728
EGYPTOLOGY [the language. the triliteral roots enormously preponderated in Egyptian of the earliest known form; that view is, therefore, no longer tenable. Many remarkable resemblances have been observed in the grammatical structure of the Berber and Cushite groups with Semitic (cf. Zimmern, Vergleichende Grammatik d. Semitischen Sprache, especially pronouns and verbs); but the relationship must be very distant, and there are no ancient documents that can take back the /WWW =1 history of any one of those languages more than a few =r; often lost, or changes to y. r and l are distinguished in later demotic and in Coptic. centuries. Their connexion with Semitic and Egyptian, therefore, remains at present an obscure though probable fD =h.) hypothesis. On the other hand, Egyptian is certainly O j- di distinction lost in Coptic. related to Semitic. Even before the triliterality of Old I =*J Egyptian was recognized, Erman showed that the so= h; in Coptic “J (sh) or jj (kh) correspond to it. called pseudo-participle had been really in meaning and in -h,; generally written with L I (3) in the Old Kingdom, form a precise analogue of the Semitic perfect, though its but £*—=» corresponds to kh in Coptic. original employment was almost obsolete in the time of the earliest known texts. Triliteralism is considered the ^ j- distinction lost at the end of the Old Kingdom. most essential and most peculiar feature of Semitic. But there are, besides, many other resemblances in structure P = $ (sh). between the Semitic languages and Egyptian, so that, although the two vocabularies present few points of clear 21 = q ; Coptic K. contact, there seems no adequate reason for doubting =k k" _y Coptic K; or 2C, tT according to dialect. that Egyptian was originally a characteristic member of S = the Semitic family of languages. See Erman, Das Verhdlt= £ ; often lost at the end of words. niss d. jEgyptischen zu d. Semitischen Sprachen (Zeitschrift = t(0); often changes to t. Coptic T; or % , O'. d. Deutschen Morgenl. Gesellschaft, 1892) • Zimmern, Vergl. = c?; in Coptic reduced to t. Gram. 1898; Erman, Flexion d. PEgyptischen Verbum (Sitzungsberichte d. Berl. Akad., 1900). The Egyptians =d(z)) often changes to c?; in Coptic proper are not, and so far as we can tell never were, Semitic in physical feature. As a possible explanation of Roots. the facts, Erman supposes that a horde of conquering Egyptian roots consist of consonants and semi-consonants only, Semites, like the Arabs of a later day, imposed their inflexion being effected by internal vowel-change and the language on the country, but disappeared, being weakened the addition of consonants or vowels at the beginning or end. The by the climate or absorbed by the native population. The Egyptian system of writing, as opposed to the Coptic, showed only latter acquired the Semitic language imperfectly from the consonantal skeletons of words: it could not record internal their conquerors; they expressed the verbal conjugations vowel - changes ; and semi-consonants, even when radicals, were by periphrases, mispronounced the consonants, and so often omitted in writing. changed greatly the appearance of the vocabulary, which Personal Pronouns. also would certainly contain a large proportion of native Sing. 1. c. yw (?) later wy. PI 1. c. n. Du. 2. m. kw. 2. c. tn. 2. c. tny. non-Semitic roots. Strong consonants gave way to weak f. tn. consonants (as (g) to } (’), in the modern Arabic of Egypt), 3. m. *fy, surviving only 3. m. In, early lost, 3. c. hiy. in a special except as and then the weak consonants disappearing altogether verbal form. suffix. produced biliterals from the triliterals. Much of this must f. ky. f. *kt, surviving have taken place, according to the theory, in the prehistoric as 3. c. period; but the loss of weak consonants, of y, and of one From these are derived the suffixes, which are shortened forms of two repeated consonants, and the development of attached to nouns to express the possessor, and to verbs to express periphrastic conjugations continued to the end. The the subject. In the latter case the verb was probably in the typical Coptic root thus became biliteral rather than participle, so that idmyy-hi, “they hear,” is literally “hearing triliteral, and the verb, by means of periphrases, developed are they.” The singular suffixes are : 1. c. -?/; 2. m. -k, f. 4; m. -/, f. -Ithe dual and plural have no special forms. tenses of remarkable precision—perhaps under the influence 3. Another series of absolute pronouns is : 2. m. twt, tw; f. tmt, of Greek. Such verbal resemblances as exist between Coptic tm ; 3. m. twt, sw; f. ttt, tt. Of these twt, tmt, &c., are emphatic and Semitic are largely due to late exchanges with Semitic forms. Many of the above absolute pronouns were almost obsolete even neighbours. the Old Kingdom. In ordinary texts some survive, especially The following sketch of the Egyptian language, mainly in its in objects of verbs, namely: wy, tw, tn, sw, st. The suffixes of all earliest form, which dates from some three or four thousand years as numbers and persons except the dual were in full use throughout, B.C., is founded upon Erman’s works. It will serve to contrast with to Coptic; -tm,, however, giving way to a new' suffix, -w, which Coptic grammar on the one hand and Semitic grammar on the other. developed first in the New Kingdom. The Egyptian Alphabet. Another absolute pronoun of the first person is ynk, AMOK, = y ; so transcribed in this article, but is often n, especially like Heb. It is associated with a series for the second and third at the beginning of words, and from the earliest times persons : nt-k, nt-t, nt-f, nt-tm, &c. ; but from their history, use, and is used in a manner corresponding to the Arabic form, it seems probable that the last are of later formation, and are hamza, to indicate a prosthetic vowel. Often lost or not to be connected with the Semitic pronouns (chiefly of the 2nd changed to ’. person) resembling them. =’ (n) ; easily lost or changes to y. Demonstrative Pronouns. There are several series based on m. p ; f. t; pi. n ; but n as a =' (y) ; lost in Coptic. This rare sound, well known in plural seems later than other two. From them are developed Semitic, occurs also in Berber and Cushite a weak demonstrative to tbe which possessive suffixes can be attached, languages. producing the definite and possessive articles (p t', n’, “the,” p’y-f, “his,” p’y-s “her,”&c.) of Middle Egyptian and the later = w ; often changes to y. language. I
