It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Nilo-Saharan languages are a proposed family of African languages spoken by some 50 million people, mainly in the upper parts of the Chari and Nile rivers, including historic Nubia, north of where the two tributaries of Nile meet. The languages extend through 17 nations in the northern half of Africa: from Algeria to Benin in west; from Libya to the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the center; and from Egypt to Tanzania in the east.
Eight of its proposed constituent divisions (excluding Kunama, Kuliak, and Songhay) are found in the modern nation of Sudan, through which the Nile River flows. As indicated by its hyphenated name, Nilo-Saharan is a family of the African interior, including the greater Nile basin and the central Sahara desert.
Joseph Greenberg named the group and argued it was a genetic family in his 1963 book The Languages of Africa. It contains the languages not included in the Niger–Congo, Afroasiatic, or Khoisan families. It has not been demonstrated that the Nilo-Saharan languages constitute a valid genetic grouping, and it has been seen as Greenberg's 'wastebasket' phylum, into which he placed all the otherwise unaffiliated non-click languages of Africa. Its supporters accept that it is a challenging proposal to demonstrate, but contend that it looks more promising the more work is done.
Some of the constituent groups of Nilo-Saharan are estimated to predate the African neolithic. Thus, the unity of Eastern Sudanic is estimated to date to at least the 5th millennium BC. Nilo-Saharan genetic unity would necessarily be much older still and date to the late Upper Paleolithic.
The Dravidian languages are a language family spoken mainly in southern India and parts of eastern and central India as well as in northeastern Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, and overseas in other countries such as Malaysia and Singapore. The most populous Dravidian languages are Telugu, Tamil, Kannada, and Malayalam. There are also small groups of Dravidian-speaking scheduled tribes, who live beyond the mainstream communities. It is often speculated that Dravidian languages are native to India. Epigraphically the Dravidian languages have been attested since the 6th century BCE. Only two Dravidian languages are exclusively spoken outside India, Brahui in Pakistan and Dhangar, a dialect of Kurukh, in Nepal.
Dravidian place-names along the northwest coast, in Maharashtra, Goa, Gujarat, and to a lesser extent in Sindh, as well as Dravidian grammatical influence such as clusivity in the Marathi, Konkani, Gujarati, Marwari, and to a lesser extent Sindhi languages, suggest that Dravidian languages were once spoken more widely across the Indian subcontinent
Dené–Caucasian is a proposed broad language family that includes the Sino-Tibetan, North Caucasian, Na-Dené, Yeniseian, Vasconic (including Basque) and Burushaski language families. The connection between the Na-Dene languages and Yeniseian languages has recently been accepted (see Dené–Yeniseian languages). The validity of the rest of the family is rejected or viewed as doubtful by most historical linguists
Almost two millennia after the language first came to China through Buddhist scriptures, renewed interest in Buddhist studies and recent discoveries of long-forgotten manuscripts in Tibet have sparked a revival of the study of the ancient language among Chinese scholars.
Beijing’s Peking University has now launched an ambitious programme to train more than 60 Chinese students in Sanskrit, with the hope of creating a team of researchers to help translate hundreds of manuscripts containing scriptures that have been found in Tibet and other centres of Buddhism, such as Hangzhou in China’s east.
“There is a rich manuscript collection in Tibet, particularly. Many of the originals have not been recovered, and are only available in Chinese and Tibetan, so it is important for us to find a way to render them back into Sanskrit,” said Satyavrat Shastri, a renowned New Delhi-based Sanskrit scholar and poet, who is in Beijing this week as a visiting lecturer to meet and advise students and teachers here.
History of Sanskrit (Influence on other languages)
Influence on other languages
Sanskrit's greatest influence, presumably, is that which it exerted on languages of India that grew from its vocabulary and grammatical base; for instance, Hindi is a "Sanskritised register" of theKhariboli dialect. However, all modern Indo-Aryan languages, as well as Munda and Dravidian languages, have borrowed many words either directly from Sanskrit (tatsama words), or indirectly via middle Indo-Aryan languages (tadbhava words). Words originating in Sanskrit are estimated to constitute roughly fifty percent of the vocabulary of modern Indo-Aryan languages, and the literary forms of (Dravidian) Malayalam and Kannada. Literary texts in Telugu are lexically Sanskrit or Sanskritised to an enormous extent, perhaps seventy percent or more.
