Double form -osyo /-oho in the Phaistos Disk

grapheus_at_www.com
Date: 03/17/05 

Date: 17 Mar 2005 14:04:36 -0800

I have to come back to the COEXISTENCE of the genitive endings -osyo
and -oho in the text of the Phaistos Disk.

I agree that this coexistence is an UNEXPECTED FACT, which HAS TO BE
EXPLAINED.
What I don't agree about is the DOGMATIC POSITION of Mr Miguel
Carrasquer, who wrote that this is "a reason to declare rubbish the
Proto-Ionic decipherment".

A language is NEVER "pure", and in ANY language there are UNEXPECTED
FACTS. To limit my scope to Mycenaean, with "Carrasquer's reasoning",
one should declare the Ventris' solution as "rubbish" because there are
for instance : o-pi-a2(ha)-la < *opi sala (with s>h) versus ku-ru-so
(no change for the -s-) -- or for the Plural Dative : ka-ke-u-si (
khalkeusi) versus te-o-i < *theoisi (change s>h).

So, the problem is TO EXPLAIN the UNEXPECTED, not to draw in advance
RIDICULOUS CONCLUSIONS from it !..

The SAME COEXISTENCE in the Homeric Epic has been explained as a DOUBLE
SOURCE : The -oio form (equivalent of the Disk's -osyo) would be "an
Eolian archaďsm" -- the -oo form (equivalent to the Disk's -oho) a
"Ionic Form".
A similar explanation can be given for the Phaistos Disk's forms. The
HISTORY of the "Proto-Ionians" (See J.F.'s book "Les Proto-Ioniens...")
has shown that they arrived in the Aegean c. 2900BC, i.e. 1200 years
BEFORE the "people of the Disk" wrote it.
During this long period of time, the Proto-Ionians DID NOT LIVE IN
ISOLATION. On the contrary ! They were in contact with many peoples, in
particular with some other "Proto-Greeks". From those, they probably
borrowed some Proper Names and names of particular items, like later
the Mycenaeans BORROWED a few Proto-Ionic words (denounced by the
absence of an etymological digamma, for instance)...

Now, let see which words in the Disk's text have -osyo, and which -oyo.
Well, the TYPICALLY Greek words have the -oho ending. One may therefore
think that, at the time of the Disk, the "Proto-Ionic" language of the
people who printed it HAD ALREADY CHANGED the primitive "Common Greek"
-*osyo ending into -oho.
The words with -osyo are the Proper Name <Argos> (a name which
designated later a Mycenaean city) and the word <diphros> : "chariot",
CERTAINLY a word BORROWED by the PROTO-IONIAN SEAFARERS !

MY CONCLUSION : Yes, the coexistence of two forms is a problem. But IT
CAN BE SOLVED in a reasonable way. As reasonable than explaining that
Myc. ku-ru-so or Myc. ka-ke-u-si have KEPT their -s- because they are
"borrowed words"...
Of course, I don't expect DOGMATIC PEOPLE, blind by their PRECONCEIVED
IDEAS, to accept it... They always APLY DOUBLE STANDARD : the SAME
explanation is VALID when it goes their way. It is UNACCEPTABLE when it
CONTRADICTS their theories....

grapheus

> > >> If Faucounau's "decipherment" of the Phaistos Disk relies on
> > >> the existence side by side of two genitive forms *-osyo and
> > >> *-oyo, then that's one more reason why the decipherment is
> > >> rubbish.

> > >> Miguel Carrasquer

Quantcast