The Morphology of Adjectives in the Neo-Aramaic Dialects of ʿAqra

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Aziz Emmanuel Eliya Al-Zebari

Abstract The present article presents a synchronic description of the morphology of adjectives in the highly endangered Neo-Aramaic dialects of ʿAqra in the Kurdistan region of Iraq. It discusses the morphology of adjectives in these dialects as used in the sixties of the last century. In particular, the article highlights adjectival patterns, inflectional features, and the adaptation of loanwords from Kurdish, Arabic, and Turkish. The article contributes to the description of the grammar of some 150 North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA) dialects in the Kurdistan region that are gradually falling into disuse, due to internal disputes, wars, economic crises, and globalisation.

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-233
Author(s):  
Hezy Mutzafi

Abstract Although folk etymology is a common linguistic phenomenon, it has hitherto hardly been touched upon in lexicological and other works related to varieties of Neo-Aramaic. The present article concerns twelve cases of folk etymology selected from some of the dialects of North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA), the largest and most variegated division of modern Aramaic. Among these are three folk-etymological interpretations that did not induce structural or other changes, as well as nine cases of folk-etymological processes that reshaped NENA lexical items.


2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-299
Author(s):  
Alessandro Mengozzi ◽  
Emanuele Miola

Abstract In the present article we aim to describe the distribution and functions of preposed and postposed paronomastic infinitives in literary and spoken varieties of North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA). In the first part, the syntax and the function(s) of constructions involving a paronomastic infinitive will be described from a typological point of view. Syntactic and functional variation of NENA paronomastic infinitives largely corresponds to what is found in other Semitic languages, as well as in many languages belonging to other families. In the second part of the article we will address the rendering of Biblical Hebrew and Classical Syriac paronomastic infinitives in NENA Bible translations and offer a survey of various constructions found in spoken varieties and in the language of early Christian Neo-Aramaic poetry.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-51
Author(s):  
Hezy Mutzafi

Abstract The present article concerns twelve cases of Akkadian lexical influences on Aramaic that are not manifest until the modern period. These are added to several cases already discussed in scholarly works, and include ten substrate words and two loan translations, all in North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA), and in one case of loan translation apparently also in Western Neo-Aramaic (assuming a westward diffusion of the innovation involved). As most Akkadian lexical influences which surface in Neo-Aramaic are confined to NENA, it seems that the main reasons for the lack of their attestation in pre-modern Aramaic is the strictly vernacular nature of the remote progenitor of NENA, and the fact that the history of this dialect group is not attested.


Africa ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernd Heine

Opening ParagraphColin M. Turnbull's publications form virtually the only source available on Ik clture and society. His bookThe Mountain Peoplehas found wide distribution, far beyond anthropological circles. The problems it raises have been discussed in a number of reviews (see especially Beidelman, 1973; Spencer, 1973; Barth, 1974; Winteret al., 1975). Through the present article, I wish to show that there is an urgent need for a more comprehensive and less biased study of Ik culture md society.


2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-324
Author(s):  
Hezy Mutzafi

Abstract The present article refers to several selected lexical oddities which appear in Yona Sabar's A Jewish Neo-Aramaic Dictionary. The article seeks to clarify the etymologies of these lexical items, to refine their definitions whenever necessary, and to offer extensive comparative data related to cognates and missing links in various other Neo-Aramaic varieties, in particular North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA) dialects. All lexical items in question are proven to be inherited from pre-modern Aramaic, and five of them appear to be part of the inventory of Akkadian loanwords in NENA and other Aramaic languages. Mere recourse to Classical Aramaic is inadequate for uncovering the origins of most of these lexical items due to far-reaching semantic, phonological and morphological changes that have distanced them from their precursors. In most cases, therefore, a comparative inter-dialectal study is crucial for securing well-founded etyma for these puzzling words. Each etymological discussion specifies the diachronic processes involved in the development of the lexical item under consideration.


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hezy Mutzafi

The present article concerns salient Jewish Neo-Aramaic (jna) innovations in the framework of North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic (nena).jnais such a wide spectrum of varieties that in some cases geographically distant dialects are fundamentally different from each other on all levels of language structure and are mutually incomprehensible. Nevertheless, all these dialects share some typical or unique traits which transcend dialectal boundaries and bind thejnavarieties together to the exclusion of all or the vast majority of neighboring Christiannenadialects. Ethnolectal divisions and separate Jewish as opposed to Christian isoglosses innenahave likely emerged due to diffusional patterns dominated by the force of communal and confessional cohesiveness that has overridden convergence and affinity with geographically proximate, but religiously distinct,nena-speaking communities.


Author(s):  
Eleanor Coghill

The North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic dialects form one of the surviving branches of the Aramaic language family. Extremely diverse, they are or were spoken by Christian and Jewish minorities originating in Iraq, Turkey, Syria and Iran. They have been in intense contact with other languages of the region, most notably Kurdish, but also Arabic, Turkic languages and Persian. As a result, they show a great deal of contact influence, not only in lexicon and phonology but also in morphology and syntax. The precise forms of the borrowings, as well as their behavior, usually reflect the local dialects of the donor language, showing how important fine-grained dialectal data is in a study of language contact. While some of the languages in contact, namely Kurdish, Turkish and Persian, are structurally very different to NENA, structural congruence or compatibility plays at best a fluctuating role in facilitating borrowings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document