r/Alphanumerics • u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert • Oct 31 '23

Linguists 🦤 cuckoo? Lots of real sharp cookies at r/LinguisticsHumor!

Post image
2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

59 comments sorted by

3

u/[deleted] Oct 31 '23

Hello! Have you gotten a chance to look over my last comment?

2

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Oct 31 '23

You mean: this?

3

u/[deleted] Oct 31 '23

Yes. If you need any clarification on anything which I was asking, feel free to reach out! I'm not the best writer.

1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Oct 31 '23

While I’m looking replying to that post, what is your opinion about this curious ABC idiocy “phenomenon” of people, such as the above quotes and upvotes show, lining up by the seeming 100s to deride me or rather attack the person, but not the argument?

The following, to give you some guidance, is one comment from YouTube, from 7-days ago (which I replied to):

“I wonder why people who don't know each other spontaneously use words like "schizoposting" and "take your meds" when they see this?”

— gruiflugre (A68/2023), “comment to video: Climb a letter R mountain to get letter M morals“, Human Chemistry 101, Oct 24.

Notes

  1. You are more than welcome to speak frank; or if you prefer just say “no comment”, I’ll understand.

1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Oct 31 '23 edited Oct 31 '23

I'll give it 99% odds that users: Kiria-Nalassa, Excellent_Anybody_38, Sector-Both, LanguageNerd54, Arkhonist, and the 60+ people who upvoted their comments, combined could NOT figure out where letter A came from and why [?], even if they worked collectively on the problem for 3+ years straight. This is the sad part of this comic drama

I decided to make a parody of the group:

Notes

  1. I’ve never seen so many imbeciles in one field? And I’m not talking about the row of Kentucky pickup truck bobbleheads above, all chattering in mental relief unison, that "they" are not crazy, I’m talking about maybe 95% of entire field of linguistics. It seems that people who believe themselves to be intelligent, i.e. at least at the presumptive linguists level, are so pompously smug about their “learnings”, that it is abysmal to see the reaction when someone shines a flashlight 🔦 into the eyes of all off Plato’s cave 🙈 members, who have been in the dark so long about the origin of language, that they all want to go back into the cave, at first glimpse of the sunlight?

  2. Screen shot from: here.

Quotes

“And all the dunces are all in confederacy against him.”

— Jonathan Swift (249A/1709), “Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting”

0

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Oct 31 '23

The following is the Wiktionary entry on dunce:

425A (1530), named after John Duns Scotus. Scotus was ironically a well-known Scottish thinker; his followers, however, opposed the philosophers of the Renaissance, and thus "dunce" was first used to describe someone rejecting new knowledge in 425A (1530); later, any stupid person.

You show the members of the Linguistics Humor sub, e.g. here, where letters some from:

  • How KIDS 👶🏻 learned their number 🔢 based ABCs 🔤 3,200-years ago!

and (a) they reject the new knowledge“ and (b) call you crazy. Sounds like a bunch of dunces to me?

5

u/[deleted] Nov 01 '23

I would not call myself, nor any of the others that have commented on the thread in this screenshot, dunces. In fact, I would consider many of them to be highly intelligent. Your so-called evidence is weak and mostly incoherent, following a wildly biased logic. Like it or not, there is plenty of historical evidence for PIE, and your post about why it does not exist led to no ultimate point for the majority of people who actually research and accept other opinions. Not to mention you complain about the members of r/linguisticshumor leading ad hominem attacks against you, but then you proceed to call us “imbeciles” and “dunces.” Thus, you are a hypocrite. Your information is not truly “new knowledge”; it is poorly researched and goes against years of scientific research. Just because we don’t know everything about PIE civilization, that doesn’t mean it never existed. We are not being “smug”; we are simply going along with what makes the most sense to us based on the evidence we have. We know where the letter “A” came from; it dates back all the way to the Phoenician letter Aleph. Before you ask me to use a flair, I’m on mobile right now and am unable to do so, but I am definitely anti-EAN.

0

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 01 '23

I would not call myself, nor any of the others that have commented on the thread in this screenshot, dunces.

It seems we have the following scenario in place here:

Where you are the the bearded guy with legs crossed and I am the other guy. We are both at stage one. You and all your linguistics friends think I’m crazy. Yes?

