apparently, you fail to understand that Ugaritic is ** not ** Proto-Semitic.
Who is incompetent here, jerk?
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
What an ignorant question.

Sorry if you can't understand the question, and fail to answer it.
First of all, "the Psalms" is not a uniform corpus

Post by Peter T. Daniels
but includes texts composed at least 1000, probably more, years apart,
exhibiting numerous linguistic strata.

ah, any proof of such a claim?

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Why not 2000 years or 5000 years?? You're a clown.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Any study of Classical Hebrew takes into account all ancient epigraphy and
reconstructs the probable historic forms that led to the attested corpus.

Reference for example?

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

You're a clown.
Besides you still have not answered my initial question about people who might have worked on reconstructing an older version of the Psalms.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
The most celebrated Ugaritic approach to Psalms is Mitchell Dahood's, in the
Anchor Bible.

I'm afraid this is again off the mark.

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

ok, so you're idiotically stuck in your "Ugaritic" paradigm,
and you can't understand what people write.
Never mind. I was not expecting anything positive from you.
A.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Apparently, you fail to understand that Ugaritic is ** not ** Proto-Semitic.
Who is incompetent here, jerk?

The question was about reconstructing PS. How do you imagine PS is reconstructed?

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Why not 2000 years or 5000 years?? You're a clown.

Are you too ignorant to consult ANY commentary on the Psalms published within
the last 150 years or so?

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Besides you still have not answered my initial question about people who might have worked on reconstructing an older version of the Psalms.

I repeat: there is no "the Psalms" as a single linguistic corpus.

No one would publish "reconstructions" of extensive texts. Everyone's commentary
shows what can be learned from comparative philology. Every commentator
assumes that anyone interested in Hebrew knows the phonological history of all
forms that are not in some way anomalous.

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

ok, so you're idiotically stuck in your "Ugaritic" paradigm,
and you can't understand what people write.
Never mind. I was not expecting anything positive from you.

Since you know nothing about Hebrew or biblical philology, there is no point in
going any further. Get an education.

There's plenty of biblical scholarship published in French. Maybe that would be
a good place to start. The name Henri Cazelles comes to mind.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Apparently, you fail to understand that Ugaritic is ** not ** Proto-Semitic.
Who is incompetent here, jerk?

The question was about reconstructing PS. How do you imagine PS is reconstructed?

No, *my*question is about trying to reconstruct a version of the Psalms in Proto-Semitic.
I have no lesson to get from you about PS, about which you know close to nothing, senile jerk.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Why not 2000 years or 5000 years?? You're a clown.

Are you too ignorant to consult ANY commentary on the Psalms published within
the last 150 years or so?

as usual, senile garbage that has nothing to do with the proposed topic.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Besides you still have not answered my initial question about people who might have worked on reconstructing an older version of the Psalms.

I repeat: there is no "the Psalms" as a single linguistic corpus.

You can decree that.
But in all cases, there's no reason why not to take the Psalms as a single linguistic corpus.
All your idiotic garbage posted here amounts to a single linguistic corpus.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
No one would publish "reconstructions" of extensive texts. Everyone's commentary
shows what can be learned from comparative philology. Every commentator
assumes that anyone interested in Hebrew knows the phonological history of all
forms that are not in some way anomalous.

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

ok, so you're idiotically stuck in your "Ugaritic" paradigm,
and you can't understand what people write.
Never mind. I was not expecting anything positive from you.

Since you know nothing about Hebrew or biblical philology, there is no point in
going any further. Get an education.

My question is not about Biblical Studies.
Apparently, your confused and befuddled mind can't make a difference between Proto-Semitic and Biblical Studies.
Get yourself clarity of mind.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
There's plenty of biblical scholarship published in French. Maybe that would be
a good place to start. The name Henri Cazelles comes to mind.

[DKleinecke]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Apparently, you fail to understand that Ugaritic is ** not ** Proto-Semitic.
Who is incompetent here, jerk?

The question was about reconstructing PS. How do you imagine PS is reconstructed?

No, *my*question is about trying to reconstruct a version of the Psalms in Proto-Semitic.
I have no lesson to get from you about PS, about which you know close to nothing, senile jerk.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Why not 2000 years or 5000 years?? You're a clown.

Are you too ignorant to consult ANY commentary on the Psalms published within
the last 150 years or so?

as usual, senile garbage that has nothing to do with the proposed topic.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Besides you still have not answered my initial question about people who might have worked on reconstructing an older version of the Psalms.

I repeat: there is no "the Psalms" as a single linguistic corpus.

