Re: con-translation (was: Semitic/Celtic Ties)

At 5:43 am +0000 13/3/99, John Fisher wrote:
.......
>I was a bit surprised by your translation, as it's clear to me that
>the inscription is in fact written in an archaic form of Elet Anta.
>My own command of archaic EA is pretty sketchy, but the inscription is
>not very difficult.
[snipped]
>
>> RE-A-NJA (the three symbols)
>The three linear symbols should in fact be read
>LO-A-NA
>Note that Linear B and the other syllabaries of the area do not
>distinguish between /l/ and /r/.
Although Linear B does not make that distinction, the Cypriote syllabary,
in fact, did distinguish the {la}, {le}, {li}, {lo}, {lu} series from the
{ra}, {re}, {ri}, {ro}, {ru} series.  What Linear A did is anyone's guess
until such time that the script yields to decipherment.

>This is clearly the name of the Anta
>goddess Loarna.
>
>Thus the text in fact reads:
>
> "The boy (or prince) of the Left-Hand Folk, of ordinary rank until
> today, comes to lead the people.  LOARNA."
>
>Matching it to the modern EA:
>
> Epenyoye setanirvey enente par Shifaye.  Loarna.
> epioi    zETanTE    enetE  par siPai     LO-A-NA
>
>Or if siPai is a name:
>
> "The boy (or prince) Sipai, of ordinary rank until today, comes to
> lead the people.  LOARNA."
Darn it! So speakers of proto-Elet-Anta were settled in the Lisithi plateau
in the 3rd century BC.  Oh dear - I'll have to revise all my earlier
theories :)

Ray.

PS - I was a little surprised that no Semiticist on this list queried
Gordon's or Steiglitz's 'translations' of the Psykhro inscription.