Primele postări au fost pe:
http://cabalinkabul.wordpress.com/2013/01/22/dacopatie-placutele-de-la-sinaia-un-fals-grosolan/#comment-1017
bogdan bobolea permalink
Domnule Alexe, faptul ca utilizati epitete (grosolan, minunatul, exaltata, escros, dementa) nu va ajuta in demonstratie.
Ati utlizat si termenul de “Calpuzanul”
CALPUZÁN, -Ă, calpuzani, s.m. și f. (Înv.) Falsificator de bani. ♦ Fig. Om rău, ticălos. – Din tc. kalpazan.
Am inserat aici definitia cuvantului, pentru ca aici ii este locul cuvantului utillizat de dvs: la epitete.
Dumneavoastra insa este posibil sa il fi utilizat incercand sa utilizati primul sens cel de “falsificator”, (deoarece in fraza care urmeaza celei care contine termenul “calpuzan”, spuneti:
“Iata cum se da de gol un falsificator necunoscator al ABC-ului studiilor elenice”
dar in mod incorect, deoarece autorul articolului pe care il criticati nu a falsificat nici o moneda.
Eu nu fac aici decat o analiza a argumentelor aduse de dumneavoastra.
1. “limba necunoscuta noua, pentru ca “scrierea”, lesne de citit, nu e altceva decat alfabetul grecesc atic, trintit acolo alandala si caruia falsificatorii i-au adaugat un M etrusc pe care dacii nu il puteau cunoaste…”
- de ce credeti ca Dacii ar fi avut o scriere total diferita de a grecilor ? Este obligatoriu sa fie total diferita (rune, lite chirilice, cuneiforme, ideografice) ?
- de ce Dacii nu puteau cunoaste “M”-ul etrusc ?
- de ce Dacii nu puteau cunoaste “M”-ul etrusc ?
2. “Regularitatea desenului literelor face improbabila absenta separãrii dintre cuvinte…”
Contrargumente:
Twice in recent issues of Bible Review, in otherwise excellent articles, Harvey Minkoff has asserted that “Ancient [Hebrew] manuscripts generally did not leave space between words.”a Writing without word divisions is called scriptio continua, or continuous writing.
Ancient Greek was commonly written like that. Stone monuments from Athens and other Greek cities, Greek papyri found in Egypt, classical and biblical manuscripts in Greek all show line after line of letters in unbroken sequences.
Ancient Greek was commonly written like that. Stone monuments from Athens and other Greek cities, Greek papyri found in Egypt, classical and biblical manuscripts in Greek all show line after line of letters in unbroken sequences.
In Ancient Egyptian, determinatives may have been used as much to demarcate word boundaries as to disambiguate the semantics of words.[1] Rarely in Assyrian cuneiform, but commonly in the later cuneiform Ugaritic alphabet, a vertical stroke 𒑰 was used to separate words. In Old Persian cuneiform, a diagonally sloping wedge was used.[2]
As the alphabet spread throughout the ancient world, words were often run together without division, and this practice remains or remained until recently in much of South and Southeast Asia. However, not infrequently in inscriptions a vertical line, and in manuscripts a single (•), double (:), or triple interpunct (dot) was used to divide words. This practice was found in Phoenician, Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, and continues today with Ethiopic, though there whitespace is gaining ground.
As the alphabet spread throughout the ancient world, words were often run together without division, and this practice remains or remained until recently in much of South and Southeast Asia. However, not infrequently in inscriptions a vertical line, and in manuscripts a single (•), double (:), or triple interpunct (dot) was used to divide words. This practice was found in Phoenician, Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, and continues today with Ethiopic, though there whitespace is gaining ground.
Scriptio continua
The early alphabetic writing systems of Mesopotamia, such as the Phoenician alphabet, had only signs for consonants (although some signs for consonant could also stand for a vowel, so-called matres lectionis). Without some form of visible word dividers, parsing a text into its separate words would have been a puzzle. With the introduction of letters representing vowels in the Greek alphabet, the need for inter-word separation became much less. The earliest Greek inscriptions used interpuncts, as was common in the writing systems which preceded it, but soon the practice of scriptio continua, continuous writing in which all words ran together without separation became common
The early alphabetic writing systems of Mesopotamia, such as the Phoenician alphabet, had only signs for consonants (although some signs for consonant could also stand for a vowel, so-called matres lectionis). Without some form of visible word dividers, parsing a text into its separate words would have been a puzzle. With the introduction of letters representing vowels in the Greek alphabet, the need for inter-word separation became much less. The earliest Greek inscriptions used interpuncts, as was common in the writing systems which preceded it, but soon the practice of scriptio continua, continuous writing in which all words ran together without separation became common
3. ““Sarmato” nu are ce sa caute acolo… Dacii, vecini cu cei pe care ii numim noi astazi “Sarmati”, le-ar fi zis “Sauro-mati”… Aceia erau de limba iraniana, de unde etnonimul lor: Sauro-ceva – care venea de la ir. “sauro” = negru””
Exista oare posibilitatea ca Dacii sa fii pronuntat in propria limba “Sarmato” si nu in iraniana cum afirmati dvs? Asa cum noi spunem “trac”, iar englezii “Thracian” ? De ce trebuie ca Dacii sa scrie exact cum scriau Iranienii ?!