Sanskrit is recognised as a storehouse of scripture and as the language of prayers in Hinduism. Like Latin's influence on European languages and Classical Chinese's influence on East Asian languages, Sanskrit has influenced most Indian languages. While vernacular prayer is common, Sanskrit mantras are recited by millions of Hindus, and most temple functions are conducted entirely in Sanskrit, often Vedic in form. Of modern day south asian languages, Hindi, Nepali, Bengali, Assamese, Konkani, and Marathi still retain a largely Sanskrit and Prakrit vocabulary base, while Hindi and Urdu tend to be more heavily weighted with Arabic and Persian influence. The Indian national anthem, Jana Gana Mana, is written in a literary form of Bengali (known assadhu bhasha); it is Sanskritised to be recognisable but is still archaic to the modern ear. The national song of India, Vande Mataram, which was originally a poem composed by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay and taken from his book called 'Anandamath', is in a similarly highly Sanskritised Bengali. Malayalam, Telugu and Kannada also combine a great deal of Sanskrit vocabulary. Sanskrit also has influence on Chinese through Buddhist Sutras. Chinese words like 剎那 chànà (Devanagari: क्षण kṣaṇa 'instantaneous period of time') were borrowed from Sanskrit.
Interaction with other languages
Further information: Silk Road transmission of Buddhism, Hinduism in Southeast Asia, Indianized kingdom, and
Sanskrit and related languages have also influenced their Sino-Tibetan-speaking neighbors to the north through the spread of Buddhist texts in translation.Buddhism was spread to China byMahayanist missionaries sent by Emperor Ashoka mostly through translations of Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit and Classical Sanskrit texts, and many terms were transliterated directly and added to the Chinese vocabulary. (Although Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit is not Sanskrit, properly speaking, its grammar and vocabulary are substantially the same, both because of genetic relationship, and because of conscious implementation of Pāṇinian standardisations on the part of composers. Buddhist texts composed in Sanskrit proper were primarily found in philosophical schools like the Madhyamaka.) The situation in Tibet is similar; many Sanskrit texts survive only in Tibetan translation (in the Tanjur).
In Southeast Asia, languages such as Thai and Lao contain many loan words from Sanskrit, as do Khmer, Vietnamese to a lesser extent, through Sinified hybrid Sanskrit. For example, in Thai, the Rāvana—the emperor of Sri Lanka is called 'Thosakanth' which is a derivation of his Sanskrit name 'Dashakanth' ("of ten necks").
Many Sanskrit loanwords are also found in Austronesian languages, such as Javanese particularly the old form from which nearly half the vocabulary is derived from the language. Other Austronesian languages, such as traditional Malay, modern Indonesian, also derive much of their vocabulary from Sanskrit, albeit to a lesser extent, with a large proportion of words being derived from Arabic.
Similarly, Philippine languages such as Tagalog have many Sanskrit loanwords, although more are derived from Spanish.
A Sanskrit loanword encountered in many Southeast Asian languages is the word bhāṣā, or spoken language, which is used to mean language in general, for example bahasa in Malay,Indonesian and Tausug, basa in Javanese, Sundanese, and Balinese, phasa in Thai and Lao, bhasa in Burmese, and phiesa in Khmer.
abide v. i.
Indian Tamil iru ‘be’, ‘exist’
euskara (Basque) iraun ‘abide’
Indian Tamil iru ‘be’, ‘exist’
euskara (Basque) irateteko ‘abiding’
Indian Tamil sudu ‘heat’
euskara (Basque) sudun ‘heated’
euskara (Basque) sutsu‘ablaze’
One Indian Tamil consonant has both dand t sounds. So sudu can be pronounced as sutu too. Thus Tamil sudu becomes euskara (Basque) sutsu.
to abolish v. t.
Indian Tamil kenhdu po ‘take away’
Tamil po means ‘go’.
euskara (Basque) kendu‘to abolish’
Please see Simple Pronunciation Guide about pronouncing the unique Indian nh sound.
Since euskara (Basque), Spanish, German and English do not have the unique nhsound, simple n sound is used.
Indian Sanskrit jaathi ‘caste’
euskara (Basque) jatorrizko ‘aborigine’
rsound added to Sanskrit word
Hindi gaadibecomes euskara (Basque) gurdiand Sanskrit vaada becomes English word likewise.
d is our symbol for soft dsound as in this.
