Re: More Etymology!

On Feb 12, 2:49 am, "Franz Gnaedinger" <f...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

If Klaus Schmidt sees no writing, how can you ascribe to those images a
phonetic value?

He says there are messages, durable messages
from people to people, conveyed by means of
pictograms plus hieroglyphs (abstract pictograms
and small figurative elements).

What is this distinction you are trying to make between "hieroglyph"
and "pictogram"?

I attest a phonetic
value to the lying H, on the basis of my Magdalenian
hypothesis,

But your "Magdalenian hypothesis" has no basis in reality. Quite aside
from the absurdity of a human language having derivational morphology
based on "permutations" of phonemes, EVEN IF you "Magdalenian" were a
conceivable stage of pre-proto-Indo-European, what relevance would it
have to people at GT, thousands of years earlier than and thousands of
km away from any place there might have been speakers of PPIE?

as I explain three of the stone pillar
temples as calendars, while Klaus Schmidt speaks
of a Neolithic Stonehenge, and bigger than Stonehenge,
at least fifteen temples are waiting to see the light again.
I ascribe phonetic values to one hieroglyph (AC CA,
lying H), to one pictogram (DhAG, fox). and to one
sculpture (AAR RAA, AAR RAA NOS, Ouranos,
limestone ring that makes one see the deceased
ruler in the sky, in his heavenly abode, ex negativo,
composed of air and light).

Now somebody killrate my message, as usual

Evidently you are your own killrater. Normally, masochists do not
complain of the punishments they inflict on themselves.

.