EarlyAramaic inscriptions date from 11th century BC, placing it among theearliest languages to be written down.[5] AramaicistHolger Gzella [de] notes, "The linguistic history of Aramaic prior to the appearance of the first textual sources in the ninth century BC remains unknown."[24] Aramaic is also believed by most historians and scholars to have been the primarylanguage spoken byJesus of Nazareth both for preaching and in everyday life.[25][26]
This clay tablet represents a classroom experiment; a teacher imposed a challenging writing exercise on pupils who spoke both Babylonian-Akkadian and Aramaic. The pupils had to use traditional syllabic signs to express the sounds of the Aramaic alphabet.c. 500 BC. From Iraq
The scribes of the Neo-Assyrian bureaucracy used Aramaic, and this practice was subsequently inherited by the succeedingNeo-Babylonian Empire (605–539 BC) and later by theAchaemenid Empire (539–330 BC).[30] Mediated by scribes that had been trained in the language, highly standardized written Aramaic, named by scholarsImperial Aramaic, progressively also became thelingua franca of public life, trade and commerce throughout Achaemenid territories.[31] Wide use of written Aramaic subsequently led to the adoption of the Aramaic alphabet and, aslogograms, some Aramaic vocabulary in thePahlavi scripts, which were used by severalMiddle Iranian languages, includingParthian,Middle Persian,Sogdian, andKhwarezmian.[32]
The connection between Chaldean, Syriac, and Samaritan as "Aramaic" was first identified in 1679 by German theologianJohann Wilhelm Hilliger.[52][53] In 1819–1821Ulrich Friedrich Kopp published hisBilder und Schriften der Vorzeit ("Images and Inscriptions of the Past"), in which he established the basis of thepaleographical development of the Northwest Semitic scripts.[54] Kopp criticisedJean-Jacques Barthélemy and other scholars who had characterized all thethen-known inscriptions and coins as Phoenician, with "everything left to the Phoenicians and nothing to the Arameans, as if they could not have written at all".[55] Kopp noted that some of the words on theCarpentras Stele corresponded to the Aramaic in theBook of Daniel, and in theBook of Ruth.[56]
Josephus andStrabo (the latter citingPosidonius) both stated that the "Syrians" called themselves "Arameans".[57][58][59][60] TheSeptuagint, the earliest extant full copy of the Hebrew Bible, a Greek translation, used the termsSyria andSyrian where theMasoretic Text, the earliest extant Hebrew copy of the Bible, uses the termsAramean andAramaic;[61][62][63] numerous later bibles followed the Septuagint's usage, including theKing James Version.[64] This connection between the names Syrian and Aramaic was discussed in 1835 byÉtienne Marc Quatremère.[65][66]
In historical sources, Aramaic language is designated by two distinctive groups of terms, first of them represented byendonymic (native) names, and the other one represented by variousexonymic (foreign in origin) names. Native (endonymic) terms for Aramaic language were derived from the sameword root as the name of its original speakers, the ancientArameans. Endonymic forms were also adopted in some other languages, like ancientHebrew. In theTorah (Hebrew Bible), "Aram" is used as a proper name of several people including descendants of Shem,[67] Nahor,[68] and Jacob.[69][70] AncientAram, bordering northern Israel and what is now called Syria, is considered the linguistic center of Aramaic, the language of the Arameans who settled the area during theBronze Agec. 3500 BC.
Unlike in Hebrew, designations for Aramaic language in some other ancient languages were mostly exonymic. Inancient Greek, Aramaic language was most commonly known as the "Syrian language",[65] in relation to the native (non-Greek) inhabitants of the historicalregion of Syria. Since thename of Syria itself emerged as a variant of Assyria,[71][72] the biblicalAshur,[73] and Akkadian Ashuru,[74] a complex set ofsemantic phenomena was created, becoming a subject of interest both among ancient writers and modern scholars.
TheKoine Greek wordἙβραϊστί (Hebraïstí) has been translated as "Aramaic" in some versions of the ChristianNew Testament, as Aramaic was at that time the language commonly spoken by theJews.[75][76] However,Ἑβραϊστί is consistently used in Koine Greek at this time to mean Hebrew andΣυριστί (Syristi) is used to mean Aramaic.[77] In Biblical scholarship, the term "Chaldean" was for many years used as a synonym of Aramaic, due to its use in the book of Daniel and subsequent interpretation byJerome.[78]
During the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian Empires,Arameans began to settle in greater numbers inBabylonia, and later in the heartland ofAssyria, also known as the "Arbela triangle" (Assur,Nineveh, andArbela).[79] The influx eventually resulted in the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911–605 BC) adopting anAkkadian-influenced Imperial Aramaic as the lingua franca of its empire.[31] This policy was continued by the short-lived Neo-Babylonian Empire, and both empires became operationally bilingual in written sources, with Aramaic used alongside Akkadian.[80] The Achaemenid Empire (539–323 BC) continued this tradition, and the extensive influence of these empires led to Aramaic gradually becoming the lingua franca of most of western Asia,Anatolia, theCaucasus, andEgypt.[27][29]
Beginning with the rise of theRashidun Caliphate and theearly Muslim conquests in the late seventh century, Arabic gradually replaced Aramaic as the lingua franca of theNear East.[81] However, Aramaic remains a spoken, literary, and liturgical language for local Christians and also some Jews. Aramaic also continues to be spoken by the Assyrians of northern Iraq, northeastern Syria, southeastern Turkey, and northwest Iran, with diaspora communities inArmenia,Georgia,Azerbaijan, and southernRussia. The Mandaeans also continue to use Classical Mandaic as a liturgical language, although most now speak Arabic as their first language.[44] There are still also a small number of first-language speakers of Western Aramaic varieties in isolated villages in western Syria.
Being in contact with other regional languages, some Neo-Aramaic dialects were often engaged in the mutual exchange of influences, particularly with Arabic,[81] Iranian,[82] and Kurdish.[83]
The turbulence of the last two centuries (particularly theAssyrian genocide, also known asSeyfo "Sword" in Syriac, has seen speakers of first-language and literary Aramaic dispersed throughout the world. However, there are several sizable Assyrian towns in northern Iraq, such asAlqosh,Bakhdida,Bartella,Tesqopa, andTel Keppe, and numerous small villages, where Aramaic is still the main spoken language, and many large cities in this region also have Suret-speaking communities, particularlyMosul,Erbil,Kirkuk,Dohuk, andal-Hasakah. In modern Israel, the only native Aramaic-speaking population are theJews of Kurdistan, although the language is dying out.[84] However, Aramaic is also experiencing a revival amongMaronites in Israel inJish.[85]
Aramaic is often spoken of as a single language but is actually a group of related languages.[86] Some languages differ more from each other than theRomance languages do among themselves. Its long history, extensive literature, and use by different religious communities are all factors in the diversification of the language. Some Aramaic dialects are mutually intelligible, whereas others are not, similar to the situation with modernvarieties of Arabic.
