Talk:Rongorongo/archive 1

message: I have placed a link at the top of the article as a link to Rongorongo (wife of Turi), an ancestress of the Māori of New Zealand. This is to save having a disambiguation page. If there is a better solution just let me know. Kahuroa 10:58, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's good. kwami 11:14, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rongorongo, New Zealand

message: #Just wondering if we could have a clarification of what 'maori' means in Rapa Nui? 
#Is there a source that this statement attributed to Hotu Matu'a comes from? Kahuroa 00:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: our greatest maori

message: Dear Kahuroa,
In the first place, maori, in that context, was probably used to designate a very wise man.  In the second, these are not attestable by any account.  They come from scholarly forms of folklore and it is a quotation of Hotu Matu'a much in the same way Et tu, Brute? is a quotation of Julius Caesar.  I'd appreciate if you didn't erase it, though.  It's making a point.  Hope you can get to Italy.
Sincerely,
Mbrutus 03:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maori and Hotu 

message: Dear Kahuroa,
Here's the full alleged quote as recorded by Father Sebastian Englert,
Our ko hau rongorongo are lost! Future events will destroy these sacred tablets which we bring with us and those which we will make in our new land. Men of other races will guard a few that remain as priceless objects, and their maori will study them in vain without being able to read them. Our ko hau motu mo rongorongo will be lost forever. Aue! Aue!
Hope you can use this.  Cheers!
Sincerely,
Mbrutus 18:43, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Quote" 

message: I found a source with a translation of maori in Rapa Nui. It is actually ma'ori and means 'skilled, old'. Kahuroa 00:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ma'ori

message: I wonder where the aborigens got the wood for the plates from, since the trees on the island were cut out well before the arrival of Europeans?--Shakura 23:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some are carved oars and other wooden, likely European artifacts. There is some evidence that Rongorongo was developed after the first European contact. Gwen Gale 23:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or rather the other way round: there is no evidence that it would have been developed before the first European contacts. --Drieakko 11:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or "wood" have developed :) Gwen Gale 20:57, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget driftwood, also even if the last trees were felled in the 17th century, there would be a legacy of wooden artifacts as they can last a long time, some of these tablets may have been reworked from earlier pieces, or perhaps in the case of the Rei Miru inscribed on a much older object. Also between 1770 and 1862 there were a number of European and American ships that visited wanting water, sex and supplies; so we shouldn't be surprised if some wood reached the island in this timeJonathan Cardy 07:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wood? 

message: Cleaned up the decypherment bit. Mostly restored it to the last version I'd worked on, which meant losing the Italian stuff, since I mostly couldn't understand it. But Guy (above) is right, the Spanish version looks pretty good, and we might want to consider that as an example to follow for improving this article. kwami 23:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Restored the Fischer stuff. As it is now, Fischer proposed that RR is the result of contact diffusion, and also that it's a mnemonic device for genealogies. I doubt he would think it's both, but I don't know his work. Can s.o. check? kwami 05:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  cleaned up 

message: What's with these "manuscripts"? Do they even belong in the article? or are they just someone copying rongorongo onto paper in modern times without understanding what they were writing? kwami (talk) 02:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  manuscripts 

message: (cont. from above)
Kwami, mes amis du groupe Timoteakoako m'ont informes des deviances sur la page  Wikipedia rongorongo. Je tenterai d'inserer dans cette page de discussion des informations plus justes. Ceci pour maintenir Wikipedia a flot car cette encyclopedie n'est plus pedagogique mais une sorte de blog ou de forum. Nous informons nos etudiants des lycees colleges et université de la chute de l'information sur Wikipedia. Des articles dans les revues scientifiques ont paru a ce sujet. Lorena Bettocchi.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.161.46.37 (talk) 13:02, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Lorena. I'll try taking a look at your site again, though right now isn't the best time. I wonder, however, how you can say that the script is proto-writing or that the "oiseau avec une main" has a score of meanings when you haven't been able to decipher it. (Not that anyone has deciphered it, or demonstrated that it's syllabic!) Are you saying that you understand the script but it cannot be deciphered because it isn't full writing and therefore does not represent language, or that it can't be deciphered because too much has been lost? kwami (talk) 08:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Style 2