SAHARAN LANGUAGE *
It has been suggested that an ancient Saharan language was used by linguists to invent all the "Indo-European" and Semitic languages, including Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, German, Hebrew, Yiddish etc. (Nyland 2001). This was done with the use of different formulaic manipulations of the Saharan vocabulary, creating largely invented (non-genetic) language "families". Nyland has now proposed several hypotheses and a theory on the origin of these languages (see Theory). In Genesis 11:1 this language is said to be spoken in the whole world, and therefore should be called the Universal Language, which had been the language of the first civilization on earth, located in North Africa and the Near East. It is still spoken in an altered form by the Dravidians of India, the Basques of Euskadi and the Ainu of Japan. In Genesis 11:7 we are told: "Come, let us confuse their language that they may no longer understand one another's speech". The clergy of both Judaism and Christianity considered this a biblical command and have spent an enormous, and long sustained effort to enforce this belief. The formula used by them in most of the artificially constructed vocabularies is called the "vowel-interlocking" or "VCV formula". Because the Basque language is the closest to the ancient Saharan language and has the best English dictionary, this will be called Basque from now on. In most cases, the first 2nd, 3rd or 4th letters of each Basque word were agglutinated into a new word (agglutinate = to unite or combine into a group) . After this was done, some or many of the vowels and h's were removed according to a plan to give the new words special characteristics. In Hebrew most, if not all, of the vowels were removed for writing, but not for speaking. For example, Talmud, was spelled 'lmd' but pronounced 'tal-mud', from Basque tala - mudapen, watch out - alteration: "Watch out for alteration", which is basic to an oral law.
It is the task of the linguistic archaeologist to look at languages before the invention of writing, to search the very roots of such languages; the subject could also be called pre-historical linguistics but that name would still be part of the fortress called linguistics. To make this process at least plausible, other disciplines such as religion, mythology, archaeology and historical linguistics must be included, while earlier research and hypotheses in this field should be carefully re-examined.
Many languages, including such early languages as Hebrew and Sanskrit, were created by formulaic manipulation of Basque vocabulary. However, the name Basque, or more accurately Bask because there is no Q in the language, did not exist at the time this language invention was done. There must have been an earlier form of this language available to the linguists doing this manipulation. But where did it come from and what was it like?
The research done by Dr. N. Lahovary and published in his book "Dravidian Origins and the West" shows conclusively that Basque and the old Dravidian languages of India are closely related. Nyland’s research into the Ainu language of Japan shows the same. The Ainu are thought to have been isolated in the Far East for as long as 8,000 years, yet they retain an early, non-agglutinated, form of Saharan, thus the original language must have been very old. These startling finds seem to indicates that the precursor of the Basque language was spoken very early in Europe, Africa and Asia, just like Genesis 11:1 tells us: "Now the whole world spoke one language". Nyland suggested that the forerunner of the Basque, Dravidian and Ainu languages was the Saharan language and that the language spoken in the beautifully painted cathedral caves in southern France and northern Spain was an early form of the same. However, this early form of the language cannot have been the one used by the early religious scholars doing the inventing of new languages such as Sanskrit. They used a later, manipulated, form that was constructed with agglutination. It employed the vowel-consonant-vowel interlocking principle.
That many words in the Saharan/Basque vocabulary are artificially assembled is obvious from words like alkar, meaning mutual. It comes from three Basque roots: al-ka-ar:
al. - .ka - ar.
ala - aka - are
alai - akatsbako - arreman
happy - perfect - relationship
"A perfectly happy relationship".
This is a very good definition of the meaning: 'mutual'. Applying the same system of analysis to other words, it becomes clear that thousands of Basque words have been similarly assembled using the VCV vowel-interlocking system, but not all. Underneath this artificial vocabulary lies a non-invented, non-agglutinated Basque language, but how can this be explained? Is it possible that this substratum Basque language is still spoken somewhere?
THE MEANING OF SAHARA
The Basque word zahar means old, and the name Sahara could therefore be interpreted as "the old country", but the Basque ‘z’ and the ‘s’, which is pronounced as ‘sh’, are quite different letters so zahar may not be the origin of the name Sahara. However, there appears to be another meaning embedded in "Sahara". It is analyzed as:
esa - aha - ara
esan - ahalguzti - aratz
to say/speak - Almighty - pure/refined
"The speech of the Almighty is refined"
Could this interpretation of the name mean that the original language had been refined or developed by early linguists? The logical and highly organized structure of the Basque language surely seems to support this possibility. The name used by the Basques for their own language is "Euskera", analyzed as:
eu - us. - .ke - era
eu - usa - ake - era
euki - usaiako - akela - erabildura
to retain/preserve - usual/traditional - goddess - usage/speech
"We preserve the traditional speech of the Goddess".
Margaret Magnus's work is particularly interesting from a writer's point of view.
Inanna called to her servant Ninshubar, saying:
"Come Ninshubar, once you were Queen of the East
Now you are the faithful servant of the holy shrine of Uruk.
