Aramaic
Aramaic | |
---|---|
ארמית, ܐܪܡܐܝܬ Arāmāiṯ | |
Region | Fertile Crescent (Levant, Mesopotamia, and Southeastern Anatolia), eastern Arabia,[1] Sinai |
Afro-Asiatic
| |
Dialects | |
Barzani Neo-Aramaic bhn – Bohtan Neo-Aramaichrt – Hertevin Neo-Aramaicaij – Inter-Zab Neo-Aramaictmr – Jewish Babylonian Aramaicjpa – Jewish Palestinian Aramaickqd – Koy Sanjaq Neo-Aramaiclhs – Mlaḥsô languagemid – Modern Mandaicoar – Old Aramaicsam – Samaritan Aramaic languagesyn – Senaya Neo-Aramaicsyr – Suret languagehuy – Trans-Zab Neo-Aramaictru – Turoyo languagetrg – Urmia Neo-Aramaicamw – Western Neo-Aramaic | |
Glottolog | aram1259 |
Linguasphere | 12-AAA |
Aramaic (
Aramaic served as a language of public life and administration of ancient kingdoms and empires, and also as a language of divine worship and religious study. Several modern varieties, the Neo-Aramaic languages, are still spoken by the Assyrians, Mandeans, Mizrahi Jews[5][6][7][8] and by the Arameans (Syriacs) in the towns of Maaloula and nearby Jubb'adin in Syria.[9][10][11][12][13][14][15] Aramaic is used as the liturgical language of several West Asian churches.[16][17][18][19][20]
Aramaic belongs to the Northwest group of the
The Aramaic languages are now considered endangered, with several varieties used mainly by the older generations.[25] Researchers are working to record and analyze all of the remaining varieties of Neo-Aramaic languages before they or in case they become extinct.[26][27] Aramaic dialects today form the mother tongues of the Arameans (Syriacs) in the Qalamoun mountains, Assyrians and Mandaeans, as well as some Mizrahi Jews.
Early
History
Historically and originally, Aramaic was the language of the
According to the
Aramaic was the
The scribes of the
Some variants of Aramaic are also retained as
Name
The connection between Chaldean, Syriac, and Samaritan as "Aramaic" was first identified in 1679 by German theologian Johann Wilhelm Hilliger.[52][53] In 1819–21 Ulrich Friedrich Kopp published his Bilder und Schriften der Vorzeit ("Images and Inscriptions of the Past"), in which he established the basis of the paleographical development of the Northwest Semitic scripts.[54] Kopp criticised Jean-Jacques Barthélemy and other scholars who had characterized all the then-known inscriptions and coins as Phoenician, with "everything left to the Phoenicians and nothing to the Arameans, as if they could not have written at all".[55] Kopp noted that some of the words on the Carpentras Stele corresponded to the Aramaic in the Book of Daniel, and in the Book of Ruth.[56]
Josephus and Strabo (the latter citing Posidonius) both stated that the "Syrians" called themselves "Arameans".[57][58][59][60] The Septuagint, the earliest extant full copy of the Hebrew Bible, a Greek translation, used the terms Syria and Syrian where the Masoretic Text, the earliest extant Hebrew copy of the Bible, uses the terms Aramean and Aramaic;[61][62][63] numerous later bibles followed the Septuagint's usage, including the King James Version.[64] This connection between the names Syrian and Aramaic was discussed in 1835 by Étienne Marc Quatremère.[65][66]
In historical sources, Aramaic language is designated by two distinctive groups of terms, first of them represented by
Unlike in Hebrew, designations for Aramaic language in some other ancient languages were mostly exonymic. In
The Koine Greek word Ἑβραϊστί (Hebraïstí) has been translated as "Aramaic" in some versions of the Christian New Testament, as Aramaic was at that time the language commonly spoken by the Jews.[76][77] However, Ἑβραϊστί is consistently used in Koine Greek at this time to mean Hebrew and Συριστί (Syristi) is used to mean Aramaic.[78] In Biblical scholarship, the term "Chaldean" was for many years used as a synonym of Aramaic, due to its use in the book of Daniel and subsequent interpretation by Jerome.[79]
Geographic distribution
During the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian Empires, Arameans, the native speakers of Aramaic, began to settle in greater numbers in Babylonia, and later in the heartland of Assyria, also known as the "Arbela triangle" (Assur, Nineveh, and Arbela).[80] The influx eventually resulted in the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911–605 BC) adopting an Akkadian-influenced Imperial Aramaic as the lingua franca of its empire.[38] This policy was continued by the short-lived Neo-Babylonian Empire and the Medes, and all three empires became operationally bilingual in written sources, with Aramaic used alongside Akkadian.[81] The Achaemenid Empire (539–323 BC) continued this tradition, and the extensive influence of these empires led to Aramaic gradually becoming the lingua franca of most of western Asia, Anatolia, the Caucasus, and Egypt.[18][20]
Beginning with the rise of the Rashidun Caliphate and the early Muslim conquests in the late seventh century, Arabic gradually replaced Aramaic as the lingua franca of the Near East.[82] However, Aramaic remains a spoken, literary, and liturgical language for local Christians and also some Jews. Aramaic also continues to be spoken by the Assyrians of northern Iraq, northeastern Syria, southeastern Turkey, and northwest Iran, with diaspora communities in Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, and southern Russia. The Mandaeans also continue to use Classical Mandaic as a liturgical language, although most now speak Arabic as their first language.[44] There are still also a small number of first-language speakers of Western Aramaic varieties in isolated villages in western Syria.
Being in contact with other regional languages, some Neo-Aramaic dialects were often engaged in the mutual exchange of influences, particularly with Arabic,[82] Iranian,[83] and Kurdish.[84]
The turbulence of the last two centuries (particularly the
Aramaic languages and dialects
Aramaic is often spoken of as a single language but is actually a group of related languages.[87] Some languages differ more from each other than the Romance languages do among themselves. Its long history, extensive literature, and use by different religious communities are all factors in the diversification of the language. Some Aramaic dialects are mutually intelligible, whereas others are not, similar to the situation with modern varieties of Arabic.
Some Aramaic languages are known under different names; for example, Syriac is particularly used to describe the Eastern Aramaic variety spoken by Syriac Christian communities in northern Iraq, southeastern Turkey, northeastern Syria, and northwestern Iran, and the Saint Thomas Christians in Kerala, India. Most dialects can be described as either "Eastern" or "Western", the dividing line being roughly the Euphrates, or slightly west of it.
It is also helpful to distinguish modern living languages, or Neo-Aramaics, and those that are still in use as literary or liturgical languages or are only of interest to scholars. Although there are some exceptions to this rule, this classification gives "Old", "Middle", and "Modern" periods alongside "Eastern" and "Western" areas to distinguish between the various languages and dialects that are Aramaic.
Writing system
The earliest Aramaic alphabet was based on the Phoenician alphabet. In time, Aramaic developed its distinctive "square" style. The ancient Israelites and other peoples of Canaan adopted this alphabet for writing their own languages. Thus, it is better known as the Hebrew alphabet. This is the writing system used in Biblical Aramaic and other Jewish writing in Aramaic. The other main writing system used for Aramaic was developed by Christian communities: a cursive form known as the Syriac alphabet. A highly modified form of the Aramaic alphabet, the Mandaic alphabet, is used by the Mandaeans.[44]
In addition to these writing systems, certain derivatives of the Aramaic alphabet were used in ancient times by particular groups: the
Periodization
Most commonly used types of periodization are those of Klaus Beyer and Joseph Fitzmyer.
Periodization of Klaus Beyer (1929–2014):[17]
- Old Aramaic, from the earliest records, to c. 200 AD
- Middle Aramaic, from c. 200 AD, to c. 1200 AD
- Modern Aramaic, from c. 1200 AD, up to the modern times
Periodization of Joseph Fitzmyer (1920–2016):[91]
- Old Aramaic, from the earliest records, to regional prominence c. 700 BC
- Official Aramaic, from c. 700 BC, to c. 200 BC
- Middle Aramaic, from c. 200 BC, to c. 200 AD
- Late Aramaic, from c. 200 AD, to c. 700 AD
- Modern Aramaic, from c. 700 AD, up to the modern times
Recent periodization of Aaron Butts:[92]
- Old Aramaic, from the earliest records, to c. 538 BC
- Achaemenid Aramaic, from c. 538 BC, to c. 333 BC
- Middle Aramaic, from c. 333 BC, to c. 200 AD
- Late Aramaic, from c. 200 AD, to c. 1200 AD
- Neo-Aramaic, from c. 1200 AD, up to the modern times
Old Aramaic
Aramaic's long history and diverse and widespread use has led to the development of many divergent varieties, which are sometimes considered
The central phase in the development of Old Aramaic was its official use by the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911–608 BC), Neo-Babylonian Empire (620–539 BC), and Achaemenid Empire (500–330 BC). The period before this, dubbed "Ancient Aramaic", saw the development of the language from being spoken in Aramaean city-states to become a major means of communication in diplomacy and trade throughout Mesopotamia, the Levant, and Egypt. After the fall of the Achaemenid Empire, local vernaculars became increasingly prominent, fanning the divergence of an Aramaic dialect continuum and the development of differing written standards.
Ancient Aramaic
"Ancient Aramaic" refers to the earliest known period of the language, from its origin until it becomes the lingua franca of the Fertile Crescent. It was the language of the Aramean city-states of Damascus, Hamath, and Arpad.[98]
There are inscriptions that evidence the earliest use of the language, dating from the 10th century BC. These inscriptions are mostly diplomatic documents between Aramaean city-states. The alphabet of Aramaic at this early period seems to be based on the Phoenician alphabet, and there is a unity in the written language. It seems that, in time, a more refined alphabet, suited to the needs of the language, began to develop from this in the eastern regions of Aram. Due to increasing Aramean migration eastward, the Western periphery of Assyria became bilingual in Akkadian and Aramean at least as early as the mid-9th century BC. As the Neo-Assyrian Empire conquered Aramean lands west of the Euphrates, Tiglath-Pileser III made Aramaic the Empire's second official language, and it eventually supplanted Akkadian completely.
