DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.1167#0015
My description is somewhat eclectic and does not address all 4500 years of attested
Egyptian language history in equal depth, nor are all questions which may seem impor-
tant treated in detail. I am mainly concerned with the time beginning in the New
Kingdom (from approximately 1500BC on) when the first intense contacts of Egyptian
with neighboring languages become evident and provide extensive data for phonological
research. The phonology of the earlier periods of Egyptian, which must be reconstructed
primarily by internal evidence, is treated more briefly. I have largely avoided consider-
ing the genetic relations of Egyptian to Afroasiatic or other languages. Even if a
phonetic correspondence between genetically related languages is assumed to be certain,
the correspondence is of a principally abstract nature and does not allow for a conclusion
about the actual pronunciation in one of the compared languages. The situation is
different if language contact is attested in historical times. Evidence of this kind is
amply referred to in this book. I hope, however, that this book will help other scholars use
Egyptian evidence within the framework of genetic reconstruction.
The reader will note that I do not outline synchronic descriptions of different stages of
the language in chronological order. Instead, each section is devoted to a particular topic
which in turn is discussed from a diachronic perspective. It is a peculiarity of Egyptian
linguistics that there is frequently good reason to assume the operation of a specific
phonetic process while we cannot establish the exact time at which it took place.
Therefore, a relative chronology of individual phonetic changes often remains problem-
atic. This is due to the existence of "dark ages" for which insight into Egyptian phonol-
ogy is considerably more difficult than for other periods. Several factors are responsible
for this: a large tendency to write in an archaic style (e.g. in the centuries following the
New Kingdom), the lack of structuralistic investigation into the writing system
(Demotic), the lack of words preserved in both an Egyptian and a foreign writing system
(Old Kingdom), the small number of known texts (Late Coptic), the lack of strictly
synchronic glossaries or grammatical descriptions of several periods, or a lesser acquain-
tance on the author's side with certain stages of Egyptian than with others.
1-2 Remarks on the transcription and specific terminology
used throughout this book
1.2.1 Notation of Egyptian consonants
In this book, Egyptian words are not usually given in the original script but in the conven-
tional Egyptological transcription. This transcription is always printed in italics, e.g. ntr
god". If a single consonant is cited in transcription, it is put in pointed brackets, e.g. <£>.
The conventional transcription indicates the consonants of a word by means of conven-
tionalized symbols. It is important to note that the conventional consonant symbols must
not be interpreted phonologically or phonemically. For more details about the conven-
tional Egyptological transcription D®5 § 2.6.
15
Egyptian language history in equal depth, nor are all questions which may seem impor-
tant treated in detail. I am mainly concerned with the time beginning in the New
Kingdom (from approximately 1500BC on) when the first intense contacts of Egyptian
with neighboring languages become evident and provide extensive data for phonological
research. The phonology of the earlier periods of Egyptian, which must be reconstructed
primarily by internal evidence, is treated more briefly. I have largely avoided consider-
ing the genetic relations of Egyptian to Afroasiatic or other languages. Even if a
phonetic correspondence between genetically related languages is assumed to be certain,
the correspondence is of a principally abstract nature and does not allow for a conclusion
about the actual pronunciation in one of the compared languages. The situation is
different if language contact is attested in historical times. Evidence of this kind is
amply referred to in this book. I hope, however, that this book will help other scholars use
Egyptian evidence within the framework of genetic reconstruction.
The reader will note that I do not outline synchronic descriptions of different stages of
the language in chronological order. Instead, each section is devoted to a particular topic
which in turn is discussed from a diachronic perspective. It is a peculiarity of Egyptian
linguistics that there is frequently good reason to assume the operation of a specific
phonetic process while we cannot establish the exact time at which it took place.
Therefore, a relative chronology of individual phonetic changes often remains problem-
atic. This is due to the existence of "dark ages" for which insight into Egyptian phonol-
ogy is considerably more difficult than for other periods. Several factors are responsible
for this: a large tendency to write in an archaic style (e.g. in the centuries following the
New Kingdom), the lack of structuralistic investigation into the writing system
(Demotic), the lack of words preserved in both an Egyptian and a foreign writing system
(Old Kingdom), the small number of known texts (Late Coptic), the lack of strictly
synchronic glossaries or grammatical descriptions of several periods, or a lesser acquain-
tance on the author's side with certain stages of Egyptian than with others.
1-2 Remarks on the transcription and specific terminology
used throughout this book
1.2.1 Notation of Egyptian consonants
In this book, Egyptian words are not usually given in the original script but in the conven-
tional Egyptological transcription. This transcription is always printed in italics, e.g. ntr
god". If a single consonant is cited in transcription, it is put in pointed brackets, e.g. <£>.
The conventional transcription indicates the consonants of a word by means of conven-
tionalized symbols. It is important to note that the conventional consonant symbols must
not be interpreted phonologically or phonemically. For more details about the conven-
tional Egyptological transcription D®5 § 2.6.
15