User:Danielito el traviesito/sandbox

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

In my own theory, which I name ____________ , according to what I have so far studied, I believe that Old and Middle Egyptian used an amended version of the a-Vowel theory mixed with Matres Lectonis, which makes reading the hieroglyphics much more simpler than previously believed by a majority of Egyptologists. I will break down the words below within categories:

Initial Glides[edit]

Any word beginning with ˤ, ɜ, w or j, y (ï, e) is equated to the syllable: glide + the short vowel /a/ and the vowel is co-articulated according to the preceding glide, for example:

  • jst - jǎsə (ⲎⲤⲈ) .. /a/ is most likely pronounced /æ/ ... In the example of Isis < jǎ > has been monophthongized and thus fossilized as ⲎⲤⲈ in Coptic, this also happened with many nouns (jrp - wine ~ ⲎⲢⲠ) but did not appear to collectively happen when a root was used as a verb, for example: ⲰⲤⲔ (jsq) - to linger; delay. Conversely, some nouns also did not get monophthongized (ⲈⲒOⲘ -ym - sea) and others used a different vowel (ⲒⲈⲒⲢⲈ - eye - jrt); in my opinion, the reason for this has to do with the many homonyms in Egyptian as well as coarticulation- they needed to be able to tell one word apart from another and as time progressed a word appeared to favor monophthongization while another word did not. In the case of ym - sea, it was loaned into Egyptian at a later date and kept the original pronunciation of the source language as was the case with many other loaned words in Coptic. And in the case of ⲒⲈⲒⲢⲈ - eye, we are dealing with jrt being a popular root combination, jr - to do, r - mouth/door, ect.. each of these roots utilized a specific phonological process to be able to tell the words apart and the spelling used was unpredictable. Throughout the dialects we find the root combination (j)r(t) to be sporadically spelled in different ways, for example: ⲒⲈⲒⲢⲈ - eye in the construct form in the Fayyumic dialect is ⲒⲎⲦ-, which tells me that the construct or pronominal form was borrowed as the noun in the other dialects which have ⲒⲈⲒⲢ(Ⲉ) or ⲒⲈⲀ as the word for eye - jrt, possibly the weak consonant /r/ aided in the entire raising of the vowel as well. Either way all spellings for eye revert back to an original standard spelling of jǎrə - eye with /a/ being pronounced as /æ/.
There are some cases of the initial syllable ⲒⲎ, for example ⲓⲏⲥⲟⲩⲥ - Jesus. In these examples it appears that the vowel could have been either pronounced /æ ~ a/ or /i/ (Jee-sus, Jay-sus, Jah-sus, ect..), which technically would be the true spelling for the syllable jǎ.
  • ˤ utilied the coarticulated vowel /ɑ/ undergoing a similar process as above: Ⲏ(Ⲓ) - ˤt - house. The vowels /ɑ/ vs /æ/ caused a slight difference in spelling in Coptic with /ɑ/ mostly keeping true to the vowel /ɑ/ while /æ/ has a tendency to be fronted into /æ ~ ɛ ~ e̞ ~ e ~ i / ɪ/ adjacent to certain consonants (and this is if /æ/ has not been raised and rounded into an /o/ which appeared to be the case generally with verbs). Like with /j/, /ˤ/ could be monophthongized in nouns, for example Ⲏ(Ⲓ) - ˤt - house, though unlike with the noun Isis, Ⲏ(Ⲓ) - ˤt - house has been generally perceived to be pronounced < ā(y) > and Isis is < æ-sə or ī-sə >.
  • ɜ appears to be the most stable, compared to ˤ and j, as most of the time in Coptic it renders Ⲱ, ⲰⲰ, O, OO- but there are several cases of < Ⲏ > monophthongization. Even though in Coptic < ɜ > tends to render a normal vowel paradigm, the complexities of the early Egyptian rendering of the < ɜ > sound can complicate how we trace back the pronunciation of words. It is not quite known what category /a/ was sounded in combination with /ɜ/ but I am going to assume it was /ɑ/ in lieu of /ˤ/ with the tendency of the vowel next to /ɜ/ generally appearing to be more stable than for example /j/.
  • w is the most stable. it is usually always wɑ ~ wo with a few cases of wi or we.

Glide Combinations[edit]

In Egyptian hieroglyphics there are many instances of glide combinations which appear in Coptic as a pure vowels. Christian de Vartavan did an intense study on Egyptian vocalization which I truly admire and I will try to break it down in a different way because Christian de Vartavan includes the vowel /o/ and it is generally believed that this sound surmounted after the Canaanite vowel shift, so we will have to take it a little bit further back in Egyptian.

  • /iɜ/ would have normally given us the syllables yǎ-ɜə according to the sylable structure of the Standard Theory, but this combination was most possibly reduced into a long /(æ) ~ ɛ/. In this type of scenario, if a word was spelled /iɜ/ it could be assumed that /ɜ/ entirely fell away only exposing the remnant of the coarticulated vowel of the first consonant exposing itself now as a long vowel. Christian de Vartavan explains the digraph /iɜ/ was then used as a vowel marker to further assist the reader. Some words following this paradigm:
iɜft - nail (ⲒⲈϤⲦ ~ ⲰϤⲦ)
iɜdt - net (ⲀⲦⲈ) - the spelling of this word appears to be entirely reorganized by Coptic but does show a complete loss of /ɜ/ if it ever even existed in this word, in which case if /ɜ/ was not intended, may have originally instead been better spelled: jdt - net.
iɜbt - eastern (ⲈⲒⲈⲂⲦ)
It is also to be noted that the sound representing /iɜ/ is not as stable as we'd like to assume, after all we are dealing with an original yǎ-ɜə which was then reduced at an early period.
  • /jw/ would have assumingly given us the syllables yǎ-wə according to the syllable structure of the Standard Theory, but even I question this particular syllable combination in certain words. According to Christian de Vartavan, we are following a similar pattern to the previous digraph ultimately giving us: /æ/, not yet turning into /ɛ/... I could add that there may have been a soft or slight dipthongization here as well: æ(w) ~ æ(ʊ̯) ~ ǣ, which was not always exposed in Coptic due to simplification of spelling. Below are some examples of words:
jw - particle, verbal prefix (Ⲉ-, Ⲁ-)
j(w)st - Isis (ⲎⲤⲈ)
  • /ˤɜ/ gives us ˤǎ-ɜə according to the syllable structure of the Standard Theory. This combination gives an odd reduction in Coptic, it is almost like /ˤ/ vanishes and the combination follows instead that of a regular /ɜ/ syllable. According to Christian de Vartavan this digraph gives us a long guttural /ɑ/ sound which I would assume would be something like: ɑ(ɜ) ~ ɑ and then Christian de Vartavan continues by mentioning that there was a sort of diphthong evolution: ɑ(w) ~ ɑ(ʊ̯) / ɑ(y) (the w / j / y addition evolved probably when /ɜ/ lost its originally pronunciation). Below are words following this pattern:
ˤɜ - big (Ⲱ or O) - remember that in Coptic, < Ⲱ > is in the construct form with the verb taking on the spelling/s: ⲀⲒⲀⲒ, ⲀⲒⲈⲨⲈ, ⲀⲈⲒⲈⲨⲒⲈ - to increase.
ˤɜbt - offering (ⲰⲂⲦ)
  • /ɜˤ/ gives us the reduction /ɑ(ʔ) ~ ɑ/ but there are many words in Coptic which show a short /ɑ/. This is probably due to the syllable adapting to the structure of the previously mentioned /ˤɑ/ since /ɜ/ eventually vanished and /ʔ/ instead took over.
  • /ɜw/ is a popular digraph used at the end of words in the hieroglyphics, but it was also used elsewhere in a word as well. I would assume, unlike the previous combinations, that this sound further shifted into separate categories depending on the root.. for example:
When used as an abstract marker we are dealing with (C)Cɜ.w - CaCăɜ + aw, which typically exposed -O or -Ⲱ at the end of the word in Coptic. Here the entire ending vanished including the /ɜ/. Although in some fossilized nouns there are cases of -O(O)Ⲩ / -Ⲁ(Ⲁ)Ⲩ.
If a root included w as part of the root then w is also exposed in Coptic with a reduced vowel preceding it:

Applying Given Rules to the Hieroglyphics to Form Full Vocalized Forms[edit]

zjwhat pnthis nwtime nof jwcome ntrgod pnthis[1]
what is this hour for a god to come?
zǎ pǐn nǐw-n jǐw natǔr-pin[2]

dj=jI give n=kfor you rd-wy=kfoot (dual) your šm-tgo (infinitive)
I give you your feet, may you make your feet going (=go your way)
dǎi nǐk radǎk šǐmat/šǐt[3]

Coptic Letters[edit]




ɜ r g
j h t
y t
w h d
b z
p z
f š
m q
n k

Name of Isis and Osiris[edit]

Both names use the same letters in the hieroglyphs but are generally perceived as being pronounced differently.

Osing adduces[4], for Isis, the vocalization: ūɜsit - she who hastens, she who belongs to the giblets, she who perishes, or she who has sovereign powers; of these the last, derived from wɜs, is clearly the most suitable. The word for 'throne' or 'seat' (which is used to write the first part of her name in the hieroglyphics, st) was probably pronounced se as early as the Middle Kingdom and is missing an initial syllable. In Coptic Isis is spelled ⲎⲤⲈ, Greek has Ἰσις In Cuneiform we have ešu with one indication of a possible /i/-elision in a pre-Neo-Babylonian rendition of the name niḫti(-e)-ša-ra-u. The Meroitic language has wosi, wesi or wisi[5] - it is hypothesized that the wo syllable is actually a realization of the vowel /u/. In the hieroglyphics her name is transcribed as j(w)st or ꜣst. I would assume the name Isis was a corrupted version of the Semitic goddess Ištar[6] and the Semitic deity aš-šur/il aššurî (or Osiris, as shown below). These two deities, Isis and Osiris are linked in the same manner that the Semitic deities Ištar and Ašur are linked.

Osiris, on the other-hand, Osing posits usǐri. wst has to be assumed, as being a part of his name, rather than the word for 'throne (st)' or part of Isis's name. The second part of his name in the hieroglyphics is an eye which has been long associated with 'jrt' but it has recently been more associated with 'jrj' which means to do or create. Osing, then regards the first element as close in meaning to that of Isis, it is formed, he thinks, from a feminine element and means she or that which has sovereign power whereas the second part, for him, means she or that which is active or creative. This is an indirect association to the feminine adjective/noun wst coming from wsr which means to be mighty implying the powerful one which has been the most popular belief of the origin of Osiris's name to date. Osiris in Coptic is OⲨⲤⲒⲢⲒ, in Meroitic it is osori, asori, usuri, soreyi[7] and sereyi. It is also interesting to note that Υσιρις was recorded in Plutarch's De Isede et Osiride which Hellanicus of Lesbos, according to him, heard the priests pronounce. There is also a diety in Sumerian/Babylonian named Asari (or aš-šur; stemming from il aššurî - god of Ashur, genitive[8]) who has been continuously associated with and believed to have been borrowed from ancient Sumerian culture, not only as the name Osiris but his entire identity[9]. In the hieroglyphics his name is usually transcribed as wsjr by most Egyptologists, but many instead choose to transcribe the name as ꜣsjr (possibly by analogy of relation to Isis) or jsjrj (possibly by analogy of how the name was pronounced at the time).

... For their King and Lord Osiris they portray by means of an eye and a sceptre; there are even some who explain the meaning of the name as "many-eyed" on the theory that os in the Egyptian language means "many" and iri "eye"; and the heavens, since they are ageless because of their eternity, they portray by a heart with a censer beneath[10]...

...Now “Osiris” has got his name compounded out of the words ισιος and ιερος: for he is the common Word (Reason) of the things in heaven, and of those in hell, of which the former the ancients were wont to term ιερα, the latter οσια[11]...

...Hence they name the former Isis, from its being “sent out” (ιεσθαι), and travelling, with knowledge, as being a “motion endued with soul,” and intelligence, since her Name is not a foreign word; for just as all gods have a common designation derived from “Visible” and “Running” (θεοι from θεατος and θεειν), so this goddess do we call Isis, and the Egyptians also Isis, from the word signifying “knowledge” and “Motion” at the same time. And thus Plato says that the ancients signified “Holy One” (οσια) by calling her “Isia,” and similarly “Intelligence” and “Perception,[12]...

Other Names [13][edit]


Akhenaten -> Ahanjati (?) [14]

Usermaatre Setepenre Ramesses Meriamun (Wsr-m3ˁ.t-Rˁ-stp.n-Rˁ Rˁ msj sw mrj Jmn) -> akk. Uašmuaria šatepnaria Riamašeša maia-amana[15]

An-ḫa-pu - anx=f-n-(DN) 'He lives for (DN)'[16]

In-ḫa-hu-ú - anx (?!); they are not sure what the Egyptian name is behind the Akkadian cuneiform script. They propose anx-ḥr (not to be confused with Ankh-Hor) and they think it means 'The face (of a god?) may live'. I have not been able to find any example of a proper name like this in Egyptian[17]An-ḫa-pu and In-ḫa-hu-ú may have been Egyptians in Babylon during the Neo-Babylonia period, but their names do not have to be Egyptian. In the Late Period Egyptians often had non-Egyptian names.
Ακεγχερὴς - metathesis of Αγκε (anke) + χερὴς (x[p]r-ra) = anx-xpr.w-ra

Πετενεφθῖμις - correponds to Egyptian PA-d(w)-nfr-tm, based on the god's name Nefertem, known in Neobabylonian as Pa-aṭ-ni-ip-te-e-mu (Pa-aṭ-ni-ip-te-e-mu son of Amunu-tapnahti)

Apiru and Ḫapiru
ap-pa/í - jp.y - toponym Luxor

  • a-ma-an-ap-pa / a-ma-an-ap-pí - Amun of Luxor

Amun amá:nu [amána / amánu (Schenkel shows iamá:nuw). “Hidden One” NK Cun. a-ma-na ~ ‘amánə > ~ amáne (LE) (Peust)], Meroitic Amani[18]. Allen AEL 2013, 24; Schenkel EAS 1990, 89 ; Peust Hiero 2001, 117[19]
a-ma-na / a-ma-a-nu / a-mu-nu - Amun

  • qa-aḫ-sa-mu-nu - ḫꜣ' s.t imn (ḫꜣ' - to put)
  • taš-da-ma-né-e / taš-da-am-ma-né-e / taš-da-am-ma-né-e' - tnwt-jmn
  • Meroitic: jrk-jmn(-k) - εργαμενης
  • Εμονατοπ πα Πιριτ / Αμενωθ πα Φαρατ - Ỉmn-ḥtp sȝ Pa-rt

Anubis ** aná:pu [mjw *aná:pu (on basis of Coptic survival panub ~ Arabic banu:b and the similarly patterned names imn, itm, which see for more bibliography][20]
Atum *atá:mu [ia:tāmuw = mjw: ‘atámu >~ atʰám (LE) (Peust)] Schenkel LingAeg 2005, 147; Peust Hiero 2001, 117[21]
a-ḫar(mur)-ți-še - (dj-sw)
'(ɜ)ztrt ('ztjjjrt, 'ztjrt, 'srt, 'zt, 'st, 'ztt) - rendered with vowels as Astat, Asa, Ata - the goddess Astarte - Ἀστάρτη - Akkadian as As-dar-tu[22]


Bastet *bu’ísti:t [buʔísti:t or buʔístiat > béstʰe (LE) (Peust) > ubísti (late); buʔísti:t or buʔístiat > béstʰe (LE) (Peust) > ubísti (late) (Osing : b(u)Ꜣést˘t) > Copt F. ubesti; mjw preferred form buʔísti:t according to feminine singular nisbe ending for f. nouns ult-t ‘-ti:t’ from Werning] Allen AEL 2013, 74; Osing NB 1976, 310, 855-856; Peust Hiero 2001, 117; Werning Glides 2016, 33, 37, 38[23]... Bišti - bɜst(.t) - pu-ṭu-Bīšti (Pa-aṭ-u-as-tum) / pu-ṭu-beš-ti / pa-ad-ú-ba-si-ti

Biš - Egyptian god Bes (in Assyrian and Babylonian may have been Pessû[24])
Bu-kur-ni-ni-(')-ip / bu-uk-ku-na-an-ni-'-pi - (n - genitive; bɜk-n-nf - "servant of the wind")
in-si-bi-ia - nsw-bjty (Note: bjt - bee: honey) - king of Lower & Upper Egypt


duḫulu - fem. article + fem noun = bolt, passageway, gateway (uncertain word)


Gi-lu-ḫe-pa (kjr-gpɜ) - a Mitanni name
Ka-at-pa-tuk-ka - Eg. gdpdk (Cappadocia)


Ar-ma-a-aš / ḫa-a-ra-ma-aš-ši / Ḫaramašši / Ḫaramašša / ḫa-ra-ma-ša / Ḫar(a)-ma-a-aš - Ḥrw-ms / Ḥrw-ms-sw - "Horus is born" (Αρμεσις / Αρμεσσης) can be Horemheb's second name[25]
Ḫapši - ḫpš - right hand[26]
ḫanša - the god ḫnsw - Ú-ṣi-ḫa-an-ša
Ḥarmaḥa - Horemheb (Ḥrw-m-Ḥb) "Horus is in jubilation"[27]
ḫār (ḫāra, ḫāru) / ḫūru - ḥr.w - Horus

Ṣi-i-ḫū-ru / Ṣi-i-ḫūr-ru
piša-n-ḫūru - (n - genitive)
ḫar-si-ịa-e-šu - ḥr-sɜ-ɜsj.t - Horus son of Isis
ḫar-ti-bu-u - ḥr-tɜ-bɜ(.t)
ḫar-ma-ki / ḫa-ar-ma-ḫi-i' - (ḥr.w m ɜḫ.t - Horus is in the horizon) - Aramaic: ḥrmḥy - Greek: αρμαχι(ς)
Ὁρουηβις πα Ιενμουθης - Ḥr-wʿb (pa) Ỉy-m-ḥtp
Ταμιν τα Ὡρου - Ta-Mỉn ta Ḥr
  • In Greek, 2 words are thought of as originating from ḥr.w due to Greek/Egyptian fusion:
ἡμέρα Σεβαστή - Sebastian's birthday ... (ᾱ̓μάρᾱ (āmárā), ᾱ̓μέρᾱ (āmérā), ἡμέρη (hēmérē) are other translations) Lengthened form of ἦμαρ (êmar, “day”
ἡμέραι (δέκα) - 10 days ... (ἡμέρών δέκα) is another translation
and Hour - ὥρα[28]
Note: There is debate as to the Greek word's etymological origins for both words.