Some Aramaic languages are known under different names; for example, Syriac is particularly used to describe the Eastern Aramaic variety spoken bySyriac Christian communities in northern Iraq, southeastern Turkey, northeastern Syria, and northwestern Iran, and the Saint Thomas Christians inKerala, India. Most dialects can be described as either "Eastern" or "Western", the dividing line being roughly theEuphrates, or slightly west of it.
It is also helpful to distinguish modern living languages, or Neo-Aramaics, and those that are still in use as literary or liturgical languages or are only of interest to scholars. Although there are some exceptions to this rule, this classification gives "Old", "Middle", and "Modern" periods alongside "Eastern" and "Western" areas to distinguish between the various languages and dialects that are Aramaic.
The earliest Aramaic alphabet was based on thePhoenician alphabet. In time, Aramaic developed its distinctive "square" style. The ancient Israelites and other peoples ofCanaan adopted this alphabet for writing their own languages. Thus, it is better known as theHebrew alphabet. This is the writing system used inBiblical Aramaic and other Jewish writing in Aramaic. The other main writing system used for Aramaic was developed by Christian communities: a cursive form known as theSyriac alphabet. A highly modified form of the Aramaic alphabet, theMandaic alphabet, is used by theMandaeans.[44]
Periodization of historical development of Aramaic language has been the subject of particular interest for scholars, who proposed several types of periodization, based on linguistic, chronological and territorial criteria. Overlapping terminology, used in different periodizations, led to the creation of severalpolysemic terms, that are used differently among scholars. Terms like: Old Aramaic, Ancient Aramaic, Early Aramaic, Middle Aramaic, Late Aramaic (and some others, like Paleo-Aramaic), were used in various meanings, thus referring (in scope or substance) to different stages in historical development of Aramaic language.[87][88][89]
Most commonly used types of periodization are those of Klaus Beyer and Joseph Fitzmyer.
Aramaic's long history and diverse and widespread use has led to the development of many divergent varieties, which are sometimes considereddialects, though they have become distinct enough over time that they are now sometimes considered separatelanguages. Therefore, there is not one singular, static Aramaic language; each time and place rather has had its own variation. The more widely spokenEastern Aramaic languages are largely restricted toAssyrian,Mandean andMizrahi Jewish communities inIraq, northeasternSyria, northwesternIran, and southeasternTurkey, whilst the severely endangeredWestern Neo-Aramaic language is spoken by small Christian and Muslim communities in theAnti-Lebanon mountains, and closely related western varieties of Aramaic[94] persisted inMount Lebanon until as late as the 17th century.[95]The term "Old Aramaic" is used to describe the varieties of the language from its first known use, until the point roughly marked by the rise of theSasanian Empire (224 AD), dominating the influential, eastern dialect region. As such, the term covers over thirteen centuries of the development of Aramaic. This vast time span includes all Aramaic that is now effectively extinct. Regarding the earliest forms, Beyer suggests that written Aramaic probably dates from the 11th century BC,[96] as it is established by the 10th century, to which he dates the oldest inscriptions of northern Syria. Heinrichs uses the less controversial date of the 9th century,[97] for which there is clear and widespread attestation.
The central phase in the development of Old Aramaic was its official use by theNeo-Assyrian Empire (911–608 BC),Neo-Babylonian Empire (620–539 BC), andAchaemenid Empire (500–330 BC). The period before this, dubbed "Ancient Aramaic", saw the development of the language from being spoken in Aramaean city-states to become a major means of communication in diplomacy and trade throughoutMesopotamia, theLevant, andEgypt. After the fall of the Achaemenid Empire, local vernaculars became increasingly prominent, fanning the divergence of an Aramaicdialect continuum and the development of differing written standards.
"Ancient Aramaic" refers to the earliest known period of the language, from its origin until it becomes the lingua franca of theFertile Crescent. It was the language of the Aramean city-states ofDamascus,Hamath, andArpad.[98]
There are inscriptions that evidence the earliest use of the language, dating from the 10th century BC. These inscriptions are mostly diplomatic documents between Aramaean city-states. The alphabet of Aramaic at this early period seems to be based on thePhoenician alphabet, and there is a unity in the written language. It seems that, in time, a more refined alphabet, suited to the needs of the language, began to develop from this in the eastern regions of Aram. Due to increasing Aramean migration eastward, the Western periphery of Assyria became bilingual in Akkadian and Aramean at least as early as the mid-9th century BC. As theNeo-Assyrian Empire conquered Aramean lands west of theEuphrates,Tiglath-Pileser III made Aramaic the Empire's second official language, and it eventually supplanted Akkadian completely.
From 700 BC, the language began to spread in all directions, but lost much of its unity. Different dialects emerged in Assyria, Babylonia, theLevant andEgypt. Around 600 BC, Adon, aCanaanite king, used Aramaic to write to an EgyptianPharaoh.[99]
Around 500 BC, following theAchaemenid (Persian) conquest of Mesopotamia underDarius I, Aramaic (as had been used in that region) was adopted by the conquerors as the "vehicle for written communication between the different regions of the vast empire with its different peoples and languages. The use of a single official language, which modern scholarship has dubbed Official Aramaic orImperial Aramaic,[100][30][101] can be assumed to have greatly contributed to the astonishing success of the Achaemenids in holding their far-flung empire together for as long as they did".[102] In 1955, Richard Frye questioned the classification of Imperial Aramaic as an "official language", noting that no surviving edict expressly and unambiguously accorded that status to any particular language.[103] Frye reclassifies Imperial Aramaic as the lingua franca of the Achaemenid territories, suggesting then that the Achaemenid-era use of Aramaic was more pervasive than generally thought.
