CopticReader and je ak tonk

edited September 2014 in Hymns Discussion
According to CopticReader the Lord's resurrection is to be commemorated:
"From the eve of the Resurrection to the last day of the Pentecost period, as well as Sundays from the Apostles Fast to the 4th Sunday Hatoor and on the commemorations of the Annunciation, Nativity and Resurrection (ie the 29th of every Coptic month) and from the 29th of Paone to the 29th of Paope"

Can anyone confirm what is meant by "29th of Paone to the 29th of Paope"? I have never heard of this before and it is contradicted by other parts of CopticReader.


  • Paope? So the Coptic reader cannot read Coptic? Let me refrain from commenting on Paone!
  • Ophadece, thank you for refraining from commenting. Let's keep language out of this. 

    I think it is a typo. It should say 29th of Baramhat to 29th of Hatoor. 

    What it is saying is that Je aktonk is said on on the 29th of every Coptic month in the Coptic year from Paone to Paope (but it got the months wrong). It is stating it backwards. Tubah 29 and Amshir 29 are excluded from using aktonk. The month after Amshir, which is Baramhat, we start saying aktonk on on the 29th of each month from Baramhat until Hatoor. It would have been easier to say the 29th of every Coptic month from Thout to Mesori, except Tubah and Amshir.

    (On a side note, we say aktonk daily from the Resurrection to the Pentecost and weekly from the Apostle's Fast to the last Sunday of Hatoor, regardless of the day of the month the Sunday falls on.) Coptic Reader simply did articulate this clearly.

    Now there might be another rule that I don't know about that excludes Paremhat/Baramhat 29, Pharmouthi/Baramouda 29, Pashons/Bashans 29, and Thout/Toot 29 from using aktonk that Coptic Reader is referring to. Maybe Minatasgeel or Drew or someone else can shed some light. 
  • I don't know of any other rule rule but it might be based on HGBY opinion of keeping the 29th day celebration as its "original rite," being a celebration of only the Annunciation....that's my guess.
  • @Remenkimi,
    My issue is not with the Coptic language per se, what's authentic what's not, but with the continuing invention and innovation since no body seems to appreciate how the names read and they just apply the innovative rules as a means of reading contradicting the simple fact that they are not read that way. Again not language but we're unfortunately going down the route of God's word "my people are destroyed by the lack of knowledge".
  • Ophadece.....khalina 7elweeeeeen please :-)
  • @minatasgeel
    I hope you don't mean 7'alleena allawy.. for English speakers let's be flimsy.. sorry for my loose translation. Anyway you may have seen how people are making things up in every aspect of the Coptic language. I wish people learn from the west since they are living in the west now and say I DON'T KNOW instead of doing things willy nilly so that it may be near correct if not totally correct.. well, I believe that is a very wrong attitude.. at the very least not one that suits Christianity let alone the orthodox dogma of which..
  • @ophadece

    Can we please stick to the topic? Feel free to open another thread to discuss this.
  • @qawe,
    I thought this is part of the topic too. Sorry dear it seems people are not really interested in hearing other people's views unless they agree with what they think.. ok, sorry again..
  • @ophadece

    The thread is about dates not pronunciation/spelling. It has nothing to do with what I want to hear.
  • Sorry @qawe. Seriously I didn't know that you were posting the thread to hear a particular thing without opening the discussion onto other aspects. I learnt my lesson...
  • edited September 2014

    Usually I don't mind pursuing a relevant tangent to the discussion at hand.  And I do believe the correct spelling of Paope and Paone is a relevant tangent. But the topic of correct Coptic pronunciation already has numerous other threads devoted to it.  The original topic of the discussion does not (as far as I am aware).  Further, discussions on OB vs GB have a history of spiralling out of control, and if this discussion does, I'll probably never get an answer to my original question.  I believe my request is reasonable, so I'd appreciate it if you could drop the sarcasm (at least you appear to me to be sarcastic).
  • qawe, I am afraid there might not be another answer to your question. I believe Coptic Reader had a typo. If there is another reason, I hope someone else can explain the rubric in question. Sorry for not being more helpful.
  • @qawe,
    Once again this discussion that I posed is not at all related to GB vs authentic Coptic at all. It just relates to people not knowing what they are talking about and then inventing... oops, sorry that is GB essentially. Anyway, let me not digress here; that's just a side comment. It just continues to amaze me how Coptic is being abused and mutilated by people who don't know how to read the months of the year. 
Sign In or Register to comment.