ḥm - priest - ḫa-am-na-ta ... ϨOⲚⲦ - ḥm nṯr ... Meroitic: anata - priest
ḫa'i, ḫa-a-i - ?
ḫā-ịa / ḫa-a-a / ḫa-ịa-a- ? name of different men in cuneiform ?
ḫa-at-pi-mu-nu (a-ma-an-ḫa-at-pi) (ḥtp.w - pleased), aman-ḫa-at-pi
Hēpa, Hīpa (a Hit.-Mit. goddess) - Eg. gɜ, in abdi-, gi-lu-, pu-du ... tadu-ḫe/ḫi(-e)-pa/ba
ḫar-ti-bu-u (bɜ.t - tree)
ḫu-ni-ma - ẖnmw - jug with one handle

ḫu-ú / ḫe-e - ḥɜ.t - front, beginning ... Greco-Egyptian: -η- (Ḥȝ.t-ḥȝ.t ? - Ἁει-, Ἁη- )... Coptic: ϩⲏ

  • pa-re-a-ma-ḫu-ú
  • ma-an-ti-me-an-ḫe-e
  • Τασόκμητις / Τασοκμήτιος - Ta-Sbk-m-ḥȝ.t - The one of Sobek is in front ... Σόκμητις (< Sbk-m-ḥȝ.t)
  • Ἀμενέμησος / Ἀμενέμης - Ỉmn-m-ḥȝ.t

ḥɜt - heart ... Greco-Egyptian: Qbḥ-ḥȝṱ=s - her heart is cool - Κοβαετησ, Coptic: ⲕⲃϩⲱ=

  • Παῆς - Pa-ḥȝ.t - "The one of the superior one" or “The one who is in advance/ The best one” (derived from ḥȝ.t, a term from which also the Egyptian word for “heart” derives)
  • Ψενσενπάης / Ψενσενπάη<το>ς - Pȝ-šr-n-tȝ-šr.t-n-pa-ḥȝ.t - The son of the daughter of the heart
  • Ψενσενπαῆς - Pȝ-šr-n-tȝ-šr.t-n-pa-ḥȝ.t - The son of the daughter of the one of the heart

Ḥ'p.j - the Nile god Hapi - ḫa-ip, ḫa-ap, ha-a-pí
ḥw - the Egyptian diety - ḫa-a-ma-ša-ši

ḫa-ma-aš-s(a) - name of a man
ḫa-a-maš-ši - another name of men

(H)api - Egyptian diety ḥ(ɜ)p(.w)- a-pi, a-pí, ap-pí-ḫa

Ἀρτεμειταρου τα Ὑπεις - ȝrtmytry ta Ḥpʿy

Hathor ** ḥatḥáru or (possibly?) ḥatḥára [*mjw ḥatḥáru or ḥatḥára > ~ ḥatḥáre (LE) (Peust)] Peust Hiero 2001, 117[29]. Hathor - ḥwt-ḥr mansion of Horus - Ἅθωρ (há.tʰɔːr) also Ἁθύρ (with shifted accent)

  • (ḥw.t nn nzw) ḫi-ni-in-ši (loss of the 2nd "n") - Coptic: ϨⲚⲎⲤ - Greek: ανυσις

Khonsu ḫánsu [ḫánsu (Osing shows ḫánz˘w). in Cun. compound U-ṣi-xa-an-ša (probably for wḏꜢ-ḫnsw) > (LE) chánse (Peust)] Osing 1976, 166; Vycichl Vocalisation 1990, 180; Peust Hiero 2001, 117[30]


(jꜥḥ) Moon god - Cuneiform: ia /ya - ia-ma-a-ia (here, -ma-a-ia = my, a hypocoristicon of ms(.j) - to be born, so ia-ma-a-ia may therefore be rendered as jꜥḥ-ms - 'the moon god is born')[31]

iš - (Eg. (n)s belonging to - iš-pi-ma-a-țu


Σενπατεμινις τα Ψενταησυιος - Tȝ-šr.t-pȝ-dỉ-Mỉn ta Pȝ-šr-ta-Ỉs.t-ḥwȝ
Σενψενησις τα Βης - Ta-šr.t-pȝ-šr-Ỉs.t (ta) Bs


Kush - Egyptian: kꜣš - Cuneiform: ku-si - Hebrew: kūś - Coptic: ⲈϬⲰϢ (kꜣš.j)
ⲠⲔⲀⲦⲀⲔOⲒⲦⲒ / ⲠⲔⲀⲦⲀⲔⲰⲦⲈ - the vagina (?)[32] ... The word in question may be a reduplicated *ⲔⲰⲦⲈ. For the pre-stress vocalization ⲔⲀⲦⲀ-. For an etymology, cf. hieroglyphic k3t with the same meaning; actually, a derivative form has to be assumed that preserved the t, lost otherwise since the end of the Old Kingdom (but cf. also OOⲦⲈ / OⲦⲈ / ⲦOⲦⲈ etc., 'womb, vagina', from hieroglyphic jdt.).

Note: σαρακοιτιν from Dioscorus' Greek-Coptic glossary where it is said to mean the same as κυόφορος and καιφος (gloss (κ)ε(φος) = κέπφος), viz. ⲠϪⲀϪ. The editors deduce from the context that "we have here some hitherto unknown slang use of the word", which is otherwise recorded only in the sense 'the sparrow' but thought to mean here 'the womb' (Bell-Crum 1925: 205-206). As the following three entries seem to mean 'membrum virile', ϪⲀϪ and its alleged Greek equivalents may as well be words for 'vagina'.

k3 - AE Hy.t-k3-ptH (*Haykuptah)(= "Mansion of the ka, i.e. life force, of Ptah"), in Cueniform: Khi-ku-up-ta-akh ... the personal name a-ku-pi-ti-yo (Aikupitiyo, i.e. Aiguptios, "the Egyptian") is attested (Talanta XXVIII/XXIX, p.157). Note that Hy.t (*Hayit) is a variant of the more usual Hw.t or H.t (see Vycichl p. 5, 287, 519).


Mi-ia-ri-e -
ma, me (Eg. prep, in)

  • manti-me-(an)-ḫē
  • pa-rta-ma-ḫū
  • sa-ḫpi-ma-a-ū
  • ma naia - In my ...

manti - ma-an-ti-me-an-ḫi-e

Maat mú’Ꜥat [múʔʕa (Allen) / (múʀʕat Lop.) / (múꜢ`at Ray) (múꜢꜤ˘t > múꜢꜤə Schenkel)] Allen AEL 2013, 25; Loprieno AE 1995, 39; Ray LingAeg 1999, 134; Schenkel EAS 1990, 88[33]
ma-ḫu-ú / ma-ḫe-e - Mehit *maḥú:yat [maḥú:jvt > məḥú:ʔ] Loprieno AE 1995, 39[34]

  • This source states that Mȝʿ - true in initial position is: Μαιε- , middle position is -μα- ... and Mȝʿ.t is Μα- both initial and middle positions
  • Ἁρμάχορος - Ḥr-mȝʿ-ḫrw - Horos is true of voice
  • Ἑρμάχωρος - Ḥr-mȝʿ-ḫrw, “Horos is true of voice”
  • Μαίευρις - Mȝʿ-Ḥr - Horos is true or Mr-Ḥr, “Beloved of Horos”... Μεῦρις / Μεύρι̣ος are other versions ... the participle or mry, “to love”, appears as ⲙⲁⲓ in Coptic
  • ⲦⲘⲀⲒ(Ⲉ)O / ⲦⲘⲀⲒⲀ (mȝʿ - to be justified) - justify, praise

  • Παμαρῆς / Ταμάρεις / Ταμαρρῆς - Pa-Mȝʿ.t-Rʿ - The one of Marres
  • Ταμαρεύς - Ta-Mȝʿ.t-Rʿ-ỉw - The one of Marres has come
  • Θενμαρρῆς - Tȝ-šr.t-n-Mȝʿ.t-Rʿ - The daughter of Marres
  • Θενμαρσίσουχος - Tȝ-šr.t-n-Mȝʿ.t-Rʿ-sȝ-Sbk - The daughter of Marres, son of Sobek
  • Ψενμάγως / Ψενμάγωτος / Ψενμάγωτος - Pȝ-šr-n-mȝʿ-wỉȝ - The son of The sacred bark is true (Mȝʿ(.t)-wỉȝ.t > Μάγως)
  • Ἁρμάγως / Ἁρμάγωτος / Ἁρμάγωτος - Ḥr-mȝʿ-wỉȝ - Horos of The sacred bark is true

  • Σενερμάχωρος / Σενερμαχώρου - Tȝ-šr.t-n-Ḥr-mȝʿ-ḫrw - The daughter of Horos is true of voice
  • Ḥr-mȝʿ-ḫrw > Ἁρμάχορος/Ἑρμάχορος
  • Τσενθοτομοῦς - Tȝ-šr.t-n-Ḏḥwty-mȝʿ - The daughter of Thoth is righteous
  • Θοτομοῦς < Ḏḥwty-mȝʿ
  • Μαίθωτις < Mȝʿ-Ḏḥwty
Note: The Greek -μαι- could render the participle of mry, “to love” (cf. Coptic ⲙⲁⲓⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ), but it could also transcribe mȝʿ, “true, righteous”
Πετεμαιένουρις - Pȝ-dỉ-mry-Ỉn-ḥr.t - He who has been given by the beloved of Onuris or Pȝ-dỉ-mȝʿ-Ỉn-ḥr.t - He who has been given by Onuris is true
  • Μαρεφαυῆς - Mȝʿ.t-Rʿ-pa-ỉȝw - Marres, the aged one

  • Maatkare - it it hypothesized and opined that the Hebrew Biblical name מַעֲכָה (Maakah)[35] renders a corrupted version of the female name Maatkare (Μ(ο)ωχα, Μα(α)χα are the Greek versions)[36][37]

  • Note: These words spelled similarly:
ⲘⲀ / ⲘⲀⲒ / ⲘOⲨ / (Demotic: mȝ, mȝʿ) - place ... ⲘⲰⲒⲦ in Crum's Coptic dictionary pg 153, doesn't have a definition
ⲘⲎ / ⲘⲒ (mwy(.t)MEg, mȝ(.t)Demotic, mt.tDemotic) - urine
ⲘOⲨⲒ (mȝwyMEg, mȝyDemotic, mȝ) - new
ⲘOⲨⲈ (mȝy(.t)) - island (from "new") ... GreeK: νη̂σος
mȝyMEg - foetus ... mjLEg - sperm ... mwDem - semen

mȝȝ - to see ... Pro-Afro-Asiatic: mVrVʔ, Proto-Semitic: ʔVmVr- ... One rule is apparent, though, namely that <r> is always reflected as Coptic Ⲗ in a word which also contains Ꜣ ... Peust pg 129.
mr.ty - two eyes
mrj - to love ... Akkadian: rāmī a cognate of Hebrew: raHǎmíy shown in the Hebrew biblical conjugated form: ʔɛ|rHɔm|əkɔ́ʔ - I love you ... The Hebrew name Miriam, Hebrew: מִרְיָם‬ (miriam), Modern Miryam, possibly from Aramaic מרים (Maryām), Tiberian: Miryām. The name's etymology is unclear. Since many Levite names are of Egyptian origin, the name could come from the Egyptian mr "love", as in the Egyptian names mry.t-jmn (Merit-Amun) "beloved of Amun" and mry.t-rꜥ (Merytre) "beloved of Ra". A Judeo-Aramaic variant of this name, Maryām (Μαριάμ) is recorded in the New Testament.
ma-ja-a-ti / ma-ja-tu - (mry.t jtn - beloved of jtn) - Meritaten, Akhenaten's eldest daughter, leading some scholars to think that the -aten portion of her name may have had a "y" sound preceding it. I tend to disagree, based on how Amenhotep III's throne name was rendered, with a "ua/wa" sound, which could have been similar to the Akkadian "ya" sound, which incorporated the /t/ function of the name.[38]

Manya (Egyptian hypocoristicon of Manaḫpirya = prenomen of Thutmose III)[39]
Ma-a-ia (Maya) (Egyptian hypocoristicon of Taḫmašši)
Ma(-a)-ia - from ma-a-i-A-ma-na and ta-aḫ-ma-ia

Mut ** mí’wat [*mjw mí’wat < meʔwat (Loprieno) > méwtʰ (LE) (Peust)] Loprieno AE 1995, 245; Peust Hiero, 117[40]

  • In Greek names, mw.t (the goddess) renders: μουθ-, μουτ- ... In Coptic, ⲙⲟⲩⲧ in the name ⲡⲉⲧⲉⲙⲟⲩⲧ
  • Ψενμύθης/-ιος / Σένμωθις / Σενεμουτ - Pȝ-šr-n-Mw.t, “The son of Mut”
  • Σενπέμουτις - Tȝ-šr.t-n-pa-Mw.t - The son of the one of Mut
  • Pa-Mwt - The one of Mut
  • Pȝ-šr-n-Mw.t - The son of Mut
  • Ψενμούθης
  • Ψενμώθου
  • Ψενενμούθης / Ψενε̣ν̣μούθου
  • Ψεμωθ / Ψεμωθ( )
  • Σενμούθης / Σενμύθης / Σένμωθις - Tȝ-šr.t-n-Mw.t - The daughter of Mut

Mother - mw.t - ⲙⲁⲁⲩ (S), ⲙⲁⲩ (B) Kȝ-mw.t=f - Greek: Καμητ- ... Bull of his mother

  • Ψενμοντκάμητις - Pȝ-šr-n-Mnṱ-kȝ-mw.t=f - The son of Montu, the bull of his mother
  • Ἁρεμῆφις - Ḥr-iwn-mw.t=f
Ḥr-(ỉwn)-mḥ=f > Ἁρέμηφις
  • Ψενσενκάμητις - Pȝ-šr-n-tȝ-šr.t-n-kȝ-mw.t=f - The son of the daughter of the bull of his mother
  • Kȝ-mw.t=f > Κάμητις
  • -μουθ- ... Ỉwn-mw.t=f - Pillar of his mother
  • Σενπετεαρμούθης - Tȝ-šr.t-(n)-pȝ-dỉ-Ḥr-ỉ(w)n-mw.t=f(.t) - The daughter of he who has been given by Horos, the pillar of his mother
  • Σενκάμητις - Tȝ-šr.t-n-kȝ-mw.t=f - The daughter of the bull of his mother - ⲧⲥⲉⲛⲕⲁⲙⲓⲧ

Lion, in Greek: -μουι-, -μοι- (singular) and -μγευ- (plural) ... ⲙⲟⲩⲓ, ⲙⲩⲉ

  • Ψένμουις - Pȝ-šr-n-mȝy, “The son of the lion”
  • Ψενεμγεύς - Pȝ-šr-n-nȝ-mȝy.w - The son of the lions
  • Σενεμγεύς - Tȝ-šr.t-n-nȝ-mȝy.w - The daughter of the lions
  • Ψενταμιεύς - Pȝ-šr-n-ta-mȝy.w - The son of the one of the lions
  • Σένφμοις - Tȝ-šr.t-n-pȝ-mȝy - The daughter of the lion
  • Σένμοις - Tȝ-šr.t-n-mȝy - The daughter of the lion
  • Σενπαμιῆς - ȝ-šr.t-n-pa-mȝy - The daughter of the one of the lion
  • Πετέμοις / Πετμούεις - Pȝ-dỉ-mȝy - He who has been given by the lion
  • Σενπετεμιχόντης / Σενπετεμιχώντης / Χενπετεμιχώντης - Tȝ-šr.t-n-pȝ-dỉ- mȝy-ḫnt - The daughter of He who has been given by the lion that is in front
  • Σενεριόφμοις / Σεν[ε]ριόφμοι(τος) - Tȝ-šr.t-n-hry-pȝ-mȝy (?) - The daughter of The lion is satisfied (?)
  • Σενχεσφμο - Tȝ-šr.t-n-Ḫnsw-pȝ-mȝy - The daughter of Khonsu the lion

Death: -μου- ... ⲙⲟⲩ - Mw.t

  • Σενεπμοῦς / Σενεφμοῦς / Τσενέπμουτις - Tȝ-šr.t-n-pȝ-mwt - The daughter of death
  • Ψενεφμοῦς - Pȝ-šr-n-pȝ-mw.t - The son of death

Fierce looking lion: Μιευσ-/Μιεύς, Μιυσ-/ Μιυς - Μȝy-ḥs

  • Θενμιεύς - Tȝ-šr.t-n-mȝy-ḥs - The daughter of the fierce looking lion
  • Σεναρμίυσις - Tȝ-šr.t-(n)-Ḥr-mȝy-ḥs - The daughter of Horos, the fierce looking lion
  • * Ψενταμίωσις - Pȝ-šr-n-ta-mȝy-ḥs - The son of the one of the fierce looking lion

Water - mw appears as Coptic: ⲙⲟⲟⲩ, Greek: -μοου

  • Παπμοου - Pa-pȝ-mw - The one of the water
  • Τρεμπαμοου - Tȝ-rmt.t-n-pa-mw - The woman of the one of the water
  • Τρμπμόου - Tȝ-rmt.t-n-pȝ-mw - The woman of the water

  • (ỉ)my, “cat”, appears in Greek as -(α)μι-, in Coptic as ⲉⲙⲟⲩ (Sahidic, Bohairic), ⲁⲙⲟⲩ (Sahidic), and mȝy, “lion”, as ⲙⲟⲩⲓ in all the dialects, but the forms ⲙⲓⲏ, ⲙⲓⲉ, ⲙⲩⲉ, ⲙⲟⲩⲓⲏ are also attested. The etymology of both terms is onomatopeic. If the name Τάμις represents the pronoun ta- plus a name of animal, mȝy would fit better than (ỉ)my. On the other hand, in two different names are possibly mixed: the Demotic name Ta-my without translation, seems to have the foreing determinative and represent a meroitic name.
  • Ψένταμις - Pȝ-šr-n-ta-my - The son of the one of the cat
  • Ψένταμις / Τάμις - Ta-my, “The one of the cat”
  • Πάμις - Pa-my The one of the cat
  • Ψενταΐλουρος / Ψενταϊλούρου - Demotic: Pȝ-šr-tȝylwrys.. this name has also been restructured to mean “The son of the (female) cat” because the "ϊ" has not been entirely noted
  • Πτεέμαυς / Πτεεμαυ / Πτέμαυς / Πετεμενω - Pȝ-dỉ-ỉmy - He who has been given by the cat

Ma-né-e / Ma-ni-e - Menes - he who endures

ma-ni-e-na-an, ma-ni-en-na-a-an
urda-ma-ni-e (?)
pu-ți-ma-a-ni - pɜ dy __ - the gift of ___

ma-an-ti-me-an-ḫi-e - (ḥɜ.t - front) (ma, me - Eg. prep, in) - king of Thebes
mi-in-pa-ḫi-ri-ta-ri-a (menpehtirê) - Ramses I, king of Egypt, named as ancestor of Ramses II - mn-pḥty-rʿ - established by the strength of Ra
mur-ši-li-iš - Egyptian or Hittite oriented name (m-r'-s'-r') - is a name of a Hittite king
maš(š)a - msj - beget


ma-na-aḫ-bi-(ir)-ia - ḫpr -
ma-r-ka-ba-ta - chariot .. Semitic loan word
ma-n-da-ta - tax .. Semitic loan word from Akkadian mandattu

Montu ** mánṯu [*mjw mánṯu >~ mántʰe (LE) (Peust); mjw: using ṯ instead of t on basis of OE attestations, all of which use the spelling mnṯw (see Hannig)] Peust Hiero 2001, 117; Hannig WAR 2003, 1594[41]

Min - mínu [mínu (Allen) >~ (LE) mín (Peust)] Allen AEL 2013, 82; Peust Hiero 2001, 117[42]


naḫtu - nḫt - strong; strength

na-aḫ-ti-ḫū-ru-an-sīni (-sini - Eg. šn.w) (-an-nɜ - pi. of the article)

Ni-iḫ-ti(-e)-ša-ra-u - nḫt-ɜs(-t)-irw - Isis is strong towards them - name of female
na-ma-di - ? - ni-im-ma-ḫe-e, nim-ki-su
ni'ipi (Eg. nf wind), in bukku-na(n)-ni-'-i-pi (n(a), ni - Eg. particle of genitive)

  • Nḫṱ - To be strong ... In Greek: Νεχθ- (initial), -ναχθ- (medial)
Σενεχνηβις τα Βης - Tȝ-šr.t-Nḫt-nb=f ta Bs

nap-ḫu'-ru-ria - (Eg., pl. of ḫpr; cf. aḫbir) na-aḫ-ki-e -
ni-ḫar-a-u - ?
naḫra (Eg., perhaps a deity ? ) - na-aḫ-ra-mašši
nabnasu - a type of wood - Akkadian: nanṣabu ... Egyptian: nꜣ-bnšw
namdu-u - the words - nꜣ-mḏꜣ.wt
namsu-u - these letters/rolls - nꜣ (n) mḏꜣ.wt
nim-ša-ḫu / nam-šu-ḫa - nɜ-msḥ(w) - the crocodiles ... Πεψας, Πεμσας, Πεμσαις ... Arabic: timsāḥ (with fem article instead of masc, articles were interchangeable sometimes)
nit(i)ru - nṯry

nzw - king - in Cuneiform has two renditions un-zu / un-šu and in-si in the New Kingdom, this may signify a syllabic nasal - ϢⲚⲤ / ϢⲈⲚⲤ - fine linen (šs-nzw - royal linen)

  • Nsw - King ... Greek: -σ-, -σε-, -σο-
(ḥw.t nn nzw) ḫi-ni-in-ši (loss of the 2nd "n") - Coptic: ϨⲚⲎⲤ - Greek: ανυσις
Σενσοντωοῦς - Tȝ-šr.t-n-nsw-tȝ.wy - The daughter of the king of the two lands
Πατεμοστοῦς, Πετεμοστοῦς - Pȝ-dỉ-Ỉmn-nsw-tȝ.wy - He who has been given by Amun, king of both lands
Ταπετεστοῦς - Ta-pȝ-dỉ-nsw-tȝ.wy - The one of He who has been given by the king of both lands
Ταπετεστοῦς / Ταπετεστο(ῦτος) - Ta-pȝ-dỉ-nsw-tȝ.wy - The one of He who has been given by the king of both lands
Ἀμονρασώνθηρ - jmn-Rʿ-nsw-ntr.w - Amun-Ra, King of gods
Πατεμοστοῦς, Πετεμοστοῦς, Πετεμέσθης / Πετε̣μεσθέους, Πετεμονστωοῦς / Πετεμονστωοῦτος - Pȝ-dỉ-Ỉmn-nsw-tȝ.wy - He who has been given by Amun, king of both lands

Nikū - Νεκώ(ς), Νεχαώ, נְכֹה (ne̞/əχo̞h) - King of Memphis and Sais.. /n-kA.w/ (M) 'for/of 'belongs' to the bulls' (King's name)
na-ap-te-ra - nfr.t-jrj - beautiful companion... Nefertari wife of Rameses II
naftíta (originally nafratíta) - “The beautiful one has come” (Nefertiti)
na-ap-ḫu-ru-ri-ia / nap-ḫur-i-ri-ia / nam-ḫur-ri-ia / ni-ip-ḫu-ur-ri-ri-ia / [na-ap-ḫu]-ra-r[i-i]a / nap\nip-ḫuru-rīa- Νεφερχερης - nfr-ḫprw-r‘

Ni-ib-mu-wa-ri-ia, Ni-ib-mu-a-ri-ia (Ni-im-mii-u-ri-ia, Mi-im-mu-u-ri-ia, Im-niu-u-ri-an, Nam-mu-ri-ia, Ni-im-nu-u-ri-i[43], mimmareya[44]) - Nibmuria "Lord of truth is Re" - Amenhotep III ... there is also a spelling of the name written in error which was later amended and fixed, nibmudria[45]
mi-in-mu-a-ri-a (Min-mji-a-ri-a, Nim-imi-a-a-ri-ia) - Akkadian version of Egyptian Royal name of king Seti I, mn-mɜˤ.t-rˤw (minmuʔˤɘ'riˤɘ) (1,000 BCE) 'Ra is stable of truth'
Ni-im-ma-ḫe-e - nb-mḥyt - lord of the north winds
Nephthys ** nibatḥáwt [*mjw nibatḥáwt > ~nebtʰḥá (LE) (Peust)] Peust Hiero 2001, 117[46]

Neith ní:yit [nīrit / nīyit (Ray) > néjtʰ (LE) (Peust)] Ray LingAeg 2004, 153; Peust Hiero 2001, 117[47]

Asenat אָסְנַת ('asěnat) - Tiberian ʾåsənaṯ - is a figure in the Book of Genesis (41:45, 41:50-52), an Egyptian woman who Pharaoh gave to Joseph, son of Jacob, to be his wife. Most popular explanation for the Egyptian etymology of Asenat, jw.s-(n)-n(j.)t - she who belongs to Neith or jw.s-n-’t - she belongs to her (fem sg., i.e., to a goddess or to her mother, jw.s-n.t). Such names are well attested in the Middle Kingdom and Hyksos periods (c. 2100-1600 B.C.), K.A. Kitchen, NBD, 94.” Gordon Wenham, “ Genesis 16-50” (1994), p. 397.[48] ... N(j.)t - the goddess Neith in Greek Νηϊθ[49]

נֹא (noʔ) - city

  • cuneiform: ni-u, ni-i; nu ... MnoteMeroitic - jmn-njwtj - Amon of the city Thebes ... Coptic: ⲚⲎ, ⲚⲈ - Thebes
  • njw.t, nw.t, nꜢw(.t), nyꜢ(.t)Demotic - city
  • Generally theoretically vocalized as naawa(a).t presuming a connection with Hebr. naa'aa, naawaa[50]- a name of a city in the bible, as well as having possible effinities with the etymological Hebraic word נוית / נוות (na-yot or Navot), which is thus in connection with the Hebaric root: נוה (na-wah) which has to do with abodes and "being in one"[51]
There's another attested form in later Egyptian which uses metathesis: (cuneiform: a-na) - j(w)n.w - Heliopolis (city) (ⲰⲚ) ... and yet another attested form: n'.t - ⲚⲎ[52]
It is noted in this article[53], that in Coptic njw.t gave the spelling of ⲚⲈ as well as the possesive article nɜj(.w), it is also noteworthy that in some late Demotic papyri njw.t is often written as njɜ/nɜj, nyɜ/nɜy, n'y (nry alternate spelling in Demotic), a word that usually means "time"- Coptic: ⲚⲈⲒ / ⲚⲎⲒ, Greek: όρισμός. προθεσμία ... nrj - specified time, term perhaps Demotic "nɜy" - time.
  • ⲚⲀⲨ, ⲚⲰ, ⲚOⲨ, ⲚO - hour ... nwDemotic
  • ⲚⲀⲨ, ⲚⲈⲨ, ⲚⲰ, ⲚO, ⲚⲀOⲨ - to look, behold ... nw(ɜ) - to see, look
  • ⲚⲀ- this (neutr) of, those of ... nɜ
  • ⲚⲀⲒ - these ... nɜjDemotic
  • ⲚOⲨ= - plural possessive pronoun mine (lit: those of mine) nɜj
  • ⲚOⲨ, ⲚOⲨⲈ, ⲚOⲨⲒ - go, be going to ... n'(y)Demotic - go; n'j - travel in a boat


Potipherah - פּוֹטִיפֶ֫רַע (po-tee feh'-rah), Πετεφρης, Πετρεφης - P3-di-p3-Rʿ- "the one whom god Reʿ has given", i.e., "the gift of god Reʿ"[54]... I feel safe in asserting that A-Phrodite is Pha-Raa-Da-t, "g-ift-ofthe-Sun," or Pha-Raa-Tut. "vestal-of-the-Sim," with A or E prosthetic; and long ago her probable shrine at Bethleham was called E-Phera-ath-ah[55].

Potiphar - פוטיפר - is the shortened form of the Egyptian name "Potiphera" meaning "he whom Ra gave"

Zaphnath-Paaneah - צָפְנַת פַּעְנֵחַ (ṣāpěnat pa'nēaḥ) - its etymology is in doubt, but it seems to be an Egyptian name. The meaning of this name is "Saviour". Modern Egyptologists have tried a great many etymologies for the element "Zaphnath", but have mostly agreed that "paaneah" contains the Egyptian "p-ônḫ", meaning "the life". Georg Steindorff's explanation, differs somewhat; it is "ṣe(d)-p-nute(r)-ef-onḫ" = "the god speaks, [and] he lives". This has become popular, and is philologically possible; however, it does not convey the allusion to Joseph's office or merits which we should expect. The Septuagint and the Hexaplaric versions (respectively, "Ψονθομφανήχ" and "Ψομθομφανήχ") differ so widely from the Hebrew in the first half of the name that it may have been disfigured by copyists. These forms may come from early Coptic ⲡⲥⲟⲧ ⲙⲫⲉⲛⲉϩ psot mpeneh, where the first word is a definite noun derived from the verb ⲥⲱⲧⲉ sōte "to save", from which Jerome likely derived his translation. This interpretation was accepted by early Egyptologist Paul Ernest Jablonski.[56]... Joseph is called ip-ankh[57]

iptiḫ - the god ptḫ - ip-ti-ḫar-ṭi-e-šu (Ptah has given him), written ta-aḫ in taḫ-maįa, and taḫ in taḫ-mašši, and a-taḫ

iptiḫ-ar-țe-šu - (jr.j - ar)
mar-ni-ip-taḫ -

pi-ṭa-ti-ú / pi-ṭa-ti / pi-ṭa-tu / pí-ta-ta / pí-ta-te - bowman - pḏ.tj
pa-ḫa-am-na-ta / pa-ḫa-na-te - pɜ-ḥm-ntr - servant of god
pa-ḫi-i - Παχοις / Παχης - ⲡⲁⲭⲏ - Pꜣ-ꜣḫ.t - The one of the field - name of a man

Ψενσενπεντενταία/Ψενσενπετένταις - Pȝ-šr-n-tȝ-šr.t-pȝ-dỉ - The son of the daughter of He who has been given ...
Ψινμεσε - Pȝ-šr-n-ms - The son of the young
Ψενδεούηρις - Pȝ-šr-n-tȝ-wr.t - The son of the great one or The son of Thoeris
Ψενχνῆς / Ψινχνῆς - The name starting by Ψενχν- seems to represent Ψένχνουμις (or Ψένχνουβις) deriving from Pȝ-šr-n-H̱nm, “The son of Khnum"
Ψεντενοῦς - Pȝ-šr-n-ta-ntr - The son of the one of the god
Ψεντάτχουνις / Ψεντατχο̣ύ̣(νιος) - Pȝ-šr-n-ta-, “The son of the one…”
Ψενταπόντως / Ψενταπόντω(ς) - Pȝ-šr-n-ta-..., “The son of the one of"
Ψενθώμως - Pȝ-šr-ta-, “The son of the one of…”
Ψεντααρπ(άησις) - Pȝ-šr-n-ta-Ḥr-pa-Ỉs.t, “The son of the one of Horos the one of Isis" ... The name Ψεντααρπ( ) could be an abbreviation
Ψενσνεύς/Ψένσνως - Pȝ-sn-sn.w, “The two brothers"
Ψενσμοῦς / Ψένσμουτος - Pȝ-šr-n-ns-Mw.t, “The son of He/She who belongs to Mut”, the anthroponym Ns-Mw.t is in fact attested in hieroglyph and Demotic
Παας πα Ποβυλ - Pȝ-ʿw sȝ Pȝ-mrl
Παα πα Τοτοη - Pa-ỉw sȝ Twtw

pa-ḫu-ra / pi-ḫi-ri - the Syrian (pꜣ ḫr)
paḫita - (pḥty - strength) - min-pa-ḫi-(ri)-ta-rīa
pa-ši-ia-ra - (sr (sjr ?) - magistrate) - ⲤⲒOⲨⲢ - eunuch
pu-ū-a-a-ma - ?
pa-aq-ru-ru - pɜ-qrr - the frog
pa-ri-a-ma-ḫu-u - (ma, me - Eg. prep, in)
pa-'-u - possibly Egyptian - bird
pa'uru / pu'uru - same as above
pa-wa-ra / bi-wa-ri - pɜ-wr
pa-ri-iḫ-na-wa / pa-ri-iḫ-na-a-wa - pꜣ rḫ nwꜣ (he who knows how to see)
pir'u (pi-ir-', pi-ir-'-u, pi-ir-'-u) - pr-'ɜ - pharaoh
pi-pa-ru - the house - pɜ-prw
pi-ša-me-il-ki (pi-sa-mi-is-ki, tu-ša-me-il-ki) - psmtk - Ψαμμήτιχος
pi-ša-an-ḫu-ru - pɜ-šrj-n-ḥr - Ψενύρις - son of Horus
pu-ti-ḫu-u-ru - pɜ-dj-ḥr - gift of Horus
Pa\Pi-hu-ru - ḫr - Syrian - the Syrian
pu-țí-ma-a-ni - might be Egyptian ??
pu-țu-biš-ti - pɜ-dj-bɜst.t - Πετοβάσϧις / Πετοβάστης / Πετουβάστης - gift of Bastat
pu-țu-um-ḫi-e-še - pɜ-dj-mɜ-ḥsɜ - gift of mɜ-ḥsɜ
pu-țu-paiti (pu-țu-pa-i-ti, pu-du-pi-ia-ti) - pɜ-dy - the gift of
pusbiu / puzbiu - door - pɜ-sbɜ
paḫatum - bed - pɜ-h'tj


Ria - the god Ra
Ραμεσσυς, רמססHebrew (Ra'mses or Ra'məse), ria-maš-šešaBabylon - rꜥ-ms-sw - Ra [is] the one who gave birth to him = Ramses ... shishak (is noted in the Bible and is mostly identified to be in the hieroglyphics ššnq, Shoshenq I[58], but there is a theory believed that the Hebraic Bilblical name Šašaq may have been Ramsses) There is a hypocoristicon (shortened-form) or familiar name of Ramesses III found a monumental gateway at Medinet Habu (the mortuary temple of Ramesses III). Here it is in its simplest skeletal form of the letter ‘s’ written twice, with the extra determinative sign of a king on a throne showing that we are reading a royal name. Given that we have the pronunciation of the final semitic (Akkadian) syllable, thanks to the Hittite treaty, we may vocalise this name as Shesha. Ramesses II, who reigned a couple of generations before Ramesses III, had a more complex hypocoristicon- the two strokes (in red) represent the consonant ‘y’; the plant (in green) is combined with the coiled rope (in yellow) to give a syllable of undetermined value – possibly ‘su’ or ‘sa’. But we know from the Hittite version of the name Ramesses that the ending was ‘sha’. The Egyptian letter ‘s’ was often transcribed as ‘sh’ in semitic scripts (including Hebrew) and so we may render the hypocoristicon of Ramesses II as Shysha. Hebrew changed the name to Sh-y-sh-k (Shishak) according to their own renditions of foreign names which often had a pejorative dimension attached to their names if they didn't believe in God[59]

  • rīa-na-ap/pa - r'-nfr
  • ri-ia-ma-nu (r'-m-njwt, the city Thebes)

S / Š[edit]

Šu-ta (Šutti / Šuta) - stḫ
šaru (or šēḫu) - an Akkadian word form el-Ammarna letters that has an identical Egyptian root, tʿw , both words meaning 'breath'[60]
ša-ḫar-tu - s'rt - wool - ⲤOⲢⲦ

su-si-in-qu (šusanqu) / šusanqu - ššnq - Greek: Ζουσακιμ, ΖεσώΥχις , Σεσογχωσις - Sesonkhōsis, ΖεσόΥχις, Σεσωγχις - Sesōnkhis... Tamazight : ⵛⵉⵛⵓⵏⵇ (cicunq) ... The alteration in the vowels [o / u] and [e] is probably due to metathesis[61].
sa - tɜ(y) - to take; in the name sa-ḫpi-māu
si-įa - (Eg. sɜ - son), in ḫar-si-įa-ešu
ša-tep-na-rīa - chosen one of ra
Sa-ḫpi-ma-a-ú - (ma, me - Eg. prep, in)


Ταησις > ⲦⲀⲎⲤⲈ > tɜ-(n.t)-js.t- The one of Isis (f.)
ⲦⲘⲀⲦOⲒ - tɜ-mdɜ(.t) - name of a female
Ταυρις,Ταῦριν (Tahyris) > ⲧⲁϩⲱⲣ - tɜ-(n.t)-ḥr(.w) - the one of Horus, name of a female
Τέως, Τεως, Τάχως, Ταχως - ḏd-ḥr stp.n-inḥr ( Horus says "he will live", chosen of Anhur)- The Pharaoh Teos/Takhos
Aμυρτεος, Aμυρταιος, Aμυρταιου Aμουθαρταιος - Amyrtaeus - He is not attested in hieroglyphic sources, but occurs in demotic. Egyptian Demotic imn-ir-di-s[w] (transcribed as 'Amenirdisu') - “The God Amun has given him”; in Aramaic: 'mwrtys.
ṭaspu / daspu - seat, throne, chair - tɜ-jsb.t
ta-a-wa - tɜ.wj - the two lands

  • ni-ib-ta-a-wa - lord of the two lands

ṯs.t - knot; vertebra; tooth - Akkadian: k̩is-ru[62] - knot (used in spells for nightmares ?)

