| Northwest Semitic | |
|---|---|
| Levantine | |
| Geographic distribution | Concentrated in theMiddle East |
| Linguistic classification | Afro-Asiatic
|
| Subdivisions | |
| Language codes | |
| Glottolog | nort3165 |
Northwest Semitic is a division of theSemitic languages comprising the indigenous languages of theLevant. It emerged fromProto-Semitic in theEarly Bronze Age. It is first attested in proper names identified asAmorite in theMiddle Bronze Age. The oldest coherent texts are inUgaritic, dating to theLate Bronze Age, which by the time of theBronze Age collapse are joined byOld Aramaic, and by theIron Age bySutean and theCanaanite languages (Hebrew,Phoenician/Punic,Edomite andMoabite).[1]
The term was coined byCarl Brockelmann in 1908,[2] who separatedFritz Hommel's 1883 classification ofSemitic languages[2] into Northwest (Canaanite andAramaic),East Semitic (Akkadian, its Assyrian and Babylonian dialects,Eblaite) and Southwest (Arabic,Old South Arabian languages andAbyssinian).[3]
Brockelmann'sCanaanite sub-group includesUgaritic,Phoenician andHebrew. Some scholars now regard Ugaritic either as belonging to a separate branch of Northwest Semitic (alongside Canaanite) or a dialect of Amorite.
Central Semitic is a proposed intermediate group comprising Northwest Semitic andArabic.Central Semitic is either a subgroup ofWest Semitic or a top-level division of Semitic alongsideEast Semitic andSouth Semitic.[4]SIL Ethnologue in its system of classification (of living languages only) eliminates Northwest Semitic entirely by joining Canaanite and Arabic in a "South-Central" group which together with Aramaic forms Central Semitic.[5] TheDeir Alla Inscription andSamalian have been identified as language varieties falling outside Aramaic proper but with some similarities to it, possibly in an "Aramoid" or "Syrian" subgroup.[6][7]
It is clear that theTaymanitic script expressed a distinct linguistic variety that is not Arabic and not closely related to Hismaic or Safaitic, while it can tentatively be suggested that it was more closely related to Northwest Semitic.[8]
The time period for the split of Northwest Semitic fromProto-Semitic or from other Semitic groups is uncertain.Richard C. Steiner suggested in 2011 that the earliest attestation of Northwest Semitic is to be found in snake spells from the EgyptianPyramid Texts, dating to the mid-third millennium BC.[10] Amorite personal names and words in Akkadian and Egyptian texts from the late third millennium to the mid-second millennium BC and the language of theProto-Sinaitic inscriptions dated to the first half of the second millennium otherwise constitute the earliest traces of Northwest Semitic, the first Northwest Semitic language attested in full being Ugaritic in the 14th century BC.[11]
During the early 1st millennium, the Phoenician language was spread throughout the Mediterranean byPhoenician colonists, most notably toCarthage in today'sTunisia. ThePhoenician alphabet is of fundamental importance in human history as the source and ancestor of theGreek alphabet, the laterLatin alphabet, the Aramaic (Square Hebrew),Syriac, andArabic writing systems, Germanicrunes, and ultimatelyCyrillic.
From the 8th century BC, the use ofImperial Aramaic by theNeo-Assyrian Empire (935–608 BC) and the succeedingNeo-Babylonian Empire (612–539 BC) andAchaemenid Empire (539–332 BC), a form of theAramaic language, spread throughout the Northwest Semitic region of the Levant, northern regions of the Arabian peninsula and southern regions of Anatolia, and gradually drove most of the other Northwest Semitic languages to extinction. The ancientJudaeans adopted Aramaic for daily use, and parts of theTanakh are written in it. Hebrew was preserved, however, as a Jewishliturgical language and language of scholarship, and resurrected in the 19th century, with modern adaptations, to become theModern Hebrew language ofthe State of Israel.
After theMuslim conquests of the 7th century, Arabic began to gradually replace Aramaic throughout the region. Classical Syriac-Aramaic survives today as the liturgical language of theAssyrian Church of the East,Syriac Orthodox Church,Chaldean Catholic Church, and other churches ofSyriac Christians. It is spoken in modern dialects with an estimated one million fluent speakers by endangered indigenous populations scattered throughout the Middle East, most commonly by theAssyrians, GnosticMandeans, theArameans (Syriacs) ofMaaloula andJubb'adin, andMizrahi Jews. There is also an Aramaicsubstratum inLevantine andMesopotamian Arabic.