From 700 BC, the language began to spread in all directions, but lost much of its unity. Different dialects emerged in Assyria, Babylonia, the Levant and Egypt. Around 600 BC, Adon, a Canaanite king, used Aramaic to write to an Egyptian Pharaoh.[99]
Imperial Aramaic
Arameans |
---|
|
Syro-Hittite states |
|
Aramean kings |
Aramean cities |
Sources |
Around 500 BC, following the
Imperial Aramaic was highly standardised; its orthography was based more on historical roots than any spoken dialect, and the inevitable influence of Persian gave the language a new clarity and robust flexibility. For centuries after the fall of the Achaemenid Empire (in 330 BC), Imperial Aramaic – or a version thereof near enough for it to be recognisable – would remain an influence on the various native Iranian languages. Aramaic script and – as ideograms – Aramaic vocabulary would survive as the essential characteristics of the Pahlavi scripts.[104]
One of the largest collections of Imperial Aramaic texts is that of the
Achaemenid Aramaic is sufficiently uniform that it is often difficult to know where any particular example of the language was written. Only careful examination reveals the occasional loan word from a local language.
A group of thirty Aramaic documents from Bactria have been discovered, and an analysis was published in November 2006. The texts, which were rendered on leather, reflect the use of Aramaic in the 4th century BC Achaemenid administration of Bactria and Sogdia.[107]
Biblical Aramaic
Biblical Aramaic is the Aramaic found in four discrete sections of the Bible:
- Ezra[108] – documents from the Achaemenid period (5th century BC) concerning the restoration of the temple in Jerusalem.
- Daniel[109] – five tales and an apocalyptic vision.[110]
- Jeremiah 10:11– a single sentence in the middle of a Hebrew text denouncing idolatry.
- Genesis[111] – translation of a Hebrew place-name.
Biblical Aramaic is a somewhat hybrid dialect. It is theorized that some Biblical Aramaic material originated in both Babylonia and Judaea before the fall of the Achaemenid dynasty.
Biblical Aramaic presented various challenges for writers who were engaged in early
Post-Achaemenid Aramaic
The fall of the
By the end of the 2nd century BC, several variants of Post-Achaemenid Aramaic emerged, bearing regional characteristics. One of them was Hasmonaean Aramaic, the official administrative language of
The use of written Aramaic in the Achaemenid bureaucracy also precipitated the adoption of Aramaic(-derived) scripts to render a number of
Other regional dialects continued to exist alongside these, often as simple, spoken variants of Aramaic. Early evidence for these
Targumic
Babylonian Targumic is the later post-Achaemenid dialect found in the Targum Onqelos and Targum Jonathan, the "official" targums. The original, Hasmonaean targums had reached Babylon sometime in the 2nd or 3rd century AD. They were then reworked according to the contemporary dialect of Babylon to create the language of the standard targums. This combination formed the basis of Babylonian Jewish literature for centuries to follow.
Galilean Targumic is similar to Babylonian Targumic. It is the mixing of literary Hasmonaean with the dialect of Galilee. The Hasmonaean targums reached Galilee in the 2nd century AD, and were reworked into this Galilean dialect for local use. The Galilean Targum was not considered an authoritative work by other communities, and documentary evidence shows that its text was amended. From the 11th century AD onwards, once the Babylonian Targum had become normative, the Galilean version became heavily influenced by it.
Babylonian Documentary Aramaic
Babylonian Documentary Aramaic is a dialect in use from the 3rd century AD onwards. It is the dialect of Babylonian private documents, and, from the 12th century, all Jewish private documents are in Aramaic. It is based on Hasmonaean with very few changes. This was perhaps because many of the documents in BDA are legal documents, the language in them had to be sensible throughout the Jewish community from the start, and Hasmonaean was the old standard.
Nabataean
Palmyrene
Palmyrene Aramaic is the dialect that was in use in the multicultural[119] city state of Palmyra in the Syrian Desert from 44 BC to 274 AD. It was written in a rounded script, which later gave way to cursive Estrangela. Like Nabataean, Palmyrene was influenced by Arabic, but to a much lesser degree.
Eastern dialects
In the eastern regions (from Mesopotamia to Persia), dialects like Palmyrene Aramaic and Arsacid Aramaic gradually merged with the regional vernacular dialects, thus creating languages with a foot in Achaemenid and a foot in regional Aramaic.
In the
Tatian the Assyrian (or Syrian), the author of the gospel harmony the Diatessaron came from Adiabene (Syr. Beth-Hadiab),[121] and perhaps wrote his work (172 AD) in East Mesopotamian rather than Classical Syriac or Greek. In Babylonia, the regional dialect was used by the Jewish community, Jewish Old Babylonian (from c. 70 AD). This everyday language increasingly came under the influence of Biblical Aramaic and Babylonian Targumic.
The written form of Mandaic, the language of Mandaeism, was descended from the Arsacid chancery script.[122]
Western dialects
The western regional dialects of Aramaic followed a similar course to those of the east. They are quite distinct from the eastern dialects and Imperial Aramaic. Aramaic came to coexist with Canaanite dialects, eventually completely displacing Phoenician in the first century BC and Hebrew around the turn of the fourth century AD.
The form of Late Old Western Aramaic used by the Jewish community is best attested, and is usually referred to as Jewish Old Palestinian. Its oldest form is Old East Jordanian, which probably comes from the region of
The Old East Jordanian dialect continued to be used into the first century AD by pagan communities living to the east of the Jordan. Their dialect is often then called Pagan Old Palestinian, and it was written in a cursive script somewhat similar to that used for Old Syriac. A Christian Old Palestinian dialect may have arisen from the pagan one, and this dialect may be behind some of the Western Aramaic tendencies found in the otherwise eastern Old Syriac gospels (see Peshitta).
Languages during Jesus' lifetime
It is generally believed by Christian scholars that in the first century, Jews in
In addition to the formal, literary dialects of Aramaic based on
The three languages, especially Hebrew and Aramaic, influenced one another through
The Greek of the New Testament preserves some semiticisms, including transliterations of Semitic words. Some are Aramaic,[123] like talitha (ταλιθα), which represents the noun טליתא ṭalīṯā,[124] and others may be either Hebrew or Aramaic like רבוני Rabbounei (Ραββουνει), which means "my master/great one/teacher" in both languages.[125] Other examples:
- "Talitha kumi" (טליתא קומי)[124]
- "Ephphatha" (אתפתח)[126]
- "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" (?אלי, אלי, למה שבקתני)[127]
The 2004 film The Passion of the Christ used Aramaic for much of its dialogue, specially reconstructed by a scholar, William Fulco, S.J. Where the appropriate words (in first-century Aramaic) were no longer known, he used the Aramaic of Daniel and fourth-century Syriac and Hebrew as the basis for his work.[128]
Middle Aramaic
The 3rd century AD is taken as the threshold between Old and Middle Aramaic. During that century, the nature of the various Aramaic languages and dialects began to change. The descendants of Imperial Aramaic ceased to be living languages, and the eastern and western regional languages began to develop vital new literatures. Unlike many of the dialects of Old Aramaic, much is known about the vocabulary and grammar of Middle Aramaic.
Eastern Middle Aramaic
The dialects of Old Eastern Aramaic continued in ancient
Syriac Aramaic
Syriac Aramaic (also "Classical Syriac") is the literary, liturgical and often spoken language of
Jewish Babylonian Aramaic
Jewish Middle Babylonian is the language employed by Jewish writers in Babylonia between the fourth and the eleventh century. It is most commonly identified with the language of the Babylonian Talmud (which was completed in the seventh century) and of post-Talmudic Geonic literature, which are the most important cultural products of Babylonian Judaism. The most important epigraphic sources for the dialect are the hundreds of incantation bowls written in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic.[132]
Mandaic Aramaic
Western Middle Aramaic
The dialects of Old Western Aramaic continued with Nabataean, Jewish Palestinian (in Hebrew "square script"), Samaritan Aramaic (in the Old Hebrew script), and Christian Palestinian (in Syriac Estrangela script).[133] Of these four, only Jewish Palestinian continued as a written language.[clarification needed]
Samaritan Aramaic
The Samaritan Aramaic is earliest attested by the documentary tradition of the Samaritans that can be dated back to the fourth century. Its modern pronunciation is based on the form used in the tenth century.[134]
Jewish Palestinian Aramaic
In 135, after the
Middle Judaean Aramaic, the descendant of Old Judaean Aramaic, was no longer the dominant dialect, and was used only in southern Judaea (the variant Engedi dialect continued throughout this period). Likewise, Middle East Jordanian Aramaic continued as a minor dialect from Old East Jordanian Aramaic. The inscriptions in the synagogue at Dura-Europos are either in Middle East Jordanian or Middle Judaean.
Christian Palestinian Aramaic
This was the language of the Christian Melkite (Chalcedonian) community, predominantly of Jewish descent, in Palestine, Transjordan and Sinai[136] from the 5th to the 8th century.[137] As a liturgical language, it was used up to the 13th century. It is also been called "Melkite Aramaic", "Syro-Palestinian" and "Palestinian Syriac".[138] The language itself comes from Old Western Aramaic, but its writing conventions were based on the Aramaic dialect of Edessa, and it was heavily influenced by Greek. For example, the name Jesus, Syriac īšū‘, is written īsūs, a transliteration of the Greek form, in Christian Palestinian.[139]
Modern Aramaic
As the Western Aramaic languages of the Levant have become nearly extinct in non-liturgical usage, the most prolific speakers of Neo-Aramaic dialects in the 21st century are Eastern Aramaic speakers, the most numerous being the Central Neo-Aramaic and Northeastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA) speakers of Mesopotamia. This includes speakers of the Assyrian (235,000 speakers) and Chaldean (216,000 speakers) varieties of Suret, and Turoyo (112,000 to 450,000 speakers). Having largely lived in remote areas as insulated communities for over a millennium, the remaining speakers of modern Aramaic dialects, such as the Arameans, Assyrians and Mizrahi Jews, escaped the linguistic pressures experienced by others during the large-scale language shifts that saw the proliferation of other tongues among those who previously did not speak them, most recently the Arabization of the Middle East and North Africa by Arabs beginning with the early Muslim conquests of the seventh century.[82]
Modern Eastern Aramaic
Modern Eastern Aramaic exists in a wide variety of dialects and languages.[140] There is significant difference between the Aramaic spoken by Assyrians, Mizrahi Jews, and Mandaeans, with mutually unintelligible variations within each of these groups.
The Christian varieties of Northeastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA) are often called "Assyrian", "Chaldean" or "Eastern Syriac", and are spoken by the Assyrians in northern Iraq, northeast Syria, southeast Turkey, northwest Iran, and in the diaspora. However, they also have roots in numerous previously unwritten local Aramaic varieties and, in some cases, even contain Akkadian influences. These varieties are not purely the direct descendants of the language of Ephrem the Syrian, which was Classical Syriac.[141]
The Judeo-Aramaic languages are now mostly spoken in Israel, and most are facing extinction. The Jewish varieties that have come from communities that once lived between Lake Urmia and Mosul are not all mutually intelligible. In some places, for example Urmia, Christian Assyrians and Mizrahi Jews speak mutually unintelligible varieties of Northeastern Neo-Aramaic in the same place. In others, the Nineveh Plains around Mosul for example, the varieties of these two ethnicities are similar enough to allow conversation.