message: I see that the link to rongorongo.org has been restored despite my warning.
I have consequently deleted all the self-serving advertisements from the two charlatans, Lorena Bettocchi and Sergei Rjabchikov. Put them back and I WILL TAKE RONGORONGO.ORG OFF LINE. Have I made myself clear enough this time?
... and later:
RESPONSE ABOUT PHAISTOS DISK : it is not organized as rongorongo tablets about the structure of glyphs. rongorongo is structured in a superior livel in many sections of lines tablets. A rongorongo glyph is composed by several words, names, verbs, numbers and adverbs, and so one... a rongorongo sign may be a full sentence...
"A rongorongo glyph is composed by several words, names, verbs, numbers and adverbs" eh?
Typical of the arrant bullshit that will worm its way into the wikipedia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JacquesGuy (talk • contribs) 00:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jacques, making threats does nothing to improve the article, and pouting only undermines your own credibility. If you want to take your material offline, be my guest. But do you seriously think any threats you make will change the mind of someone who thinks you're wrong, and insists on adding their POV to the article? Have you looked at the page histories of Palestine or George W. Bush? If this is truly something you care about, then you'll help us improve it. If you feel these people are cranks, it would also help if you provided some reference to demonstrate that to the rest of us. We have no trouble saying that claimants to having deciphered the Phaistos disc are cranks; the problem with Bettocchi is I can't figure out what she's saying. kwami (talk) 00:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, Bettocchi is willing to allow Fischer, whom I must admit sounds rather ridiculous, so I don't see why we can't allow Bettocchi, unless Guy can demonstrate that her work is nonsense. We can certainly have a section on Bettocchi and semantic interpretation (not a rewrite of the entire article to reflect Bettocchi). The problem so far has been getting something intelligible. I admit I haven't spent a lot of time on her web site, but I find it very difficult to understand what her point is. Maybe it's just a problem with my French/Spanish. If you or she can write a coherent outline of her hypothesis, methods, and results, in whichever language is easiest, that would go a long way to solving this problem. If Guy then wants to say why it's wrong, we can include that too - just as we can include why Bettocchi thinks Fischer is wrong. kwami (talk) 22:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  rongorongo.org 

message: Rongorongo is not an "artificial script" in the sense defined in the article artificial script. I can't work out how to change the template but someone should. --86.137.156.17 (talk) 16:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "artificial script" 

message: 2008/01/03 23h AEST
I am appalled at what I read in the history of this article. 
One example. I see in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rongorongo&oldid=176891172 dated December 10:
"Jacques Guy and Lorena Bettocchi are working about structure of rongorongo calendar lunar in the Mamari Tablet."
This suggests that I am cooperating with that woman in the study of the lunar calendar of tablet Mamari.
The bloody cheek of it!
First, I consider the subject of the lunar calendar closed. Nothing more can be said about it. I no longer work on it, PERIOD.
Second, I have never cooperated with that woman and I never will. I cooperate with honest scholars, such as Pozdniakov, Horley and Meroz, not moonbats in tinfoil hats.
And that was only the December 10 version. What horrors am I going to discover as I wind it further back?
Jacques B.M. Guy  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.150.25 (talk) 12:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moonbatsville 

message: It didn't take long.
2008/01/03 23:35 AEST
Version of 16:00, 8 August 2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rongorongo&oldid=149993336
"Lorena Bettocchi and Dominique Proust (French CNRS astronom) are presently working on Mamari tablet..."  Another one. Who's next?
"...For Professor Lorena Bettocchi no one can read rongorongo tablets. It is contrary to the very semantic Austronesian languages."  Ah, rongorongo is contrary to the very semantic Austronesian languages, eh?  Whatever that might mean, other than nothing, it remains that for Professor Lorena Bettocchi no one can read rongorongo tablets. So how are Professor Bettocchi and Dr Proust (notice the pecking order) presently working on Mamari tablet, eh? Dipping it in tea-leaves? 
I think it was Kwamikagami who asked me just recently to demonstrate that she was a crank. Will that do?
JacquesGuy (talk) 12:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moonbatsville continued 

