--- In [email protected], cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://www.mysticalsun.com/cymatics/cymatics.html > > In his research with the tonoscope, Jenny noticed that when the > vowels of the ancient languages of Hebrew and Sanskrit were > pronounced, the sand took the shape of the written symbols for > these vowels, while our modern languages, on the other hand, did > not generate the same result! [huh-duh?! - carde] How is this > possible? Did the ancient Hebrews and Indians know this? Is there > something to the concept of "sacred language," which both of these > are sometimes called?
<snip> I just read the Web page. Utterly fascinating. But I'm puzzled. Are Sanskrit or Hebrew vowels, pronounced in isolation, different from vowels in modern languages pronounced in isolation? I can understand that some would be, but isn't there a relatively limited number of vowel sounds the human vocal apparatus can produce? Maybe it's a continuum, such that there can be extremely refined differences. But there are no "native" ancient Hebrew or Sanskrit speakers; these would have to be second languages. So how could there be a *standard* for the pronunciation of each vowel, if very refined variations would make a significant difference between the sand patterns? Seems to me you'd have to go in the other direction and say the standard for a vowel pronunciation is whether it creates the shape of the symbol for it in the sand pattern. I'm not at all sure what I'm talking about here; I'm just trying to make it come together in my head. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