Modern Central Neo-Aramaic, being in between Western Neo-Aramaic and Northeastern Neo-Aramaic, is generally represented by Turoyo, the language of the Assyrians/Syriacs of Tur Abdin. A related Neo-Aramaic language, Mlaḥsô, has recently become extinct.[142]
Mandaeans living in the Khuzestan province of Iran and scattered throughout Iraq, speak Neo-Mandaic. It is quite distinct from any other Aramaic variety. Mandaeans number some 50,000–75,000 people, but it is believed Neo-Mandaic may now be spoken fluently by as few as 5,000 people, with other Mandaeans having varying degrees of knowledge.[44]
Modern Western Aramaic
Very little remains of Western Aramaic. Its only remaining vernacular is
Sample texts
Matthew 2, verses 1-4, in Classical Syriac (Eastern accent), Christian Palestinian Aramaic and Suret (Swadaya):[144][145][146]
English ( KJV ):
|
[1] Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
[2] Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him. [3] When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. [4] And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. |
---|---|
Classical Syriac (Eastern accent):
|
[1] Ḵaḏ dēyn eṯīleḏ Īšōʕ b-Ḇēṯlḥem d-Īhūḏā b-yawmay Herodes malkā eṯaw mġōšē min maḏnḥā l-Ōrešlem.
[2] W-Āmrīn: Aykaw malkā d-īhūḏāyē d-eṯīleḏ? Ḥzayn gēr kawkḇēh b-maḏnḥā w-eṯayn l-mesgaḏ lēh. [3] Šmaʕ dēyn Herodes malkā w-ettzīʕ w-ḵullāh Ōrešlem ʕammēh. [4] W-ḵanneš ḵulhōn rabbay kāhnē w-sāprē d-ʕammā wa-mšayel-wālhōn d-aykā meṯīleḏ mšīḥā. |
Christian Palestinian Aramaic: | [1] Ḵaḏ eṯileḏ mōro Yesūs b-Beṯlḥem d-Yuḏō b-yawmay d-Herodes malkō w-hō mġušōya min maḏnḥō eṯaw l-Irušlem.
[2] Ōmrin: Hōn hū deyn d-eṯileḏ? Ḥmaynan ger kawkḇeh b-maḏnḥō w-eṯaynan d-nesguḏ leh. [3] W-ḵaḏ šmaʕ malkō Herodes eṯʕabaḇ w-ḵuloh Irušlem ʕameh. [4] W-ḵaneš ḵulhun rišay koḥnōya w-soprawi d-qahlo wa-hwo mšayel lhun hōn mšiḥō meṯileḏ. |
Suret (Swadaya):
|
[1] Min baṯar d-pišleh iliḏe Išo go Beṯlkham d-Ihuḏa b-yomane d-Herodes malka ṯelon mġoše min maḏnkha l-Orešlim.
[2] W-buqrehon: Eykeleh haw d-pišleh iliḏe malka d-ihuḏāye? Sabab khzelan l-kawkhḇeh b-maḏnkha w-telan d-saġdakh eleh. [3] Iman d-šmayeleh Herodes malka aha pišleh šġhiše w-kulaha Orešlim ʔammeh. [4] W-qraeleh kuleh gurane d-kahne w-sapre d-ʔamma w-buqrehmennay eyka bit paiš va iliḏe mšikha. |
Matthew 28, verse 16, in Classical Syriac (Eastern accent), Western Neo-Aramaic, Turoyo and Suret (Swadaya):
English ( KJV ):
|
[16] Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. |
---|---|
Classical Syriac (Eastern accent) | [16] Talmīḏē dēyn ḥḏaʕesre āzalū l-Glīlā l-ṭūrā aykā d-waʕad ennūn Īšōʕ. |
Western Neo-Aramaic: | [16] Bes aḥḥadaʕsar tilmiḏ zallun l-arʕa l-Jalila l-ṭūra ti amerlun maʕleh Yešūʕ. |
Turoyo :
|
[16] Wa-ḥḏaḥsar talmiḏe azzinnewa lu Ġlilo lu ṭūro ayko d-moʕadleh Yešū. |
Suret (Swadaya): | [16] Ina talmiḏe khadissar azzillun l-Glila l-ṭūra eyka d-bit khwaʔda ʔammeh Išo. |
Phonology
Each dialect of Aramaic has its own distinctive pronunciation, and it would not be feasible here to go into all these properties. Aramaic has a phonological palette of 25 to 40 distinct phonemes. Some modern Aramaic pronunciations lack the series of "emphatic" consonants, and some have borrowed from the inventories of surrounding languages, particularly
.Vowels
Front | Back | |
---|---|---|
Close | i | u |
Close-mid | e | o |
Open-mid | ɛ | (ɔ) |
Open | a | (ɑ) |
As with most Semitic languages, Aramaic can be thought of as having three basic sets of vowels:
- Open a-vowels
- Close front i-vowels
- Close back u-vowels
These vowel groups are relatively stable, but the exact articulation of any individual is most dependent on its consonantal setting.
The open vowel is an open near-front unrounded vowel ("short" a, somewhat like the first vowel in the English "batter", [a]). It usually has a back counterpart ("long" a, like the a in "father", [ɑ], or even tending to the vowel in "caught", [ɔ]), and a front counterpart ("short" e, like the vowel in "head", [ɛ]). There is much correspondence between these vowels between dialects. There is some evidence that Middle Babylonian dialects did not distinguish between the short a and short e. In West Syriac dialects, and possibly Middle Galilean, the long a became the o sound. The open e and back a are often indicated in writing by the use of the letters א "alaph" (a glottal stop) or ה "he" (like the English h).
The close front vowel is the "long" i (like the vowel in "need", [i]). It has a slightly more open counterpart, the "long" e, as in the final vowel of "café" ([e]). Both of these have shorter counterparts, which tend to be pronounced slightly more open. Thus, the short close e corresponds with the open e in some dialects. The close front vowels usually use the consonant י y as a mater lectionis.
The close back vowel is the "long" u (like the vowel in "school", [u]). It has a more open counterpart, the "long" o, like the vowel in "show" ([o]). There are shorter, and thus more open, counterparts to each of these, with the short close o sometimes corresponding with the long open a. The close back vowels often use the consonant ו w to indicate their quality.
Two basic diphthongs exist: an open vowel followed by י y (ay), and an open vowel followed by ו w (aw). These were originally full diphthongs, but many dialects have converted them to e and o respectively.
The so-called "emphatic" consonants (see the next section) cause all vowels to become mid-centralised.
Consonants
Labial | Dental | Alveolar | Post-alv. /
Palatal |
Velar | Uvular / Pharyngeal |
Glottal | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
plain | emp. | ||||||||
Nasal | m | n |
|||||||
Stop
|
voiceless | p | t |
tˤ | k | q | ʔ | ||
voiced | b | d |
ɡ | ||||||
Fricative
|
voiceless | f | θ | s | sˤ | ʃ | x | ħ | h |
voiced | v | ð | z | ɣ | ʕ | ||||
Approximant | l |
j | w | ||||||
Trill | r |
The various alphabets used for writing Aramaic languages have twenty-two letters (all of which are consonants). Some of these letters, though, can stand for two or three different sounds (usually a
- Labial set: פּ\פ p/f and בּ\ב b/v,
- Dental set: תּ\ת t/θ and דּ\ד d/ð,
- Velar set: כּ\כ k/x and גּ\ג ɡ/ɣ.
Each member of a certain pair is written with the same letter of the alphabet in most writing systems (that is, p and f are written with the same letter), and are near allophones.
A distinguishing feature of Aramaic phonology (and that of Semitic languages in general) is the presence of "emphatic" consonants. These are consonants that are pronounced with the root of the tongue retracted, with varying degrees of pharyngealization and velarization. Using their alphabetic names, these emphatics are:
- ח Ḥêṯ, a voiceless pharyngeal fricative, /ħ/,
- ט Ṭêṯ, a pharyngealized t, /tˤ/,
- ע ʽAyin (or ʽE in some dialects), a pharyngealized glottal stop (sometimes considered to be a voiced pharyngeal approximant), [ʕ] or [ʔˤ],
- צ Ṣāḏê, a pharyngealized s, /sˤ/,
- ק Qôp, a voiceless uvular stop, /q/.
Ancient Aramaic may have had a larger series of emphatics, and some Neo-Aramaic languages definitely do. Not all dialects of Aramaic give these consonants their historic values.
Overlapping with the set of emphatics are the "guttural" consonants. They include ח Ḥêṯ and ע ʽAyn from the emphatic set, and add א ʼĀlap̄ (a glottal stop) and ה Hê (as the English "h").
Aramaic classically has a set of four sibilants (ancient Aramaic may have had six):
- ס, שׂ /s/ (as in English "sea"),
- ז /z/ (as in English "zero"),
- שׁ /ʃ/ (as in English "ship"),
- צ /sˤ/ (the emphatic Ṣāḏê listed above).
In addition to these sets, Aramaic has the
Historical sound changes
Six broad features of sound change can be seen as dialect differentials:
- Vowel change occurs almost too frequently to document fully, but is a major distinctive feature of different dialects.
- Plosive/fricative pair reduction. Originally, Aramaic, like Assyrian Neo-Aramaic) have lost /θ/ and /ð/ and replaced them with /t/ and /d/, as with Modern Hebrew. In most dialects of Modern Syriac, /f/ and /v/ are realized as [w] after a vowel.
- Loss of emphatics. Some dialects have replaced emphatic consonants with non-emphatic counterparts, while those spoken in the Caucasus often have glottalized rather than pharyngealized emphatics.
- Guttural assimilation is the main distinctive feature of Samaritan pronunciation, also found in Samaritan Hebrew: all the gutturals are reduced to a simple glottal stop. Some Modern Aramaic dialects do not pronounce h in all words (the third person masculine pronoun hu becomes ow).
- Proto-Semitic */θ/ */ð/ are reflected in Aramaic as */t/, */d/, whereas they became sibilants in Hebrew (the number three is שלוש šālôš in Hebrew but תלת tlāṯ in Aramaic, the word gold is זהב zahav[147] in Hebrew but דהב dehav[148] in Aramaic). Dental/sibilant shifts are still happening in the modern dialects.
- New phonetic inventory. Modern dialects have borrowed sounds from the dominant surrounding languages. The most frequent borrowings are [ʒ] (as the first consonant in "azure"), [d͡ʒ] (as in "jam"), and [t͡ʃ] (as in "church"). The Syriac alphabet has been adapted for writing these new sounds.