message: Kwamikagami: "If you feel these people are cranks, it would also help if you provided some reference to demonstrate that to the rest of us."
Very well. But there is only one of "these people," you know. If you do an internet trace on  those IP addresses you'll find them coming from Wanadoo or Club-Internet, French ISP's. Likewise if you do a trace on those 58.xxx.xxx.xxx and 59.xxx.xxx.xxx and so on, you'll find that they come from AAPT Limited, 180-188 Burnley Street, Richmond VIC 3121. And although I am sometimes 59.101.234.233, sometimes 59.101.239.157, sometimes again 61.68.170.190 (and right now 61.68.187.119) there is still only one of me. So I'll leave you to guess who "these people" is.
But now, let us go to the French wikipedia on the rongorongo, where I have left the original four links (although I edited their captions).
The links are:
* 1. http://www.rongo-rongo.com/
* 2. http://www.isla-de-pascua.com/
* 3. http://www.rongorongo-ile-de-paques.com/
* 4. http://www.austronesien.com/
Find their owners (ask godaddy.com for instance)
1) 
* Domain Name:rongo-rongo.com
* Domain registrar_creation:2003-10-09 14:57:01
* Domain registrar_expiration:2008-10-09 16:57:01
* Domain registry_creation:2003-10-09 16:57:01
* Domain registry_expiration:2008-10-09 16:57:01
* Domain lastupdate:2007-11-02 23:07:46
* Name Server:ns0.online.net
* Name Server:ns1.online.net
* Owner ID: FREE-ORG-47434
* Owner Name: Lorena BETTOCCHI
* Owner Street1: 47 rue de l'Yser
* Owner City: Le Creusot
* Owner Postal Code: 71200
* Owner Country: FRANCE
* Owner Phone: +33.038578
* Owner Email: daniel@sotty.com
* Owner lastupdate: 2006-10-27 16:23:46
Take notice of the e-mail: daniel@sotty.com
Also note that the phone number is bogus. All French phone numbers are 10-digits long, with a leading zero which you omit when you dial the country prefix (33 for France). Standard fare.
2) 
* Domain Name:isla-de-pascua.com
* Domain registrar_creation:2003-10-09 15:19:00
* Domain registrar_expiration:2008-10-09 17:19:00
* Domain registry_creation:2003-10-09 17:19:00
* Domain registry_expiration:2008-10-09 17:19:00
* Domain lastupdate:2007-11-02 22:33:01
* Name Server:ns0.online.net
* Name Server:ns1.online.net
* Owner ID: FREE-ORG-47438
* Owner Name: Lorena BETTOCCHI
* Owner Street1: 47 rue de l'Yser
* Owner City: Le Creusot
* Owner Postal Code: 71200
* Owner Country: FRANCE
* Owner Phone: +33.038578
* Owner Email: daniel@sotty.com
* Owner lastupdate: 2006-10-27 16:23:46
Note the e-mail: same person again. 
And same bogus phone number.
3) 
* Domain Name:rongorongo-ile-de-paques.com
* Domain registrar_creation:2006-03-18 08:16:52
* Domain registrar_expiration:2008-03-18 03:16:52
* Domain registry_creation:2006-03-18 09:16:52
* Domain registry_expiration:2008-03-18 08:16:52
* Domain lastupdate:2007-11-02 23:07:46
* Name Server:ns0.online.net
* Name Server:ns1.online.net
* Owner ID: FREE-ORG-158768
* Owner Name: Daniel Sotty
* Owner Organization: SOTTY
* Owner Street1: Les Touillards
* Owner Street2: 38 levée du Canal
* Owner City: ciry le noble
* Owner Postal Code: 71420
* Owner Country: FRANCE
* Owner Phone: +33.385790951
* Owner Email: daniel@sotty.com
* Owner lastupdate: 2007-04-11 02:59:49
Same fellow again, this time also owner of the domain name, and with a valid phone number, his real one, which you do find in the White Pages.
4)
* Domain Name:austronesien.com
* Domain registrar_creation:2007-03-17 16:05:11
* Domain registrar_expiration:2008-03-17 16:05:11
* Domain registry_creation:2007-03-17 16:05:11
* Domain registry_expiration:2008-03-17 16:05:11
* Domain lastupdate:2007-11-02 21:14:14
* Name Server:ns0.online.net
* Name Server:ns1.online.net
* Owner ID: FREE-ORG-158768
* Owner Name: Daniel Sotty
* Owner Organization: SOTTY
* Owner Street1: Les Touillards
* Owner Street2: 38 levée du Canal
* Owner City: ciry le noble
* Owner Postal Code: 71420
* Owner Country: FRANCE
* Owner Phone: +33.385790951
* Owner Email: daniel@sotty.com
* Owner lastupdate: 2007-04-11 02:59:49
Same one again.
Who is this Daniel Sotty? If you look carefully at the home pages of her four sites you'll learn that he is their webmaster. He probably updates and maintains them. 
To find out more visit www.sotty.com
It's all about the Sotty family, 5 children, 13 grandchildren. They're into arts, crafts and interior decoration, mostly. You'll find links to goat cheeses, their family photos, Jean-Charles's computer repair shop, local Burgundese artists (Ciry le Noble is in Burgundy), Alexandre's artistic metalworking shop, Annie's works (she's a painter and cartoonist), their dog Pépette and so on and on and on.
But, towards the bottom of the page, under the title "Les sites des amis des Sotty" (The Sites of the Friends of the Sotty Family) there is a short biography (7 lines) of Lorena Bettocchi entitled
"Lorena Bettocchi nous parle des rongorongo"
(Lorena Bettocchi tells us about the rongorongo)
Clicking on that title takes you to rongo-rongo.com
A few lines further down:
Isla-de-pascua - Los origenes de la antigua escritura de la Isla de Pascua publicado en Archivum, revista historica de la V Region, a fin de 2006. Datos historicos sobre la antigua escritura de la Isla de Pascua, publicado en las actas de la IV Jornada Historica y Maritima, realizada en el Museo Maritimo de Valparaiso el 19 de octubre de 2006.
Clicking on "Isla-de-pascua" takes you to... www.isla-de-pascua.com, the site owned by Lorena Bettocchi.
Just underneath you read:
Île de Pâques - Contexte historique et découverte d'une proto-écriture à l'Ile de Pâques.
