reflexive dependent pronoun


A dependent pronoun can be more loosely attached to a preceding word but it can not stand by itself at the beginning of a sentence. A reflexive pronoun is a word in a phrase in which a substitute for a name, he, him, she, her, it, etc., does something to himself, herself, itself, etc. This is all you're having on reflexive dependent pronouns.

The ear and the owl are the giveaway to the sdm.f "to hear" construction that is the paradigm that comes from the Semitic languages. The ear, a cow's ear, is itself a triliteral sign sdm, the owl is a complimentary m sign to that triliteral and so it is not pronounced. You attach something to sedjem, thus sdm.f The f (he) can be anything attached to any verb not just sdm, "to hear." In this case, st. The upside down broken "U" and the little hump takes the place of the f in sdm.f and is attached to the actual exemplary sedjem, they depict a bolt of cloth and a loaf of bread (I dispute that, but that's another story), and here they represent the word for a 3rd person pronoun.

Oddly, st represents feminine 3rd person dependent pronoun, not masculine, but let's not be disagreeable about that right now, OK? Our pretend professors would think we're just being difficult and not perceptive and astute so let's have that slide. But at the end of the sentence you have that duck with the line, and that definitely means "son" so the stuff going on at the will have to lean on that so the 3rd person "st" will have to refer to the duck and since the duck doesn't have it's own little loaf which would make it "daughter" instead of "son", we'll just have to accept the obvious disagreement between female pronoun referring to a male noun, and say the pronoun at sdm (to hear) is "he" and not "she," as the st would otherwise indicate. Could it mean something else? Maybe. Actually, I do believe I understand the st is an old form of the 3rd person singular feminine dependent pronoun that over time has become specialized for other purposes, disagreements and misalignments be damned. So here we have an st for a decidedly unfeminine pronoun.

The arm holding out something at the front in this usage means "cause" as a verb. The thing under it is a basket with a handle and it represents a soft "k" sound and here it stands for the 2nd person pronoun "you." This short sentence is loaded with pronouns.

These glyphs can all mean other things in different situations by various constructions just as letters in our alphabet can be made to mean pretty much anything we desire.

Those hieroglyphics are transliterated thusly:


Those marks and made-up letters up there are an attempt to wrench the Western alphabet into encompassing Egyptian phonemes. The vowels are not present in hieroglyphics so they're unknown. Your guess is as good as anybody's. So guess away. Whatever works for you totally works. That transliteration is generally pronounced thusly, and this is what you would say in your head or out loud when standing in front of a monument to induce the people around you into thinking you know what you're talking about.


Translated literally The words in order are:



to hear

they, them or it



The arrangement suggests:

Cause. Who causes? You cause.

To hear. Who does the hearing? He or him.

Son. Who's son? Your son.

You cause your son to hear.

Translation into the same type of loveliness in English that would be worthy of all that chiseling in stone or painting on walls you get something like this:

"Thou shalt cause thy son hear it."

"cause•you, to hear•him, son•yours" -- See how you must flip every particle to get it to work in English?

No comments: