posted 07 December 2004 09:29 PM            

First of all the Egyptians wrote from right to left (like in Arabic and Hebrew).

I know kem means black and was frequently used but kemet (with the female suffix -et) means black land.

I read that Kemet was in refernce to the fertility of the Nile Valley after the annual inundiation rather than to the color of the people's skin.

Also i read that the Egyptians did not care much about race. Citizenship and language much by far more important to them.

So what did the prefix -emu (kem + emu) really added to?

I read that oe/u was mostly pointing out to a plural word.

posted 07 December 2004 09:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:

First of all the Egyptians wrote from right to left (like in Arabic and Hebrew).

---

This is incorrect. They wrote either left to right or right to left and from the to down.
I know this because I have translated mdw ntr written left oriented and other mdw ntr
written right oriented.

posted 07 December 2004 10:18 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

This is incorrect. They wrote either left to right or right to left and from the to down.

I know this because I have translated mdw ntr written left oriented and other mdw ntr
written right oriented.

---

I think you're right. mdw ntr means god's words right?

The direction of writing varied but you can tell the direction of any piece of writing by looking at the way the animals and people are facing - they look towards the beginning of the line.

Also people say that Sumerian and Egyptian script developed at more or less the same time.

Substantives

male singular: Substantive
female singular: Substantive + t
male plural: Substantive + oe (Substantives ending on -oe in singular: + oey)
female plural: Substantive + oet (Substantives ending on -oe in singular: + oeyt)

posted 08 December 2004 04:32 AM            

quote:

---

I know kem means black and was frequently used but kemet (with the female suffix -et) means black land

---

Oh my, Orionix. This is shaping up as another 'Berber's are never Black' fiasco from you. What a mess. I don't know where you get this stuff from Orionix but it is wrong. All of it.

* km is an adjective, it is singular and means means black.

* when you add ".t" to it you simply change it to a plural-feminine noun.

* this is a general grammatical rule applying to adjectives/noun adjectives in the mdw ntr.

If you know the difference between and adjective and a noun (?), and can apply this to "black" adjective and "Blacks" noun.

Then you will understand the nonsensical nature of your premise.

You are saying that Blacks means "black land", but of course it does not, since the word 'Blacks' does NOT contain the word "land"; a different word -> "Ta" in mdw ntr.

When using noun adjectives mdw ntr was written with determinatives to clarify what exactly, the noun referenced.

In the case of Kemet the 'place name' determinative [nu] which is drawn as a settlement intersected with streets is used. This is interpretated as city, town, nation. This is a common determinative and also consistent with the rules of mdw ntr.

When Kemet is written as Kemet[nu], it is Black (pl./noun) as reference to the Nation; or Black Nation.

As for the word kememou this is black (kem) preceding ou (ones/people) or black ones; black people.

The word for land in mdw ntr is "Ta".

I asked Abaza earlier if he knew the meaning of Ta Khent. He didn't answer, so.....

Khent means origins, beginnings, 1st, etc..

Ta Khent means Land of the Beginning.

It is a Kemetic referrence to the African interior, the Sudan, "Nubia", etc. and addresses the African Origins of Kemetu- 1st hand. NOTICE Abaza, Ta Khent not = to -> Ta Caucasia!

It is because the Kemetians were so clear on these points that so many are forced to resort to utter semantical gibberish and muddled thinking in order to evade.

thus:

Orionix writes: Citizenship and language much by far more important to them. So what did the prefix -emu (kem + emu) really added to?

It adds up to the fact that the Kememu knew who they were; what they were; and where they came from, but some don't like it, and will find a way not to hear it, using the same methods used by children when they are told something by their parents that they don't want to accept.

* pretend you didn't hear it.
* pretend you can't understand it.
* pretend they don't really mean what they are saying........like a child told NO(!) by its parents and translating it to: "maybe later". lol.

Now repeat after me Orionix: Kemet[nu] was founded by Kememu from Ta Khent, and all will be clarified.

posted 08 December 2004 09:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Oh my, Orionix. This is shaping up as another 'Berber's are never Black' fiasco from you.

---

Let's leave the social baggage of black/white aside.

quote:

---

What a mess. I don't know where you get this stuff from Orionix but it is [b]wrong. All of it.

* km is an adjective, it is singular and means means black.

---

"Km" is used frequently as "black" as a noun - using it as a female adjective results in "kmt" but then it is written differently.