(Easter Island - Historical context and discovery of a proto-script on Easter Island)
Clicking on "Île de Pâques" takes you to... have you guessed already? Yes... www.rongorongo-ile-de-paques.com which he, Daniel Sotty, owns.
Now do visit www.isla-de-pascua.com 
Its author is Lorena Bettocchi but this fact is occulted by an opening dedication, in Rapa Nui, to one Clemente Hereveri Teao, with his photograph. This gives the impression that he is the author of the page (hey, do many understand the Rapanui language? I think not).
The home page, all in Spanish, contains:
1. Bitter bitching about the English Wikipedia  being full of mistakes and Lorena Bettocchi's contributions being rejected by the loathsome Anglo-Saxons.
2. Links to a handful of articles of hers in Spanish.
3. A biography of her.
4. Links to her three other sites (rongo-rongo.com, rongorongo-ile-de-paques.com, austronésien.com)
5. One link (right at the bottom) to Daniel Sotty's forays into amateur archaeology in Burgundy. Rub my back, I'll rub yours, I suppose.
In summary, an incestuous relationship between five sites aimed at giving the impression of a consensus.
On the other hand, I don't mind Rjabchikov so much. At least he started with what seemed good ideas (and I got him published in the Journal of the Polynesian Society on the strength of his two or three good ideas) but, alas, he went batty. Fancy him having deciphered the Phaistos Disk! (and it's in Old Slavonic, too). He also started stuffing the Wikipedia full of his publications. One or two in the bibliography, all right, provided they are not too batty, and they are swamped in serious ones. Notice too how "these people" keep zapping the references to his publications as soon as he put them in the wiki. "This here wiki ain't big enough for the both of us moonbats, pardner."
61.68.187.119 (but not for long) a.k.a.
JacquesGuy (talk) 10:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. It was pretty clear to me from the writing that the sites were all written by the same person. I wasn't even thinking of it as trying to create the illusion of consensus, though I suppose that could be the case. But the quality of writing differs greatly between the posters, and the 190x IP address is in Valparaiso. Yes, a lot of the things in this article and on this talk page sounded loopy, but I couldn't be sure it wasn't a language problem. I thought perhaps one of the posters was Rapa Nui and didn't have good command of Spanish, for example. (I mean, how do you misspell Spanish?) And when the Spanish (or French) seemed to be written well, but still sounded loopy, well, my Spanish/French isn't the greatest, and anyway perhaps things were dumbed down for the general public. I find Antoine Meillet perfectly intelligible, but that's professional quality writing, and anyway maybe I've just gotten rusty. But how can you determine the semantics of a tablet if the glyphs are not decipherable? It seems B's take is that it's proto-writing, and therefore it cannot be read because it doesn't represent language. But how do you get a handle on the semantics, with no context? That doesn't seem to be explained anywhere. Is it me, is it badly written, or is it just unintelligible? kwami (talk) 11:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I know the literal meaning of the passages is often nonsense, even with my limited Spanish and French, but I keep wondering if the ideas might be sensible but just badly written. That's not very confidence inspiring, of course. However, although Bettocchi may have been in Valparaiso when those postings were made, it doesn't follow that she made them. I get the impression, from what I've been able to make out (I haven't taken the time to read all of her sites; it's difficult to read much when I'm not sure why I'm not understanding what she's saying), that she's tried to interpret rongorongo based on the Jaussen list and the modern manuscripts which were presumably based on it, much as people tried a 'semantic' interpretation of hieroglyphs before they were deciphered. She might easily be able to convince a few Rapa Nui in Chile that she's given them a key to their past. (I worked with a Rapa Nui woman in the USA, so I'm sure there are plenty in Chile.) That could arouse strong emotions, especially after near genocide and second-class citizenship, and she could have some very dedicated followers. Is the Spanish mangled because it's Bettocchi, and she hasn't mastered the language, because there are still Rapa Nui out there who are not fluent, or because she appeals to the uneducated? Not that having followers in itself makes what she says credible, but I think it's worth looking into if only for fair play. Unfortunately, she hasn't responded to my requests by summarizing her approach in a manner I find comprehensible, and unless that happens, I'm afraid I'll never find the time to really go over her web site. (I went over the slide show, and at least out of context it was ridiculous, which pretty much dampened my enthusiasm.) kwami (talk) 00:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Hey, it's starting to read like a real article! I did remove a couple things you added: links to a page that is now offline, and unsupported statements that Macri etc. are wrong - that seemed to be POV/OR, especially considering that no one knows what is right. (It does say she's never figured out any phonetic values.) kwami (talk) 17:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attn Kwamikagami mainly 

message: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Englert
Someone write an English version please. It's easy German, even I could do it. But there remains the section on Thomson, after which the article will be reasonably complete.
JacquesGuy (talk) 22:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I did it (Sebastian Englert), but I don't know German, so you might want to check the translation. Also, in the German article several of the towns link to disambiguation pages, so their IDs need to be verified. kwami (talk) 22:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Ah, the Russian version had the specific towns. However, that article is a nearly word-for-word translation of the German, except that the end was cut off, making me wonder if they didn't just link to the most likely town for each name. kwami (talk) 23:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

text: If you look to the left of the article proper, and scroll down, you'll see a list of other language wikipedias which have an article on the same topic. kwami (talk) 05:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Englert's bio

message: How many distinct glyph components did Pozdniakov end up with? kwami (talk) 08:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: en se basant sur le catalogue de T. Barthel il n'existe aucune possibilité d'accomplir une analyse statistique convenable. (p.294, second last paragraph, he explains why, too)
Designing an effective transliteration system is not easy. And then, you have do the transliteration itself. Months and months of work. And for what result? Most of the corpus hasn't been properly photographed! Working from Barthel's tracings just isn't good enough. [Jacques Guy]  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwamikagami (talk • contribs) 01:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ouh la la, cela à l'air d'être chaud chez les rongorongologues :) Pozdniakov  avait fait une petite conférence il y a environ dix ans à propos de ses travaux sur les rongorongo pour les étudiants de langues océaniennes de l'INALCO. Son approche m'avait semblé très (trop) statistique et ne m'avait pas vraiment convaincu mais je dois reconnaitre que je ne connais pas grand chose sur la question. Il a depuis eu un poste au département langues africaines, car il est avant tout un africaniste. Pour le contacter, il suffit à mon avis d'ajouter @inalco à son nom. Bon courage à tous dans la suite de vos recherches Nevers (talk) 16:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Nevers. It would be nice if we had his input too. Jacques & I have had enough for now, but if someone starts arguing we're in a conspiracy to silence the Truth again, I'll see about trying to get Pozdniakov involved. kwami (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Désolé vieux, mais je crois que Pozdniakov est toujours aux langes'o. Mais autant que vous le contactiez directement entre deux verres de vodka :)Nevers (talk) 01:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pozdniakov 

message: maybe a comment about tablets being used as reels for fishing lines, etc., with the idea that they were no longer of much value when no one could read them? kwami (talk) 11:45, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, good idea. The Echancrée of course, and H, with that gash made by a firestick (identified by Catherine Orliac). That's two out of 20 (26 minus the Staff, the two rei miro, the snuffbox, the statuette, and a probable tourist bait or two). Not a bad strike rate when you consider that few would have survived at all if they were used for fishing reels and firemaking. Bit like when you used your morning paper for bumf. Or for rolling cigarettes like they did in New Guinea (the Sydney Morning Herald was renowned for providing a cleaner, more satisfying smoke. Missionaries would sell it for one shilling a page. Donald Laycock, pers. com. ca 1970)   JacquesGuy (talk) 16:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  disappearance 

message: Hey Jacques. Here , where we illustrate the reading direction, is a dead link. Could we either put the page back online, or load the image to Wikipedia? kwami (talk) 05:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, the page is back on-line. Some day I'll have to fix those splatter-like artifacts in the GIF.  JacquesGuy (talk) 05:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  dead link 

message: Lorena à  Kwami et SergeiR sur le chapitre "names and contents" : il conviendrait d'ajouter la source bibliographique concernant  ces noms attribués aux tablettes, "ika, renga", tablettes de la mort... de Timo, le sorcier etc...  noms attribués par les tabous, la peur, le syncrétisme du début du 20e s. Je n'ai pour ma part, en 2008, après 16 années de recherches et de constitution de la banque de données comportant tous les témoignages,  qu'un seul document authentique et manuscrit qui fournit ces informations : contenu des notes de Catherine Routledge au British Museum, largement recopiées par tous les auteurs qui ont suivi. J'avais étudié cela en 1998 lorsque j'ai publié mon livre LA PAROLE PERDUE (d'après les notes du père S.  Englert);  mais à présent plus aucun philologue attaché á la culture polynésienne ne tombe dans le piège.  Quelles seraient les sources de Sergei,  qui ne sont pas des ouvrages d'ethnologues, archéologues ou missionnaires de l'après Routledge ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.170.3.58 (talk) 13:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: names and contents 

message: I get all three asking for +Carroll +"Anthropological Society of Australia"
It seems to be "Alan."  I found several theses that mention him and in all it's "Alan."
He was a paediatrician. You'll find all those references easily:
# http://alpha3.latrobe.edu.au/thesis/uploads/approved/adt-LTU20061113.110150/public/01front.pdf
# http://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/using/copies/microform/aboriginal/c.html
# http://www.dr-fnlee.org/docs5/roots/roots.pdf  
# http://www.science.org.au/academy/basser/lists/ms026.htm
# http://www.asap.unimelb.edu.au/bsparcs/biogs/P001134b.htm
# http://alpha3.latrobe.edu.au/thesis/uploads/approved/adt-LTU20061113.110150/public/05chapter6-bib.pdf
# http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/2123/402/1/adt-NU2000.0015whole.pdf
It's "Alan" in all except #4 so I'm correcting to "Alan."
—Preceding unsigned comment added by JacquesGuy (talk • contribs) 11:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Allan, Allen, or Alan Carroll?

