Prof. Obenga has addressed this question. See this video >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjBir7QkhGU
1 month ago | 1
Exactly. 💯 Which is why I do not agree with the term “sub-Saharan” either. Utter rubbish
1 month ago
| 46
Good point, everything we have came from Africa originally. To claim otherwise, is just stupid and petty.
1 month ago
| 15
There's no such thing as a white (Afro) Asiatic. There's no such thing as a white african period. North Africa used to be black.
1 month ago | 4
I’ve never accepted the Hamitic or Asiatic names. I’m good with Diop’s Paleo-African name, but why not call it the Mother Tongue? The archaic precursor language of Africa is the only one for which that claim can be made. Whatever we call it, it applies to the so called Asiatic languages of present-day West Asia. It’s only recently that European scholars have separated the Sinai and Arabian peninsulas from Northeast Africa.
1 month ago
| 5
I was wondering why people accept this absurd notion. So Indo-European connects all way from Ireland to India, but African languages are broken up into 4? And people started in Africa, and started speaking in Africa? When common words exist among African foundational concepts, it’s “loan words”, but when different European cultures have the same words, it’s a common origin? No, I don’t buy this at all.
1 month ago | 5
This is definitely crap! Afro Asiatic is a false classification to sever the tribes and cultures that they've falsely classified as white. It's crazy bc these countries are still on the continent of Africa. That's like saying that languages and customs of France and Spain are removed from the rest of Europe, even though they are on the same subcontinent. It's not a coincidence that they picked all of North Africa, Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia. Those are the histories they want to steal. Those that are linked as the precursors or selective inheritors of the knowledge and wisdom of the Egyptians. What the Eurasians have fought to hide, erase, or suppress the work of the late, great Dr Cheik Anta Diop. Dr Diop was consigned by the UN to create a volume of work about the total history and interconnectedness of the many tribes that occupy the continent. In his work, he ties Egypt to Sudan, Ethiopia, and inner Africa through various disciplines that he had expertise in. Dr Diop was a Senegalese polymath who was born in 1923 and lived until 1986. He was a Historian, Linguist, Philosopher, Author, Egyptologist/Archeologist, Chemist, Anthropologist, Sociologist, Physicist, Professor, and Researcher. Zahi Hawass is a racist who doesn't have half of Dr Diop's expertise. Hawass isn't a real scientist bc a real scientist follows the science regardless of where it goes. To top it off, Hawass was on the payroll of Nat Geo to the tune of $200k/yr while he was an Egyptian government official. That plainly speaks to me of bribery, corruption, and lies.
1 month ago | 1
This is what happens when you let others define you. This is other announcements.
1 month ago | 1
The Semitic languages are daughters of Kiswahilli and grandchildren of Bantu, which is more than 7,000 years old with its Nsibidi writing system. However, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Canaanite originated less than 3,000 years ago, the Arabic language less than 2,000, and its writing developed in 400 BC. There is nothing from the Middle East, Mesopotamia or Asia Minor borrowed by Africa for its different cultures, civilizations or tribal states in their own totally independent communication developments during the 3 Bronze Ages, never the other way around.
1 month ago | 3
All African languages btw except for Austronesian and Euro, but I've had my critiques on this concept as well, I think it's more division in a sense
1 month ago (edited)
| 6
Asia can’t be African? I mean Africa is a modern word. The first Asians were Africa. The slanted eyes are contributed to Asia but modern day “black” people have slanted eyes. From Africa to the Atlantic. The Asiatic is “African”. Dr. Ivan Van Sertima said the Asiatic is the African that crossed the bearing straight. We are not monolithic
1 month ago | 1
As always some Europeans in the 1800s came up with these classifications. Indo-European? You mean what the Boers speak? Not and indigenous African language. Hebrew is classified as AfroAsiatic. Bantu is classified as Niger-Congo. And yet many 'Bantu dialects are very close to ancient Hebrew' (some would say it is)...
1 month ago
| 9
Historia Africana
Afroasiatic Languages? Who believes in this utter nonsense?
1 month ago | [YT] | 192