Artificial language in ancient Mesopotamia - a dubious and a less dubious case

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

In the 1930s, Neugebauer suggested that the ideograms of the Old Babylonian "algebraic" texts constituted an "algebraic symbolism". Closer reading shows that this claim was accompanied by strong reservations, but the claim had a greater impact in the general historiographic literature than the reservations. Analysis of some text examples will show that the use of ideograms would often make the texts ambiguous, which is not what we normally expect from an algebraic symbolism. In order to clarify the relationship between the Babylonian mathematical texts and the topic of symbolism/artificial language, a second look at Nesselmann's distinction from 1843 between "rhetorical", "syncopated" and "symbolic" algebra will serve; so will a review of certain aspects of the origin of the Babylonian script. The final section of the paper looks at the earliest writing as a genuine instance of artificial language, more so than later written language.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftJournal of Indian Philosophy
Vol/bind34
Udgave nummer1-2
Sider (fra-til)57-88
Antal sider32
ISSN0022-1791
StatusUdgivet - 2006

Emneord

  • ideograms

Citer dette

@article{993b3910cd7311db859f000ea68e967b,
title = "Artificial language in ancient Mesopotamia - a dubious and a less dubious case",
abstract = "In the 1930s, Neugebauer suggested that the ideograms of the Old Babylonian {"}algebraic{"} texts constituted an {"}algebraic symbolism{"}. Closer reading shows that this claim was accompanied by strong reservations, but the claim had a greater impact in the general historiographic literature than the reservations. Analysis of some text examples will show that the use of ideograms would often make the texts ambiguous, which is not what we normally expect from an algebraic symbolism. In order to clarify the relationship between the Babylonian mathematical texts and the topic of symbolism/artificial language, a second look at Nesselmann's distinction from 1843 between {"}rhetorical{"}, {"}syncopated{"} and {"}symbolic{"} algebra will serve; so will a review of certain aspects of the origin of the Babylonian script. The final section of the paper looks at the earliest writing as a genuine instance of artificial language, more so than later written language.",
keywords = "ideograms, algebraic symbolism",
author = "Jens H{\o}yrup",
year = "2006",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "57--88",
journal = "Journal of Indian Philosophy",
issn = "0022-1791",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1-2",

}

Artificial language in ancient Mesopotamia - a dubious and a less dubious case. / Høyrup, Jens.

I: Journal of Indian Philosophy, Bind 34, Nr. 1-2, 2006, s. 57-88.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Artificial language in ancient Mesopotamia - a dubious and a less dubious case

AU - Høyrup, Jens

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - In the 1930s, Neugebauer suggested that the ideograms of the Old Babylonian "algebraic" texts constituted an "algebraic symbolism". Closer reading shows that this claim was accompanied by strong reservations, but the claim had a greater impact in the general historiographic literature than the reservations. Analysis of some text examples will show that the use of ideograms would often make the texts ambiguous, which is not what we normally expect from an algebraic symbolism. In order to clarify the relationship between the Babylonian mathematical texts and the topic of symbolism/artificial language, a second look at Nesselmann's distinction from 1843 between "rhetorical", "syncopated" and "symbolic" algebra will serve; so will a review of certain aspects of the origin of the Babylonian script. The final section of the paper looks at the earliest writing as a genuine instance of artificial language, more so than later written language.

AB - In the 1930s, Neugebauer suggested that the ideograms of the Old Babylonian "algebraic" texts constituted an "algebraic symbolism". Closer reading shows that this claim was accompanied by strong reservations, but the claim had a greater impact in the general historiographic literature than the reservations. Analysis of some text examples will show that the use of ideograms would often make the texts ambiguous, which is not what we normally expect from an algebraic symbolism. In order to clarify the relationship between the Babylonian mathematical texts and the topic of symbolism/artificial language, a second look at Nesselmann's distinction from 1843 between "rhetorical", "syncopated" and "symbolic" algebra will serve; so will a review of certain aspects of the origin of the Babylonian script. The final section of the paper looks at the earliest writing as a genuine instance of artificial language, more so than later written language.

KW - ideograms

KW - algebraic symbolism

M3 - Journal article

VL - 34

SP - 57

EP - 88

JO - Journal of Indian Philosophy

JF - Journal of Indian Philosophy

SN - 0022-1791

IS - 1-2

ER -