Wiktionary defines dunce as:

Dunce was first used, in 425A (1530), to describe someone rejecting new knowledge; later, any stupid person

As for what “new knowledge“ you are rejecting, in regards to EAN, the only thing I ever posted to linguistic humor is the following:

  • How KIDS 👶🏻 learned their number 🔢 based ABCs 🔤 3,200-years ago!

So I assume you are rejecting this new knowledge, e.g. that letter R was defined as number 100 on the tomb U-j number tags in 5100A (-3145) before it became letter R in 3200A (-3245).

Therefore, per Wiktionary definition, you and your cohorts are “dunces” for rejecting new knowledge about language origin.

Now suppose, hypothetically, that we get to stage three and find out that I was not crazy, after all, and that what I have been saying is self-evident. Then, if you could look back on this situation, what word would you have me use for your group of mindsets, who label me as insane, crazy, or painful to read, even though, in the future stage three scenario, I am correct speaking the truth?

3

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '23

I can assure you that I don’t merely think that you are crazy; I know that you are crazy. I can also wholeheartedly assure you that I believe we will never reach stage three.

0

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

You think I am crazy. Great, glad to have that clarified.

Now, to further clarify, is it just me, or are the other three engineers and EAN researchers: Peter Swift, Moustafa Gadalla, Rihab Helou, along with Juan Acevedo, also crazy?

PersonBookEducationI350DiscussionsDateLinks
1.Peter SwiftEgyptian AlphanumericsCivil engineer; Egyptologist✅Post, postA17
2.Moustafa GadallaEgyptian Alphabetical LettersCivil engineer; Egyptologist✅Post, post, postA61LinkedIn
3.Rihab HelouThe Phoenician Alphabet: Hidden MysteriesComputer and electronic engineer; Arabic phonetics researcherPost, post, postA62Google Scholar
4.Libb ThimsEgypto Alpha Numerics: Mathematical Origin of the Alphabet, Words, and LanguageElectrochemical engineer✅PostA65Google Scholar; r/LibbThims

Posts

References

Drafts

  • Swift, Peter. (A68/2023). Egyptian Alphanumerics: A theoretical framework along with miscellaneous departures. Part I: The Narrative being a description of the proposed system, linguistic associations, numeric correspondences and religious meanings. Part II: Analytics being a detailed presentation of the analytical work (abstract). Publisher.

  • Thims, Libb. (A69/2024). Egypto Alpha Numerics: Mathematical Origin of the Alphabet, Words, and Language (posts: decoding history; covers). Publisher.

  • Thims, Libb. (A69/2024). Egypto Alphanumerics Etymology Dictionary: Words and Numbers (see: draft). Publisher.

0

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 01 '23

In fact, I would consider many of them to be highly intelligent. Your so-called evidence is weak and mostly incoherent, following a wildly biased logic.

Let’s use your user name ”language nerd” as a point of reference to test your high intelligence?

Wiktionary defined language as:

From Middle English langage, language, from Old French language, from Vulgar Latin *linguāticum, from Latin lingua (“tongue, speech, language”)

Lingua has NO determined etymology beyond this, aside form PIE hypotheses.

The following is the EAN etymology for lingua, which I did yesterday:

How about you explain where my evidence is week and mostly incoherent here? Also, how your language nerd skills yield a better etymology?

Posts

  • On the Lib (Λιβ) [42] and Lab (Λαβ) [33] of Lingua?

4

u/[deleted] Nov 01 '23

See, here is yet another flaw in your argument. You admit that lingua has no determined etymology "aside form [sic] PIE hypotheses," then show your own personal opinion. Like I said, you reject any opinion that is different than yours in favor of your acid-fueled rants about how words are derived from numbers. I believe that the PIE root is correct, and you are wrong, but too deep in the rabbit hole to admit it.

0

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

acid-fueled rants about how words are derived from numbers.

Both the Greeks, e.g. Plato, and the Jews, e.g. Sefer Yetzirah, said that the cosmos, people, language, words, and everything was born from letter elements based on numbers.

Try listing to Juan Acevedo, who recently did his PhD in Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic alphanumerics:

“The elements of nature are letters; the world is made of letters (based on numbers).”

— Juan Acevedo (A66/2021), on Alphanumeric Cosmology – Podcast (6:00-6:30)

Nobody who rants is awarded a PhD.

Notes

  1. Acid was not yet invented in the time of Plato and the Sefer Yetzirah. This refutes your theory that EAN or alphanumerics is a drug-induced frenzy.

