tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post7567246221689530964..comments2023-06-12T00:43:52.680-07:00Comments on Minoan language blog: Cracking the libation formula - Part IIAndras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-15574850747972905822010-07-10T01:50:02.078-07:002010-07-10T01:50:02.078-07:00Maybe the issue is your own inability with having ...Maybe the issue is your own inability with having an intelligent debate.<br />By the way, my study of PIE-Hurrian connections is published here:<br />http://www.nostratic.ru/books/(432)bomhard-hurrian.pdfFrance_LGChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08169145428521942518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-5276182551767581582010-06-09T16:20:43.618-07:002010-06-09T16:20:43.618-07:00Naturally, Yangg's delusional Hurrian-PIE conn...Naturally, Yangg's <a href="http://books.google.ca/books?id=tzU3RIV2BWIC&pg=PA29&dq=%22with+that+of+the+earlier+non-IE+Hurrian%22&hl=en&ei=hSAQTPTFDaPGM7XttLwM&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA" rel="nofollow">delusional Hurrian-PIE connections</a> are beneath intelligent debate.<br /><br />"Yangg" also goes by "Arnaud Fournet" and <a href="http://tech.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist_admin/message/809" rel="nofollow">trolls Cybalist</a>... <a href="http://tech.dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist_admin/message/816" rel="nofollow">incessantly</a>.Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-57934589485014882222010-03-05T23:49:42.621-08:002010-03-05T23:49:42.621-08:00As for Hurrian and PIE connections, I've writt...As for Hurrian and PIE connections, I've written a book draft on that topic with Allan Bomhard. <br />I definitely think that Hurrian and PIE are close relatives. Hurrian is very close to the kind of PIE hypothesized by some people like Lehmann and alias. <br />This is not exclusive of possible connections with Caucasic languages as well. I'm not in a kind of "it's X or Y" approach. I tend to think that both are true.<br /><br />Best<br />A.France_LGChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08169145428521942518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-86934820154423762192010-03-05T23:43:38.469-08:002010-03-05T23:43:38.469-08:00Bayndor [sounds like Gold Bath in French!] wrote :...Bayndor [sounds like Gold Bath in French!] wrote : hittite consonantal gemination<br /><br />I think you are confusing the features of the inadequate cuneiform system, which does not have a clear and straightforward way of writing voiced consonants with the features of the real language(s).<br />It's nonsense to posit REAL geminates. these are just graphic geminates.<br /><br />Best<br />A.France_LGChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08169145428521942518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-63801204113327553342010-02-15T15:35:17.763-08:002010-02-15T15:35:17.763-08:00As for the E and O sounds, their presence in Minoa...As for the E and O sounds, their presence in Minoan was always (how do I put this) problematic. This is because of several factors: One is the absolute rarity of these sounds. This is not a subjective 'rarity': I did some statistical calculations on the frequency of signs (of course, to help the decipherment), and that did give some interesting results: For example, the frequency of 'O' sounds (judged by the frequency of the corresponding syllabograms) is only about 5% [and this is mostly from sign RO]. The same time 'A' has about 35%, 'U' and 'I' 20-25% frequency. Ther vowel 'E' has another interesting feature: Despite its moderate overall frequency (15%), it is only found in about 1-2% of the word-initial vowels (half of the initial vowels is 'A', and - while still disfavoured - 'O' does not face the same level of discrimination in initial positions as 'E').<br /><br />The second argument (that probably comes from the first, i.e. the low overall frequency), is the extreme rarity or total lack of certain 'O'-based signs. Take the example of 'SO': it occurs about 2 times (in the same word) in all the corpus. Sign 'QO' does not occur at all. 'NO' is also extremely hard to find (perhaps the *28b sign IS 'NO', but that only occurs 3 times). There is also another problem with the Minoan 'O': namely, ther are sign-groups, where 'O' and 'U' seem exchangeable to some extent (apart from the difference in junction): take the example of SU-PU2-WA and A-SI SU-PO-A.<br /><br />For the last, the value of certain signs hints at their origins, and that does tell something about the original value of 'O' signs: Take the example of Lin A *79 = DO. It depicts an eye. I have a feeling that it does have something to do with Luwian Dawa = 'eye' and Etruscan Tva = 'to see'. In this case, it might have arisen through the path *tawa -> *tau -> *to [DO]. While I do not deny the existence of 'O' and 'E' in Minoan (some scholars do), they are still pretty rare compared to other sounds. Just do a similar statistics for Greek, and you will see what I did mean.Andras Zekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-49383982774760864462010-02-14T15:03:07.437-08:002010-02-14T15:03:07.437-08:00How do you conclude that Aegean languages "di...How do you conclude that Aegean languages "disfavour or straightforwardly lack vowels like E or O"? What reason is there against *e and *o reconstructed for Proto-Aegean as well. (Afterall, vee-shaped 5-vowels sytems are very common the world over.)Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-56663552928667883552010-02-14T02:31:00.569-08:002010-02-14T02:31:00.569-08:00Correction to my post above:
Hittite did not lack...Correction to my post above:<br /><br />Hittite did not lack voiced consonants: nevertheless, it is believed to have undergone a consonantal shift in its stops according to some scholars:<br />voiced -> voiceless; voiceless -> aspirated; aspirated voiced -> voiced w/o aspiration <br />(i.e. D->T; T->TH [-tt- in script]; DH -> D). This Anatolian phonological theory is no way a universally accepted one, yet interesting explanation of hittite consonantal gemination.Andras Zekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-69588470084747466632010-02-13T06:58:05.615-08:002010-02-13T06:58:05.615-08:00Dear Yangg,
