I’ve been learning hieroglyphs and the Kemetic language(s) for a while, but have started taking it much more seriously and making faster progress.
Aside from improving my language skills, I have noticed other benefits. Lots of improved intuition, e.g. the sun setting the west is more obvious than it ever was as a “memorised fact”. I’ve started to notice a more natural, low-effort recognition of animals as well, particularly birds, and at a distance.
I’m surprised at, but grateful for, the scale of impact on the way I see the world and think.
I’m curious if anyone else is on the same path, or has been, and if they have had similar experiences?
Hi Sem
I’ve been doing a BA in Egyptology and Ancient History, have done 3 modules of Middle Egyptian. Had to translate a lengthy stela last term! (took aeons just to do something unimpressive!)
I find it weird that the majority of Egyptologists don’t actually study the language.
For myself, I wanted to be able at least to have an opinion on stuff, especially the ‘funerary texts’, besides what the ‘great men’ tell me stuff means…
Blessings
Rufus
Hello Sem, I am learning to read and write the hieroglyphs and I bought a book " Mejat Wefa" Conversation book English to Medu Neter. Although I know,nobody really knows how the Egyptians spoke but it’s interesting and I like to thank and honour my Goddesses/ Gods in their language at least in a certain degree
Is it any good? I have been quite wary of their content, but having more material would certainly be useful!
The spelling on the title bar of their homepage put me off.
Too many determinatives for my tastes… some of which seem wrong. I tried to give some feedback but was met with a combination of very pedantic nitpicking and some philosophical nonsense about european thinking poisoning my mind with notions of canonicity. That being said, the videos are quite good, even if I question their interpretation of certain words, lots of standard translations are awful - I’m thinking of “justified” for maa hrw, or “instructions” for sbayt, or any use of “soul”
Reconstructing pronunciation is an interesting topic on its own. Most people I’ve seen vocalising the language have used Egyptological pronunciation, or something close to it with perhaps some of the old “helpful vowels” of Budge (hetep vs hotep, nefer vs nofer, nofre)
Thanks for sharing a few pages, it definitely looks interesting - I don’t know enough to say for sure, but some of this does seem a little off to me still.
Good evening, I hope you can help me with my problem When I "google " the name Meretseger/ Mr.t-sgr I only find her name written like this… picture … But I wonder if it’s written wrong or do I have an error in reasoning I never found the Hieroglyph for “T” just “R”. Is her name a modern version and she was never called like this, but Mr.s-sgr( Meres Seger) ???
The .t is implied by the feminine aspect, but its not always written, e.g.
Here we can see the same kind of writing with the name of Renenutet, missing the .t also.
In this case we find it spelled out more fully… although the placement of the feminine .t is not where the standard transliteration would suggest, and introduces some w…
I guess, another way to look at it, is that the .t is embedded in the determinative, and much like modern arabic, the .t is often silent when vocalised, becoming -a rather than -et.
I have some access to this online through a university, and the ability to photocopy or capture segments, but its painfully hard to get hold of otherwise… I’m certainly not keen to dump hundreds of pounds into unfettered access to it until I’m in a much better place personally.
As for the explanation it is my own, some from experience far outside of hieroglyphs and the Kemetic languages.
I remember learning to read the newspaper as a child… and the word for newspaper in the flavour of arabic i was first exposed to has several silent letters in reading, and not all of them are written, and none spoken… but they are the legacy of a feminine aspect to the word, and silent .t…
notice the final, silent t, even in transliteration… and note that it traditionally would be vocalised ‘ton’ if not for the silence. instead it becomes ‘a’