Imperial Aramaic was highly standardised; its orthography was based more on historical roots than any spoken dialect, and the inevitable influence ofPersian gave the language a new clarity and robust flexibility. For centuries after the fall of the Achaemenid Empire (in 330 BC), Imperial Aramaic – or a version thereof near enough for it to be recognisable – would remain an influence on the various nativeIranian languages. Aramaic script and – as ideograms – Aramaic vocabulary would survive as the essential characteristics of thePahlavi scripts.[104]
One of the largest collections of Imperial Aramaic texts is that of thePersepolis Administrative Archives, found atPersepolis, which number about five hundred.[105] Many of the extant documents witnessing to this form of Aramaic come fromEgypt, andElephantine in particular (seeElephantine papyri). Of them, the best known is theStory of Ahikar, a book of instructive aphorisms quite similar in style to the biblicalBook of Proverbs. Consensus as of 2022[update] regards the Aramaic portion of the Biblical book of Daniel (i.e., 2:4b–7:28) as an example of Imperial (Official) Aramaic.[106]
Achaemenid Aramaic is sufficiently uniform that it is often difficult to know where any particular example of the language was written. Only careful examination reveals the occasional loan word from a local language.
A group of thirty Aramaic documents fromBactria have been discovered, and an analysis was published in November 2006. The texts, which were rendered on leather, reflect the use of Aramaic in the 4th century BC Achaemenid administration of Bactria andSogdia.[107]
Jeremiah 10:11 – a single sentence in the middle of a Hebrew text denouncing idolatry.
Genesis[111] – translation of a Hebrew place-name.
Biblical Aramaic is a somewhat hybrid dialect. It is theorized that some Biblical Aramaic material originated in both Babylonia and Judaea before the fall of the Achaemenid dynasty.
Biblical Aramaic presented various challenges for writers who were engaged in earlyBiblical studies. Since the time ofJerome of Stridon (d. 420), Aramaic of theBible was named as "Chaldean" (Chaldaic, Chaldee).[112] That label remained common in earlyAramaic studies, and persisted up into the nineteenth century. The "Chaldean misnomer" was eventually abandoned, when modern scholarly analyses showed that Aramaic dialect used in the Hebrew Bible was not related toancient Chaldeans and their language.[113][114][115]
The fall of theAchaemenid Empire (c. 334–330 BC), and its replacement with the newly created political order, imposed byAlexander the Great (d. 323 BC) and hisHellenistic successors, marked an important turning point in the history of Aramaic language. During the early stages of the post-Achaemenid era, public use of Aramaic language was continued, but shared with the newly introducedGreek language. By the year 300 BC, all of the main Aramaic-speaking regions came under political rule of the newly createdSeleucid Empire that promotedHellenistic culture, and favoredGreek language as the main language of public life and administration. During the 3rd century BC, Greek overtook Aramaic in many spheres of public communication, particularly in highlyHellenized cities throughout the Seleucid domains. However, Aramaic continued to be used, in its post-Achaemenid form, among upper and literate classes of native Aramaic-speaking communities, and also by local authorities (along with the newly introduced Greek). Post-Achaemenid Aramaic, that bears a relatively close resemblance to that of the Achaemenid period, continued to be used up to the 2nd century BC.[116]
By the end of the 2nd century BC, several variants of Post-Achaemenid Aramaic emerged, bearing regional characteristics. One of them was Hasmonaean Aramaic, the official administrative language ofHasmonaean Judaea (142–37 BC), alongsideHebrew, which was the language preferred in religious and some other public uses (coinage). It influenced the Biblical Aramaic of theQumran texts, and was the main language of non-biblical theological texts of that community. The majorTargums, translations of the Hebrew Bible into Aramaic, were originally composed in Hasmonaean Aramaic. It also appears in quotations in theMishnah andTosefta, although smoothed into its later context. It is written quite differently from Achaemenid Aramaic; there is an emphasis on writing as words are pronounced rather than using etymological forms.
The use ofwritten Aramaic in the Achaemenid bureaucracy also precipitated the adoption of Aramaic(-derived) scripts to render a number ofMiddle Iranian languages. Moreover, many common words, including even pronouns, particles, numerals, and auxiliaries, continued to be written as Aramaic "words" even when writing Middle Iranian languages. In time, in Iranian usage, these Aramaic "words" became disassociated from the Aramaic language and came to be understood assigns (i.e.logograms), much like the symbol '&' is read as "and" in English and the original Latinet is now no longer obvious. Under the early 3rd-century BCParthian Arsacids, whose government used Greek but whose native language wasParthian, the Parthian language and its Aramaic-derived writing system both gained prestige. This in turn also led to the adoption of the name 'pahlavi' (<parthawi, "of the Parthians") for that writing system. ThePersian Sassanids, who succeeded the Parthian Arsacids in the mid-3rd century AD, subsequently inherited/adopted the Parthian-mediated Aramaic-derived writing system for their own Middle Iranian ethnolect as well.[117][118] That particular Middle Iranian dialect,Middle Persian, i.e. the language of Persia proper, subsequently also became a prestige language. Following the conquest of the Sassanids by the Arabs in the 7th-century, the Aramaic-derived writing system was replaced by the Arabic alphabet in all butZoroastrian usage, which continued to use the name 'pahlavi' for the Aramaic-derived writing system and went on to create the bulk of all Middle Iranian literature in that writing system.
Other regional dialects continued to exist alongside these, often as simple, spoken variants of Aramaic. Early evidence for thesevernacular dialects is known only through their influence on words and names in a more standard dialect. However, some of those regional dialects became written languages by the 2nd century BC. These dialects reflect a stream of Aramaic that is not directly dependent onAchaemenid Aramaic, and they also show a clear linguistic diversity between eastern and western regions.
BabylonianTargumic is the later post-Achaemenid dialect found in theTargum Onqelos andTargum Jonathan, the "official" targums. The original, Hasmonaean targums had reached Babylon sometime in the 2nd or 3rd century AD. They were then reworked according to the contemporary dialect of Babylon to create the language of the standard targums. This combination formed the basis of Babylonian Jewish literature for centuries to follow.
Galilean Targumic is similar to Babylonian Targumic. It is the mixing of literary Hasmonaean with the dialect ofGalilee. The Hasmonaean targums reached Galilee in the 2nd century AD, and were reworked into this Galilean dialect for local use. The Galilean Targum was not considered an authoritative work by other communities, and documentary evidence shows that its text was amended. From the 11th century AD onwards, once the Babylonian Targum had become normative, the Galilean version became heavily influenced by it.
Babylonian Documentary Aramaic is a dialect in use from the 3rd century AD onwards. It is the dialect of Babylonian private documents, and, from the 12th century, all Jewish private documents are in Aramaic. It is based on Hasmonaean with very few changes. This was perhaps because many of the documents in BDA are legal documents, the language in them had to be sensible throughout the Jewish community from the start, and Hasmonaean was the old standard.
Nabataean Aramaic was the written language of the Arab kingdom of Nabataea, whose capital wasPetra. The kingdom (c. 200 BC – 106 AD) controlled the region to the east of theJordan River, theNegev, theSinai Peninsula, and the northernHijaz, and supported a wide-ranging trade network. The Nabataeans used imperial Aramaic for written communications, rather than their native Arabic. Nabataean Aramaic developed fromImperial Aramaic, with some influence from Arabic: "l" is often turned into "n", and there are some Arabic loanwords. Arabic influence on Nabataean Aramaic increased over time. Some Nabataean Aramaic inscriptions date from the early days of the kingdom, but most datable inscriptions are from the first four centuries AD. The language is written in acursive script that was the precursor to theArabic alphabet. After annexation by the Romans in 106 AD, most of Nabataea was subsumed into the province of Arabia Petraea, the Nabataeans turned to Greek for written communications, and the use of Aramaic declined.
Palmyrene Aramaic is the dialect that was in use in the multicultural[119] city state ofPalmyra in the Syrian Desert from 44 BC to 274 AD. It was written in a rounded script, which later gave way to cursiveEstrangela. Like Nabataean, Palmyrene was influenced by Arabic, but to a much lesser degree.
In the eastern regions (from Mesopotamia to Persia), dialects like Palmyrene Aramaic and Arsacid Aramaic gradually merged with the regional vernacular dialects, thus creating languages with a foot in Achaemenid and a foot in regional Aramaic.
In theKingdom of Osroene, founded in 132 BC and centred inEdessa (Urhay), the regional dialect became the official language: Edessan Aramaic (Urhaya), that later came to be known asClassical Syriac. On the upper reaches of theTigris, East Mesopotamian Aramaic flourished, with evidence from the regions ofHatra andAssur.[120]
The western regional dialects of Aramaic followed a similar course to those of the east. They are quite distinct from the eastern dialects and Imperial Aramaic. Aramaic came to coexist with Canaanite dialects, eventually completely displacingPhoenician in the first century BC andHebrew around the turn of the fourth century AD.
The form of Late Old Western Aramaic used by the Jewish community is best attested, and is usually referred to as Jewish Old Palestinian. Its oldest form is Old East Jordanian, which probably comes from the region ofCaesarea Philippi. This is the dialect of the oldest manuscript of theBook of Enoch (c. 170 BC). The next distinct phase of the language is called Old Judaean lasting into the second century AD. Old Judean literature can be found in various inscriptions and personal letters, preserved quotations in theTalmud and receipts fromQumran.Josephus' first, non-extant edition of hisThe Jewish War was written in Old Judean.
The Old East Jordanian dialect continued to be used into the first century AD by pagan communities living to the east of the Jordan. Their dialect is often then called Pagan Old Palestinian, and it was written in a cursive script somewhat similar to that used for Old Syriac. A Christian Old Palestinian dialect may have arisen from the pagan one, and this dialect may be behind some of the Western Aramaic tendencies found in the otherwise eastern Old Syriac gospels (seePeshitta).
It is generally believed by Christian scholars that in the first century, Jews inJudea primarily spoke Aramaic with a decreasing number usingHebrew as their first language, though many learned Hebrew as a liturgical language. Additionally,Koine Greek was the lingua franca of the Near East in trade, among the Hellenized classes (much like French in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries in Europe), and in the Roman administration.Latin, the language of the Roman army and higher levels of administration, had almost no impact on the linguistic landscape.
In addition to the formal, literary dialects of Aramaic based onHasmonean and Babylonian, there were a number of colloquial Aramaic dialects spoken in the southern Levant. SevenWestern Aramaic varieties were spoken in the vicinity of Judea inJesus' time.[123] They were probably distinctive yet mutually intelligible. Old Judean was the prominent dialect ofJerusalem and Judaea. The region ofEin Gedi spoke the Southeast Judaean dialect.Samaritan Aramaic was distinct; it ultimately merged [ʔ], [h], [ħ], and [ʕ] as aglottal stop, only maintaining [ʕ] in the initial position before the vowel [a]. Galilean Aramaic, the dialect of Jesus' home region, is only known from a few place names, the influences on Galilean Targumic, some rabbinic literature, and a few private letters. It seems to have a number of distinctive features, including the collapse of gutturals and the maintenance ofdiphthongs. In theTransjordan, the various dialects of East Jordanian Aramaic were spoken. In the region ofDamascus and theAnti-Lebanon Mountains, Damascene Aramaic was spoken (deduced mostly from Modern Western Aramaic). Finally, as far north asAleppo, the western dialect of Orontes Aramaic was spoken.
The three languages, especially Hebrew and Aramaic, influenced one another throughloanwords andsemantic loans. Hebrew words entered Jewish Aramaic. Most were mostly technical religious words, but a few were everyday words likeעץʿēṣ "wood". Conversely, Aramaic words, such asmāmmôn "wealth" were borrowed into Hebrew, and Hebrew words acquired additional senses from Aramaic. For instance, Hebrew:ראוי,romanized: rāʾûi,lit. 'seen' borrowed the sense "worthy, seemly" from Aramaicḥzî "seen, worthy".
