Doxologies intro

Hello all,
In the Doxologies intro, we say "Hail to you O Virgin, the right and true Queen"
السلام لك ايتها العذراء الملكة الحقيقية الحقانية

ما الفرق بين الحقيقية والحقانية؟

علما بأن الأصل القبطى
Ti oro emmi en alitheni
معناها الحقيقية باللغتين القبطية واليونانية
Emmi: Coptic from methmi (like khen ou methmi anesti)
Alitheni: Greek from Alithos (like Alithos anesti)


  • Dear @Bisho82,
    You mean khan oumatmai afdonf, not anesty!
    Diowro emmai I guess refers to the Virgin in figure of speech, as she is the mother of the King of kings.. And 'nalitenai refers to her being a true queen as she has attained such a title through the witness of Christ when she has taken up a position unachievable for the human race..
    Oujai khan ebshois
  • There is no difference between mei and alethine. Both mean "true". One is Coptic and one is Greek as you said. The reason, I think, the words are used this way is to illustrate a bilingual idiom. In Coptic, repeating a word usually adds emphasis or duplication. For example, when we say the phrase "every day", we say "emmini emmini" (literally "day day"). The duplication of the word expresses the emphasis normally translated as "every". By using tioro emmei (adjective) enalethine (adjective) is to emphasize that no matter what language she the true queen. In colloquial English, we can change the sentence to "she is really really the queen." The redundancy expresses emphasis.

    Does that make sense? 
  • I have seen some book drop "الحقانية" from the line. 
  • Hello ophadece,
    Thank you so much for your reply .. yes meant "Khen ou methmi aftonf" which is the coptic form of "Alithos Anesti"

    Oujai khen epchoice
  • Hello Remnkemi,
    Ti sheb ehmot entotk .. Your reply is more than enough and of course makes sense.

    I like your sentense so much:
    "By using tioro emmei (adjective) enalethine (adjective) is to emphasize that no matter what language she the true queen."

    Oujai khen epchoice
  • Hi Mina,
    Thank you so much for your reply. Yes. And we used to say it in the past الملكة الحقيقية dropping الحقانية

    Then changed to say both words together

    But the problem is that some people nowadays saying it should be الحقانية only and dropping الحقيقية claiming that الحقيقي should said only to God.
  • Dear @Remnkemi,
    No, 'mmani 'mmani doesn't convey emphasis through repetition.. It is just an expression meaning day by day, daily or always..
    Oujai khan ebshois
  • @ophadece,
    It would make sense in that case. To say "each one", we say piouai piouai, literally "the one the one." Also, in the Basilian Institution Narrative, the priest says "...`ebol qen paiwik vai@...pai`avot [email protected] `ere tenhiwis..." The prefix pai means "this <whatever noun was followed by it>" and vai also means "this"- just in the demonstrative way (hey, look at this.) Literally, it would be "...of this bread this:... this cup this: you proclaim..." This makes no grammatical sense- instead, it means "this very bread:... this very cup..," putting emphasis on this.

    `mmyni `mmyni, by the same logic, would mean "every day."
  • Well said @Daniel_Kyrillos, therefore such expressions do not convey emphasis in that sense..
    Oujai khan ebshois
  • edited April 2017
    Why are you arguing over these things? If you want to say every day, it would be `ehoou niben.  Syntatically, that means "all day" but it is more understood as "every day". This also occurs with "all times" - which in Coptic is cop niben - which is always translated as "Every time you eat of this bread..." It can also give the meaning of "each time" (which makes more sense theologically but it is not that different from "every time"). So we can see one Coptic phrase can have multiple meanings, as well as one meaning can come from multiple Coptic syntaxes.

    No one every said there is only one way to convey emphasis. One can use duplication, one can use the demonstrative pronoun (this or that), one can even use phonetic tone shift (just pronounce it with emphasis). One can use capital letters only. One can use bold or italics or underline, etc. 

    For the record, Luke 9:23 (as well as many other verses) uses mmyni once to mean "daily" as in the English translation. Therefore, if mmyni once means "daily", what is the point of mmyni twice? Could it be.....EMPHASIS. If you don't believe duplication is a Coptic morphosyntactical method to convey emphasis, you have to provide evidence or references (preferably from Coptic linguistic scholars), not personal opinion. I can provide evidence to show duplication is used for emphasis. I'll get back to you with references. 

    Also notice Daniel_Kyrillos, that paiavot vai  is a duplication of the two demonstrative pronouns (this and that). So the duplication of the demonstrative pronoun is another way to express emphasis - which translates into English as "very". If one only wanted to emphasize one specific noun (hey, look at this cup), one would simply use "Aha anau `epaiavot ", (ie, one demonstrative noun is sufficient) and it would mean "hey look at THIS cup". The duplication of the demonstrative pronoun emphasizes "this cup" even more as in "This, THAT cup" which is better translated as "this very cup" to illustrate emphasis in English. In Coptic, it is the use of duplication that adds emphasis to the emphasized cup. 

    Regardless, this is red herring. The op questioned why use mmyi  and aly;iny  in the same sentence. I offered an explanation and a comparison. If you don't agree with my assessment, then offer an alternative solution. Or at the very least, show why duplication doesn't apply to the text in question, not why duplication is not a method of emphasis. The first addresses the op, the second just trolls the topic. (Note I did not point out that I totally disagree with Ophadece's proposed solution (Reply #1 above) because that would only distract the topic and it doesn't help the op at all.)

  • Dear @Remnkemi,
    I sense that you are learning Arabic as a language, or studying an advanced level in it and I can tell you that repetition of words for the purpose of emphasis is an Arabic metaphorical characteristic but not Coptic. However I would be interested in you providing references for your statement.
    Oujai khan ebshois
  • I am not studying Arabic at all. Even if duplication is an Arabic metaphorical characteristic, it is irrelevant. We see it in our Coptic hymns. Unless you want to argue that all of our Coptic hymns where duplication occurs is a by product of Arabic linguistic influence, then we can conclude that duplication is also a Coptic syntactical tool, like Arabic (and English and about every other language), independently developed from other languages. 

    And I'll repeat that this is not the point of the op or my response. Bilingual duplication is either done for emphasis or to reach more people who are not bilingual. The latter can't apply here since we are talking about one word duplicated, not an entire phrase. 

  • Ekhrestos anesty
    No @Remnkemi, I certainly am not arguing that repetition is an Arabic influence, and I was wrong thinking you were studying Arabic. Repetition with the purpose of emphasis is an Arabic metaphorical characteristic not Coptic. Please provide me with references if you believe that is the case and we will discuss more thoroughly..
    Oujai khan ebshois
  • Repitition was used occasionally in Coptic as an idiomatic expression. Classical examples as the one mentioned above would alternate a Coptic word with a Greek one. I do not believe it was for emphass, it's more of an idiomatic expression e.g.
    ⲫⲏⲉⲑⲟⲩⲁⲃ ⲡⲓⲁⲅⲓⲟⲥ
    ϯⲟⲩⲣⲱ ⲙ̀ⲙⲏⲓ ⲛ̀ⲁⲗⲓⲑⲓⲛⲏ
    ⲡⲓⲁⲅⲓⲟⲥ ⲉⲑⲟⲩⲁⲃ
    as for ⲡⲁⲓⲁⲫⲟⲧ ⲫⲁⲓ that's a classical idiomatic expression, that was not meant for empasis, it even slipped into arabic 'heya fi di essa'a di' in this hour هي في دي الساعة دي
Sign In or Register to comment.