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

MDagger

Is it possible most of their abstractions were in the spoken language and not in written language?  Does every spoken word have a writing equivalent?

MDagger

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
1 minute ago, MDagger said:

Is it possible most of their abstractions were in the spoken language and not in written language?  Does every spoken word have a writing equivalent?

 

Obviously there can be subtle and not so subtle differences between spoken and written language but we're talking about 95% of our language is missing and all these missing words share a common trait; they are abstractions.  All the words that are known are not abstractions when they are taken literally.  I seriously doubt that such a coincidence is possible or that they had two different vocabularies for expressing their "thought" especially when they didn't even have the abstraction we call "thought".  

This is still new to me too.  I only very recently observed that there are no abstractions.  I already knew they had no words for "belief", "thought", taxonomies, or reductionism but I hadn't realized that these are definitional to "abstraction".  All abstractions fall within one of these categories.  The ancients said that meaning in the "words of the gods" arises like a lily from the Nile and this appears to be a very accurate description of understanding any of the writing.  I myself came to understand it only by creating models of the words as I solved them.  I can "get into the minds" of the authors but this was very much the intention of ancient communication.  We tell people our thoughts but the meaning of Ancient Language disclosed what the speaker  was "thinking".  And it disclosed this thinking because vocabulary and grammar were tied to what was known to all.  It was tied to human understanding of the cosmos rather than to what each individual believed.,   

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
2 hours ago, cladking said:

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.

Still uttering this made up nonsense Cladking?

Utterance 303

464: To say the words:
"O Gods of the West,
O Gods of the East,
O Gods of the South,
O Gods of the North !
These four pure reed floats which you placed for Osiris when he ascended towards heaven

Now you say the word gods = theory - doesn't really sound right does it? LOL

Again there the AE had a religion which is why they had temples, tombs and incantation like these

Quote

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".

No they didn't you just made that up. Please link to all of these then. Odd you don't do that when you make your claim - are you trying hide your 'source'....which is your imagination?

 

Quote

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.  

No you got it seriously wrong which isn't surprising given you CANNOT READ THE AE LANGUAGE - but you endlessly attempt to pretend you can - very sad and silly on your part. They have lots of abstractions you just refuse to see them. Like they say beautiful.....God, spirits - etc, all of which you try to ignore.

Unfortunately for you I and everyone else can just read the PT ourselves:

https://www.pyramidtextsonline.com/translation.html#antenorth

  • Like 6

Share this post


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

Is it possible most of their abstractions were in the spoken language and not in written language?  Does every spoken word have a writing equivalent?

MDagger

No the written language is full of abstraction Cladking is lying to you.

https://www.pyramidtextsonline.com/translation.html#antenorth

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
2 hours ago, cladking said:

Obviously there can be subtle and not so subtle differences between spoken and written language but we're talking about 95% of our language is missing and all these missing words share a common trait; they are abstractions.  All the words that are known are not abstractions when they are taken literally.  I seriously doubt that such a coincidence is possible or that they had two different vocabularies for expressing their "thought" especially when they didn't even have the abstraction we call "thought".  

"95" where did you pull that out of? Chuckle - show us where you got that from - I suspect you made it up.

Why can't you see the words Spirit, God, Goddess, Gods, Beauty, etc in the PT they are there? Why pretend they aren't there?

 

282: so he said, the Rich-one-in-plow-land, he who-lives-in-the-Duat.
"She comes to meet you, the beautiful West-goddess, to meet you with her beautiful locks!"
She says: "He comes whom I have borne,

Beauty and/ or beautiful is an abstraction

Quote

I myself came to understand it only by creating models of the words as I solved them.  I can "get into the minds" of the authors but this was very much the intention of ancient communication.  We tell people our thoughts but the meaning of Ancient Language disclosed what the speaker  was "thinking".

More of your long term delusion that you have magical powers to understand the ancient Egyptians? You are still saying this in public? What great unintended comedy.

Show us the word 'Ancient Language' in the PT?

 

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph

Hans — seriously — why even engage with clad? You know he’s just going to lie or ignore any cogent point you make. 

—Jaylemurph 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
12 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

Hans — seriously — why even engage with clad? You know he’s just going to lie or ignore any cogent point you make. 

—Jaylemurph 

Yep he will lie and avoid but I'm providing the truth by way of evidence to allow other people to see exactly how he is trying to deceive them. In my experience he always sticks his foot in his mouth and contradicts himself.

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

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

Many animals understand "space" and "time". Google it before you make such a asinine statement.

As for humans with no abstractions??? Dude....your .......I actually can't think of a damn thing to say....:blink:

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
3 minutes ago, Piney said:

Many animals understand "space" and "time". Google it before you make such a asinine statement.

