The Script of Harappa and Mohenjodaro and its Connection with Other Scripts c10.s25: Analysis of Table XXVI
The Script of Harappa and Mohenjodaro and its Connection with Other Scripts c10.s25
- Language
- English
Analysis of Table XXVI
c10.s25.1
Although π is a variant of π, π does not appear to have any connection with π, their sequences being entirely different. This is not necessarily a matter of surprise, as there is no reason to assume that π and π, or π and π were in any way connected as to their pictographic origin (see pictographic Table). And we have noted above how the similarity between the designs of the signs in Col. IV of Table XXV is purely coincidental.
c10.s25.2
The sign π would seem to be connected with π in view of the occurrence of the sequence π πR which is found nowhere else. In that case we may probably assume that the groups in Col. IV Texts 20-24 are modifications of π by the addition of strokes corresponding to a modification of the vowel of the syllable to Δ. The group appearing in texts 34-38 may be the compound ππ. The sign in Col. IV against Nos. 40-41 is probably of independent pictorial origin.
c10.s25.3
π may be π + π ; π may be π + π (cf. Table LXIV π ). π is clearly π + π ; π is π + π . With regard to the signs in Nos. 47-56 π is almost certainly equal to π which makes us suspect that in this form of bracket we have really a splitting of the sign π to make room for enclosing a sign with which 0 is to be compounded. In the case of Nos. 54, 55, the compounds would appear to be 'integral' (i.e. each syllable pronounced fully without elision or contraction).
c10.s25.4
The signs 0 and ( ) are then identical. We may therefore assume that 0, 0 and ( ) are also identical. The fact that 0 is like 0 liable to be compounded with an inserted 'fish' suggests that it is a phonetically allied syllable, and that in ( ), ( ) we have really one word 0 0 differently pronounced. The fact that 0 is found with the same modifying element ) as is found with 0 , makes us suspect that 0 and 0 are allied syllables. . And from what will be said concerning ) in the analysis of Table XXIX together with what we have already said about it we may infer that 0 is 0 with the substitution of i for a as its vowel element.
c10.s25.5
I would then conclude that the form 0 is original and is , that 0 is the syllable articulated with i, 0 with e, 0 is quite independent of 0 0 is 0 articulated with u , 0 is the same articulated with u.
c10.s25.6
) is a modifying phonetic element, not a mere variant. This is clear from text b, where in both 0 and 0 appear. This element is also found with 00. It is not to be confused, phonetically, at least, with the element similar in shape in the signs 0, 0. These signs are animal signs, and the element ) is in them pictographic, indicating an ear while 0 probably indicates the jaw. Being merely pictographic their presence or absence is immaterial to the ideogram which consequently shows much variety, appearing either with 2 ears, 1 ear, 2 jaws, 1 jaw, or 1 jaw - or nothing! See tables LIX and XIX.