Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
cladking

Why is Ancient Language Different?

260 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

cladking

Why does no ancient writing from the Great Pyramid building age have a word for everything we have a word for that existed at that time but has no word for any abstractions at all?

Why wasn't it noticed that there are no words for "thought", "belief", reductionism, or taxonomies?   Why wasn't it noticed the language breaks Zipf's Law?

 

It was asked in another thread why the ancients had grave goods and many rituals if they weren't superstitious but it seems that a race of people with no words to invent or hold superstitions might naturally have a great number of rituals.  Without abstractions there is little to bind a people together other than ritual and ceremony.   

Our understanding of animal languages is still very very poor.  If we want to discourse with an ape we must teach him English because we can't speak "Ape".  But there are dozens and dozens of words in animal languages coming to light in the last several years and each word has a common denominator; there are no abstractions.  Animals invent cities and can adapt the environment to suit their own needs yet they do it without a single abstraction.  Perhaps we don't understand animals or ancient writing because the meaning is in the formatting.   

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
11 minutes ago, cladking said:

Why does no ancient writing from the Great Pyramid building age have a word for everything we have a word for that existed at that time but has no word for any abstractions at all?

As discussed in detail on other forums:

You've deliberately (because you know you are doing it) decided to insist that the small percentage of the AE Egyptian is contained within the PT. You refuse to recognize that not all the words in the Ancient Egyptian are contained within in it, Yet you insist that all the words ARE in that fragment and if they aren't there then the word doesn't exist and therefore the concept and idea of it doesn't exist

The PT has no word for orange, ducks, Pheasants, 'Ancient Language', Ancient Science, Logic, Mathematics, consciousness, etc etc. By your idea this means they don't exist. Silly idea to the extreme.

How many words in the AE language? You don't know

How many separate words in the PT? You don't know

You expect the PT to contain all the 750,000 words in English - ?

 

Quote

Why wasn't it noticed that there are no words for "thought", "belief", reductionism, or taxonomies?   Why wasn't it noticed the language breaks Zipf's Law?

Because it doesn't. You don't even know what Zipf's law is. You learned that term in your foray to Linqusitic forums where they rejected your ideas and deleted your posts - for being unscientific drivel. Belief can be found in their repeated use of "Gods".

Quote

It was asked in another thread why the ancients had grave goods and many rituals if they weren't superstitious but it seems that a race of people with no words to invent or hold superstitions might naturally have a great number of rituals.  Without abstractions there is little to bind a people together other than ritual and ceremony. 

They believe in an after life an idea brought to them by religion. You can see in this image of a tomb food, tools etc left - what is that for?

ZES7yEY.jpg

 

Quote

Our understanding of animal languages is still very very poor. 

No kidding huh?

So you are continuing to pretend your ideas have not been falsified huh? Care to explain what happens when the meaning YOU say apply to AE words which you also claim have only one meaning. are applied to all existing places in the PT?

What happens - this question will be repeated until honestly answered.

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Megaro

I would say both "Ka" and "Ba" are pretty abstract.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
Just now, Megaro said:

I would say both "Ka" and "Ba" are pretty abstract.

Well yeah, good point but in Cladkingism the Ancient Egyptian had no religion, were not HSS and they were 'really' "scientific' terms" - but wait for his unusual explanation.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
48 minutes ago, Megaro said:

I would say both "Ka" and "Ba" are pretty abstract.

Obviously the terms "ka" and "ba" were abstractions to the writers of the book of the dead.  But it is merely assumed they have the same meaning to the Ancient Language where they arose.  It is apparent from how the words were used in sentences from ancient times that these words had no abstract meaning.  "Ka" was simply a person's "life's work" and "ba" was the ability to create.  Kas became defined only when the individual died and it was largely his ka that was remembered rather than the character or personality.  It was his "ba' that allowed him to create his life's work.  His "shadow' was the physical impact made on others.  Osiris' shadow was above him because his shadow is what we today call "alexander's band".   

There were simply no words that meant "belief".  They lacked any "infrastructure" for superstition. They could no more believe in something than create a belief or communicate one.  They couldn't even understand the concept of "belief" because they had no words to express them and no abstractions to paint a picture of belief.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
Just now, cladking said:

Obviously the terms "ka" and "ba" were abstractions to the writers of the book of the dead.  But it is merely assumed they have the same meaning to the Ancient Language where they arose. 

You've never written up any thing that shows that 'ancient language' existed nor do the AE have a word for it.

Quote

It is apparent from how the words were used in sentences from ancient times that these words had no abstract meaning.  "Ka" was simply a person's "life's work" and "ba" was the ability to create. 

