Rubbish. It has nothing to do with phonetics. You are talking utter nonsense. "BBL" is merely a transliteration of the Hebrew characters.Mental flatliner wrote:I clearly stated above that "BBL" was the correct phonetic spelling for Babel.hjalti wrote:And how exactly am I lying?
Again, you are talking utter nonsense. You haven't read your Uruk book for you would know that you have got it all wrong. Names last millennia. you can find the name Uruk, for example, in 2nd c. BCE texts despite the name being thousands of years old.Mental flatliner wrote:I clearly stated above the history of Babylonian culture overlaying Sumerian. When this happened, the names of most of the cities changed, necessitated by the change in dominance from the (now dead) Sumerian language to Akkadian.
Yet again, stop talking rubbish. Babylon is an Anglicization of the Greek βαβυλωνος (via Latin). The -ος is a nominative suffix, while the "ν" was added to allow the Greeks to add suffixes to the toponym. So we find the root of the town name is βαβυλω- while the Akkadian name was Bab-ilu. The Greek is derived from the Akkadian.Mental flatliner wrote:I clearly pointed out that phonetically, "BBLN" should be the correct spelling for Babylon.
Balderdash once again. Why do you open your mouth to keep changing feet? בבל is simply a transliteration of the consonant because Hebrew only had consonants until very late.Mental flatliner wrote:The fact that Hebrew failed to make the change indicates that it preserves the old spelling even in apparent error.
Babel and Babylon are renderings of the original name with different trajectories. Your fixation with these forms is irrelevant. Babel is Bab-ilu, as is Babylon.
No, it isn't.Mental flatliner wrote:This is called an "anachronism".
Again with the irony. You are obsessed here pulling ignorant ideas out of the air in order to seem like you know something. But it is plain that you cannot process the languages involved. You lack even rudimentary philology.Mental flatliner wrote:Your obsession with trying to find a Hebrew language source for the wrong spelling indicates you have an extremely shallow understanding of history and cross-cultural influences.
Obsession! Irony. You're suffering from repetitive stress after a bout of your total contentless spew. Shame on you. You know nothing and yet you think you can pretend here. You're a joke.Mental flatliner wrote:Your obsession with putting meanings into my posts is a deliberate falsification of what I wrote. You always have the option of asking for clarification. You never have the option of lying about my claims.
At least get a copy of Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon and learn how to use it. Then you wouldn't consistently get these things wrong. The lexicon even features semitic variants such as Akkadian name forms.
If you went back to your peers and said this sort of piffle, would they know that you were just bullshitting or do they have as little idea as you?