Over the course of its 4000+ year written history, the ancient Egyptian language was written in different ways: hieroglyphs, hieratic, demotic and Coptic. The process of translating all but Coptic is done in two stages, transliteration then translation. In this post I explain why transliteration isn't just a technical exercise (or, as beginner students sometimes suggest, a waste of time), but is an essential tool for analysing and understanding the language before we translate. I also address some common questions, such as why transliteration conventions may differ between textbooks/ text editions, and whether we could (or should) use the evidence of Coptic to bring our transliteration of earlier stages of Egyptian closer to the sounds of the spoken language.
What is transliteration?
The hieroglyphic writing system is complex: some hieroglyphs represent the consonants in Egyptian words, while others represent ideas. Words are commonly written with one or more hieroglyphs spelling out consonant sounds followed by one or more hieroglyphic 'determinatives' that give a broad indication of meaning. Transliteration is a way of representing the consonant sounds of Egyptian words - plus some grammatical information - using a special version of the standard Latin alphabet.
For example, the Middle Egyptian word for 'be silent' was written using hieroglyphs representing the sounds 'g' and 'r' followed by a determinative that is a picture of a man with his hand to his mouth. The determinative was not pronounced in the spoken language, but tells the reader that the word has to do with speech/ thought/ eating/ drinking. We transliterate the word as gr. We don't transliterate the determinative as it had no phonetic value.
Some important points about transliteration
Here are some important things to remember about the transliteration of ancient Egyptian:
It doesn't include determinatives.
It doesn't include vowels.
It employs 'extra' letters that we don't use when we write English, created by adding diacritic marks to standard letters. For example, there are four h's, a plain h, one with a dot under (ḥ), one with a straight line under (ẖ), and one with a curved line under (ḫ). Diacritic marks indicate different nuances of pronunciation that existed in Egyptian (but may not exist in English).
It puts spaces between words - hieroglyphic writing does not.
We write it left to right, regardless of the direction of the original hieroglyphs, which may be right to left, left to right, and/ or in columns.
It uses punctuation in the middle of words to indicate the grammatical role of different elements. For example, in gr.f meaning 'he is silent', the gr is the verb 'be silent' and the .f is a suffix meaning 'he'.
We type transliteration in italics. This helps the reader to distinguish easily between transliteration, translation and other text.
There's more than one system, but the differences between the modern systems aren't too great. See below for more on this.
Some common questions about transliteration
Why does the transliteration in my textbook/ dictionary/ reader looks a bit different from the transliteration in some other publications?
One challenge that students encounter is that transliterations of the same Egyptian word/ text don’t necessarily look the same in different books. For example, you might notice that your textbook uses a j in its transliterations, but another textbook doesn't, or that the use of marks such as full stops and equals signs to indicate the grammatical relationship between parts of words differs.
Variations arise because scholars and institutions have developed and use slightly different systems. This can be confusing, but my advice to a beginner is to start by using the system in your main textbook. As you progress and use different resources, such as grammar reference works, dictionaries, text editions and journal articles, you'll become familiar with other systems and find that, by and large, the differences aren't that great. You may eventually choose to switch systems, or may be required to do so, for example, to publish in a particular journal. However, once you have a solid grasp of the language this is not too great a hurdle.
Why don't we try to insert the vowels/ make our transliteration a closer representation of the sounds of the spoken language, for example, by using the evidence of Coptic?
Transliteration of ancient Egyptian avoids reconstructing vowel sounds because the hieroglyphic writing system did not record them. Including vowels in transliteration would introduce an interpretative element not present in the original text.
While Coptic, the final stage of the Egyptian language, uses a full set of vowels and provides valuable evidence about ancient pronunciation, it is not a direct reflection of earlier stages of the language. Over the millennia, pronunciation and grammar evolved, meaning that Coptic vowels cannot simply be applied to transliterations of hieroglyphic texts. More generally, attempting to reconstruct ancient pronunciation based on later evidence could misrepresent the linguistic reality of earlier periods. Instead of trying to approximate how Egyptian was spoken, transliteration serves as a standardized and neutral representation of the script itself.
But if it's got no vowels, how do we read it aloud?
Transliterations do not include vowels, but we generally need vowels to make words easy to say. When reading transliteration, we therefore insert an 'e' where we need to. For example, the word transliterated as nfr is read 'nefer'. This practice makes transliterations easier to read aloud and remember while preserving the integrity of the original text.
Why shouldn't you skip transliteration (even if you're pretty sure you know what the hieroglyphs say)?
Beginners are often tempted to skip transliteration (or 'do it in their head') and translate immediately. Here are some reasons not to:
It’s the first step in translation Transliteration helps you figure out what’s going on in the sentence. When you transliterate, you identify the breaks between words, divide words into their grammatical elements, and restore to their 'correct' position words or symbols that have been written out of order for artistic reasons or to show respect ('honorific transposition'). This helps you understand the grammar and spot sentence structures more easily. The exercise of transliteration may reveal that your initial instinctive translation was in fact wrong.
Because typing/ drawing hieroglyphs is a hassle Even today, word processing hieroglyphs can be tricky. With transliteration, you can discuss texts, write notes and share ideas without fiddly software or artistic talent.
It shows your working Transliteration isn’t just for you: it lets your teacher - or, when you're more advanced, anyone reading your work - see exactly how you got from the hieroglyphs to your translation.
It's easier to read at a glance Hieroglyphs can be dense and overwhelming, especially in long texts. A transliteration helps you scan the sentence and understand its structure more quickly.
It’s how Egyptologists actually work If you ever want to read academic books or papers on ancient Egyptian, they’ll almost always use transliteration. If you get used to it now, you’ll have a much easier time later.
Conclusion
Transliteration is a vital part of understanding and analysing ancient Egyptian texts: it provides a framework for grammatical analysis and promotes consistency in scholarly communication. Although variations in transliteration systems and the absence of vowels can be challenging, these conventions are designed to make the study of hieroglyphs more accessible and systematic. Embrace transliteration as a powerful tool in your journey through ancient Egyptian language and culture - it’s key to unlocking the secrets of hieroglyphs.