Re: More Etymology!

On Feb 13, 4:49 am, "Franz Gnaedinger" <f...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I have combined Franz's two replacement replies into one.

I wrote a long reply, posted it. My post was
succesful, Google said, but until now it did not
arrive, so I write a small part of it again:

Yes, google lies. I realized after losing just a few posts to google
that the way to beat it is to copy -- initially, just to the Clipboard
-- the full text of my reply. If I don't have immediate confirmation
that my message has been posted, I Paste the reply into a Notepad file
and try again a few minutes later.

my
distinction between pictures, pictograms,
hieroglyphs, glyphs, and writing. Also the star
counting doesn't work, it gives me a sum total
of 32 ratings while I got 3,024 ratings yesterday
morning. Heidi: look up the _profile_, I told you
so in my long message about Google rating
a couple of days ago in another thread (please
read my replies when I take my time answering
your questions).

On Feb 12, 8:38 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I don't have Klaus Schmidt here to ask.

Read his book.

I asked _you_.

And I told you that I agree on his distinction.

You have not stated what is distinction is. I have told you that his
book is not available to me, and from your description, it does not
sound like a professional site report, but a popularization.

What is the distinction that seems plausible to you?
Then you are using a strange definition of "pictogram."

You say that the bit that can be read /nar mer/ is "writing" because
it is "hieroglyphs"?

Now, then, you must define both "writing" and "hieroglyphs," as well
as "pictogram."

Pictures represent, say, animals. Pictograms
convey precise messages via symbolic pictures.

This is _not_ how "pictogram" is used by scholars of semiotic systems.
I believe that you would convey your meaning if you used "ideogram"
instead.

The horses in a Paleolithic cave painting may
be just animals, or they may represent the sun:
the descending horses in the niche at the rear
end of the axial gallery of Lascaux the winter sun
(Marie E.P. König), the red horse in the rotunda
of Lascaux the rising midsummer sun (me) ...
Narmer possibly was the legendary Menes who
united Egypt after two hundred years of war.
The pictures on the Narmer palette convey his
victory, and his position in the Nile valley, on the
basis of an ancient and mostly but not completely
lost ancient iconography. I identified Narmer with
the constellation of Orion, his servant with Sirius,
and the falcon in front of him with Aldebaran. So

Do you find any justification for this whatsoever in Egyptian
astronomical texts? (Yes, there are Egyptian astronomical texts.)

the pictures on the Narmer palette are pictograms:
conveying precise messages via symbolic pictures.
The two small signs on top have phonetic values:
nar mer, they form a minimal string of two phonetic
signs and convey his name, Narmer, so they are
writing. The sign 'nar' shows a fish, but the meaning
of the picture doesn't count anymore, all that counts
is the phonetic value 'nar'. Our letter A came from
the picture of the head of an oxen, you can still see
it when you turn it upside down, but ALASKA doesn't
mean land of oxen. 'A' was once the picture of the
head of an ox, became a pictogram, then a hieroglyph,
then a glyp, and now is a simple letter in writing.

Your definition of "writing" is the correct one, but "A" never
"became" an [ideo]gram, and you have still not defined "hieroglyph" or
"glyp[h]."

I snip the rest, hoping to come through at least
with this.

On Feb 13, 5:09 am, "Franz Gnaedinger" <f...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As the new Google interface doesn't work properly,
and swallowed my long and careful reply, I answer
piece by piece now, hastily, so that I come through.

On Feb 12, 8:38 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I left in that entire pointless paragraph to show that you still don't
have the slightest idea what I or your more persistent critics are
talking about, and how when we raise the crucial objections, you
simply ignore them.

My paragraph was a _reductio ad absurdum_
of your understanding of language.

Well, you've gone and removed it, so I don't know what you're talking
about, but, no, it wasn't.

We are NOT TALKING ABOUT 147,592 BP; we are talking about the
Magdalenian Period, for which you have reconstructed a linguistic
system that you posit as an ancestor to Indo-European. We are talking
about a period when human language was already as evolved as it was
going to get, when the human speech ability was identical to what it
is today. (Even evolution understands "If it ain't broke, don't fix
it.")

Language is the means of getting help, support
and understanding from those we depend upon
in one way or another --- and every means of
getting help, support and understranding may
be called language, on whatever level of life
it occurs ... (my definition of from 1974/75).

No matter how many times you repeat it, it does not become a useful or
helpful definition of "language." Fortunately, it is irrelevant here.

Language was different in Magdalenian times,
since life was different. I assume that words by
then consisted of one or two or three phonemes.
I make this assumption, and I look how far I get
with it. It led me to the discovery of my four laws
of Magdalenian, and using these laws, I mined
plenty of Magdalenian words.

As you say, this is your _assumption_. You have taken to ending every
post with an assertion that you make _arguments_ that are never
answered. You have, however, never offered an _argument_ is support of
this assumption.

You are completely incapable of explaining how a language you posit
for Franco-Cantabria before 12,000 could be identical to the language
you posit for GT half a millennium later (never mind the spurious
specificity of your dates), and how that one language could be
ancestral to Indo-European, thousands of years later and thousands
more km away.

Magdalenian art came to a sudden stop around
12,000 years ago. My claim is that the learned
- shamans and arch-shamans and their folks -
wandered northward and eastward, following
the retiring animals, and so some of them came
to the Eurasian steppes and Anatolia, where
the Magdalenian language turned into Azilian
and later into the language called Japhetic.

There are no such thing as "Azilian" and "Japhetic" languages, but
that has nothing to do with the point. While they were "wandering"
north and east for thousands of years, their language did not stay the
same. GT-language was NOT the same as Magdalenian language.

What is your evidence that it "certainly" does anything of the sort?

Google introduced rating, in order to cope with
tooo much nonsense. They are certainly watching
now whether it works, and how it works.

So your evidence is a repeated assertion.

You assert that again and again, yet you never offer an argument in
support of your approach.

Titles, ranking, Google stars, and your going
along with the mainstream may count in academe,
for publishing houses, etc., but not in the sciences
per se, where only one thing counts: arguments
and better arguments.

We wish you would offer any sort of argument at all.

I say it again: the above is only the stripped rump
of the second part of a long and carefully written
message I posted before, Google said my post
was successful, but it did not arrive.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: More Etymology!
    ... As the new Google interface doesn't work properly, ... and swallowed my long and careful reply, ... of your understanding of language. ... Magdalenian Period, for which you have reconstructed a linguistic ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Victim of US/China politics, or simply bad luck?
    ... pictures of Asian models and their pictures are all ... of why my site was banned), to another internal google email she gave ... problem with my site (which I am unaware of - as in 302 redirects, ... If you try a reinclusion request, you might get a second chance. ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Moderating and netiquet whiners hurting interest in Perl
    ... >> So you do indeed know little about Usenet. ... There is no way Google can ... >> They do the language even less favor, so crap ahead, please. ... > that you only want "Perl" questions (and nothing about what it's ...
    (comp.lang.perl.misc)
  • Anyone willing to trade multi-lingual dictionary databases?
    ... Because some language has position each word completely different from ... I doubt how can nowadays Google foreign language do? ... I am a Windows Automated Robot Script Programmer ... search engine request list of search terms in their ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Victim of US/China politics, or simply bad luck?
    ... pictures of Asian models and their pictures are all ... of why my site was banned), to another internal google email she gave ... http://seelai.com (A Address redirect to an IP address at Register.com ... Typepad, as Typepad wants the user to name the blog, and in my case I ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)