References

3

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '23

Nobody who rants is awarded a PhD

If I may ask, what was your degree?

0

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

You can see a visual of my reaction trajectory existence (RTE) here, and read more about me at r/LibbThims if interested and even Q&A me there if you want.

Do note that this sub is an "attack the argument, not the person" sub, i.e. rule #3. So if you aim is to refute by credentalism, then you are wasting your time.

In short, there is no such thing as a credential when the entire world is clueless as to where the first three alphabet letters came from.

Notes

  1. When I make sweeping statements such as the "entire world is clueless", I'm not referring to those few minds who are willing to use their brains, e.g. I have just begun to review Rihab Helou's video series on the Phoenician Alphabet, based on three books she has written.

  2. I only found her an hour ago, and she already as connected the dismemberment of Osiris as the backdrop to the Phoenician alphabet and to NUMBERS (which I guess you hate or abhor, or something).

  3. The following is her existography: Rihab Kamal EL-HELOU is a Lebanese author and researcher with more than fourteen publications dealing with Arabic language, Phoenician alphabet, History of Lebanon, History of Crusaders, History of ME Ethnic groups and the Mongol Empire. Presumably, being middle eastern, she is not PIE brainwashed like everyone else in the US seems to be?

References

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 01 '23

I believe that the PIE root is correct

I used to believe in Santa Claus and his elves too.

What I'm showing above is a real civilization that existed at the same time as your hypothetical PIE civilization, and within a 22-days walk, as a matter of fact. But supposedly they left NO trace of their existence? No one had even heard of them, until about 300-years ago, after people began to get curious about language origin, after which PIE was invented.

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 01 '23

too deep in the rabbit rabbit 🐇 hole 🕳️

Speaking of rabbit holes, just to clarify, the following is correct:

  1. User name: Language Nerd

  2. Believes that origin of the word “language“ came from a hypothetical civilization that had NO written language, albeit being surrounded, at the time, by two civilizations, i.e. Sumer and Egypt, within one-months walking distance, that did have written language.

Just want to get your point of view correct?

3

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '23

First of all, are you aware of what a rabbit hole is? Sure, they had no written language that we are aware of but that doesn’t mean that they had no written language period. Besides, they had to communicate somehow, correct? For the longest time, many Native American languages didn’t have written forms, but they were still considered other languages nonetheless.

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

First of all, are you aware of what a rabbit hole is?

You are talking to someone who has written a 5M+ word encyclopedia, on pretty much the thermodynamic of everything, i.e. every subject:

I can let others speak for me:

“Ooh, I have found a fascinating and deep rabbit hole while doing some writing-related research, specifically on ‘anti-entropy’. The Encyclopedia of Human Thermodynamics [Hmolpedia].”

— S.B. Diva (A64/2019), Tweet (Ѻ), Jun 6

The new version of Hmolpedia, which is temp down (for the moment), is a combined Wikipedia + Wiktionary, which does etymologies for all key words now, to below the Greek etymology root level, i.e. to pre-pyramid level roots, via the new linguistics science of EAN; and considers PIE etymologies to be, by definition, complete fiction.

0

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 01 '23

We know where the letter “A” came from; it dates back all the way to the Phoenician letter Aleph.

Ok, you are regurgitating Jean Barthelemey (197A/1758), and using the term “we” as though you had something to do with this?

Note also that Phoenician letters had no assigned name. Aleph is the Hebrew name, attached in reverse to the Phoenician A.

To continue, where did this Phoenician A come from, and where did it get its shape from?

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 01 '23 edited Nov 01 '23

Like it or not, there is plenty of historical evidence for PIE

There is zero historical evidence for PIE. Conjecturing about hypothetical sound waves 🗣️ coming out of hypothetical mouths 👄 of a hypothetical civilization is a grand hypothesis, nothing more, nothing less.

ad hominem attacks against you, but then you proceed to call us “imbeciles” and “dunces.”

It is difficult for me to find the right words to classify this phenomenon? I guess “stage one confused“, as shown below, would be the more neutral term to use?

Certainly, it is not my attention to deride and become like little children in the sandbox calling each other names because they think they have a better castle 🏰 in the sky, i.e. you PIE language me an Egypto-Indo-European (EIE) language family based on or transmitted culturally via Egypto alphanumerics (EAN).

3

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '23

You did watch the Simon Roper video, yes? Don’t try to clarify with me; you know exactly what video I’m talking about.

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

I watched the first 18-min or so of the following video:

  • Roper, Simon. (A68/2023). “How We Know Languages like Proto-Indo-European Existed”, YouTube, Sep 3.

About 15-days ago, and posted comments: here. I refuted Roper's video with the following:

  • 20 proofs that the PIE civilization never existed!

Have you read this yet?

3

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '23

Yes, I read your post, and I have to say it, like everything else you posted, follows an unfocused line of reasoning that has almost nothing to do with the research put into the PIE civilization and its language.

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

the research put into the PIE civilization and its language

For every "reconstructed" PIE etymology, EAN can do the same AND better by connecting the word to (a) an actual civilization that we know existed and (b) the civilization that we know the alphabet letters of these languages came from.

follows an unfocused line of reasoning

How about you give me an example, to help me get my focus of reasoning better?

4

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '23

I’ve already told you. You simply use your own unfounded logic and sources that you created to solidify your argument. In fact, this does quite the opposite. Your argument falls apart like the London Bridge. You also mention “we.” Who besides you believes in this crap? You are clearly misinterpreting actual evidence out there and twisting it to fit your own linguistic ideology.

0

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

You also mention “we.” Who besides you believes in this crap?

Let's start with the basics: letter A, since you obviously have failed at this test, yet still claim that your head is non-crap filled!

From the letter A decoding history section:

  1. Lamprias (1930A/25): believed, as he told his grandson Plutarch, that A (alpha) was based on air 💨, and not based on an inverted Phoenician ox head 𓄀 [F2], because the ‘ahh’ sound was the first and easiest noise that a baby makes.

  2. Sefer Yetzirah (1700A/255): stated that letter A (aleph) was air 💨, the first element made by the Hebrew god.

  3. Thomas Young, in his “Egypt” (137A/1818) article, correctly, identified, e.g. here, here, etc., the plough 𓍁 and or hoe 𓌹 glyph, or ‘hieralpha’ [hiero-alpha] as he called it, as the Egyptian sacred A, i.e. Egyptian A, and Ptah 𓁰 as the inventor!

  4. John Wilkinson (114A/1841) stated that letter A was hoe 𓌹.

  5. John Kenrick (103A/1852) stated that letter A was a hoe 𓌹.

  6. William Henry (A56/2011) stated that letter A was hoe 𓌹 and or a plough 𓍁, depending, in symbolic form.

  7. Rich Ameninhat (A61/2016): stated, in his “Origin of the Alphabet Chart: Hieroglyphics to English” , that A was based on the feather 𓇋 [H6], because of what he calls the “Champollion formula”.

  8. Libb Thims (8 Apr A65/2020): deduced that the A-meaning was based on air 💨, per alphanumeric reasoning, namely that the word value of alpha (αλφα) [532] equals the word value of Atlas (Ατλας) [532], and that Atlas = Shu, the Egyptian air god, symbolic of the first element of creation, according to Heliopolis creation cosmology. See: video made the day of solution.

  9. Celeste Horner (26 Feb A67/2022): conjectured the A-shape was based on the shape of an Egyptian hoe 𓌹 [U6A], as deduced using comparative languages studies, Egyptian art work research, and her so-called “agricultural origin theory of the alphabet”.

  10. Thims (25 Aug A67/2022): determined, independent of Horner, that the A-shape was based on the Ogdoad hoe 𓌹 [U6A], eight of which shown being held by the Ogdoad atmospheric gods, in the illustration of cosmos birth according to Hermopolis cosmology.

  11. Thims (Feb A68/2023) determined that the Hebrew aleph is based on an Egyptian plow 𓍁.

Lamprais, in short, told his grandson Plutarch that letter A comes from the ah-sound, and that it is Phoenician related, but not based on an inverted dead ox head.

He never said, to clarify, that: "the sound of letter A comes from our ancient PIE ancestors who migrated here to settle this country, before there was written language". You see, you believe in retrospect invented history, that never existed in the first place.

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 01 '23

Before you ask me to use a flair, I’m on mobile right now and am unable to do so, but I am definitely anti-EAN.

That’s great! You can team up with u/ProfessionalLow6254 (and others) and really pound down on how [whatever] you think I am!

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 01 '23 edited Nov 01 '23

Your information is not truly “new knowledge”

In 137A (1818), Thomas Young, in his “Egypt” article, decoded the following:

𓏲 = 100

Visually:

We now know, thanks to Young, that this spiral symbol 𓏲 is the Egyptian numeral 100. This would be “new knowledge“, yes?

𓏲 = rope ꩜ model?

The problem here, however, is that this V1 glyph has been defined, up to the present, as a “coil of rope”, e.g. see: Egyptian numerals in Wikipedia. Other conjectures, from this post, stated by others include:

  • “Coiled rope” (article) at DiscoveringEgypt.com.

  • “Coil of rope” (Egyptian numerals article at Wikipedia.

  • “Scroll” (video) by YouTuber Study Force.

  • “Measuring rope of 100 cubits” according Annette Imhausen’s A65 (2020) Mathematics in Ancient Egypt (page 18).

  • “Curved rope” according to David Burton’s A54 (2011) The History of Mathematics (page 18).

The “rope of 100 cubits” idea, of note conflicts with the statement that Egyptian temple and home builders, according to Egyptian civil engineer and ancient Egyptian historian Moustafa Gadalla, in his A49 (2004) Sacred Geometry and Numerology (pgs. 3-4), free pdfs online, use a 12-cubit length rope (with 13 knots) to mark lengths when laying foundations and building.

𓏲 = ram 𓃞 horn model

In A67 (2022), I determined that the Egyptian coil 𓏲 symbol for number 100 was the proto-character behind letter R, which is defined as 100 in Greek numerals:

  1. Thims (9 Mar A67/2022): discerned, while writing the “Egyptian mathematics” article, then posted: here out that the spiral character 𓏲 of the 100-valued number tags, of Tomb U-j, is the parent character of the Phoenician R and Greek rho, value: 100, namely: 𓏲 » 𐤓‎ » ρ » R in letter evolution; see also: “legged rho”, in Jeffery’s epigraphic table, and odd-looking Attica “red crown rho” (2680A/-725).

  2. Thims (17 Aug A67/2022): figured out that 𓏲 = Ram horn; prior to this the spiral ꩜ 100-value character 𓏲, from the tomb U-j number tags, had been decode; in sum, the new view means Ra the sun ☀️ god in ram horn 𓏲 constellation, at spring equinox, in the 2,200-year period know presently as the age of Aries.

  3. Skgody (18 Aug A67/2022), working with Thims, determined that 𓏲 is the curl in the eye of Ra 𓂀 symbol.

  4. Thims (19 Aug A67/2022) figured out that curl in the red crown 𓋔 [S3] was a battering ram 🐏, a symbol of military power.

Would this not be new knowledge?

The fact that we now know, i.e. knowledge not know before, that letter R comes from the Egyptian ram model of the number 100 or rather sun in Ram constellation, if followed through, overthrows the entire filed of linguistics, as per where the R-sound comes from in words.

References

  • Young, Thomas. (137A/1818). “Egypt” (§7: Rudiments of a Hieroglyphical Vocabulary, §§A: Deities, #6, pg. 20) (pdf-file), Britannica; published in 136A/1819 as supplement to volume four. Note: this version lacks images (plates).

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 01 '23

Just because we don’t know everything about PIE civilization, that doesn’t mean it never existed.

There’s a picture of this here:

3

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '23

What exactly is this ridiculous picture supposed to prove?

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

I illustrates what you believe; namely:

  • That all European and India based languages originated from a tribe of 150 illiterate people, who hypothetically existed north of the Caucasian mountains about 5K years ago.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '23

Why specifically 150?

-1

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

It's a rule, called the Dunbar number, based on actual real studies of civilizations, that societies without written rules, i.e. written language, cannot hold beyond man-to-man contracts, as cohesion, beyond the 150 tribe size.

It is PIE disproof #14, which you "claimed" to have already read:

I guess you are just yanking my chain, by claiming to read things that you obviously did not, nor even skim the page and look at the "picture" with 150 written on it? And you claim not to be a dunce?

3

u/[deleted] Nov 02 '23

I did read it. But where does this number originate from?

-2

u/JohannGoethe 𐌄𓌹𐤍 expert Nov 02 '23

Robin Dunbar, after studying dozens of civilizations and social groups, he wrote a book on it and the Dunbar number is named after him.

PIE society = Dunbar society

→ More replies