My sukkal who gives me wise advice,
My warrior who fights by my side,
Save the Boat of Heaven with the holy me!
Originally posted by LeConnea
reply to post by JayinAR
I'm always taking notes. A lot of this actually hits on some things I've been working on. I've been hunting for new and innovative ways of using language to communicate on multiple levels of awareness in storytelling. How to craft a better, more engaging, and more entertaining story. Looking for more precise communication structures. Ways of using fractal language to create various effects.
What surprises me is that I was expecting to become entangled in complexity but what I'm learning points the way to every shorter and simpler structure. And that makes a certain kind of sense. Looking back at the long and elaborate sentences of something from say David Copperfield down to the way Hemingway wrote (and beyond) seems to indicate that progression. (The attention span is just not there anymore.)
Twitter is particularly exciting at the moment watching how people are communicating and storytelling through it. A great deal of it is consumerism and noise (especially in the writing community. God, don't get me started.) But there is some amazingly innovative potential there.
Anyway, these thoughts collided with a recent realization about the power of pattern and repetition in culture. One of the lessons consumerism has taught me is if they bombard you with the same thing over and over again you will usually grow to like it. If they play the same ten songs all day on the radio, you'll like those ten songs. Which raises all kinds of questions about art. And about man's obsession with pattern which sparked the mystic in me.
But anyway... I'm not an intellectual by any means, so there is very little I can add to the kind of hard work people are doing trying to learn the content on FL's sight. I am very excited and eager to study and learn what I can. Margaret Magnus's work is particularly interesting from a writer's point of view. (Brotherman, I see that inflamed you as well. Quantum Aesthetics catches my attention. I'll be studying the literary and artistic works that fall into that category.
I agree with you. It is one of the best threads I've seen in quite a while. Everyone will be studying language for months. Why didn't they introduce it this way in school? I always tell people, if they would teach sacred geometry in school, the children would be much more interested in math. (Perhaps we will become telepathic indeed (through some interface) and can share our skills mind to mind. Then our children wouldn't have to mindlessly repeat everything over and over again and be bombarded with wasted time and effort.)
It's an exciting time to be alive as an artist and as a human. So much is changing. We're on the brink of amazing things that will explode into the mainstream in a very short time. I don't know where it will take us but it will be an amazing adventure.
Can these ideas lead to harm and damage? Yes. Will fleeing from them stop it? No. Prometheus leads the way as usual. There will be much gnashing of teeth about religion and stubborn clinging to belief. I'm not immune from this. I try to keep duality at bay with the tension between opposites. Believing in everything while at the same time believing in nothing. My intuition whispers that people create their own reality and we pull at each other as observers. There will probably be great collapse as the old tower falls. It will be the people who open themselves to great novelty that will be the innovators of the future. Part of that novelty may include meeting other observers from outside this planet. Strangely, I don't think we have to travel very far to do it.
As to my question about fear, thank you for being courageous and open. Just looking at your avatar though, you're already standing on the cliff with the sun at your back. Staring toward the water. Very interesting image, that.
What surprises me is that I was expecting to become entangled in complexity but what I'm learning points the way to every shorter and simpler structure.
When you picture Neanderthals, you might imagine subhuman brutes grunting -- but new research suggests these ancient hominids were more articulate than previously thought.
A recent paper, authored by Dutch scientists at the Max Planck Institute of Psycholinguistics, argues that not only did Neanderthals and modern humans interact and interbreed -- but they also likely shared some elements of speech and language.
In fact, this new research claims that modern language and speech date back to the most recent ancestor we shared with the Neanderthals, Homo heidelbergensis. And it's even possible that the languages we speak today retain some elements of Neanderthal language.
"We suggest that if Neanderthals had something like modern speech and language, and that we did interact with them, then maybe mod languages have some trace of that language," Dr. Dan Dediu, psycholinguist and one of the study's lead authors, told The Huffington Post.
By pointing to ancient DNA and new archaeological discoveries, the linguists suggest that language developed through a gradual Darwinian process of both biological and cultural evolution -- rather than, as another popular theory states, through one or just a few random genetic mutations.
If this new theory is correct, the team's findings could push back the origins of modern language by 10 times what was previously thought.
While many believe that modern language began around 50,000 years ago, the paper names a period about a million years ago as the beginning of modern language -- some time between the emergence of our genus, Homo sapiens (around 1.8 million years ago), and the emergence of Homo heidelbergensis.
Neanderthals, like modern humans, likely communicated among themselves and with others using tonal languages.