New Testament Greek preserves some semiticisms, including transliterations ofSemitic words. Some are Aramaic,[124] liketalitha (ταλιθα), which represents the Aramaic nounטליתאṭalīṯā,[125] and others may be either Hebrew or Aramaic likeרבוניRabbounei (Ραββουνει), which means "my master/great one/teacher" in both languages.[126] Other examples:
"Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" (?אלי, אלי, למה שבקתני)[128]
The 2004 filmThe Passion of the Christ used Aramaic for much of its dialogue, specially reconstructed by a scholar,William Fulco, S.J. Where the appropriate words (in first-century Aramaic) were no longer known, he used the Aramaic of Daniel and fourth-century Syriac and Hebrew as the basis for his work.[129]
During the Late Middle Aramaic period, spanning from 300 BCE to 200 CE, Aramaic diverged into its eastern and western branches. During this time, the nature of various Aramaic dialects began to change. The descendants of Imperial Aramaic ceased to be living languages, and the eastern and western regional dialects started to develop significant new literatures. Unlike many dialects of Old Aramaic, much is known about the vocabulary and grammar of Middle Aramaic.[130]
Syriac Aramaic (also "Classical Syriac") is the literary, liturgical, and often spoken language ofSyriac Christianity. It originated in thefirst century in the region ofOsroene, centered inEdessa, but its golden age was the fourth to eighth centuries. This period began with the translation of the Bible into the language: thePeshitta, and the masterful prose and poetry ofEphrem the Syrian. Classical Syriac became the language ofEastern Christianity and missionary activity led to the spread of Syriac from Mesopotamia andPersia, intoCentral Asia,India, andChina.[132][133]
Jewish Middle Babylonian is the language employed by Jewish writers in Babylonia between the fourth and the eleventh century. It is most commonly identified with the language of the BabylonianTalmud (which was completed in the seventh century) and of post-TalmudicGeonic literature, which are the most important cultural products of Babylonian Judaism. The most important epigraphic sources for the dialect are the hundreds ofincantation bowls written in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic.[134]
Classical Mandaic, used as a liturgical language by theMandaeans ofIraq andIran, is a sister dialect to Jewish Babylonian Aramaic, though it is both linguistically and culturally distinct. It is the language in which the Mandaeans'gnosticreligious literature was composed. It is characterized by a highly phonetic orthography and does not make use of vowel diacritics.[43]
TheSamaritan Aramaic is earliest attested by the documentary tradition of theSamaritans that can be dated back to the fourth century. Its modern pronunciation is based on the form used in the tenth century.[15]
Hebrew (left) and Aramaic (right) in parallel in a 1299 Hebrew Bible held by theBodleian Library
In 135, after theBar Kokhba revolt, manyJewish leaders, expelled fromJerusalem, moved toGalilee. The Galilean dialect thus rose from obscurity to become the standard among Jews in the west. This dialect was spoken not only in Galilee, but also in the surrounding parts. It is the linguistic setting for theJerusalem Talmud (completed in the 5th century), Palestiniantargumim (Jewish Aramaic versions of scripture), andmidrashim (biblical commentaries and teaching). The standardvowel pointing for theHebrew Bible, the Tiberian system (7th century), was developed by speakers of the Galilean dialect of Jewish Middle Palestinian. Classical Hebrew vocalisation, therefore, in representing the Hebrew of this period, probably reflects the contemporary pronunciation of this Aramaic dialect.[136]
Middle Judaean Aramaic, the descendant of Old Judaean Aramaic, was no longer the dominant dialect, and was used only in southern Judaea (the variant Engedi dialect continued throughout this period). Likewise, Middle East Jordanian Aramaic continued as a minor dialect from Old East Jordanian Aramaic. The inscriptions in the synagogue atDura-Europos are either in Middle East Jordanian or Middle Judaean.
This was the language of the ChristianMelkite (Chalcedonian) community, predominantly ofJewish descent, inPalestine,Transjordan andSinai[137] from the 5th to the 8th century.[138] As a liturgical language, it was used up to the 13th century. It is also been called "Melkite Aramaic", "Syro-Palestinian" and "Palestinian Syriac".[139] The language itself comes from Old Western Aramaic, but its writing conventions were based on theAramaic dialect ofEdessa, and it was heavily influenced byGreek. For example, the name Jesus, Syriacīšū‘, is writtenīsūs, a transliteration of the Greek form, in Christian Palestinian.[140]
As theWestern Aramaic dialects of theLevant have become nearly extinct in non-liturgical usage, the most prolific speakers of Neo-Aramaic languages in the 21st century areEastern Aramaic speakers, the most numerous being theCentral Neo-Aramaic andNortheastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA) speakers ofMesopotamia. This includes speakers of the Assyrian (235,000 speakers) and Chaldean (216,000 speakers) varieties ofSuret, andTuroyo (112,000 to 450,000 speakers). Having largely lived in remote areas as insulated communities for over a millennium, the remaining speakers of modern Aramaic dialects, such as the Arameans of theQalamoun Mountains,Assyrians,Mandaeans andMizrahi Jews, escaped the linguistic pressures experienced by others during the large-scalelanguage shifts that saw the proliferation of other tongues among those who previously did not speak them, most recently theArabization of the Middle East and North Africa byArabs beginning with theearly Muslim conquests of the seventh century.[81]
Modern Eastern Aramaic exists in a wide variety of dialects and languages.[141] There is significant difference between the Aramaic spoken byAssyrians,Mizrahi Jews, and Mandaeans, with mutually unintelligible variations within each of these groups.
The Christian varieties of Northeastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA) are often called "Assyrian", "Chaldean" or "Eastern Syriac", and are spoken by theAssyrians in northern Iraq, northeast Syria, southeast Turkey, northwest Iran, and in thediaspora. However, they also have roots in numerous previously unwritten local Aramaic varieties and, in some cases, even containAkkadian influences. These varieties are not purely the direct descendants of the language ofEphrem the Syrian, which wasClassical Syriac.[142]
TheJudeo-Aramaic languages are now mostly spoken inIsrael, and most are facing extinction. The Jewish varieties that have come from communities that once lived betweenLake Urmia andMosul are not all mutually intelligible. In some places, for exampleUrmia, Christian Assyrians and Mizrahi Jews speak mutually unintelligible varieties of Northeastern Neo-Aramaic in the same place. In others, theNineveh Plains around Mosul for example, the varieties of these two ethnicities are similar enough to allow conversation.
ModernCentral Neo-Aramaic, being in between Western Neo-Aramaic and Northeastern Neo-Aramaic, is generally represented by Turoyo, the language of the Assyrians/Syriacs ofTur Abdin. A related Neo-Aramaic language,Mlaḥsô, has recently become extinct.[143]
Mandaeans living in theKhuzestan province of Iran and scattered throughout Iraq, speakNeo-Mandaic. It is quite distinct from any other Aramaic variety. Mandaeans number some 50,000–75,000 people, but it is believed Neo-Mandaic may now be spoken fluently by as few as 5,000 people, with other Mandaeans having varying degrees of knowledge.[44]
Very little remains of Western Aramaic. Its only remaining vernacular isWestern Neo-Aramaic, which is still spoken in the Aramean villages ofMaaloula andJubb'adin onSyria's side of theAnti-Lebanon Mountains, as well as by some people who migrated from these villages, toDamascus and other larger towns of Syria.Bakh'a was completely destroyed during theSyrian civil war and all the survivors fled to other parts of Syria or to Lebanon.[144] All these speakers of modern Western Aramaic are fluent in Arabic as well.[95] Other Western Aramaic languages, likeJewish Palestinian Aramaic andSamaritan Aramaic, are preserved only in liturgical and literary usage.
Each dialect of Aramaic has its own distinctive pronunciation, and it would not be feasible here to go into all these properties. Aramaic has a phonological palette of 25 to 40 distinct phonemes. Some modern Aramaic pronunciations lack the series of "emphatic" consonants, and some have borrowed from the inventories of surrounding languages, particularlyArabic,Azerbaijani,Kurdish,Persian, andTurkish.
As with most Semitic languages, Aramaic can be thought of as having three basic sets of vowels:
Opena-vowels
Close fronti-vowels
Close backu-vowels
These vowel groups are relatively stable, but the exact articulation of any individual is most dependent on its consonantal setting.
The open vowel is an open near-front unrounded vowel ("short"a, somewhat like the first vowel in the English "batter",[a]). It usually has a back counterpart ("long"a, like thea in "father",[ɑ], or even tending to the vowel in "caught",[ɔ]), and a front counterpart ("short"e, like the vowel in "head",[ɛ]). There is much correspondence between these vowels between dialects. There is some evidence that Middle Babylonian dialects did not distinguish between the shorta and shorte. In West Syriac dialects, and possibly Middle Galilean, the longa became theo sound. The opene and backa are often indicated in writing by the use of the letters א "alaph" (aglottal stop) or ה "he" (like the Englishh).
The close front vowel is the "long"i (like the vowel in "need",[i]). It has a slightly more open counterpart, the "long"e, as in the final vowel of "café" ([e]). Both of these have shorter counterparts, which tend to be pronounced slightly more open. Thus, the short closee corresponds with the opene in some dialects. The close front vowels usually use the consonant יy as amater lectionis.
The close back vowel is the "long"u (like the vowel in "school",[u]). It has a more open counterpart, the "long"o, like the vowel in "show" ([o]). There are shorter, and thus more open, counterparts to each of these, with the short closeo sometimes corresponding with the long opena. The close back vowels often use the consonant וw to indicate their quality.
Two basicdiphthongs exist: an open vowel followed by יy (ay), and an open vowel followed by וw (aw). These were originally full diphthongs, but many dialects have converted them toe ando respectively.
The so-called "emphatic" consonants (see the next section) cause all vowels to become mid-centralised.
The various alphabets used for writing Aramaic languages have twenty-two letters (all of which are consonants). Some of these letters, though, can stand for two or three different sounds (usually astop and africative at the same point of articulation). Aramaic classically uses a series of lightly contrasted plosives and fricatives:
Labial set:פּ\פp/f andבּ\בb/v,
Dental set:תּ\תt/θ andדּ\דd/ð,
Velar set:כּ\כk/x andגּ\גɡ/ɣ.
Each member of a certain pair is written with the same letter of the alphabet in most writing systems (that is,p andf are written with the same letter), and are nearallophones.
A distinguishing feature of Aramaic phonology (and that of Semitic languages in general) is the presence of "emphatic" consonants. These are consonants that are pronounced with the root of the tongue retracted, with varying degrees ofpharyngealization andvelarization. Using their alphabetic names, these emphatics are:
Ancient Aramaic may have had a larger series of emphatics, and some Neo-Aramaic languages definitely do. Not all dialects of Aramaic give these consonants their historic values.
Overlapping with the set of emphatics are the "guttural" consonants. They include ח Ḥêṯ and ע ʽAyn from the emphatic set, and add א ʼĀlap̄ (aglottal stop) and ה Hê (as the English "h").
Aramaic classically has a set of foursibilants (ancient Aramaic may have had six):
Six broad features of sound change can be seen as dialect differentials:
Vowel change occurs almost too frequently to document fully, but is a major distinctive feature of different dialects.
Plosive/fricative pair reduction. Originally, Aramaic, likeTiberian Hebrew, had fricatives as conditionedallophones for each plosive. In the wake of vowel changes, the distinction eventually became phonemic; still later, it was often lost in certain dialects. For example,Turoyo has mostly lost/p/, using/f/ instead, like Arabic; other dialects (for instance, standardAssyrian Neo-Aramaic) have lost/θ/ and/ð/ and replaced them with/t/ and/d/, as with Modern Hebrew. In most dialects of Modern Syriac,/f/ and/v/ are realized as[w] after a vowel.
Loss of emphatics. Some dialects have replaced emphatic consonants with non-emphatic counterparts, while those spoken in theCaucasus often haveglottalized rather thanpharyngealized emphatics.
Guttural assimilation is the main distinctive feature of Samaritan pronunciation, also found inSamaritan Hebrew: all the gutturals are reduced to a simple glottal stop. Some Modern Aramaic dialects do not pronounceh in all words (the third person masculine pronounhu becomesow).
Proto-Semitic */θ/ */ð/ are reflected in Aramaic as */t/, */d/, whereas they became sibilants in Hebrew (the number three is שלושšālôš in Hebrew but תלתtlāṯ in Aramaic, the word gold is זהב zahav[148] in Hebrew but דהב dehav[149] in Aramaic). Dental/sibilant shifts are still happening in the modern dialects.
New phonetic inventory. Modern dialects have borrowed sounds from the dominant surrounding languages. The most frequent borrowings are[ʒ] (as the first consonant in "azure"),[d͡ʒ] (as in "jam"), and[t͡ʃ] (as in "church"). TheSyriac alphabet has been adapted for writing these new sounds.
As in other Semitic languages, Aramaicmorphology (the way words are formed) is based on the consonantalroot. The root generally consists of two or three consonants and has a basic meaning, for example, כת״בk-t-b has the meaning of 'writing'. This is then modified by the addition of vowels and other consonants to create different nuances of the basic meaning:
Aramaic nouns and adjectives are inflected to showgender,number andstate.
Aramaic has two grammatical genders: masculine and feminine. The feminine absolute singular is often marked by the ending ה--â.
Nouns can be either singular or plural, but an additional "dual" number exists for nouns that usually come in pairs. The dual number gradually disappeared from Aramaic over time and has little influence in Middle and Modern Aramaic.
Aramaic nouns and adjectives can exist in one of three states. To a certain extent, these states correspond to the role of articles and cases in theIndo-European languages:
Theabsolute state is the basic form of a noun. In early forms of Aramaic, the absolute state expresses indefiniteness, comparable to the English indefinite article a(n) (for example, כתבהkṯāḇâ, "a handwriting"), and can be used in most syntactic roles. However, by the Middle Aramaic period, its use for nouns (but not adjectives) had been widely replaced by the emphatic state.
Theconstruct state is a form of the noun used to make possessive constructions (for example,כתבת מלכתאkṯāḇat malkṯâ, "the handwriting of the queen"). In the masculine singular, the form of the construct is often the same as the absolute, but it may undergo vowel reduction in longer words. The feminine construct and masculine construct plural are marked by suffixes. Unlike agenitive case, which marks the possessor, the construct state is marked on the possessed. This is mainly due to Aramaic word order:possessed[const.] possessor[abs./emph.] are treated as a speech unit, with the first unit (possessed) employing the construct state to link it to the following word. In Middle Aramaic, the use of the construct state for all but stock phrases (like בר נשאbar nāšâ, "son of man") begins to disappear.
Theemphatic ordetermined state is an extended form of the noun that functions similarly to thedefinite article. It is marked with a suffix (for example, כתבתאkṯāḇtâ, "the handwriting"). Although its original grammatical function seems to have been to mark definiteness, it is used already in Imperial Aramaic to mark all important nouns, even if they should be considered technically indefinite. This practice developed to the extent that the absolute state became extraordinarily rare in later varieties of Aramaic.
Whereas otherNorthwest Semitic languages, like Hebrew, have the absolute and construct states, the emphatic/determined state is a unique feature to Aramaic.Case endings, as inUgaritic, probably existed in a very early stage of the language, and glimpses of them can be seen in a few compound proper names. However, as most of those cases were expressed by short final vowels, they were never written, and the few characteristic long vowels of the masculine plural accusative and genitive are not clearly evidenced in inscriptions. Often, thedirect object is marked by a prefixed -לl- (thepreposition "to") if it is definite.
Adjectives agree with their nouns in number and gender but agree in state only if used attributively. Predicative adjectives are in the absolute state regardless of the state of their noun (acopula may or may not be written). Thus, an attributive adjective to an emphatic noun, as in the phrase "the good king", is written also in the emphatic state מלכא טבאmalkâ ṭāḇâ – king[emph.] good[emph.]. In comparison, the predicative adjective, as in the phrase "the king is good", is written in the absolute state מלכא טבmalkâ ṭāḇ – king[emph.] good[abs.].
"good"
masc. sg.
fem. sg.
masc. pl.
fem. pl.
abs.
טב ṭāḇ
טבה ṭāḇâ
טבין ṭāḇîn
טבן ṭāḇān
const.
טבת ṭāḇaṯ
טבי ṭāḇê
טבת ṭāḇāṯ
det./emph.
טבא ṭāḇâ
טבתא ṭāḇtâ
טביא ṭāḇayyâ
טבתא ṭāḇāṯâ
The final א--â in a number of these suffixes is written with the letteraleph. However, some Jewish Aramaic texts employ the letterhe for the feminine absolute singular. Likewise, some Jewish Aramaic texts employ the Hebrew masculine absolute singular suffix ים--îm instead of ין--în. The masculine determined plural suffix, יא--ayyâ, has an alternative version,-ê. The alternative is sometimes called the "gentilic plural" for its prominent use in ethnonyms (יהודיאyəhûḏāyê, 'the Jews', for example). This alternative plural is written with the letteraleph, and came to be the only plural for nouns and adjectives of this type in Syriac and some other varieties of Aramaic. The masculine construct plural,-ê, is written withyodh. In Syriac and some other variants this ending isdiphthongized to-ai.
Possessive phrases in Aramaic can either be made with the construct state or by linking two nouns with the relative particle -[ד[יd[î]-. As the use of the construct state almost disappears from the Middle Aramaic period on, the latter method became the main way of making possessive phrases.
For example, the various forms of possessive phrases (for "the handwriting of the queen") are:
כתבת מלכתאkṯāḇaṯ malkṯâ – the oldest construction, also known as סמיכות səmîḵûṯ : the possessed object (כתבה kṯābâ, "handwriting") is in the construct state (כתבת kṯāḇaṯ); the possessor (מלכה malkâ, "queen") is in the emphatic state (מלכתא malkṯâ)
כתבתא דמלכתאkṯāḇtâ d(î)-malkṯâ – both words are in the emphatic state and the relative particle -[ד[יd[î]- is used to mark the relationship
כתבתה דמלכתאkṯāḇtāh d(î)-malkṯâ – both words are in the emphatic state, and the relative particle is used, but the possessed is given an anticipatory, pronominal ending (כתבתה kṯāḇtā-h, "handwriting-her"; literally, "her writing, that (of) the queen").
In Modern Aramaic, the last form is by far the most common. In Biblical Aramaic, the last form is virtually absent.
The Aramaic verb has gradually evolved in time and place, varying between varieties of the language. Verb forms are marked forperson (first, second or third),number (singular or plural),gender (masculine or feminine),tense (perfect or imperfect),mood (indicative, imperative, jussive, or infinitive), andvoice (active, reflexive, or passive). Aramaic also employs a system ofconjugations, or verbal stems, to mark intensive and extensive developments in the lexical meaning of verbs.
Aramaic has two propertenses:perfect andimperfect. These were originallyaspectual, but developed into something more like apreterite andfuture. The perfect isunmarked, while the imperfect uses variouspreformatives that vary according to person, number and gender. In both tenses the third-person singular masculine is the unmarked form from which others are derived by addition ofafformatives (and preformatives in the imperfect). In the chart below (on the root כת״ב K-T-B, meaning "to write"), the first form given is the usual form in Imperial Aramaic, while the second isClassical Syriac.
Like other Semitic languages, Aramaic employs a number ofderived verb stems, to extend the lexical coverage of verbs. The basic form of the verb is called theground stem, orG-stem. Following the tradition of mediaeval Arabic grammarians, it is more often called the Pə‘al פעל (also written Pe‘al), using the form of theSemitic root פע״ל P-‘-L, meaning "to do". This stem carries the basic lexical meaning of the verb.
By doubling of the second radical, or root letter, the D-stem or פעל Pa‘‘el is formed. This is often an intensive development of the basic lexical meaning. For example,qəṭal means "he killed", whereasqaṭṭel means "he slew". The precise relationship in meaning between the two stems differs for every verb.
Apreformative, which can be -הha-, -אa-, or -שša-, creates the C-stem or variously the Hap̄‘el, Ap̄‘el or Šap̄‘el (also spelt הפעל Haph‘el, אפעל Aph‘el, and שפעל Shaph‘el). This is often an extensive or causative development of the basic lexical meaning. For example, טעהṭə‘â means "he went astray", whereas אטעיaṭ‘î means "he deceived". The Šap̄‘el שפעל is the least common variant of the C-stem. Because this variant is standard in Akkadian, it is possible that its use in Aramaic represents loanwords from that language. The difference between the variants הפעל Hap̄‘el and אפעל Ap̄‘el appears to be the gradual dropping of the initial הh sound in later Old Aramaic. This is noted by the respelling of the olderhe preformative with אaleph.
