PSacramento if you took the time to use an ounce of common sense before you typed your post you would of notice that countries that neighbor each have similarities because they neighbor each other. Not because they stem from the same language. But I don't understand why you're still trying to disagree with me. You admitted I was right in your first sentence.
Tower Of Babel
by Blue Grass 65 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Blue Grass
PSacramento if you took the time to use an ounce of common sense before you typed your post you would of notice that countries that neighbor each have similarities because they neighbor each other. Not because they stem from the same language. But I don't understand why you're still trying to disagree with me. You admitted I was right in your first sentence.
-
daniel-p
PSacramento if you took the time to use an ounce of comment sense before you typed your post you would of notice that countries that neighbor each have similarities because they neighbor each other. Not because they stem from the same language. But I don't understand why you're still trying to disagree with me. You admitted I was right in your first sentence.
You don't know what you are talking about. Physical proximity does not determine similarity among culture. Just look at the Balkans, or the difference between the Basque region of Spain and the surrounding areas. Language is everything.
-
PSacramento
Blue Grass,
I made that post as simple as I could and as plainly stated as I could word it, sorry it didn't register, not sure what other way I can put it, but perhaps you can take Narkissos advice and look more deeply in your opinion.
All the best.
-
undercover
...if you took the time to use an ounce of common sense before you typed your post...
A lesson in how not to win friends and influence people
or
how ad hominem doesn't win debates
-
journey-on
you would of notice that countries
It is "would have noticed", not "would of notice". Sorry, Blue Grass, your grammar, spelling, and sentence structure is killing me to the point I can't even focus on what you are attempting to convey. Please take time to "use an ounce of comment sense" (whatever THAT is) before you type. -
OUTLAW
PSacramento has given up his Battle of Wit`s..
With an unarmed person..
Thats extremely Chivalrous of you PSacramento!
..................................
-
journey-on
Thank you for making that correction via the "edit" feature, Blue Grass. Please finish the job.
-
Leolaia
Someone(who I can't remember) on a thread(which I can't remember) said the Tower of Babel story is proven false because some languages evolved from others and thus that was another strike against the Bible as being fiction. However this person doesn't realize that there are languages on this earth that has absolutely no relation whatsoever such as Chinese-English, Spanish-Arabic, Greek-Xhosa, etc. Not to mention all of the ancient languages that are now extinct due to invading countries forcing their own language on other countries. Rather than acknowledge these obvious facts, the indiviual decided to turn off his brain and pretend every language on this earth stems from one language just so they could justify critizing an accurate account in the Bible.
Actually it is the biblical story in Genesis that claims that "all the earth was of one language" as recent as the late third millennium BC (the Society suggests a date around 2200 BC) and as recent as the founding of the city of Babylon. The languages of the world cannot be traced to a single ancestor but this is obviously due to the fact that human migrations have been going on for a time scale far exceeding our ability to detect linguistic relatedness; the settling of Australia occurred before 40,000 BC and the Americas about 13,000 BC. Because basic vocabulary is replaced gradually over the millennia, genetic kinship is only demonstrable at a time depth of about 10,000 years at the most. Beyond this, it is not possible to distinguish genetic relatedness from chance similarity.
It is clear however that there were a multiplicity of languages throughout the earth in the third millennium BC and earlier. In the case of the Semitic languages, we know from inscriptions that Akkadian existed before 2500 BC and Eblaite existed as early as 2250 BC. These East Semitic languages branched off from an older ancestor, as they are cognate to West Semitic and South Semitic branches of the family which clearly did not descend from East Semitic. This pushes back the origin of Proto-Semitic to about 3500-3000 BC. But Proto-Semitic, in turn, is but a daughter language of a far older ancestor called Proto-Afro-Asiatic. A sister language to Proto-Semitic was Egyptian, documentation of which goes back to at least 3200 BC. Other branches of Afro-Asiatic include Berber, East Cushitic, and West Chadic. Most experts agree that the date of Proto-Afro-Asiatic is between 8000 and 5000 BC. Beyond this it is really hard to say. Some linguists reconstruct a Proto-Nostratic protolanguage that is the ancestor of Proto-Indo-European, Proto-Uralic, Proto-Altaic, Proto-Kartvelian, and Proto-Afro-Asiatic, which would have to go back to the Upper Paleolithic, e.g. 15,000-12,000 BC, but most historical linguists are skeptical of the existence of Proto-Nostratic and the evidence cited to demonstrate it (which imo is not strong enough to demonstrate genetic relatedness of the superfamily).
In the case of the Indo-European languages, we have the earliest attestation of Hittite in 2000 BC which points to the existence of Proto-Anatolian about 2500 BC or earlier. The Mitanni records attests the existence of an Indo-Iranian language in 1500 BC which also corresponds to the date of Vedic Sanskrit in India, indicating that Proto-Indo-Iranian goes further back to c. 2500-2000 BC. Similarly, Mycenaean Greek documented in the Linear B tablets dates to about 1300 BC, indicating again that the original source of Proto-Greek goes back to before 2000 BC. The two Tocharian languages spoken in China were written down in the first millennium AD, but the people was known to the ancient Greeks and archaeological evidence shows that the Tocharians settled the Tarim Basin before 1800 BC. The Tocharians thus probably split off from the rest of the Indo-European family before 2000 BC. The ancestor of all these languages (including Proto-Celtic, Proto-Germantic, Proto-Balto-Slavic, Proto-Illyrian, etc.) is generally dated to about 3500-3000 BC.
