[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cree Syllabary (was Re: D! IV)
>> Any resemblance to Cree syllabic characters?
> I have never ventured there. But I have always been curious whether or not
> there was a connection. Language would be the place to look. I would love to
> go through it with you.
Watch out, Big Jim -- curiosity only kills the cat, mercifully, but can make
humans into pariahs when it starts leading to possible answers. ;-) Any
connection in pre-history between Turtle Island (N. America) and the Middle
East is, on the face of it, preposterous. And yet there's that pesky
molecular analysis of Egyptian mummies' hair showing traces of THC, tobacco,
and cocaine. I guess nobody really knows nuthin' about pre-history, yet
everyone knows when something doesn't fit their notion of pre-history. Hmmm
-- and where does that notion come from? The culture of Western Civ. I
believe language IS the place to look.
BTW -- the Meru Foundation <www.meru.org>, I believe, is firmly behind the
notion that Hebrew letters are visually encoded hand shapes -- sign
>> When once I was shown a chart with the Blackfoot Syllabarium which Cree
>> derives from, along with characters labeled ancient Arabic, ancient Sanskrit
>> and Cypriote script, I remember noting that some seemed mirrored and/or
>> flipped, but fairly clearly related.
> I would love to see your sign representations.
Yes -- and so would I! I've been trying for years to get the Blackfoot
researcher to let me see it again. I'm now in email contact with him and
seeing him again once every few years, so I hope he'll share soon.
> (Scroll down)
>>>> So I'm curious if this visual code could be applied to other arabic
>>>> alphabets, especially languages with similiar alpahbets like Spanish,
>>>> French, or who knows what else?
>>> Actually all letters, with a couple of exceptions, have their base in
>>> pictures. This was the origin of the idea that Egyptian words had double
>>> meanings. One definition based on what was commonly accepted, and one based
>>> on the Hieroglyphs. What I have seen in this is a lot older than Egyptian.
>>> In fact if it was true of Egyptian, determinatives would never have had to
>>> be instituted. A true ancient word was itself both word (common definition)
>>> and determinative (the meanings of the pictures behind the "letters".) A
>>> Hebrew word like AMR, that which references all ideas of communication,
>>> actually translates, that which is born from the head.
>>>> Decoded voynich "words" may still look encoded if they are of a similiar
>>>> alphabet, but still another language.
>>> This has been a thorn with this group but I accept all blame. I have not as
>>> yet been able to post my method as the PDF program I have been waiting for
>>> has not yet arrived. After the word is exposed by this groups "alphabet",
>>> the language is Hebrew but is actually visually encoded Hebrew. Vowel points
>>> may or may not be represented at any given time. False vowels may be
>> This is in no way outlandish to me since I would claim that the Cree and
>> Blackfoot syllabaries are visually encoded kinesthetic primes equally suited
>> to sign language (see below). Vowels are problematic in possibly all
>> syllabaries except what I now consider to be the original -- in America.
>>>> Has this visual approach been applied to non-arabic langugaes? It would be
>>>> interesting to see how it worked against something Slavic. Or perhaps
>>>> someone would like to undertake the daunting task of looking for
>>>> similiarities in languages not centered around an alphabet, like Chineese
>>>> or Japanese.
>>> All writing started in pictures. Late languages like Latin used pre
>>> established picture references if they used the method at all. A lot of
>>> times meanings were totally reversed.
>> I am now in a position to question that first statement.
>> Try this on for a cognitive spin: the syllabary was invented once, long ago,
>> and was o kinesthetically (not visually) based system (transmitting bodily
>> feelings of process and relationship, not objects) with four vowels such that
>> each consonant character twirled to the Four Directions to show them. Later
>> this Ur-Syllabary made its way to the Middle East and India -- along with the
>> concept of zero -- where it was used by languages having more than 4 vowels,
>> so the consonants became fixed in one of the 4 directions. And since these
>> other languages were based on visual rather than the original kinesthetic
>> processing, pictures later became associated with the shapes much as our own
>> "'A' is for Apple" books for English literacy.
> I would love an active example of this....From what I have seen, picture
> representations are solidly traceable to the 8th millennia bc. Catal Huyuk
> shrines in the 7th millennia etc. There also existed many undefined signs
> which just may be those of which you speak. They come in if I remember right
> about 15,000ish /17,000 bc
???? that early?
> and are more like directional signs...V's..also signs that depict movement
> proper and are better termed as flowing energy depictions...flowing outwards,
> inwards and just "flowing within". I am not 100% sure if this is the kind of
> symbolism you are referring to, but it never seemed to fit what came later.
OH ... MY ... GOD !!! That is EXACTLY the way a Blackfoot woman described
what we call (1st, 2nd, 3rd) *person* -- or pronouns -- in Algonkian
languages: "there's no ME -- there's stuff coming toward (me) and going away
from (me), but no *me*." What we call their pronoun affixes are really
energy directional vectors -- like the difference in "John is easy/eager to
please," with different vectors.
>> I am coming to believe this is an accurate rendering of the pre-history of
>> syllabic writing.
>> Oh, and I also believe this Algonkian Ur-Syllabary was also responsible for
>> the early Cherokee syllabary and thus the Anthon characters behind the Mormon
>> golden tablets; my Blackfoot colleague also believes this from separate
> Well treat me as a beginner in this and let me have some word examples. Maybe
> a breakdown letter by letter of your "alphabet" would be a good place to
> start. What effect each "letter" has on the developing idea as it becomes a
> word. You have me curious.
Wish I could. I've got someone checking some things for me. Maybe we can
recreate what I saw.
warm regards, moonhawk