Grammar
As in other Semitic languages, Aramaic morphology (the way words are formed) is based on the consonantal root. The root generally consists of two or three consonants and has a basic meaning, for example, כת״ב k-t-b has the meaning of 'writing'. This is then modified by the addition of vowels and other consonants to create different nuances of the basic meaning:
- כתבה kṯāḇâ, handwriting, inscription, script, book.
- כתבי kṯāḇê, books, the Scriptures.
- כתובה kāṯûḇâ, secretary, scribe.
- כתבת kiṯḇeṯ, I wrote.
- אכתב 'eḵtûḇ, I shall write.
Nouns and adjectives
Aramaic nouns and adjectives are inflected to show gender, number and state.
Aramaic has two grammatical genders: masculine and feminine. The feminine absolute singular is often marked by the ending ה- -â.
Nouns can be either singular or plural, but an additional "dual" number exists for nouns that usually come in pairs. The dual number gradually disappeared from Aramaic over time and has little influence in Middle and Modern Aramaic.
Aramaic nouns and adjectives can exist in one of three states. To a certain extent, these states correspond to the role of articles and cases in the Indo-European languages:
- The absolute state is the basic form of a noun. In early forms of Aramaic, the absolute state expresses indefiniteness, comparable to the English indefinite article a(n) (for example, כתבה kṯāḇâ, "a handwriting"), and can be used in most syntactic roles. However, by the Middle Aramaic period, its use for nouns (but not adjectives) had been widely replaced by the emphatic state.
- The construct state is a form of the noun used to make possessive constructions (for example, כתבת מלכתא kṯāḇat malkṯâ, "the handwriting of the queen"). In the masculine singular, the form of the construct is often the same as the absolute, but it may undergo vowel reduction in longer words. The feminine construct and masculine construct plural are marked by suffixes. Unlike a genitive case, which marks the possessor, the construct state is marked on the possessed. This is mainly due to Aramaic word order: possessed[const.] possessor[abs./emph.] are treated as a speech unit, with the first unit (possessed) employing the construct state to link it to the following word. In Middle Aramaic, the use of the construct state for all but stock phrases (like בר נשא bar nāšâ, "son of man") begins to disappear.
- The emphatic or determined state is an extended form of the noun that functions similarly to the definite article. It is marked with a suffix (for example, כתבתא kṯāḇtâ, "the handwriting"). Although its original grammatical function seems to have been to mark definiteness, it is used already in Imperial Aramaic to mark all important nouns, even if they should be considered technically indefinite. This practice developed to the extent that the absolute state became extraordinarily rare in later varieties of Aramaic.
Whereas other
Adjectives agree with their nouns in number and gender but agree in state only if used attributively. Predicative adjectives are in the absolute state regardless of the state of their noun (a copula may or may not be written). Thus, an attributive adjective to an emphatic noun, as in the phrase "the good king", is written also in the emphatic state מלכא טבא malkâ ṭāḇâ – king[emph.] good[emph.]. In comparison, the predicative adjective, as in the phrase "the king is good", is written in the absolute state מלכא טב malkâ ṭāḇ – king[emph.] good[abs.].
"good" | masc. sg. | fem. sg. | masc. pl. | fem. pl. |
---|---|---|---|---|
abs. | טב ṭāḇ | טבה ṭāḇâ | טבין ṭāḇîn | טבן ṭāḇān |
const. | טבת ṭāḇaṯ | טבי ṭāḇê | טבת ṭāḇāṯ | |
det./emph. | טבא ṭāḇâ | טבתא ṭāḇtâ | טביא ṭāḇayyâ | טבתא ṭāḇāṯâ |
The final א- -â in a number of these suffixes is written with the letter aleph. However, some Jewish Aramaic texts employ the letter he for the feminine absolute singular. Likewise, some Jewish Aramaic texts employ the Hebrew masculine absolute singular suffix ים- -îm instead of ין- -în. The masculine determined plural suffix, יא- -ayyâ, has an alternative version, -ê. The alternative is sometimes called the "gentilic plural" for its prominent use in ethnonyms (יהודיא yəhûḏāyê, 'the Jews', for example). This alternative plural is written with the letter aleph, and came to be the only plural for nouns and adjectives of this type in Syriac and some other varieties of Aramaic. The masculine construct plural, -ê, is written with yodh. In Syriac and some other variants this ending is diphthongized to -ai.
Possessive phrases in Aramaic can either be made with the construct state or by linking two nouns with the relative particle -[ד[י d[î]-. As the use of the construct state almost disappears from the Middle Aramaic period on, the latter method became the main way of making possessive phrases.
For example, the various forms of possessive phrases (for "the handwriting of the queen") are:
- כתבת מלכתא kṯāḇaṯ malkṯâ – the oldest construction, also known as סמיכות səmîḵûṯ : the possessed object (כתבה kṯābâ, "handwriting") is in the construct state (כתבת kṯāḇaṯ); the possessor (מלכה malkâ, "queen") is in the emphatic state (מלכתא malkṯâ)
- כתבתא דמלכתא kṯāḇtâ d(î)-malkṯâ – both words are in the emphatic state and the relative particle -[ד[י d[î]- is used to mark the relationship
- כתבתה דמלכתא kṯāḇtāh d(î)-malkṯâ – both words are in the emphatic state, and the relative particle is used, but the possessed is given an anticipatory, pronominal ending (כתבתה kṯāḇtā-h, "handwriting-her"; literally, "her writing, that (of) the queen").
In Modern Aramaic, the last form is by far the most common. In Biblical Aramaic, the last form is virtually absent.
Verbs
The Aramaic verb has gradually evolved in time and place, varying between varieties of the language. Verb forms are marked for person (first, second or third), number (singular or plural), gender (masculine or feminine), tense (perfect or imperfect), mood (indicative, imperative, jussive, or infinitive), and voice (active, reflexive, or passive). Aramaic also employs a system of conjugations, or verbal stems, to mark intensive and extensive developments in the lexical meaning of verbs.
Aspectual tense
Aramaic has two proper tenses: perfect and imperfect. These were originally aspectual, but developed into something more like a preterite and future. The perfect is unmarked, while the imperfect uses various preformatives that vary according to person, number and gender. In both tenses the third-person singular masculine is the unmarked form from which others are derived by addition of afformatives (and preformatives in the imperfect). In the chart below (on the root כת״ב K-T-B, meaning "to write"), the first form given is the usual form in Imperial Aramaic, while the second is Classical Syriac.
Person & gender | Perfect | Imperfect | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Singular | Plural | Singular | Plural | |
3rd m. | כתב kəṯaḇ ↔ kəṯaḇ | כתבו ↔ כתב(ו)\כתבון kəṯaḇû ↔ kəṯaḇ(w)/kəṯabbûn | יכתוב ↔ נכתוב yiḵtuḇ ↔ neḵtoḇ | יכתבון ↔ נכתבון yiḵtəḇûn ↔ neḵtəḇûn |
3rd f. | כתבת kiṯbaṯ ↔ keṯbaṯ | כתבת ↔ כתב(י)\כתבן kəṯaḇâ ↔ kəṯaḇ(y)/kəṯabbên | תכתב tiḵtuḇ ↔ teḵtoḇ | יכתבן ↔ נכתבן yiḵtəḇān ↔ neḵtəḇān |
2nd m. | כתבת kəṯaḇt ↔ kəṯaḇt | כתבתון kəṯaḇtûn ↔ kəṯaḇton | תכתב tiḵtuḇ ↔ teḵtoḇ | תכתבון tiḵtəḇûn ↔ teḵtəḇûn |
2nd f. | (כתבתי ↔ כתבת(י kəṯaḇtî ↔ kəṯaḇt(y) | כתבתן kəṯaḇtēn ↔ kəṯaḇtên | תכתבין tiḵtuḇîn ↔ teḵtuḇîn | תכתבן tiḵtəḇān ↔ teḵtəḇān |
1st m./f. | כתבת kiṯḇēṯ ↔ keṯḇeṯ | כתבנא ↔ כתבן kəṯaḇnâ ↔ kəṯaḇn | אכתב eḵtuḇ ↔ eḵtoḇ | נכתב niḵtuḇ ↔ neḵtoḇ |
Conjugations or verbal stems
Like other Semitic languages, Aramaic employs a number of derived verb stems, to extend the lexical coverage of verbs. The basic form of the verb is called the ground stem, or G-stem. Following the tradition of mediaeval Arabic grammarians, it is more often called the Pə‘al פעל (also written Pe‘al), using the form of the Semitic root פע״ל P-‘-L, meaning "to do". This stem carries the basic lexical meaning of the verb.
By doubling of the second radical, or root letter, the D-stem or פעל Pa‘‘el is formed. This is often an intensive development of the basic lexical meaning. For example, qəṭal means "he killed", whereas qaṭṭel means "he slew". The precise relationship in meaning between the two stems differs for every verb.
A
These three conjugations are supplemented with three further derived stems, produced by the preformative -הת hiṯ- or -את eṯ-. The loss of the initial ה h sound occurs similarly to that in the form above. These three derived stems are the Gt-stem, התפעל Hiṯpə‘el or אתפעל Eṯpə‘el (also written Hithpe‘el or Ethpe‘el), the Dt-stem, התפעּל Hiṯpa‘‘al or אתפעּל Eṯpa‘‘al (also written Hithpa‘‘al or Ethpa‘‘al), and the Ct-stem, התהפעל Hiṯhap̄‘al, אתּפעל Ettap̄‘al, השתפעל Hištap̄‘al or אשתפעל Eštap̄‘al (also written Hithhaph‘al, Ettaph‘al, Hishtaph‘al, or Eshtaph‘al). Their meaning is usually reflexive, but later became passive. However, as with other stems, actual meaning differs from verb to verb.
Not all verbs use all of these conjugations, and, in some, the G-stem is not used. In the chart below (on the root כת״ב K-T-B, meaning "to write"), the first form given is the usual form in Imperial Aramaic, while the second is Classical Syriac.