As for Chinese, it was first attested in the Shang Dynasty at c. 1500 BC, and Proto-Sinitic probably goes back to 2000 BC (the Xia Dynasty). Proto-Sinitic was affiliated with Proto-Tibeto-Burman and archaeological evidence of the origin of the Sino-Tibetan people point to a date of c. 4000 BC for Proto-Sino-Tibetan. The role of archaeology is particular prominent in the dating of the origin of the Austronesian languages, as the spread westward of the Austronesian peoples into unpopulated areas yields pretty solid dates for the divergence of sub-branches of the family. The breakup of Proto-Central-Eastern-Polynesian (the ancestor of Marquesan, Tahitian, Hawaiian, Maori, etc.) occurred about AD 300, the breakup of Proto-Eastern-Polynesian (the ancestor of Proto-Central-Eastern-Polynesian and the language of Easter Island) occured by about 200 BC, the breakup of Proto-Nuclear-Polynesian (the ancestor of Proto-Eastern-Polynesian and the languages of Samoa and the Outliers) occurred by about 500 BC, the breakup of Proto-Polynesian (the ancestor of Proto-Nuclear-Polynesian and Tongan) occurred by about 800 BC, the breakup of Proto-Central-Pacific (ancestor of Proto-Polynesian, Rotuman, and Fijian) occurred by about 1000 BC, and the breakup of Proto-Eastern-Oceanic (ancestor of Proto-Central-Pacific, Proto-Nuclear-Micronesian, Proto-South-Vanuatu, Proto-Southeast-Solomonic, and Proto-New-Caledonian) occurred by about 1200 BC. Archaeological evidence of the settlement of Western Melanesia show that Proto-Oceanic (ancestor of Proto-Eastern-Oceanic, Proto-Admiralty, and Proto-Western-Oceanic) broke up by 1600 BC. The breakup of Proto-Eastern-Malayo-Polynesian (ancestor of Proto-Oceanic and Proto-South-Halmahera) dates to about 2000 BC and Proto-Malayo-Polynesian (ancestor of Proto-South-Halmahera and all the Indonesian and Philippine languages) dates to between 3000-2500 BC. Finally, Proto-Austronesian (ancestor of Proto-Malayo-Polynesian and Proto-Formosan) was spoken in Taiwan about 4000-3500 BC. The earliest archaeological dates are 4300 BC for Taiwan, 3500 BC for Philippines, 2500 BC for Indonesia, and 1900 BC for Melanesia. The cultural complex at Taiwan, the homeland of the Austronesian people, morever can be traced back to the Chinese coastal mainland in Fukien Province, and still earlier to the Yangtse near the homeland of the Tai-Kadai languages at about 6000 BC. What is interesting about this is that there are clear correspondences between words in Tai-Kadai and Austronesian, suggesting either that they descend from a common ancestor or that Proto-Tai-Kadai received many loanwords from the ancestor of Proto-Austronesian prior to the spread of the Austronesian people into the Pacific. Beyond this it is not possible to trace the languages further back.
In the case of Mesopotamia, it should also be recalled that Akkadian was preceded by the Sumerian language, inscriptions of which go back to 3100 BC. And Sumerian itself was preceded by a still-earlier lost language, as attested in the non-Sumerian technical terms and names of cities and other toponyms (compare the toponyms derived from extinct native American languages still in use in the United States and elsewhere); these are similar to Elamite names, so one theory is that the pre-Sumerian language of Mesopotamia was genetically related to Elamite. Sumerian texts also refer to the existence of far-off civilizations in places like Aratta (possibly the Jiroft civilization in eastern Iran), Meluhha and Makan (possibly the Harappan civilization of the Indus Valley and possibly involving speakers of Proto-Dravidian), and Dilmun (probably the island of Bahrain). The Sumerian story Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, concerning the king Enmerkar from the first dynasty of Uruk (c. 2800 BC), describes the Sumerian king using an interpreter to translate to make the lord of Aratta understand.
The city of Babylon was first mentioned by Sargon of Akkad (2270–2215 BC) and one text (the Weidner Chronicle) refers to him as its founder. Akkad is also not known to have existed before the time of Sargon. In Genesis 10:9-10, Nimrod is referred to as the founder of Babel and Akkad, but it also mentions Erech (= Uruk) which actually pre-dates the Sumerian civilization, going back to the Uruk Period starting around 4000 BC.
-
bohm
BlueGrass: Im an atheist. Thanks for your incoherent illogical drivel. Its the most fun i had since trying to nail my balls to a fence with a stapler. You make Reniaa seem logical and well-researched.
Okay just wanted to bump up Leolaias excelent response up. It deserve a thread on its own, as opposed to mr. troll here.
