Jump to content

Zub Zool oan and Abraham 1:2b


maklelan

Recommended Posts

Dan,

Excellent work.

One thing worth emphasizing, I believe. You wrote:

Whenever the fifth degree produces a narrative of its own, rather than non-contextual words, phrases, or concepts, it does not find its way into the subsequent narrative. The best explanation for this phenomenon is that a narrative already existed into which the GAEL expansions did not fit. Those expansions serve some purpose unrelated to the production of a narrative.

This is a very incisive observation, and you will find that the remainder of the character explanations, almost without exception, adhere to this general rule.

Link to comment

One more thing: Several people have probably noted that Dan is referring to the EA/GAEL characters both by sequential number as well as by the transliteration of their sounds. A few clarifying notes on that system of reference are in order.

I numbered the characters sequentially, according to the order in which they appear in EA-WP(Phelps). I will, at some point in the near future, post on this message board a table listing the characters by sequential number and the corresponding transliterations of their assigned "sounds."

I have chosen to use the Phelps transliterations as the reference standard, for the simple reason that his transliterations from the EA documents are, almost without exception, the ones then employed in the GAEL, notwithstanding the fact that Joseph Smith's transliterations of the sounds are quite frequently different. (This is merely one element of text-critical evidence, among many, that Phelps was the dominant force behind the Alphabet & Grammar project--more on that in my published article.)

-WS

Link to comment

I responded to a few comments made by Chris Smith on a thread on the other board called "Question for Maklelan." Much of my argument here is significantly clarified by some of the posts on the third page of that thread. Any who are interested should check it out.

Link to comment

I responded to a few comments made by Chris Smith on a thread on the other board called "Question for Maklelan." Much of my argument here is significantly clarified by some of the posts on the third page of that thread. Any who are interested should check it out.

I was interested, of course.

I checked it out.

A single word came to mind at the conclusion of my reading: pwned. :P

Of course, in any debate, the advantage is held by the person defending the strongest arguments and the most definitive evidence. In the case of the question of the dependency of the Alphabet & Grammar on a pre-existing text of the BoA, I think it is becoming increasingly evident that we are holding all the aces.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...