4. “In acest alfabet care nu e altul decat cel grecesc arhaic numele Burebista e scris ΒΩΕΡΟΒΥΣΤΩ… cu Y pentru i !… Calpuzanul, nefiind filolog, ignora total faptul ca in greaca pre-bizantina Y reprezenta vocala U, iar nu i, ca astazi… Ulterior in atica, si apoi in koiné, a devenit fonetic Ü, ca sa sfarseasca in i de astazi…”
Acelasi contrargument ca la punctul 3. De ce trebuie ca Dacii sa fii avut toate literele alfabaetului lor identice ca Grecii?
5. “sarpe copiat de pe logo-urile moderne ale farmaciilor”
In Greek mythology, the Rod of Asclepius (⚕; sometimes also spelled Asklepios or Aesculapius), also known as the asklepian,[1] is a serpent-entwined rod wielded by the Greek god Asclepius, a deity associated with healing and medicine. The symbol has continued to be used in modern times, where it is associated with medicine and health care, yet frequently confused with the staff of the god Hermes, the caduceus. Theories have been proposed about the Greek origin of the symbol and its implications.
The Rod of Asclepius takes its name from the god Asclepius, a deity associated with healing and medicinal arts in Greek mythology. Asclepius’s attributes, the snake and the staff, sometimes depicted separately in antiquity, are combined in this symbol.[2]
The most famous temple of Asclepius was at Epidaurus in north-eastern Peloponnese. Another famous healing temple (or asclepieion) was located on the island of Kos, where Hippocrates, the legendary “father of medicine”, may have begun his career. Other asclepieia were situated in Trikala, Gortys (in Arcadia), and Pergamum in Asia.
The Rod of Asclepius takes its name from the god Asclepius, a deity associated with healing and medicinal arts in Greek mythology. Asclepius’s attributes, the snake and the staff, sometimes depicted separately in antiquity, are combined in this symbol.[2]
The most famous temple of Asclepius was at Epidaurus in north-eastern Peloponnese. Another famous healing temple (or asclepieion) was located on the island of Kos, where Hippocrates, the legendary “father of medicine”, may have begun his career. Other asclepieia were situated in Trikala, Gortys (in Arcadia), and Pergamum in Asia.
Poate ca farmaciile au inceput sa foloseasca acest simbol si nu invers cum afirmati dvs.
6. “siluetele de soldati cu scuturi care umplu friza de jos sint copiate de pe vase antice grecesti precum ãsta:”
Soldatii oricarei armate antice aveau scuturi pentru autoaparare si uneori pentru atac.
Imaginea care se acceseaza urmand linkul postat de dvs. nu are nici o similitudine majora cu imaginea soldatilor de pe tablite: imaginile soldatilor greci sunt suprapuse iar cei reprezentati pe tablite sunt distincte, individualizate (pe Coloana lui Traian soldatii sunt insa suprapusi).
La final o remarca personala: daca dvs si altii ca dvs ati pastra discutia la nivelul ideilor, fara sa jigniti persoanele care sustin idei contrare credintei dvs, totul ar fi superb. Dar din experienta personala am extras urmatoarea idee: in momentul in care o persoana ma jigneste sunt doua optiuni:
a) fie eu am dreptate si persoana respectiva nu mai are argumente rationale a ma combate
b) fie persoana respectiva sufera de un complex de superioritate
b) fie persoana respectiva sufera de un complex de superioritate
Dvs. in ce categorie intrati ?
Bogdan Bobolea permalink
Sa pornim discutia de la afirmatia dvs. :
” Toate întrebările dumneavoastra pleacă de la supozitii imposibil de demonstrat”.
” Toate întrebările dumneavoastra pleacă de la supozitii imposibil de demonstrat”.
Un lucru similar il pot afirma si eu despre urmatoarele idei enuntate de dvs.:
1. “Alfabetul grec clasic asa cum figureaza pe acele falsuri ar fi fost împrumutat”
Pe ce va bazati afirmatia ? De ce trebuie neaparat ca Dacii sa fi imprumutat acel alfabet ? Poate fi oare si o alta varianta ?
2. ” Limba autentica a dacilor, o limba indo-europeană, nu putea suna atât de polinezian”.
De ce ? Atat timp cat anumiti lingvisti afirma ca din limba dacica au ramas doar un numar restrans de cuvinte si acelea provin din albaneza cum puteti exprima o asemenea idee?
Ati auzit in mod sigur de silogisme. Pornind de la o premisa falsa se poate ajunge la o concluzie eronata ?
bogdan bobolea permalink
Erata
A se citi “excroc” in loc de “escros”
bogdan bobolea permalink
Ati scris urmatoarele:
“Ancient Greek”… Textul citat de tine se referă la perioada arhaica din secolele 4-5 a.Chr. In perioada clasica reprezentata de alfabetul imitat acolo separarea cuvintelor era o regula absoluta, atât in greaca cat si in latina.
Replica mea este
In the West, the oldest Greek and Latin inscriptions use word dividers, but these are rare in the later periods when scriptio continua becomes the norm (in Classical Greek and late Classical Latin).[1][2] By around 1000 AD, alphabetical texts in Europe are written with spaces between words.
Atata timp cat tablitele orginale au fost topite nu se poate stabili cu exactitate cand au fost create. Exista oare posibilitatea ca placutele sa fii scrise exact in perioada in care se folosea scriptio continua ?
Inca o intrebare: daca ar fi fost vorba de un fals, de ce oare “calpuzanul” (de data aceasta termenul este folosit corect) nu a realizat un text care sa elimine o asemenea “problema” pe care lingvistii ar fi detectat-o imediat ?
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu