Blog

1.2 Origins of Human EvolutionBy Peter Snyders 24th April 2024The early humans were under pressure to increase their brain capacity. They did not invent guns and military equipment because that would always mean devolution. So, they made tools to allow them to hunt energy-rich meat products. This all happened some 4 million years ago.&nbsp;Modern behavioural modernity includes specialized tools, jewellery, images such as drawings, and rituals like the burial of the dead. They also use specialised hunting techniques, trade (or barter), and use of language. All these have been built on the foundations of the spiritual development of human ancestors.About 50,000 years ago, human culture began to evolve rapidly, which has been characterised as the “Great Leap Forward.” Some groups, like the Bushmen, chose not to adopt modern farming. Today, some Europeans typify them as savages and brutes, but instead of modern cannons, guns, and forts, they lived with their bows and arrows (and some tribes also used lances), which do not kill on a large scale as men do today.The Australian Aboriginal population separated from the African population around 75 000 years ago. 60 000 years ago, they made a 160 km sea journey. It was also at this time that they started burying their dead, making clothing from animal hides, hunting with more sophisticated techniques (such as pit traps or driving animals off cliffs) as well as cave painting. Fishhooks, buttons, and bone needles showed signs that had not been seen before 50 000 before the present. (Human Evolution: Wikipedia p.23)A Bishop from England took the saying in the Bible of 2 Peter 3:8 literally: “But forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” The Bishop then concluded that the seven days in Genesis were seven thousand years in the time of humankind.The Cradle of Humankind states that science says the universe that we find ourselves in was formed about 14 billion years ago. The Earth is about 4.6 billion years old, and life evolved from fossils found 200 million years ago in South Africa. (Cradle of Humankind: Maropeng p.2) It goes on to say that Africa is the birthplace of humankind; that Homo sapiens, the species to which we all belong, evolved in Africa about 200 000 years ago; that all humanity shares an African heritage.Agriculture, which started about 10 000 years ago, showed that humans could determine their own civilization (some 5 000 years ago) rather than being completely subservient to natural selection. 5 000 years ago, humans developed urbanization, which led to industrialization 250 years ago. There are arguments that genetic differences have occurred to the extent that people differ today. Light skin and blond hair in some populations developed due to both climate and altitude adaptations. (Wiki: Human Evolution p23)Culturally driven evolution causes some pressure due to effective contraception, higher education, and social norms. The human brain expansion could not only be the cause of the just-mentioned evolution, but may also be the cause of the brain’s social learning and still-greater efficiency. It also supports skill development and the rapidly increasing technologies.&nbsp;(Wiki: Human Evolution p23)“Mitochondrial DNA” (mtDNA) can trace all modern humans to a single common female ancestor who lived about 200 000 years ago – and she’s from Africa, the African Eve, the Mother of all. It showed that all ancestors are African.&nbsp;(Cradle of Humankind: Maropeng, p.13)Wrapping up this section, please allow us to introduce you to The Callers at the Cape before Jan van Riebeeck came to set up his halfway station here. Vasco da Gama in 1497 was the first to contact the Khoisan. These were Bushmen who made their living by foraging for food, and the Khoikhoi. Da Gama reported that their food near the Berg River at St. Helena Bay was confined to the flesh of seals, whales, gazelles, and the roots of herbs. They had no livestock.After Da Gama’s men came to know them, he noted that the Bushmen (San), had a brownish orange to light brown skin colour. They were like ‘men of little spirit, quite incapable of violence.’ This reminds one of Matthew 5:3 “Blessed [are] the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” The Cochoqua, Bushmen, Watermen, or Strandlopers (Beach rangers) were another of this same group as those in St Helena Bay.&nbsp;Alan Barnard: Anthropology and the Bushmen, p. 13.At the Cape, they were about forty strong and headed by Autshumao, known by Jan van Riebeeck as Harry, the Strandloper. In 1631, Autshumao was taken by a British ship on its way to Bantam (Java) to learn Dutch on the ship. Van Riebeeck notes that they, too, had no livestock. This is why Van Riebeeck continually mentions that Autshumao could speak some English.&nbsp;This is where we end this short series about the origin of Humans. We will meet them again either as Bushmen, where they were on their own, or as Khoisan, where they were mixed with Khoikhoi who had either left their clan or had been thrown out.

1.2 Origin of Humans

a group of young girls walking across a grass covered field

1.2 Kaaps Copyright © 26.12.2024 by Peter Snyders GWe must begin at The Origin of Kaaps to have a solid foundation. There is so much background that must be explained first, and no Foreword or Introduction would suffice. Metalanguage is one of the first reasons why we are writing these discussions on Kaaps in English. Another bonus, linguists and ordinary people all over the world can understand what we are establishing, and many will be able to use our resources to explain away all the irrational hostility towards their language.&nbsp;All our many engagements of Kaaps can even lead spontaneously to a Kaapse Wordlist. I look forward to you all taking part. If you add meanings to the words you are using in our Wordlist, we could also, later, have a Dictionary of Kaaps. This is where all the rules of Kaaps are given a chance to show how rationally ordered our language is. All of these would be sufficient reasons for everybody to seriously consider Kaaps as at least a language whose linguistic rules need more respect. We will show you how you can either make your own book or be part of a book where this information is given.&nbsp;You are free to participate in any of the projects we will be presenting. &nbsp;Since we would all like to see a Wordlist and Spelling Rules of Kaaps, we look forward to you showing us how you speak and write in Kaaps. If you would like to send us your way of writing in Kaaps, make sure that the context in which you use the word is clear. Kaaps has five phases. This latest phase, Modern Kaaps, contains words like notch, bakvissie, bossies, tjais, nwata, etc., that not everyone understands.Moving on, we assume that all of us have Kaaps as our mother tongue or have a familiarity with our language to an appreciable degree. We have in our sources: (i) Bo-Kaap Kaaps (ii) Griqua Kaaps (iii) Namakwalands Kaaps (iv) and Rehoboth Basters Kaaps, and of course, the mother of all, (v) Kaapse Kaaps. Anyone from any Coloured community anywhere in South Africa is welcome to contribute their variant of Kaaps. If you look at the history of people of colour, you will discover that they all took their Pidgin or Creole with them wherever they went.To call these dialects variants of Afrikaans is not correct because Afrikaans did not exist until Die Genootskap van Regte Afrikaners came together in 1875 to standardise a civilised Afrikaans. We will (as always) prove that Kaaps had its existence long before that time. All variants of Kaaps are daughter languages or dialects of Kaaps and not of Afrikaans.There is a lot of senseless shouting for Kaaps to be recognised, to be used in schools, especially for at least the first three grades, and so on. But where is the language? What must be taught?&nbsp;Where are the Lexicon (words) and the rules of Kaaps for (1) Morphology (parts of a word), (2) Phonology (the sounds of the words), (3) Syntax (the order of the words), and (4) Semantics (the meaning of words)?All these rules depend on words or the lexicon. So that is where any association of mother-tongue speakers begins, and the first fundamental is always: “Ôs skryf soes ôs praat.” That is where all of you come in. Please do not water down your language with Afrikaans. You will only lose the essence and the inherent rules of Kaaps. You have your own language, and we are going to prove that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the way we speak and write.Are some of you scared thinking: “Dié’s mos ‘n djop vi linguists!” While there is in any discipline always the genuine ones, our experience of linguistics is that it is not adequately regulated and sometimes wilfully abused. We need a better, more scientific system; one that will recognise all those errors in linguistics where subtle minimalizing of the language of another occurs. This better system is called Spiritual Science.The main ingredient of Spiritual Science is experience. We do not need people with degrees to sit in their studies and, with prejudice, dream up nonsense about the languages of others. You, the ones who have your language internalised (inside you), are the true scientists. And since you are scientists, you do not believe anything unless it has been proved.&nbsp;We do not accept that we can teach anyone anything that he or she is not ready to receive. Supreme Master Ching Hai says that knowledge without understanding is not knowledge [1]. So, we avail ourselves to you as your facilitator. We will be a signpost or one of those boards you see along the road. We will just be pointing: ‘This way to the Airport’; ‘that way to Cape Town,’ and ‘you are on Turfhall Road now, and it is part of the M10’ (or whatever). Yóú will have to do the travelling; experience everything yourself. [2] If you do, you will build your house on a rock (foundation) [3].&nbsp;We are going to accept nothing less than facts, rather than opinions, preferences, passions, social media, fake science, or any untested ideas for our treatise. Many searches for true knowledge begin with a hypothesis. While the ideas are untested, they are probabilities or hypotheses and a good starting point to start exploring. So, do not be afraid to contribute in this way. There are no wrong answers.We will keep ourselves in the background.&nbsp;So, let us get started.References[1] &nbsp; &nbsp; Supreme Master Ching Hai[2] &nbsp; &nbsp; Lord Buddha[3] &nbsp; &nbsp; Lord Jesus

Kaaps 1.2

MetalanguageCopyright 11.2.2024 by Peter Snyders (G)Before we begin, let us first decide which language we should be using as our metalanguage. A metalanguage is the language used to talk about language. Most modern languages use the same language as their own as a metalanguage. Therefore, we find that English is used to talk about the English language, and Afrikaans is the metalanguage when the Afrikaans language is discussed.&nbsp;The use of Kaaps as the metalanguage of Kaaps is not conducive because Kaaps, as a language, is not documented. It will only confuse as one tries to explain an unknown phenomenon with the same language whose values have not yet been identified. It is like explaining that someone who says, “Ek moe∙nou druk” betieken: “Ekke moe∙nou gooi.”It is worthwhile to keep in mind who the target group is. So, for example, one could use Afrikaans to study Dutch and vice versa because there is only about a fifteen percent difference between the two languages. The speakers of one of these languages would therefore understand the language of the other.Our target group is: &nbsp;1. &nbsp; &nbsp; Mother-tongue Kaaps speakers2. &nbsp; &nbsp; People speaking a variant or daughter language of Kaaps.[1]&nbsp;3. &nbsp; &nbsp; People who have a fascination for Kaaps, irrespective of their cultural differences.Even though Kaaps originated as a trading language (pidgin) between the indigenous Khoikhoi people and the Dutch colonisers, Dutch is still quite foreign to Kaapsers.[2]&nbsp;Many words that we customarily write with an /s/ are written with a /z/, e.g., Zuid-Afrikaans in Dutch. The Dutch language also uses a /c/ where we use a /k/ and a /t/ where we would use an /s/ like in redactie. The /ij/ spelling may also be confusing because sometimes it is pronounced as the schwa as in makkelijk (easy), while at other times it is pronounced as the diphthong /y/ in Kaaps, e.g., vergelijk (compare). Nouns and pronouns have a gender which is preceded by the article de while het is placed in front of the neutral case, e.g., de man; de vrouw; het kind.The list of reasons for not having Dutch as our metalanguage goes on and gets more complex, especially with respect to verbs. This does not, however, make it impossible to understand a Netherlander. We identify a few words that sound familiar to us and mentally fill in the context.The use of Afrikaans as a metalanguage to clearly show how Kaaps works is hampered by the numerous clashes between the two languages. Meagan Hammon, together with the invaluable contribution from Emile YX, articulates our experience clearly when they say that “Kaaps was always regarded as lesser than pure Dutch and that this ‘slave tongue’ carried very little status in the social hierarchy.” [3]After Kaaps having been around for more than two hundred years, “In 1875, the Genootskap van Regte Afrikaners made the first attempts at standardising Afrikaans. They distanced themselves from the Kaaps creole by branding it as slang and once again characterised it as a second-class language.” [3] There are many more issues between the two languages, but we are keeping it short because we are merely trying to show that Afrikaans is not a suitable metalanguage.[4]&nbsp;Our best choice for a metalanguage is English. Most people in our target group are conversant with English. While all creoles are renowned for their extensive borrowing from other languages, and English is not an exception, the two languages remain distinct, but English also has a much less denigrating and discriminating mental position towards Kaaps.Please download this free book on Kora,&nbsp; <a data-mce-href="https://sahistory.org.za/archive/kora-lost-khoisan-language-early-cape-and-gariep-menan-du-plessis" href="https://sahistory.org.za/archive/kora-lost-khoisan-language-early-cape-and-gariep-menan-du-plessis" data-mce-selected="inline-boundary">" Kora: A Lost Khoisan Language of the early Cape and the Gariep by Menán du Plessis"</a> the language spoken by the Khoikhoi and Khoisan before Van Riebeeck came. Only the dictionary is in Kora-English and in English-Kora. The rest of the book is in English.<ol style=""><li>[1] Kaaps, as we will prove, originated here in and around Cape Town, the Cape {Kaap}, and all language variants of Kaaps, such as Namakwalands, Griekwa, Rehoboth Bastertaal, and other regional languages spoken by Coloured people, do not show much deviation from the Kaaps still spoken at the Cape.</li><li>[2] ‘n Kaapser is someone who speaks Kaaps. We use the rule where –er is added to the language of the individual who speaks it to define him or herself, e.g., Nederlands ~ Nederlander; Afrikaans ~ Afrikaner; Duits ~ Duitser; Hollands ~ Hollander; Italiaans ~ Italianer.</li><li>[3] Paraphrased to select only the Afrikaners’ marginalising attitude toward Kaaps. From m.capetownmagazine.com.</li><li>[4] We would like to say from the start that we do not intend to cause anguish or hurt to Afrikaans speakers. We sometimes have no option but to state the facts the way they are.</li></ol>

