Lesson 13: Noun phrases

• Apposition
• Conjunctions
• Direct Genitives
• Indirect Genitives
• Disambiguation
• Summary
• Vocabulary
• Exercises
• Sidebar: The non-breaking direct genitive rule

One noun immediately after another forms a noun phrase. In Egyptian, a noun phrase can have several different meanings. Noun phrases can also be extended by adjectives and words which link nouns.

Apposition

Apposition is when two nouns refer to the same thing in different ways: “your friend Bob” or “Chairperson Helen.” Egyptian allows such phrases as well: 𓊹𓏏𓐰𓂋𓅃𓀭 nṯr ḥrw “the god Horus”; 𓊹𓍛𓇋𓏠𓐰𓈖𓊵𓐰𓏏𓐱𓊪 ḥm-nṯr jmn-ḥtp “the priest Amenhotep”.

Apposition seems simple but is actually a big part of the language; it’s how the word ky “another” works (𓎡𓐰𓇋𓐱𓇋𓊃𓐰𓀀𓐱𓏤 ky z “another one, a man”), and is part of how other phrases, including possibly the indirect genitive (see below), developed.

Conjunctions

Two adjacent nouns could be a pair that would be joined with “and” or “or” in English: 𓅭𓐴𓏤𓅭𓐴𓏏𓁐 zꜢ zꜢt can mean “son and daughter”, or it can mean “son or daughter”. But there are ways to be less ambiguous.

For “and”, one can use the prepositions  𓎛𓈖𓐰𓂝 ḥnꜤ “with, together with” or 𓁷𓐰𓏤 ḥr “upon”. Using ḥr is like saying “on top of” in a sentence like: “And on top of all his new toys, his grandparents gave him some money!”

𓏏𓐱𓏐𓐰𓏒𓎛𓈖𓐰𓂝𓎛𓈎𓐰𓏏𓏋 t ḥnꜤ ḥnqt
“bread with beer”

𓏏𓐱𓏐𓐰𓏒𓁷𓐰𓏤𓎛𓈎𓐰𓏏𓏋 t ḥr ḥnqt
“bread upon beer”

For “or”, there is a phrase 𓂋𓐰𓏤𓊪𓅱 r-pw which functions as a “whichever”. r-pw is written at the end of a list of words: 𓇋𓏠𓐰𓈖𓀭𓊪𓐰𓏏𓎛𓀭𓇳𓐰𓏤𓀭𓂋𓐰𓏤𓊪𓅱 jmn ptḥ rꜤ r-pw “Amun, Ptah, or Re” (literally “Amun, Ptah, Re, whichever”).

Direct Genitives

A genitive is a way of expressing “ownership” or similar connection between two things. In English we do this two ways: via apostrophe-S (“Dave’s car”) or the preposition “of” (“house of the witch”).

The simplest way to express the genitive in Egyptian is the direct genitive construction. Simply put the “owned” noun before the “owner” noun.

𓊹𓏤𓆎𓅓𓏏𓐰𓊖 nṯr kmt
“god of Egypt”

𓅭𓐴𓏏𓁐𓊃𓐰𓀀𓐱𓏤𓄤𓆑𓐰𓂋 zꜢt z nfr pn
“the daughter of this good man”

We highlighted the adjectives in the latter example for a reason. It’s okay to modify the second noun in a direct genitive with suffix pronouns, demonstratives, or adjectives. However, there is a rule about direct genitives: nothing is permitted to be between the two nouns (with rare exceptions). Therefore, you’re not allowed to put those modifiers on the first noun.

So if you say “this good daughter of a man”, the adjective and demonstratives nfrt tn would come after zꜢt, which would put them between the two words of the direct genitive phrase, so that is not allowed. In such a case, you have two options. The first is to move the adjective to the end of the entire phrase, but this can be ambiguous:

𓅭𓐴𓏤𓊃𓐰𓀀𓐱𓏤𓄤𓆑𓐰𓂋 zꜢ z nfr
“son of a good man” or “a good son of a man”
(lit. “son man good-masc.“)

The no-interruption rule means that nfr could be modifying either noun. If the first noun were “daughter” instead of “son”, then the gender of the adjective (nfr or nfrt) would tell you if it was modifying “man” or “daughter”. But for clarity, and since the gender marking of adjectives disappeared over time anyhow, the indirect genitive can be the better solution.

