Pre-Late Egyptian Reconstruction/Egyptian Pronunciation

Most of this information comes from the masterminds of:

Werner Vycichl
Jozef Vergote
Sir A.H. Gardiner
Pierre Lacau
Antonio Loprieno
Gábor TAKÁCS
Helmut Satzinger
James P. Allen
Carsten Peust

If there's any scholar not mentioned above who partook they will be respectively added in future edits. Thank you for your hard work.

Consonants

In earlier Egyptian may have represented a uvular trill (ʀ) or voiced uvular trill (ʁ)
By the Middle Kingdom, |ɜ| turned into a glottal stop (ʔ)- which is similar to the gulping/choking sound found in the British pronunciation of bottle (though this may have also been a dialectal variation of the sound ɜ).

Some other theories are that |ɜ| may have been a lateral approximate (l, ɫ, ect..) or voiceless dental and alveolar lateral fricative (ɬ).

Since prehistoric times |j| is believed to have been a palatal approximate (j, ʲ).
By the beginning of the Middle Kingdom |j| assimilated into a glottal stop (ʔ, ^ʔ) before an unstressed vowel in initial position (jawīn > ^ʔawīn), as well as at the end of a syllable of a stressed syllable (bājnat > bā^ʔnat).
In hieroglyphs when used as a clitic/suffix/addition at the end of a word (or beginning of a word) it may have signaled a vowel rather than Vj or jV.

Either represents y in yes or can be used in lieu of j. It appears to have been originally used for Afroasiatic y in loan words or group writing but also took on the unstable characteristics of Egyptian j

Is like it is in English labio-velar approximant (w).
Like Egyptian -j, w may have signaled a vowel rather than -Vw / -wV especially when used as a suffix/clitic/addition.
The diphthong -aw may have sounded like äʊ or äʊ̯ which is a popular pronunciation used in many Afroasiatic languages.

ꜥ

Is generally believed to be a voiced pharyngeal fricative (ʕ).
It is also believed that a dialect (or two) possibly instead used a d sound [look under the letter d for vocalization].

f, p and b

f is pronounced as it is in English voiceless labiodental fricative| (f).
p was a voiceless bilabial stop (p) and under some conditions was aspirated (pʰ).
b was a voiced bilabial stop (b). During the Late Kingdom b may have started to be pronounced like a voiced bilabial fricative (β) under some environments.
b tends to be regarded as the unaspirated voiced counterpart of p which is regarded as aspiratable voiceless- this is evident in Coptic variant spellings of these two phonemes especially in final syllable position.

m and n

Are pronounced as they are in English: bilabial nasal (m) and alveolar nasal (n).
Also appears that the vowels used in the same syllable as m and n were strongly nasalized culminating in n => velar nasal (ŋ)- sound in sing or possibly uvular nasal (ɴ) at the end of a syllable when in contact by specific consonants (like g, k, ect.), and in other instances (n) and (m) may have had a geminated pro-longed enunciation. There also was a change of the original stressed vowel a into u within the same syllable as (n) and (m) which grew predominance during the Canaanite Vowel Shift.

The Four H's: h, ḥ, ḫ, h

h = like it is in English.
ḥ = started out as an voiceless pharyngeal fricative (ħ). Typically characterized as a fricative in the upper pharynx, it is often a whispered [h]. The two consonants h and ḥ have merged to Coptic h.
ḫ = voiceless velar fricative (x) from Semitic/Afroasiatic loans... may have also colloquially been a voiced velar fricative (ɣ) or voiceless uvular fricative (ꭓ). Occasionally a voiced pharyngeal fricative (ʕ) from Semitic loan words. This sound has two (Pre-)Coptic descendants: ḫ and h=> which is palatalized. This ocurred in the New Kingdom with ḫj (Demotic h-hooked) occasionally used for older ḫ where the Coptic descendent is h . This new digraph in the New Kingdom indicates a secondary palatalization (x > x).

h = voiceless palatal fricative (ç)

voiceless palato-alveolar sibilant (ʃ). The consonants transcribed as h and š are regularly distinguished from one another only after the Old Kingdom. Earlier words that later have h are regularly spelled š (but not vice versa).

voiceless alveolar fricative (s), although originally there may have been a supplementary feature |+palatal| which gave an articulation close to sʲ.

May have been an ejective (sˈ). Old Egyptian |s| is the heir of Afroasiatic voiceless dental fricative (θ) and voiceless alveolar sibilant (s) and thus may have represented either sound. Other theories are that it may have been a voiceless alveolar affricative (t͡s).
At some point before the Middle Kingdom |z| and |s| were neutralized.

k, q and g

k = voiceless velar stop (k). Possibly aspiratable (kʰ) and/or palatalized (kʲ) under certain environments.
q = Started out as a voiceless uvular stop/plosive (q) (it is pronounced like k, except that the tongue makes contact not on the soft palate but on the uvula) and eventually it was pronounced like a uvular ejective (qʼ) .
g = velar ejective (kʼ).

d and t^[1]

d may have been an ejective apical consonant (t̺ˈ) or apical non-ejective d̺. Other hypotheses are that it is either laminal denti-alveolar (d̪) similar to Spanish, or like emphatic/pharyngeal dˤ of Arabic. It's actual pronunciation is a matter of debate but it may have been something similar to an ejective apical t̺ˈ or apical non-ejective d̺ especially due to ejective/aspiration alternations with consonants and the change from orthographic d into t in Coptic.
t = (if d ~ t̺ˈ ) may have been the non-ejective aspiratable counterpart of d, thus: t̺(ʰ).
-vt syllables whether in unstressed position (natǎrat) or stressed (jātraw) were reduced (e.g; natǎra^ʔ, jā^ʔraw)- this is not always indicated in spelling.

d and t

d was the palatal(ized) counterpart of d : t̺ʲˈ, palatal ejective (cʼ), palatao-alveolar ejective affricative (t͡ʃʼ), t̺ˈʃ / tˈʃ, voiced palato-alveolar affricative (d͡ʒ) (possibly an ejective post-alveolar voiced affricative (dʒʼ)), voiced palatal stop (ɟ) ~ ejective (ɟˈ) or voiced palatal affricate (ɟ͡ʝ) . This digraph may have originally been split into several different sounds with similar pronunciations and shows a gradual merging into ɟ with total loss of ejective characteristics by the time of Coptic.

t was the palatal(ized) counterpart of t : t̺ʲ, voiceless palatal stop (c) or voiceless palato-alveolar (t͡ʃ).

r and l

r = is a central alveolar flap (ɾ), almost identical to Italian or Spanish r or the dd in English ladder.

Although l did not have an orthographic letter in Egyptian until the New Kingdom/Late Egyptian, the lateral approximate (l) did exist and may have sounded something like the Japanese alveolar lateral flap (ɺ)^[2] or less likely retroflex flap (ɽ)^[3].

Ejective VS Pharyngeal VS Glottal

There is some debate as to whether q, g, d, z, t, and d were ejective, pharyngeal or glottal. I have chosen to lean towards ejective mainly because other Egyptian consonants appeared to have been ejective in nature which causes speculation as to other consonants were as well and that these series of consonants constituted an ejective grouping- there is some indirect evidence in Bohairic orthpgraphy. Ejective consonants are also fairly prominent among other Northern African languages near to Egypt and extend down the Nile river into the Horn of Africa.

Though pharyngealized or glottal consonants could have equally been utilized. It is also plausible dialects may have had different variations of the same consonant becoming glottal in one yet ejective in another, ect.

Vowels

Vowels for Egyptian are fairly difficult to reconstruct since we don't have any credible known examples. In studies throughout the field there appears to be two major theories in regard to the Egyptian vowel- 1) the vowel was always |a| and due to the proximity of specific consonants |a| morphed into another vowel causing harmonious enunciation, and 2) the Semitic-centric vowel inventory of |a-i-u| existed since the Prehistoric Egyptian times. The following may be applicable using either of the two theories:

ä/ɑ

open central unrounded vowel (ä)- like Spanish rata or an open back unrounded (ɑ) is another possibility.

During the Late New Kingdom long stressed |a| turns into long stressed |o|.

near-close near-front unrounded vowel - like English sit.

In early New Kingdom, short stressed |i| turns into short stressed |e|. At a later date, |i > e| and short stressed |u| merged into |e|^[4].

ʊ (ɯ̽, or ɯ)

Originally (u) may have been pronounced as a close back rounded vowel (u) in all positions.
near-close near-back vowel (ʊ) may have been used for short (u) since Archaic Egyptian, as this is fairly typical in most North African languages as well as ʊ is an allophone of short (u) in colloquial Egyptian Arabic.
At some point between the Middle Kingdom and Late Kingdom long stressed u may have been pronounced as a close back unrounded vowel (ɯ) due to the speakers' adaptability to enunciate (u) as an unrounded vowel in relation to the vowels a and i - that is articulating u with the lips unrounded rather than pressed together, just like one would pronounce a and i.
It is possible but less likely that a long stressed u may have turned into a long stressed ʊ (at some point in the Middle Kingdom or Late Kingdom) and not long after that it may have been pronounced as an unrounded near-close near-back vowel (ɯ̽) due to the other vowels being unrounded. Though since a long stressed ʊ is rather rare among North African languages (ɯ̽ is even more rare) this is majorly an unproven hypothesis.
During the Late New Kingdom long stressed |u| turns into long stressed |e|.

Unstressed Syllables

I would assume, based upon other Afroasiatic languages, that in Ancient Egyptian speech unstressed -a probably reduced to ə (schwa) or stayed the same, unstressed -i probably reduced to open-mid front unrounded vowel (ɛ) or a close central unrounded vowel (ɨ) or stayed the same and unstressed -u probably reduced to ɛ, i, ɨ, ə or stayed the same. Eventually unstressed syllables became even more reduced [or deleted within syllables] through into Coptic. In Coptic orthography, unstressed vowels (and sometimes even stressed vowels) have no straight forward pattern among them (though maybe more research in this area may prove otherwise), but thus far we can analyze and cross-examine within the Egyptian language as a whole and compare with all other sister languages.
Original -Vw, -Vj/y, -Vr, -Vt, ect or any other possible combination sometimes have been entirely reduced to ɛ, i, ə (schwa) or ɨ in unstressed syllable position.

Notes

The instability of vowel qualities within the Egyptian language may have had two main explanations:

Some type of language contact or multilingual borrowings with a Nilo-Saharan language (or more than one as well as any other unrelated Afroasiatic language/s) in Egyptian's pre-history. Nilo-Saharan languages utilize distinct linguistic features such as advanced retracted tongue root (ATR/RTR) as well as vowel harmony and tone/pitch possibly explaining some of the vowel inconsistencies in Egyptian. These linguistic features were lost in Egyptian Pre-history but remnants may have still existed (for example relocation of tone-stress occasionally changes vowel qualities in Coptic- this is not too common in most Afroasiatic languages (other than Hebrew) but is reminiscent of Nilo-Saharan pitch-tone relocation and/or vowel harmony). This also seems to be the case with Cushitic languages which also have Nilo-Saharan/Niger-Congo sub-phylum characteristics.
The infamous Canaanite shift contributed to a total reorganization of vowel qualities before the turn of the century.

↑ t colloquially was not pronounced when ending a syllable, for ex: nāf(i)rat => nāfra, nāfrə or nāfre.... Note: stressed -a ~ u did not occur until the Late Kingdom when 'stressed -a ~ o.
↑ Merely a hypothesis based upon Coptic Fayyumic, in which case would be better regarded as a dialectal variation of |r| possibly of |l| in the main Sahidic or Bohairic dialects.
↑ Merely a hypothesis based upon Coptic Fayyumic, in which case would be better regarded as a dialectal variation of Coptic orthographic |r and l|.
↑ A phonetic evolution which probably did not affect the phonological level is /i:/ > [e:] in proximity of |ʔ| and |j|.

This article is issued from Wikiversity - version of the Saturday, April 02, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.