Byrd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > > cladking Wrote:

> > The Pyramid Texts
> > simply leaped out as not containing any of the
> > words that cause the the incidence of word
> usage
> > to be a straight line on a logarithmic scale.
> It
> > was researching this that led me to Zipf's Law.

> Except that you don't know this. You're working
> from the ENGLISH (and outdated) translation which
> isn't the same as the original.

I have no reason to doubt that the words were translated correctly. This isn't about good or bad translations but rather about translating a language that is unparseable. Most of the non-literal translations actually introduce more words and make it appear to more closely obey the law yet it still does not.

> I haven't seen any proof of an "Ancient Language"
> other than Egyptian.

Either this language is contradictory and internally inconsistent or my assumption is correct that all people always make sense. I'm still betting on my assumption and the literal meaning of the PT that does make sense. It is merely silly little rituals associated with the kings' ascension ceremonies. If my assumption is correct than AL exists and the PT is not a book of incantation.

> I'd seriously like to see what the other
> definitions (in English) are for the word "four."
> Not the spoke one. The written one. Likewise
> "for" and "fore."

My unabridged 1952 Funk and Wagnall's Lists a 60 word definition for "fore" about 250 words for "for" and 350 for "four". Don't forget that not one of these definitions have any meaning at all without each word in those definitions being defined and each of the words of the definition of the definition must be defined as well. It won't do any good to understand the words no matter how many you look up because you'll just find more words (more opinion) underlies every one of them. Also don't forget that words have more than an infinite number of meanings because they each have connotations which can wholly change the meaning of a sentence.

It's a wonder we can communicate at all but we do it by trying to parse sentences as the author intended. One of the chief causes of communication failure is that when we don't like the speaker or we assume he is making no sense we stop trying to parse sentences as were intended and start looking for his many logical flaws.

There can be no such thing as logic in a parseable language because every speaker still takes a different meaning.

The irony is in ancient language "four" wasn't even "defined" and was simply represented as "/ / / /".

"Four" in Ancient Language was representative, digital, and metaphysical. It meant one single thing and could not be defined,. As such it also can not be translated because nobody knows which of the numerous definitions is intended. You must model it as "/ / / /". No more no less.

> > All modern human languages are symbolic,
> > abstract,
> > and have no fixed definitions.

> If that was true we couldn't communicate.

People just don't notice communication failures. I've overheard two people holding a conversation on two distinctly different topics.

> What the heck? "Metaphysics" is not the same as
> "basis of science."

Words not only have no fixed meanings they evolve over short periods of time and sometimes with disastrous results. My dictionary says "inflammable" means" can explode but now the word means "does not burn". "if you have a fire just spread something inflammable on it".

"Metaphysics" used to mean this and it is still the best word. We've lost sight of the fact that science even has a basis. One might use "epistemology" but this word is too "mathematical" in nature to describe something that can not be expressed mathematically.

To each his own.

> > It's impossible because words lack fixed
> > meanings. Ancient words had fixed meanings.

> I think you just contradicted yourself.

Our words have only the meaning intended by the author. This is always parsed differently than was intended.

Ancient words had fixed meanings and author intent was always apparent. If you failed to take his meaning the sentence sounded like gobbledty gook.

____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/24/2022 09:03AM by cladking.