Cladking has maintained across many numerous boards that all people on earth spoke this Ancient Language before roughly 2000 BCE, although he has hedged this recently, referencing dates around 3500, 3200, 2750 or 2500 BCE as the starting point for its decline (would this not "void" the PT as Ancient Language?). On the matter of another attested written language contemporary with OK Egyptian, namely Sumerian, a few Cladking quotes are germaine:
"I have read all the Sumerian writing I can find that positively pre-dates 2000 BC and it is not necessarily written in modern language. All of it can be described as being superstitious as it is translated. " (09-08-13: [www.scienceforums.net])
"In many ways it [ie, Ancient Language] was far far simpler than modern languages. It was so simple that a Sumerian could quickly come to understand an Egyptian because everything was the same except a few pronunciations. The language was rooted in science by grammar and nature. For all practical purposes it was science itself." (05-21-15: [boards.straightdope.com])
"Just like Egyptian, Sumerian is not understood. If it were understood we'd see it means something much different but it's the same sort of formatting and means of expressing meaning as Egyptian and everything written in Ancient Language." (10-08-17: [historum.com])
I have no background in the Egyptian language, or Egyptology, but I do have background in Assyriology, and can read and translate Sumerian and Akkadian cuneiform. As such, I provide here an example of the Sumerian language, from roughly the same time as the PT.
This example comes from the beginning of multicolumned inscriptions of Enmetena ruler of Lagash (ca. 2400 BCE), found in two duplicates (clay cone and clay pot/cylinder), recounting events in the long-standing border conflict between the states of Lagash and Umma. This conflict lasted from as early as ca. 2600 BCE until the conquest of both states by Sargon of Akkad ca. 2325 BCE. This is a historical recounting that covered many generations, albeit exclusively from the perspective of Lagash:
2. lugal kur-kur-ra
king of all lands
3. ab-ba diŋir-diŋir-re₂-ne-ke₄
father of all gods
4. inim gi-na-ni-ta
at his firm word
7. ki e-ne-sur
a place pressed out.
9. lugal kiški-ke₄
king of Kish
10. inim dištaran-na-ta
at the word of Ishtaran
11. eš₂-gana₂ be₂-ra
the field-rope struck out
12. ki-ba na bi₂-ru₂
(and) a stone at that place he set up.
16. nam-inim-ma diri-diri-še₃
wording very superfluously
he ripped out,
20. eden lagaški-še₃
(and) into the plain of Lagash
23. ur-saŋ den-lil₂-la₂-ke₄
hero of Enlil,
24. inim si-sa₂-ni-ta
at his straightforeward word,
28. inim den-lil₂-la₂-ta
(and) at the word of Enlil
29. sa-šuš-gal bi₂-šuš
the great overwhelming-net he threw out.
Its left behind dirt mounds
31. eden-na ki ba-ni-us₂-us₂
on the plain were grounded there.
"Enlil, king of all lands (and) father of all gods, by his firm order delineated a border for (the gods) Ningirsu and Shara. Mesalim, king of Kish, by the firm command of (the god ) Ishtaran, made a survey, (and) set up a (boundary-)stone. USH, the ruler of Umma, took the oath frivolously. He ripped out the (boundary-)stele (and) marched into the territory of Lagash. Ningirsu, warrior of Enlil, at his (ie, Enlil's) just command, made war with Umma (and), at the command of Enlil, overwhelmed (them) with the great battle-net. Tumuli (with enemy dead) were then heaped up on the plain." (The inscription continues with 5 more columns.)
One can observe some fundamental differences between OK Egyptian and Early Dynastic Sumerian. Whereas OK Egyptian had VSO syntax, Sumerian had SOV syntax. There was no grammatical gender in Sumerian, but rather varying degrees of animacy. Typologically, it was an ergative language, in which (among other aspects) the object of a transitive verb and the subject of an intransitive verb are marked the same way, whereas in a nominative-accusative languge (like Semitic or Indo-European), these are marked differently. Another difference is the mixed use of logograms (word signs) and syllabic signs to convey the grammar (similar to modern Japanese).
The methodology employed in the above transliteration is standard Assyriological practice for rendering Sumerian. The words, and the cuneiform signs with which they were written, are well understood, although the reading of a few in this passage is obscure. The reading of the name of the ruler of Umma is unknown, so the basic reading for the sign is given in capitals (UŠ). Similarly, the reading of his city, known as Umma in later texts, may have been different at this time (possibly Gišša). Lastly, the reading of left behind dirt mounds is unknown. The signs used are SAHAR "dirt" + DU₆ "hill (tell)" + TAK₄ "leave", but these may or may not have indicated the pronunciation of the phrase.
The context of casting a battle-net which destroys the enemy, after which dead enemy soldiers are buried in tumuli, can be found in scenes carved in the so-called Stele of Vultures, which dates to the time of Eanatum, predecessor of Enmetena from about 2 generations earlier.
I have given this Sumerian passage as an example since little contextual evidence from literate peoples other than OK Egyptians has generally been offered, so as to demonstrate the unlikelihood of a common linguistic identity. I remain unconvinced that OK Egyptian and Early Dynastic Sumerian could have been merely "dialects" of only one Ancient Language, "the same except [for] a few pronunciations", given distinct scripts, and especially differences in grammar and syntax.
Apologies for issues with posting.
Douglas Frayne, Presargonic Period (2700-2350 BC). Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia. Early Periods, 1. Toronto, University Press of Toronto, 2007, pp. 194-199 (18.104.22.168), with further bibliography.
An online translation of the entire inscription can be found at: [sumerianshakespeare.com]
Images of Enmetena inscriptions:
[cdli.ucla.edu] (photo of AO 03004 [Louvre])
[cdli.ucla.edu] (photo of NBC 02501 [Yale])
The transliteration given above is taken from left-most column.
Stele of Vultures scenes:
See images 4 (Ningirsu holding net) & 5 (burial of dead enemy soldiers in tumulus [left of image; right shows offering])
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 25-Nov-17 22:38 by atugablish.