Also i read that this was never the name of the nation and has never been used like this.

"Kmt" was only used in documents regarding the fertility of the Nile valley and its crops. The name is just catchy but not the most important one.

In foreign documents we find the name of "misr" - probably being derived from "ta-meri" as "land of the plough".

In the book of Cheick Anta Diop he gives plenty liguistic examples for what the name of Egypt stands for but i don't know if he translated them correctly.

posted 08 December 2004 09:44 AM            

Well, Orioinix, you are plagiarising again, from Seregeth at Egyptiandreams.com.

When you plagiarise, you admit that you don't know the subject, yet you offer false pretense of argument. Since you don't know anything about Kemetic linguistics (and it's linguistics, not liguistics), you are better off asking questions than engaging in your usual orgy of frantic irrelevant plagiarism, which usually ends with a bout of ugly profanity from you, once you run out of stolen material.

quote:

---

Also i read that this was never the name of the nation

---

quote:

---

"Kmt" was only used in documents regarding the fertility of the Nile valley and its crops.

---

quote:

---

In foreign documents we find the name of "misr" - probably being derived from "ta-meri" as "land of the plough".

---

quote:

---

In the book of Cheick Anta Diop he gives plenty liguistic examples for what the name of Egypt stands for but i don't know if he translated them correctly.

---

posted 08 December 2004 01:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Well, Orioinix, you are plagiarising again, from Seregeth at Egyptiandreams.com.

---

This is not "plagiarised". You are just plagiarising everything from Diop.

Diop was wrong in this aspect because Kemet (the Black Land) did not refer to the color of the people's skin. It was in reference to the dark, fertile soil that remained after the Nile floodwaters had receded.

You can read it from encarta:
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_461511156/Ancient_Egypt.html

I think that Diop's book was also politically motivated, at least partially. He goes for early Anthroplogy (skull measurments) in order to prove that the Egyptians were of black race.

Diop's book was partially founded on a long-discredited fallacy: the supposition that the term "negroid" has any anthropological or physical meaning. Remember that from a false premise, ANY conclusion can be deduced.

posted 08 December 2004 01:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
"Km" is used frequently as "black" as a noun - using it as a female adjective results in "kmt" but then it is written differently.

Also i read that this was never the name of the nation and has never been used like this.

"Kmt" was only used in documents regarding the fertility of the Nile valley and its crops. The name is just catchy but not the most important one.

In foreign documents we find the name of "misr" - probably being derived from "ta-meri" as "land of the plough".

In the book of Cheick Anta Diop he gives plenty liguistic examples for what the name of Egypt stands for but i don't know if he translated them correctly.

Also the vowels oe/u is mostly pointing out a plural word. -ou doesn't mean people.

---

Why dont you question the accuracy of the translations on Egyptian Dreams?

The pages from Diop show seven usages of KM.t and km.t in words for
people. You imply that Diop is an inept negro whose translation cannot
be trusted. However, unknown to you, youre really casting aspersion on
caucasian authors, the only authors whom you feel are credible.

Diop didnt do the translation. The translation comes from two European
sources, one German the other French, they being
1. the Worterbuch der Agyptischen Sprache and
2. the Prolegomenes a letude de la religion egyptienne.

You continue to make glaring errors in interpreting mdw ntr.
Ta Meri means the beloved land.
The determinatives seated man and\or seated woman mean people.

Please study elementary hieroglyphics and Kmtyw vocabulary before
trying to comment on them and only revealing that you are really speaking
from a pure lack of knowledge not from any kind of real study.

In direct literal translation km.t.nwt means black nation, where the root km
(black) is an adjective suffixed by t which makes km.t a feminine noun
whose meaning black nation is indicated by the determinative nwt. Since
km.t.nwt is a noun it cant be an adjective referring to the color of soil since
no determinative for soil is given. When km.t.nwt is literally translated as the
black land, the word land cam only mean country in the sense of nation.
If land in the sense of soil was meant the word ta would precede km.t,
something I have yet to see in a mdw ntr text.

This thread of yours is a distraction that keeps the discussion at a pre
elementary level causing others to repeat and repeat time and time
again the basest of foundations. What youre doing only dissuades
the beginner who doesnt know your argument is a house of cards
with a matchstick foundation all built in the sand right at the shoreline
during low tide.

I wish I had a kinder way to say all that, sorry but I didnt, so please
forgive me of any parts of the above that may sound hurtful. My intent
was to lay bare the source and intention underlying the premise that
opened this thread and then to demolish it not to reflect on your person,
a fellow human being, someone I dont even know but am sure has a
good heart.

posted 08 December 2004 01:37 PM            

quote:

---

alTakuri:

Why dont you question the accuracy of the translations on Egyptian Dreams?

---

I didn't say they were completely accurate there. My point was that kemet did not refer to the people's race.

quote:

---

alTakuri:

The pages from Diop show seven usages of KM.t and km.t in words for people.

---

It was never used for the people's race, rather than for the nation. Kemet means "black nation".

This is why i said that Diop's book was partially politically motivated.

posted 08 December 2004 01:50 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Well, Orioinix, you are plagiarising again, from Seregeth at Egyptiandreams.com.

---

quote:

---

This is not "plagiarised".

---

quote:

---

You are just plagiarising everything from Diop.

---

quote:

---

Diopas wrong in this aspect.

---

you can read it from encarta:
The Encarta article merely repeats a fallacy while offering no supporting linguistic evidence.

quote:

---

I think that Diop's book was also politically motivated, at least partially.

---

quote:

---

He goes for early Anthroplogy (skull measurments) in order to prove that the Egyptians were of black race.

---

quote:

---

Diop's book

---

quote:

---

was partially founded on a long-discredited fallacy: the supposition that the term "negroid" has any anthropological or physical meaning.

---

Diop's original works are written in French, wherein' Negro is also a word that most closely approximates "black", (like Kem). This cannot be taken as a validation by Diop of fallacious [wst] race anthropology, which Diop has in fact done much to debunk.

But then, you haven't actually read him, and are only copying stolen comments blindly, so how would you know.

quote:

---

Remember that from a false premise, ANY conclusion can be deduced.

---

posted 08 December 2004 01:53 PM            

quote:

---

Kemet means "black nation".

---

posted 08 December 2004 01:58 PM            

quote:

---

In direct literal translation km.t.nwt means black nation, where the root km
(black) is an adjective suffixed by t which makes km.t a feminine noun
whose meaning black nation is indicated by the determinative nwt. Since
km.t.nwt is a noun it cant be an adjective referring to the color of soil since
no determinative for soil is given. When km.t.nwt is literally translated as the
black land, the word land cam only mean country in the sense of nation.
If land in the sense of soil was meant the word ta would precede km.t,
something I have yet to see in a mdw ntr text.

---

posted 08 December 2004 02:26 PM            

quote:

---

Rasol:

Well, THAT sentense was not. What you wrote prior was cut and pasted from Seregath at Egyptiandreams.com.

---

So what? Segereh knows Egyptian linguistics very well and probably better than you.

IIRC he also debunked you once.

quote:

---

Rasol:

I don't know why you bother to lie about it. Just because I am the only one who calls you on it, doesn't mean that others don't know.

---

Because Kemet was not in reference to the people's race.

quote:

---

Rasol:

Actually, I did not quote Diop in this discussion, but if I did, I would certainly cite him, as alTakruri properly did above in this thread.

---

But you are indeed taking most of your ideas from Diop.

quote:

---

Rasol:

Diop can read Mdw Ntr. You can't. That is the difference.

---

Diop is also a pseudo-scientist.

While he has some training in Egyptology most of his book is politically motivated.

quote:

---

Rasol:

The Encarta article merely repeats a fallacy while offering no supporting linguistic evidence.

---

Why is that a fallacy? Kemet did not reffer to the people's race or skin color! I have yet to see proof from you which says otherwise.

The difference between you and Encarta is that Encarta deals with real science.

quote:

---

Rasol:

Just as you have no linguistic argument to support your ill-informed view, you offer no linguistic counter argument to Diop, or anyone else.

---

You have no linguistic evidence to support your pseudo-historical argument about Kemet being in refference to the people's skin color.

quote:

---

Rasol:

But then, you haven't actually read him, and are only copying stolen comments blindly, so how would you know.

---

How do you know i havn't read him? You are making assumptions which you do not know.

His book contains pseudo-scientifical early Anthro stuff.

quote:

---

Rasol:

Example of false premise: Kemet means 'land' or 'soil'. You offer no linguistic basis for your premise.