Thank you for providing this resource...Dear Yangg,<br /><br />Thank you for providing this resource. <br /><br />As for the Etruscan connection, it is not self-understanding, nor intuitively trivial. I came to join this camp, because of the pronominal and declensional system found in Minoan Linear A and Cypriote Linear C shows undeniable similarity to Etruscan. The Cypriot and Cretan languages appear to be heavily related to each other: take the example of the TA-N- particles (*tan = accusative case of the demonstrative pronoun). If we work on endings, we may come to similar conclusions: the vowel-consonant-vowel type suffixes of Minoan words appear quite different from the Indo-European system but have possible parallels in Etruscan. The semitic interpretations, on the other hand, are often absurd. <br /><br />Still, there are still some words, like PO-TO-KU-RO that suggest IE connections. How can we reconcile that? Because there is an increasing number of scholars who believe the Etruscan, Rhaetian and Lemnian languages actually orginate in the Aegean, and are distantly related to Proto-Indo-European, there may not be any contradictions at all. Once I read an intrepretation of Eteo-Cypriot texts that used the Aegean theory (these were the first meaningful translations I have ever seen), it convinced me immediately that it is more than worthwhile to search for such parallels.<br /><br />The Aegean theory is important because it can explain a baffling problem: both Cretan, Cypriot and mainland Anatolian languages of the 2nd millenium B.C. seem to lack voiced consonants, and disfavour or straightforwardly lack vowels like E or O. In turn, they may have aspirated consonants (TH, PH, etc.). Etruscan, Rhaetian and Lemnian share exactly the same features. But the Anatolian languages like Luwian or Hittite are Indo-European, and this development was clearly shown to be secondary in the Anatolian branch (i.e. de-voicing of voiced consonants). The best possible explanation is a Bronze-age areal effect between nearby languages (that is, the Aegean and related languages influenced the Anatolian ones or an unknown third language influenced both). This areal effect also extends to Lemnian. On the other hand, Hurrian seems unaffected. <br /><br />As for Hurrian, I would love to see a consistent theory that explains its connections with Indo-European languages. Yet I would not be surprised if the Hurrian-Urartuian family would turn out to have common roots with some Caucasian languages instead.Andras Zekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-32944662643838699402010-02-13T06:10:01.543-08:002010-02-13T06:10:01.543-08:00Thank you Glen, for adding one small but important...Thank you Glen, for adding one small but important detail: the explanation of JA-DI-KI-TE-TE-DU-PU2-RE. (I must admit, I was so busy explaining the other words on the libation tables I totally forgot about this one).<br /><br />I also believe that the interpretation of the -TE (perhaps *-ethe) endings as a locative is essentially correct. The only thing I could not explain up to date is the fine distinction between the -TE and -TI endings (the latter, too, has been implicated as a locative).Andras Zekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-50510337085892359332010-02-12T22:11:25.711-08:002010-02-12T22:11:25.711-08:00I made a Hurrian vocabulary available here:
http:...I made a Hurrian vocabulary available here: <br />http://www.scribd.com/doc/25255681/Hurrianic-Vocabulary<br />There are plenty of indications that Eteo-cypriot and Carian are also very close to Hurrian. And I think it is possible to decipher them with Hurrian.<br /><br />I'm not sure what the connection between Minoan and Hurrian really is, but in all cases Hurrian, Carian and Eteo-Cypriot have about nothing in common with Etruscan. <br />And I can't see any reason to make Etruscan a non native and non autochthonous language. <br /><br />I'm neutral about Linear A language. <br />Eteo-Cretan as written in Greek alphabet is completely un-hurrian sounding. <br />And I can't see what Etruscan would bring here.<br /><br />Best<br />A.France_LGChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08169145428521942518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-23345347286899776002010-02-11T17:56:41.364-08:002010-02-11T17:56:41.364-08:00I really don't see why people continue to push...I really don't see why people continue to push a desperate connection between Minoan and Hurrian of all things. If we just look at it geographically, we see that the Hurro-Urartian group gravitates around the region of Lake Van in <i>*eastern*</i> Turkey. I wouldn't be averse to the idea however that <i>some</i> Hurrian words made their way into Minoan via Hittite or Luwian. That at least is plausible but exceedingly hard to prove at the present time given such little information.<br /><br />As for your analysis, Andras, well done although you could cut it down a few paragraphs. ;o) The phrase JA-DI-KI-TE-TE-DU-PU2-RE is surely two words: <i>Adíkitete dupure</i>. To an Etruscan, it would look like a locative noun phrase (ie. Minoan <i>-e-te</i> = Etruscan <i>-e-θi</i> [loc.sg.]+'in'). It's already surmised by many that <i>Adíkitu</i> means 'Mount Dikte'.Glen Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440249042894225949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-33312305917792359532010-02-10T13:59:03.990-08:002010-02-10T13:59:03.990-08:00I must confess I did play with the thought many ye...I must confess I did play with the thought many years ago, when I first became interested in the Linear A inscriptions. It was too bad I could not encounter any Hurran glossary large enough to serve as a meaningful basis of comparison. Initially I thought that the word-initial J- came from some Hurrian pronoun, but later rejected the idea. Since then I have taken the position that Minoan is much closer related to Cypriot, Etruscan and Lemnian than any other surrounding language. But what you say is certainly worth a try - to see if we can come to some good grammatical parallels and well-fitting words.Andras Zekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-66562435094049731052010-02-10T00:30:25.188-08:002010-02-10T00:30:25.188-08:00Interesting blog.
I've been working on several...Interesting blog.<br />I've been working on several ill-understood languages as well. I think they are Hurrian dialects. <br />I would personally recommend to check your analyses against Hurrian.<br /><br />A.France_LGChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08169145428521942518noreply@blogger.com