You can decree that.
But in all cases, there's no reason why not to take the Psalms as a single linguistic corpus.
All your idiotic garbage posted here amounts to a single linguistic corpus.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
No one would publish "reconstructions" of extensive texts. Everyone's commentary
shows what can be learned from comparative philology. Every commentator
assumes that anyone interested in Hebrew knows the phonological history of all
forms that are not in some way anomalous.

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

ok, so you're idiotically stuck in your "Ugaritic" paradigm,
and you can't understand what people write.
Never mind. I was not expecting anything positive from you.

Since you know nothing about Hebrew or biblical philology, there is no point in
going any further. Get an education.

My question is not about Biblical Studies.
Apparently, your confused and befuddled mind can't make a difference between Proto-Semitic and Biblical Studies.

Actually you asked for pre-Hebrew not proto-Semitic.

Dahood did what you asked for (as PTD said). Of course Dahood
only tried to get back to Ugaritic days and his treatment of
vowels was proforma (just what was necessary).

As I understand it PS vowels are still quite controversial. I
imagine that you, AF, are thinking of applying some top-down
reasoning based on Afro-Asiatic. Otherwise why would a version
of Psalms be of any interest to anyone?

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by DKleinecke

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Apparently, you fail to understand that Ugaritic is ** not ** Proto-Semitic.
Who is incompetent here, jerk?

The question was about reconstructing PS. How do you imagine PS is reconstructed?

No, *my*question is about trying to reconstruct a version of the Psalms in Proto-Semitic.
I have no lesson to get from you about PS, about which you know close to nothing, senile jerk.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Why not 2000 years or 5000 years?? You're a clown.

Are you too ignorant to consult ANY commentary on the Psalms published within
the last 150 years or so?

as usual, senile garbage that has nothing to do with the proposed topic.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Besides you still have not answered my initial question about people who might have worked on reconstructing an older version of the Psalms.

I repeat: there is no "the Psalms" as a single linguistic corpus.

You can decree that.
But in all cases, there's no reason why not to take the Psalms as a single linguistic corpus.
All your idiotic garbage posted here amounts to a single linguistic corpus.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
No one would publish "reconstructions" of extensive texts. Everyone's commentary
shows what can be learned from comparative philology. Every commentator
assumes that anyone interested in Hebrew knows the phonological history of all
forms that are not in some way anomalous.

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

ok, so you're idiotically stuck in your "Ugaritic" paradigm,
and you can't understand what people write.
Never mind. I was not expecting anything positive from you.

Since you know nothing about Hebrew or biblical philology, there is no point in
going any further. Get an education.

My question is not about Biblical Studies.
Apparently, your confused and befuddled mind can't make a difference between Proto-Semitic and Biblical Studies.

Actually you asked for pre-Hebrew not proto-Semitic.
Dahood did what you asked for (as PTD said). Of course Dahood
only tried to get back to Ugaritic days and his treatment of
vowels was proforma (just what was necessary).
As I understand it PS vowels are still quite controversial. I

Most agree on 3 qualities of 2 lengths 2 diphthongs

Post by DKleinecke
imagine that you, AF, are thinking of applying some top-down
reasoning based on Afro-Asiatic. Otherwise why would a version
of Psalms be of any interest to anyone?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by DKleinecke

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Apparently, you fail to understand that Ugaritic is ** not ** Proto-Semitic.
Who is incompetent here, jerk?

The question was about reconstructing PS. How do you imagine PS is reconstructed?

No, *my*question is about trying to reconstruct a version of the Psalms in Proto-Semitic.
I have no lesson to get from you about PS, about which you know close to nothing, senile jerk.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Why not 2000 years or 5000 years?? You're a clown.

Are you too ignorant to consult ANY commentary on the Psalms published within
the last 150 years or so?

as usual, senile garbage that has nothing to do with the proposed topic.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Besides you still have not answered my initial question about people who might have worked on reconstructing an older version of the Psalms.

I repeat: there is no "the Psalms" as a single linguistic corpus.

You can decree that.
But in all cases, there's no reason why not to take the Psalms as a single linguistic corpus.
All your idiotic garbage posted here amounts to a single linguistic corpus.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
No one would publish "reconstructions" of extensive texts. Everyone's commentary
shows what can be learned from comparative philology. Every commentator
assumes that anyone interested in Hebrew knows the phonological history of all
forms that are not in some way anomalous.

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

ok, so you're idiotically stuck in your "Ugaritic" paradigm,
and you can't understand what people write.
Never mind. I was not expecting anything positive from you.

Since you know nothing about Hebrew or biblical philology, there is no point in
going any further. Get an education.

My question is not about Biblical Studies.
Apparently, your confused and befuddled mind can't make a difference between Proto-Semitic and Biblical Studies.