Phonologically, Ugaritic lost the sound*ṣ́, replacing it with/sˁ/ (ṣ) (the same shift occurred in Canaanite andAkkadian). That this same sound became/ʕ/ in Aramaic (although in Ancient Aramaic, it was written withqoph), suggests that Ugaritic is not the parent language of the group. An example of this sound shift can be seen in the word forearth: Ugaritic/ʔarsˁ/ (’arṣ), Punic/ʔarsˁ/ (’arṣ),Tiberian Hebrew/ʔɛrɛsˁ/ (’ereṣ),Biblical Hebrew/ʔarsˁ/ (’arṣ) and Aramaic/ʔarʕaː/ (’ar‘ā’).
Thevowel shift from*aː to/oː/ distinguishes Canaanite from Ugaritic. Also, in the Canaanite group, the series of Semiticinterdentalfricatives becomesibilants:*ð (ḏ),*θ (ṯ) and*θ̣ (ṱ) became/z/,/ʃ/ (š) and/sˤ/ (ṣ) respectively. The effect of this sound shift can be seen by comparing the following words:
| shift | Ugaritic | Aramaic | Biblical Hebrew | translation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| *ð (ḏ)→/z/ | 𐎏𐎐𐎁 ḏanabu | דנבא danḇā | זנב zānāḇ | tail |
| *θ (ṯ)→/ʃ/ (š) | 𐎘𐎍𐎘 ṯalāṯu | תלת təlāṯ | שלש šālōš | three |
| *θ̣ (ẓ)→/sˤ/ (ṣ) | 𐎑𐎍𐎍 ẓillu | טללא ṭillālā | צל ṣēl | shadow |
Proto-Northwest Semitic had three contrastive vowel qualities and a length distinction, resulting in six vocalic phonemes: *a, *ā, *i, *ī, *u, and *ū. While *aw, *ay, *iw, *iy, *uw, and *uy are often referred to as diphthongs, they do not seem to have had a different status as such, rather being a normal sequence of a short vowel and a glide.
| Type | Manner | Voicing | Labial | Interdental | Alveolar | Lateral | Postalveolar | Palatal | Velar/Uvular | Pharyngeal | Glottal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Obstruent | Stop | voiceless | *p[p] | *t[t] | *k[k] | ||||||
| emphatic | *ṭ[tˤ] | *q/ḳ[kˤ] | *ʼ,ˀ[ʔ] | ||||||||
| voiced | *b[b] | *d[d] | *g[ɡ] | ||||||||
| Fricative | voiceless | *ṯ[θ] | *s[t͡s] | *ś[ɬ] | *š[s~ʃ] | *ḫ[x~χ] | *ḥ[ħ] | *h[h] | |||
| emphatic | *ṯ̣/θ̣/ẓ[t͡θˤ] | *ṣ[t͡sˤ] | *ṣ́/ḏ̣[t͡ɬˤ] | ||||||||
| voiced | *ḏ[ð] | *z[d͡z] | *ġ/ǵ[ɣ~ʁ] | *ʻ,ˤ[ʕ] | |||||||
| Resonant | Trill | *r[r] | |||||||||
| Approximant | *w[w] | *l[l] | *y[j] | ||||||||
| Nasal | *m[m] | *n[n] | |||||||||
Suchard proposes that: "*s, both from original *s and original *ṯ, then shifted further back to a postalveolar *š, while deaffrication of *ts and *dz to *s and *z gave these phonemes their Hebrew values, as well as merging original *dz with original *ḏ. In fact, original *s may have been realized as anything between[s] and[ʃ]; both values are attested in foreign transcriptions of early Northwest Semitic languages".[citation needed]
In Proto-Northwest Semitic the emphatics were articulated with pharyngealization. Its shift to backing (as opposed to Proto-Semitic glottalization of emphatics) has been considered a Central Semitic innovation.[12]
According to Faber, the assimilation *-ṣt->-ṣṭ- in the Dt stem in Hebrew (hiṣṭaddēḳ ‘he declared himself righteous’) suggests backing rather than glottalization. The same assimilation is attested in Aramaic (yiṣṭabba ‘he will be moistened’).
Three cases can be reconstructed for Proto-Northwest Semitic nouns (nominative,accusative,genitive), twogenders (masculine, feminine) and threenumbers (single, dual, plural).[13]
| Number/case | ‘dog(s)’ (m.) | ‘bitch(es)’ (f.) |
|---|---|---|
| sg.nominative | *kalbu(m) | *kalbatu(m) |
| sg.genitive | *kalbi(m) | *kalbati(m) |
| sg.accusative | *kalba(m) | *kalbata(m) |
| du.nominative | *kalbā(na) | *kalbatā(na) |
| du.genitive/accusative | *kalbay(na) | *kalbatay(na) |
| pl.nominative | *kalabū(na) | *kalabātu(m) |
| pl.genitive/accusative | *kalabī(na) | *kalabāti(m) |
Proto-Northwest Semitic pronouns had 2 genders and 3grammatical cases.
| independent nominative | enclitic | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| accusative | genitive | nominative | ||
| 1.sg. | *ʔanāku/ *ʔana | *-nī | *-ī, *-ya | *-tu |
| 2.sg.masc. | *ʔanta | *-ka | *-ta | |
| 2.sg.fem. | *ʔanti | *-ki | *-ti | |
| 3.sg.masc. | *hūʔa | *-hu | *-a | |
| 3.sg.fem. | *hīʔa | *-hā | *-at | |
| 1.pl. | *naḥnu/ *naḥnā | *-nā | ||
| 2.pl.masc. | *ʔantum | *-kum | *-tum | |
| 2.pl.fem. | *ʔantin | *-kin | *-tin | |
| 3.pl.masc. | *hum(ū) | *-hum | *-ū | |
| 3.pl.fem. | *hin(na) | *-hin | *-ā | |
Reconstruction of Proto-Northwest Semitic numbers.
| Number | Masculine | Feminine |
|---|---|---|
| One | *ʔaḥadum | *ʔaḥattum |
| Two | *ṯnāna | *ṯintāna |
| Three | *ṯalāṯatum | *ṯalāṯum |
| Four | *ʔarbaʕatum | *ʔarbaʕum |
| Five | *ḫamisatum | *ḫamisum |
| Six | *siṯṯatum | *siṯṯum |
| Seven | *sabʕatum | *sabʕum |
| Eight | *ṯamāniyatum | *ṯamāniyum |
| Nine | *tisʕatum | *tisʕum |
| Ten | *ʕaśaratum | *ʕaśrum |
| Suffix conjugation (Perfect) | Prefix conjugations (Imperfect) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st person | singular | *qaṭal-tu | 'I have killed' | *ʔa-qṭul(-u/-a) | 'I will kill' | |
| plural | *qaṭal-nā | 'we have killed' | *na-qṭul(-u/-a) | 'we will kill' | ||
| 2nd person | singular | masc. | *qaṭal-ta | 'you have killed' | *ta-qṭul(-u/-a) | 'you will kill' |
| fem. | *qaṭal-ti | 'you have killed' | *ta-qṭul-ī(-na) | 'you will kill' | ||
| plural | masc. | *qaṭal-tum | 'you have killed' | *ta-qṭul-ū(-na) | 'you will kill' | |
| fem. | *qaṭal-tin | 'you have killed' | *ta-qṭul-na | 'you will kill' | ||
| 3rd person | singular | masc. | *qaṭal-a | 'he has killed' | *ya-qṭul(-u/-a) | 'he will kill' |
| fem. | *qaṭal-at | 'she has killed' | *ta-qṭul(-u/-a) | 'she will kill' | ||
| plural | masc. | *qaṭal-ū | 'they have killed' | *ya-qṭul-ū(-na) | 'they will kill' | |
| fem. | *qaṭal-ā | 'they have killed' | *ta-qṭul-na | 'they will kill' | ||
The G fientive or G-stem (Hebrewqal) is the basic, most common, unmarked stem. The G-stem expresses events. The vowel of the prefix of the prefix conjugations in Proto-Northwest Semitic was *-a- and the stem was *-qṭul- or *-qṭil-, as in *ya-qṭul-u 'he will kill', while the stem of the suffix conjugation had two *a vowels, as in *qaṭal-a 'he has killed'.
