Talk:Phaistos Disc/Archive 6

message: Do these language tags serve any real purpose? Anyone who is not warned off an article with a clearly non-English title may not be warned by a tag eitherl and at least one of them was misplaced on Duhoux's article, which is of course in English, even though he's French. Septentrionalis 16:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the label are for external links, they should not be used in bibliographies. dab (ᛏ) 18:01, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: compared with AB 37, Linear B ti
What's AB mean? Septentrionalis 16:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: the numbering scheme for Linear A/B glyphs? dab (ᛏ) 18:01, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I would have thought; but better not to make the reader guess. Septentrionalis 20:29, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Right. A=Linear A B=Linear B. Kadmos 20:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, but the numbering is identical for glyphs that appear in both scripts (thank god). But maybe just "A 37" would be enough here. dab (ᛏ) 07:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Language labels

message: This thesis has been advocated by  several scholars because the comparisons of the disk's glyphs with signs of other already known scripts are trite, unsignificant or farfetched. As these glyphs appear to belong to the Aegean area (cf Paul Muenzer, L.Godart, S.Dow., etc.), they see the disk's script as the original invention of an Aegean people. One of these scholars, J.Faucounau supposes this people to be a maritime one, the proto-Ionians, settled in the Cycladic Islands since c.2500BC, who borrowed the idea of a hieroglyphic acrophonic writing from Egypt during the VIth Dynasty.
:And this in spite of the fact that A.Evans, for instance, sees the Disk as made by  "seafaring peoples who at a somewhat later date are found descending on the Delta", adding that "the indications at our disposal may be thought to point to the Western coastlands of Asia Minor "(Scripta Minoa, p. 27).  Or that Gunther Ipsen wrotes : "Eine eingehende Untersuchung aller Bilder sichert so die agäische Herkunft des Diskus" (Indogermanische Forschungen 47, 1929, p. 4)
:So, in your eyes, people who share your POV, like O.Monti or T.Timm, know better about the Aegean archaeology than Arthur Evans or G. Ipsen...  An hypothesis condemned by A.Evans is worth a paragraph in the WP article, not the "Aegean original Script" hypothesis, which not only is in agreement with Evans' ideas, but also with other scholars ideas, like, for instance, B. Schwartz, who considers the Disk as Cretan, but not as Minoan : as a GREEK artifact !!!!
:Yes, strange attitude indeed, contradicting the WP rules and spirit !... But never mind, it's only the 3RR rules which counts, right ?  it's the way a pack of wolves has found to impose his POV.  (80.90.39.45 12:02, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For your remedies, see wikipedia:dispute resolution. Railing and threats will only get you ignored. Septentrionalis 23:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Aegean original script hypothesis

message: This is now the second time that Dr Lukas Pietsch has deleted the paragraph I asked to add about the hypothesis that the PD script would be an "Aegean original script". What are Mr -sorry, Dr!- Pietsch's credentials to be an arbitrator in this field ? Dr Pietsch -the obscure author of a more obscure and confidential book on  "Variable Grammars"-,  is well-known in the Hamburg University for his extraordinary arrogance. Because he is the inventor of the German Extended Unicode Keyboard (a very minor achievement), he acts as if he was a universally recognized Professor-Doctor, giving HIS opinion on everything, NEVER discussing a matter (how could he do ? He generally is a perfect ignoramus in the fields he believes to be an expert), Such an incredible arrogance has led people on the NET to write PUBLIC APPRECIATIONS about him like the following one : (I quote) "Pietsch, you are just a little primitive hater of everything human and positive, a racist of the worst kind. Your letters are full of dirt. No regards" (Reference may be given on request). Personnally, I consider him as a liar and an ignoramus in the Phaistos Disk's matters. Should really this guy be the arbitrator in the Phaistos Disk's WP article ?...  This seems to me the preliminary question for an honest discussion, able to keep the high reputation of the WP Encyclopedia  (80.90.39.45 14:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To Dr Lukas Pietsch : I am sick and tired about your threats and your unethical conduct. If you go on with this editwar and with your anti-WP spirit, I'll send some documents concerning you to the Hamburg University, and they will not be anonymous, this time. My advice : think about that before going on with your usual way to act on the WP encyclopedia. Like many others, I say : no regards to you, sir (80.90.39.45 18:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, Mr Bachmann, I know as well as you do the WP rules, and the WP spirit. The aim of the WP encyclopedia is not to be the site of some unscientific theories, called consensus because a bunch of guys, knowing nothing to the problem but sharing the same POV about it, are threatening other editors, like Dr Pietsch did with this poor Rose-Mary, falsely accusing her of sockpupettry and other things to eliminate her (What, sadly, happened) (80.90.39.45 21:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, Mr Bachmann, it seems to me that you have not read what I wrote in the preceding hereabove paragraph. What are you responding to my objection : an hypothesis, which has no scholarly support (Timm's theory) would be mentioned in the WP article, but not one which is a kind of synthesis between the opinions of diverse scholars (A.Evans : no Minoan, Anatolian coast origin -- Best/Woudhuizen : idem -- B. Schwartz, St. Fischer, M. Stawell, G. Hempl, etc. : a Greek language -- A.Evans, A.Reinach : a proto-Philistine people + scholars thinking that proto-Philistines were Greek-speakers -- etc. ) ? Waiting for your answer, Sir. (80.90.39.45 20:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Rose-mary has neglected to add Robert Graves. Septentrionalis 23:34, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question to Mr Bachmann and other WP administrators : should Dr Lukas Pietsch be the arbitrator ?