It stood for soul or spirit dude and that is kinda abstract. Lets see your source for the statement, "Ka" was simply a person's "life's work" and "ba" was the ability to create.

Quote

  It was his "ba' that allowed him to create his life's work.  His "shadow' was the physical impact made on others.  Osiris' shadow was above him because his shadow is what we today call "alexander's band".   

Source for all these claims? Source for AE noting or associating that part of a rainbow?

Quote

There were simply no words that meant "belief".  They lacked any "infrastructure" for superstition.

They used the term Gods which they believed in. Jesus is it really this hard for you to understand this? Infrastructure you mean, tombs, temples and priest - yet they had those and incantations too. You should read up about the AE culture and religions before you to try to convince people they had no religion.

Quote

They could no more believe in something than create a belief or communicate one.  They couldn't even understand the concept of "belief" because they had no words to express them and no abstractions to paint a picture of belief.  

They also had no words for

Where is orange?

Where is Ancient Science?

Where is Ancient Language?

Where is Logic?

Where is Mathematics?

 

He is making these weird declarations based on a small fragment of the AE language - why he does so he won't explain

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
6 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

To pick, at random this first book I see in my house, “Gone With The Wind” it doesn’t contain the words “McDonalds” or “Lesbian” so I presume those things do not exist either, because one text chosen at random does not mention them?

I once described this weird brain cramp to one taking a short story of Jules Verne translated into English and pontificating that it is proof that the 80% of the words in the French language don't exist....

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
14 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

To pick, at random this first book I see in my house, “Gone With The Wind” it doesn’t contain the words “McDonalds” or “Lesbian” so I presume those things do not exist either, because one text chosen at random does not mention them?

This is simple.  There are tens of thousands of words written in the great pyramid building age which still survive.   This is the entire language so far as we know.  No doubt there are more words that were used but did not survive in writing but these are irrelevant since we have no means at this time of knowing what they are.  but one thing we know they were not is abstractions because none of the words are abstractions.   

So how do you have a language with no abstraction?  When you answer this question you'll understand Ancient Language and know how to begin to understand animal languages.

While there are tens of thousands of words surviving that were written in the great pyramid building age the simple fact is that there are very very few different words and these same few words just repeat over and over and there are no abstractions.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acute
16 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

To pick, at random this first book I see in my house, “Gone With The Wind” it doesn’t contain the words “McDonalds” or “Lesbian”

Really?

I always thought Scarlett O'Hara was up for pretty much anything! :yes:

 

(Too posh to eat burgers, though)

  • Like 2
  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, cladking said:

This is simple.  There are tens of thousands of words written in the great pyramid building age which still survive. 

"tens of thousands" huh, individual words? How do you know this. Show us the source for this claim? What you don't do evidence- then your claim is dismissed.

 

Quote

 This is the entire language so far as we know. 

LOL, sure it is yep all you have to do is state it and its true - now show us the proof of it. Lets see the evidence that its the entire language.

Quote

No doubt there are more words that were used but did not survive in writing but these are irrelevant since we have no means at this time of knowing what they are.  but one thing we know they were not is abstractions because none of the words are abstractions.   

 

....but but but that then defeats your whole "if its not in the PT then the word and the concept don't exist" - you've been screaming and ranting that for quite some time. Except for all the words that are like 'Gods'.

Quote

So how do you have a language with no abstraction?  When you answer this question you'll understand Ancient Language and know how to begin to understand animal languages.

But what about all the words that already exist in the fragments of the language we have like Gods - why are you ignoring this

""56: You awake in peace, (the Goddess) Tayt awakes in peace,  ""

What is peace and what are goddess

""Be seated before Unas as his god,
open his way in front of the spirits,
that he may stand in front of the spirits like Anubis Khentimentiu.
Forward! Forward, before Osiris!""

God, spirits, spirits like Anubis Khentimentius, Osiris

 

Lots of abstractions - why can't you see them?

I mean Cladking haven't you actually even READ the PT?

 

Quote

So how do you have a language with no abstraction? 

We don't have any such human languages.

 

Quote

While there are tens of thousands of words surviving that were written in the great pyramid building age the simple fact is that there are very very few different words and these same few words just repeat over and over and there are no abstractions.  

You've provided no sources or evidence that this is true. Your ascertain is not a fact. The entire sentence is one made up whopper.

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
5 hours ago, acute said:

Really?

I always thought Scarlett O'Hara was up for pretty much anything! :yes:

 

(Too posh to eat burgers, though)

I don't know nothin' about birthin' no babies.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
10 hours ago, cladking said:

Why does no ancient writing from the Great Pyramid building age have a word for everything we have a word for that existed at that time but has no word for any abstractions at all?

Why wasn't it noticed that there are no words for "thought", "belief", reductionism, or taxonomies?   Why wasn't it noticed the language breaks Zipf's Law?

 

It was asked in another thread why the ancients had grave goods and many rituals if they weren't superstitious but it seems that a race of people with no words to invent or hold superstitions might naturally have a great number of rituals.  Without abstractions there is little to bind a people together other than ritual and ceremony.   

Our understanding of animal languages is still very very poor.  If we want to discourse with an ape we must teach him English because we can't speak "Ape".  But there are dozens and dozens of words in animal languages coming to light in the last several years and each word has a common denominator; there are no abstractions.  Animals invent cities and can adapt the environment to suit their own needs yet they do it without a single abstraction.  Perhaps we don't understand animals or ancient writing because the meaning is in the formatting.   

So did you enjoy Dr Dolittle?

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom1200
15 hours ago, cladking said:

Why does no ancient writing from the Great Pyramid building age have a word for everything we have a word for that existed at that time but has no word for any abstractions at all?

Why start a thread with the title Why is Ancient Language Different? and then open with such an incoherent first sentence?  It makes more sense if you omit the first 'no' but that's what you wrote.  Do you proofread anything you write, or are you happy to share your track of thoughts, regardless of merit?

Apart from that - you and I actually have a lot in common!  I, too, know virtually nothing about Ancient Egypt, and - like you - I get most of my initial information and research from Wikipedia.  The big difference is - before some people commit a response to public scrutiny they make a bit more effort to analyse and evaluate their musings.

15 hours ago, cladking said:

Why wasn't it noticed that there are no words for "thought", "belief", 

Better people than me have already addressed that point, but - as a comparison - I've just done a quick scan of Genesis.  (The book, not the band.)  It probably depends on the translator, but in the source I used 1 out of 36 300 words 'thought' appears just seven times (including entries such as this - [38:15] When Judah saw her, he thought her to be a prostitute, for she had covered her face.) and the word 'belief' - never.  I would hesitate to argue, based on this, that the authors of Genesis lacked belief in abstract concepts.

Anyway - back to your original post:

15 hours ago, cladking said:

Our understanding of animal languages is still very very poor.  If we want to discourse with an ape we must teach him English because we can't speak "Ape".  But there are dozens and dozens of words in animal languages coming to light in the last several years and each word has a common denominator; there are no abstractions.  Animals invent cities and can adapt the environment to suit their own needs yet they do it without a single abstraction.  Perhaps we don't understand animals or ancient writing because the meaning is in the formatting.   

You link together some interesting observations.  What point(s) are you trying to make?  Could you perhaps elaborate on the "dozens and dozens of words in animal languages" giving some examples and sources?  Can you cite any descriptions of "Animals invent cities" apart from examples from the well-known Hymenoptera order?  And I truly apologise for being dimmer than the average Joe, but what did you mean by "the meaning is in the formatting"? 

All the best,

Tom

1 http://www.vatican.va/archive/bible/genesis/documents/bible_genesis_en.html

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
14 hours ago, Hanslune said:

Lots of abstractions - why can't you see them?

I can think of about 20 words in Korean, Japanese, Ojibway, Turkic, Northern Germanic and Koine  off the top of my head that are abstractions that have no English equivalent. The AE certainly had these too.

I'm guessing he only speaks English......

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, Piney said:

I can think of about 20 words in Korean, Japanese, Ojibway, Turkic, Northern Germanic and Koine  off the top of my head that are abstractions that have no English equivalent. The AE certainly had these too.

I'm guessing he only speaks English......

...and you would be partially correct  he has demonstrated an ability to speak a LOT of metaphysical gibberish too

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
Just now, Hanslune said:

 metaphysical gibberish

Ah, he speaks Newage American English. ^_^

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
1 hour ago, Piney said:

Ah, he speaks Newage American English. ^_^

More like forgetful old man mid-American English with highlights of gibberish on the side.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph
12 hours ago, cladking said:

I don't know nothin' about birthin' no babies.   

Tasteless and insensitive. 

Honestly, folks: responding to clad’s OP feeds his delusion this is even worth discussing. It isn’t.

—Jaylemurph 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
7 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

 

Quote

 

I certainly haven't seen anybody better than you in this thread.  There is one poster I have on "ignore" but I'm quite certain he isn't better than you either.  

Quote

Why start a thread with the title Why is Ancient Language Different? and then open with such an incoherent first sentence?  It makes more sense if you omit the first 'no' but that's what you wrote.  Do you proofread anything you write, or are you happy to share your track of thoughts, regardless of merit?

