Egyptian Grammar

[cdowis]

What is his theory?

1. His full paper is found at John A. Tvedtnes, "The Use of Mnemonic Devices in Oral Traditions, as Exemplified by the Book of Abraham & the Sensen Papyrus," NPSEHA No.120, April, 1970

2. In a footnote, Gee quotes a personal communication from John Tvedtnes regarding Larson's treatment of his work:

"Mr. Larson, like other critics of the book of Abraham, has cursorily dismissed the work Richley Crapo and I did with the Sensen papyrus. He dwells on some minor points and ignores the overall work. The one point in which he felt our case was strongest is far from the strongest point in the original article, most of which he keeps from his audience. (He also didn't note the two follow-up articles on the same subject.) Larson fails to note that we demonstrated that there was a consistency in the way Joseph Smith separated out Egyptian words from a text in which there are no spaces marking the division between words, and that the meaning of each Egyptian word is consistently reflected in the English text of the book of Abraham to which it was juxtaposed in the book of Abraham manuscripts. Certainly this is evidence that Joseph Smith knew the meaning of those words! Larson presents as an example of the weakness of our case the use of the word 'this' in Abraham 1:11. He shows a single occurrence for this word in the verse. The truth is that the word appears three times in that verse, while its plural equivalent appears once. As Crapo and I wrote, it is not the importance of the word in the verse that matters, but whether it is reflected at all. The fact that the Egyptian words are reflected in the corresponding English text each and every time is statistically significant. . . .

"Larson also failed to note that Crapo and I suggested other possibilities for the tie between the Abraham story and the Sensen text, including the suggestion that a later descendant of Abraham had worded the story of his ancestor to fit the Sensen text. If this be true, then it doesn't matter when the Sensen text was composed....."

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=92

3. Finally, you can read his 1968 paper (note: if you can find it, read his 1970 paper) http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/mnemonic.htm

[William Schryver]

CK:

Youâ??ve been taking too much of what Metcalfe says at face value! And, unfortunately, I donâ??t have the time today to address each of your assertions in turn. However, I will touch upon one example:

You will note that verses 1-3 in manuscript 1 are in the handwriting of W.W. Phelps and appear to have been orally dictated.

Here is the portion of Ms. #1 to which you refer:

Ms1_page1_Phelps

Now, I am quite confident that there are several elements of this document (and the history of the BoA translation effort) that establish it as a copy of an earlier manuscript. What I am curious to know is what things you would point to in order to justify your claim that it appears to be orally dictated?

And, even if we were to conclude that this portion of Ms. #1 is from an original dictation, why is not possible for it to have occurred in July 1835?