Inspired by the work of renowned linguist John Huehnergard and featuring contributions from top s... more Inspired by the work of renowned linguist John Huehnergard and featuring contributions from top scholars in the field, Bēl Lišāni showcases the latest research on Akkadian linguistics. Chapters focus on a wide range of topics, including lexicon, morphology, word order, syntax, verbal semantics, and subgrouping. Building upon Huehnergard’s pioneering studies focused on the identification of Proto-Akkadian features, the contributors explore linguistic innovations in the language from historical and comparative perspectives. In doing so, they open the way for further etymological, dialectical, and lexical research into Akkadian.
This collection showcases the contributions of the study of endangered and understudied languages... more This collection showcases the contributions of the study of endangered and understudied languages to historical linguistic analysis, and the broader relevance of diachronic approaches toward developing better informed approaches to language documentation and description.
The volume brings together perspectives from both established and up-and-coming scholars and represents a globally and linguistically diverse range of languages.The collected papers demonstrate the ways in which endangered languages can challenge existing models of language change based on more commonly studied languages, and can generate innovative insights into linguistic phenomena such as pathways of grammaticalization, forms and dynamics of contact-driven change, and the diachronic relationship between lexical and grammatical categories. In so doing, the book highlights the idea that processes and outcomes of language change long held to be universally relevant may be more sensitive to cultural and typological variability than previously assumed.
Taken as a whole, this collection brings together perspectives from language documentation and historical linguistics to point the way forward for richer understandings of both language change and documentary-descriptive approaches, making this key reading for scholars in these fields.
The Semitic Languages presents a comprehensive survey of the individual languages and language cl... more The Semitic Languages presents a comprehensive survey of the individual languages and language clusters within this language family, from their origins in antiquity to their present-day forms. This second edition has been fully revised, with new chapters and a wealth of additional material. New features include the following: • new introductory chapters on Proto-Semitic grammar and Semitic linguistic typology • an additional chapter on the place of Semitic as a subgroup of Afro-Asiatic, and several chapters on modern forms of Arabic, Aramaic and Ethiopian Semitic • text samples of each individual language, transcribed into the International Phonetic Alphabet, with standard linguistic word-byword glossing as well as translation • new maps and tables present information visually for easy reference. This unique resource is the ideal reference for advanced undergraduate and postgraduate students of linguistics and language. It will be of interest to researchers and anyone with an interest in historical linguistics, linguistic typology, linguistic anthropology and language development.
The present volume has largely emerged from a section on “Comparative Semitic and Arabic studies”... more The present volume has largely emerged from a section on “Comparative Semitic and Arabic studies” at the conference “Horizons of Islamic Theology”, which was held at Goethe University Frankfurt in September 2014. It comprises five contributions and covers an area reaching from general and comparative Afro-Asiatic syntax to South Arabian phonology to diachronic and synchronic Arabic linguistics.
Interest in non-canonically case-marked subjects has been unceasing since the groundbreaking work... more Interest in non-canonically case-marked subjects has been unceasing since the groundbreaking work of Andrews and Masica in the late 70's who were the first to document the existence of syntactic subjects in another morphological case than the nominative. Their research was focused on Icelandic and South-Asian languages, respectively, and since then, oblique subjects have been reported for language after language throughout the world. This newfangled recognition of the concept of oblique subjects at the time was followed by discussions of the role and validity of subject tests, discussions of the verbal semantics involved, as well as discussions of the theoretical implications of this case marking strategy of syntactic subjects. This volume contributes to all these debates, making available research articles on different languages and language families, additionally highlighting issues like language contact, differential subject marking and the origin of oblique subjects.
This book includes thirty contributions - twenty-nine papers and one artistic contribution - by J... more This book includes thirty contributions - twenty-nine papers and one artistic contribution - by John's colleagues, former students, and friends, on a variety of topics that represent John's versatility and many interests, including philology, history, natural history, and art.
Historical syntax has long been neglected in the study of the Semitic languages, although it hold... more Historical syntax has long been neglected in the study of the Semitic languages, although it holds great value for the subgrouping of this diverse language family. Focusing on the development of adverbial subordination, nominal modifiers and direct speech marking, as well as reviewing changes through language contact and drift, this book is the first step in the syntactic reconstruction of the Aramaic dialect group, the longest-attested branch of the Semitic language family.
The verb ibašši, the 3ms durative of bašā’um, functions as an intransitive existential predicate ... more The verb ibašši, the 3ms durative of bašā’um, functions as an intransitive existential predicate in all dialects of Akkadian. It typically has a nominal subject and frequently an adverbial complement. While most of this form’s attestations are as an existential, in Neo-Assyrian it also appears in non-existential and non-predicative functions, and it is generally treated in the secondary literature as a modal adverb (e.g., Hämeen-Anttila 2000: 109). In this paper we will explore the non-existential function(s) of ibašši in Neo-Assyrian. We will argue that it is a focus sensitive particle which may stand after any constituent in the sentence, except the predicate. We trace the development of this function of ibašši in Assyrian and suggest a diachronic process by which an existential marker becomes a focus particle.
While most Akkadian dialects use two coordinators, a phrase and clause level u= and a clause leve... more While most Akkadian dialects use two coordinators, a phrase and clause level u= and a clause level =ma, in the Neo-Assyrian period both are mostly missing from native Assyrian texts. Not only is lack of overt coordination exceptional among the Semitic languages, cross-linguistically asyndeton is a rare strategy, only attested in languages with no writing tradition. In this paper, we will concentrate on u=. We sketch the various environments where u= is no longer used in Neo-Assyrian and consider what other strategies are used to mark coordination in this dialect. Finally, we propose a diachronic path to explain which processes contributed to the loss of the coordinator u=.
Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 2022
Unlike many West-Semitic languages, for most of its history Akkadian did not develop a copula. So... more Unlike many West-Semitic languages, for most of its history Akkadian did not develop a copula. Some scholars (GAG §196c; Hämeen-Anttilla 2000: 107; de Ridder 2018 §676) argue that at least in Neo-Assyrian, and possibly in Middle Assyrian, a copula, on the basis of the 3rd person personal pronoun, is used. In this paper, we will argue that the 3rd person personal pronoun in Neo-Assyrian has not, in fact, grammaticalized to become a copula. We will show that the pronoun in Akkadian shows none of the expected behaviors of a copula and therefore should not be considered one.
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 2022
Assyriologists and Semitists have assumed that the attributive masculine plural morpheme-ūt found... more Assyriologists and Semitists have assumed that the attributive masculine plural morpheme-ūt found in Akkadian is a secondary development in analogy with the feminine plural-āt. In this paper I suggest that this morpheme should be reconstructed to Proto-Semitic. My arguments are based on some attributive pronouns in West Semitic and the existence of a distinction between attributive and predicative plural morphology in both branches of Semitic.
Aramaic was the lingua franca in the Levant in the millennium prior to the Muslim conquests. The ... more Aramaic was the lingua franca in the Levant in the millennium prior to the Muslim conquests. The exact nature of the spread of Arabic and the specifics of language shift in the Middle East are not yet well understood. Many scholars assume that Arabic primarily spread in the immediate aftermath of the Muslim conquest. The common opinion is that in the new empire, Arabic was learnt imperfectly by speakers of other languages, and the resulting dialects bear the marks of those underlying languages (Versteegh 2012). Specifically, in the Levant and parts of Mesopotamia that language was Aramaic. Several features of the colloquial dialects of the Levant and Mesopotamia were argued to be a result of an Aramaic substrate. In this paper we concentrate on the alleged Aramaic substrate in the modern Arabic dialects of the Levant, where information about the Arabic dialects is more complete, and draw attention to a number of methodological flaws in the scholarly work supporting this hypothesis. We show that some core 'Aramaic' features in Levantine Arabic are unlikely to originate from Aramaic. We further argue that the evidence is not consistent with a rapid and imperfect language shift, which resulted in substrate influence, but rather with a prolonged period of contact between bilingual populations, which resulted in the expected transference of specialized lexical items, but almost no grammatical features.
New Perspectives in Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew, 2021
Hebrew has two suffixed plural morphemes: -ōṯ and -īm. Typically, grammars describe the plural... more Hebrew has two suffixed plural morphemes: -ōṯ and -īm. Typically, grammars describe the plural morpheme -ōṯ as marking the plural of feminine nouns and the plural morpheme -īm as marking the plural of masculine nouns. However, the distribution of plural morphemes with substantives is not always predictable, although gender assignment is not affected. The question of this gender-number morphological mismatch in all phases of Hebrew is a long-standing problem; attempts to explain it have mostly been synchronic and restricted to evidence from Hebrew. In this paper, I contextualize the Hebrew case within a wider Semitic context and ask whether this system is especially typical of Hebrew, and, if not, what that tells us about plural formation in Hebrew.
Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 2020
Despite the important contribution of Semitic to linguistics, the field has been in decline for m... more Despite the important contribution of Semitic to linguistics, the field has been in decline for many years: fewer students are interested in investing in languages, fewer positions exist to support it. In this paper some of the signs of decline are reviewed, such as the reduction of “Semitic” to mean only Arabic or Aramaic, and some of the underlying reasons for it are identified, such as the balkanization of the Semitic languages by religion: Hebrew is studied in Old Testament departments, Arabic in Institutes for the study of Islam, etc. I provide a few examples to illustrate how such practices are damaging to the health and progress of the field. Finally, a couple of tentative solutions are proposed to change course.
Inspired by the work of renowned linguist John Huehnergard and featuring contributions from top s... more Inspired by the work of renowned linguist John Huehnergard and featuring contributions from top scholars in the field, Bēl Lišāni showcases the latest research on Akkadian linguistics. Chapters focus on a wide range of topics, including lexicon, morphology, word order, syntax, verbal semantics, and subgrouping. Building upon Huehnergard’s pioneering studies focused on the identification of Proto-Akkadian features, the contributors explore linguistic innovations in the language from historical and comparative perspectives. In doing so, they open the way for further etymological, dialectical, and lexical research into Akkadian.
This collection showcases the contributions of the study of endangered and understudied languages... more This collection showcases the contributions of the study of endangered and understudied languages to historical linguistic analysis, and the broader relevance of diachronic approaches toward developing better informed approaches to language documentation and description.
The volume brings together perspectives from both established and up-and-coming scholars and represents a globally and linguistically diverse range of languages.The collected papers demonstrate the ways in which endangered languages can challenge existing models of language change based on more commonly studied languages, and can generate innovative insights into linguistic phenomena such as pathways of grammaticalization, forms and dynamics of contact-driven change, and the diachronic relationship between lexical and grammatical categories. In so doing, the book highlights the idea that processes and outcomes of language change long held to be universally relevant may be more sensitive to cultural and typological variability than previously assumed.
Taken as a whole, this collection brings together perspectives from language documentation and historical linguistics to point the way forward for richer understandings of both language change and documentary-descriptive approaches, making this key reading for scholars in these fields.
The Semitic Languages presents a comprehensive survey of the individual languages and language cl... more The Semitic Languages presents a comprehensive survey of the individual languages and language clusters within this language family, from their origins in antiquity to their present-day forms. This second edition has been fully revised, with new chapters and a wealth of additional material. New features include the following: • new introductory chapters on Proto-Semitic grammar and Semitic linguistic typology • an additional chapter on the place of Semitic as a subgroup of Afro-Asiatic, and several chapters on modern forms of Arabic, Aramaic and Ethiopian Semitic • text samples of each individual language, transcribed into the International Phonetic Alphabet, with standard linguistic word-byword glossing as well as translation • new maps and tables present information visually for easy reference. This unique resource is the ideal reference for advanced undergraduate and postgraduate students of linguistics and language. It will be of interest to researchers and anyone with an interest in historical linguistics, linguistic typology, linguistic anthropology and language development.
The present volume has largely emerged from a section on “Comparative Semitic and Arabic studies”... more The present volume has largely emerged from a section on “Comparative Semitic and Arabic studies” at the conference “Horizons of Islamic Theology”, which was held at Goethe University Frankfurt in September 2014. It comprises five contributions and covers an area reaching from general and comparative Afro-Asiatic syntax to South Arabian phonology to diachronic and synchronic Arabic linguistics.
Interest in non-canonically case-marked subjects has been unceasing since the groundbreaking work... more Interest in non-canonically case-marked subjects has been unceasing since the groundbreaking work of Andrews and Masica in the late 70's who were the first to document the existence of syntactic subjects in another morphological case than the nominative. Their research was focused on Icelandic and South-Asian languages, respectively, and since then, oblique subjects have been reported for language after language throughout the world. This newfangled recognition of the concept of oblique subjects at the time was followed by discussions of the role and validity of subject tests, discussions of the verbal semantics involved, as well as discussions of the theoretical implications of this case marking strategy of syntactic subjects. This volume contributes to all these debates, making available research articles on different languages and language families, additionally highlighting issues like language contact, differential subject marking and the origin of oblique subjects.
This book includes thirty contributions - twenty-nine papers and one artistic contribution - by J... more This book includes thirty contributions - twenty-nine papers and one artistic contribution - by John's colleagues, former students, and friends, on a variety of topics that represent John's versatility and many interests, including philology, history, natural history, and art.
Historical syntax has long been neglected in the study of the Semitic languages, although it hold... more Historical syntax has long been neglected in the study of the Semitic languages, although it holds great value for the subgrouping of this diverse language family. Focusing on the development of adverbial subordination, nominal modifiers and direct speech marking, as well as reviewing changes through language contact and drift, this book is the first step in the syntactic reconstruction of the Aramaic dialect group, the longest-attested branch of the Semitic language family.
The verb ibašši, the 3ms durative of bašā’um, functions as an intransitive existential predicate ... more The verb ibašši, the 3ms durative of bašā’um, functions as an intransitive existential predicate in all dialects of Akkadian. It typically has a nominal subject and frequently an adverbial complement. While most of this form’s attestations are as an existential, in Neo-Assyrian it also appears in non-existential and non-predicative functions, and it is generally treated in the secondary literature as a modal adverb (e.g., Hämeen-Anttila 2000: 109). In this paper we will explore the non-existential function(s) of ibašši in Neo-Assyrian. We will argue that it is a focus sensitive particle which may stand after any constituent in the sentence, except the predicate. We trace the development of this function of ibašši in Assyrian and suggest a diachronic process by which an existential marker becomes a focus particle.
While most Akkadian dialects use two coordinators, a phrase and clause level u= and a clause leve... more While most Akkadian dialects use two coordinators, a phrase and clause level u= and a clause level =ma, in the Neo-Assyrian period both are mostly missing from native Assyrian texts. Not only is lack of overt coordination exceptional among the Semitic languages, cross-linguistically asyndeton is a rare strategy, only attested in languages with no writing tradition. In this paper, we will concentrate on u=. We sketch the various environments where u= is no longer used in Neo-Assyrian and consider what other strategies are used to mark coordination in this dialect. Finally, we propose a diachronic path to explain which processes contributed to the loss of the coordinator u=.
Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 2022
Unlike many West-Semitic languages, for most of its history Akkadian did not develop a copula. So... more Unlike many West-Semitic languages, for most of its history Akkadian did not develop a copula. Some scholars (GAG §196c; Hämeen-Anttilla 2000: 107; de Ridder 2018 §676) argue that at least in Neo-Assyrian, and possibly in Middle Assyrian, a copula, on the basis of the 3rd person personal pronoun, is used. In this paper, we will argue that the 3rd person personal pronoun in Neo-Assyrian has not, in fact, grammaticalized to become a copula. We will show that the pronoun in Akkadian shows none of the expected behaviors of a copula and therefore should not be considered one.
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 2022
Assyriologists and Semitists have assumed that the attributive masculine plural morpheme-ūt found... more Assyriologists and Semitists have assumed that the attributive masculine plural morpheme-ūt found in Akkadian is a secondary development in analogy with the feminine plural-āt. In this paper I suggest that this morpheme should be reconstructed to Proto-Semitic. My arguments are based on some attributive pronouns in West Semitic and the existence of a distinction between attributive and predicative plural morphology in both branches of Semitic.
Aramaic was the lingua franca in the Levant in the millennium prior to the Muslim conquests. The ... more Aramaic was the lingua franca in the Levant in the millennium prior to the Muslim conquests. The exact nature of the spread of Arabic and the specifics of language shift in the Middle East are not yet well understood. Many scholars assume that Arabic primarily spread in the immediate aftermath of the Muslim conquest. The common opinion is that in the new empire, Arabic was learnt imperfectly by speakers of other languages, and the resulting dialects bear the marks of those underlying languages (Versteegh 2012). Specifically, in the Levant and parts of Mesopotamia that language was Aramaic. Several features of the colloquial dialects of the Levant and Mesopotamia were argued to be a result of an Aramaic substrate. In this paper we concentrate on the alleged Aramaic substrate in the modern Arabic dialects of the Levant, where information about the Arabic dialects is more complete, and draw attention to a number of methodological flaws in the scholarly work supporting this hypothesis. We show that some core 'Aramaic' features in Levantine Arabic are unlikely to originate from Aramaic. We further argue that the evidence is not consistent with a rapid and imperfect language shift, which resulted in substrate influence, but rather with a prolonged period of contact between bilingual populations, which resulted in the expected transference of specialized lexical items, but almost no grammatical features.
New Perspectives in Biblical and Rabbinic Hebrew, 2021
Hebrew has two suffixed plural morphemes: -ōṯ and -īm. Typically, grammars describe the plural... more Hebrew has two suffixed plural morphemes: -ōṯ and -īm. Typically, grammars describe the plural morpheme -ōṯ as marking the plural of feminine nouns and the plural morpheme -īm as marking the plural of masculine nouns. However, the distribution of plural morphemes with substantives is not always predictable, although gender assignment is not affected. The question of this gender-number morphological mismatch in all phases of Hebrew is a long-standing problem; attempts to explain it have mostly been synchronic and restricted to evidence from Hebrew. In this paper, I contextualize the Hebrew case within a wider Semitic context and ask whether this system is especially typical of Hebrew, and, if not, what that tells us about plural formation in Hebrew.
Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 2020
Despite the important contribution of Semitic to linguistics, the field has been in decline for m... more Despite the important contribution of Semitic to linguistics, the field has been in decline for many years: fewer students are interested in investing in languages, fewer positions exist to support it. In this paper some of the signs of decline are reviewed, such as the reduction of “Semitic” to mean only Arabic or Aramaic, and some of the underlying reasons for it are identified, such as the balkanization of the Semitic languages by religion: Hebrew is studied in Old Testament departments, Arabic in Institutes for the study of Islam, etc. I provide a few examples to illustrate how such practices are damaging to the health and progress of the field. Finally, a couple of tentative solutions are proposed to change course.
Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 2020
In a recent paper, Cohen (2018) suggested that nominal sentences without overt subjects are a reg... more In a recent paper, Cohen (2018) suggested that nominal sentences without overt subjects are a regular and common part of Semitic grammar. More specifically, he suggested that some arguments in Semitic relative clauses are gapped, namely are missing on a regular basis. This, he argued, is especially common in relative clauses where the predicate is a prepositional phrase. In the current paper, I argue that relative clauses exhibit the same syntax as main clauses. I also provide additional evidence from Syriac and Assyrian Akkadian that prepositional phrases following a relative marker are phrasal, not clausal.
The Semitic languages share the same pattern for adverbial subordination, but they do not share c... more The Semitic languages share the same pattern for adverbial subordination, but they do not share cognate subordinators. Following widely accepted approaches to syntactic reconstruction, such as Harris & Campbell (1995), it is possible to reconstruct a proto construction for this family, even without cognate material. However, in this article I argue that adverbial subordination cannot be reconstructed to the proto language and the shared structure is a case of parallel development which was motivated by influence from a type of relative clause. I suggest that parallel development was triggered by the presence of a shared structural feature, which created similar pressures in different nodes and allowed for identical lines of development to take place, but nevertheless yielded distinct outcomes. The development of adverbial subordinators as outlined here shows that despite structural similarities in adverbial subordination among the Semitic languages, it is unlikely that this pattern is reconstructable to the proto language.
The Assyrian subordinative morphemes-u/-ni are treated as allomorphs with the same distribution a... more The Assyrian subordinative morphemes-u/-ni are treated as allomorphs with the same distribution and function. In this paper we will examine the syntax of these morphemes in Assyrian and argue that they are in fact two distinct morphemes with no allomorphic relation. We will further follow a number of significant syntactic developments in the use of the subordinative morphemes in Neo-Assyrian.
The Aramaic preposition lwāt has two distinct meanings: kinetic ('towards') and stative ('with').... more The Aramaic preposition lwāt has two distinct meanings: kinetic ('towards') and stative ('with'). In this paper, I discuss the origin and etymology of this preposition, previous attempts to account for its form and other examples of similar polysemy in Semitic.
All the Semitic languages use a relative marker as at least one strategy of relativization, and a... more All the Semitic languages use a relative marker as at least one strategy of relativization, and all branches show reflexes or relics of reflexes of an interdental relative marker. The wide consensus among semitists that the relative pronoun was originally identical to the proximal demonstrative is based on the formal identity between the bases of the two in West Semitic, and on the wide attestation of the process Demonstrative > Relative in world languages (Heine and Kuteva 2002; Diessel 2009). In this paper we will review the evidence supporting these assumptions and argue that the current analysis of the Semitic relative is a procrustean bed, into which the Semitic evidence does not fit comfortably. We will show that there are a number of significant problems with the reconstruction of the relative pronoun, which, when taken together, make tracing its origin to the demonstrative highly unlikely. We will discuss the syntactic behavior and morhology of the relative marker to show that it is unlikely to be derived from the demonstrative. Instead, we will argue, that the opposite is true: the demonstrative in West Semitic is a secondary formation on the basis of the relative marker.
The Islamic conquests of the late antique Near East and North Africa brought speakers of Arabic i... more The Islamic conquests of the late antique Near East and North Africa brought speakers of Arabic into contact with speakers of a number of other languages, both closely related, most notably Aramaic, others only distantly related or not at all. Arabic dialectologists have taken great interest in identifying features in the modern dialects transferred from the substrate and adstrate languages spoken by the populations who eventually adopted Arabic. When the donor language is not related to Arabic, identifying these features is often relatively clear. However, in cases where speakers of another Semitic language adopted Arabic, identifying transferred features is quite challenging. Aramaic was the lingua franca of much of the Levant and Mesopotamia, and speakers of Arabic and Aramaic were in frequent contact for centuries. It is thus not surprising that scholars of Syrian and Mesopotamian dialects have identified the origin of a number of features of these dialects as Aramaic. Most studies dedicated to this topic have concentrated on the lexicon (Fraenkel 1886; Feghali 1918; Hobaika 1939; Hopkins 1995; Contini 1999; Müller-Kessler 2003; Retsö 2006). Much less work has explicitly focused on phonological, morphological and syntactic features (Diem 1971; Fleisch 1974; Behnstedt 1991; Arnold and Behnstedt 1993; Retsö 2000; del rio Sánchez 2013); nevertheless, a number of features have become widely (though not universally) accepted as examples of transfer from Aramaic into Arabic via second-language acquisition by Aramaic speakers after the Islamic conquests; for example, the shift ā > ō (e.g., lisān > lisōn; fallāḥ > fallōḥ) in a number of Lebanese and Anatolian dialects; 3rd and 2nd plural pronouns (e.g., hinnōn/hinnēn; kon/ken) in a number of Syrian dialects, and others. In this paper, reexamine some of these proposed features. We will argue that many of these features are better explained as the result of common linguistic processes. Others are well attested in a number of Semitic languages, and may therefore constitute a retention in Arabic. Overall, we will argue that the influence of Aramaic on the contemporary Arabic dialects of the Levant and Mesopotamia is indeed quite limited. Further, we will argue that we should not expect a great deal of Aramaic influence on these dialects for several reasons. First, Arabic was more widespread in the pre-Islamic period than is typically appreciated (Al-Jallad forthcoming). Second, there has been a great deal of convergence in modern dialects. Finally, given the long history of Aramaic/Arabic contact, bilingualism was probably extremely common, and thus rapid imperfect acquisition of Arabic by Aramaic speakers in the early Islamic period, which would have ostensibly led to the transfer of many Aramaic features, can now be considered very unlikely. Our results may have implicatiosn to our understanding of the social structure of the region and the difference between speakers in urban versus rural areas.
One of the sub-branches of Central Semitic, Northwest Semitic, contains a number of languages wit... more One of the sub-branches of Central Semitic, Northwest Semitic, contains a number of languages with no established hierarchical relation among them: Ugaritic, Aramaic, Canaanite, Deir Alla and Samalian. Over the years, scholars have attempted to establish a more accurate sub-branching for Northwest Semitic or to suggest a different genetic affiliation for some languages, usually Ugaritic. In this paper, we review the arguments in favor of the micro-classification of the Northwest Semitic sub-branch. We will show that the arguments in favor of a Ugaritic-Canaanite sub-branch are linguistically weak. We propose a number of features, which we suggest can establish an Aramao-Canaanite sub-branch. This proposal not only outlines a more coherent family tree for Northwest Semitic, but also accounts for numerous “Aramaic”-like features in biblical Hebrew, which have thus far been treated as the result of language contact in the early Iron Age.
In his seminal comparative study, Khan (1988:227) remarks that syntactic parallels
may have one o... more In his seminal comparative study, Khan (1988:227) remarks that syntactic parallels may have one of three explanations: (1) an existing common syntactic feature on the basis of which a subsequent development is built (i.e., parallel development); (2) areal contact (i.e., Sprachbund); and (3) independent development due to typological tendencies. Khan notes that it is possible that in most cases none of these explanations would be verifiable. It seems, however, that in most historical studies, only the latter two options are taken into account, while similarity stemming the first is considered unusable for subgrouping or reconstruction (starting from Meillet 1918). In this paper, I will argue that in some well-defined cases, parallel development can be proven as a feature of the linguistic structure and is therefore relevant for historical linguistics. I further suggest that parallel development is likely to recur in languages of a genetically cohesive family, which share relevant structural features. Several Semitic examples will serve to illustrate this point.
Several current lingusitic approaches offer formulaic paths of change, suggesting
that linguistic... more Several current lingusitic approaches offer formulaic paths of change, suggesting that linguistic change is restricted by the initial material from which it arose. Grammaticaization theory assumes change is possible only in a specific direction (lexical > grammatical), and Sources and Targets have a close functional relationship. For example, copulas change to existentials, dative becomes possessor etc. Thus, similar source-to-target combination in different languages are treated as an identical process. In this talk I will argue that a superficial similarity, such as dative-to-possessor in different languages does not imply similarity of processes and that methods focusing on source-to-target are superficial and do not explain language change; rather, our focus should be on the process itself, regardless of source or target. I will review a few cases of classic source-to-target changes in Semitic and Indo-European languages which do not reflect similar process despite their superficial similarities. References: Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva (2002). World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vincent, Nigel (1995). Exaptation and Grammaticalization. Historical Linguistics 1993. H. Andersen. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins: 433–445.
Several scholars have claimed that there is ample evidence for at least two, possibly three, dial... more Several scholars have claimed that there is ample evidence for at least two, possibly three, dialects in the text of the Hebrew Bible: Judahite, Israelian and possibly Benjaminite (e.g. Mitchell Dahood, Cyrus Gordon, James Davila, and Gary Rendsburg). The main difference between the two main dialects was argued to be a result of contact between Hebrew speakers of the northern kingdom with speakers of Aramaic and Phoenician (Dahood 1952). Most of the material presented as evidence is lexical, but several morphological, phonological and syntactic features have also been argued to be indicative of the northern dialect (Rendsburg 2003).
Although there have been several critical evaluations of the idea of Israelian Hebrew, There hasn’t been a systematic evaluation of the linguistic evidence (Fredericks 1996; Schniederwind and Sivan 1997). In this paper, I will examine the linguistic features that have been claimed to be distinctive of the northern dialect. The results will show that despite biblical stories reporting on the dialects, there is little if any linguistic evidence for different dialects in the language of the Hebrew Bible. That is not to say that a dialectal differentiation did not exist, but rather that we cannot identify these dialectal features from the text of the Bible. These findings are also important for the dating of biblical texts, as alleged dialectal features have been used to dismiss the validity of dating (Young et al. 2008 I: 200).
This paper deals with the history of the Semitic relative clauses and its development in differen... more This paper deals with the history of the Semitic relative clauses and its development in different branches all the way to Hebrew. It will be argued that Hebrew shows conservatism as well as innovation, some of which a result of other syntactic innovations and changes within the Canaanite branch.
It has been observed in many languages that third person subject markers on verbs are frequently ... more It has been observed in many languages that third person subject markers on verbs are frequently zero, while those of first and second person are overt. There have been several explanations for this phenomenon: some argue that they are less frequent in discourse, bot others (e.g., Givón) argue that first and second persons, which are more accessible, constantly regenerate, while the third person markers do not. Proponents of this explanation assume that third person subjects do develop, but are subsequently lost and reduce to zero. For example, Middle Welsh 1sg oedwn vs. 3sd oed (Watkins 1962).
In this paper I suggest that in the paradigm of the West Semitic perfect (< Akkadian stative), the suffixes of the third person are nominal (i.e., reflect genfer-number inflection), while first and second person suffixes are pronominal (i.e., reflect gender-number-person). In other words, I suggest that proto Semitic did not have a third person subject form at all. The short vowel used to mark the 3ms perfect form is, I suggest, a reanalysis of the 3fs –at.
The Canaanite subgroup is one of the better-studied branches of Semitic. The position of this bra... more The Canaanite subgroup is one of the better-studied branches of Semitic. The position of this branch in relation to other Semitic languages is a matter of almost unanimous consensus, the result of many detailed studies. However, despite the fact that most of the texts written in Canaanite dialects are consonantal, the features that distinguish Canaanite from the other Northwest Semitic languages are essentially vocalic (for example, the Canaanite shift). In this paper we will suggest a couple of additional morpho-syntactic features, which should beconsidered a Canaanite innovation: the relative particle *ˀaṯar and the morpho-syntax of the infinitives. These features are easily detected in non-vocalized texts and improve our ability toidentify texts written in Canaanite dialects.
One of the sub-branches of Central Semitic,1 Northwest Semitic, contains a number of languages, w... more One of the sub-branches of Central Semitic,1 Northwest Semitic, contains a number of languages, with no established hierarchical relation among them, that is, they remain in a polytomic formation: Ugaritic, Aramaic, Canaanite, Deir Alla and Samalian. This formation is tantamount to admitting that there is no empirical evidence to justify any further subgrouping. Scholars have continually attempted to establish a more accurate sub-branching or to suggest a different genetic affiliation, primarily in regards to the position of Ugaritic.
In this paper, we review the arguments in favor of the micro classification of the Northwest Semitic sub-branch. We will show that the arguments in favor of a Ugaritic-Canaanite sub-branch are linguistically weak. We offer a number of features which we suggest can establish an Aramao-Canaanite sub-branch: fs proximal demonstrative, the direct object marker, dative subjects, construct with prepositions and the G imperfect inflection of geminate roots.
Following the well established strength of morphosyntax in demonstrating genealogical relations, the evidence in favor of grouping Aramaic and Canaanite together as a separate subgroup is much stronger than the case previously made in favor of other combinations.
The emergence and development of complex structures have always fascinated historical linguists. ... more The emergence and development of complex structures have always fascinated historical linguists. Only recently, however, attention has been shifted to the origin(s) of clausal subordination from a typological point of view (Heine and Kuteva 2007; Hendery 2012; Givón 2009; Givón and Shibatani 2009). Two main paths of change have been suggested to explain the rise of clausal subordination cross-linguistically: nominalization (or “expansion”) and clause integration (Heine and Kuteva 2007; Heine 2009):
1. Expansion: S [NP] > S1 [S2]
2. Integration: S1 + S2 > S1 [S2]
But are these typological pathways viable cross linguistically and properly representative of the diachrony of relative clauses? On the basis of evidence from Semitic, it will be suggested that the assumption that sentential subordination is a unique pattern because it has complex internal syntax is biased. The evidence in Semitic does not follow any of the paths outlined above. It is therefore better to acknowledge that Proto-Semitic did not have a specific strategy to subordinate sentences and they were treated as any other nominal attribute. Typologists regularly note languages where the relative and genitives fall together (Gil 2011). I argue that in Semitic adnominalization is a category.
Classical Arabic is considered conservative among both the Semitic languages and variants of Arab... more Classical Arabic is considered conservative among both the Semitic languages and variants of Arabic. Many Arabists consider it the most archaic form of Arabic and even the source of some of the modern dialects. The most archaic features of the language are its consonantal inventory and its nominal inflection (case system). Indeed for the most part these features are not attested in the modern dialects, which are considered by many linguists innovative.
In this paper I will discuss several morpho-syntactic features in modern Arabic dialects, which are not found in Classical Arabic. I will show that these features date back to earlier phases, namely before the split of the Arabic sub-branch, and were lost in the Classical language. The data presented in this paper strongly suggests that some dialects preserved important archaic features where the Classical language innovated. In other words, we cannot assume a-priori that Classical Arabic is conservative; rather, the relative archaism of any Arabic feature needs to be evaluated compared with evidence from other Semitic languages. I argue, therefore, that Classical Arabic existed in tandem with some of the existing dialects hut is unlikely to be their source. I further discuss the role of standardization and prestige in preserving archaisms in non-standard variants.
The Canaanite subgroup is one of the better-studied branches of Semitic. The position of this bra... more The Canaanite subgroup is one of the better-studied branches of Semitic. The position of this branch in relation to other Semitic languages is a matter of almost unanimous consensus, the result of many detailed studies. However, despite the fact that most of the texts written in Canaanite dialects are consonantal, the features that distinguish Canaanite from the other Northwest Semitic languages are essentially vocalic (for example, the Canaanite shift). In this paper we will suggest a couple of additional morphosyntactic features, which should be considered a Canaanite innovation: the relative particle *atar and the morphosyntax of the infinitives. These features are easily detected in non-vocalized texts and improve our ability to identify texts written in Canaanite dialects.
Uploads
Books by Na'ama Pat-El
The volume brings together perspectives from both established and up-and-coming scholars and represents a globally and linguistically diverse range of languages.The collected papers demonstrate the ways in which endangered languages can challenge existing models of language change based on more commonly studied languages, and can generate innovative insights into linguistic phenomena such as pathways of grammaticalization, forms and dynamics of contact-driven change, and the diachronic relationship between lexical and grammatical categories. In so doing, the book highlights the idea that processes and outcomes of language change long held to be universally relevant may be more sensitive to cultural and typological variability than previously assumed.
Taken as a whole, this collection brings together perspectives from language documentation and historical linguistics to point the way forward for richer understandings of both language change and documentary-descriptive approaches, making this key reading for scholars in these fields.
Papers by Na'ama Pat-El
with substantives is not always predictable, although gender assignment
is not affected. The question of this gender-number morphological mismatch in all phases of Hebrew is a long-standing problem; attempts
to explain it have mostly been synchronic and restricted to evidence from Hebrew. In this paper, I contextualize the Hebrew
case within a wider Semitic context and ask whether this system
is especially typical of Hebrew, and, if not, what that tells us
about plural formation in Hebrew.
The volume brings together perspectives from both established and up-and-coming scholars and represents a globally and linguistically diverse range of languages.The collected papers demonstrate the ways in which endangered languages can challenge existing models of language change based on more commonly studied languages, and can generate innovative insights into linguistic phenomena such as pathways of grammaticalization, forms and dynamics of contact-driven change, and the diachronic relationship between lexical and grammatical categories. In so doing, the book highlights the idea that processes and outcomes of language change long held to be universally relevant may be more sensitive to cultural and typological variability than previously assumed.
Taken as a whole, this collection brings together perspectives from language documentation and historical linguistics to point the way forward for richer understandings of both language change and documentary-descriptive approaches, making this key reading for scholars in these fields.
with substantives is not always predictable, although gender assignment
is not affected. The question of this gender-number morphological mismatch in all phases of Hebrew is a long-standing problem; attempts
to explain it have mostly been synchronic and restricted to evidence from Hebrew. In this paper, I contextualize the Hebrew
case within a wider Semitic context and ask whether this system
is especially typical of Hebrew, and, if not, what that tells us
about plural formation in Hebrew.
We will show that there are a number of significant problems with the reconstruction of the relative pronoun, which, when taken together, make tracing its origin to the demonstrative highly unlikely. We will discuss the syntactic behavior and morhology of the relative marker to show that it is unlikely to be derived from the demonstrative. Instead, we will argue, that the opposite is true: the demonstrative in West Semitic is a secondary formation on the basis of the relative marker.
Aramaic was the lingua franca of much of the Levant and Mesopotamia, and speakers of Arabic and Aramaic were in frequent contact for centuries. It is thus not surprising that scholars of Syrian and Mesopotamian dialects have identified the origin of a number of features of these dialects as Aramaic. Most studies dedicated to this topic have concentrated on the lexicon (Fraenkel 1886; Feghali 1918; Hobaika 1939; Hopkins 1995; Contini 1999; Müller-Kessler 2003; Retsö 2006). Much less work has explicitly focused on phonological, morphological and syntactic features (Diem 1971; Fleisch 1974; Behnstedt 1991; Arnold and Behnstedt 1993; Retsö 2000; del rio Sánchez 2013); nevertheless, a number of features have become widely (though not universally) accepted as examples of transfer from Aramaic into Arabic via second-language acquisition by Aramaic speakers after the Islamic conquests; for example, the shift ā > ō (e.g., lisān > lisōn; fallāḥ > fallōḥ) in a number of Lebanese and Anatolian dialects; 3rd and 2nd plural pronouns (e.g., hinnōn/hinnēn; kon/ken) in a number of Syrian dialects, and others.
In this paper, reexamine some of these proposed features. We will argue that many of these features are better explained as the result of common linguistic processes. Others are well attested in a number of Semitic languages, and may therefore constitute a retention in Arabic. Overall, we will argue that the influence of Aramaic on the contemporary Arabic dialects of the Levant and Mesopotamia is indeed quite limited. Further, we will argue that we should not expect a great deal of Aramaic influence on these dialects for several reasons. First, Arabic was more widespread in the pre-Islamic period than is typically appreciated (Al-Jallad forthcoming). Second, there has been a great deal of convergence in modern dialects. Finally, given the long history of Aramaic/Arabic contact, bilingualism was probably extremely common, and thus rapid imperfect acquisition of Arabic by Aramaic speakers in the early Islamic period, which would have ostensibly led to the transfer of many Aramaic features, can now be considered very unlikely. Our results may have implicatiosn to our understanding of the social structure of the region and the difference between speakers in urban versus rural areas.
This proposal not only outlines a more coherent family tree for Northwest Semitic, but also accounts for numerous “Aramaic”-like features in biblical Hebrew, which have thus far been treated as the result of language contact in the early Iron Age.
may have one of three explanations: (1) an existing common syntactic feature on
the basis of which a subsequent development is built (i.e., parallel development); (2)
areal contact (i.e., Sprachbund); and (3) independent development due to typological
tendencies. Khan notes that it is possible that in most cases none of these explanations
would be verifiable. It seems, however, that in most historical studies, only the latter
two options are taken into account, while similarity stemming the first is considered
unusable for subgrouping or reconstruction (starting from Meillet 1918). In this paper,
I will argue that in some well-defined cases, parallel development can be proven as a
feature of the linguistic structure and is therefore relevant for historical linguistics. I
further suggest that parallel development is likely to recur in languages of a genetically
cohesive family, which share relevant structural features. Several Semitic examples will
serve to illustrate this point.
that linguistic change is restricted by the initial material from which it arose. Grammaticaization
theory assumes change is possible only in a specific direction (lexical
> grammatical), and Sources and Targets have a close functional relationship. For
example, copulas change to existentials, dative becomes possessor etc. Thus, similar
source-to-target combination in different languages are treated as an identical process.
In this talk I will argue that a superficial similarity, such as dative-to-possessor in
different languages does not imply similarity of processes and that methods focusing
on source-to-target are superficial and do not explain language change; rather, our
focus should be on the process itself, regardless of source or target. I will review a
few cases of classic source-to-target changes in Semitic and Indo-European languages
which do not reflect similar process despite their superficial similarities.
References:
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva (2002). World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Vincent, Nigel (1995). Exaptation and Grammaticalization. Historical Linguistics
1993. H. Andersen. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins: 433–445.
Although there have been several critical evaluations of the idea of Israelian Hebrew, There hasn’t been a systematic evaluation of the linguistic evidence (Fredericks 1996; Schniederwind and Sivan 1997). In this paper, I will examine the linguistic features that have been claimed to be distinctive of the northern dialect. The results will show that despite biblical stories reporting on the dialects, there is little if any linguistic evidence for different dialects in the language of the Hebrew Bible. That is not to say that a dialectal differentiation did not exist, but rather that we cannot identify these dialectal features from the text of the Bible. These findings are also important for the dating of biblical texts, as alleged dialectal features have been used to dismiss the validity of dating (Young et al. 2008 I: 200).
In this paper I suggest that in the paradigm of the West Semitic perfect (< Akkadian stative), the suffixes of the third person are nominal (i.e., reflect genfer-number inflection), while first and second person suffixes are pronominal (i.e., reflect gender-number-person). In other words, I suggest that proto Semitic did not have a third person subject form at all. The short vowel used to mark the 3ms perfect form is, I suggest, a reanalysis of the 3fs –at.
In this paper, we review the arguments in favor of the micro classification of the Northwest Semitic sub-branch. We will show that the arguments in favor of a Ugaritic-Canaanite sub-branch are linguistically weak. We offer a number of features which we suggest can establish an Aramao-Canaanite sub-branch: fs proximal demonstrative, the direct object marker, dative subjects, construct with prepositions and the G imperfect inflection of geminate roots.
Following the well established strength of morphosyntax in demonstrating genealogical relations, the evidence in favor of grouping Aramaic and Canaanite together as a separate subgroup is much stronger than the case previously made in favor of other combinations.
1. Expansion: S [NP] > S1 [S2]
2. Integration: S1 + S2 > S1 [S2]
But are these typological pathways viable cross linguistically and properly representative of the diachrony of relative clauses? On the basis of evidence from Semitic, it will be suggested that the assumption that sentential subordination is a unique pattern because it has complex internal syntax is biased. The evidence in Semitic does not follow any of the paths outlined above. It is therefore better to acknowledge that Proto-Semitic did not have a specific strategy to subordinate sentences and they were treated as any other nominal attribute. Typologists regularly note languages where the relative and genitives fall together (Gil 2011). I argue that in Semitic adnominalization is a category.
In this paper I will discuss several morpho-syntactic features in modern Arabic dialects, which are not found in Classical Arabic. I will show that these features date back to earlier phases, namely before the split of the Arabic sub-branch, and were lost in the Classical language. The data presented in this paper strongly suggests that some dialects preserved important archaic features where the Classical language innovated. In other words, we cannot assume a-priori that Classical Arabic is conservative; rather, the relative archaism of any Arabic feature needs to be evaluated compared with evidence from other Semitic languages. I argue, therefore, that Classical Arabic existed in tandem with some of the existing dialects hut is unlikely to be their source. I further discuss the role of standardization and prestige in preserving archaisms in non-standard variants.