- 一般社団法人 日本オリエント学会
- オリエント (ISSN:00305219)
- vol.43, no.1, pp.19-39, 2000-09-30 (Released:2010-03-12)
The main subject of Middle Egyptian studies should be to seek its “langue” through careful analysis of the instances of “parole.” But many Egyptologists, such as Erman, Sethe, and Gardiner, did not fully recognize the importance of the “langue” of Middle Egyptian, instead they paid great attention to the study of morphological differences in the instances of “parole” themselves, and adapted the Semitic system to these differences. From the point of linguistics, however, morphological studies that are separated from the “langue” may possibly lead to misunderstandings of language.It was the linguist Hans Jakob Polotsky who first established the Middle Egyptian “langue” system through the analysis of grammatical categories and syntax. The German scholar Friedrich Junge also developed his grammatical study based on syntax and the “transformationsgrammatik” of Chomsky. By so doing, Polotsky and Junge disproved of the old-fashioned method of the Egyptologists' “Morphological Grammar, ” but there are also differences in the understanding of Middle Egyptian sentence system between Polotsky and Junge. Despite these differences, Leo Depuydt combined these two distinct studies and gave them the label “Standard theory.” Nowadays many scholars regard Polotsky's Idea as “Standard theory” according to Depuydt's terminology. It must be noted, however, that such a label is quite unsatisfactory since “Standard theory” does not equal to Polotsky's Idea, and that the very main point of Polotsky's Idea has been neglected by using such an unfortunate label. It is now clear that the subject with which we must grapple is to clarify the main point of Polotsky's Idea.In this paper I will examine Polotsky's Idea and point out the following Middle Egyptian sentence system explained by Polotsky. 1) There is a distinction of mode in Middle Egyptian. 2) The indicative mode of the main sentence is introduced by an auxiliary and has three tenses (i. e., present, past, future). 3) Some of the main sentences of indicative mode (1st tenses) have their counterparts in the emphasized adverbial sentences (2nd tenses). 4) The emphasized adverbial sentences in initial position (2nd tenses) begin with bare sdm. f/sdm. f form. 5) The prospective mode in the main sentence is expressed by bare sdm. f form.