As for humans with no abstractions??? Dude....your .......I actually can't think of a damn thing to say....:blink:

 

   

282: so he said, the Rich-one-in-plow-land, he who-lives-in-the-Duat.
"She comes to meet you, the beautiful West-goddess, to meet you with her beautiful locks!"
She says: "He comes whom I have borne,

...and in Cladking's cheery PT world the words Gods, Goddess, God, spirits, etc don't stand for religious abstractions - why may you ask? Because, wait for it , because he says so. LOL - have some fun and ask him about that - beware however of the deluge of pseudo intellectual spew you'll get

 

  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
29 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

Hans — seriously — why even engage with clad? You know he’s just going to lie or ignore any cogent point you make. 

 

I will ignore EVERY point he makes because I have him on "ignore".  He got there not by being remarkably insulting and abusive but rather by repeating the same things over and over.  

I will not engage him except on sites where he can  murder threads and sub-threads.  

If you have anything to say that's relevant to the topic I'd be very interested.  Odds are the individual you quote does not have anything relevant.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
9 minutes ago, Piney said:

Many animals understand "space" and "time". Google it before you make such a asinine statement.

As for humans with no abstractions??? Dude....your .......I actually can't think of a damn thing to say....:blink:

 

Of course they understand space and time.  These are not abstractions in their four dimensional world of four dimensional brains and four dimensional language.  Space and time are the reasons we don't understand ancient and animal languages.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

Of course they understand space and time.  These are not abstractions in their four dimensional world of four dimensional brains and four dimensional language.  Space and time are the reasons we don't understand ancient and animal languages.  

Ok, I'm done with you. :rolleyes:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

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

*cough*

https://psychology.uiowa.edu/sites/psychology.uiowa.edu/files/groups/wasserman/files/apaBaboonAbs.pdf (2001)

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/many-animals-can-think-abstractly/ (2014)

and there are a few more out there.. you need to get out of the victorian/darwin age of thinking my friend.. and start thinking.. dare I say.. abstractly..

 

ok.. so your saying AE had no belief etc.. what about other ancient cultures? are they the same? 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I will ignore EVERY point he makes because I have him on "ignore".  He got there not by being remarkably insulting and abusive but rather by repeating the same things over and over.  

I will not engage him except on sites where he can  murder threads and sub-threads.  

If you have anything to say that's relevant to the topic I'd be very interested.  Odds are the individual you quote does not have anything relevant.  

That's a laugh indeed he is  complaining about my using the same material - yeah since he repeats the same claims hundreds of times. Chuckle

However this is his relatively new fraud - using the word Abstraction; instead of ramp, geysers, etc., etc., new word same tactics - misinterpreting words, making up new meaning, refusing to answer questions, repeating the same claims without presenting supporting evidence - yep a Cladking thread.

What I'm murdering threads now? Do they taste good?

I destroyed him on this particular idea at Graham Hancock so he came here - with me locked out - to try it again;

The monster thread - don't read it if you value your sanity

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1143658

More useful sub-threads

http://grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?1,1143658,1220629#msg-1220629

Its all pure idiocy however

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Of course they understand space and time.  These are not abstractions in their four dimensional world of four dimensional brains and four dimensional language.  Space and time are the reasons we don't understand ancient and animal languages.  

YES - it's time for a Goofy science idea today!

Wow 'four dimensional language'.

One can note Cladking's complete lack of understanding of science and common sense but he is still the king of unintended comedy!

Edited by Hanslune
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

YES - it's time for a Goofy science idea today!

Wow 'four dimensional language'.

Roll, Pitch, Yaw.... and ummmm.......

.............Keel. :yes:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
5 minutes ago, Piney said:

Roll, Pitch, Yaw.... and ummmm.......

.............Keel. :yes:

Since he is blocking my brilliant commentary anyone BRAVE enough to ask him what four dimensional language is?

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/maybe-einstein-uses-a-four-dimensional-language/

 

Edited by Hanslune
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
45 minutes ago, DingoLingo said:

*cough*

https://psychology.uiowa.edu/sites/psychology.uiowa.edu/files/groups/wasserman/files/apaBaboonAbs.pdf (2001)

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/many-animals-can-think-abstractly/ (2014)

and there are a few more out there.. you need to get out of the victorian/darwin age of thinking my friend.. and start thinking.. dare I say.. abstractly..

 

ok.. so your saying AE had no belief etc.. what about other ancient cultures? are they the same? 

Neither of these studies are showing clear evidence of abstraction;

Quote

Vonk presented the apes with a touch-screen computer and got them to tap an image of an animal—for instance, a snake—on the screen. Then she showed each ape two side-by-side animal pictures: one from the same category as the animal in the original image and one from another—for example, images of a different reptile and a bird. When they correctly matched animal pairs, they received a treat such as nuts or dried fruit. When they got it wrong, they saw a black screen before beginning the next trial. After hundreds of such trials, Vonk found that all five apes could categorize other animals better than expected by chance (although some individuals were better at it than others). 

The animal might simply be reporting what animals taste similar or how hard they are to catch since snakes are far easier than birds,. 

All animals can learn.   We see human characteristics of consciousness because we can see only what we believe.   Animals see what they know and they know that birds fly and snakes slither.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DingoLingo
1 minute ago, cladking said:

Neither of these studies are showing clear evidence of abstraction;

The animal might simply be reporting what animals taste similar or how hard they are to catch since snakes are far easier than birds,. 

All animals can learn.   We see human characteristics of consciousness because we can see only what we believe.   Animals see what they know and they know that birds fly and snakes slither.  

heh go looking clad.. I have thrown 2 of the many that you can find.. 

sadly. .your wrong

 

again.. 

 

but lets go to my other question to you.. 

53 minutes ago, DingoLingo said:

ok.. so your saying AE had no belief etc.. what about other ancient cultures? are they the same? 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cladking
Quote

ok.. so your saying AE had no belief etc.. what about other ancient cultures? are they the same? 

Yes!  There was a single worldwide language that was encoded right in the genes because it was also the blueprint of the human brain.  This language was perfectly logical because it was the articulated logic just as our mathematics is quantified logic.  It is the basis in logic that allows all animal science and all animal science.  What differentiates ancient human science from animal science is NOT intelligence because there is no such thing as intelligence.  What separated it was that a mutation arose 40,000 years ago that tied the speech center to higher brain functions.  This allowed closer cooperation between individual and scientific progress and it was accumulated knowledge that separated us from the animals.  In those days we weren't very separate though because people were very similar to animals and had similar language.  All animals including humans operated on knowledge but humans had much more knowledge. 

The language became too complex for most people and a pidgin languages arose and new abstractions were added to these languages as they changed and morphed into the languages we use today.   

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

Yes!  There was a single worldwide language that was encoded right in the genes because it was also the blueprint of the human brain.  This language was perfectly logical because it was the articulated logic just as our mathematics is quantified logic.  It is the basis in logic that allows all animal science and all animal science.  What differentiates ancient human science from animal science is NOT intelligence because there is no such thing as intelligence.  What separated it was that a mutation arose 40,000 years ago that tied the speech center to higher brain functions.  This allowed closer cooperation between individual and scientific progress and it was accumulated knowledge that separated us from the animals.  In those days we weren't very separate though because people were very similar to animals and had similar language.  All animals including humans operated on knowledge but humans had much more knowledge. 

The language became too complex for most people and a pidgin languages arose and new abstractions were added to these languages as they changed and morphed into the languages we use today.   

Yes this is Cladking's paraphrased fantasy story. If you ask him to provide the sources and evidence for all this stuff you'll find he just made it all up.

If you want to see his head  explode - he holds that the languages all became different around 2,000 BCE. Ask him why Sumerian and Egyptian - the ancient versions before 2,000, are completely different in structure.......then be prepared to laugh. Then ask him how they are exactly the same as Han Chinese....................

He also claims he can read the 'ancient language' but oddly can only do so with ancient Egyptian, not Sumerian or Han which he says are the same language but also the ancient Egyptian he can read but only if someone else first translates it into English....

 

Edited by Hanslune
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman

Wikipedia on Koko the gorilla:

Quote

As with other great-ape language experiments, the extent to which Koko mastered and demonstrated language through the use of these signs is disputed.[9][10] She understood nouns, verbs, and adjectives, including abstract concepts like "good" and "fake". It is generally accepted that she did not use syntax or grammar, and that her use of language did not exceed that of a young human child.[11][12][13][14][15] However, she scored between 70 and 90 on various IQ scales, and some experts, including Mary Lee Jensvold, claim that "Koko...[used] language the same way people do".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koko_(gorilla)

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
15 minutes ago, cladking said:

Yes!  There was a single worldwide language that was encoded right in the genes because it was also the blueprint of the human brain. 

Then why do I think differently when I think in English and think in Japanese. 

15 minutes ago, cladking said:

 What separated it was that a mutation arose 40,000 years ago that tied the speech center to higher brain functions. 

Many Asian groups were already separated and genetically isolated. How did they acquire the mutation? 

19 minutes ago, cladking said:

The language became too complex for most people and a pidgin languages arose and new abstractions were added to these languages as they changed and morphed into the languages we use today.   

Do you speak any languages other than English? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
4 minutes ago, Piney said:

Then why do I think differently when I think in English and think in Japanese. 

 

I've noted the same thing and a very different pattern in using Arabic.

Quote

Do you speak any languages other than English? 

You do realize your asking rational questions to a person espousing thoroughly irrational ideas?

Edited by Hanslune
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

I've noted the same thing and a very different pattern in using Arabic.

 

Kipchak Turk too.

16 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

You do realize your asking rational questions to a person espousing thoroughly irrational ideas?

That "genetic language" woo was sheer crackpottery. I never heard such noise.

 

 

  • Thanks 2

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.