The G stative is like the fientive but expressing states instead of events. For the prefix conjugation of stative roots, the vowel of the prefix was *-i- and it contained an *a vowel, e.g. *yi-kbad-u 'he will become heavy', while the second vowel of the suffix conjugation was either *-i-, as in *kabid-a 'he is/was/will be heavy', or *-u-, as in *ʕamuq-a 'it is/was/will be deep'. Whether the G-stem stative suffix conjugation has *i or *u in the stem is lexically determined.
The N-stem (Hebrewnip̄ʕal) is marked by a prefixed *n(a)-. It is mediopassive which is a grammatical voice that subsumes the meanings of both the middle voice and the passive voice. In other words, it expresses a range of meanings where the subject is the patient of the verb, e.g. passive, medial, and reciprocal. The stem of the suffix conjugation is *naqṭal-, and the stem of the prefix conjugations is *-nqaṭil-; as is the case with stative G-stem verbs, the prefix vowel is *-i-, resulting in forms like *yi-nqaṭil-u 'he will be killed'.
The D-stem (Hebrewpiʕel) is marked by gemination of the second radical in all forms. It has a range of different meanings, mostly transitive. The stem of the suffix conjugation is *qaṭṭil-, and the same stem is used for the prefix conjugations. It is not clear whether the Proto-Northwest-Semitic prefix vowel should be reconstructed as *-u-, the form inherited from Proto-Semitic (i.e. *yuqaṭṭil-u), or as *-a-, which is somewhat supported by evidence from Ugaritic and Hebrew (*yaqaṭṭil-u).
The C-stem (Hebrewhip̄ʕil) more often than not expresses a causative meaning. The most likely reconstructions are *haqṭil- (from older *saqṭil-) for the stem of the suffix conjugation and *-saqṭil- for the stem of the prefix conjugations. The reconstructed prefix vowel is the same as that of the D-stem, and similarly, the participle is to be reconstructed as *musaqṭilum.
All of the stems listed here, except the N-stem, could bring forth further derivation. The "internal passive stems" (Gp, Dp, and Cp; Hebrew passiveqal,puʕal, andhɔp̄ʕal) aren't marked by affixes, but express their passivity through a different vowel pattern. The Gp prefix conjugation can be reconstructed as *yu-qṭal-u 'he will be killed'. Reflexive or reciprocal meanings can be expressed by the t-stems, formed with a *t which was either infixed after the first radical (Gt, Ct) or prefixed before it (tD).
The precise reconstruction are uncertain.
| G fientive | G stative | D | C | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| perfect | *qaṭal-a | *kabid-a | *qaṭṭil-a | *ha-qṭil-a |
| imperfect | *ya-qṭul-u | *yi-kbad-u | *yV-qaṭṭil-u | *yVsa-qṭil-u |
| participle | *qāṭil-um | *kabid-um | *mu-qaṭṭil-um | *musa-qṭil-um |
| Gp | N | Dp | Cp | |
| perfect | *quṭVl-a | *na-qṭal-a | *quṭṭVl-a | *hu-qṭVl-a |
| imperfect | *yu-qṭal-u | *yin-qaṭil-u | *yu-qVṭṭal-u | *yusV-qṭal-u |
| participle | *qaṭīl-um, *qaṭūl-um | *na-qṭal-um or *mun-qaṭil-um? | *mu-qVṭṭal-um | *musV-qṭal-um |
| Gt | tD | Ct | ||
| perfect | *qtaṭVl-a? | *ta-qaṭṭVl-a | *sta-qṭVl-a? | |
| imperfect | *yi-qtaṭVl-u | *yVt-qaṭṭVl-u | *yVsta-qṭVl-u | |
| participle | *mu-qtaṭVl-um | *mut-qaṭṭVl-um | *musta-qṭVl-um |
{{cite journal}}:Cite journal requires|journal= (help){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