message: Having cast a closer glance at the page, I realize that, maybe, the gif image
Roro-HPQ3.gif should be some 40 pixels narrower. As it is, it seems to eat into the right-hand margin. Could an old hand at this game please advise? Miroir du Baron Samedi? (My display is set to 1024x768)
Sorry. Ignore this. I hadn't maximized the window. Bit of advice in such cases would still be welcome.
JacquesGuy (talk) 04:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You can set the width of an image, but the problem comes in when others have different browser settings. If the image is too wide, it just triggers a left-right scroll-bar. You can see both at Rings of Saturn. kwami (talk) 07:47, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Illustration of parallel text

message: An interesting story here: http://www.helsinki.fi/hum/ibero/xaman/articulos/9805/9805_hk2.html
JacquesGuy (talk) 02:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Knorozov vs Barthel

message: I noticed this footnote:
:In 1886 Ure Vaeiko recited a chant translated as "Land copulated with the fish Ruhi Paralyzer: There issued forth the sun", which Fischer cites as a parallel
Where is that in Fischer? I seem to remember something like that, but very vaguely.
Anyway, that can only refer to this verse of Atua-Matariri:
Ure Vaeiko: Heima; Ki ai Kiroto Kairui Kairui-Hakamarui Kapu te Raa.
Salmon:    God Heima and goddess Kairui-hakamarui produced stars.
Métraux: He Hina [He ima?] ki ai ki roto kia Rui-haka-ma-rui, ka pu te raa.
Métraux: Moon (?) by copulating with Darkness (?) produced Sun
To get the meaning given by Fischer we need to read:
Henua, ki 'ai ki roto ki a Ruhi Hakamaruhi, ka pu te raa
Henua is "land", ruhi is the name of a fish, haka is a factitive verbal prefix, maruhi is "paralytic", raa is "sun."
But in this case "ruhi" is a proper noun because it is introduced by "ki a". As a common noun it would be introduced by "ki te" viz:
Henua, ki 'ai ki roto ki te ruhi hakamaruhi, ka pu te raa
As for it being a paralyzer, Englert does not give it as dangerous but as a large, dark fish with tasty flesh (cierto pez, grande, de color oscuro, carne sabrosa).
JacquesGuy (talk) 10:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Footnote about Atua Matariri

message: "However, this only dates the wood, not the inscriptions, and the scarcity of wood on Easter Island meant that such things must have been often recycled."
Upon re-reading and re-reading again, this does not make much sense to me. There would seem to be a hierarchy of sorts as to what you recycle into what. When you recycle a tablet as a fishing reel, like the Echancrée was, and many others according to Pinart as quoted by Chauvet, it is because the tablet has become valued lower than a fishing reel. Likewise when it becomes used for fire-making like Tablet H according to Catherine Orliac. Against that, there is Tablet A, an oar recycled the other way, as a tablet. But an oar of European origin. Thus there is only evidence for these to have been recycled once. Even the Snuffbox. There is no evidence that it came from a tablet recycled as a fishing reel.
At best, this only allows to speculate about the date when tablet-engraving ceased to be considered worthwhile, and to speculate further whether that was contemporary with the toppling of the statues. Practical wooden objects, however, fishing reels for example, would likely have become recycled into tablets with the growth of the tourist trade. But where is the evidence? And nowadays wood is available. Not much point in recycling decades-old bits of it. (Where do curio carvers get their supplies from, I wonder?)
I'd rather say something to the effect: "However, this only dates the wood, which may have been used for various other purposes before being inscribed on." And let readers sort it out themselves.
JacquesGuy (talk) 23:45, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dating the tablets

message: I put in a (fact) note since it wasn't clear when Barthel published the calendar claim. I assume it was 1958b. There's also a problem in the corpus section, where we say that Barthel was the first to publish the corpus, but then go on to compare his drawing w Phillipi. I assume Phillipi only published a small portion, but we should mention that before getting into Barthel. kwami (talk) 02:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that Philippi only published the Santiago Staff (in its entirety, too). Carroll published part of the Oar in his first JPS article. Delving deeper into all the stuff written on the subject will probably reveal many bits and pieces of the corpus published.
JacquesGuy (talk) 02:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Published