Stem | Perfect active | Imperfect active | Perfect passive | Imperfect passive |
---|---|---|---|---|
פעל Pə‘al (G-stem) | כתב kəṯaḇ ↔ kəṯaḇ | יכתב ↔ נכתב yiḵtuḇ ↔ neḵtoḇ | כתיב kəṯîḇ | |
התפעל\אתפעל Hiṯpə‘ēl/Eṯpə‘el (Gt-stem) | התכתב ↔ אתכתב hiṯkəṯēḇ ↔ eṯkəṯeḇ | יתכתב ↔ נתכתב yiṯkəṯēḇ ↔ neṯkəṯeḇ | ||
פעּל Pa‘‘ēl/Pa‘‘el (D-stem) | כתּב kattēḇ ↔ katteḇ | יכתּב ↔ נכתּב yəḵattēḇ ↔ nəkatteḇ | כֻתּב kuttaḇ | |
התפעל\אתפעל Hiṯpa‘‘al/Eṯpa‘‘al (Dt-stem) | התכתּב ↔ אתכתּב hiṯkəttēḇ ↔ eṯkətteḇ | יתכתּב ↔ נתכתּב yiṯkəttēḇ ↔ neṯkətteḇ | ||
הפעל\אפעל Hap̄‘ēl/Ap̄‘el (C-stem) | הכתב ↔ אכתב haḵtēḇ ↔ aḵteḇ | יהכתב↔ נכתב yəhaḵtēḇ ↔ naḵteḇ | הֻכתב huḵtaḇ | |
התהפעל\אתּפעל Hiṯhap̄‘al/Ettap̄‘al (Ct-stem) | התהכתב ↔ אתּכתב hiṯhaḵtaḇ ↔ ettaḵtaḇ | יתהכתב ↔ נתּכתב yiṯhaḵtaḇ ↔ nettaḵtaḇ |
In Imperial Aramaic, the participle began to be used for a historical present. Perhaps under influence from other languages, Middle Aramaic developed a system of composite tenses (combinations of forms of the verb with pronouns or an auxiliary verb), allowing for narrative that is more vivid. Aramaic syntax usually follows the order verb–subject–object (VSO). Imperial (Persian) Aramaic, however, tended to follow a S-O-V pattern (similar to Akkadian), which was the result of Persian syntactic influence.
See also
- Talmud
- Arameans
- Aramaic studies
- Arabic alphabet
- Aramaic of Hatra
- Ephrem the Syrian
- Hebrew alphabet
- Gospel of Matthew
- Peshitta
- List of Aramaic-language television channels
- List of loanwords in modern Aramaic
- Romanization of Syriac
References
- ISBN 9781463236649.
The Syriac writers of Qatar themselves produced some of the best and most sophisticated writing to be found in all Syriac literature of the seventh century, but they have not received the scholarly attention that they deserve in the last half century. This volume seeks to redress this underdevelopment by setting the standard for further research in the sub-field of Beth Qatraye studies.
- ISBN 9783030303983.who naturally looked to their co-linguists back in Mesopotamia.
The Persian location and character of the Metropolitan proved to be a source of friction between the Syriac-speaking Christians of Beth Qatraye
- ISBN 9781538124185.
He was born in the region of Beth Qatraye in Eastern Arabia, a mixed Syriac- and Arabic Speaking region…
- ^ a b Brock 1989, pp. 11–23.
- ISBN 978-3-11-018613-0.
- ISBN 9780802877482.
The overarching concept of Aramaic, strictly a historical-linguistic abstraction, is made more concrete by various terms for the various Aramaic languages (or dialects, where we are mainly dealing with regional vernaculars without a written tradition; the neutral term variety includes both categories).[…] Or scholars use the same terms to refer to different historical periods, as with "Old Aramaic" or "Imperial Aramaic." Others still are just misleading, such as "Modern Syriac" for the modern spoken languages, which do not directly descend from Syriac. When discussing what a certain word or phrase is "in Aramaic" then, we always have to specify which period, region, or culture is meant unlike Classical Latin, for instance. […] For the most part, Aramaic is thus studied as a crucial but subservient element in several well-established, mainly philological and historical disciplines and social sciences. Even in the academic world, only few people see any inherent value that transcends the disciplinary boundaries in this language family.
- ISBN 978-1-59333-714-8.
Aramaic itself consists of a great number of language forms (and indeed languages), spoken and written in many different scripts over a period of 3000 years.
- ^ Aufrecht 2001, p. 145: "The Aramaic Language originated in ancient Syria at the end of the Late Bronze Age (c. 1500–1200 B.C.), is one of the oldest continually spoken languages in the world."
- ISBN 9783446239005.
Ich kenne das Dorf nicht, doch gehört habe ich davon. Was ist mit Malula?‹ fragte der festgehaltene Derwisch. >Das letzte Dorf der Aramäer< lachte einer der…
- ISBN 9783110199192.
The fact that nearly all Arabic loans in Ma'lula originate from the period before the change from the rural dialect to the city dialect of Damascus shows that the contact between the Aramaeans and the Arabs was intimate…
- ISBN 9783643152619.
Aramäer von Ǧubbˁadīn
- ISBN 9783447033268.
Die arabischen Dialekte der Aramäer
- ISBN 9783447033268.
Die Kontakte zwischen den drei Aramäer-dörfern sind nicht besonders stark.
- ISBN 9783447053136.
Aramäern in Ma'lūla
- ISBN 9783447053136.
Viele Aramäer arbeiten heute in Damaskus, Beirut oder in den Golfstaaten und verbringen nur die Sommermonate im Dorf.
- ^ Sokoloff 1983.
- ^ a b Beyer 1986.
- ^ a b c Lipiński 2000.
- ^ Creason 2008, pp. 108–44.
- ^ a b c Gzella 2015.
- ^ Lipiński 2001, p. 64.
- ^ Gzella 2015, pp. 17–22.
- ^ Daniels 1996, pp. 499–514.
- ^ Beyer 1986, p. 56.
- ^ Naby 2004, pp. 197–203.
- ^ Macuch 1990, pp. 214–23.
- ^ Coghill 2007, pp. 115–22.
- OCLC 1018201352.
- ^ Khan 2007, pp. 95–114.
- ^ "Sanhedrin 38b". www.sefaria.org.
- ^ Ruzer 2014, pp. 182–205.
- ^ Buth 2014, pp. 395–421.
- ^ Gzella 2015, p. 237.
- ^ Kitchen 1965, pp. 31–79.
- ^ Rosenthal 2006.
- ^ Gzella 2015, pp. 304–10.
- ^ a b Folmer 2012, pp. 587–98.
- ^ a b Bae 2004, pp. 1–20.
- ^ Green 1992, p. 45.
- ^ Beyer 1986, pp. 38–43.
- ^ Casey 1999, pp. 83–93.
- ISSN 2081-1330.
- ^ a b Burtea 2012, pp. 670–85.
- ^ a b c d Häberl 2012, pp. 725–37.
- ^ Heinrichs 1990, pp. xi–xv.
- ^ Beyer 1986, p. 53.
- ^ "Did you know". Surayt-Aramaic Online Project. Free University of Berlin.
- .
- ^ Brock, An Introduction to Syriac Studies Archived 2013-05-18 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Kopp, Ulrich Friedrich [in German] (1821). "Semitische Paläographie: Aramäische ältere Schrift". Bilder und Schriften der Vorzeit. pp. 226–27.
- ISBN 978-3-11-071290-2.
The earliest of the Aramaic finds known to us is the so-called "Carpentras stele"...
- JSTOR 593293.
Hilliger first saw clearly the relation of the so-called Chaldee, Syriac, and Samaritan (1679)
- ^ Johann Wilhelm Hilliger (1679). Summarium Lingvæ Aramææ, i.e. Chaldæo-Syro-Samaritanæ: olim in Academia Wittebergensi orientalium lingvarum consecraneis, parietes intra privatos, prælectum & nunc ... publico bono commodatum. Sumtibus hæred. D. Tobiæ Mevii & Elerti Schumacheri, per Matthæum Henckelium.
[Partial English translation]: "The Aramaic language name comes from its gentile founder, Aram (Gen 10:22), in the same manner as the Slavic languages Bohemian, Polish, Vandal etc. Multiple dialects are Chaldean, Syrian, Samaritan."; Latin Original: Linguae Aramaeae nomen à gentis conditore, Aramo nimirum (Gen. X 22) desumptum est, & complectitur, perinde ut Lingua Sclavonica, Bohemican, Polonican, Vandalicam &c. Dialectos plures, ceu sunt: Chaldaica, Syriaca, Samaritana.
- ISBN 9781575068879. Retrieved 2022-10-05.)
In his Bilder und Schriften der Vorzeit, Ulrich Friedrich Kopp (1819–21) established the basis of the paleographical development of the Northwest Semitic scripts...
{{cite book}}
:|website=
ignored (help)CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of January 2024 (link - ^ Kopp 1821, p. 226-227 (§168–169): "Irre ich nicht, so hat man die Benennung "phönicische Schrift" bisher etwas zu freygebig gebraucht, den Phöniciern alles gegeben, und den Aramäern nichts gelassen, gleichsam, als ob diese gar nicht hätten schreiben können, oder doch von ihnen nicht ein einziges Denkmal aus ältern Zeiten sich sollte erhalten haben. Selbst Schriften, in welchen sich die aramäische Mund-Art gar nicht verkennen läßt, nennen die Orientalisten phönicisch (§. 195), bloß weil sie noch nicht geahndet haben, daß eine Verschiedenheit vorhanden seyn könne. Ein Haupt-Unterscheidungs-Zeichen – So weit man, ohne auch dasjenige gesehen zu haben, was etwa noch entdeckt werden könnte, vorjetzt durch bloße Induction schließen kann – scheint in den Buchstaben ב, ד, ע und ר zu liegen. Denn so viele phönicische Denkmäler ich auch betrachtet habe; so sind mir doch in keinem einzigen ächt phönicischen diejenigen Gestalten vorgekommen, welche sich oben öffnen (§. 100). Nur bey dem einzigen ע finden sich, wie ich schon erinnert habe, jedoch höchst seltene Ausnahmen, die zuweilen bloß von der Uebereilung des Schreibers herrühren (z.B. im ersten ע der oxforder Inschrift (B.I. S.207). Wir haben sogar oben (§. 159) gesehen, daß selbst noch 153 Jahre nach Christi Geburt, als schon die Schrift in Phönicien sehr ausgeartet war, und in dem ganzen Zeit-Raume vorher, nie ד und ר mit von oben geöffneten Köpfen erscheinen. Dagegen haben diejenigen Denkmäler, auf welchen man sie antrifft, wie ich glaube, auch keinen Anspruch an Pönicier, als Urheber. §. 169 Unter solche gehört vor allen die Inschrift von Carpentras, welche ich hier um so lieber vornehme, als ihre Aechtheit über allen Zweifel erhoben ist... §. 195 Die Schrift darauf nannte man ehemals ägyptisch, welches freylich, weder in Vergleichung mit der ägyptischen Buchstaben-Schrift eine angemessene Benennung, noch der Sprache wegen eine zu wagende Vermuthung war. Schwerlich richtig ist aber auch die bey neuern Gelehrten (Gessenii Gesch. d. hebr. Spr. 139. Bibl. der alt. Literat. VI. 18. Hammer Fund-Grub. V. 277 °°) aufgekommene Benennung "Phönicisch". Ja Hartmann (II. II. 540) nennt sogar unmittelbar nach der ersten malteser diese "eine andere phönicische Inschrift". Schon die Mund-Art, welche nicht phönicisch, sondern aramäisch ist, würde uns vermuthen lassen, daß die Schrift den Aramäern ebenfalls gehöre; wenn nicht in dieser sich zugleich auch Merkmale einer Verschiedenheit von der phönicischen zeigten (s. oben §. 100. 168). Ich habe daher mit gutem Vorbedachte unser Denkmal von Carpentras aus meiner kleinen Sammlung phönicischer Inschriften (B. I. 195) ausgeschlossen. §. 196 Es scheint, als ob zur Zeit des oben (§. 193) mitgetheilten babylonischen Denkmals Aramäer und Phönicier eine und dieselbe Schrift gehabt hätten. Gegen 300 Sahre vor unserer Zeit-Rechnung war aber meiner Vermuthung nach schon eine Trennung eingetreten. Ich sage Vermuthung: denn mein Schluß gründet sich nur auf die einseitige Auslegung folgender Münze, bey welcher man mir vielleicht mehr als einen Einwurf zu machen im Stande ist.."
