-1

Well, read this, if you want to understand the issues:

In the 1930s, Benjamin Whorf wrote a number of published and unpublished essays, proposing to identify phonetic elements within the writing system. Although some specifics of his decipherment claims were later shown to be incorrect, the central argument of his work, that Maya hieroglyphs were phonetic (or more specifically, syllabic), was later supported by the work of Yuri Knorozov, who played a major role in deciphering Maya writing.[18] In 1952, Knorozov published the paper "Ancient Writing of Central America" arguing that the so-called "de Landa alphabet" contained in Bishop Diego de Landa's manuscript Relación de las Cosas de Yucatán was actually made of syllabic, rather than alphabetic symbols. He further improved his decipherment technique in his 1963 monograph "The Writing of the Maya Indians"[19] and published translations of Maya manuscripts in his 1975 work "Maya Hieroglyphic Manuscripts". In the 1960s, progress revealed the dynastic records of Maya rulers. Since the early 1980s it has been demonstrated that most of the previously unknown symbols form a syllabary, and progress in reading the Maya writing has advanced rapidly since.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_script#History

"1950s scholars found read Maya text of a breakthrough"

should read:

"In the 1950s scholars were able to read Maya text, in a breakthrough"

"Found" and "read" one after the other don't make sense, except if they were able to find somehow already read/deciphered Maya text, which based on Wiki was not the case: they deciphered it then first.

.... My specific question: One who has helped me and described the texts above failed to throw a light on the bold part. Is there anyone who could show me what really the bold part means?

closed as off-topic by FumbleFingers, ColleenV, user3169, 200_success, Dinusha Nov 30 '14 at 3:51

  • This question does not appear to be about learning the English language within the scope defined in the help center.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • The bolded part (the explanation by your friend) means that you only can use one verb in the clause: found or read, but not these two verbs together. The clause makes no sense with two verbs joined in this way. – CowperKettle Nov 29 '14 at 18:22
  • 3
    I could not find your quote on the mentioned webpage. – user3169 Nov 29 '14 at 20:23
  • if it was buried somewhere in the revision history it may week just be a tyop – Tetsujin Nov 29 '14 at 21:03
  • 5
    This question appears to be off-topic because the quote that is the subject doesn't exist in the source. – ColleenV Nov 29 '14 at 22:12
  • 1
    @Tetsujin I concede that I chose the wrong reason, but the question should be clarified. Closing just puts it on hold until the asker can improve it, so I don't see why it makes sense to leave it open for a day to accumulate answers that may be based on misinterpreting the question. – ColleenV Nov 29 '14 at 23:39
2

1950s scholars found read Maya text of a breakthrough"

The sentence above I understand to be something you've written, and this sentence is an edited version made by someone who is helping you:

In the 1950s scholars were able to read Maya text, in a breakthrough.

With "found read" I think you meant to say:

In the 1950s, scholars discovered how to read Mayan text, in a breakthrough.

  • 1
    +1 I couldn't make out what OP was asking, but I think you've solved it. – StoneyB Nov 29 '14 at 19:32
  • I'm feeling red rather than reed [sorry, I can't do phonetics] but I still don't grok it from the OP. Your version makes the best sense so far, but I'm not convinced it's the 'perfect translation' of the OP's question. (I'd also prefer Mayan, but that's just an aside at this point;-) – Tetsujin Nov 29 '14 at 23:20
  • would you tell me where i can find such a combination, that is., find read? – nima Nov 30 '14 at 18:17
  • I don't believe you'll find it, nima, because the verb 'to find' requires either a direct object (I found a penny on the sidewalk) or an object-phrase (I've found that laughter isn't always the best medicine). In your example, 'read' is either a bare infinitive ('to read' without 'to') or a past-participle (I have read that book) without the helper/auxiliary 'have'. – Tᴚoɯɐuo Nov 30 '14 at 18:26
  • So, is that incorrect? – nima Nov 30 '14 at 19:05

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.