- Well, is Sumerian still to be regarded as an orphan, having lost all its relatives, and having died out with no distant family members to attend its funeral?Message 1 of 11 , Jun 9, 2011View SourceWell, is Sumerian still to be regarded as an orphan, having lost all
its relatives, and having died out with no distant family members to
attend its funeral? Parpola thinks it still had contact (trade) with
the ancestors in the homeland.
Or was it unique and autogenous, a product of autogenesis, the result
of a game (like Esperanto) of "let's invent a language", or two?
(Has that eme-sal language been sorted out yet? Was it a matter of
different vocabulary being used by men and women?)
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Brian Colless <briancolless@...>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Date: 6 June 2011 5:46:45 PM
> To: ANEfirstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [ANE-2] Sumerian as Uralic
> Reply-To: ANEemail@example.com
> Simo Parpola
> Sumerian: A Uralic Language
> (Helsinki, 2007)
> 53e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Moscow, July 23, 2007
> I have often heard that Sumerian is "an agglutinative language like
> Now that my daughter Laurel Colless has given me two Finnish
> granddaughters, I ought to be interested in this question (she is the
> wife of Finland's ambassador in Washington, but soon to move to
> Simo Parpola has now argued that Sumerian is Ural-Altaic, bringing it
> in from the cold of isolation (or into the cold). He notes that this
> hypothesis has been tried before but has been rejected by Finno-
> Ugrists and Assyriologists.
> Another thing that is said about Finnish is that its nouns have
> umpteen cases (inflexions).
> From my observation, languages with cases lose them along the way
> (Latin into the Romance languages), though German has been very
> conservative in contrast to English.
> Did Sumerian have a paradigm of cases?
> Is there a connection? Parpola had found relevant 478 verbs and 589
> nouns in 2007, but I have seen, for example, a long list of words that
> shows Italian and Arabic are closely related, though I think Parpola's
> argument would be stronger.
> He has the Sumerians arriving in Mesopotamia (as invading immigrants,
> with wheeled vehicles) around 3300 BCE.
> Brian Colless
> School of History
> Massey University
> New Zealand
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- I m not really specialized in emesal but somehow I have the impression that it, perhaps similar to the UD.GAL.NUN writing system, is not far from aMessage 2 of 11 , Jun 9, 2011View SourceI'm not really specialized in emesal but somehow I have the impression that it, perhaps similar to the UD.GAL.NUN writing system, is not far from a cryptography derived from "standard" Sumerian (cf. Krebernik, OBO 160/1, p. 309).
Regarding Prof Parpola's article, I'm more interested in his suggestion:
"The non-Uralic features of Sumerian, such as the ergative construction and the prefix chains of the verb, can be explained as special developments of Sumerian in an entirely new linguistic environment after its separation from the other Uralic languages."
Any comments from the list? Many thanks.
Dr. Xianhua Wang
Department of History
Beijing 100871, China
发件人： Brian Colless
发送时间： 2011-06-09 22:45:56
主题： [ANE-2] Sumerian as Uralic
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]