DOI Artikel:
Albright, William Foxwell: The principles of Egyptian phonological development
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.12747#0080
70 W. F. ALBRIGHT. [7]
*éadmàien, which correspond to the Eth. gerundives in a, qatilô for *qatîldhu, used
somewhat similarly. In other words, the Goptic subjunctive was originally tlie adverbial
accnsative of the infinitive. The accentuation in cÏMoq is based on the analogy of
otmcdt~n, though it is possible that the accusative ending was accented.
The preceding sketch has simply touched the subject; Egyptian is throughout a
Semitic language. The number of certain etymologies is increasing with great rapidity,
and though there are many problems as yet unsolved, the vvriter is convinced that
Egyptian is in no sensé a Mischsprache, like Babylonian, but is purely Semitic through-
out. We can trace Egyptian through an actual, changing history of 35oo years,
from the Isl Dynasty to the âge of classical Coptic, so it is not surprising that great
transformations are évident in the course of this long history, which cannot be paral-
leled elsewhere; Babylonian can be tracecl for only 2600 years, and Greek for the
same length of time. The language of the Pyramid Texts, c. 2800 B. C, is quite as
différent from the Goptic of 3ooo years later as it must bave been from the Semitic
of 3ooo years before. In the Pyramid âge the phonelic breakdown had not gone half
as far as it has in Coptic; the vovvels had hardly been changed. By that time the old
Semitic tenses had been replaced by the édmf and the édmnf, but there was as yet
hardly a hint of the remarkable composite structures which are the despair of the
Semitist who glances into a Coptic grammar.
W. F. Albright.
*éadmàien, which correspond to the Eth. gerundives in a, qatilô for *qatîldhu, used
somewhat similarly. In other words, the Goptic subjunctive was originally tlie adverbial
accnsative of the infinitive. The accentuation in cÏMoq is based on the analogy of
otmcdt~n, though it is possible that the accusative ending was accented.
The preceding sketch has simply touched the subject; Egyptian is throughout a
Semitic language. The number of certain etymologies is increasing with great rapidity,
and though there are many problems as yet unsolved, the vvriter is convinced that
Egyptian is in no sensé a Mischsprache, like Babylonian, but is purely Semitic through-
out. We can trace Egyptian through an actual, changing history of 35oo years,
from the Isl Dynasty to the âge of classical Coptic, so it is not surprising that great
transformations are évident in the course of this long history, which cannot be paral-
leled elsewhere; Babylonian can be tracecl for only 2600 years, and Greek for the
same length of time. The language of the Pyramid Texts, c. 2800 B. C, is quite as
différent from the Goptic of 3ooo years later as it must bave been from the Semitic
of 3ooo years before. In the Pyramid âge the phonelic breakdown had not gone half
as far as it has in Coptic; the vovvels had hardly been changed. By that time the old
Semitic tenses had been replaced by the édmf and the édmnf, but there was as yet
hardly a hint of the remarkable composite structures which are the despair of the
Semitist who glances into a Coptic grammar.
W. F. Albright.