The sentence is hard to parse but it is exactly what I meant.  I often write hard to parse sentences in hopes people will understand everything we read, hear, see, and experience is parsed.   

I'll rephrase it.  

We have hundreds of thousands of words.  Of course many are for things that didn't exist in the great pyramid building age so we can't expect there to be the word "television" in AL.  But they certainly jhad things like "mammal", "thought", "beliefs" and "multiplication" right?  WRONG!   They had no such words.  If you look at a dictionary it is rare that the word exists in AL and none of the ones that do exist are "abstractions". 

It makes no sense AT ALL to believe a language like our's could possibly exist with only nouns and almost no other words and no abstractions.  It follows that their language was not like ours and probably can't be translated.  I can show that their language was like all other animal languages and could not be parsed without losing the meaning.   We completely misunderstand the words because of this.  

Quote

You link together some interesting observations.  What point(s) are you trying to make?  Could you perhaps elaborate on the "dozens and dozens of words in animal languages" giving some examples and sources?  Can you cite any descriptions of "Animals invent cities" apart from examples from the well-known Hymenoptera order?  And I truly apologise for being dimmer than the average Joe, but what did you mean by "the meaning is in the formatting"? 

Few animal words are known. There are many thousand of species and we know only a few dozen words.  The best known language is probably Prairie Dog;

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/prairie-dogs-language-decoded-by-scientists-1.1322230

What ALL of these words have in common is that there are no abstractions; just like Ancient Language.  We don't understand animal languages because they are formatted differently.  We understand Prairie Dog because word order is apparently irrelevant (it is very simple language that contains no knowledge)  so finding word meaning reveals "author intent".   These ani9mal, beavers, bees, termites, etc etc create cities.  All of these cities are quite complex and some have agriculture and air conditioning.  These are NOT the result of "instinct"  There is no such thing as "instinct" or "intelligence" as we define them.  They are the result of language which is simply a manifestation of the wiring of the brain.

The pyramid builders were a force of nature and not moribund and superstitious bumpkins.  They used knowledge and natural means to accomplish everything they did and to procreate giving birth to "Homo Omnisciencis".  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
4 hours ago, Piney said:

I can think of about 20 words in Korean, Japanese, Ojibway, Turkic, Northern Germanic and Koine  off the top of my head that are abstractions that have no English equivalent. The AE certainly had these too.

I'm guessing he only speaks English......

ALL MODERN LANGUAGES use abstractions.  Indeed, it is the use of abstraction even in definitions that requires every sentence to be parsed.  This is DIFFERENT than all animal languages.  It is the reason cats and dogs understand one another better than we can understand ourselves.   Of course we now have modern science to give us insight into almost every single subject except "consciousness" and the nature of language.  

Animals don't understand abstraction. They have no beliefs whatsoever and neither did the pyramid builders.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
13 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

So did you enjoy Dr Dolittle?

I have little capability of communicating with animals.  They've taught a mere handful of words.  I understand babies pretty well though and probably because I understand the specific formatting and babies provide much more feedback than other animals.

None of the words in any of these languages are abstractions.  Indeed the first  concept I teach a baby ready to learn language is abstraction.  Of course they need some vocabulary before they begin true language acquisition.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rashore
11 minutes ago, cladking said:

 

Animals don't understand abstraction. They have no beliefs whatsoever and neither did the pyramid builders.  

Ok, now the notion of the pyramid builders having no beliefs whatsoever is just absurd. The whole point of the pyramids was based in the abstract beliefs of an afterlife, and deities, and a persons soul.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
16 minutes ago, rashore said:

Ok, now the notion of the pyramid builders having no beliefs whatsoever is just absurd. The whole point of the pyramids was based in the abstract beliefs of an afterlife, and deities, and a persons soul.

This belief is a product of our parsing the Ancient Language.  That we parsed it wrong is essentially proven by the fact that they had no abstractions so no belief at all is possible.

The pyramid builders said numerous times that the pyramid is not a tomb and the dead king does not rot in it or anywhere else.  But everywhere they literally stated the pyramid wasn't a tomb we parse the words symbolically or using our abstractions and change the meaning to "the pyramid is a tomb".  They said over and over and over that the pyramid is the dead king and is not a tomb.  The literal meaning of their words was the intended meaning and we parse them wrong because the authors of the "book of the dead" parsed them wrong and we translate AND interpret  the ancient language only in terms of the "book of the dead".  

We got it all wrong.  There are no abstractions because animal minds don't give birth to no abstractions.  Once you take Ancient Language and animals literally their meaning will begin to emerge.  Animal language will prove more difficult because it is necessary to know what they know AND how they know it.  

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.