---

Yes it was in reference to the nation, not to the people's race.

quote:

---

Rasol:

And so, you change the subject from linguistics that you don't know, to author's that you haven't read.

---

I have read Diop and much of his book is politically motivated.

quote:

---

Rasol:

Plagiarising all the while. Same old Orionix. Learn some new tricks kid.

---

If you are all about "tricks" than you really are a pseudo-historian.

[This message has been edited by Orionix (edited 08 December 2004).]

posted 08 December 2004 02:54 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
It was never used for the people's race, rather than for the nation. Kemet means "black nation".

This is why i said that Diop's book was partially politically motivated.

---

How ignorant. Please translate the following usages of km.t and show
how nation rather than people is meant. And this is the last that I waste
my time on an idealogue who doesnt know from linguistics. Youre
preaching a faith not doing linguistic analysis.

KM.t.rmt&st| ||

km.t.yw.rmt| ||

st.st KM.t.shnt

Please study elementary hieroglyphics and Kmtyw vocabulary before
trying to comment on them and only revealing that you are really speaking
from a pure lack of knowledge not from any kind of real study.

I for one will no longer give you the pleasure of laughing at how easily
you and others of your ilk can take the group off track and get members
to make solid researched contributions in return for regurgitated dribble
issuing like a mantra from you and yours who totally ignore researched
postings.

posted 08 December 2004 02:56 PM            

quote:

---

So what? Segereh knows Egyptian linguistics very well and probably better than you.

---

quote:

---

IIRC he also debunked you once.

---

quote:

---

Because Kemet was not in reference to the people's race.

---

Kememou is how you say Black people in mdw ntr. It is, indeed, the only way to say it, and is grammatically consistent with the rules of the language and script, as Diop demonstrated, and as you cannot even begin to dispute. Really you are wasting our time. Again, instead of plagiarising from Seregath, why don't you bring him here so that at least we can talk to the correct end of the horse, so to speak.

posted 08 December 2004 03:06 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]In direct literal translation km.t.nwt means black nation, where the root km
(black) is an adjective suffixed by t which makes km.t a feminine noun
whose meaning black nation is indicated by the determinative nwt. Since
km.t.nwt is a noun it cant be an adjective referring to the color of soil since
no determinative for soil is given. When km.t.nwt is literally translated as the
black land, the word land cam only mean country in the sense of nation.
If land in the sense of soil was meant the word ta would precede km.t,
something I have yet to see in a mdw ntr text.

---

[/QUOTE]

Just an affirmation of what you already wrote which is pure mdw ntr linguistics
unfiltered through any racio-political sieve myopically applied by Eurocentrists to km
but never to any other word in the language.

posted 08 December 2004 03:08 PM            

quote:

---

How do you know i havn't read him? You are making assumptions which you do not know

---

The same way we know when you cite genetic studies and then ask us where we get the info from, when we quote the very studies you cite, but did not bother to actually read.

You are quite transparent Orioinix. I stated in the 1st reply that this thread would be another "Berber's are never Black" debacle and that is exactly what it has become. Some folks never learn.

posted 08 December 2004 04:07 PM            

quote:

---

Posted by alTakruri
How come people with excellent research skills and a wealth of references allow
themselves to chase willow the wisps of
nonsequiturs while legitimate questions
requiring research and new think fall
unattended by the wayside?
I mean everybodys wasting their time and energy on countering emotional and idiotic
pabulum whose proponents dont give a whit about sharing scientific or historical
sources on Egypt and Egyptology.

Maybe thats the disruptors only goal to slow
down, prevent, or take off track the train of current revelation that displaces the once
hallowed postulations of the pseudo science of
Eurocentrism too often still taught in "church," primary school, and even university.

---

posted 08 December 2004 05:58 PM            

According to what i know Diop has been heavily criticized for his radical scholarship and uncompromising.
http://www.africawithin.com/diop/diop.htm

This is what encarta africana says about Diop's scholarship:

quote:

---

encarta africana:

According to Cheikh Anta Diop all original early Holocene (c. 10,000-4000 b.c.e.) inhabitants of North Africa were black, and that they alone were responsible for the predynastic culture of Egypt, and for all of the early dynasties. During the Old Kingdom it was thought that small-scale Caucasoid incursions from the Levant lightened the skin tone of the original Egyptians, with subsequent "invasions" from Persia, Greece, and Rome further transforming the physical characteristics of the Egyptians. Needless to say, this in-mixing of foreigners was thought to be linked to the decline of Egypt, with the best of Egyptian ideas being responsible for the grandeur of Greece and subsequent European civilization.

This is not the place to enter into a point-by-point debate on Diop's claims, and those of his numerous intellectual descendants. At their best they do much to redress the anti-African bias inherent in early Egyptology; at their worst they recreate in reverse the oblique racism inherent in the hyperdiffusionistic school of Grafton Elliot-Smith in the 1930s. Modern consensus sees Egypt, from its beginnings, as a multiracial civilization, with African cultural aspects particularly coming from Egypt's Nubian corridor to Africa.

---

quote:

---

From encylopedia encarta:

According to inscriptions and documents found by archaeologists, the Egyptians called their country Kemet, meaning “the Black Land,” a reference to the dark, fertile soil that remained after the Nile floodwaters had receded. They also used another term, Deshret, or “the Red Land,” a designation for the desert sands that burned under the blazing Sun. In addition, they used the term Lower Egypt to refer to the northern delta area and the term Upper Egypt to refer to the communities along the river all the way south to Aswân.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_461511156/Ancient_Egypt.html

---

The fact stands. The ancient Egyptians did not care about race which is relatively a new concept. Unfortunately today many people do.

Race as it is known today was not known to the Egyptians.

The most important political event in Egypt was the unification of Upper Egypt by king Narmer (also knows as Menes or king Scorpion) with Lower Egypt by 3150 bc.

posted 08 December 2004 06:05 PM            

quote:

---

Rasol:

FWIW, that is unlikely, since I don't have an account on that site (which I find frivolous and superficial prima facie) and only 'discovered' it while searching for your obviously plagiarised remarks.

---

I honestly doubt it.

There was a guy once in egyptian dreams named ahmose which got banned after making a personal attack on Segereh.
http://forum.egyptiandreams.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=256&highlight=kemet&sid=c9212571529d65832b3596501a182810

[This message has been edited by Orionix (edited 08 December 2004).]

posted 08 December 2004 06:25 PM            

quote:

---

I'm not going argue with you.

---

posted 08 December 2004 06:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
......certainly you are not going to make a linguistic argument, since you do not have one.

---

Yes i do and it's very simplistic and has nothing to do with race (as you think it has).

Kemet ("the black land"), Deshret ("the red land").

posted 08 December 2004 07:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Incorrect, kem/deshr, black/red, adj. Kemet/Deshret Black/Red (noun),
land is ta,
land is not "et"
you have no linguistic argument.
but it is true that your argument is "simplistic".

---

I havn't seen any evidence that Kemet was in reference to the people's skin color or race.

All this was not important to the Egyptians.

posted 08 December 2004 07:41 PM            

quote:

---

I havn't seen any evidence that Kemet was in reference to the people's skin color

---

posted 09 December 2004 07:54 AM            

quote:

---

As far as I am aware, the word is only translated as "black land" due to the inclusion of the determinative for city

---

quote:

---

The word is "Km-t". The word for soil in Egyptian is "Km".

---

quote:

---

Thus Kemet could simply be translated as "land of the soil".

---

quote:

---

Interestingly, "Kem", when written in an identical way to "Kemet", only without the -t and with a scroll determinative means "to be complete".

---

One thing you said that is correct is that 'km' or 'kem' also means complete.
In mdw ntr; kem = black = complete = sacred. Just as in the English language, colors also have symbolic value. Black (kem) was sacred in mdw ntr.

quote:

---

The Egyptians also called their homeland "T3mri" (Tamery- beloved land) and "T3wy" (Tawy- dual land- i.e Upper and Lower Egypt).

---

posted 09 December 2004 10:05 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:

The fact stands. The ancient Egyptians did not care about race which is relatively a new concept. Unfortunately today many people do.

Race as it is known today was not known to the Egyptians.

[This message has been edited by Orionix (edited 08 December 2004).]

---

posted 09 December 2004 10:16 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Psusennes I:
As far as I am aware, the word is only translated as "black land" due to the inclusion of the determinative for city or land. The word is "Km-t". The word for soil in Egyptian is "Km". Thus Kemet could simply be translated as "land of the soil". Interestingly, "Kem", when written in an identical way to "Kemet", only without the -t and with a scroll determinative means "to be complete". As the Egyptians were fond of rhymes and puns (see the dream book etc.) this might be of relevance.

The Egyptians also called their homeland "T3mri" (Tamery- beloved land) and "T3wy" (Tawy- dual land- i.e Upper and Lower Egypt).

---

posted 09 December 2004 10:47 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kem-Au

The determinant for land is not present in the word KMT.

---

I believe that you may be confusing the biliteral glyph that is part of the word for land (the line with three dots below it- t3-N16 in Gardiner's) with the determinative for land, city or place (O49 in Gardiner's). The determinative is a circle with an 'x' shape through it, and is almost always shown in the word 'Kemet'. It is the inclusion of the glyph that defines it a 'soil/black/complete land' rather than just 'soil/black or complete' (save the extra t).

posted 09 December 2004 10:55 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by imhotep:
Rasol,
If Kem = black = complete = Sacred, might it be plausible to argue that Kemet stands for the sacred land?

---

No because you are still committing two errors.

1) confusing the noun km.t with the adjective km.

2) asserting 'land' (ta) where it is not present.

In Budge's heiroglyphic dictionary.
Kem: (km) black.
Kemet (km.t) -> any thing Black. (def of noun) (note: budge used an 'a' for the vowell instead of 'e', again the vowels are added by the translator since mdw ntr was written without them, and so vary.)

This rule is applied and correctly and consistently by virtually all translators of mdw ntr, except as alTakruri insightfully pointed out, when it comes to the one word, and for a very obvious reason.

Thus: Kemet with ('cow' determinative) is translated as -> black cattle

Kemet with ('cat' determinative) is translated as -> black cat.

Kemet with ('people' determinative)...? ?

To evade translation into Black people the very rules established by the translator's in question must be gratuitously violated, and the result is semantical nonsense.

Note: Kem (km) means black, it is black that is sacred and complete. The concepts are not either or, but rather inclusive and and causal, wherein the blackness of a thing causes it to be sacred and complete.

Understanding this, one can ask...where is the Blackness that is sacred and complete ultimately located? Via the sacred images of the Gods whose skin is painted Black (Kem ti) we can see that the blackness that is sacred in the skin of the people.

(kemOsirus and KemIsi) are not called the Black One, the Great Black, the Black mother, the Black ancestor....and painted black skin in order to reference soil. That is absurd.

Kemset, the Black Lady where the lady is Black AND Black is sacred does not reference soil. It is Kemset that is Black and Kemsit that is 'sacred'. The black is IN the people.

That is Kemetian dialectics and most intelligent linguists who translate the text know it, whether they admit it or not, because it is only logical conclusion to be derived from their own translations.

posted 09 December 2004 10:58 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Psusennes I:
I believe that you may be confusing the biliteral glyph that is part of the word for land (the line with three dots below it- t3-N16 in Gardiner's) with the determinative for land, city or place (O49 in Gardiner's). The determinative is a circle with an 'x' shape through it, and is almost always shown in the word 'Kemet'. It is the inclusion of the glyph that defines it a 'soil/black/complete land' rather than just 'soil/black or complete' (save the extra t).

[This message has been edited by Psusennes I (edited 09 December 2004).]

---

No, I'm talking about the determinant. The determinant used in KMT is different from the determinant used in Ta-Shrt (desert). To clarify, KMT includes the determinant for villiage/settlement from what I understand, while Ta-Shrt does not. The word for desert includes the prefix "Ta" which means land (ie Ta-Meri, Ta-Neteru) which KMT does not.

posted 09 December 2004 11:03 AM            

quote:

---

The determinative is a circle with an 'x' shape through it, and is almost always shown in the word 'Kemet'.

---

Incorrect, the nwt determinative is a place name determinative and is translated as city/town/nation/settlement/community.

For example, James Allen translates it as town or settlement, whilst William Petrie and James Hoch translate it as city.

You can see the Glyph here, in this translation "Cities of the Anu": http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/teraneter.html (line 3).
(the anu btw, shown in the picture to the left, are the 1st ruling class of Kemet)

As alTakruri pointed out kemet[nwt] can only mean 'land' if by land you mean 'nation'. And...for the 1 millionth time....it does not mean soil.

posted 09 December 2004 11:05 AM            

quote:

---

, I'm talking about the determinant. The determinant used in KMT is different from the determinant used in Ta-Shrt (desert). To clarify, KMT includes the determinant for villiage/settlement from what I understand, while Ta-Shrt does not. The word for desert includes the prefix "Ta" which means land (ie Ta-Meri, Ta-Neteru) which KMT does not.
In short, it is accurate to translate desert to mean "red land", but KMT would more accurately translate to "black community or black settlement", etc.

