Hans Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------



The words "belief" and "thought" simply don't appear in the PT nor do any other abstractions.

> However, lets fix your 'opinion' first - so give
> us your definition of what an abstraction is?

This is a highly complex and abstract question due to the very nature of modern language. It couldn't be asked in Ancient Language because the words themselves and the question are abstractions and they had no abstractions. Words weren't defined they were named and every word had a single fixed meaning as "defined" by their names.

But in modern language every word has many meanings and shades of meaning and the intended meaning is parsed out of the sentence structure. Additionally words have ranges of being abstract or concrete. In a very real sense no word is wholly concrete because all words are symbolic and analog. The differences between the languages is absolute and they can not be translated and never will. The differences can never be reconciled.

But the concept of "abstraction" is simple enough; it is a referent that is not palpable. You can't touch or feel "abstract" or "concrete" but you can touch the "concrete" of which a sidewalk is composed. You can touch a "car" but not your "personal transportation".

When I say "there are no abstractions in Ancient Language" it must be properly parsed just like all sentences in modern languages. I certainly don't mean that "love", for instance, is an abstraction in every sense of the word. In human terms, and Ancient Language speakers were fully human, emotions are very real and originate in the amygdala as the vector sum total of our relationships and state of being. "Love" in this sense is quite palpable and produces everything from poetry to children.

To understand the Ancient Language you must recognize that the words can not be parsed, that there are no abstractions, and that the meaning isn't stated but implied. You must recognize that words have a single meaning and are representative. You must model the language on this basis. It is very difficult to break the habit of parsing words because the parsing of words is the very basis of the acquisition of modern language. Children have sufficient vocabulary to speak long before they actually use proper grammar and syntax and they lack the ability to order words to shade their meanings. They understand earlier than they can actually speak. Much of learning modern language involves the ability to "get" abstractions.

The reason there are so very few words in Ancient Language is simply that it was formatted like computer code so needed very very few words. It breaks Zipf's Law because it is digital and words are all related mathematically in nice neat equations. Rather than parsing Ancient Language we must model it because our brains no longer function the way they did when the pyramids were built as mnemonics by which to remember great leaders. Bad leaders had their hearts tossed to the creatures in the winding watercourse but great leaders became justified in maat and and were then cremated in the iskn. It was pyramid building by which the kings were rebuilt to live every day.

There are simply no abstractions in Ancient Language because there was no way to format such things in a digital language.

____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/24/2021 02:05PM by cladking.