The word for today is bizarre and more evidence from 'En 'Avdot

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), May 13, 2010 at 07:12

Our dear iam who is mixing EA with the Arabs and their appearance in the literary sources (which is dated as 900BCE) go figure. He also has no clue about the language of the Arabs and its evolution and that we have extant literary sources in Arabic as early as 100-300BCE and what does this have to do with EA? go figure. and he does not realize that EA is a real language and Egyptians speak it and live it and love it

But the most amusing thing is he is debating the history of the Arabic language when he does not know any Arabic and cannot read the primary sources in their original language and he cannot a student of history either ,,, Then he tells us that and Arab and Arabian are different oh there will be more about this little gem so stay tuned

>You are saying that ancient Egyptian arabic,

What on earth is ancient Egyptian Arabic? What are you talking about? You did not understand a word did you right?

For the readers check all my posts I never wrote anything about ancient EA not a single word because there is no such thing. There is EA that is alive and a great language

>which you call EA,

Hello: EA is the language spoken by the people of Egypt now and it started following the Arab invasion of Egypt in 642CE! How many times I have to tell you that?

For the readers: there is no doubt that EA is a language and it is not just a dialect of Arabic. It has its own unique grammar and vocabulary and it has many loan words from not just Egyptian/Coptic but also from Turkish, Greek, Italian

> is proof of Arabs pre-500 BCE,

Gobbledygook

For the readers: I told our dear iam the demagogue not just one time but several times that he can write a book and tell the whole world that Hoyland and Versteegh and Resto were wrong and that there were no Arabs before 500BCE and he will be making a fool of himself and I even suggested that on his next trip to Israel that he stops at the Dept of Arabic and islamic studies at Hebrew University and tell them about his gobbledygook theories and they will laugh at him

And Hello: EA has nothing to do with when do Arabs first appear in the literary sources

>and/or Arab writings pre-400 CE.

Hypocrite and here is another line from 'En 'Avdot's inscription dated 88CE-150CE (see Versteegh)

fa yaf' alu la fidan wa la atara

Anyone who knows Arabic can read the above as

for (he) works without reward or favor (see Belamy who reads the "he" as Obdos)

So do you think that Versteegh and Belamy made up this inscription?

Now go and tell them at Hebrew University that this is all made up and they will laugh at you

>there is no Arabs before 500 BCE

Hypocrite

But wait what language did they speak between your bogus 500BCE and your 400CE? Martian? Sobhanallah

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".