---

posted 09 December 2004 04:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Psusennes I:
I believe that you may be confusing the biliteral glyph that is part of the word for land (the line with three dots below it- t3-N16 in Gardiner's) with the determinative for land, city or place (O49 in Gardiner's). The determinative is a circle with an 'x' shape through it, and is almost always shown in the word 'Kemet'. It is the inclusion of the glyph that defines it a 'soil/black/complete land' rather than just 'soil/black or complete' (save the extra t).

---

This is the glyph Ta, Gardiners N16

It means land and appears at the front of words like Ta Meri.

This is the glyph xAst, Gardiners N25

It means land and appears at the end of words like Khurru or Kush.

This is the glyph niwt, Gardiners O49

It means city, town, etc,, and appears at the end of the word KM.t.
Note that KM.t also appears with other determinatives and not just
only with nwt.

The problem enters with our concept of the word land which can mean
a parcel of land or a country or nation. The Kmtyw marked the distinction
because nwt never means a parcel of land, it always mean a crossroads
village town city nation, etc.

Please provide an example from a mdw ntr text where the nwt determinative
means soil. What hieroglyphic dictionary gives soil as the meaning of nwt
which is a glyph that depicts a crossroads not a field or a desert or some such?

posted 09 December 2004 04:25 PM            

quote:

---

Has anyone noticed in Budge's dictionary under the root listings for km;p787b, that there is one hieroglyph which he doen't bother to translate or even transliterate:
it is written Kmw with the determinative of a man putting something to his mouth; to eat;taste;speak;feel;etc.
What do you think it means? Black speech? Black ??

---

Budge on the origins of mdw ntr:

It is impossible for me to believe that Egyptian is a Semetic language fundamentally. There are a very large number of words that are not Semetic and were never invented by a Semetic people. These words were invented by one of the oldest African people of the Nile valley of whose written language we have any remains. Their home lay far to the south, and all that we know of Predynastic Egypt suggests that it was in the neighborhood of the Great Lakes.

posted 09 December 2004 04:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by alTakruri:

This is the glyph Ta, Gardiners N16

It means land and appears at the front of words like Ta Meri.

This is the glyph xAst, Gardiners N25

It means land and appears at the end of words like Khurru or Kush.

This is the glyph niwt, Gardiners O49

It means city, town, etc,, and appears at the end of the word KM.t.
Note that KM.t also appears with other determinatives and not just
only with nwt.

The problem enters with our concept of the word land which can mean
a parcel of land or a country or nation. The Kmtyw marked the distinction
because nwt never means a parcel of land, it always mean a crossroads
village town city nation, etc.

Please provide an example from a mdw ntr text where the nwt determinative
means soil. What hieroglyphic dictionary gives soil as the meaning of nwt
which is a glyph that depicts a crossroads not a field or a desert or some such?

[This message has been edited by alTakruri (edited 09 December 2004).]

---

Your analysis is sound; Gardner's analysis is somewhat incomplete:

This is the glyph Ta, Gardiners N16

It means land and appears at the front of words like Ta Meri.

Not only does it mean land, but it is a drawing of an actual strip of land...

This is the glyph niwt, Gardiners O49

It means city, town, etc,, and appears at the end of the word KM.t.

Again, this is the picture of an actual city's intersection, the so-called "x".
This ideography "Nw";"Nwtiu" was only used for Kemetian cities, since they (Kemetians)were the only ones to have civilized cities on earth, of course...

Foreigners were distinguished as Khast;Khastiu;Khasut for desert;barren;uncivilized;uncouth;etc, etc...

http://www.geocities.com/wally_mo/black_lang.html

posted 09 December 2004 04:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]
Has anyone noticed in Budge's dictionary under the root listings for km;p787b, that there is one hieroglyph which he doen't bother to translate or even transliterate:
it is written Kmw with the determinative of a man putting something to his mouth; to eat;taste;speak;feel;etc.
What do you think it means? Black speech? Black ??