Actually you asked for pre-Hebrew not proto-Semitic.
Dahood did what you asked for (as PTD said). Of course Dahood
only tried to get back to Ugaritic days and his treatment of
vowels was proforma (just what was necessary).
As I understand it PS vowels are still quite controversial. I

Most agree on 3 qualities of 2 lengths 2 diphthongs

I think David means that the morphological vocalizations of forms are
controversial, rather than the inventory.

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by DKleinecke
imagine that you, AF, are thinking of applying some top-down
reasoning based on Afro-Asiatic. Otherwise why would a version
of Psalms be of any interest to anyone?

--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[DKleinecke]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by DKleinecke

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Apparently, you fail to understand that Ugaritic is ** not ** Proto-Semitic.
Who is incompetent here, jerk?

The question was about reconstructing PS. How do you imagine PS is reconstructed?

No, *my*question is about trying to reconstruct a version of the Psalms in Proto-Semitic.
I have no lesson to get from you about PS, about which you know close to nothing, senile jerk.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what people write.
Why not 2000 years or 5000 years?? You're a clown.

Are you too ignorant to consult ANY commentary on the Psalms published within
the last 150 years or so?

as usual, senile garbage that has nothing to do with the proposed topic.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Besides you still have not answered my initial question about people who might have worked on reconstructing an older version of the Psalms.

I repeat: there is no "the Psalms" as a single linguistic corpus.

You can decree that.
But in all cases, there's no reason why not to take the Psalms as a single linguistic corpus.
All your idiotic garbage posted here amounts to a single linguistic corpus.
A.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
No one would publish "reconstructions" of extensive texts. Everyone's commentary
shows what can be learned from comparative philology. Every commentator
assumes that anyone interested in Hebrew knows the phonological history of all
forms that are not in some way anomalous.

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

ok, so you're idiotically stuck in your "Ugaritic" paradigm,
and you can't understand what people write.
Never mind. I was not expecting anything positive from you.

Since you know nothing about Hebrew or biblical philology, there is no point in
going any further. Get an education.

My question is not about Biblical Studies.
Apparently, your confused and befuddled mind can't make a difference between Proto-Semitic and Biblical Studies.

Actually you asked for pre-Hebrew not proto-Semitic.
Dahood did what you asked for (as PTD said). Of course Dahood
only tried to get back to Ugaritic days and his treatment of
vowels was proforma (just what was necessary).
As I understand it PS vowels are still quite controversial. I

Most agree on 3 qualities of 2 lengths 2 diphthongs

I think David means that the morphological vocalizations of forms are
controversial, rather than the inventory.

Thanks Peter. I should have made myself clearer.

But I am unsure whether Arnaud accepts even the usual set
of vowels.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by DKleinecke

Post by Arnaud Fournet
My question is not about Biblical Studies.
Apparently, your confused and befuddled mind can't make a difference between Proto-Semitic and Biblical Studies.

Actually you asked for pre-Hebrew not proto-Semitic.

Well, the thread's title mentions Proto-Semitic.
A.

Post by DKleinecke
Dahood did what you asked for (as PTD said). Of course Dahood
only tried to get back to Ugaritic days and his treatment of
vowels was proforma (just what was necessary).
As I understand it PS vowels are still quite controversial. I
imagine that you, AF, are thinking of applying some top-down
reasoning based on Afro-Asiatic. Otherwise why would a version
of Psalms be of any interest to anyone?

Actually, I'm wondering what happens with metrical issues, when a vocalism closer to PS is applied to the Psalms.
A.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by DKleinecke

Post by Arnaud Fournet
My question is not about Biblical Studies.

The hell it isn't. See your latest version of The Question below.

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by DKleinecke

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Apparently, your confused and befuddled mind can't make a difference between Proto-Semitic and Biblical Studies.

Actually you asked for pre-Hebrew not proto-Semitic.

Well, the thread's title mentions Proto-Semitic.

Post by DKleinecke
Dahood did what you asked for (as PTD said). Of course Dahood
only tried to get back to Ugaritic days and his treatment of
vowels was proforma (just what was necessary).
As I understand it PS vowels are still quite controversial. I
imagine that you, AF, are thinking of applying some top-down
reasoning based on Afro-Asiatic. Otherwise why would a version
of Psalms be of any interest to anyone?

Actually, I'm wondering what happens with metrical issues, when a vocalism closer to PS is applied to the Psalms.

Why the hell didn't you say so?

I could give you plenty of references on biblical metrics. But I won't.

If you don't know how to use basic bibliographic reference tools, fuck off.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Tue, 15 Aug 2017 08:53:14 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet
I had something like Proto-Semitic vocalism in mind.