Θοτευ πα Φιβ̣ - Ḏḥwty-ỉw (sȝ) Pȝ-hb
Θοτσυτομ πα Παυων - Ḏḥwty-sḏm (sȝ) Pa-wn

U / w[edit]

wsr - to be strong ... Greco-Egyptian: Ὀσε-
waš-mu-a-a-ri-a na-aḫ-ta- (mꜢ`t - truth, ws(r) - strong, nḫt.w to be strong)

wr(.t) - great - -ορ- (M), -οηρ-, -ουηρ- (F) Bi-wa-ri, Pa-wa-ra - (Eg., Pawīra) - wr - great
Οσοροηρις - wsjr-wr- Osiris the great, name of a man
S-n-Wsr.t - the man of the powerful one (f.) - Sesostris - Greco-Egyptian - Σεσοωσ-

Úna-mu-nu - wn-jmn
ū-na-mu-nu - wn
un-sar-di ... - wn

ú-și-ḫa-an-ša - (uși - wdɜ) (i-și-ia-e is another spelling of uși)
ur-d(ț)a-ma-ni-e - ?
ušana - ú-ša-na-ḫu-ru
ma-'-pi - in list/inventory (m wpwt) or wa-pi - list, inventory (wpwt) --- this is questionable (the word "ma-'-pi" has been edited in afterwards), as it is found in the below sentence unaltered:

  • pi-še-pa ma-zu-u - might mean: pꜢ sp (n) mḏꜣ.wt - the rest of the letters

ú-e-eḫ / ú-e-e / ú-e-ú - w'w - soldier (ḫ significes Egyptian ' )
Wp.t - messenger Greco-Egyptian: -απις
ú'-pu-ti, ú'-pu-ut - wpw.tyw - messengers
ḫa-a-ma-aš-ši / ḫa-a-maš-ši - ḫ'j m wꜣs.t - who has risen in Thebes - χαμοις / χομοις / χαμμωις / χομμουις
Ugarit - (in group writing) transcribed as 'a/i-ti-ri-ku but translated as: 'á-kú-ri-tá - Cuneiform: u-ga-ri-id


zi-lu-u - Typonym; name of a city ? - ṯꜢrw - ⲤⲈⲖⲎ
zꜢ - Asyut (town) - ⲤⲒOOⲨⲦ - Cuneiform: ši-ia-a-u-tú

Numbers (From Cuenieform)[edit]

Ταπαοῦς - Ta-pa-ʿw - The one of the one of the great one
ši-na (maybe šina'mu) - 2 ... Greco-Egyptian: -σναυ-, -σνευ-, -σνω-
ḫa-am-tu / ḫamtum - 3 ... Greco-Egyptian: -χεμ-, -χεμτ- ... ḫamtu-šu-nu - possibly "two of them" - ḫmtw-sn
i(p)-ti-i / pi-ța-u - 4 ... Greco-Egyptian: Φθου-
țiu - 5 ... Greco-Egyptian: -τι-, -τιου-
išša-u / šu-u(t) - 6
šapḫa - 7
ḫaman - 8
pišid / pišiț - 9
muțu - 10

ḫamtunu - 3rd

țibnu - 91 grammes (dbn - weight of 91 grammes)

Ay /iy/ (M) - king's name
A-a to be read Įa, and probably Aįa in pure Ba.-As. names ... A-a-a (i. e. Aįa), the masc. name
Aįa - name in cuneiform used a lot (especially in compound words) which may have been also the name of Egyptian kings (Canaanite in origin)
Aįa / Aa (to be read Aįa or Įa) - popular male name A-a-u - Au (or Įau) - another popular name (used in compounds: A-u-ba-ni - Au is creator) used in cuneiform; might be of Akkadian, Summerian, or West Semitic origin
Įā / Įau - W. Semitic male name
ịa-a-u - possibly rendition of Įau
Ēa - a diety also used as a name in Old Babylonian

Te-i-e or Te-i-i (Eg tj, ty, tyy) possibly of Mitanni origin; transcribed as Tiy, Tiyi, Tye (Yuya's daughter)
Tu-u-įa - Egyptian name ... twyy, hypocoristicon

Menhet, Menwi and Merti[63] (sometimes also Menhet, Menqi and Merti) - I also gave them the formal Semitic names of Marta, Menukhah and Manahet and the last two do seem to correspond to the nicknames given them in antiquity[64]

A-ma-an-ap-pa/bi - 'imn-(m-)ip(.t), jp.t - the city Luxor
A-ma-an-ḫa-at-bi - 'imn-ḥtp(.w) - Amun is pleased
A-ma-an-ma-ša - Eg(?)
A-ma-an-ap-pa - ỉmn-m-ỉp3.t - αμενωφις - “Amun in Luxor”

yhw3(h) - יהוה‎ (YHWH)- the pronunciation YaHuWaH is a definite possibility[65][66][67]

Names of Undetermined Meaning Believed to be of Egyptian Origin/Influence
aḫ-ri-bi-ta (Eg. or Hit.)
(A-ma)-a-su - Eg, (šar Miṣir - King of Egypt)
bita (perhaps Eg.) - Aḫ-ri-bi-ta, Bi-ta-a
Tu-ur-ba-zu - Eg?
Tur-bi-ḫa-a - Eg?
Um-mat-ḫa - Eg?
La-me-in-tu (Eg.)
Naḫra - possibly an Egyptian god? - Na-aḫ-ra-ma-áš-ši
Pa-i-ti - Egyptian diety in Pu-ṭu-Pa-i-ti or -pi-ia-ti
mḫēšu - Pu-ṭu-um-ḫi-e-še - pɜ-dy - the gift of ____
Mi-ḫu-ni (Eg.?)
Ni-i-u - Man of Ni? , a messenger of Amenophis III (?); common name of an unknown meaning[68]... may reflect Egyptian njɜ, however it's meaning is unknown[69]
Un-šar(sar)-d(ṭ)i - Eg?
Um-mat-ḫa . . . (Eg.)
wi-iš-įa-ri - ?
zinnuk - is recently believed to be an interpretation of a phonetic transcription of an Egyptian phrase into Cuneiform.[70] pi-ṭa-aš ni mu-u-'-da - uncetain, possibly pds n - a chest of (or for); nꜣ bnšw ?

Some Names that May have been used all Over or Dubious[edit]

as-ii - is another rendition of Akkadian a-su-u = physician and was probably an element in peoples' names
ašur (and to a lesser extent ašir) mean Assyria or an Assyrian; ašur seemed to be a popular element in some Akkadian names

in the hieroglyphics there's some names spelled: asj and may have had a similar pronunciation to the above two Akkadian anmes

ti-tii - appears as a name in Akkadian texts, and may have also been a named used in Egypt (in the hiroglyphics this name is spelled tjtj for a female)
ta-ti-i - appears as a name in Akadian texts and may also have been used as a name in Egypt (it is cited as being used majorly in Asia Minor stemming from the word Ta-ti-im)
Ta-e - is cited as a Mitanni abbreviation but also may have been a name used in Egypt

Some Popular Egyptian Names[edit]

ria / riya (?) - must have been a phonetic spelling of r' - sun, in the hieroglyphics there are several spellings indicating this personal name: r, ry, r', rjꜢ, rjꜢy, rjw ... this name was apparently used for both males and females. The nickname "Ri" (possibly equivalent to modern day Li or Asian RI / Li was possibly used)
ḥar / ḥara - Horus was another apparently popular name which could be used by itself
Sabak - Sobek
Isa / Asa - Isis

Some Native Egyptian Names I Hypothesize May Have Been Rendered in The Hieroglyphics with Different Spellings[edit]

Sasha -- Shasha - unisex name
Kara - Kayra - Kiera - Kayla - female name but can also be used for a male
Kaya - Kay - Kae - may be more of a male name
Caleb - there must have been some version of this name which comes from Hebrew, possibly pronounced Kayrib - Kayrab - Karib - Karab - Ka'ab or using an initial ḥ or ḫ sound. It is hypothesized that part of this name might contain the word for "heart" - jb which in Hebrew is " לֵב (lev)"
Sarah - adopted from Hebrew or might be a native name which the Egyptians had that was not at all related to Hebrew.. there were names which appeared to have been pronounced Sar(a), šar(a), could also be Sira - šira, or ša(r), there could have numerous plays on this name... this name is used for males or females
Tia - Tay - Tae - different versions of this name were popular both for males and females ... Tiara and Tayra might have been other versions used too maybe even Taya
Hanan - usually male name, sometimes female

Mira - Mirya or Mara - Marya - is hypothesized that the name Mary (or Hebrew Miriam) may be borrowed from the Egyptian version... it is interesting to note that males in Egypt also utilized this name and the name must have been originally pronounced either Mir(y)a or Mar(y)a in Egypt especially comparing it to the Hebrew version.
Mas(y)a -- Maysa -- Mose -- Moyse -- this may have been the original name borrowed into the modern name Moses/Moises
Maya - was a popular nickname for certain longer names for both males and females .. I wouldn't be surprised if it was further shortened to May - Mae maybe even Mo in later times when stressed a<o.

Palatalized versions of some of the above names may have existed as well, for example: Chia, Chay, Chae, Chara, Chiara, Shia, Shea, Shaeya, Shaya, Shaysha, Shaesha, Tasha, Taysha, Taesha, Chasha, ect ... I would hypothesize a majority of these versions were female names but could have been equally used for males

Nicknames using reduplication like: Titi, Taetae, Taytay, Chichi, Shishi, Sisi, ect appeared to be popular at different times in Ancient Egypt.


Notes On Pronunciation[71][edit]

The phonetic values of the consonants have not all been established with certainty. The emphatics *ṭ and *ṣ (an asterisk indicates a hypothetical form derived from later attestations) seem to have merged with originally nonemphatic stops. Final *-r (at end of syllable) shifted to -ʾ (hamzah, a glottal stop); *li and *lu to ʾi; *ki and *ku to ṯ (pronounced as tch); and *gi and *gu to ḏ (pronounced dj).

In some cases ṯ and ḏ apparently reflect original affricates. Egyptian d and ḏ (both possibly unvoiced) also correspond to Afro-Asiatic emphatics and were so transcribed in Hebrew. Later, *ti and *tu, as well as *di and *du, seem to have been affricated and have variant writings with ṯ and ḏ. The original lateral sounds were lost. The values of g and q are unclear but were transcribed as emphatics in Hebrew. The sibilants s and š are straightforward.

The term wayyiqtol refers to a specific form of the Hebrew verb that serves as the standard narrative tense to relate action that occurred in the past. It is built from the PC form, as may be seen from the inclusion of yiqtol in wayyiqtol, with the addition of the particle wa- (otherwise this is the conjunction ‘and’) and the gemination or lengthening of the pronoun marker (in this case the 3rd masculine singular -y-, thus -yy-). The origin of this form is debated by scholars, but a close parallel with the Egyptian iw sdm-n-f form used to narrate past action has been noted (Young 1953). If this relationship is accepted, then most likely the gemination or lengthening of the pronoun marker is the result of a nun <N> that has assimilated to the following consonant. Note that in Egyptian n serves to mark the past tense, as, for example, in the simple past form sdm-n-f and in the previously cited iw sdm-n-f form.[72]

Furthermore, another feature not as often seen but even more notable is the underdifferentiation of Greek /y/ as /u/ because there was no /y/ in (Coptic-)Egyptian. This feature, however, is largely connected to the early Roman period due to Greek internal phonological developments: quite simply, the vowel quality /y/ was lost in Greek because it eventually raised to /i/. Therefore the nonstandard usage of Greek /y/ as /u/ is somewhat indicative of the first stages of societal bilingualism, before e.g. often used administrative terms estabilised from native language phonologically integrated forms to more faithful productions following the phonology of the second language[73].

In Sahidic, /a/ retracts to [ɑ] adjacent to /h/ ( a glottal fricative). According to Kahle, this also happens before /r/, m/ and /n/ but more rarely. True to form, the standard Ⲉ <e> has been written as Ⲁ <a>. There is also coarticulation involved with nonstandard writings of Ⲏ <ē> instead of Ⲉ <e> (standing for the supralinear stroke, /ə/), the mid vowel quality having raised before /n, m, r/ (nasal, bilabial, coronal); later in Coptic, also before /n, r, ʃ/ (nasal, coronals). The lip constriction when producing labials (here /m/), although considered front consonants, has a tendency to lower the F2 values of close vowels so that the vowel quality is in fact retracted rather than fronted; it becomes even more retracted than adjacent to velars. Likewise, /r/ can retract close vowels; the same seems to go for /ʃ/.

One possible interpretation for the irregularity of stress placement in disyllabic words is that Coptic stress lay on the heavy syllable. It seems that it is possible to deduce that with three-syllable words, Egyptian stress mostly landed on the penultima, a logical position for a stress-timed language. According to Nübling and Schrambke (2004: 284-285), stress-timed languages prefer stress placement in the heavy syllable and e.g. have positionally determined allophones and reductions, exactly as Coptic.

In Hebrew, It is IMPORTANT to remember that a syllable begins with a consonant and cannot begin with a vowel, so that, for example, the two-syllabled word בָּרָד is bā-rād (and cannot be bār-ād)[74]

Apparently, in Coptic, as discussed in Section 2.3.1, the stressed syllable could be open or closed, but the posttonic syllable always had to begin and end in a consonant, i.e. it had a consonant-vowel-consonant sequence; on the other hand, the stressed syllable could end in a vowel or a consonant, so long as it was not a consonant cluster[75]

Coptic not having unstressed /o/ was reflected on the orthographic level; /u/, on the other hand, was one of the possible vowels for unstressed syllables (see Peust 1999: 253 and Gignac 1976: 332 for vowel inventory for Fayyumic), and often seen in place of /o/. Another point to bear in mind is that Coptic neutralised the difference between /o/ and /u/ adjacent to /m/ and /n/. Therefore, besides disliking /o/ in the unstressed syllable, Egyptian also replaced it with /u/ in certain phonemic environments. Hence, /u/ is an allophone of /o:/ in Coptic. Where standard /o/ has been replaced with /u/, the change occurs adjacent to coronals/sonorants, as in <Hermeinou>, <Makrinou> and <Troeilou>.


The Egyptian vowels seem to have been of a more intermediate character than the vowels in many other languages, partaking probably of the nature of that urvocal[76] or fundamental vowel sound into which our English vowels tend to lapse, as in the words, about, assert, bird, oven, but, double. Egyptian signs are constantly written without the vowel signs, the complimentary vowels of each consonant being especially liable to omission. We may suppose that the vowel was in a sort of way regarded as inherent in the preceding consonant, very much as in the case of Sanskrit and Ethiopic, in which every language every consonant is regarded as containing the short ǎ as an inherent vowel, unless another vowel is expressly indicated. In this way it seems to have been assumed that each of the Egyptian letters was followed by its complimentary vowel, only initial and final vowels, and medial vowels when emphatic, being necessarily written down. Thus the alphabetic symbol 𓊃 (s) was originally the the picture of a "bolt", ses, and its primitive syllabic value must have been se. In conjunction with 𓏭 (i) the group 𓊃 𓏭 is read si, the vowel sound of e being elided, so that the symbol 𓊃 has the power of a pure consonant.[77]

Notes On Pronunication II Coarticulation, eta, ect[edit]

To paraphrase everything in the above mentioned article, Old Egyptian /a/ => ⲎCoptic was evidently merging into /i/ adjacent to front consonants (which are palatal, coronal and labial; these include the consonants: s, sʲ, ʃ, ð, θ, ʒ, t, d, r, l, m, n, ʝ, ɟ, j, w, ç, c) and continued to be pronounced /a/ adjacent to back consonants (which are velar, uvular, pharyngeal and glottal/glottal consonants; these include the consonants: k, kʼ, g, x, ɣ, q, qʼ, χ, ʁ, ʀ (uvular trill), ɴ (uvular nasal), ʡ, ħ, ʕ, ʔ, ɦ, h).
Supposing an innate and universal guttural natural class, uvular, pharyngeal, and glottal consonants are predicted to lower or back vowels regardless of whether another guttural consonant occurs in a given language. Of the 628 language varieties (549 Ethnologue languages) in P-base (Mielke 2008), 13 varieties possess at least one uvular, but no glottals or pharyngeals. In 3 of these, high vowels are actively lowered, and in 2 others, uvulars cannot occur with front vowels.[78]

Check Peust pg 264 for syllabic examples

Peust believes the variation to be phonetically conditioned, not related to a phonological opposition. He offers evidence in the form of ca. 200 Late Egyptian words with eta that seems to suggest that /a/ was in fact the ‘default’ phoneme with allophonic variation occurring with /i/ where consonantal environment caused it. For example, Peust says that monosyllabic words were realised as /a/, regardless of them being stressed (therefore eliminating the possibility of <a> representing schwa). Examples are native Coptic words such as ⲘⲎⲒ (mēi), ⲚⲎⲂ (nēb), ϨⲎⲂ hēb and ⲦⲎⲢϤ(tērf). The first three of these have bilabials and nasals in the proximity of the vowel, and these have the ability to lower the quality of a close vowel, as discussed before. The fourth one is again related to the unclear picture of the effect of liquids on vowels in Coptic; presumably they mostly follow the phonemic surroundings, which in this case do not give cause to retract vowel quality, unless the labial /f/ at the very end of the word is sufficient reason for anticipatory coarticulation.

According to Peust, also polysyllabic native Coptic words with word-final eta usually tend to have [a]; again, the example words have consonantal surroundings also seen capable of retracting close vowel quality related to the confusion of /i, e/; /s/, liquids, and nasals. On the other hand, Greek loanwords display variation between /i/ and /a/ without any clear symmetry. Interestingly, the treatment of non-final eta is divided between native Coptic words and Greek loanwords in the way that the Coptic ones are pronounced with [a] and Greek ones mostly with [i]. In some cases, variation seems to be targeted for vowel dissimilation in order to better perceive distinct vowel qualities; therefore, eta might have received the phonetic value of [a] if there was an /i/ in the previous syllable. This principle seems to be behind some of the wild variation in Greek loanwords: for example in ⲈⲔⲔⲖⲎⲤⲒⲀ (ekklēsia) eta was sometimes pronounced as [a] and sometimes as [i] because of the apparently Coptic desire to create dissimilative distinction between the phonemes, and on the other hand sometimes being written faithfully to its contemporary Greek pronunciation. It seems evident that because the period of Peust’s example material is a late one, Greek vowel raising was finalised and eta was in Greek pronounced [i]. Peust believes that it might be possible that eta was originally pronounced [i] in unstressed syllables and [a] in stressed ones (Peust 1999: 229-230). This seems like a reasonable opinion based on the fact that /i/ is more likely to preserve its distinctive quality in unstressed syllables, whereas /a/ might get centralised to schwa. However, following Peust’s examples of the display of eta in loanwords (from Coptic and Greek) and place names in Modern Arabic (Peust 1999: 230), it seems most likely that coarticulation was the main motive for this variation: eta is most faithfully represented with near consonants that typically raise vowel value in Arabic, and likewise with <a> adjacent to e.g. /r/ that normally retracts vowel quality in Modern Standard Arabic.[79]

In Greek loanwords in Egyptian/Coptic, coronal consonants tend to cause fronting (and raising) of vowels (when discussing the fronting effect of coronal consonants on vowels, vowel raising is included in the discussion as a similar phenomenon as that of fronting (e.g. Flemming 2003). Greek was undergoing a process of vowel fronting at the time. This was probably caused by coronal consonants (Teodorsson 1974: 252; Gignac 1976: 330). Horrocks (2010: 168) speculates this to be connected to a stressless position i.e. difficulty of distinctive articulation, and grammatical factors such as the falling together of aorist and perfect, rather than a phonetic environment. Coronal consonants are the largest consonant group so fronting occurring adjacent to them is also a statistical phenomenon. Behind this is the tendency of consonant quality affecting the quality of the vowels, a phenomenon known to belong to Coptic from the numerous nonstandard spellings of Greek loanwords in Coptic. In addition to this, in some words bilabials are causing the same phenomenon, as are some groupings of vowels, together forming another subgroup ‘sonorants’, also with a tendency to cause fronting of adjacent vowels.

strypʰēs from stropʰēs (στροφη̃ς) could be a product of coarticulation regarding an anticipatory raising effect of the bilabial /pʰ/ coming after the vowel, with the <y> probably representing /u/. Bilabials can have the tendency to raise the open vowels’ quality; in Greek, ο <o> was [o] i.e. close-mid, but in Coptic, o <o> was [ɔ] i.e. open-mid. If we approach the subject from the point of view of a second language user, the quality of omikron here was probably open-mid, followed by the bilabial /pʰ/. The nonstandard vowel is here also following a cluster of coronal consonants /s, t, r/, and although /r/ seems to generally centralise vowel quality in Coptic usage of Greek loanwords (Dahlgren and Leiwo (in prep.)), maybe this cluster as a whole was enough to contribute to the raising of the vowel quality (raising, rather than fronting, because it must be kept in mind that it was unlikely that <y> represented /y/, but probably the grapheme stood for /u/).

This appeared to also be the vocalic struggle of earlier Egyptian as can be seen in Akkadian cueniform transcriptions of Egyptian words where there also appeared to be a /u/ adjacent to front consonants, especially nasals, this /u/ merger was still productive in Coptic, although at times unpredictable, as it was also in Akkadian transcriptions of Egyptian words... whereas, in the Late New Kingdom, after Ramses II, around 1200 BCE, stressed /ˈaː/ changes to stressed /ˈoː/; this change causes a new vocalic reorganization added on top of the previous a~i confusion. In Coptic, stressed /o/ appeared to favor single standing absolute forms (to an almost equal but substantially lesser extent also construct & pronominal forms), and it is interesting to note, unlike the other vowels, /o/ is never used in an unstressed position. On the other hand, a stressed Ⲏ favored adaptive construct forms (which were also variously used in absolute form) as well as the 2-lit qualitative, and Ⲏ was also used in unstressed positions.

Extra notes I did for syllabic from pronunciation section under syllabic... A similar approach can be seen with cuneiform renditions of compounded Egyptian words, i.e., Ni-ib-mu-wa-ri-ia where mꜢꜤ.t exhibits /u/, nb and rꜤ show /i/ and the /a/ in mu-wa is possibly a reduced schwa vowel. In this instance, Coptic has ⲘⲎ (maah or mee) and Greek has instances of Μα in unstressed position. No other Coptic or hieroglyphic examples expose /u/ in this word. Another similar approach in Cuneiform is: ri-ia-ma-nu (r'-m-njwt, the city Thebes), here ma is possibly in unstressed position exposing a schwa-like vowel coinciding with another unstressed word nu thus having the stressed word ri-a affecting the outcome of the rest of the word. Though Cuneiform also shows us that this coarticulated pattern was very unpredictable, as we have some renditions which break this rule: na-ap-ḫu-ru-ri-ia (nfr-ḫprw-r‘) which is another word exposing a random /u/, although this /u/ may be an indirect indication of an unstressed vowel, as the Greek version shows Νεφερχερης, with r‘ once again in stressed position.

Note on MꜢꜢ (may not be true)[edit]

Note - There is a tendency for < n > to replace < Ꜣ > in the hieroglyphics in some roots. It is unclear if at times < n > represented /n/ or /l/ because < n > could also be used in lieu of /l/; and /r/ and /l/ were also interchanged orthographically as well as phonetically. In such case the verb MꜢꜢ - to see was written MꜢn.f - he sees in some pronominal forms. MꜢꜢ appears to come from the pro-Afro-asiatic root mVrVʔ[80] which indirectly shows that some sort of metathesis and assimilation occurred with irregular omission of < r > in the proximity of /ʔ/[81]. With this being said, it is my hypothesis that this sequence would have been initially pronounced mǎʁ-ləf possibly merging into ʔ-ləf => mꜢn.f - he sees.[82]. There is also another verb with a similar hieroglyphic spelling which follows an identical scheme in Coptic: ⲘⲈ[83] - love = ⲘⲈⲢⲈ- , ⲘⲈⲢⲒⲦ=.
There are also many times when /r/, /l/ and < j > replace < Ꜣ > indirectly showing us that < Ꜣ > was merely a graphical substitution for those weak consonants when not fully enunciated in a word during the intermediate stages of the Egyptian language.

R-Stressed Syllables (Using the a-Vowel Theory)[edit]

In a stressed /r/-syllable, the vowel went through many instabilities, i.e.,

Syllable r + ɜ and normal syllables:
* ⲢO (rɜ) - goose [and mouth which also has a ⲢⲀS variation and ⲢⲈ-, ⲢⲰ= )
Notice ⲦO / ⲦⲰ (tɜ) - land, follows a similar pattern (pl. ⲦOOⲨ, construct is ⲦⲈ-, ⲦⲀ-) but
ⲦⲎ / ⲦⲎⲒ (dɜt, dwɜtDem) - underworld
ⲈⲦⲎϢⲒ / ⲈⲦⲈϢⲒ (dšr.t) - crane; mildew ... ⲦⲰⲢϢ (with metathesis) (dšr) - to be red; there is another form ⲦⲎⲢϢ seen in Crumm's dictionary used in a name... ⲦⲢⲰϢ - flamingo ... ⲦⲢOϢ - (intransitive) be red; ⲦOⲢϢqual
* ⲢⲰⲦ (rwd) - grow
* (Ⲉ)ⲘⲢⲰϨⲈS (mrḫt) - a vessel.
Syllable r + ꜥ :
* ⲢⲎSBO (ⲢⲈFO, Ⲣ(Ⲉ)ⲒA, ⲢⲈ-) [rꜥ] - sun
ⲈⲢⲎⲨ (plural of iry) - fellow, ⲎⲢ is the singular version, there is a plural ⲎⲢⲎⲨ
* (Ϩ)ⲀⲢⲎⲨ (ꜥrw) - perhaps (contains metathesis)
* ⲢⲀⲒⲦⲈ (ryṱtDem) - kindred; kingship, shows how the words may have otherwise may have looked if < ꜥ > was not reduced, although it is clear that this word is a direct loan from another language.
The following words also show the process:
* ⲘⲈ, ⲘⲈⲈ, ⲘⲎ, ⲘⲎⲈ, ⲘⲎⲒ (from mɜꜥ.t) - fem noun truth; justice ... in stressed position: ⲢⲘⲘⲘⲈ, ⲢⲘⲘⲘⲈⲒ - honest/true person... ⲘⲎⲦ - archaic word used in magic; true .... M3't (maat), 'justice', allowing a word play with the next line m3'w[84], 'fair wind', as noted in Lichtheim, Miriam Ancient Egyptian Literature: A Book of Readings, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973, I, p183, endnote 10.[85]
* ⲘⲈⲈⲢⲈ, ⲘⲈⲢⲈ, ⲘⲎⲎⲢⲈ (mtr) - midday, here the < t > grew silent and caused a reduction similar to < ꜥ > and thus could be grouped in this category ... ⲠⲰⲰⲢⲈS / ⲠOⲨⲢⲈA ~ ⲠⲈⲢⲈ-, ΦⲈⲢ-, ⲠOOⲢ= (ptr) - dreamCopt from ptrMEG - see ~ prjDem - dream, shows the same progression.
* ⲘⲎ (ⲘⲒ in the word ϨⲀⲖⲘⲒ) (mwytMEg - dampness, urine ~ mɜtDem) - urine
* ⲘⲈ, ⲘⲈⲒ, ⲘⲈⲒⲈ, ⲘⲎⲒ, ⲘⲒ, ⲘⲀⲈⲒⲈ (from mr(y) - to love; construct forms show: ⲘⲈⲢⲈ-, ⲘⲢⲢⲈ-, ⲘⲈⲚⲢⲈ- ... other forms; ⲘⲀⲒ- (participle) loving... ⲘⲈⲢⲒⲦ, ⲘⲈⲢⲢⲒⲦ, ⲘⲢⲢⲈⲒⲦ, ⲘⲈⲚⲢⲒⲦ - beloved
* ⲘⲎⲢ, ⲘⲈⲢ (mrw) - opposite shore; shore, which is also connected to ⲘⲢⲰ / ⲈⲘⲂⲢⲰ / ⲈⲘⲠⲢⲰ (mryt - river shore) - harbor.. Note: this word in the hieroglyphics is usually spelled out with a bilateral < mr >, the < mr > bilateral is associated with a lot of words containing ⲘⲈⲢ / ⲘⲈ / ⲘⲢ in Coptic for example: mr(y) - to love, ⲘⲢⲒⲤS / ⲈⲘⲂⲢⲒⲤ (mrsw) - a type of wine; new wine and ⲈⲘⲎⲢⲈ / ⲀⲘⲎⲒⲢⲈ (from mrj) - canal / inundation / another name for Egypt
In contrast to those syllables not containing < ꜥ or ɜ >:
* ⲘⲀⲨ, ⲘⲀⲀⲨ, ⲘO, ⲘOⲨ - (mwt) mother (there's also: ⲘⲈⲈⲨ, ⲘⲈOⲨ, ⲘⲎOⲨ, dialectal in nature)
* ⲈⲘOⲨ, ⲀⲘOⲨ (myt ~ mjwt ~ jmj) - cat
* ⲘOOⲨ, ⲘOⲨ, ⲘⲀⲨ, ⲘⲀOⲨ, ⲘⲰOⲨ (mw) - water
* ⲘOⲨ, ⲘⲀⲨⲦ (mt, mwt) - to die
* ⲘOⲨⲒ, ⲘOⲨⲈⲒ (mɜj) - lion, shows an interesting feature, it looks like this word is spelled out in a full Middle Egyptian form, for example: ma (raised to mu) + ɜ (which is not shown in Coptic but still implied) + i => ⲘOⲨⲈⲒ ... this is somewhat how mɜꜥ.t was pronounced in Cuneiform renditions of Egyptian names: Ni-ib-mu-wa-ri-ia
* ⲘOⲨⲒ, ⲘOⲨOⲨⲒ (mɜ(y)) - new, follows the same pattern as ⲘOⲨⲒ - lion
* ⲘOⲨⲢ (mr) - to bind, to tie ... ⲘⲢ-, ⲘⲈⲢ-, ⲘⲀⲢ- (also participle), ⲘOⲢ=, ⲘⲎⲢ (qualitative)... other forms of this root:
ⲘⲀⲢ, ⲘⲀⲀⲢ - participle used as a noun; bundle ... ⲘⲀⲒⲢⲈ, ⲘⲈⲢⲈ, ⲘⲎⲢⲈ, ⲘⲎⲒⲢⲈ - also a noun, bundle ... ⲘⲢⲢⲈ - a nisba used as a noun; chain, bond, joint
* ⲘOⲢⲦ / ⲘⲀⲢⲦ - beard, is generally believed to be re-borrowed into Egyptian through Berber influence and is sometimes considered a separate root from the Egyptian root mrt - chin which was also believed to be loaned into Berber where it was then re-borrowed into Egyptian.
Syllable ꜥ + r on the other hand displays a somewhat regular development:
* ⲰⲢ(Ⲉ)Ⲃ, ⲰⲢϤ (ꜥrfMEg ~ ɜrfDem) - envelop, tie up, enclose (construct forms: ⲀⲢϤ-, OⲢϤ-)
* ⲰⲢⲔ(Ⲉ) (ꜥrq) - to swear (pronominal forms: ⲰⲢⲔ=, OⲢⲔ= )
* ⲠⲎⲢⲈ (pɜrtME, pꜥrt) - quail, appears like some kind of loan word
Syllable r + r:
It is mostly Ⲱ / O(O) which appears to be the original vocalization:
* ⲀⲖⲔⲀⲢOOⲢ - from Arabic loan word
But OⲨCopt is often found and could be rather regarded as a secondary development:
* ⲔⲢOⲨⲢ - to be quiet, content
There are also a few cases of < rir > or < Cir >:
ϨⲒⲢ, ϨⲈⲒⲢS (h(ɜ)r(w)LEg, hr(y)Dem) - street/road, which comes from a direct Semitic loan ... ϬⲂⲒⲢ, ϬⲂOⲨⲢ, ϨⲂOⲨⲢ (gbyr) - east (from Demotic onwards) shows a similar spelling distribution as ϨⲒⲢ also appearing as a loan word.
ⲦⲢⲒⲢ (t(j)rr, ṱrryDem) - oven (fem) ... but, ⲦⲢOⲨⲢ (trr - to run a race) (mistankingly ⲦⲔOⲨⲢ in Crumm's dictionary) - speed
ⲢⲒⲢ (ⲢⲎⲖS) which comes from hieroglyphic ( rrj ~ ryrDem) which appears to follow an irregular analytical grammatical metathesis of a nisba -- the same concept can be observed in ⲢⲎⲤ (rsy ~ rsDem) - southern; this analytical leveling appears to be the ancestor of the coptic 2-rad Qualitative form. In affect, in this type of stressed syllable in Egyptian, C + r, the vowels Ⲱ / O ~ Ⲁ usually take the dominant role as the vowel:
* ϨⲰⲢ - Horus
* ϨⲰⲢ - squeeze (out milk)
* ϨⲰⲢⲀ - unknown meaning ??
* ϨⲰⲢⲂ - be broken
* ϨⲰⲢⲠ - be wet
* ⲢOⲘⲠⲈ / ⲢⲀⲘⲠⲈ- year
* ⲢⲀⲚ / ⲢⲒⲚS / ⲢⲈⲚAASFO - name, shows an interesting distribution, the vowel inconsistencies appear to be unstable between the liquids r + n -- ⲘⲈⲢⲀⲚB / ⲘⲎⲢⲀⲚB (mrynt) - trough; tank, is another example but here it loos like -ⲢⲀⲚ is in an unstressed syllable at least in the Coptic rendition ... where as in the example above (ⲢOⲘⲠⲈ - year), focus was drawn on the adjacent consonants in a 4-rad combination unit -npe < -mpe from rnptMEg ~ ⲢOⲘⲠⲈCopt. The syllable r + m is more stable appearing as ⲢⲰⲘ or ⲢOⲘ / ⲢⲀⲘ in most Egyptian words, i.e., ⲢⲰⲘⲈ - fish, ⲢOⲘⲤⲒⲚ - a plant, ⲢⲀⲘⲤ (rmsDem from Greek) - a kind of boat/ship
There are several cases of an irregular omission of a final /r/ reduction in a stressed syllable:
* Ⲉ / Ⲁ, ⲈⲢO= or ⲈⲢⲰ=, ⲀⲢO= or ⲀⲢⲰ= (for hieroglyphic (j)r- prep to) shows the weak vowel j in initial position (which possibly signaled a vowel, similar to ⲎⲤⲈ (jst) - Isis ~ also note ⲈⲒⲤ- / ⲈⲤ- / ⲒⲤ- (js) - behold, used mostly as a prefix -- ⲀⲤ / ⲀⲀⲤ / ⲈⲤ (js) - old, appears to be a loan word ... and Ⲉ / Ⲁ - jw ~ Ⲉ- before verbs and ⲈⲢⲈ- / Ⲁ- before nominal subject) causing a reduction but showing the full form in the construct/pronominal states (ⲈⲢO=, ⲈⲢⲰ=, ⲀⲢO=, ⲀⲢⲰ=). The same concept can be seen in hieroglyphic ꜥɜj - 'to be big' which shows a Coptic construct form of O / Ⲁ - what is interesting here is the full form does show in the infinitive ⲀⲒⲀⲒ / ⲀⲒⲈⲨⲈ - to increase. Also notice jr in unstressed position with r + C in stressed position: ⲈⲢⲰⲦⲈ / ⲀⲢⲰⲦⲈ (jrtt) - milk
* ⲈⲒⲢⲈ, ⲒⲢⲈ, ⲢⲀ (jr(j)) - to make ... Ⲣ-, ⲈⲢ-, ⲀⲀ=, ⲈⲈ=, ⲈⲀ=, ⲀⲒ=, ⲈⲒ=, ⲈⲒⲀⲦ=, ⲈⲈⲦ=, ⲈⲈⲒⲦ=, ⲈⲒⲦ=, ⲀⲒⲦ=, (Qualitative: O, OⲈⲒ, OⲒ, ⲀⲒ, ⲈⲒ, Ⲉ), shows an extremely high degree of variations with or without omission of /r/.
* ⲘⲈ, ⲘⲈⲒ, ⲘⲈⲒⲈ, ⲘⲎⲒ, ⲘⲒ, ⲘⲀⲈⲒⲈ (from mr(y) - to love; construct forms show: ⲘⲈⲢⲈ-, ⲘⲢⲢⲈ-, ⲘⲈⲚⲢⲈ- ... other forms; ⲘⲀⲒ- (participle) loving... ⲘⲈⲢⲒⲦ, ⲘⲈⲢⲢⲒⲦ, ⲘⲢⲢⲈⲒⲦ, ⲘⲈⲚⲢⲒⲦ - beloved
* ⲠⲈⲒⲢⲈ, ⲠⲒⲢⲈ, ⲠⲢⲢⲈ, ⲠⲢⲢⲒⲈ, ⲠⲢⲢⲈⲒⲈ, ⲠOⲢⲈQualitative (prj - to come forth) - come forth of light, blossom; an interesting notation with this infinitival root in Coptic is that it shows almost an identical distribution as the construct/pronominal forms of the Coptic verb ⲘⲈ - to love (ⲘⲈⲢⲈ-, ⲘⲢⲢⲈ-, ⲘⲈⲚⲢⲈ-) which at the least shows that ⲘⲈcoptic - love, is an innovative reductive adaptation of a different original hieroglyphic form ... other forms of this root: ⲠⲢⲰ / ⲠⲢOⲨ (prt) - winter (lit the coming forth of vegetation) ... -ⲠⲰⲢ / ⲠⲈⲢ- (pr) - house, is some times associated with this root.

  • Stressed syllables containing an l / Ⲗ appear to be the most fluid, the most flexible and the most innovative of any Egyptian letter, in turn it is difficult to postulate a formula- this is because a majority of these words have been directly borrowed into Egyptian from another source language, although there are some observances which can be had:
< l > has a tendency of exposing original hieroglyphic < ɜ > and < ꜥ > (with the exception of ⲖⲀ / ⲖⲈF (lꜥ) - slander):
* ⲖⲀⲒⲚ (lɜyn / lyn) - steel
* ⲖⲈϨ (ɜhw) - pain

How to Interpret Hieroglyphic w/j Endings[edit]

𓇋 (𓇌) - reed

It is mostly used as a nisba morpheme, in which case takes on the enunciation of /i or ī/ after a consonant ot /j/ after a vowel
But could sometimes also be used as the Resultative ending (infamously known as the Stative 3rd person pronoun) especially in Old Egyptian
In this case the stative 3SG.M ending would have been an indiscriminated vowel (probably a schwa in an unstressed position, if it was stressed probably an /a/)
The 3PL.M form could also use 𓇋, in which case it takes on the quantity of /u/ even in an unstressed position
Something to note here, is that when 𓇋 was used in the stative forms, it most likely represented a vocalic place marker (a majority of the time 𓅱 was used, sometimes 𓇋, 𓇌 or even 𓏭, 𓏮 indicating a type of instability there, vowels in Coptic are just as unstable in final position especially throughout the dialects), as is also evidenced in Coptic where this vowel completely disappeared in the stative 3rd person forms. This indirectly shows that there appears to be no indication of the ending representing any type of consonantal nature especially in accordance with the few examples of Coptic Qualitative 3Pl.M forms showing a sort of diphthongization or analytical leveling with the ending < OⲨ > => ϢOⲨⲰOⲨ - dried up.
There is also cases where 𓇋 was used to indicate the Egyptological termed participle forms (a majority of the time 𓅱 was used), there may be a direct connection between the participle forms and the stative as both appeared to be used as the 'resulted state of a verb' and both endings almost entirely vanished at the time of the Coptic phase of the language.

.. I by no means pretend, however, that the Hebrews and Egyptians spoke the precisely the same language. I only contend that their dialects were cognate. I think that the roots, for the greater part, might have been the same, while the articles, pronouns and the inflections in nouns and verbs might have been different. Let your correspondent reconsider what he himself has said concerning the word ⲈϨOOⲨ - day (In Sahidic: ϨOOⲨ) and compare this word with the Hebrew הוה[86], which with the yod appellative becomes יהוה (YHWH - Jehovah).[87] ...

Hebrew י‎(Yud) When prefixed to a verb stem, indicates third person, future tense. (Number and gender depend on suffixes.) He will or They will.[88]

  • יֺאמַר‎ yomar (he will say)
  • יֺאמְרוּ‎ yomru (they will say)

Hebrew י‎(Yud) is also used in the beginning of God's name as well as several other names where without the י‎(Yud) there are separate roots:

  • יַעֲקֹב (Yaʿqob, Yaʿaqov, Yaʿăqōḇ) - Jacob, one theory of the name's origins, claim that it is in fact derived from a hypothetical name like יַעֲקֹבְאֵל (Ya'aqov'el) meaning "may God protect".
  • יִשְׂרָאֵל (Yiśrāʾēl; "Triumphant with God", "who prevails with God") - Israel
  • יהודים‎ (Yehudim) plural of יהודי‎ (Yehudi) - Jews
  • יְשֻׁרוּן (Yeshurun) is a poetic name for Israel used in the Hebrew Bible. It is generally thought to be derived from a root word meaning upright, just or straight, but may have been derived from שׁור, shur, to see, or may be a diminutive form of the word Israel.

𓅱 - quail (𓏲 is also used in lieu of 𓅱)

It is used a plural marker, /w/ after a vowel or /u/ after a consonant. Coptic evidence indicates complete irregularity with pluralized words with eventual broken plurals exposing themselves in Coptic. Broken plurals do not appear to be acknowledged within the spelling of the hieroglyphics which indicates that broken plurals could have been more of an internal linguistic innovation to simplify enunciation and to not cause extreme repetitivity.
It is also used as the Resultative ending in the 3SG.M and 3PL.M forms of the stative as well as the Egyptological termed participle forms.

In Hebrew, ו‎ (Vav), can be used as a conjunctive prefix, meaning 'and, but' - Vav-conjunctive can make the "v" sound (/v/) or the "u" sound (/u/). If it is used with other prefixes, this is always the first prefix.

  • וְהוּא‎ v'hu (and he)
  • וּבַיוֹם‎ uvayom (and on the day)

In Hebrew, ו‎ (Vav (letter)) changes past tense to future tense and vice versa. Used mostly in Biblical Hebrew as vav-consecutive (compare vav-conjunctive). Pronounced "va" when changing future tense to past tense. Usually pronounced "v'" or "u" when changing past tense to future tense.

  • וַיֹּאמֶר‎ vayomer (he said) (compare יֺאמַר‎ yomar -he will say)
  • וְאָהַבְתָּ‎ veahavta (you shall love) (compare ahavta -you loved)

However, it is to be noted, that the two above uses in Hebrew are better compared to 𓍘𓅱 (jw) in Egyptian.

𓍘, 𓍘𓇋

is used as the resultative endings of 2SG.F (-ti) and 2SG.M (-ta)
Inside personal pronoun (-tā)
And the passive morpheme which most scholars are uncertain about it's enunciation
The sound combination of -tw or -tj is also shown in the feminine dual and to an extent with the feminine demonstrative pronoun

𓏏𓏮 - (-tī) Nisba M.SG. from nouns ult.-t

𓏏𓅱, 𓏏𓏲 (tVw)

Nisba M.PL. from ouns ult.-t
Passive morpheme


Nisba M.PL. from nouns ult.-t
inside resultative ending 2PL (-tū)

The way that I would fully understand Egyptian root forms is, we have a root, i.e., sdm (sadam) which can thus have suffixes added to it to form different syntactical form where stress accent varies according to the speaker and/or the position of the word in relation to another in a sentence, i.e.,

sadam + 𓅱 is most likely going to produce => sǎdma/sadǎma (Resultative Singular Masc) or sadǎme/sadmǎw (Plural)
sadam + 𓍘 is most likely going to produce => sadmǐ (Nisba and verb in the 1st person) with alternative accent variations, i.e., sǎdmi
sadam + t is most likely going to produce => sadǎmat (Relative; the /t/ may have been still pronounced in this form), sadǎmtu (Passive), sadǎmti (Fem Stative), ect...

It appears, to me, that Egyptian did not favor suffixes or prefixes, mainly due to a limited number of recognizable vocalic influxes (this makes sense in why Egyptian used a consonantal based orthography for so many years), instead they favored bounded construction forms which later, in Coptic, was the basis of the verbal paradigm, but this did start rather early on, which is overlooked by most scholars, for example in the cases of the auxiliary verbs being used -jn, -kɜt, ect and the conjunctival/prepositional constructions with not only the infinitive but other roots.

𓅱 𓍘 𓏭 𓇋 𓇌 𓏏 𓏲 𓏮 𓅂

Origins of Ancient Egyptians[edit]

Publishing its findings in Nature Communications, the study concluded that preserved remains found in Abusir-el Meleq, Middle Egypt, were closest genetic relatives of Neolithic and Bronze Age populations from the Near East, Anatolia and Eastern Mediterranean Europeans. Krause hypothesizes that ancient Northern Egypt would be much the same, if not more, linked to the Near East. Ancient Southern Egypt might be a different matter, however, where populations lived closer to Nubia, home of the "Black Pharaohs" in what is now Sudan[89].

The Passive -tw[edit]

In terms of voice, Late Egyptian had a vast array of passives, mostly inherited from earlier Egyptian (see the list in Loprieno 1995, 97). The only major innovation is the use of an indefinite pronoun tw "one" to express passive voice: "one hears X = X is heard". In Demotic and Coptic, the third person plural pronoun is used instead of an indefinite pronoun.[90]

Instances were also adduced, in which an ideagraphic character, or a consonant, appeared as an expletive in a pure Egyptian word; and also, an instance of two homophonous letters, which took different expletives, being interchanged, namely Tu and Ta, as formatives of the past participle, both of which, it was affirmed, should be read without the final vowel.[91]

Thus, the OEg. passive element -tw- ( ~ / < -tj-) of the sdm-tw=f pattern (and its extended varieties) might be identical with Sem. -t- refl. pass. pre-/infix, Brb. -ət suffix of intr. and pass. verbs, PCu.-Om -t suffix of refl., med., pass. verbs, tV- refl. prefix = t- ~ -t refl.-pass. affix, CCh: Hitkala t refl. affix.[92]

Interesting etymologies[edit]

sn - brother (Hurian- šen(n) / šena)[93]
jtf - father; originally jtj, pronounced perhaps at(t)ai > yat > ⲈⲒⲰⲦⲈ (Hurian- att / attai / attani, Summerian- ad(d)a, Antolian: atti-s)[94]... It is very interesting to notice atta(i)=iffә “my father” (absolutive)
sꜢ - son (Hurian - ša, ša-la - daughter, Elam. ša-k - son)[95]

Hurian - bù - not

There is an Egypto-Semitic uniconsonantal word for "man", it is written s in Egyptian, in Old Akkadian it is used as the relative pronoun "who, which", fully inflected (nom. šu, gen. ši, acc. ša). Later, only ša is used regardless of case. In archaic Hebrew, ša appears sporadically. From late Biblical Hebrew and in all subsequent stages down to the present, it appears as še "who, which".[96]

There is one pair of words that raises fundamental questions to be pondered though not definitively answered now. The nouns hrd 'child' and ms 'son, child' have long been known only from Egyptian. Then both turned up in Ugaritic of the Late Bronze Age, and now in Eblaite of the Early Bronze Age. Ebla had connections with Egypt, alabaster vessels with the names of Chefren (Fourth Dynasty) and Pepi I (Sixth Dynasty) have been found at Ebla in the archeological stratum that yielded the Archives. The meaning of Eblaite ḫar-da-du (ḫardātu) in the sense of "young women" is fixed by context, the same form with the same sense occurs in Old Kingdom Egypt. The situation with Eblaite maš (Egyptian ms) is more complex and tantalizing. It is common in all periods of Egyptian from start to finish. But it also occurs in Sumerian (más) with the meaning of a "kid, young goat". Words for young animals are often applied to children.[97]

hr - under, is a word I couldn't find much etymologies on until recently... Proto-AA root - gr, qr - under, down... Cushitic languages have a similar preposition- kil, kwira, kol, giri, gal, ect., and there are instances of other words with ḫ, for example ḫāli - all these words mean "under"[98]. What is interesting is that the hieroglyphic Egyptian version had some sort of indirect palatalization going on and the Coptic version ultimately utilized either Ϩ or Ⳉ. In older words it appeared that any word utilizing front vowels was attached to the consonant and then the typical vowel patterns of Egyptian were inserted throughout the history of Egyptian, so in the case of this word we were probably dealing with a word similar to an unvoiced guttural g-ish sound with palatalization: gyar, which was quickly pronounced as a guttural "h" sound or even "sh" sound at a very early period since these sounds were the closest to a foreign "gi" sound (in other instances the 'tch' or 'dj' sound were also used specifically with Semitic cognates). This type of process may have also happened with the word "woman" - ḥ(j)m.t which is hypothesized to have originated from the Sumerian word "gêmû" - woman.

Notes on Coptic Ⲏ[99][edit]

There is a belief (made newly available by Emile Maher Ishak, now Fr. Shenouda Maher Ishak of Rochester, New York), that Coptic Ⲏ was originally pronounced like a long ā, the same was said of ⲈCopt = short ǎ, there is even instances of O / Ⲱ = Ⲁ in Coptic words obviously proving the Canaanite vowel shift. There is some interesting notes to take away from this theory:

  • More than anything, in my opinion, these instances of several people from years passed, stating in documents, that Coptic Ⲁ-Ⲉ-Ⲏ => ā/ǎ, is a mere indication of word of mouth passed from generation to generation, implying that Egyptian originally utilized /a/ in a majority of the stressed syllable positions, this was probably to help neutralize confusion of how a word was supposed to be pronounced especially with the common-folk who did not know how to write.
  • In modern Coptic, there is no long ā sound currently acknowledged, the sound did exist in ancient Egyptian as shown in Cuneiform.
  • There were still many instances in words where ⲎCoptic may have been pronounced /ē/ or /ī ~ ee/ or it could have also indicated the consonant nature of < j / y > in stressed position, i.e.:
ⲎⲤⲈ (Isis) - has a bivalent pronunciation as aa-suh / ay-suh or ee-suh / eh-suh, which is all indirectly noted in this article[100].
  • This has caused a great deal of confusion when it comes to the Coptic letter < Ⲏ > mainly because the authenticity of the sound was contaminated by the foreign influences of Greek BCE and then Islamic conquests right at the turn of the century in Egypt... but through word of mouth we do get an insight on the ancient pronunciation of < Ⲏ > => ā. Here is yet another example of the sound of < Ⲏ >, an excerpt taken from a full study of Coptic sounds:
... By this indication, given that the vowel quantity was already lost, /e/ could also have been depicted with η <ē>, implying that the pronunciation of eta might have been somewhat lower in Egyptian Greek than in standard Greek, in Egypt sometimes pronounced close to [a]; this is in fact correct[101] ...

A good example of this theory can also be seen even within the Coptic dialects, in. e.:

ⲤⲀⲈⲒⲚS ~ ⲤⲎⲒⲚⲒBF - physician
Historical Features of Coptic Ⲏ[edit]

How is this letter used in Egyptian? It does raise some implications on its initial usage:

  • There's a group of words which fluctuates between /i/ and /e/, mostly in an unstressed syllable and very often adjacent to a coronal consonant. With a superficial look this group could be completely overlooked and be merely seen as evidence of Greek vowel raising. It is, however, also possible for some of these forms to have, in part, been developed out of the bivalency of Coptic eta[102].
Variation between η <ē> and ε <e>[edit]

Variation between η <ē> and ε <e> occurs in the same environments as do the previous vowel changes, i.e. again near bilabials/nasals (/m/ classifies as both), /s/, liquids and interestingly, word-finally, which is probably indicative of a phonetic-level schwa. This consonantal articulation is especially clear in the cases where eta is what seems to be retracted to epsilon.

Again, variation occurs both in Greek stressed and unstressed syllables. There is also replacement by epsilon to eta even before back vowels and the consonantal environments supposed to cause retraction from as early on as the first century CE, so what is most important here is that the variation is within these consonantal environments in both directions, i.e. judging from this, one could not tell which of these phonemes is more raised, even if retraction occurs in almost exclusively in these environments and raisin to eta includes also coronals, which could explain some of the variation in this direction. All things considered, this must mean that eta was in the process of raising but still largely considered /e/, perhaps not yet even /e̝/[103].

Coarticulation could also explain much of the variation regarding eta having been pronounced between /a/ and /i/. In many cases the presumably nonstandard /i/ is surrounded by consonants that have the ability to raise (open) vowel quality in such environments, such as coronals (/t/, /l/), labials (/f/, /m/) and nasals (/n/); once again, closeness to /r/ gives conflicting results. There are some cues to why the variation might be phonetically motivated: intermediate stages of the variation were sometimes produced, i.e. phonemes in between the stretch of /a/ to /i/. Such instances were e.g.:

  • ⲦⲎ ~ tē - pronounced as dæ
  • ⲤⲘⲎ ~ smē - as (according to Worrell) either isme or ismæ (the prothetic vowel syllable-initially is a Bohairic feature, and also present in Arabic)

It is interesting that according to Worrell, old transliterations of eta usually give /a/ as its phonemic value, except in names of persons and places. If there was a process of sound change going on, causing eta to raise toward /i/, it seems likely that the first instances of it would have appeared at phonetically vulnerable environments, i.e. near consonants with ability to raise the vowel quality.

Bivalency of Coptic eta[edit]

The uncertainty in the marking of Greek /i/ and /e/ shown in the previous section might have something to do with the bivalency of Coptic eta, which frequently had two graphemic variants in foreign language transcriptions, i.e. /i/ and /a/.

Lambdin (1958) adds his research to this topic and he expresses that there are cuneiform transcriptions from Amarna and Boǧazkale that seem to indicate that Coptic eta is in certain instances a reflection of the long vowel ū in Late Egyptian (Lambdin and Worrell use the term ‘New Egyptian’ for this stage of the language), therefore deriving from the two sources, the original ē as well as ū. Further support on this theory was found when Worrell and Vycichl published reports of the ‘Popular Traditions of the Coptic language’, which confirmed the existence of two separate phonemes being written with eta (Lambdin 1958: 179).

