Compound Pronouns
A new set of pronouns first appear in the 17th Dynasty. They have a narrow range of usage: as the subject in adverbial sentences and not after a particle. In first and second person, they take the form of ππ°π² tw plus the suffix pronouns. In third person, they appear the same as the third-person dependent pronouns: sw (masc. sing.), sj (fem. sing.), st (plural and neutral for objects).
ππ²π¨π°ππΎπ°π€π±ππππ
π²ππ°π₯ππ°π²ππ°π₯π¨π°πππ
ππ°π
sw αΊr tκ£ n κ₯κ£mw tw.n αΊr kmt (Hyksos 7)
“He holds the land of the Asiatics; we hold Egypt.”
(lit. “He is under the land of the Asiatics; we are under Egypt.”)
Note that the “Asiatics” clause, since it’s third person, has what looks like the normal dependent pronoun sw as the subject; the “Egypt” clause, since it’s first person, has the new form tw.n “we”.
There is also an impersonal form, ππ°π²ππ°π² tw.tw, which has a special use. We will see it in action in a few lessons.
Special preposition uses
As you learned when we studied prepositions, they have nuances of meaning that differ from their typical one-word English translations. This means they are used in adverbial sentences to describe things which would not be adverbial sentences in English.
Identity: m “in”
π m “in” can be used to mean “in a function, role, profession, situation, capacity” rather than its usual meaning of “in a location in space”.
π
ππ°π‘ππ°π²π
πΈπ²π m.k tw m mnjw
“You are a herdsman” (Peasant B1, 208)
(lit. “Look, you are in a herdsman.”)
Some texts (e.g. Gardiner 1957, Hoch 1997) refer to this as the “m of predication”. Grammatically, it’s just m being a preposition, but semantically, it’s a meaning of “in” not found in English; we express it with the compound “in the capacity of” or “in the role of”.
Why not just use a nominal sentence, like ntk mnjw “you are a herdsman”? Recall from the previous lesson, when we said that the particle jw seems to describe something as being currently true. That extends to sentences of this type even if using the other adverbial sentence particles. You wouldn’t say ntk mnjw unless you meant the person was intrinsically a herdsman (which might well be an insult; “you are a herdsman (and it’s all you’ll ever be”). For a profession or function, the situation is thought to be currently but not inherently true, so the adverbial form is used instead.
Another example Allen gives is: saying ntk zκ£.j “you are my son” shows that being the speaker’s son is inherent in the listener, while jw.k m zκ£.j would mean “you are in (the position or situation of) my son”, something like “you are like a son to me.” This next thought is purely speculation on my part, but maybe a man disowning his son might have said something like ntk zκ£.j m.k nn m zκ£.j “You are my son, (but) look, you are not in the role of my son.”
Possession: n “for”, αΊr “under”, m κ₯ “in hand”
The preposition π¨π°π αΊr meaning “under”, as we have seen, is used figuratively for possessions: the example used in the section above about compound pronouns, with the Asiatics and Egypt, is a great example of that. This can also done with the prepositional phrase π π m κ₯ “in (someone’s) hand”:
π¨π°πππ°ππ°π₯ππ
ππ αΊrwt.j m κ₯.j
“I have my possessions” (Urk. IV, 120, 10)
(lit. “my possessions are in my hand”)
The very busy preposition π n “for” is often used for this. As we noted when we first learned about it, it can be used for the dative of a sentence; that is, who the “action” of the sentence is for the benefit of. That is true in an adverbial sentence too, even though no verb is happening.
ππ°πππ©ππ°π€ππΎππΏπ nn jz n αΈ₯qκ£
“The ruler has no tomb”
(lit. “A tomb is not for the ruler”)
There is one “gotcha” when using n in this way, however: usually if the object of the dative is a suffix pronoun but the subject is a noun, the n-phrase moves to stand before the subject. Contrast these two examples:
ππ
±ππ°π‘πΉπ jw n.k κ₯nαΈ« wκ£s
“Life and dominion are yours.” (Urk IV, 561, 2)
(lit. “For you are life and dominion.”)
ππ
±πΉππππ π°ππ jw κ₯nαΈ« wκ£s n jmn
“Life and dominion are for Amun.”
The subject of an adverbial sentence with jw, as we saw in the last lesson, normally follows jw, and the prepositional phrase follows the subject, as with the second (“for Amun”) example. But a dative (only n, not any other preposition) using a suffix pronoun takes precedence. We shall see more about this when we learn about verbal sentences.
Futurity: r “towards”
π r “regarding, towards, against” has a variety of uses which can be used in an adverbial sentence, some of which say something about a future situation. With a place, the sentence can indicate destination:
ππ
±πππͺπ±ππ°π―ππ»π·ππ°ππΈ jw.j r pt mαΈ₯tt
“I am bound for the northern sky” (CT VI, 196t)
(lit. “I am towards the northern sky”)
With a role, function, occupation, etc., it indicates the subject is moving “towards” that role: jw.f r αΈ₯m-nαΉ―r n jmn “he is to be a priest of Amun”, lit. “he is toward a priest of Amun.” This is exactly like the special uses of m described above.
Incidentally, mαΈ₯tt “northern” is the feminine form of the nisbe of ππ»ππ mαΈ₯.t “the marshlands of the Nile Delta”.
Null subjects
When the meaning is clear enough, an adverbial sentence can be formed from a sentence particle and prepositional phrase, with no subject required:
ππ
±ππ΄ππ°πππΉπ€ jw mj sαΈ«r nαΉ―r
“It is like the plan of a god.” (Sinuhe B 43)
(lit. “Like the plan of a god”, introduced by jw)
Summary: Adverbial Sentences II
Vocabulary
- ππ€ κ₯ “arm, hand”
- ππ
κ₯κ£m “Asiatic person”
- This takes the “enemy” determinative π when the situation calls for it.
- π―π΄π wκ£s “dominion, power”
- π πππ
±π¦ mnj.w “herdsman”
- var. ππΊ, πΈπ ±
- ππ»ππ mαΈ₯.t “the Nile Delta marshlands”
- ππ»ππ π°π mαΈ₯.tj (nisbe) “northern”, “the north”
- πΎππΏπ αΈ₯qκ£ “ruler”
- π¨π°πππ°π αΊr.t “a belonging, a possession”
- π΄ππ°ππ sαΈ«r “plan”
Exercises
(forthcoming)