Indirect Genitives

The indirect gentitive is made by adding a word called the genitival adjective to link the two nouns. This is written like an adjective on the first noun, and it is marked for gender and number of the noun it modifies (the first noun in the pair).

The genitival adjective’s forms are 𓈖 n (masculine singular), 𓏌𓐰𓏤 nw (masculine plural), and 𓈖𓐰𓏏 nt (feminine, any number). When the first noun has other adjectives, the genitival adjective must be the final one:

𓅭𓐴𓏤𓄤𓆑𓐰𓂋𓈖𓇓𓏏𓐰𓈖 zꜢ nfr n nswt
“the good son of the king”

𓌢𓈖𓐰𓏲𓐱𓏭𓀀𓀀𓇋𓈎𓐰𓂋𓏛𓐰𓏲𓐱𓏭𓏌𓐰𓏤𓉠𓏏𓐰𓆇 snwj jqrwj nw nbt-ḥwt
“the two excellent brothers of Nephthys”

𓊹𓏤𓐰𓎟𓄤𓆑𓐰𓂋𓃂𓈗𓈖𓊖𓐰𓏏𓐱𓏤 nṯr nb nfr wꜤb n(t) njwt
“every good and clean god of the city”.

Just as with other adjectives, during Middle Egyptian’s time as a spoken language, the genitival adjective’s endings were disappearing and all its forms were becoming 𓈖 n, so you may run into a phrase like that. The “of the city” example above shows this, with nt written as n.

See this lesson’s Sidebar if you’d like to look at a deep linguistic dive into why the “no interruption” rule for direct genitives (and some of the exceptions) might exist.

Disambiguation

If two (or more) nouns are next to each other, without a helpful ḥnꜤ, ḥr, or r-pw, the nature of the phrase must be determined by context: what makes the most sense. Consider 𓏏𓐱𓏐𓐰𓏒𓎛𓈎𓐰𓏏𓏋 t ḥnqt (lit. “bread beer”):

• If this is apposition, it means “bread (which is) beer”, just like nṯr ḥrw would mean “the god (who is) Horus” or ky z means “another one, (who is) a man”.
• If this is a direct genitive, it means “bread of beer”, that is, bread which is owned by, or perhaps made from, beer.
• If this is a conjunction, it means “bread and beer”, or “bread or beer”.

So if the sentence is “He ate bread beer”, it probably means “He ate bread and beer.”

Of course, this won’t always resolve the question. If the noun phrase was “beer barley”, then “beer of barley” might make nearly as much sense as “beer and/or barley.” But this sort of reasoning can help you to eliminate possibilities.

