> So that would mean
> that Sumerian, Akkadian, Hattic, Ebtaite, Elamite,
> Hurrian and AE are really the SAME language,
> despite different writing methods, different S V O
> patterns, and different vocabularies
They are different dialects of the exact same language.
In all probability Ancient Language arose in a single location when a mutation occurred that allowed an individual to speak complex language and it spread from there branching into various dialects as speaking people became separated. But even if language could have and did originate in multiple places there would be little difference between their languages. This is because the language was an animal language based on the wiring of the human brain and humans are identical by definition. The dialects would sound distinct to us and they would appear different in writing but they were essentially mutually intelligible. It is this mutual intelligibility that defines them as the same language. It was their nature of reflecting human knowledge and the nature of this knowledge to reflect reality that kept them alike. Dialects changed over time but all of these changes reflected new theory and the same knowledge of nature.
> Yet you do so all the time - please explain
Ancient Language contained all human knowledge in a format that reflected a logic like mathematics. Nature provides all of her creatures with a consciousness to help them survive and communication with other members of that species is part of survival and procreation. Communication even occurs between species to aid survival of the individual though this communication is much more limited. But modern humans are the odd man out. We are totally out of the loop. We can't even see that the loop exists because we unlearn ancient language as babies in order to learn modern language. We individually forget.
This language we learn contains no logic. We are forced to think in this language so instead of understanding nature we learn taxonomies and build models of reality based on our beliefs or the results of experiment. We can't understand Ancient Language except through modelling it.
Essentially all I've done is to solve the meaning through context and build models to understand author intent. These models can then be put into words just like a description of the "law" of gravity. We don't understand "gravity" directly as the Ancient Language speakers did because we have to build models for lack of a math-like language. We can't translate Ancient Language because our language isn't tied to reality. It's EXACTLY this lack of a tie to reality that makes Ancient Language untranslatable. But, like all REAL things, the meaning in Ancient Language can be modelled and communicated in modern languages. This is what I'm doing "interpreting them for you" but I've also been showing the trail of bread crumbs I left as I solved the meaning. I can show how I deduced "shu" means "upward" and then show how this affects the meaning of the PT and how ANYONE can read the text and see the funiculars in operation. Once you start understanding the meaning you can make inferences about the rules of grammar which helps in understanding more writing.
But no matter how well anyone ever understands it, it will forever remain impossible to translate into English because it obeys rules that don't exist in English. It can not be deconstructed for translation because meaning evaporates when word meanings are changed. Each reader today or 5000 years ago must understand the exact definition of each word in order to make sense of the sentence. The modern languages speakers proclivity to "interpret" each word is the reason it can't be translated. The nature of the language to rhyme with reality itself is fundamental to its meaning and this can't be put into modern language.
All I can do is show how I solved it, interpret it, and provide insights into the nature of the ancient science and each of its axioms. I can contrast ancient and modern metaphysics and how man arrived at them. I can not translate the words and nobody ever will.