message: Much better like this. Makes room for something entitled "Oral traditions" or whatever where Routledge and Englert have their place (I'll unlock his "leyendas" on roro.org). And then that should be just about it (knock on wood).
JacquesGuy (talk) 02:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "move corpus out of deciphement"

message: The discrepancy between Fischer's rendition on the one hand, and Philippi's and Barthel's on the other, is puzzling. I find it significant that Barthel should have annotated this rubbing in red ink. Makes me think that the rubbing of the lower part of the glyph shows a knot in the wood, and that Barthel, probably having a copy of Philippi's drawing, double-checked. Whence his "Original doch 53.76!" i.e. "the original is indeed 53.76!" JacquesGuy (talk) 02:53, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know about saying that the bottom half resembles Fischer. It's just a couple lines; the distinctive part is the top. 
kwami (talk) 03:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Maybe we should cover the calendrical reading. We spend a lot of time on Fischer, which no one that I know of accepts
Nevertheless he got published by Oxford University Press, never mind they didn't ask Andrew Pawley, the only Polynesianist of their reading committee, you just can't dismiss him like that.JacquesGuy (talk) 04:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

text: but then skim over the one decipherment that everyone accepts. I would think that people would be more interested in the latter.
The lunar calendar? Not easy to deal with that in a few lines. That would lead us to Viktor Krupa's stupidities too, approved of by Barthel. Pity Knorozov is no longer alive. JacquesGuy (talk) 04:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The rubbing of line 12 of the Santiago Staff

message: Yes, appendix. The line drawings are at the end of the book, not paginated. How do you refer to them, then? JacquesGuy (talk) 03:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, my question was 1958a vs. 1958b, that's all. kwami (talk) 06:51, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Barthel (1958b:Appendix)(?)

message: Thousands? I'd rather hedge my bets.  "the many petroglyphs" rather? Oh, and there should be a ref to Georgia Lee. She's the one who knows about those petroglyphs.
59.101.164.106 (talk) 10:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added a section. I've taken some info from Lee's website, but assume that these basic points were covered in her book. kwami (talk) 02:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: the thousands of petroglyphs

message: "and a komari appears at the upper right of the central figure."
No, that's no komari glyph. That is glyph 27, which looks like a curvilinear V. The komari glyph is glyph 51, which looks very much like Japanese scissors (hasami). It is found repeated on the rei-miro with the long inscription, aka object L, which ends:
470-51t-2.678a-51-79:51-700-51-20.10-51-11-51-11-51-48-51
It occurs there twice more, but fused to the top of a difficult-to-identify glyph, perhaps 700, perhaps 48, or something else again.  This fused form is glyph 115 in Barthel's list.
The "feather" or "palm frond" to the left of the "canoe" under the central figure is glyph 3.
JacquesGuy (talk) 03:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed it. Is the 'canoe' an identifiable roroglyph? kwami (talk) 05:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ana o Keke inscription

message: I noticed this detail (in boldface) for the first time:
"Unfortunately, [Butinov's] proof for this claim consisted again, as in 1956, of the "genealogy" that Butinov believed is inscribed on the verso of the "Small Santiago Tablet" (RR 8v). In actual fact, this text appears instead to be a procreation chant whose X1YZ structure radically differs from what Butinov has segmented for this text."
In actual fact, this text rather appears to be a procreation chant whose X1YX structure (not X1YZ) radically differs from what Fischer has identified as procreation chants (X1YZ)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JacquesGuy (talk • contribs) 12:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fun with phalluses

message: I've started adding thumbnails of the tablets to the list, the way we do for the moons. They're from Chauvet and Thomson. Still have Small Santiago to go, but it's traced over. kwami (talk) 07:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Anne, I'd welcome any useful information. But the anonymous edits we've been getting - whether they're from you or Lorena or someone else - have been at times incoherent and at times demonstrably wrong, so I haven't given them much credence. I asked Lorena (or someone who seemed to be Lorena) for an explanation of her views, and was directed to an on-line slide slow. When I pointed out some of its numerous errors, the response I got was that the slide show was not reliable, so I shouldn't condemn Lorena because of it. But if it's not reliable, why does she use it to illustrate her views? I later found the description of her method on her website. It displays the same confused thinking as the slide show, and is similar to dozens of people who have claimed to have deciphered RR. The people we've included, such as Knorozov and Barthel, have made real contributions. Fischer is included because his book is so popular, but with the criticisms of others in the field who reject his conclusions. There are dozens of other people, like Barry Fell and Sergei, who claim to have deciphered RR but whose ideas aren't worth mentioning. Lorena says Sergei is nonsense, Sergei says Lorena is nonsense, and I don't see any reason to mention either of them. If you can provide a sensible description of her method, great, but what she herself has written does not strike me as notable. kwami (talk) 02:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  images 