The Popular Coptic Tradition studied by Worrell and Vycichl, concerns the Coptic variety found in Upper Egypt and more precisely Zēnīya, a village near Luxor that still at the end of the 19th century had some Coptic speakers following the “old pronunciation”. Some scholars do doubt these studies due to language contact with Arabic but even so can provide a wealth of information. This means that the village people pronounced Coptic approximately according to the phonological system of the ca. 1000 CE stage of the language, i.e. the original (Bohairic) Coptic. According to Worrell, the older pronunciation style was considered a language of the ignorant peasants. In the examples provided, Worrell gives the phonetic values [a, ɛ, e, i] for eta but it is noteworthy that he also gives a phonetic transcription for epsilon having been pronounced as [a, ɛ] and [æ]; epsilon, however, is never confused with /i/. The most frequent one of these variants and the one considered by Worrell to have been nearest to the standard seems to be [a/aː]; he also states that the qualitative i.e. stative form of every biconsonantal verb is pronounced with [aː]. Generally this phonemic feature was at the time considered to be Arabic influence but according to Worrell it is not; according to him this has been the phonetic quality of eta since ca. 1000 CE, and apparently the remnant of the Egyptian original /u/ ...
Note On ū < Ⲏ of Late Egyptian[edit]

A very interesting note to take heed off here is, that following the a-Vowel Theory (Worrell follows a Semitic-centric |a-i-u| approach[104]) his theories hold true up to here, because there may have been no original /u/ in the biconsonantal stative forms unless an adjacent consonant re-situated the vowel quality[105]. Stative forms, particularly 3rd masc forms, ended in a graphical .w/.j in the hieroglyphics, if the vowel was ever enunciated it is highly possible that it was an unstressed schwa-ə or u/i[106]; but this brings further implications, i.e.,

kǎmə (km.j/w)-- which apparently lost the final articulation by the time of the Middle Kingdom possibly even earlier than that,
was indistinguishable (orally) from (km.t - Egypt) ⲔⲎⲘⲈ > kǎmə, unless /t/ continued to be pronounced, which was not the case: kǎmat < kǎmə ~ ⲔⲎⲘⲈ.
This article[107] explains that the Coptic Qualitative/Stative, probably used a consonantal root and a vocalic affix as the input for the stative, and a non-consonantal root monomorphemic input for the infinitive, hypothesized as such by using the Optimality Theory. Ruth Kramer continues: ... if roots were extracted from the infinitive, then the infinitive would be in some sense the conjugation base for the stative, which would provide a more unified account of verbal morphology ... Bare in mind, that this is only currently acknowledged with the Egyptian Stative (to be specific with those of the 2-radical types), implying, at the least, an Egyptian progressive innovation, and that verbal inflectional forms did not exist prior. This mirrors what is stated here[108]:
... Thus, the Proto-Afrasian root may be assumed to have had two forms, either *CV or *CVC. *CVC could be extended by means of a suffix to form an inflectional stem: *CVC-(V)C-. Originally, these suffixes appear to have been utilized primarily as verb extensions. Depending upon when they became separated from the rest of the Afrasian speech community, each branch exploited to a different degree the patterning that was just beginning to develop in the Afrasian parent language, with Semitic carrying it to the farthest extreme ...
With all this being said, the bivalency of eta (in native Egyptian words) more or less concerns those words which also show sporadic monophthongization of original hieroglyphic diphthongs implying an /ē/ or /ī/ sound as well as eta being used between two strong consonants, i.e.:
ⲎⲤⲈ (jst) - Isis ... - VS - ⲰⲤⲔ (jsq) - to linger; delay
ⲔⲎⲘ (km.w) - blackened VS - ⲦⲰⲔ (tkɜ) - to throw ... or ... ⲰⲦInf vs ⲎⲦQual - meaning unknown?[109]
ⲎⲒ / ⲎⲈⲒ (ꜥt) - house - VS - ⲰⲦ / OⲨⲰⲦ (ꜥd) - fat
Other renderings of Isis: ⲈⲒⲤⲈⲒ, ⲈⲤⲀ, eš(u)Akkadian, wosMeroitic - pronounced wausa/usa; in Arabic and Hebrew her name has a tendency of beginning with ꜥa- or ꜥas[110]
notice the Qualitative of ⲰⲤⲔ: OⲤⲔ / ⲀⲤⲔ - lingered; prolonged (ⲀⲤⲔⲈS, ⲈⲤⲔⲒB - f. noun; delay)
notice the construct forms: Ⲉ- / Ⲓ- for ⲎⲒ / ⲎⲈⲒ - house
notice the construct forms: ⲈⲦ- for ⲰⲦ / OⲨⲰⲦ- fat

An identical observation of:
eta < Ⲏ > monophthongization in lieu of ~ ⲀⲒ / Ⲱ (in hieroglyphics is a unnoticed diphthong, i.e., mɜꜥt)
This can also be seen in Greek word renderings in Egyptian/Coptic:

  • /ai, e/ confusion as well as /ei, i/ is everywhere in Greek loanwords in Coptic. However, the Narmouthis ostraca have no examples of <ai, ē> confusion but there are some in Greek loanwords in Coptic, suggesting that the quality/quantity difference was not much noted by some writers, never the less it did exist[111]:
/ai, e:/ confusion:
ⲎⲎⲦⲈⲒⲤⲒⲤ <ēēteisis> for ⲀⲒⲦⲎⲤⲒⲤ <aitēsis> (αἴτησις)
ⲬⲎⲢⲒⲚ <kʰērin> for ⲬⲀⲒⲢⲈⲒⲚ <kʰairein>
the /ai, e:/ confusion also displays confusion of /e:, e/
ϨⲎⲢⲎⲤⲒⲤ <hērēsis> for ϨⲀⲒⲢⲈⲤⲒⲤ <hairesis> (αἵρεσις)

An observance from the above examples point to a renovated/new use of the Coptic eta (Ⲏ) where it was also used in a reduction in lieu of the older proper spellings within a colloquial spectrum, i.e.:

Isis -- jst ~ (j)āsəOEg ~ ēsəcolloq ~ ⲎⲤⲈ
truth - mɜꜥ(t) ~ mǎɜə(ꜥ)OEg ~ mǔɜə(ꜥ)colloq-MEg/LEG (mū-waAkkadian) ~ mějLEg ~ ⲘⲈ / ⲘⲎⲒ => another indication of a construct form, i. e., monophthongization

At the same token, < Ⲏ > was used for older < ā > when escaping the Canaanite vowel shift. The Coptic eta (Ⲏ) must have originally been used for ā or schwa-ə and the ē/ī phonetic allophone appears to be a secondary feature introduced by the Greek alphabet. A knowledge of Egyptian grammar plays a crucial role in distinguishing between the two uses:

black -- kǎmə ~ kām ~ ⲔⲎⲘ (note: ⲔⲎⲘⲈ - black land)
physician -- ⲤⲀⲈⲒⲚ ~ ⲤⲎⲒⲚⲒ (both pronounced: say(ə)n)
pig - ⲢⲒⲢ (rrjMEg) shows ⲢⲎⲖF => the bivalency of eta at work

In other words, in Egypt everything from /i/ to /a/ varied within the front axis, accommodating to the pressure from surrounding consonants. Allowing for this hypothesis would certainly explain why it seems that /a/ was the standard phoneme for eta within the language production of the Zēnīya; all other front phonemes apart from /i/ seem to have preferred a retracted quality in Coptic[112].

Sub-Classes of the Plural[edit]

The plural is best learned in distributions according to how they would normally be pronounced:

  • u + u - already discussed above
  • Word Final Assimilation
ⲢⲰOⲨ (rɜ.w) - doors ~ ⲢO (rɜ) - door
ⲦOOⲨ (tɜ.w) - lands ~ ⲦO (tɜ) - land
  • Neutralized
ⲈⲒOⲦⲈ - (jt(j).w) - fathers ~ ⲈⲒⲰⲦ (jt(j)) - father = this is a tricky word as the singular version appeared to originally end in a diphthong (jatǎi) or (jǎtaf), scholars are divided on the enunciation of this word in the singular. The ending was omitted at an early period. The plural must have originally sounded something similar to (j)at-i-jūw. The Coptic variety obviously neutralized the pronunciation to jǒte with the pluralic ending /-jūw/ being entirely omitted, the plural ending doesn't even appear to be monophthongized.
  • Vocalic Metathesis
  • Guttural/Laryngeal
ⲀⲚⲀⲨϢ (ꜥnḫ.w) - oaths ~ ⲀⲚⲀϢ (ꜥnḫ) oath - the /-u/ is brought forward
  • Diphthongization
  • Final Vocalic Harmony
  • The Feminine

Maculine AaB(aCaD) Plural

Root Class Formula Example Meaning Notes
2-lit. #1 AaBāw
#2 AaBǎw
#3 AǎBaw
#4 Aāw [113]
#5 AāB(aw)[114]
rāw [original: raꜢǎw]
ϢⲘⲰOⲨ - father-in-laws
ⲀϤOⲨⲒ[116] - flesh
ⲤOⲦ ~ ⲤⲀⲦⲈ - dung
ⲢⲰOⲨ - doors
ⲤⲰ(Ⲱ)ⲠS/ⲤOOⲠ - seasons/times
3-lit. #1 AaBǎCaw
#2 AaBāC(aw)
ⲈⲂⲀⲦⲈ[117] - months
ⲤⲚⲰ(Ⲱ)Ϥ - blood
3ae-inf. AǎB(j)aw[118] jǎtjaw fathers ⲈⲒOⲦⲈ - fathers

Feminine AaB(aCaD)at Plural

Root Class Formula Example Meaning Notes
3-lit. AaBCǎwat ranpǎwat years ⲢⲘⲠOOⲨⲈ - year
3ae-inf. AaB(aj)ǎwat ras(ay)ǎwat folds ⲢⲤOOⲨⲈ - fold(s)

w Affix forms of AaBiC, AiBaC, AuBiC & Irregulars[edit]

So far we have been dealing with a-Type forms but what of the other vocalic forms? Most of these forms show an irregular form in Coptic:

Metathesis of |-w| in Proximity of |-i-|[edit]

Most of these type of verbs originally contained the vowel |-i|, whether from a participle form or a modified i-Type formation, and in a few dialects the |ḥ| not only caused the vowel to be pronounced like an /a/ but metathesis occurred in the plural form where the pluralic ending /-w/ was brought a syllable to the left and the stressed /i/ was then colloquially pronounced like an /e/. There are a few verbs which followed the same pattern which did not contain an |ḥ|. It is not entirely known if this was also the pronunciation during Middle Egyptian.

Root Formula Example Meaning Notes
2-lit. qǐssingular ~ qǐjs bones ⲔⲈⲈⲤS.-ⲔⲀⲀⲤS.(ⲔⲀⲈⲤⲈ)-ⲔⲎⲎⲤF.
3-lit. #1 AiBěwḥ
band, fetter
pain, sorrow
3-lit. + aw
ḫǔp(i)raw ~ ḫupǐwr ~ ḫupěwr forms Akk. transcription (a)ḫ-pe/i-e/ir
for a later Egyptian form *ḫpeʔr)[119]

-ⲎⲨ & -ⲈⲈⲨⲈ Plurals[edit]

These plurals utilizes an |-ēw| in the plural rather than |-aw| due to contact with the consonant |j/y| and/or contact with another |i or u| vowel. It is also not clear if this was the also the pronunciation during Middle Egyptian.

  • šīrar (small) ~ šīrar + aw => širēw[120] [ϢⲢⲎⲨ]
  • dǎy (boat)/dꜢyMEg/dyDem/ϪOⲒ ~ dǎy + aw => adēw[121] [ⲈϪⲎⲨ]
  • ḥaꜢǎyat/ḥǎꜢyat (field canal)/ϨOⲒ (field/canal)/ḥꜢytMEg - border of a canal or wall ~ ḥaꜢǎyat/ḥǎꜢyat + aw => ḥaꜢyǐwat (ϨⲒⲈⲈⲨⲈ)[122]
  • ꜥaꜢum [ⲀⲘⲈS-ⲀⲘⲎF. (herdsman)]... ꜥꜢmMEg-Dem (herd(sman)) ~ ꜥamꜢu[123] ~ ꜥamꜢu + aw => ꜥamꜢē(w)

Double Affixal Endings[edit]

There are instances where a participle + aw/uw form became lexiconalized/nominalized and also needed to be pluralized. Since the |-aw/-uw| affix was not pronounced in many instances (also reflected as such in the hieroglyphics as well as Coptic) the original affix reappeared in shifted stressed position once the new pluralized |-aw| was attached:

Root Class Example Meaning Notes
2-lit. + u(w)
sǎn(u)singular ~ sanŭwaw (~ sanēw)
hǎwsingular[124] ~ harǔwaw (~ harěw)
3-lit. + u(w)
3-lit. + a(w)
kǎꜢm(u) ~ kaꜢmǔwaw
hǎf(Ꜣaw) ~ hafꜢǎwaw
ḥakꜢǎ(w)singular ~ ḥakꜢǎwaw
ϨϤOⲨⲒ - snakes

Metathesis of Plural Formations[edit]

There are a group of words which follow a unique pattern of bringing in the Ancient Egyptian pluralic ending /w > j/ one syllable to the left in Coptic causing double vowels or a change of quantity/quality:

  • ⲀⲂⲰⲔ - crow ~ ⲀⲂOOⲔ
  • ⲔⲀⲤ - bone ~ ⲔⲀⲀⲤ
  • ⲚOⲨⲦⲈ - god ~ ⲈⲚⲦⲈⲢ, ⲈⲚⲦⲎⲢ

And sometimes even after bringing in the pluralic ending one syllable to the right, there are remnants of the original pluralic ending still attached to the end of the word:

  • ⲔⲖOⲘ - wreath ~ ⲔⲖOOⲘ(Ⲉ)
  • ⲚOⲨⲦⲈ - god ~ ⲈⲚⲦⲈⲢ(Ⲉ)
There is some debate regarding a broken plural, with a CaCuC stem. But it can also be equally looked at as these types of plurals follow the same pattern as other plurals where /u > w > j/ is simply brought forward a syllable or that plural was borrowed from another dialect:
  • ⲈⲂOⲦ - month ~ ⲈⲂⲎⲦ, ⲈⲂⲀⲦⲈ

In terms of the plural, what makes sense at least to me, is that that if a singular word had (in the final syllable) a vowel that it had a corresponding pluralic partner, i.e.,

O ~ ⲰOⲨ / OⲨⲒ = ⲢⲰOⲨ - mouths/doors
Ⲱ ~ O(O) = ⲀⲂⲰⲔ - crow ~ ⲀⲂOOⲔ
Ⲁ ~ ⲀⲀ = ⲔⲀⲤ - bone ~ ⲔⲀⲀⲤ
Ⲉ ~ Ⲉ(Ⲉ) = ⲚOⲨⲦⲈ - god ~ ⲈⲚⲦⲈⲢ(Ⲉ)
Ⲏ ~ Ⲁ = ⲈⲢⲎⲦ - promise ~ ⲈⲢⲀⲦⲈ

If a singular word had the penultimate syllable accented the plural most likely had a shifted accent in the plural:

  • ϬⲰⲢϬ - settlement ~ ⲔⲢⲔⲎⲨ
There are exceptions to this pattern, for example: ⲤⲰϢⲈ - field ~ ⲤOOϢϢⲈ, but this looks like secondary grammatical leveling and is rare
The (ⲰOⲨ / OⲨⲒ) pattern was the original regular plural template but it also created lengthy words, and it readily grew unpopular colloquially. Instead, the original pluralic pattern (in the feminine) is most frequently used exclusively for feminine words:
  • ⲢOⲘⲠⲈ - year ~ ⲢⲘⲠOOⲨⲈ

Eventually, because of Coptic words becoming fossilized, different plural forms appeared to be borrowed for the singular, especially throughout the Coptic dialects- this is also believed, by some experts, to be the broken plural formula CaCuC + aw, i.e.,


Notes on /u/ used in article[edit]

In Coptic a majority of these words render the cuneiform /u/ = < Ⲏ >, and is believed to have been in part due to the Canaanite vowel shift. It is just as probable that, to the Akkadian ear, the scribes heard /u/ in most of these words but in fact we are dealing with the back vowel /ɑ/ which must have been raised to /ʌ/ or raised and centralized to /ɘ/ or /ɜ/ giving these syllables the /u/ coloration preceding the mysterious < ɜ > - but we are still ultimately dealing with the vowel /ɑ/ in these words which is what is reflected in Coptic < Ⲏ >. This can also explain the discrepancies between the spellings of the words between cuneiform and Coptic where the syllable: Caɜ is almost exclusively spelled in cuneiform as /u/ and in Coptic as /Ⲱ/ or /Ⲏ/, because it's dependent on how the author subjectively heard the word spoken. It's also interesting to note that this appeared to be the most noticeable with the consonants: b, p, m, n, and whatever sound < ɜ > represents- which I am assuming to be a type of rhotic-guttural or lateral lending an R-coloration to the vowel in the syllable. We have this phenomenon in English with the words: start, car, bird. On the contrary, in Haitian Creole we have a complete vanishing of the French r at the end of a syllabic coda which can cause the vowel before it to not assimilate to nasals. In Portuguese dialects, syllables ending in L change to the vowel u. It is quite obvious that the Egyptian < ɜ > affected the vowel, Egyptian < r > also affected the vowel at the end of a syllable. Now what gets more complicated is Coptic < Ⲏ > which is shown as a normal vowel, is used in all areas like other vowels, but this more-or-less appears to be because of the bivalency of < Ⲏ > which coincidentally follows a similar pattern to Egyptian < ɜ > in Middle Egyptian where < ɜ > could be used to indicate a stressed vowel.

In conclusion, there appears to be a split between Egyptian /ɑ/. When /ɑ/ was coarticulated it was generally pulled forward in the mouth /æ/ and sometimes completely raised to /i/ especially in Coptic ... before this change had officially taken place, there must have been an intermediate transmission where /ɑ/ was sometimes instead raised and stuck on the sound /ʌ/ or possibly centralized to /ɜ/ or /ɘ/ under specific environments, i.e. when preceded by < ɜ >. On the other hand, syllables containing palatals appeared to color the /ɑ ~ æ/ vowel with /i/ and it appeared that by the time of Coptic /i/ is usually the vowel authors ran to in situations of coarticulation in these types of words (for example the normal case of syllables containing Egyptian hieroglyphic /y/). Other instances of /ɑ/ with the exception of an adjacent < h > had fully raised to /o/ and once again with nasals /o/ is further raised to /u/. So the /u/ sound in the aforementioned words transmitted by cuneiform writers must have been a coarticulated intermediate sound not yet fully raised to /u/ but sounded closer to /u/ then it did for the /a/ vowel which Akkadian was accustomed to using (think of the English words: about, gut, what, ect... which go through a similar phonological process); also bear in mind that Akkadian renditions are going to follow Akkadian pronunciation and assimilate a foreign word into their own phonological structures. In Coptic, writers now more aware of the various Egyptian vowels than before, could begin to organize them appropriately, for example by assigning < Ⲱ > to infinitives, < Ⲏ > to bivalent vowels and 2-rad statives, < Ⲁ > to the untouched /ɑ/ vowel, /(Ⲉ)Ⲓ/ to fully developed coarticulated syllables and < OⲨ > as an allophone of < Ⲱ > adjacent to nasals, ect ... This same procedure occurred with the Hebrew language in the Middle Ages when vowel points were added to the consonantal alphabet. Both Biblical Hebrew and Coptic spelled words (especially words consisting of weak radicals) in an inconsistent manner, thus it is to be noted that in many instances these vowels break any rule that is given because languages are not regular but we can still see a generalized pattern that plays out.

Root Suffixes (Opinions may be wrong)[edit]

Numerous sources, from some of the most respected scholars in the field, have painstakingly researched the anatomy of the Egyptian verb and its relation in a sentence. Each partaking in portions of the reconstruction and in many instances there are some particular disagreements with how many forms of verbs there are as well as the treatment and type of vowels inserted into the skeletal repertoire of word roots. In the course of my own studies through the years I will add my opinions on the matter below.

