|
|
Post by chinitopequeno on Jun 13, 2005 9:03:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil Van Riper on Jun 15, 2005 5:14:57 GMT
Cool! "Bhasha" does sort of look like maybe a 'splosive/fricative.' And "saphah" is a fricative/splosive. (Oy!) So, maybe one could shift both of 'em just a bit and then reverse them. And >poof< you have a link! And I did just read (on the link you provided...thanks!) about Sanskrit ROOTS, which sounds kind of like the two-letter roots that one can read about in Isaac's dictionary...(just back up a few screens and check out some chapters from the book.) Perhaps there are other aspects of Sanskrit vocabulary and grammar and such that show it to be one of the seventy spin-offs at Babel. And perhaps it's closer than some of the other spin-offs to the original language (Edenic). (It does say language got _mixed up_...it _doesn't_ say homogenized!) Some other aspects of Sanskrit seem a bit more difficult to work with. Among them time. If you Google "Michael Cremo" you'll come across some of his articles (too long to be essays) that postulate that humans (modern humans, not hominids from the Olduvai Gorge), have been here for millions of years. Millions, not the thirty thousand or a hundred thousand that archaeologists talk about - and certainly not the 5,765 years that the Bible speaks about. Please forgive me for studiously avoiding another difficult topic. Hey, I don't even know how to spell cosmogony. 8-( Besides, I'm writing this rather late on a Tuesday evening...and I'm running low on aspirin...not to mention coffee.  |
|
|
|
Post by IsaacMozeson on Jul 8, 2005 21:21:54 GMT
Chinitopequeno's link was excellent! I want to acknowledge his real name, as I put it in the e-word, OOS and the Sanskrit list. See how easy it is for Edenic SaPHaH (language, possible source of SPEECH) to shift bilabials to S-BH-H, then to metathesize or swap syllables, so that it's read BH-S-0H .... just like Sanskrit bhasaha (language). Isaac  |
|
