Duketown Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Martin Stower Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > In Ancient Egyptian: A linguistic
> > introduction, Antonio Loprieno has this to
> > say:
> >
> > “Ancient Egyptian represents an autonomous
> > branch of the language phylum called Afroasiatic
> > in the USA and in modern linguistic terminology,
> > Hamito-Semitic in Western Europe and in
> > comparative linguistics, Semito-Hamitic mainly in
> > Eastern Europe. Afroasiatic is one of the most
> > widespread language families in the world, its
> > geographic area comprising, from
> > antiquity to the present time, the entire area of
> > the eastern Mediterranean, northern Africa, and
> > western Asia.”
> >
> > He lists Ancient Egyptian as a separate and sui
> > generis branch of the Afroasiatic family, distinct
> > from Semitic. I do not know on what criteria he
> > does so.
> >
> > Regarding the stative, he tells us that it
> > “exhibits close kinship to the suffix
> > conjugation of Semitic and Berber”.
> >
> > This is as much as I know. Like so many things,
> > it is on the agenda.
> >
> > M.
>
>
> lol, you want to hide your own rationale behind
> Loprieno?

Like you hide yours behind 3-year-olds in a kindergarten⸮

Nope.

Loprieno says of Ancient Egyptian that “its morphological repertoire differs to a great extent from that of Semitic and of other Afroasiatic languages”. This may in part explain his treating it as sui generis.

The book is full of detail and to understand it takes nontrivial knowledge of (a) linguistics and (b) Egyptology. I doubt you understand what I’ve just quoted.

M.