- ^ Kopp 1821, p. S. 182–185: "Es gehört nicht viel dazu, um einzusehen, daß die Mund-Art, welche in dieser Inschrift herrscht, aramäisch sey. Schon de Wörter עבדת קדם ,ברת ,אמרת, u. s . w. verrathen sie. Allein rein Chaldäisch kann man sie nicht nennen; man müßte denn mit O. G. Tychsen zu manchen Vorausseßungen und Uenderungen seine Zuflucht nehmen wollen. [ ] ist nimmermehr chaldäisch; sondern entweder äthiopisch hic, hoc loco, oder das hebräische Demonstrativum. Denn man bemerkt auch ben [ ] die Orthographie, nach welcher [ ] statt [ ] gefegt wird. Ich war einmal in Versuchung das Relativum der Zabier darinnen sinden zu wollen, weil ich [ ] wirklich gedruckt fand. Als ich aber die Handschrift selbst verglich, say' ich bald, daß es ein Druckfehler, statt [ ], war… [ ]. Oyngeachtet die Endigung nicht gewöhnlich im Chaldäischen ist, so findet sich doch in der Ueberseßung des Buches Ruth (III. 10) dieses Wort grade so geschrieben. [ ] Daß dieses Zeit-Wort hier nicht perfectus fuit, wie gewöhnlich, heißen könne, lehrt der Zusammenhang. Es hat aber auch transitive Bedeutung, wie die Wörter-Bücher lehren (Simonis und Gesenius n. 2) und auch das arabische [ ] tamam wird für perfecit, complevit gebraucht. Ich habe mir daher um so weniger ein Gewissen daraus gemacht, ihm die transitive Bedeutung hier beyzulegen, als in dieser Anschrift, in welcher [ ], [ ] und dergleichen an keine Regeln gebundene Wörter vorkommen, es eine Recheit reyn würde, den Sprach-Gebrauch vorschreiben zu wollen. Daß übrigens in [ ] das [ ] für [ ] stehe, siehet man selbst aus dem Chaldäischen der Bibel (Dan. IV. 15. V. 8)."
- ^ Andrade 2013, p. 7.
- ^ Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 1.144: "Aram had the Aramites, which the Greeks called Syrians" (Greek: Ἀραμαίους δὲ Ἄραμος ἔσχεν, οὓς Ἕλληνες Σύρους προσαγορεύουσιν
- ^ Strabo, Geographica, 1.2.34: "But it would seem that the view of Poseidonius is best, for here he derives an etymology of the words from the kinship of the peoples and their common characteristics. For the nation of the Armenians and that of the Syrians and Arabians betray a close affinity, not only in their language, but in their mode of life and in their bodily build, and particularly wherever they live as close neighbours. Mesopotamia, which is inhabited by these three nations, gives proof of this, for in the case of these nations the similarity is particularly noticeable. And if, comparing the differences of latitude, there does exist a greater difference between the northern and the southern people of Mesopotamia than between these two peoples and the Syrians in the centre, still the common characteristics prevail. And, too, the Assyrians, the Arians, and the Aramaeans display a certain likeness both to those just mentioned and to each other. Indeed, Poseidonius conjectures that the names of these nations also are akin; for, says he, the people whom we call Syrians are by the Syrians themselves called Arimaeans and Arammaeans; and there is a resemblance between this name and those of the Armenians, the Arabians and the Erembians, since perhaps the ancient Greeks gave the name of Erembians to the Arabians, and since the very etymology of the word "Erembian" contributes to this result".
- ^ Strabo, Geographica, 16.4.27: "Poseidonius says that the Arabians consist of three tribes, that they are situated in succession, one after another, and that this indicates that they are homogeneous with one another, and that for this reason they were called by similar names – one tribe "Armenians," another "Arameans," and another "Arambians." And just as one may suppose that the Arabians were divided into three tribes, according to the differences in the latitudes, which ever vary more and more, so also one may suppose that they used several names instead of one. Neither are those who write "Eremni" plausible; for that name is more peculiarly applicable to the Aethiopians. The poet also mentions "Arimi,"by which, according to Poseidonius, we should interpret the poet as meaning, not some place in Syria or in Cilicia or in some other land, but Syria itself; for the people in Syria are Arameans, though perhaps the Greeks called them Arimaeans or Arimi".
- ^ Wevers 2001, pp. 237–51.
- ^ Joosten 2008, pp. 93–105.
- ^ Joosten 2010, pp. 53–72.
- ISBN 9004116419.
The designations Syria and Syrian were derived from Greek usage long before Christianity. When the Greeks became better acquainted with the Near East, especially after Alexander the Great overthrew the Achaemenian empire in the 4th century B.C., they restricted the name Syria to the lands west of the Euphrates. During the 3rd century B.C., when the Hebrew Bible was translated by Jewish scholars into the Greek Septuagint for the use of the Hellenized Jews of Alexandria, the terms for 'Aramean' and 'Aramaic' in the Hebrew Bible, were translated into 'Syrian' and 'the Syrian tongue' respectively. [Footnote: "The Authorized Version of the Bible continued to use the same terms that the Septuagint had adopted. In 1970, the New English Bible, published by Oxford and Cambridge University presses, and translated by biblical scholars drawn from various British universities, went back to the original Hebrew terms, using Aram and Arameans for Syria and Syrians respectively."] In Palestine itself, according to Noldeke, the Jews and later the Christians there referred to their dialect of Aramaic as Syriac; in Babylon, both Greeks and Persians called the Arameans Syrians. The second-century B.C. Greek historian Posidonius, a native of Syria, noted that 'the people we [Greeks] call Syrians were called by the Syrians themselves Arameans….for the people in Syria are Arameans'."
- ^ a b Nöldeke, 1871, p. 115: "Die Griechen haben den Namen "Aramäer" nie eigentlich gekannt; ausser Posidonius (dem Strabo folgt) nennt ihn uns nur noch ein andrer Orientale, Josephus (Ant. 1, 6, 4). Dass Homer bei den 'Ερεμβοι oder in den Worten eiv 'Αρίμοις an sie dächte, ist sehr unwahrscheinlich. Die Griechen nannten das Volk "Syrer"".
- ^ Quatremère, Étienne Marc (1835). "Mémoire Sur Les Nabatéens". Journal asiatique (in French). Société asiatique: 122–27.
Les livres du Nouveau Testament furent immédiatement traduits dans fa langue du pays. Or ces livres étaient écrits dans la langue des Grecs, et offraient par conséquent les expressions et les dénominations en usage chez'ce peuple. Or les noms de Syrie, de Syriens se trouvaient souvent employés dans les livres fondamentaux du christianisme. Les habitants des pays situés entre la Méditerranée et l'Euphrate, se voyant désignés par une dénomination qui leur était étrangère, mais qui se trouvait en quelque sorte consacrée par l'autorité des livres qu'ils vénéraient à tant de titres, ne crurent pas sans doute pouvoir rejeter ce nom, et l'adoptèrent sans répugnance. Ils se persuadèrent que, régénérés par un nouveau culte, ils devaient sous tous les rapports devenir un peuple nouveau et abjurer leur nom antique, qui semblait leur rappeler l'idolâtrie à laquelle le christianisme venait de les arracher. Cette conjecture est, si je ne me trompe, confirmée par un fait que je crois décisif. Dans la langue syriaque ecclésiastique, le mot armoïo, ܐܪܡܝܐ, qui ne diffère du nom ancien, ormoïo, ܐܪܡܝܐ, que par une seule voyelle, désigne un païen, un idolâtre. Ainsi s'intrôduisit le nom de Sourioïo, Syrien. Quant à la dénomination Orom, Aram, ou le pays des Araméens, elle fut appliquée de préférence à la contrée que les Grecs et les Latins appelaient Assyrie.
- ^ Genesis 10:22
- ^ Genesis 22:21
- ^ 1 Chronicles 7:34
- ^ "The name Aram in the Bible". Abarim Publications. Archived from the original on 29 September 2018. Retrieved 10 October 2018.
- ^ "Hittites, Assyrians and Aramaeans". fsmitha.com. Retrieved 10 October 2018.
- ^ Frye 1992, pp. 281–85.
- ^ Frye 1997, pp. 30–36.
- ^ "Strong's Hebrew: 804. אַשּׁוּר (Ashshuwr) – Asshur". biblehub.com. Retrieved 2020-07-31.
- ^ "Search Entry". www.assyrianlanguages.org. Retrieved 2020-07-31.
- ^ Köstenberger 2009, p. 350.
- ^ Hamp 2005, p. 4.
- ^ Buth & Pierce 2014, pp. 107–109.
- JSTOR 527111.
The author of Daniel uses the word as a title for the members of the Babylonian guild of priests, as already Herodotus regards oi Xardalot as a designation of the priests of Baal, and the name was subsequently the customary one for the Magians, Astrologers, Soothsayers, etc., of the East. Jerome, however, and those who followed him, confused therewith the use of o'yu, as name of the people; and since, in Dan. II., 4, the "Chaldeans" speak Aramaic, so "Chaldaic" and "Aramaic" were held to be identical. And the matter has stood thus in the "Chaldee grammars" and the "Hebrew and Chaldee lexicons," in spite of all protests,3 up to this day. [Footnote 3: Cf. already Schloezer in Eichhorn's Repertorium, viii. (1781), p. 118 sq.; the correct distinction of East-Aramaic (Syriac) and West-Aramaic (Biblical Aramaic and the language of the Targums) was expressly drawn again by Geiger ZDMG, xviii., 654, and Noeldeke, ibid. xxi., 183 sq,, and particularly xxv., 113 sq. (die Namen der aram. Nation und Sprache.)]
- ^ https://www.ucl.ac.uk/sargon/essentials/countries/centralassyria/,"…[permanent dead link] The heartland of Assyria is demarcated by the city of Assur (modern Qala'at Sherqat) in the south, by Nineveh (modern Mosul with the ruin mounds Kuyunjik and Nebi Yunus) in the north and by Arbela (modern Erbil) in the east.“
- ^ Streck 2012, pp. 416–24.
- ^ a b c Weninger 2012, pp. 747–55.
- ^ Kapeliuk 2012, pp. 738–47.
- ^ Chyet 1997, pp. 283–300.
- ^ "The last of the Aramaic speakers", Miriam Shaviv, 14 July 2013, Times of Israel
- ^ "Aramaic Israelis seek to revive endangered language of Jesus". The Jerusalem Post. 9 November 2014. Retrieved 10 October 2018.
- ISBN 978-0-02-865928-2.
- ^ Fitzmyer 1997, pp. 57–60.
- ^ Gzella 2015, pp. 47–48.
- ^ Butts 2019, pp. 222–25.
- ^ Fitzmyer 1997, pp. 60–63.
- ^ Butts 2019, pp. 224–25.
- ^ Younger, K. Lawson Jr. (1986). "Panammuwa and Bar-Rakib: Two Structural Analyses" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 10 October 2018.
- ISBN 9783110805451.
- ^ a b Arnold 2012, pp. 685–96.
- ^ Beyer 1986, p. 11.
- ^ Heinrichs 1990, p. x.
- ^ Fales 2012, pp. 555–73.
- ^ Beyer 1986, p. 14.
- ^ Gzella 2012a, pp. 574–86.
- ^ Gzella 2012b, pp. 598–609.
- ^ Shaked, Saul (1987). "Aramaic". Encyclopædia Iranica. Vol. 2. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul. pp. 251–52. Retrieved 10 October 2018.
- JSTOR 2718444.
- ^ Geiger, Wilhelm; Kuhn, Ernst (2002). "Grundriss der iranischen Philologie: Band I. Abteilung 1". Boston: Adamant: 249.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - ^ Stolper, John A. Matthew (2007). "What are the Persepolis Fortification Tablets?". The Oriental Studies News & Notes (winter): 6–9. Retrieved 10 October 2018.
- ^ Collins 1993, pp. 710–12.
- ISBN 1874780749.[page needed]
- ^ 4:8–6:18 and 7:12–26
- ^ 2:4b–7:28
- ^ Hasel 1981, pp. 211–25.
- ^ 31:47
- ^ Gallagher 2012, pp. 123–41.
- ^ Nöldeke 1871, pp. 113–31.
- ^ Kautzsch 1884a, pp. 17–21.
- ^ Kautzsch 1884b, pp. 110–13.
- ^ Gzella 2015, pp. 212–17.
- ^ Beyer 1986, p. 28.
- ISBN 9781860646751. Retrieved 10 October 2018.
- ISBN 9780226600055.
- ISBN 9789004300156.
- ISBN 978-0-19-256246-3.
- JSTOR 25066933.
- ^ Fitzmyer 1980, pp. 5–21.
- ^ a b Mark 5:41
- ^ John 20:16
- ^ Mark 7:34
- ^ Mark 15:34
- ^ Darling, Cary (25 February 2004). "What's up with Aramaic?". Miami Herald. Archived from the original on 3 April 2004. Retrieved 10 October 2018.
- ^ Sebastian Brock (2021). "The place of Syriac among the Aramaic dialects 2". SyriacPress dot com. Retrieved 1 April 2022.
- ^ Healey 2012, pp. 637–52.
- ^ Briquel-Chatonnet 2012, pp. 652–59.
- ^ Sokoloff 2012b, pp. 660–70.
- ISBN 9781134109456.
…. Palestinian Aramaic also began to be written for the first time (Coptic was written in an adapted Greek script and Palestinian Aramaic in a modified Estrangelo….
- ^ Tal 2012, p. 619–28.
- ^ Sokoloff 2012a, pp. 610–19.
- ISBN 9789004343047.
For the Aramaic-speaking Christian communities of Sinai, Palestine or Trans-Jordan, Christian Palestinian Aramaic was the dominant language in local churches; for Syria and Mesopotamia, it was rather Syriac.…
- ISBN 9781463238933.
The main center of Aramaic-speaking Melkites was Palestine. During the 5th-6th centuries, they were engaged in literary, mainly translation work in the local Western Aramaic dialect, known as "Palestinian Christian Aramaic", using a script closely resembling the cursive Estrangela of Osrhoene. Palestinian Melkites were mostly Jewish converts to Christianity, who had a long tradition of using Palestinian Aramaic dialects as literary languages. Closely associated with the Palestinian Melkites were the Melkites of Transjordan, who also used Palestinian Christian Aramaic. Another community of Aramaic-speaking Melkites existed in the vicinity of Antioch and parts of Syria. These Melkites used Classical Syriac as a written language, the common literary language of the overwhelming majority of Christian Arameans.
- ^ Morgenstern 2012, pp. 628–37.
- ISBN 9781317929338.
However, what truly distinguishes the CPA Gospels from the Syriac ones is the strong influence that Greek Biblical tradi- tions had upon it. This is evident, for example, in the syntax of the Gospel passages and even in the spelling of proper nouns, both of which duplicate the Greek Gospels. Therefore, unlike Syriac where "Jesus" is spelled īšū', in CPA it is spelled īsūs.
- ^ Murre van den Berg 1999.
- ^ Khan 2012, pp. 708–24.
- ^ Jastrow 2012, pp. 697–707.
- ^ "The Village of Bakh'a in Qalamoun: Interview". 26 January 2020.
- ISBN 978-90-04-66979-6.
- ^ Christa Müller-Kessler; Michael Sokoloff. The Christian Palestinian Aramaic New Testament Version from the Early Period. STYX Publication.
- ^ "Classical Syriac". rinyo.org. Retrieved 18 November 2023.
- ^ "Strong's Hebrew: 2091. זָהָב (zahab) – gold". biblehub.com. Retrieved 2020-07-31.
- ^ "Strong's Hebrew: 1722. דְּהַב (dehab) – gold". biblehub.com. Retrieved 2020-07-31.
Notes
- ^ Also ܐܪܡܝܐ, ܐܪܐܡܝܬܐ. The form arāmāyā is less common in classical texts, but may be found (for example) in the Cave of Treasures (ed. Su-Min Ri) XXIV:10 and in Eusebius (ed. Cureton) p. 4 (Syriac pagination) line 10. See Payne Smith, R. (Robert) (1879). Thesaurus Syriacus. Vol. 1. Clarendon Press. p. 387. and in English at Payne Smith, J. (Jessie) (1903). A Compendious Syriac Dictionary: Founded Upon the Thesaurus Syriacus of R. Payne Smith. Clarendon Press. pp. 29, 242.
Sources
- Andrade, Nathanael J. (2013). Syrian Identity in the Greco-Roman World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781107244566.
- Andrade, Nathanael J. (2014). "Assyrians, Syrians and the Greek Language in the late Hellenistic and Roman Imperial Periods". Journal of Near Eastern Studies. 73 (2): 299–317. S2CID 163755644.
- Arnold, Werner (2012). "Western Neo-Aramaic". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 685–96. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Aufrecht, Walter E. (2001). "A Legacy of Syria: The Aramaic Language". Bulletin of the Canadian Society for Mesopotamian Studies. 36: 145–55.
- Bae, Chul-hyun (2004). "Aramaic as a Lingua Franca During the Persian Empire (538–333 B.C.E.)". Journal of Universal Language. 5: 1–20. .
- Beyer, Klaus (1986). The Aramaic Language: Its Distribution and Subdivisions. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. ISBN 9783525535738.
- ISBN 9781725272026.
- Bowman, Raymond A. (1948). "Arameans, Aramaic, and the Bible". Journal of Near Eastern Studies. 7 (2): 65–90. S2CID 162226854.
- Briquel-Chatonnet, Françoise (2012). "Syriac as the Language of Eastern Christianity". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 652–59. ISBN 9783110251586.
- JSTOR 23962351.
- Brock, Sebastian P. (1989). "Three Thousand Years of Aramaic Literature". ARAM Periodical. 1 (1): 11–23.
- ISBN 9781463214104. Archived(PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09.
- Burnett, Stephen G. (2005). "Christian Aramaism: The Birth and Growth of Aramaic Scholarship in the Sixteenth Century" (PDF). Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. pp. 421–36. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09.
- ISBN 9783110251586.
- Buth, Randall (2014). "The Riddle of Jesus' Cry from the Cross: The Meaning of ηλι ηλι λαμα σαβαχθανι (Matthew 27:46) and the Literary Function of ελωι ελωι λειμα σαβαχθανι (Mark 15:34)". In Buth, Randall; Notley, R. Steven (eds.). The Language Environment of First Century Judaea Vol. 2. Leiden-Boston: Brill. pp. 395–421. ISBN 9789004264410.
- Buth, Randall; Pierce, Chad (2014). "Hebraisti in Ancient Texts: Does ἑβραϊστί Ever Mean 'Aramaic'?". In Buth, Randall; Notley, R. Steven (eds.). The Language Environment of 1st Century Judea Vol. 2. Leiden-Boston: Brill. pp. 66–109. ISBN 9789004264410.
- Butts, Aaron M. (2019). "The Classical Syriac Language". The Syriac World. London: Routledge. pp. 222–42.
- Casey, Maurice (1999). Aramaic Sources of Mark's Gospel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781139425872.
- Casey, Maurice (2002). An Aramaic Approach to Q: Sources for the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781139438285.
- Coghill, Eleanor (2007). "Fieldwork in Neo-Aramaic" (PDF). Languages of Iraq: Ancient and Modern. Cambridge: The British School of Archaeology in Iraq. pp. 115–22. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-08-02. Retrieved 2021-02-08.
- Creason, Stuart (2008). "Aramaic" (PDF). The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 108–44.
- ISBN 9781575060200.
- JSTOR 3267414.
- Daniels, Peter T. (1996). "Aramaic Scripts for Aramaic Languages". The World's Writing Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 499–514. ISBN 9780195079937.
- Fales, Frederick M. (2012). "Old Aramaic". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 555–73. ISBN 9783110251586.
- JSTOR 3265697.
- ISBN 9780802848468.
- Folmer, Margaretha (1995). The Aramaic Language in the Achaemenid Period: A Study in Linguistic Variation. Leuven: Peeters Publishers. ISBN 9789068317404.
- Folmer, Margaretha (2012). "Imperial Aramaic as an Administrative Language of the Achaemenid Period". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 587–98. ISBN 9783110251586.
- S2CID 161323237.
- Frye, Richard N. (1997). "Assyria and Syria: Synonyms" (PDF). Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies. 11 (2): 30–36. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-07-13.
- Frye, Richard N. (1999). "Reply to John Joseph" (PDF). Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies. 13 (1): 69–70. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-07-11.
- ISBN 9789004228023.
- Gianto, Agustinus (2008). "Lost and Found in the Grammar of First-Millennium Aramaic". Aramaic in its Historical and Linguistic Setting. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 11–25. ISBN 9783447057875.
- Green, Tamara M. (1992), The City of the Moon God: Religious Traditions of Harran, BRILL, ISBN 978-90-04-09513-7.
- ISBN 9780521200912.
- Gzella, Holger (2008). "Aramaic in the Parthian Period: The Arsacid Inscriptions". Aramaic in its Historical and Linguistic Setting. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 107–30. ISBN 9783447057875.
- Gzella, Holger (2012a). "Imperial Aramaic". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 574–86. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Gzella, Holger (2012b). "Late Imperial Aramaic". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 598–609. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Gzella, Holger (2015). A Cultural History of Aramaic: From the Beginnings to the Advent of Islam. Leiden-Boston: Brill. ISBN 9789004285101.
- Gzella, Holger (2017). "New Light on Linguistic Diversity in Pre-Achaemenid Aramaic: Wandering Arameans or Language Spread?". Wandering Arameans: Arameans Outside Syria: Textual and Archaeological Perspectives. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 19–38.
- Häberl, Charles G. (2012). "Neo-Mandaic". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 725–37. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Hamp, Douglas (2005). Discovering the Language of Jesus: Hebrew Or Aramaic?. Calvary Chapel Publishing. ISBN 9781597510172.
- Hasel, Gerhard F. (1981). "The Book of Daniel and Matters of Language: Evidences Relating to Names, Words, and the Aramaic Language". Andrews University Seminary Studies. 19 (3): 211–25.
- Healey, John F. (1980). First Studies in Syriac. Birmingham: University of Birmingham. ISBN 9780704403901.
- Healey, John F. (2007). "The Edessan Milieu and the Birth of Syriac" (PDF). Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies. 10 (2): 115–27. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09.
- Healey, John F. (2008). "Variety in Early Syriac: The Context in Contemporary Aramaic". Aramaic in Its Historical and Linguistic Setting. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 221–29. ISBN 9783447057875.
- Healey, John F. (2012). "Syriac". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 637–52. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Healey, John F. (2019). "Arameans and Aramaic in Transition – Western Influences and the Roots of Aramean Christianity". Research on Israel and Aram: Autonomy, Independence and Related Issues. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. pp. 433–46. ISBN 9783161577192.
- ISBN 9781555404307.
- Jastrow, Otto (2008). "Old Aramaic and Neo-Aramaic: Some Reflections on Language History". Aramaic in its Historical and Linguistic Setting. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 1–10. ISBN 9783447057875.
- Jastrow, Otto (2012). "Ṭuroyo and Mlaḥsô". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 697–707. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Joosten, Jan (2008). "The Septuagint as a Source of Information on Egyptian Aramaic in the Hellenistic Period". Aramaic in its Historical and Linguistic Setting. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 93–105. ISBN 9783447057875.
- Joosten, Jan (2010). "The Aramaic Background of the Seventy: Language, Culture and History". Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies. 43: 53–72.
- Kautzsch, Emil F. (1884a). Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramäischen: Mit einer Kritischen Erörterung der aramäischen Wörter im Neuen Testament. Leipzig: Vogel.
- JSTOR 527111.
- ISBN 9783110251586.
- Khan, Geoffrey (2007). "Aramaic in the Medieval and Modern Periods" (PDF). Languages of Iraq: Ancient and Modern. Cambridge: The British School of Archaeology in Iraq. pp. 95–114. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-08-02. Retrieved 2021-02-08.
- ISBN 9783110251586.
- Kim, Ronald (2008). "Stammbaum or Continuum? The Subgrouping of Modern Aramaic Dialects Reconsidered". Journal of the American Oriental Society. 128 (3): 505–31.
- Kitchen, Kenneth A. (1965). "The Aramaic of Daniel" (PDF). Notes on Some Problems in the Book of Daniel. London: Tyndale Press. pp. 31–79. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09.
- Köstenberger, Andreas J. (2009). "Translating John's Gospel: Challenges and Opportunities". In Scorgie, Glen G.; Strauss, Mark L.; Voth, Steven M. (eds.). The Challenge of Bible Translation: Communicating God's Word to the World. Zondervan. ISBN 978-0310321859.
- ISBN 9783447057875.
- ISBN 9789042908598.
- ISBN 9789042908154.
- S2CID 162559782.
- Morgenstern, Matthew (2012). "Christian Palestinian Aramaic". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 628–37. ISBN 9783110251586.
- ISBN 9789062589814.
- Murre van den Berg, Heleen (2008). "Classical Syriac, Neo-Aramaic, and Arabic in the Church of the East and the Chaldean Church between 1500 and 1800". Aramaic in Its Historical and Linguistic Setting. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 335–52. ISBN 9783447057875.
- Naby, Eden (2004). "From Lingua Franca to Endangered Language: The Legal Aspects of the Preservation of Aramaic in Iraq". On the Margins of Nations: Endangered Languages and Linguistic Rights. Bath: Foundation for Endangered Languages. pp. 197–203. ISBN 9780953824861.
- JSTOR 43366019.
- Nöldeke, Theodor (1886). "Semitic Languages". The Encyclopaedia Britannica. Vol. 21 (9th ed.). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. pp. 641–56.
- Nöldeke, Theodor (1904). Compendious Syriac Grammar (1st English ed.). London: Williams & Norgate.
- Peursen, Wido van (2008). "Language Variation, Language Development, and the Textual History of the Peshitta". Aramaic in Its Historical and Linguistic Setting. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 231–56. ISBN 9783447057875.
- Prym, Eugen; Socin, Albert (1881). Der neu-aramaeische Dialekt des Ṭûr 'Abdîn. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht's Verlag.
- Richard, Suzanne (2003). Near Eastern Archaeology: A Reader. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 9781575060835.
- ]
- Rubin, Milka (1998). "The Language of Creation or the Primordial Language: A Case of Cultural Polemics in Antiquity". Journal of Jewish Studies. 49 (2): 306–33. .
- Ruzer, Serge (2014). "Hebrew versus Aramaic as Jesus' Language: Notes on Early Opinions by Syriac Authors". The Language Environment of First Century Judaea. Leiden-Boston: Brill. pp. 182–205. ISBN 9789004264410.
- ISBN 9783447045575.
- John F. A., Sawyer (1999). Sacred Languages and Sacred Texts. London and New York: Routledge. ISBN 9781134801398.
- Shepardson, Christine (2019). Controlling Contested Places: Late Antique Antioch and the Spatial Politics of Religious Controversy. Oakland: University of California Press. ISBN 9780520303379.
- Sokoloff, Michael, ed. (1983). Arameans, Aramaic and the Aramaic Literary Tradition. Tel Aviv: Bar Ilan University Press.
- Sokoloff, Michael (1990). A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine Period. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press. ISBN 9789652261014.
- Sokoloff, Michael (2002). A Dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic of the Talmudic and Geonic Periods. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press. ISBN 9789652262608.
- Sokoloff, Michael (2003). A Dictionary of Judean Aramaic. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press. ISBN 9789652262615.
- Sokoloff, Michael (2012a). "Jewish Palestinian Aramaic". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 610–19. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Sokoloff, Michael (2012b). "Jewish Babylonian Aramaic". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 660–70. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Sokoloff, Michael (2014). A dictionary of Christian Palestinian Aramaic. Leuven: Peeters.[permanent dead link]
- Stefanovic, Zdravko (1992). The Aramaic of Daniel in the Light of Old Aramaic. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. ISBN 9780567132543.
- Stevenson, William B. (1924). Grammar of Palestinian Jewish Aramaic. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 9781725206175.
- Streck, Michael P. (2012). "Akkadian and Aramaic Language Contact". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 416–24. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Tal, Abraham (2012). "Samaritan Aramaic". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 619–28. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Tezel, Aziz (2003). Comparative Etymological Studies in the Western Neo-Syriac (Ṭūrōyo) Lexicon: With Special Reference to Homonyms, Related Words and Borrowings with Cultural Signification. Uppsala: Uppsala University Library. ISBN 9789155455552.
- Tezel, Sina (2015). "Arabic or Ṣūrayt/Ṭūrōyo". Arabic and Semitic Linguistics Contextualized: A Festschrift for Jan Retsö. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 554–68.
- Tezel, Sina (2015). "Neologisms in Ṣūrayt/Ṭūrōyo". Neo-Aramaic in Its Linguistic Context. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. pp. 100–09.
- Taylor, David G. K. (2002). "Bilingualism and Diglossia in Late Antique Syria and Mesopotamia". Bilingualism in Ancient Society: Language Contact and the Written Word. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 298–331. ISBN 9789004264410.
- Waltisberg, Michael (2016). Syntax des Ṭuroyo. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. ISBN 9783447107310.
- Wevers, John W. (2001). "Aram and Aramaean in the Septuagint". The World of the Aramaeans. Vol. 1. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. pp. 237–51. ISBN 9781841271583.
- Weninger, Stefan (2012). "Aramaic-Arabic Language Contact". The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 747–55. ISBN 9783110251586.
- Yitzhak, Frank (2003). Grammar for Gemara and Targum Onkelos: An Introduction to Aramaic. Jerusalem: Ariel. ISBN 9781583306062.
- Younger, Kenneth Lawson (2016). A Political History of the Arameans: From Their Origins to the End of Their Polities. Atlanta: SBL Press. ISBN 9781628370843.
External links
- Ancient Aramaic Audio Files: Contains audio recordings of scripture.
- The Aramaic Language and Its Classification – Efrem Yildiz, Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies Archived 2008-09-09 at the Wayback Machine
- Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon (including editions of Targums) at the Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati
- Dictionary of Judeo-Aramaic
- Jewish Language Research Website: Jewish Aramaic Archived 2008-05-11 at the Wayback Machine