=20
Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what=
people write.
Apparently, you fail to understand that Ugaritic is ** not ** Proto-Semitic=
.

NOBODY in this discussion claimed that Ugaritic would be
Proto-Semitic. Strawman. Dismissed.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Tue, 15 Aug 2017 08:53:14 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Who is incompetent here, jerk?

I would almost add "Go fuck yourself elsewhere" to my previous
comment, but that would be too close to Arnoud's own style.

[Ruud Harmsen]

Tue, 15 Aug 2017 08:53:14 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

First of all, "the Psalms" is not a uniform corpus but includes
texts composed at least 1000, probably more, years apart,
exhibiting numerous linguistic strata.

ah, any proof of such a claim?

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what=
people write.
Why not 2000 years or 5000 years?? You're a clown.

Wiki says it's more like 500.

No idea myself. I always thought psalms were invented around 1568 by
Dutch protestant rebels, together with the 'gezangen' and our national
hymn the "Wilhelmus". Completely ignorant and I admit it.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Ruud Harmsen
Tue, 15 Aug 2017 08:53:14 -0700 (PDT): Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

First of all, "the Psalms" is not a uniform corpus but includes
texts composed at least 1000, probably more, years apart,
exhibiting numerous linguistic strata.

ah, any proof of such a claim?

Is any further proof needed of AF's incompetence in Semitic studies?

Once again blaming other people for your own idiotic inability to read what=
people write.
Why not 2000 years or 5000 years?? You're a clown.

Wiki says it's more like 500.

One of them is almost a verse-by-verse parallel with an Egyptian hymn.
Some are said to be Hellenistic. That's a good 1000 years between. Ugaritic
poetry relies on many of the same parallel pairs, indicating that there
was a widespread oral poetic tradition -- so many that three large volumes
called "Ras Shamra Parallels" was published in the Analecta Orientalia series.

Post by Ruud Harmsen
No idea myself. I always thought psalms were invented around 1568 by
Dutch protestant rebels, together with the 'gezangen' and our national
hymn the "Wilhelmus". Completely ignorant and I admit it.

Maybe there's a Low Countries joke in there somewhere ...

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

I found this:

Mark S. Smith, “Canaanite Backgrounds to the Psalms,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2014)

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

Mark S. Smith, “Canaanite Backgrounds to the Psalms,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2014)

thanks !
Yours is the first post on topic in the thread! :):)
A.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

Mark S. Smith, “Canaanite Backgrounds to the Psalms,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2014)

thanks !
Yours is the first post on topic in the thread! :):)

You think Mark "reconstructed a pre-Hebrew version of the Psalms"?? In a
"handbook" article, no less? Good grief.

I think he sent me a copy of that article, but I'd have to search the email
(having lost a hard drive recently).

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

Mark S. Smith, “Canaanite Backgrounds to the Psalms,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2014)

thanks !
Yours is the first post on topic in the thread! :):)

You think Mark "reconstructed a pre-Hebrew version of the Psalms"?? In a
"handbook" article, no less? Good grief.
I think he sent me a copy of that article, but I'd have to search the email
(having lost a hard drive recently).

Don't worry, Senile, I have a whole pdf of the book.
No big deal if you recently "lost a hard drive" or more than that...
A.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

Mark S. Smith, “Canaanite Backgrounds to the Psalms,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2014)

thanks !
Yours is the first post on topic in the thread! :):)

You think Mark "reconstructed a pre-Hebrew version of the Psalms"?? In a
"handbook" article, no less? Good grief.
I think he sent me a copy of that article, but I'd have to search the email
(having lost a hard drive recently).

Don't worry, Senile, I have a whole pdf of the book.
No big deal if you recently "lost a hard drive" or more than that...

You own the book ... but you don't know what's in it?

You sound more and more stupid every day.

[Arnaud Fournet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Arnaud Fournet

Post by Yusuf B Gursey

Post by Arnaud Fournet
Has somebody ever tried to reconstruct a pre-Hebrew version of the psalms?
For example, building on the consonants and assuming an archaic vocalism.

Mark S. Smith, “Canaanite Backgrounds to the Psalms,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2014)

thanks !
Yours is the first post on topic in the thread! :):)

You think Mark "reconstructed a pre-Hebrew version of the Psalms"?? In a
"handbook" article, no less? Good grief.
I think he sent me a copy of that article, but I'd have to search the email
(having lost a hard drive recently).

Don't worry, Senile, I have a whole pdf of the book.
No big deal if you recently "lost a hard drive" or more than that...

You own the book ... but you don't know what's in it?
You sound more and more stupid every day.

I'm quite busy and I certainly can't read all the pdfs I have in store.
A.