Native Indian Languages of Louisiana Linked to the Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs

New Orleans, LA (PRWEB) August 3, 2006

In a study of comparative linguistics of three Native Indian languages from Louisiana (Atakapa, Chitmacha and Tunica), Charles William Johnson of http://www.earthmatrix.com, Science in Ancient Artwork, has identified certain correspondences between these languages and the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs. Johnson considered that if the earth mounds of Louisiana shared perhaps a common geodesic grid system with the pyramids of Giza, then possibly the languages of these peoples may be related as well.

In a previous study, Johnson demonstrated how Nahuatl, the language of the Aztecs of Mexico, related directly to the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs by eliminating the letter "L" in the Nahuatl words. Now, with the three cited languages of the Choctaw family, another direct relationship of linguistic correspondence makes its appearance in his new book, "The Sound of Meaning: Comparative Linguistics of the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs with Atakapa, Chitmacha and Tunica."

For the comparison, Johnson utilizes a glossary of words in Atakapa, Chitimacha and Tunica, three Native Indian peoples who lived, and still live, mainly in Louisiana (Texas and Mississippi). The glossary is from a 1919 study by John R. Swanton published by the Smithsonian Institution, in which Swanton showed that the three Choctaw languages were related to one another through linguistic correspondence.

In comparing this glossary to the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs, Johnson finds numerous correspondences, even some cognates. Consider the different words for grains or seeds in the three languages. The word for seed in Tunica is "uxsu," in ancient Egyptian it is "usheb-t." The word for seed in Chitimacha is "tcaca," while in ancient Egyptian "tchab" means a kind of seed. In Atakapa the word "ots" means seed, while "utit" in the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs means grain or seed.

The Native Indian languages appear more related to ancient Egyptian than among themselves. The entire list of words studied by Johnson reveals numerous linguistic correspondences of this nature between the Native Indian languages of Louisiana and the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs, suggesting some kind of shared history.

The historical and archaeological records do not offer any evidence of a relationship between these ancient peoples. In Johnson’s view, the languages themselves may offer proof of a common historical past. As more Native Indian languages of the Americas are studied and compared to the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs within the Earth/matriX project, additional examples of linguistic correspondence may arise, giving need to re-examine history itself. The linguistic correspondence of the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs with the languages studied to date (Maya, Nahuatl, Tunica, Chitimacha and Atakapa) may represent only the tip of the iceberg.

###