message: 80.90.39.45 wrote "I would like to know why the PD sign n° 01 (and not the sign n° 39, which would be more logical) is linked by T.Timm to the Linear A/B sign RE". Such a link is not given at my article or homepage. The only source is chapter 11 "Annäherung an die Bestimmung von Silbenwerten" in Timm 2005 where also the explantion can be found. But before you can start reading chapter 11 you have to read chapter 4, 8, 9 and 10. Chapter 11 is based on the results given there. And dont miss the sentence "Zusammenfassend sei betont, dass die Silbenzuordnungen für D 01 und D 08 als wenig gesicherte Hypothesen betrachtet werden müssen. Die zu den betreffenden Lautwerten führenden Überlegungen sind zwar in sich schlüssig, die Gesamtheit der ihnen zugrunde liegenden Hinweise erscheint für eine sichere Aussage jedoch als nicht ausreichend." [Timm 2005: 175]. Ttimm 18:39, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: PD sign n° 01

message: Some portions of the following may be worth including on their merits:
:This thesis has been advocated by several scholars because they consider the comparisons of the disk's glyphs with signs of other already known scripts to be too few, and the valid ones to be trite and therefore unsignificant. So, A.Evans wrote in Scripta Minoa (p.24/25) that "when one come to compare the figures in detail with those of the Minoan hieroglyphic signary, very great discrepancy is observable... Out of the forty-five separate signs on the Phaistos Disk, no more than ten more or less ressemble Cretan hieroglyphic forms... The human figures in their outline and costume are non-Minoan... The representation of the ship also differs from all similar designs that occur either among the hieroglyphic or the linear documents of Crete". In a similar way, C.J. Ruijgh once wrote to Woudhuizen (about his decipherment based upon comparisons with the Luwian Hieroglyphic script) :  "I don't believe a word of it" (F.Woudhuizen, The Language of the Sea Peoples, Foreword p.xii) 
   
:Most of these scholars consider the glyphs to belong to the Aegean area (e.g. G.Ipsen wrote that  "eine eingehende Untersuchung aller Bilder sichert die ägäische Herkunft des Diskus"), so they have to see the disk's script as the original invention of an Aegean people (living eventually in Crete or more probably in the vicinity of this island) who was, as A.Evans wrote "among the group of Seafaring peoples... who later ravaged the Delta" (op.cit.).  
Septentrionalis 23:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the text is better now. Your behaviour is getting worse. Speaking for myself, I don't feel any 'hatred' at all, but you should consider the possibility that you are obsessed with Faucounau's work. Possibly because you are Jean Faucounau, or at least, as you admit yourself, a close friend of his. There is no conspiracy. Faucounau's work isn't ignored becase of irrational hatred against his person, but rather because it is not very impressive. That's the simple and unexciting truth about the matter. dab (ᛏ) 10:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not obsessed by J.F.'s work. Contrary to you, I find it impressive, because 1)- it is the way to give a logical explanation of the "mystery", in agreement with all the most secure data established by a lot of other scholars :  "The disk cannot be Minoan" (A.Evans) -- "It is probably a script" (Y.Duhoux)" --  "It has been written by an Aegean people, in close relationship with Crete" (G. Ipsen, L.Godart) -- "a people linked to the Anatolian coast" (A.Evans, J.Best & F. Woudhuizen) -- "a people who was the ancestor of the Philistines" (A.Evans, A.Reinach) -- "a Greek language seems to be the most suitable" (Y.Duhoux 1979, St. Fischer. Moreover there is a great majority of attempts in this direction, what seems to be significant. Not to mention the "Attic character" of several signs, as demonstrated by J.F.)  2)-it is supported by impressive evidence (even if it is not your opinion !) (for instance, a logical explanation of almost all the epigraphical facts, i.e. why the scribe crowded the signs in A29 but not in A31) (80.90.39.79 13:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup. That's how it is. Less paranoia, less foam-at-the-mouth, less personal attacks, a bit more yielding-to-consensus and a dash more adhering-to-academia, and things would be fine here. Alexander 007 11:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but the proto_Ionian theory is something alright. It puts a pep in your step, and a zip in your hip. Sort of like Ginger ale soda. We should all go out and buy a copy of J.F., don't you think? An old college try? 70.237.79.127 14:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, J.F. is my hero! He made me understand the Aegaean Early Bronze Age. I have am a happy owner of his collected works, and reading and re-reading turns me on every time. It's alright to be a little bit obsessed with such a tremendous man of genius! 213.3.117.137 14:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed text

message: I'm curious to know whether you think a case can be made for formally encoding Phaistos in Unicode. Be specific yea or nay. Thanks Evertype 13:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: yea, I am sure a case can be made, unless they have an explicit policy against incorporating undeciphered writing systems. It's a clear set of 47 symbols (45 glyphs, the stroke and the "word" separator. 48 with Best's name marker). It is clearly notable (there are dozens of books and hundreds of journal articles dedicated to it). If such a proposal is made, however, it would be practical to submit it as part of a proposal to encode Cretan hieroglyphs. With the 1996 CHIC (see article), there is a clearly numbered glyph inventory of some 150 glyphs. If the Phaistos glyphs are included in the proposal as extra signs, it would amount to some 200 glyphs, all documented and numbered in academic literature, so that it would seem sensible to propose a 8-bit block of "Cretan hieroglyphics". Is there any proposal to include Luwian hieroglyphs btw? That's after all a deciphered script with a rather larger corpus than the Cretan stuff. dab (ᛏ) 14:50, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have information on the other Cretan materials, but in view of its status, I think keeping Phaistos Disc characters on their own is the only way to get it through. I'm interested in building the case. Evertype 23:29, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phaistos in Unicode?