Dr. Josef Ben Levi on language and epistemology-gctid156779

[Heru Djet]

Agya Yaw;159053 wrote:

Seems like you agree with my premise that we should learn another Kmtyw language before getting serious about Mdw Ntr. Further, in Dr. Rkhty's book, that you reference above, there are 7 sounds she mentions as having no english equivalent. I wanted to get the audio files that accompanied the book but they seem to be unavailable. When I read that I wondered if these sounds have equivalents in another Kmtyw language?

There are a number of communities spread around the U.S. and at least two sites that I know of in Kmt where people are seeking to advance this work. It might be fair to note that there are four dominant approaches to mdw nTr. First are those who seek to understand it for the sake of engaging with ancient texts. These are the majority of students/teachers that I have encountered. Second are those who seek to reconstruct this as a living language. Dr. Rekhty Amen is the biggest proponent of this. Third are those folks who are content with saying "hotep", "hetepu", etc. without actually delving deeper into the language in all of its epistemic and ontological complexity. There is a fourth strand of people who fancy themselves linguists, but seem to lack any substantive training. From them I've seen a number of things that have puzzled me. For instance, take the word nTr, which is pronounced net-cher. Some may pronounce it net-er. I've even seen people say no-tor-oo. I've not encountered this in any of my study of the language. My teachers, Yvonne Jones and Josef Ben Levi, adhere to very similar linguistic conventions to Rkhty Amen (which should be unsurprising given her early role in the Kemetic Institute of Chicago). My point is that many folks are deviating from some of the more established linguistic conventions that were established decades ago by Dr. Amen as well as Dr. Obenga. I have, as of yet, not encountered arguments in favor of these newer approaches that I have found compelling. That said, these novel approaches do seem to attract a fair number of folks.

I agree with Obadele Kambon, we should utilize every cultural vehicle available to us in this process of Re-Kmtywization. I do think that having a connection to an extant Kmtyw culture is a plus, and think that studying mdw nTr in concert with such language is a good thing.

[Heru Djet]

Let me add this, a cacophony of voices does not mean that that each voice is equally endowed with knowledge or wisdom. There may be just as many voices of confusion as there are of reason.

What gives me confidence in the approach to the language that I have learned is that I have seen how they have determined the sound values of the language, using Coptic as a template, and subsequent to this, the consistency of this application throughout. I would query whether everyone can demonstrate a linguistically rigorous method via which they have derived their interpretation of the language. By this I mean, how does the evidence, beyond their own self-referentiality, support their claims?

[Agya Yaw]

Heru Djet;159056 wrote: Let me add this, a cacophony of voices does not mean that that each voice is equally endowed with knowledge or wisdom. There may be just as many voices of confusion as there are of reason.

What gives me confidence in the approach to the language that I have learned is that I have seen how they have determined the sound values of the language, using Coptic as a template, and subsequent to this, the consistency of this application throughout. I would query whether everyone can demonstrate a linguistically rigorous method via which they have derived their interpretation of the language. By this I mean, how does the evidence, beyond their own self-referentiality, support their claims?

Great statement! From my observations on Mdw Ntr teachers, all those I have observed who were taught by Dr Rkhty have the most knowledge and credibility on the subject in my view. That's not to say anyone outside of this "tree" has no credibility.

Heru Djet;159055 wrote: There are a number of communities spread around the U.S. and at least two sites that I know of in Kmt where people are seeking to advance this work. It might be fair to note that there are four dominant approaches to mdw nTr. First are those who seek to understand it for the sake of engaging with ancient texts. These are the majority of students/teachers that I have encountered. Second are those who seek to reconstruct this as a living language. Dr. Rekhty Amen is the biggest proponent of this. Third are those folks who are content with saying "hotep", "hetepu", etc. without actually delving deeper into the language in all of its epistemic and ontological complexity. There is a fourth strand of people who fancy themselves linguists, but seem to lack any substantive training. From them I've seen a number of things that have puzzled me. For instance, take the word nTr, which is pronounced net-cher. Some may pronounce it net-er. I've even seen people say no-tor-oo. I've not encountered this in any of my study of the language. My teachers, Yvonne Jones and Josef Ben Levi, adhere to very similar linguistic conventions to Rkhty Amen (which should be unsurprising given her early role in the Kemetic Institute of Chicago). My point is that many folks are deviating from some of the more established linguistic conventions that were established decades ago by Dr. Amen as well as Dr. Obenga. I have, as of yet, not encountered arguments in favor of these newer approaches that I have found compelling. That said, these novel approaches do seem to attract a fair number of folks.

I agree with Obadele Kambon, we should utilize every cultural vehicle available to us in this process of Re-Kmtywization. I do think that having a connection to an extant Kmtyw culture is a plus, and think that studying mdw nTr in concert with such language is a good thing.

Those four strands of thought can make learning this language confusing. It made me wonder, "does anybody really know what their talking about"? As you stated in the first approach, I'm looking to learn this language to eventually interpret ancient texts. So I think finding Dr. Rhkty's guides and former students that are teaching is good. Still going to focus on Twi and KiSwahili first.

[Ɔbenfo Ọbádélé]

Agya Yaw;159053 wrote:

Seems like you agree with my premise that we should learn another Kmtyw language before getting serious about Mdw Ntr. Further, in Dr. Rkhty's book, that you reference above, there are 7 sounds she mentions as having no english equivalent. I wanted to get the audio files that accompanied the book but they seem to be unavailable. When I read that I wondered if these sounds have equivalents in another Kmtyw language?

I think the issue at hand here is less one of order of operations and more one of intellectual and scholarly rigor. This should not be confused with priorities of "talking at white folks" who have a vested interest in continued deception with regard to Kmt, but making sure we get things right for ourselves and our future generations. @Heru Djet rightly brings up issues of method, which I think are key. To come back to the current discussion, I think that the more tools we have at our disposal, the better. When I was studying Mdw Ntr with Dr. Beatty, the connections that I was able to make between Akan and Mdw Ntr were the primary reason why he [strikethrough]coerced[/strikethrough] convinced me to go to grad school for Kmtyw languages so that we would have better ground to stand on with regard to these connections.

On another note, it is disconcerting to see the non-scholarship of the self-proclaimed linguists who don't know anything about linguistics apart from whatever books they had available at their local community library. I think that some of these folks are saboteurs to derail this important work.

[Kwadwo Tòkunbọ̀]

Bump.

I appreciate this thread.  As a new language leaner I agree with the statements made above in terms of learning and the rigor of approach by those really seeking to further the work.

-------------------------------------------
The oppressed, having internalized the image of the oppressor and adopted his guidelines, are fearful of freedom.
Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed