Yet Another “Decipherment” of the Isthmian Writing2 System
Yet Another “Decipherment” of the Isthmian Writing2 System
View/
Citable Link (Handle URI) 
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11811/1429
Abstract
The qW << 0:1 condition hypothesis is formulated as an estimating quick test for the feasibility of a structurally unique and therefore uncontroversial decipherment
of a given morpho-phonographic writing2 system. In order to support this hypothesis it is shown that – beside the “Epi-Olmec decipherment” by Justeson and Kaufman (1993) based on pre-proto-Zoquean and despite the claim of the same authors that the data does not fit a Mayan language model – it is also possible to consistently “identify” the language behind the Isthmian writing2 texts as proto-Huastecan. The conclusion is thus that there is no epigraphic evidence for the Mixe-Zoque hypothesis (i. e. that the Olmecs and/or the so-called Epi-Olmecs spoke a Mixe-Zoquean language).
After giving a general introduction into the fi eld, the main treatise has a bipartite structure: Chapter 2 is the overriding part and deals with the above-mentioned topics, while the appendix – actually a separate paper (and as such it will be presented) – contains the “decipherment” of the Isthmian writing2 system based on the “Huastecan hypothesis” presented as a what-if study (videlicet what if the author were unaware of the arguments discussed in ch. 2).
of a given morpho-phonographic writing2 system. In order to support this hypothesis it is shown that – beside the “Epi-Olmec decipherment” by Justeson and Kaufman (1993) based on pre-proto-Zoquean and despite the claim of the same authors that the data does not fit a Mayan language model – it is also possible to consistently “identify” the language behind the Isthmian writing2 texts as proto-Huastecan. The conclusion is thus that there is no epigraphic evidence for the Mixe-Zoque hypothesis (i. e. that the Olmecs and/or the so-called Epi-Olmecs spoke a Mixe-Zoquean language).
After giving a general introduction into the fi eld, the main treatise has a bipartite structure: Chapter 2 is the overriding part and deals with the above-mentioned topics, while the appendix – actually a separate paper (and as such it will be presented) – contains the “decipherment” of the Isthmian writing2 system based on the “Huastecan hypothesis” presented as a what-if study (videlicet what if the author were unaware of the arguments discussed in ch. 2).
Subjects
Morpho-phongraphic writing systems, Isthmian writing, Decipherment, Mesoamerican Archaeology, Huastecan language
Classification (DDC)
300 Sozialwissenschaften, Soziologie, Anthropologie 400 Sprache, Linguistik 490 Andere Sprachen 930 Alte Geschichte, Archäologie 970 Geschichte NordamerikasVonk, Thomas: Yet Another “Decipherment” of the Isthmian Writing2 System.
Online-Ausgabe in bonndoc: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11811/1429
Online-Ausgabe in bonndoc: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11811/1429
@unpublished{handle:20.500.11811/1429,
author = {{Thomas Vonk}},
title = {Yet Another “Decipherment” of the Isthmian Writing2 System},
year = 2020,
month = feb,
note = {The qW << 0:1 condition hypothesis is formulated as an estimating quick test for the feasibility of a structurally unique and therefore uncontroversial decipherment
of a given morpho-phonographic writing2 system. In order to support this hypothesis it is shown that – beside the “Epi-Olmec decipherment” by Justeson and Kaufman (1993) based on pre-proto-Zoquean and despite the claim of the same authors that the data does not fit a Mayan language model – it is also possible to consistently “identify” the language behind the Isthmian writing2 texts as proto-Huastecan. The conclusion is thus that there is no epigraphic evidence for the Mixe-Zoque hypothesis (i. e. that the Olmecs and/or the so-called Epi-Olmecs spoke a Mixe-Zoquean language).
After giving a general introduction into the fi eld, the main treatise has a bipartite structure: Chapter 2 is the overriding part and deals with the above-mentioned topics, while the appendix – actually a separate paper (and as such it will be presented) – contains the “decipherment” of the Isthmian writing2 system based on the “Huastecan hypothesis” presented as a what-if study (videlicet what if the author were unaware of the arguments discussed in ch. 2).},
url = {https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11811/1429}
}
author = {{Thomas Vonk}},
title = {Yet Another “Decipherment” of the Isthmian Writing2 System},
year = 2020,
month = feb,
note = {The qW << 0:1 condition hypothesis is formulated as an estimating quick test for the feasibility of a structurally unique and therefore uncontroversial decipherment
of a given morpho-phonographic writing2 system. In order to support this hypothesis it is shown that – beside the “Epi-Olmec decipherment” by Justeson and Kaufman (1993) based on pre-proto-Zoquean and despite the claim of the same authors that the data does not fit a Mayan language model – it is also possible to consistently “identify” the language behind the Isthmian writing2 texts as proto-Huastecan. The conclusion is thus that there is no epigraphic evidence for the Mixe-Zoque hypothesis (i. e. that the Olmecs and/or the so-called Epi-Olmecs spoke a Mixe-Zoquean language).
After giving a general introduction into the fi eld, the main treatise has a bipartite structure: Chapter 2 is the overriding part and deals with the above-mentioned topics, while the appendix – actually a separate paper (and as such it will be presented) – contains the “decipherment” of the Isthmian writing2 system based on the “Huastecan hypothesis” presented as a what-if study (videlicet what if the author were unaware of the arguments discussed in ch. 2).},
url = {https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11811/1429}
}
The following license files are associated with this item:
