Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a284ee6d3fa9b7b5

Jump to content

Talk:Edomite language

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Zhomron in topic Edomite Text

Untitled

[edit]

Neither whb 'gave' nor tgr 'merchant' are exclusively Arabic. Both are common in Aramaic as well, and tgr is originally Sumerian.

How the closely it related to Ammonite and moabite.

Something not mention, would be names, estimated dates and locations of inscriptions and text in Edomite. - Thank-you! --Anaccuratesource (talk) 20:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

As far as I could tell, there's a few inscriptions in "Ḥorvat-ʕuza" and "Ḥorvat Qitmit"- defining what we know about Edomite, from the 8th to 6th centuries BCE, in three alphabets I believe (Cuneiform, Phoenician and Aramaic), I recall there's only 4 or 5 inscriptions, with real text, and some sculptures of deity "Qoš/Qos", sometimes the the name prescribed, which might be related to Nabataeans/Bedouin tribes. And you are right about these roots, "whb" common in Ethio-Semitic as well, probably as retention, and might be a cognate of Hebrew "hb" / "yhb" (bring, give), Tigrinya has both roots ("ወሃቢ" - donor, "ሃበ"), the strange thing, "whb" did not go through the North-West-Semitic shift to "yhb" here, but it happens "even" in Hebrew sometimes as a re-loan probably ("yld" vs "wld"). "tgr" might be related to either Sumerian or some Indo-European source.

Oyd11 (talk) 14:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Edomite Text

[edit]

@Zhomron: Please stop making up “reconstructions.” Rhemmiel (talk) 18:49, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

The reconstruction is not made up in the slightest, in fact, it's from the literal only source in that section. So, no. Zhomron (talk) 20:18, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply