[Article] Proposed solution by Gerard Chesire

[Stephen Carlson]

New on LingBuzz, Cheshire has another paper up: "Plant Series, No. 6. Manuscript MS408. Portfolio 4, Right (JPEG 009)" (Jan. 2020), here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Overall, Cheshire is undeterred from his approach. For example, it includes this gem:

Note: The word æia (aeia) is the Latin version of ehyéh, which is a Hebrew term, meaning to be, to exist, I’ll be, and so on.

A lot of wrongness is packed into this. The Hebrew ehyéh (אֶהְיֶה) is a first person imperfect, not the infinitive "to be" that he chooses for the translation. Either "I will be" or "I am" would have been a better choice for the Hebrew word. Completely unmotivated is the use of Hebrew instead of Latin for such a basic concept, since Latin already has words for "to be" (esse), "I am" (sum), and "I will be" (ero). So the Latin version of ehyéh would be sum as the Vulgate famously translates Exod 3:16, not the non-Latin aeia. Finally, the vowels don't match up between aeia and ehyéh, and the consonants are missing.

Neverthless, the paper has some proposed flora comparisons, which might be of interest.