Tenth International Congress of Egyptologists Abstracts of Papers

XICE – Abstract of Papers
Although the ancient Egyptian tales play a major role in our understanding of
Egyptian grammar, thus far there has been no detailed comparison of the grammar of
the tales of different language phases. This paper will present some of the conclusions
of my analysis of the Middle Egyptian, Late Egyptian, and Demotic tales, which
focuses on the linguistic presentation of the basic story elements (events, characters,
and settings). My methodology is drawn primarily from that of the linguist MICHAEL
TOOLAN, who distinguishes grammatical constructions which push the story forward
from those whose purpose is descriptive (Narrative: A critical linguistic introduction
[London/New York, 2001]). I place different Egyptian clause types and grammatical
forms in one of these two categories, identifying those which present narrative action
and those which provide background description. My analyses begin on the level of
the clause and move outward to examine the relationship of clauses within sentences
and sentences within paragraphs, thereby exploring how the grammatical components
of a tale combine to tell a story. In doing so, I develop a grammar of narrative for the
ancient Egyptian tales.
By determining the key structural elements that characterize the entire corpus of
tales, I establish a framework within which to identify the features that distinguish
individual works. Through this analysis, I believe that I have achieved a deeper
understanding of certain texts, particularly the Tale of Sinuhe, the Report of
Wenamon, and the Petition of Petiese. Both Sinuhe and Wenamon stand out for their
innovative features. Sinuhe exhibits a highly creative use of language, for it contains a
broader range of grammatical forms than other Middle Egyptian tales; in particular, I
examine its use of the second tense, aHa.n sDm.n=f, and sDm.in=f to demarcate
different scenes. Where Sinuhe is creative in its use of grammatical forms, Wenamon
is distinguished by the constructions that it does not use. It avoids key initial sentence
forms commonly found in other Late Egyptian narratives, employing neither
repetitive fronted temporal formulae (such as “after many days”) nor initial verb
forms. Therefore, it is necessary to acknowledge that Wenamon differs in significant
ways from other Late Egyptian narratives, both literary and documentary, and truly
belongs to a category all its own. In contrast, the grammar of the petition section of
Petiese is not unique.
It is the standard grammar of a Demotic tale, stylistically tying the petition more
closely to the Demotic literary texts than to the documentary texts. The text as a
whole, however, exhibits an extremely proficient use of language, for while the
petition itself is written is good literary Demotic, the text of two stelae appended to
the end of the petition uses Middle Egyptian and is written in Hieratic. Each language
phase had its own characteristic verb forms and particles, and by examining the major
changes in grammar that occurred from phase to phase, I explore how these changes
impacted the narrative structure of Egyptian tales. Some forms have clear parallels in
the other stages: for example, aHa.n sDm.n=f, the primary main clause narrative form
of the Middle Egyptian tales, is paralleled in Late Egyptian by wn.in=f Hr sDm and in
Demotic by sDm=f. Other forms, however, do not have parallels. For example, there is
no Demotic equivalent to the non-initial main clause, which takes the form of the
continuative sDm.n=f in Middle Egyptian and iw=f Hr sDm in Late Egyptian. As time
passes, the grammar of the Egyptian tales becomes increasingly simplified, a trend
which I examine in order to explore questions concerning the audience and the
general purpose of the tales.
129