New research, published in the journal Frontiers in Language Sciences, presents strong evidence -- genetic, fossil, archaeological and more -- that modern speech and language existed among Neanderthals, Denisovans (a Paleolithic type of human), and early members of our own species.
“Modern humans and Neanderthals and Denisovans are very similar genetically, and there are indications of interbreeding as well, strengthening this similarity,” lead author Dan Dediu told Discovery News, explaining that a gene involved in language and speech, FOXP2, is present in all three groups.
Neanderthal genes also suggest that the stocky, yet brainy, individuals possessed tonal languages, since there is an association between tone and two of their genes involved in brain growth and development.
Dediu is a senior investigator in the Language and Genetics Department and is group leader of Genetic Biases in Speech and Language at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
In addition to outlining the DNA evidence, Dediu and colleague Stephen Levinson also explain that Neanderthals possessed a human-like hyoid bone, which is involved in speech production. Neanderthal ear bones further appear to have evolved for hearing speech in addition to other sounds, just as ours have.
Researchers studying the fossil skulls of humans and the primitive creatures that came before them have taken a new step toward solving one of the major puzzles in the story of mankind's evolution:
Just when did we learn to speak?
Generations of anthropologists have believed that true language -- so crucial for peoples to work together and build cooperative societies -- came only with the evolution of modern humans, little more than 40,000 years ago.
Now, however, scientists at Duke University say the evidence from tiny bones in the oldest skulls of Homo sapiens, and of the Neanderthals who evolved before them, shows that the capacity for speech may have developed much, much earlier -- perhaps nearly 400,000 years ago.
The new evidence for early speech is tentative and likely to stir controversy. It is based on features of a single type of bony structure in the base of the fossilized skulls of modern humans and Neanderthals compared with similar structures in the skulls of modern apes, as well as far more primitive human-like creatures that evolved millions of years earlier.
But the evidence also supports a dramatic discovery made a decade ago, when Israeli anthropologists found a different bony structure in a group of fossil Neanderthal skulls indicating that the anatomy of their throats could well have allowed them to utter the vowels and consonants of true speech.
In the Hebrew Bible, "Rephaim" can describe an ancient race of giants in Iron Age Israel, or the places where these individuals were thought to have lived. See: Gen 14:5, 15:20; Deut 2:10-11, 2:18-21, 3:11; Josh 12:4, 13:12, 15:8, 17:15, 18:16; 2 Sam 5:18, 5:22, 23:13; 1 Chron 11:15, 14:9, 20:4. In the biblical narrative, the Israelites are instructed to exterminate the previous inhabitants of the "promised land," i.e. "Canaan," which include various named peoples, including some unusually tall/large individuals. See the passages listed above in the book of Joshua, and also Deut. 3:11, which implies that Og, the King of Bashan, was one of the last survivors of the Rephaim, and that his bed was 9 cubits long in ordinary cubits. (An ordinary cubit is the length of a man's forearm according to the New American Standard Bible, or approx. 18 inches, which differs from a royal cubit. This makes the bed over 13 feet long. Anak, according to Deut 2:11, was a Rephaite.
The area of Moab at Ar, (the region East of the Jordan) before the time of Moses, was also considered the land of the Rephaites. Deuteronomy 2:18-21 refers to the fact that Ammonites called them "Zamzummim", which is related to the Hebrew word זמזם, which literally translates into "Buzzers", or "the people whose speech sounds like buzzing." In Arabic the word زمزم (zamzama) translates as "to rumble, roll (thunder); murmur". As in Deut 2:11, the Moabites referred to them as the Emim.
Our suite of proprietary technologies enable us to take a highly scientific approach to advertising. Partnering with world-leading companies such as Yahoo!, Google, Acquisio and Facebook gives us unparalleled access and insight into each channel as well as how they can be made to work together.
Originally posted by Eidolon23
Originally posted by Jonjonj
reply to post by JayinAR
To be honest I have no interest in if they have money or not, in fact I have no interest in anything at all about them now but the intelligence they have shown. It's like a magnet, and makes me wonder WHY the dark side? No idea about that at all, things beyond my scope, and intelligence, and maybe even morality I guess. Fascinating.
I hate to be a tool, but if you fail to see the profit angle and take it into account, then the "dark side" isn't going to make much sense. How better to obscure a money trail (or rather, any interest in tracking it) than by throwing up a cloud of disagreeable imagery?
The only ones who will be interested are the ones most vulnerable to rehashed folk tales.
Unless they are really straight-up reppin' Chaotic Evil and just wanna deconstruct what makes us human for the hell of it.