  • It appeared an Egyptian root was the elementary form, and no matter where or how this word-root was used the elementary form was always automatically implied ... in other words, Ancient Egyptian always had only one morphological root form and did not appear to originally be distinguished by different vowels depending on what type of root it was. Take for example the root sdm, the only time an inflectional variance occurred is if a suffix or prefix was attached to the root (i.e., sdm ~ sdm.t ~ sdm.w ~ sdm.j, ect...), all other instances of its use was always simply sdm (better analyzed as sadam with preferable ante-penultimate stress: sádam). Unlike sister languages, Ancient Egyptian did not appear to develop vocalic patterns (at least in the way which Hebrew or Arabic developed them) but instead the combination of the root + suffixes or prefixes were fossilized and used as separate words in later stages of the language. Sometimes these words can be difficult to associate with the original root because some words were heavily de/re-constructed and other times truncated and can not be associated as stemming from the same root just by their appearances alone (take for example the roots: ⲂⲰⲰⲚ - bad = bjn ~ ⲈⲂⲒⲎⲚ - wretched = Ꜣbyn, and ⲀⲒⲀⲒ - to increase in size = ꜥɜj ~ -O / -Ⲁ / ⲰOⲨ, -ⲀⲒ / -OⲒ - used in compounds, means 'great; big', ect...). These separate but related root forms do not constitute a separate categorical vocalic pattern because their new spelling is more-or-less specialized and individualized to that new word.
Unfortunately, the above mentioned approach goes against the idea of utilizing varied sets of vowels (the Semitic approach) to distinguish between one morphological root in the hieroglyphics, but at least to me, it appears that this was the case as is evidenced by the omission of vowels in the original Egyptian script in combination with the newly appearing vowels used in Coptic which don't always equate to several different vocalic patterns like they do in modern day Arabic and Hebrew.
  • There were many irregular forms both in the hieroglyphics and in Coptic. Such is said of the geminating verbs (i.e., kbb - to be cool) as well as the final weak verbs (mrj - to love). In my opinion, both of these type of irregular verb forms are related. It seems that in many instances the elementary form (which is better termed the absolute form) was truncated so that sometimes verbs like kbb were pronounced káb and other times kabáb. In the case of mrj (or final weak verbs) there are times where mrr was preferred. There are two main possible explanations for this use in the final weak category of verbs:
1.) The original root mrr was intended and the final < r > was omitted thus causing the verb to be pronounced máre or mírre
2.) The original root mrj was intended and the final < j > was omitted thus causing a mirroring duplication of the final radical: marár or marír
3.) A third probable explanation is that the root was mr and it was turned into a nisbe: mrj and then it was borrowed as a regular root form... (this indirectly appears to be the situation in Coptic where weak final verbs adopt a type of nisbe spelling- it is unclear if this existed in the old language but according to Cuneiform and Greek we are actually dealing with many /a/ vowels inside of these verbs versus the /i/ that we see in Coptic which some scholars instead term as the 'participle substantive' pattern; it is probable that there was simply a sound change causing a split in the spelling of the original intended form).
Coptic is of no assistance in relation to the final weak verb or of the geminated roots because there are various spellings of these roots in an unpredictable fashion. This, at the least, tells us that there was more than one way to pronounce these verbs and their original root formation continued to be obscured. In English such irregularities also exist in the past tense, for example: get = got / gotten, lie - lain / laid, burn = burnt / burned, dream = dreamt / dreamed, learn = learnt / learned, smell = smelt / smelled. Ancient Egyptian must have had a similar distribution with final weak verbs as it is not uncommon in languages to have more than one pronunciation for the same verb form.
Extra caution should also be taken with strong verb roots duplicating the final radical,i.e.: sdmm, which was probably a productive verb form in the earliest stage of the Egyptian language. By the time of Middle Egyptian this verb form was no longer productive and instead these verb forms were most possibly lexiconalized. There have also been cases where the last radical is tripled, i.e.: sddmmm ... I truly am unable to explain these instances without performing more research on them but I would assume there is some sort of phonological precedence there where the scribe emphasized the stressed syllable or there were individualized spellings according to how the scribe choose to write out their words. Sometimes in the New Kingdom, scribes also transcribed foreign words with a tripled consonant or tripled vowel emphasizing the stressed syllable so this is what I would assume happened in the earlier scripts.
  • Phonological reorganization took precedence over the verb class in such a way it could be difficult to postulate what the original root spelling was when comparing Coptic to the hieroglyphic script. For example what is the hieroglyphic rendering of the Coptic infinitive ⲘⲈ(Ⲓ) - to love? Was it mrj? In this sense did < j > took over for < r >?! Or was the Coptic spelling ⲘⲈ(Ⲓ) only used during the last stages of the Ancient Egyptian language? We are not sure yet. But we can see a similar phonological pattern with other words like the demonstrative pronoun pɜy = ⲠⲈⲒ which can indirectly point to analytical leveling.
  • It is also very clear that dialects played a large role in which vowels were used. There are not only alterations between the consonants but also with vowels; for example where Bohairic might have < Ⲁ > Fayyumic has < Ⲉ > and where Bahairic or Sahidic have < Ⲉ > Fayyumic has < Ⲓ >, the same is true of the alternation of the vowels < Ⲁ ~ O / Ⲱ >, and < Ⲏ > can be used in an unstressed position which points to a bi-valency in the pronunciation alternating between an < ɛ, e > sound and < ɑ / æ >, not including the Greek predominance of the sound instead being < i >. This suggests hypothetical instances where the predominant vowel in Boahiric may have been < ɑ ~ o / ɔ > and in Fayyumic there may have instead been a vowel predominence of < ɑ ~ i / e > with the Canaanite shift /a < o/ being less effective in some dialects versus others. The unstressed syllables between dialects may have also been different, as well as stress and accent placements. This could account for different spellings in the hieroglyphics as well. Grammar and lexicon, on the other hand, was much more stable between the dialects.


Considering all the research I have read and studied, I can account, so far without much doubt, for the following verb forms:

  • The Elementary Form - which is basically the absolute form of the Coptic infinitive. This form was the 'go-to' vocalization, i.e.:
dam or sádam - to hear
wǎstan - to stride
máre / míre ? / mirré[125] - to love
kabáb - to be cool
The elementary form could be further divided into the pronominal and construct forms which contained a change in stress/accent placement or vowel reduction/s.
  • The Feminine Form - which is simply an addition of the suffix /-t/. The feminine form was adopted to the infinitive of final weak verbs, as well as the relative forms in earlier Egyptian and generally must have followed a vocalic pattern similar to:
dmat / sédmet
was-tá-nat / was-té-nat
már(y)at / mírit ?[126]
There were also many masculine words with a final stress imitating a Coptic feminine ending, this appears to have also existed in Middle Egyptian and gave way to words which scholars believe may be an indication of a nominative ending /-u/. It is unclear if this actually was a nominative ending. In Coptic the ending exists in some masculine words:
PⲀ(Ⲁ)MⲈ / PⲀMⲎ - fish (it is hypothecized that because < Ⲏ > is used in conjunction with < Ⲁ > which is normally unstressed, that the final syllable is accented)
In Coptic this ending is also reproduced alongside the Coptic plural as:
-Ⲉ(Ⲉ)Ⲩ or -ⲎⲨ
  • The Abstract Form - which is simply an addition of the suffix /-w/. The abstract form originally added some kind of nominal dimension to a verb root but appeared to be extended to the plural and the dual.
sadmáw ~ sadmá / sadmā or sádmaw ~ sádmə ? [127]
was-ti-náw (here, I'm assuming, there must have been an epenthetic /i/ inserted)
mar(y)áw / mir(y)éw ?
In reference to the plural, in my opinion, I could assume, most masculine words which ended in the stressed vowel /-é/ could be pluralized as /-éw/, most other masculine words followed a broken plural formation. Feminine words adopted a truncated form of the feminine abstract ending /-áw-wat/ and this was used regularly as a normal ending. The reason for this abnormality is unclear, but it may stem from the fact that the ancient Egyptians possibly interpreted the vowels as vague and in an indiscriminate manner, so that the true plural ending (which was most possibly -u) was treated as a consonant instinctively and they chose to not pluralize words which ended in a consonant with /u/ because it may have assimilated along other similar vowel sounds. Also constantly adding /-aw/ must have lengthened too many words in a sentence and become cumbersome, so they naturally inverted the plural in some masculine forms, i.e.:
sanáf - blood ~ saná(u)f or saná(y)f < sanā(ˁ)f
And in other instances relocated the plural stress, i.e.:
yāt (should originally be yá-te, yá-ti or yá-təf) - father ~ yá-te (instead of yatáw) - it is to be noted that most 2 radical roots with a medial long /Ⲱ/ is a truncated version of /CáCe/CaCé/ or /CaCáw/ɜ/r/.
sán - brother ~ sanéw
  • The Nisba Form - which is simply an addition of the suffix /-j/. Did the Coptic final weak verb form adopt the nisba form - they almost look the same??
sadmī / sedmī / sid
was-ti-nī (there could have been emphases spreading throughout the entire word, i.e.: wis-ti-nī)
mar(y)ī / mir(y)ī
ka-b(b)ī / kib(b)ī
  • The Partial Final Reduplicated Verb Form - in most Afroasiatic languages this has an intensive repetitious meaning, and this form can be hypothesized in the earlier stages of the Egyptian language.

Full reduplication of a root (i.e.: snsn from sn) is a well documented paradigm for the verb. Although this schematic technique was most productive in the earlier stages of the language later being lexiconalized as an individual verb.

  • The Qualitative - originates from the Ancient Egyptian Stative. In the earlier stages of the language specialized suffix pronouns were used to designate the Stative construction but as the language progressed the suffix pronouns were no longer used and instead in Coptic the Qualitative construction was used in lieu of the Stative. It is the only inflectional verbal paradigm currently acknowledged within Egyptological studies and it must be noted that it was solely used in the latest stages of the Egyptian language possibly some time right before the turn of the century after Late Egyptian but there's a possibly of it being used colloquially well before.
  • The Plural - it has not yet been proven (nor dis-proven) if plurals were inflected within an Egyptian root in the earlier stages of the language. In Coptic the broken plural is productive but it is in my opinion that the broken plural gave way in the later stages of the Egyptian language almost culminating into an identical Arabic-esque construction. Many words also do not utilize the plural instead having a choice to use the singular or the plural for the plural, and in most cases the plural has been lexiconalized as was the case with other Egyptian suffixoids.
  • The Prefix - there are scarce remnants of some prefixes being used in some Egyptian nouns, n- and m- being the most noted. Also the causative (s-) is well documented in the verb category. These prefixes lost their significance early on in the language.


An observation to be noted along with the above information is that Egyptian (in her infancy) must have had a mother language (or more than one mother language) where roots and grammatical features were extracted from because Egyptian has a sort of creolized underlining characteristic associated with its skeletal grammar and lexicon. I would assume ancient Hebrew had an enormous influence on Pre-Egyptian as a whole as can be seen with cognates and the metathesis and reorganization of Hebraic roots (I wouldn't be surprised if Ancient Hebrew was in fact Ancient Egyptian's mother tongue). There also appears to be some indirect indications of a prehistoric Anatolian and Sumerian linguistic connection more-so with lexical loan words. To be further examined, lexical, phonological and grammatical borrowings from other nearby languages (i.e. Berber and Nilo-Saharan languages) contributed to the majority of the differences between the closely related Egyptian and Hebrew languages. Pre-Egyptian also appeared to quickly steer away from a root and pattern morphology that is so popular in most Afro-Asiatic languages which also assists in separating these languages from Egyptian in turn establishing a strong connection more-or-less with the agglutinative nature of Nilo-Saharan languages. This process (albeit it in different ways) is also observed heavily in the Cushitic, Chadic and Omotic langauges located just to the south and south-west of Egypt.

  1. file:///home/chronos/u-8ba1890381385217bd1d86d526612d5ffc9fbeac/Downloads/Tests_on_verbal_Aktionsart_applied_to_An.pdf .. page 7
  2. Possible syllabic shift due to augmented pronoun.
  3. There was an irregular loss of < m > through time.
  4. taken from: ... .. pg 94
  9. .. pg 119
  13. here's some Egyptian names to help
  26. .. pg 9
  37. ... pg 73
  45. .. pg 2
  52. Taken from Peust's book.
  53. .. pg 127
  60. .. pg 5
  70. .. pg 6
  72. ... pg 100
  73. ... pg 113
  75. .. pg 86
  76. For Rapp, it is an intermediate vowel which he calls the urvocal representing unentwickelte Indeferens (undeveloped indifference), between the more refined values surrounding it...
  79. .. pg 110
  81. One rule is apparent, though, namely that <r> is always reflected as Coptic Ⲗ in a word which also contains Ꜣ ... Peust pg 129.
  82. There are a few instances of irregularities in consonants emerging in pronominal forms, for example: (excluding -t of weak verbs) ... ⲤϩⲀⲒ - write = ⲤϩⲀⲒⲤ- or ⲤϩⲀⲒⲦ-.
  83. In my own research I have come across the stem for 'love' in Akkadian: rāmī a cognate of Hebrew: raHǎmíy shown in the Hebrew biblical conjugated form: ʔɛ|rHɔm|əkɔ́ʔ - I love you, taken from this source:'to%20love'&f=false
    This shows a possible root of rV(HV)Vm(V) - love [or the like] with some sort of metathesis in Egyptian following a similar pattern to mVrVʔ - see... Akk. rāmu, ra?āmu, ramāmu; Ebl. ra-a-mu-um [*ra?ām-um “to love”]; Ar. r?m: ra?ima...
  84. WBrb.: Zenaga a-maya ‘trombe précédant la tornade’ [Ncl. 1953, 203] perhaps Bed. mē ~ mī ‘Hagel’ [Rn. 1895, 161] = mi ~ miʔ ‘hailstone’ [Rpr. 1928, 213] SCu.: Ma’a má ‘blasen’ [Mnh. 1906, 312] (unless identical with Ma’a ma ‘schlagen’) WCh.: Ngizim màmà ‘coldness, the harmattan, cold season’ [Schuh 1981, 110] CCh.: Hina mii, Musgoy (Daba) mbíí ‘Wind’ (CCh.: Str. 1910, 460) ECh.: Mokilko màayé ‘wind’ [Lks. 1977, 224] = màayé ‘vent, air’, cf. móyòyò adj. ‘frais, froid’ [Jng. 1990, 135]. From AA *m-y ‘(cold) wind’ [GT]. Cf. also Takács 1999, 107, #33 (Eg.-Hina-Mokilko).
    Whether Dem. mj ‘Wind’ (hapax, DG 151:3) = ‘vent’ (Cenival 1987, 4) is cognate is highly dubious. W. Spiegelberg (followed by Erichsen, DG l.c.; Cenival l.c.) derived it from Eg. m3ꜥ.w ‘(richtiger) Wind’ (since MK, Wb) = ‘bon vent’ (Cenival), which, in turn, originated in Eg. m3ꜥ ‘richtig’ (Wb, q.v.)... ... pg 14
  85. ... pg 9
  86. In Hebrew, the verb הוה (hawa I -- the root-verb הוה (hawa II) means to fall, or so we surmise) is an older version of the verb היה (haya)... the verb היה (haya) means 'to be doing something that defines the doer' or in case of some unfolding event: to happen...
  90. .. pg 23
  91. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Dr. Hincks (1836-1869), Vol. 3 (1844 - 1847), pp. 177-180
  92. ... pg 12
  101. .. pg 65
  102. ... pg 61
  103. .. pg 105.
  104. Also note (in reference to co-articulation), that Lambdin (1958: 179-180) disagrees with Worrell about the qualitative of biconsonantal verbs with a written eta having always been pronounced [aː] as there are occurrences where it is clearly transcribed with /i/. Again, many of the surrounding phonemes in the examples Lambdin gives have the ability to raise vowel quality, the vowel in the nonstandard forms mostly rests in between labials and /r/, apart from one word, ⲔⲎ - kē. If the rules of Arabic phonology are applied, even /k/ has the ability to raise vowel quality. On the other hand, Lambdin is confident based on the results of his own very complicated etymological studies that Late Egyptian /u/ became to be marked with eta in Coptic. In the four major dialects, Sahidic, Bohairic, Achmimic and Fayyumic, there are contrastive differences between eta, epsilon and iota in the orthography of the same words so Lambdin marks iota as an allophone to eta, especially adjacent to /r/ (Lambdin 1958 185-187).
  105. I, personally, find it highly improbable that Ancient Egyptian used vocalic markers that were specifically marked to distinguish between root forms, if so, these would have been indicated within the hieroglyphics- with that being said, /u ~ w/ could emerge sporadically from hieroglyphic /w/ and was shown a majority of the time in the hieroglyphics although the vowel /u/ could also have been an allophone of /a/ adjacent to nasals, liquids and other consonants and this may have existed since the pre-historic phases of Egyptian but it was clearly utilized in an inconsistent manner especially comparing them within the dialects, foreign transcriptions and time in between. A clear-cut example: Amān(ə) ~ Amūn / Amōn ... mǎɜə(ꜥ) ~ mūɜ ~ mī/mā/mē
  106. Indirect evidence of this final hieroglyphic w/j (with an internal 'a' vowel) being pronounced can be found in some 2-lit ultimae weak roots: ⲦOⲒ, ⲦO(ⲈⲒⲈ), ⲦⲀ(Ⲁ)Ⲓ - gave, from infinitive Ϯ, Ϯ(ⲈⲒ), ⲦⲈⲒ, ⲦⲎ, and ϤⲎⲨ - carried, from ϤⲒ -to carry.
  109. In Crumm's dictionary pg 531
  111. .. pg 130.
  112. ... pg 111
  113. These consist of those 2-lit. roots/stems which contain a weak consonant in the last syllable which cause that consonant to vanish and cause an elongated aaahh sound at the end of the word.
  114. This form may have not needed -aw since the form AāB is distinctive- there appeared to be a gradual loss of the usage of the affix -aw and when unnecessary it was immediately omitted.
  115. James P. Allen shows a reconstructed singular form as |ꜥuf instead of ꜥaf| - Unfortunately (at the current time) I am unable to prove or discredit either spelling as both can be applicable.
  116. The Coptic pluralic ending -OⲨⲒ has been transcribed as -uj several times by C. Peust (Egyptian Phonology: an introduction to the phonology of a dead language pg 137, 142, 148)- though this is more in relation to specific words which follow the pattern -OⲨⲒ ~ uj due to a syllable ending in a semi-consonant... The Coptic Church appears to sound out pluralic endings as |-owee| other times |-wee| coinciding with the hieroglyphs ... Some plural words may alternate between -OⲨⲒ and -ⲰOⲨ.
  117. Theres another well-known plural form for this word: ⲈϬⲎⲦ, and this form will be discussed here.
  118. At some point between Middle and Late Kingdom the stressed syllable of the word moved one to the left which is reflected in Coptic spelling.
  119. Antonio Loprieno, A Linguistic Introduction pg 58.
  120. Note that the r ~ j sound change has assimilated an original a vowel into an i ~ ēw and a shift of stress.
  121. Note here the y is treated as a consonant which causes an extra syllable to form in the front of the word... the y is then assimilated into a vowel and the vowel |i| reemerges in palatal position as well as modification due to the consonant |y|.
  122. Here the vowel |a| turned into an |i| like it did in the previous example.
  123. Metathesis occurred in Pre-Coptic.
  124. This form is irregular as the hieroglyphics show a hrww form in the singular and a hrw.w form in the plural... this may have been an indication that the |r| was not pronounced and instead the |w| was pronounced in the singular form but then the |r| reappeared in the plural form.
  125. Which is better analyzed as a syllabic word: mə-rrə
  126. Vowel harmony/emphases spreading and was there a glide
  127. Coptic shows two stress patterns... the stress patterns were possibly individualized to the new lexiconalized Coptic word and does not appear to have a straight forward pattern