Metalanguage

1.1 Origin of the HumansBy Peter SnydersAs we will do with everything we discuss, we will go to the foundation, or the origin. This time, we will be zeroing in on the Coloured people, per se. True to our style, we will go to the source, which is the origin of Humankind. From there, we will proceed to one of our ancestors, the Bushmen, some of whom still exist today.We will always be quoting reliable sources just as we did when we looked at Genesis Chapter 1 to Chapter 2: 1 – 4. This time, we will be looking at the origin of humankind from a scientific perspective. We urge you to look at the article on <a data-mce-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution" title="Human Evolution">Human Evolution </a>on Wikipedia. You will then have all the references to support our summary.At the end of paragraph two, Wikipedia says: “Anatomically modern humans emerged in Africa approximately 300 000 years ago.” Some white scientists did not like the first proofs of this. If this is in fact the case, does this make all humans African in origin? How can this be? Africans are black, and Europeans are white?Fossils found at Blombos Cave in Heidelberg, some 300 km east of Cape Town, indicate that South Africa may be the birthplace of the lineage of humans. While it still leaves the possibility open that there could still be multiple places of human origin, the facts show that Homo sapiens (intelligent humans) reached South Africa about 100 000 years ago. (Patric Tariq Mellet: The Lie of 1652 pp 32-3)Google ‘Blombos Cave’ or the ‘Cradle of Humankind’ and access places where human fossils were found. You will see that Africa – and especially South Africa – features strikingly. Do these finds contradict the Garden of Eden, which was not far from Baghdad, the capital of Iraq today?Let’s leave the teaser there for a while and get back to our ape ancestors. Back in Wiki, we are informed that African hominids [erect bipedal ape-like mammals comprising recent humans] diverged from orangutans about 14 million years ago. &nbsp; Humans parted from the gorillas between 8-9 million years ago and separated from chimpanzees 4-7 million years ago. Human DNA is approximately 98.4% identical to that of chimpanzees. (See your copy of Wikipedia: Human Evolution ± p.4)Humans who made tools from stone (homo habilis) emerged in Africa approximately 300 000 years ago. They evolved larger brains. They could also lock their knees as women with short skirts do.&nbsp;The opening in their skull through which the spinal cord passes to become the medulla oblongata enlarged because of their larger brains. From here on, they are no longer hampered by a little evolved brain but could instinctively learn to do things such as to control fire and start cooking their meat. This led to them needing smaller teeth.&nbsp;All these progressions entitled them to be called homo erectus [humans characterized by firm or rigid straightness in bodily posture], that is, modern humans that do not sleep in trees any longer. (Wikipedia: Human Evolution ± p.9)In Europe and Asia, evidence was found of a group called Neanderthals from 400 000 to about 28 000 years ago. The Khoikhoi people that Jan van Riebeeck called savages and brutes looked incredibly handsome compared to the constructions of the Neanderthal ancestors of the Europeans.&nbsp;When the ice age broke out, there is a narrative that, unlike the other pre-human species that migrated to the warmer torrid zone of Africa, many of the Neanderthals chose to remain in Europe. Some of them could adapt to the frigid environment, but a sizable number of them perished from the extreme cold. Those who survived developed a keenness of sight which proved useful in the dimmer light of glacial Europe.&nbsp;By 28 000 years ago, all Neandertals had died out, but they left some of their useful acquisitions to the primitive European humans. All non-Africans have about 1% to 4% Neandertal DNA. The Neanderthals also appear to have passed on depression in their genes to modern-day Europeans, according to a study conducted by Corinne Simoneti Vanderbilt University in Nashville. (Refer again to Wiki’s Human Evolution)Next, we will look at homo sapiens (meaning ‘wise” or “intelligent” humans in Latin). They emerged in Africa around 300 000 years ago. In South Africa, the San (or Bushmen) are the oldest inhabitants of Southern Africa, where they have lived for at least 20 000 years. (There are many scientific sources to confirm this, but we took this information, including the bold type, from the San - Siyabona Africa / Kruger National Park Site.)&nbsp;It is possible that our ancestors were part of the intelligent species of humans that emerged in Africa some 300 000 years ago. We will be tracing the origin, nature, and destiny of human beings until we feel that we have arrived at the Bushmen origin and then stop contributing to this site, but continue it under another section dealing more fully with, first, the Bushmen, then the Khoikhoi, Khoisan, and then, to a lesser extent, with other groups like the Bantu and Europeans. We will also deal distinctively with our slave ancestry, but all in its time. And as always: with proofKoran: The Prophet Joseph – Yusuf 74: What shall be the recompense [a return for something done], if you prove to be lying?Bible: 1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

1.1. Origin of Humans

<h3>1.1 Kaaps&nbsp;</h3>Copyright © 26.12.2024 by Peter Snyders (G)We are now ready to begin writing about Kaaps, the native language of many South African speakers. The mission is to integrate Kaaps into South Africa's multi-linguistic setup.When Bartholomew Dias entered Mossel Bay in 1487, the Khoikhoi of the area drove their livestock inland at the sight of his two ships and a small vessel.&nbsp;On 10th November 1497, Vasco da Gama set free a Khoisan man and, with signs at St. Helena Bay, indicated to him to bring back some of his men. The next day, fourteen or fifteen Khoisan men came to where Da Gama had moored his ships. The locals had no livestock and were not violent. They could not communicate except with signs. This continued until late 1613, when the ship Hector took Coree, an Indigenous leader, to England to have him learn English. He was returned on 18th June 1614.Coree could speak a few English words, but in 1630, the English took Hadah (Autshumao) with them to Bantam (Java) so that he could learn English while on the ship. Autshumao (also called Herrie by the Dutch) became the interpreter for the English.Why was it so hard for a Khoikhoi to learn a Western language? It was because they spoke two nearly completely different languages. Khoikhoi was so unique, being the only language (including all the ethnic groups and clans) that uses a click.&nbsp;The European visitors and the local Khoikhoi used a Pidgin language only to barter. They would settle on single-fettered words like baa for an ox or cow and boo for a sheep. This was agreeable to the Khoikhoi because it used the simplest of their language, Kora. Because there were many Portuguese, English, and Dutch ships, with French and Danish to a lesser degree, this would make even the Pidgin language difficult to create.The English had an innovative idea to get a Khoikhoi man to learn their language, which would, of course, also be very difficult. Coree and Harry had some insight into the value of things and could thus increase their costs by being the managers of the assignments.&nbsp;The baby hears mostly the language of the mother, which is why it is called the mother tongue. The child will hear this language spoken by others in the family.&nbsp;The sounds of the language would be so ingrained in the individual that any new sounds would be discarded. So, when bartering was to take place, the Khoikhoi people could only hear their language.&nbsp;We must begin at The Origin of Kaaps, so that we can have a solid foundation. There is so much background that must be explained first, and no Foreword or Introduction would suffice. Metalanguage is one of the first reasons why we are writing these discussions on Kaaps in English. Another bonus, linguists and ordinary people all over the world can understand what we are establishing, and many will be able to use our resources to explain away all the irrational hostility towards their language.&nbsp;Since we would all like to see a Wordlist and Spelling Rules of Kaaps, I look forward to you all taking part. If you add meanings to the words you are using in our Wordlist, we could also have a Dictionary of Kaaps. All of these would be sufficient reasons for everybody to seriously consider Kaaps as at least a language whose linguistic rules need more attention.You are free to participate in any of the projects we will be presenting. &nbsp;Since we would all like to see a Wordlist and Spelling Rules of Kaaps, we look forward to you showing us how you speak and write in Kaaps. If you would like to send us your way of writing in Kaaps, make sure that the context in which you use the word is clear. Kaaps has five phases. This latest phase, Modern Kaaps, contains words like notch, bakvissie, bossies, tjais, nwata, etc., that not everyone understands.We will show you how you can either make your own book or be part of a book where this information is given. All our many engagements of Kaaps can even lead spontaneously to not only a Kaapse Wordlist, but a Dictionary of Kaaps can issue from it, where all the rules of Kaaps are given a chance to show how rationally ordered our language is. All of these would be sufficient reason for anybody to seriously consider Kaaps as a language whose linguistics are comparable to any other so-called civilised language.Moving on, we assume that all of us have Kaaps as our mother tongue or have a familiarity with our language to an appreciable degree. We have in our sources: (i) Bo-Kaap Kaaps (ii) Griqua Kaaps (iii) Namakwalands Kaaps (iv) and Rehoboth Basters Kaaps, and of course, the mother of all, (v) Kaapse Kaaps. Anyone from any Coloured community anywhere in South Africa is welcome to contribute their variant of Kaaps. If you look at the history of people of colour, you will discover that they all took Creole with them to wherever they went.To call these dialects variants of Afrikaans is not correct because Afrikaans did not exist until Die Genootskap van Regte Afrikaners came together in 1875 to standardise Afrikaans. We will (as always) prove that Kaaps had its existence long before that time. All variants of Kaaps are daughter languages or dialects of Kaaps and not of Afrikaans.