message: Moved the calendar to Rapa Nui language. —kwami (talk) 08:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a good move. The calendar has to do with paleaoastronomy and decipherment. Practically nothing to do with the language, except for a few names of nights which constitute weak (very weak) evidence that the language of the roro is Rapa Nui. Night Hiro for instance, represented by a feather(?) garland doubled up, while "hiro" is homophonous with a verb that means "to twist fibres into a rope." But on its own this piece of evidence amounts to nothing at all. It is only when added to other similar evidence (Tane for instance, represented by a frigate bird, tavake, same first syllable) that it could amount to something. The interest of the calendar lies elsewhere. It demonstrates, for instance, that the roro are not a pictographic system. If it were, the moon crescents after the full moon would face the other way. It further suggests that sign 3 is a marker for gods, and an allograph of 59f the "feather cape." And so on. Nothing of that is relevant to an article on the Rapa Nui language.   JacquesGuy (talk) 00:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

text: The "calendar" is the only text which everyone agrees upon being that. So it belongs first and foremost in "decipherment." The next candidate is the genealogy. But there is no consensus there. If you remove the calendar, then you have to remove the genealogy. And everything else.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JacquesGuy (talk • contribs) 07:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The proposed genealogy is rongorongo, Thomson's calendar is not, and we don't provide any way of connecting it to rongorongo. The link is there for anyone who wants to follow up on it. kwami (talk) 15:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Okay, maybe that should go. kwami (talk) 15:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  calendar 

message: I thought Thomas Barthel deserved some recognition, so I created an article stub. You might want to verify it. kwami (talk) 04:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked for a biography of him in German and so far found nothing. I could not even find the title of his thesis.JacquesGuy (talk) 14:20, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I found this and added what I understood of it to the article. kwami (talk) 14:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  biography stub 

message: "the only [text] with punctuation."
We don't know that! The vertical line exists in Ancient Egyptian too, and it's not a punctuation mark at all. It means that the hieroglyph it accompanies is to be taken as what it represents, i.e. is to be interpreted as an icon, not a symbol. For instance, to take a familiar, modern example, a picture of a woman in a skirt is to be understood as "woman" (icon) not as "women's toilet" (symbol). And a cup as "cup" (icon) not "cafeteria" (symbol). We know nothing of what that roro vertical line represented. JacquesGuy (talk) 13:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Santiago Staff again

message: The picture of glyph 067 displays as:
  Image:Rongorongo 067.svg
in my browser (latest version of Firefox: 2.0.0.12).
Does Firefox not like scalable vector graphics, or is the file defective? JacquesGuy (talk) 21:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I just haven't gotten around to finishing that graphic, but having a placeholder in the article keeps me from forgetting it. kwami (talk) 02:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dating the tablets: glyph 067

message: But the quote is in English, whereas "Neues zur Osterinselschrift" (Barthel 1959a) is in German. Wouldn't it be better to reference the page in Fischer 1997 where that translation appears? (It's right at the bottom of p.526) JacquesGuy (talk) 00:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "This is Barthel 1959a in Fischer 1997" (in footnote)

message: Sorry, still haven't gotten to that citation. 
I've added articles for most of the tablets now. Mostly material taken from Fischer's summaries; eventually I'd like to add the texts. 
Also added a short section on Harrison's 'name' lists. kwami (talk) 10:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections 

message: Just realized we don't have a section on how the script was used. That requires teasing apart the traditions, of course, so we'd have to say it's all rather uncertain, but I thought the New Scientist article had a decent summary: 
:At formal gatherings, the tablets were flourished, and the inscriptions were ritually sung to activate their spiritual power. Depending on their content, inscriptions could elicit supernatural powers to kill a murderer, enhance female fertility, invoke rain, or increase crop productivity or the size of a catch.
:Islanders say that in pre-missionary days many tablets were destroyed in wars or deliberately burnt to remove the spiritual power of rival clans. Other tablets were buried with the honoured dead. 
Is this in the ballpark, considering that we don't really know? kwami (talk) 11:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use 

message: Let's see, though. If they haven't conchié this article on March 1st I'll restore roro.org and see.
As for New Scientist, I don't lend it much more credibility than to whatsitsname again? New Dawn. Or the Weekly World News.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JacquesGuy (talk • contribs) 04:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wot? Moonbats yukue fumei? 

message: Good. The stupid arsehole called Coolgamer thinks he knows English better. roro.org will not be restored on March 1st.
(Addendum) I don't see any point in contributing to something that any poor moron, like Coolgamer, can drop his shit in as he happens by. Farewell and go screw your sorry selves.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.183.165 (talk) 14:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, you're keeping your site off-line because someone changed no-one to nobody a week ago?? Oh well. Thanks for all the work you've done developing this article. A few touch-ups and it should be ready for FA nomination. kwami (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: @ Coolgamer