Summary: Noun Phrases

1. An apposition is a noun phrase where the two nouns are referring to the same thing, such as when there is a title: 𓊹𓍛𓇋𓏠𓐰𓈖𓊵𓐰𓏏𓐱𓊪 ḥm-nṯr jmn-ḥtp “the priest Amenhotep”.
2. A conjunction is a noun phrase where the two nouns have an “and” or “or” relationship, such as 𓅭𓐴𓏤𓅭𓐴𓏏𓁐 zꜢ zꜢt “a son and a daughter” or “a son or a daughter.”
3. For less ambiguity, the prepositions ḥnꜤ “with” and ḥr “upon” can show an “and” relationship: 𓏏𓐱𓏐𓐰𓏒𓎛𓈖𓐰𓂝𓎛𓈎𓐰𓏏𓏋 t ḥnꜤ ḥnqt “bread with beer”, 𓏏𓐱𓏐𓐰𓏒𓁷𓐰𓏤𓎛𓈎𓐰𓏏𓏋 t ḥr ḥnqt “bread upon beer”.
4. The “or” relationship can be clearly shown with the phrase 𓂋𓐰𓏤𓊪𓅱 r-pw “whichever”: 𓇋𓏠𓐰𓈖𓀭𓊪𓐰𓏏𓎛𓀭𓇳𓐰𓏤𓀭𓂋𓐰𓏤𓊪𓅱 jmn ptḥ rꜤ r-pw “Amun, Ptah, or Re” (literally “Amun, Ptah, Re, whichever”).
5. A direct genitive is a noun phrase where the nouns have a connection or “possession” relationship: 𓊹𓏤𓆎𓅓𓏏𓐰𓊖 nṯr kmt “god of Egypt”.
6. With rare exceptions, no adjectives (or other words) can come between the two words of a direct genitive. An adjective may be placed after the two words, but this could then modify either noun: 𓅭𓐴𓏤𓊃𓐰𓀀𓐱𓏤𓄤𓆑𓐰𓂋 zꜢ z nfr can mean “the good son of the man” or “the son of the good man”.
7. The indirect genitive is a noun phrase that uses a linking word, the genitival adjective, which is declined like any other adjective and is written as the last adjective on the first noun, which allows the nouns to have adjectives or other words modifying them: 𓊹𓏤𓐰𓎟𓄤𓆑𓐰𓂋𓃂𓈗𓈖𓊖𓐰𓏏𓐱𓏤 nṯr nb nfr wꜤb n(t) njwt “every good and clean god of the city”.
8. When you have two nouns together and no linking word, it may be difficult to determine if they are an apposition, a conjunction, or a direct genitive. In such a case, you simply need to try each possibility and see which makes the most, or the least, sense.

Vocabulary

• 𓿟𓏌𓐰𓊖 jwn.w “Heliopolis” (lit. “pillars”)
• 𓇋𓏠𓐰𓈖𓀭 jmn Amun (Theban god, king of the gods)
• 𓁹 jr (jrj) “do, make”
• 𓉐𓐰𓂋𓂻 pr (prj) “emerge, issue forth, go up”
• 𓍋𓅓𓂋𓉴 mr “pyramid”
• 𓌻𓐰𓂋𓀁 mr (mrj) “love, desire, wish”
• 𓈖 n (nj) the genitival adjective, used to construct indirect genitive phrases
  • Fem. 𓈖𓐰𓏏 nt. Masc. plur. 𓏌𓐰𓏤 nw. Must be the final adjective modifying its noun.
• 𓂋𓐰𓏤𓊪𓅱 r-pw “whichever”
• 𓄂𓐰𓏏𓐱𓏤 ḥꜢt “front, forepart”, “foremost”
• 𓊹𓍛 ḥm-nṯr “priest” (“god’s servant”)
  • Note the honorific placing of the nṯr glyph before ḥm.
• 𓅃𓀭 ḥr.w “Horus”
• 𓄡𓐰𓏏𓐱𓏤 ẖt “belly, womb”

Exercises

Click here to do the exercises for Lesson 13.

Sidebar: The non-breaking direct genitive rule

Some Egyptologists suggest that direct genitives were essentially compound words. If so, it makes sense why adjectives cannot usually interrupt them. Consider the English phrase “white doghouse”. As written in standard English, it’s unambiguous: it means the house is white, regardless of the color of the dog. But what if you wanted to say “a house of any color for a white dog”? You couldn’t say “whitedoghouse” or “dogwhitehouse”, because the compound “doghouse” is established pretty well as one unit. You’d have to say “house of a white dog” instead.

For a very scholarly work on the subject, not recommended for people without some decent background in linguistics, see Werning (2024). He explores the use of direct vs. indirect genitives in actual Middle Egyptian (that is, used during the Middle Kingdom) as opposed to Middle Egyptian as it is used in later periods (Égyptien de tradition, as Pascal Vernus called it).

Essentially: When people centuries after Middle Egyptian was no longer spoken tried to “simulate” Middle Egyptian, how well did they succeed?

You can see how rich the field of Egyptian language studies remains. Over 200 years have passed since Champollion’s breakthrough with the Rosetta Stone, and we still have far to go in our understanding.