Studies in the Grammar and Lexicon of Neo-Aramaic

What it is about

A volume of seventeen papers on modern Aramaic (North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic, Ṭuroyo, Western Neo-Aramaic of Maʿlula, Neo-Mandaic); the card is written from the abstracts the book prints and the opening of the first paper. Grammar papers: Barsky and Loesov trace the Central Semitic adjective pattern *qaṭṭīl ("deep", "wise") from a property adjective, through a corpus study of Classical Syriac, to the intransitive preterite of Ṭuroyo; Noorlander shows that possessors and experiencers marked by old dative affixes behave as non-canonical subjects; Khan describes NENA verb forms (bət-qaṭəl, qam-qaṭəl, the narrative subjunctive) that mark discourse dependency on what precedes without syntactic subordination, and derives them from apodosis and purpose-clause forms; Cohen classifies the conditionals of Jewish Zakho; Waltisberg and Bunis weigh Arabic contact against conservatism; Fassberg explains Afel forms for old Peal intransitives in Maʿlula; Gutman shows a cycle in which genitive/oblique case and an apocopate construct state are lost and re-created. Lexicon papers: plant and animal names, Swadesh lists with etymologies (over 90% of Christian Urmi basic words have reliable Aramaic etymologies), material-culture vocabulary, Arabic loans, and language loss in the Swedish diaspora; Mutzafi shows that some "Urmi" animal names in dictionaries are Syriac classicisms that never were spoken words.

Ideas

• I1. Discourse dependency as a cross-Aramaic feature: Khan's NENA forms and the Hebrew wayyiqṭol/weqaṭal (his paper in hbobook-obp0250-…) share one mechanism, a clause form that links to the preceding clause without subordination. The event reader can use one relation type (continues) for both, with the form list per variety as data.
• I2. Dictionary hygiene: a lexicon entry should record whether it is attested in speech or text, or only in dictionaries and Bible translations; Mutzafi's classicisms are the negative examples. Mova's Aramaic lexicon tables can carry an attested field and refuse unattested forms as gold.
• I3. The *qaṭṭīl adjective pattern (C1aC2C2īC3) as a pattern entry in the Aramaic noun chapter, with its Syriac examples, so that the segmenter and lemmatiser recognise it as an adjective template rather than a D-stem verb form.
• I4. The Swadesh lists with etymologies are a small cross-variety test: for each basic meaning, the exponent in Syriac, Targumic, Talmudic and Neo-Aramaic varieties, checked against Mova's Aramaic lexicon for coverage.
• I5. Conditional types (ordinary, speech-act, inferential, concessive, counterfactual) as a label set for conditional clauses in Aramaic and Hebrew frames, with Cohen's examples as tests.

For Mova

I1 goes into The verb in Biblical Aramaic and Discourse: narrative, speech and the shape of a text (cross-reference) and the event chain in world; I2 into The lexicon of Biblical Aramaic; I3 into The noun in Biblical Aramaic; I4 is a test for The lexicon of Biblical Aramaic and The Aramaic family and the Jewish varieties; I5 into Particles and syntax of Biblical Aramaic. Neo-Aramaic is not one of Mova's reading varieties; these are comparison notes and tests.

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

@book{khan2021studies,
  title = {{Studies in the Grammar and Lexicon of Neo-Aramaic}},
  author = {Khan, Geoffrey and Noorlander, Paul M.},
  year = {2021},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0209}
}

References

71 references, 0 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

2. Al-Zahre, Nisrine and Nora Boneh, 2010. “Coreferential Dative Constructions in Syrian Arabic and Modern Hebrew’. Brill’s Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics 2: 248–82. ↗
3. Bar-Asher, Elitzur A. 2008. ‘The Origin and the Typology of the Pattern “qtil li” in Syriac and Babylonian Aramaic’. In Sha’arey Lashon: Studies in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Jewish Languages in Honor of Moshe Bar–Asher II, edited by Aharon Maman, Steven Fassberg and Yohanan Breuer, 360–92. In Hebrew. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute. find
4. ———. 2011. ‘On the Passiveness of one Pattern in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic—A Linguistic and Philological Discussion’. Journal of Semitic Studies 56: 111–43. find
5. ———,. 2014. ‘From a Non-Argument-Dative to an Argument Dative: The Character and Origin of the Qṭil Li Construction in Syriac and Jewish Babylonian Aramaic’. Folia Orientalia 51: 59–101. find
6. Berman, Ruth A. 1982. ‘Dative Marking of the Affectee Role: Data from Modern Hebrew’. Hebrew Annual Review 6: 35–59. find
7. Coghill, Eleanor. 2010. ‘Ditransitive Constructions in the Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Telkepe’. In Studies in Ditransitive Constructions: A Comparative Handbook, edited by Andreĭ Lʹvovich Malʹchukov, Martin Haspelmath, and Bernard Comrie, 221–42. De Gruyter. ↗
8. ———. 2014. ‘Differential Object–Marking in Neo–Aramaic’. Linguistics 52: 335–64. find
9. ———. 2016. The Rise and Fall of Ergativity in Aramaic: Cycles of Alignment Change. Oxford (etc.): Oxford University Press. find
10. ———. 2019. ‘Grammatical relations in Telkepe Neo-Aramaic’. In Argument Selectors: A new perspective on grammatical relations, edited by Alena Witzlack-Makarevich and Balthasar Bickel, 349–98. Amsterdam: Benjamins. find
11. Cohen, Eran. 2012. The Syntax of Neo–Aramaic: The Jewish Dialect of Zakho. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. ↗
12. Cole, Peter, Wayne Harbert, Gabriella Hermon and Shikaripur N. Sridhar. 1980. ‘The Acquisition of Subjecthood’. Language 56: 719–43. ↗
13. Comrie, Bernard. 1982. ‘Syntactic—Morphological Discrepancies in Maltese Sentence Structure’. Communication and Cognition 15 (3/4): 281–306. ↗
14. Cowell, Mark W. 1964. A Reference Grammar of Syrian Arabic. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Damsma, Alinda. forthcoming. The Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Haṣṣan. find
15. Diem, Werner. 2012. Vom Status pendens zum Satzsubjekt: Studien zur Topikalisierung in neueren semitischen Sprachen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. find
16. Doron, Edit and Geoffrey Khan. 2012. ‘The Typology of Morphological Ergativity in Neo–Aramaic’. Lingua 122: 225–40. ↗
17. Fassberg, Steven. 2018. ‘The Ethical Dative in Aramaic’. Aramaic Studies 16: 101–16. ↗
18. Fox, Samuel E. 2009. The Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Bohtan. Gorgias Neo–Aramaic Studies 9. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. ↗
19. Givón, Talmy. 1976. ‘Topic, Pronoun and Grammatical Agreement’. In Subject and Topic, edited by Charles N. Li, 151−85. New York: Academic Press. find
20. Goldenberg, Gideon. 1997. ‘Conservative and Innovative Features in Semitic Languages’. In Afroasiatica Neapolitana, edited by Alessandro Bausi and Mauro Tosco, 3–21. Studi Africanistici. Serie Etiopica 6. Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale. find
21. Greenblatt, Jared. 2011. The Jewish Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Amədya. Leiden: Brill. ↗
22. Gutman, Ariel. 2008. ‘Reexamination of the Bare Preterite Base in the Jewish Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Zakho’. Aramaic Studies 6 (1): 59–84. ↗
23. Haig, Geoffrey. 2018a. ‘The Grammaticalization of Object Pronouns: Why Differential Object Indexing is an Attractor State’. Linguistics 56 (4): 781–818. ↗
24. ———. 2018b. ‘Northern Kurdish (Kurmanjî)’. In The Languages and Linguistics of Western Asia. An Areal Perspective, edited by Geoffrey Haig and Geoffrey Khan, 106–58. Berlin: De Gruyter. find
25. ———. 2018c. ‘The Iranian Languages of Northern Iraq’. In The Languages and Linguistics of Western Asia. An Areal Perspective, edited by Geoffrey Haig and Geoffrey Khan, 267–304. Berlin: De Gruyter. find
26. Halevy, Rivka. 2008. ‘Grammaticalization ‘Chains’ of the Subject–Coreferential Dative in Semitic and Elsewhere’. New Reflections on Grammaticalization, Leuven 17–19/07/2008. Conference presentation. Hoberman, Robert. find
27. D. 1989. The Syntax and Semantics of Verb Morphology in Modern Aramaic: A Jewish Dialect of Iraqi Kurdistan. American Oriental Series 69. New Haven, Connecticut: American Oriental Society. find
28. Hopkins, Simon. 1989. ‘A Tale in the Jewish Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Naγada (Persian Azerbaijan)’. Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 12: 243–81. find
29. Israeli, Yafa. 1998. The Jewish Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Saqqiz (Southern Kurdistan). Ph.D. Thesis. In Hebrew. Jerusalem. Hebrew University of Jerusalem. find
30. Jastrow, Otto. 1985. Laut- und Formenlehre des neuaramäischen Dialekts von Mīdin im Ṭūr ʿAbdīn. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. find
31. ———. 1988. Der neuaramäische Dialekt von Hertevin (Province Siirt). Semitica Viva 3. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. find
32. ———. 1992. Lehrbuch der Ṭuroyo–Sprache. Semitica Viva Didactica 2. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. find
33. ———. 1994. Der neuaramäische Dialekt von Mlaḥsô. Semitica Viva 14. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. find
34. Joosten, Jan. 1989. ‘The Function of the So-called Dativus Ethicus in Classical Syriac’. Orientalia 58: 473–92. find
35. Kapeliuk, Olga. 1989. ‘Some Common Traits in the Evolution of Neo-Syriac and of Neo-Ethiopian’. Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 12: 294–320. find
36. Keenan, Edward L. 1976. ‘Towards a Universal Definition of Subject’. In Subject and Topic, edited by Charles N. Li, 303–33. New York: Academic Press. find
37. Khan, Geoffrey. 1988. Studies in Semitic Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
38. ———. 1999. A Grammar of Neo–Aramaic: The Dialect of the Jews of Arbel. Leiden: Brill. find
39. ———. 2002. The Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Qaraqosh. Leiden: Brill. find
40. ———. 2008a. The Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Barwar I–III. Leiden: Brill. find
41. ———. 2008b. The Jewish Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Urmi. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. find
42. ———. 2009. The Jewish Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Sanandaj. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. find
43. ———. 2016. The Neo-Aramaic Dialect of the Assyrian Christians of Urmi. Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics 86, I: Grammar: Phonology and morphology, II: Grammar: Syntax, III: Lexical studies and dictionary, IV: Texts. Leiden: Brill. find
44. Lehmann, Christian. 1988. ‘On the Function of Agreement’. In Agreement in Natural Language: Approaches, Theories, Descriptions, edited by Michael Barlow and Charles A. Ferguson, 55−65. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information. find
45. Mengozzi, Alessandro. 2002a. Israel of Alqosh and Joseph of Telkepe: A Story in a Truthful Language Religious Poems in Vernacular Syriac (North Iraq, 17 th Century) I: An Anthology. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 627. Louvain: Éditions Peeters. find
46. ———. 2002b. Israel of Alqosh and Joseph of Telkepe: A Story in a Truthful Language Religious Poems in Vernacular Syriac (North Iraq, 17 th Century) II: Introduction and Translation. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 628. Louvain: Éditions Peeters. find
47. ———. 2006. ‘Middle Markers: Neo–Aramaic and Italian Verbal Forms with a 3rd Singular Feminine Pronominal Object’. In XII Incontro Italiano di Linguistica Camito–Semitica (Afroasiatica): Atti, edited by Marco Moriggi, 105–15. Soviera Mannelli: Rubbettino. find
48. Mor, Uri and Na’ama Pat-El 2016. ‘The Development of Predicates with Prepositional Subjects in Hebrew’. Journal of Semitic Studies, 61(2): 327−46. ↗
49. Mutzafi, Hezy. 2004. The Jewish Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Koy Sanjaq (Iraqi Kurdistan). Semitica Viva 32. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. find
50. ———. 2008a. The Jewish Neo–Aramaic Dialect of Betanure (Province of Dihok). Semitica Viva 40. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. find
51. Mutzafi, Hezy. 2008b. ‘Trans–Zab Jewish Neo–Aramaic’. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 71 (3): 409–31. ↗
52. Næss, Åshild. 2007. Prototypical Transitivity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. find
53. Noorlander, Paul M. 2012. ‘Neo-Aramaic Alignment in a Historical Perspective: Some Preliminary Remarks’. Semitics Philology Seminar, Cambridge, 03/12/2012. Invited talk. find
54. ———. 2018a. ‘Me Likes the Subject–Subject-like Properties of Experiencers and Possessors in Aramaic’. Neo-Aramaic Languages across Space and Time. Uppsala, 05–07/10/2018. Conference presentation. find
55. ———. 2018b. Alignment in Eastern Neo-Aramaic Languages from a Typological Perspective. Ph.D. Thesis. Leiden: Leiden University. find
56. ———. 2019a. ‘Resultatives and Asymmetries in Aramaic Alignment Change’. International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Canberra, 01–05/07/2019. Conference presentation. find
57. ———. 2019b. ‘One Way of Becoming Perfect? Possessive Resultatives in Semitic and Aramaic in Particular’. Semitic Philology Seminar. Cambridge, 14/10/2019. Invited talk. find
59. Onishi, Masayuki. 2001. ‘Non-canonically Marked Subjects and Objects: Parameters and Properties’. In Non–Canonical Marking of Subjects and Objects, edited by Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald, Robert M. W. Dixon and Masayuki Onishi, 1–51. Typological Studies in Language 46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ↗
60. Panoussi, Estiphan. 1990. ‘On the Senaya Dialect’. In Studies in Neo-Aramaic, edited by Wolfhart Heinrichs, 107–29. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press. ↗
61. Pat-El, Na’ama. 2018. ‘The Diachrony of Non-canonical Subjects in Northwest Semitic’. In Non–Canonically Case–Marked Subjects: The Reykjavík– Eyjafjallajökull Papers. Studies in Language Companion Series 200, edited by Jóhanna Barðdal, Na’ama Pat-El and Stephen M. Carey, 159–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ↗
62. Pennacchietti, Fabrizio A. 1994. ‘Il Preterito Neoaramaico con Pronome Oggetto’. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 144: 259–83. find
63. Polotsky, Hans Jakob. 1979. ‘Verbs with two Objects in Modern Syriac (Urmi)’. Israel Oriental Studies 9: 204–27. find
64. ———. 1996. ‘Notes on a Neo–Syriac Grammar’. Israel Oriental Studies 16: 11–48. find
65. Prym, Eugen and Albert Socin 1881. Der neu-aramaeische Dialekt des Ṭûr ‘Abdîn. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht’s Verlag. find
66. Rendsburg, Gary A. 1991. ‘Parallel Developments in Mishnaic Hebrew, Colloquial Arabic, and other Varieties of spoken Semitic’. In Semitic Studies in Honor of Wolf Leslau, II, edited by Alan S. Kaye, 1265–77. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. find
67. Rhétoré, P. Jacques. 1912. Grammaire de la langue Soureth ou chaldeen vulgaire, selon le dialecte de la plaine de Mossoul et des pays adjacents. Mossoul: Imprimerie des Pères Dominicains. find
68. Ritter, Helmut. 1967–1971. Ṭūrōyō: Die Volksprache der syrischen Christen des Ṭūr ʕAbdîn A. Texte I: 1967, II: 1969, III: 1971. Beirut: Steiner. find
69. Rubin, Aaron D. 2005. Studies in Semitic Grammaticalization. Harvard Semitic Studies 57. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. find
70. Stassen, Leon. 2009. Predicative Possession. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
71. Stilo, Donald L. and Paul M. Noorlander. 2015. ‘On the Convergence of Verbal Systems of Aramaic and its Neighbours. Part II: Past Paradigms Derived from Present Equivalents’. In Neo-Aramaic and its Linguistic Context, edited by Geoffrey Khan and Lidia Napiorkowska, 453–85. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. ↗
72. Talay, Shabo. 2004. Ed. Lebendig begraben: Die Entführung des syrisch–orthodoxen Priesters Melki Tok von Midən in der Südosttürkei. Einführung, aramäischer Text (Turoyo), Übersetzung und Glossar. Studien zur Orientalischen Kirchengeschichte 29. Münster: LIT. find
73. Waltisberg, Michael. 2016. Syntax des Ṭuroyo. Semitica Viva 55. Wiesbaden: Harrassowiz. THE JEWISH NEO-ARAMAIC DIALECT OF DOHOK: TWO FOLKTALES AND SELECTED FEATURES OF VERBAL SEMANTICS Dorota Molin find

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbobook-obp0209-khan-studies-grammar-lexicon-neo-aramaic/