And another round of the same happening once again...talk about foolish.
As I know from examining the math of things, to do with measures and astronomy and geometry, you can't fault a simple equation where numbers cannot be manipulated. It doesn't take long to find a fault in a sum because the answer is incorrect. Translating hieroglyphs though can be susceptible to faulty translations which affects the meaning of a tract of text and can really alter what the text is.
Sam, I don't think there will ever be a time when your work is accepted because you have just slight alterations to accepted meanings that scholars have translated, and those meanings are just a little more colourful and not at all other than what accepted translations are. Folk who attack and belittle just don't like a little more colour to their world, and would rather it stay quite bland, and state 'How dare you add something to what shouldn't be altered'.
In my interactions with you, I see you link a bit of text that everyone can access, even me because I have quite a few books on my laptop (not as many as I used to have but that old laptop hard-drive is still with me, although corrupted...bugger) and you offer a little colour to what that text means. You know what? Folk who like to attack you in some way aren't actually reading the text nor the colour...they just read 'Cladking' and go at it.
A damn shame that. Now, for the sake of maybe doing something with your work, try weebly.com to put all you work on as one long stretch of data where PT is one side of a page and your translation is the other side, and keep building it as it goes, and then estimate blocks of text in here in the same way blocks of text is grouped together. Well, there would be no point doing the whole thing, because such as this:
1a. To say by Nut, the brilliant, the great: This is (my) son, (my) first born, N., opener of (my) womb;
1b. this is (my) beloved, with whom I have been satisfied.
...doesn't really have much to it. Contentious stuff that offers 'King as Pyramid' is good for further explanation than just a translation. I do have a few books that offer up big explanations instead of straight translations, especially on AE magic and religion and what folk like Budge has to say, and it is only because he has the hieroglyph translations to work from, historical context other scholars have put together to work from, and the potential of language having more than one meaning to work from. That's how anyone puts together something, isn't it? A group of references and the eye of an artist to paint a picture of a thousand words?
Once in groups that offer up some colour to basic things...well, defining what a Pharaoh is actually having happen to him after his dead mouth has been touched by a metal instrument and why that has happened isn't basic, is it...quite the enigmatic thing that, especially where it happens inside the pyramid, and why at that place and not another, and does it reference an area of the sky and some celestial body or bodies there doing their thing while Pharaoh is doing his thing. Yeah, that isn't basic at all, is it. Who actually has a combination of things that ties different things together? I know I do...but they are using texts as they are, the pyramid as it is, the cosmos as it is, the Pharaoh and his retinue doing what they do, but there is no colour to it...just straight combinations of things.
Anyway, Sam, if you get blocks of text with a little colour to it, how can anyone actually state you are wrong when you aren't disagreeing with scholars who translated hieroglyphs in the first place? People can't, can they...or it shows they need no colour what-so-ever. How drab...Anyway, then you have blocks brought in here and offer them and it doesn't matter what folk say because that's all there is to it...like my math relating to solid things that folk don't like...some folk just don't like solid things and need it quite misty because they get to keep investigating or judging when things aren't solid...it gives them purpose because they can't apply intelligence toward problem solving...they can only offer pieces of a puzzle that they aren't sure about and that is the way they like it.
You diggin me, Sam? Look at the cycles of you and others in this topic and other topics and understand what it is that is being argued about. See the ruts some wheels are stuck in, and why they keep going round and round and never finding new paths to follow. You gettin a bigger picture, Sam? Widening your focus some? Narrowing your eyes even? It ain't about the topic at all...it's about being able. And some folk don't like 'able' because they're 'disabled'.
Well, I'm out until tomorrow. I'll give you an example of what I mean tomorrow. CHeers