---

This was written by Budge in 1920![/QUOTE]

You know, until I referenced myself above, I had forgotten that I had already given my own interpretation:
Kemou - Black ones : benevolent, divine, good

posted 09 December 2004 08:58 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally:
[b]Your analysis is sound; Gardner's analysis is somewhat incomplete:

This is the glyph Ta, Gardiners N16

It means land and appears at the front of words like Ta Meri.

Not only does it mean land, but it is a drawing of an actual strip of land...

This is the glyph niwt, Gardiners O49

It means city, town, etc,, and appears at the end of the word KM.t.

Again, this is the picture of an actual city's intersection, the so-called "x".
This ideography "Nw";"Nwtiu" was only used for Kemetian cities, since they (Kemetians)were the only ones to have civilized cities on earth, of course...

Foreigners were distinguished as Khast;Khastiu;Khasut for desert;barren;uncivilized;uncouth;etc, etc...

http://www.geocities.com/wally_mo/black_lang.html

[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 09 December 2004).][/B]

---

posted 09 December 2004 10:13 PM            

Here i found a full list of it:

Gardiner to Manual de Codage Mapping

Edit: So Gardiner gave each hieroglyph a code but how can he assess the accurate meaning of each hieroglyph? There are more than 2000 hieroglyphic characters.

This is like looking for a needle in a haystack.

posted 10 December 2004 08:16 AM            

Kemet the noun contains the niwt glyph, not the ta or desert glyph.

Without the niwt glyph it would not mean black land, but something entirely different. The niwt determinative never appears in the word for soil. It only appears without the niwt glpyh, and with the hoe deterninative.

One should note that in Egyptian the border between noun, adjective and verb is slim and indeed many nouns and adjectives can be used as verbs depending on their position in the sentence, and the inclusion of a suffix pronoun etc.

[EDIT: Somebody asked how to work out the meaning of each glyph using Gardiner's listings. In my experience the easiest and most obvious method is to use Gardiner's Grammar itself and just look up the relevant section in his authoritative sign-list.]

posted 10 December 2004 12:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Psusennes I:

Kemet the noun contains the niwt glyph, not the ta or desert glyph.

Without the niwt glyph it would not mean black land, but something entirely different. The niwt determinative never appears in the word for soil. It only appears without the niwt glpyh, and with the hoe deterninative.

---

Precisely why cannot mean black land in the sense of a
parcel of land which happens to be black in color. Nwt means crossroads,
village, town, city, nation. Hence logically means Black
nation not black piece of land.

Except in this instance of deliberate obfuscation, please show texts
where nwt is translated as land instead of crossroads. The dictionary
entry for nwt is village, town, city not land. The dictionary entries for t3
and smt are land.

Further, the codage system classes niwt under O (buildings) not in the
N (heaven earth and water) class where t3 and x3st are categorized.
Logic dictates that KM.t.nwt cannot mean black land both according
to codage class and according to grammar where KM.t in KM.t.nwt is
indeed a feminine noun and is not an adjective. The name of a nation
is always a noun never an adjective.

posted 10 December 2004 01:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dada Afre:
Your website is very informative Wally

---

posted 10 December 2004 01:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Wally a good research project would be to see if Egyptians used this "x" determinant in any cities we now call Nubia. This would give us a better understanding of where Egyptians thought their souther border was.

---

Say, are you giving ME that assignment???
But seriously, this would be good for someone to tackle, keeping in mind that Kemet's southern borders constantly shifted thoughout its history.
--At the back of Budge's dictionary there is an exhaustinve listing of geographic names and places, complete with the determinatives of Nu and Khast, distinguishing the Kememu from the foreigners. Well...

posted 10 December 2004 04:47 PM            

quote:

---

Precisely why cannot mean black land in the sense of a
parcel of land which happens to be black in color. Nwt means crossroads,
village, town, city, nation. Hence logically means Black
nation not black piece of land.

Further, the codage system classes niwt under O (buildings) not in the
N (heaven earth and water) class where t3 and x3st are categorized.
Logic dictates that KM.t.nwt cannot mean black land both according
to codage class and according to grammar where KM.t in KM.t.nwt is
indeed a feminine noun and is not an adjective. The name of a nation
is always a noun never an adjective. .

---

Judging by the lack of answers to your question (asked 3 times now, resulting in non-responsive 'replies'), plus the lack of questions of your answer, your point has been clearly made and obviously grasped.