These three conjugations are supplemented with three further derived stems, produced by the preformative -התhiṯ- or -אתeṯ-. The loss of the initial הh sound occurs similarly to that in the form above. These three derived stems are the Gt-stem, התפעל Hiṯpə‘el or אתפעל Eṯpə‘el (also written Hithpe‘el or Ethpe‘el), the Dt-stem, התפעּל Hiṯpa‘‘al or אתפעּל Eṯpa‘‘al (also written Hithpa‘‘al or Ethpa‘‘al), and the Ct-stem, התהפעל Hiṯhap̄‘al, אתּפעל Ettap̄‘al, השתפעל Hištap̄‘al or אשתפעל Eštap̄‘al (also written Hithhaph‘al, Ettaph‘al, Hishtaph‘al, or Eshtaph‘al). Their meaning is usuallyreflexive, but later becamepassive. However, as with other stems, actual meaning differs from verb to verb.
Not all verbs use all of these conjugations, and, in some, the G-stem is not used. In the chart below (on the root כת״ב K-T-B, meaning "to write"), the first form given is the usual form in Imperial Aramaic, while the second isClassical Syriac.
Stem
Perfect active
Imperfect active
Perfect passive
Imperfect passive
פעל Pə‘al (G-stem)
כתב kəṯaḇ ↔ kəṯaḇ
יכתב ↔ נכתב yiḵtuḇ ↔ neḵtoḇ
כתיב kəṯîḇ
התפעל\אתפעל Hiṯpə‘ēl/Eṯpə‘el (Gt-stem)
התכתב ↔ אתכתב hiṯkəṯēḇ ↔ eṯkəṯeḇ
יתכתב ↔ נתכתב yiṯkəṯēḇ ↔ neṯkəṯeḇ
פעּל Pa‘‘ēl/Pa‘‘el (D-stem)
כתּב kattēḇ ↔ katteḇ
יכתּב ↔ נכתּב yəḵattēḇ ↔ nəkatteḇ
כֻתּב kuttaḇ
התפעל\אתפעל Hiṯpa‘‘al/Eṯpa‘‘al (Dt-stem)
התכתּב ↔ אתכתּב hiṯkəttēḇ ↔ eṯkətteḇ
יתכתּב ↔ נתכתּב yiṯkəttēḇ ↔ neṯkətteḇ
הפעל\אפעל Hap̄‘ēl/Ap̄‘el (C-stem)
הכתב ↔ אכתב haḵtēḇ ↔ aḵteḇ
יהכתב↔ נכתב yəhaḵtēḇ ↔ naḵteḇ
הֻכתב huḵtaḇ
התהפעל\אתּפעל Hiṯhap̄‘al/Ettap̄‘al (Ct-stem)
התהכתב ↔ אתּכתב hiṯhaḵtaḇ ↔ ettaḵtaḇ
יתהכתב ↔ נתּכתב yiṯhaḵtaḇ ↔ nettaḵtaḇ
In Imperial Aramaic, theparticiple began to be used for ahistorical present. Perhaps under influence from other languages, Middle Aramaic developed a system of composite tenses (combinations of forms of the verb with pronouns or anauxiliary verb), allowing for narrative that is more vivid. Aramaicsyntax usually follows the order verb–subject–object (VSO). Imperial (Persian) Aramaic, however, tended to follow a S-O-V pattern (similar to Akkadian), which was the result of Persian syntactic influence.
^Kozah, Mario;Abu-Husayn, Abdulrahim; Al-Murikhi, Saif Shaheen; Al Thani, Haya (9 December 2014).The Syriac Writers of Qatar in the Seventh Century. Gorgias Press. p. 298.ISBN9781463236649.The Syriac writers of Qatar themselves produced some of the best and most sophisticated writing to be found in all Syriac literature of the seventh century, but they have not received the scholarly attention that they deserve in the last half century. This volume seeks to redress this underdevelopment by setting the standard for further research in the sub-field of Beth Qatraye studies.
^Huehnergard, J., "What is Aramaic?." Aram 7 (1995): 281
^Thompson, Andrew David (31 October 2019).Christianity in Oman. Springer. p. 49.ISBN9783030303983.The Persian location and character of the Metropolitan proved to be a source of friction between the Syriac-speaking Christians ofBeth Qatraye who naturally looked to their co-linguists back in Mesopotamia.
^Raheb, Mitri; Lamport, Mark A. (15 December 2020).The Rowman & Littlefield Handbook of Christianity in the Middle East. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 134.ISBN9781538124185.He was born in the region of Beth Qatraye in Eastern Arabia, a mixed Syriac- and Arabic Speaking region...
^Huehnergard, John;Rubin, Aaron D. (2011). "Phyla and Waves: Models of Classification of the Semitic Languages". In Weninger, Stefan (ed.).The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. pp. 259–278.ISBN978-3-11-018613-0.
^Gzella 2021, pp. 4–5: "The overarching concept of Aramaic, strictly a historical-linguistic abstraction, is made more concrete by various terms for the various Aramaic languages (or dialects, where we are mainly dealing with regional vernaculars without a written tradition; the neutral term variety includes both categories). ... Or scholars use the same terms to refer to different historical periods, as with "Old Aramaic" or "Imperial Aramaic." Others still are just misleading, such as "Modern Syriac" for the modern spoken languages, which do not directly descend from Syriac. When discussing what a certain word or phrase is "in Aramaic" then, we always have to specify which period, region, or culture is meant unlike Classical Latin, for instance. ... For the most part, Aramaic is thus studied as a crucial but subservient element in several well-established, mainly philological and historical disciplines and social sciences. Even in the academic world, only few people see any inherent value that transcends the disciplinary boundaries in this language family."[excessive quote]
^Van Rompay, Lucas (2011)."Aramaic". In Brock, Sebastian P.; Butts, Aaron M.; Kiraz, George A.; Van Rompay, Lucas (eds.).Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage (Electronic Edition, Beth Mardutho, 2018 ed.). Gorgias Press.ISBN978-1-59333-714-8.Aramaic itself consists of a great number of language forms (and indeed languages), spoken and written in many different scripts over a period of 3000 years.
^Aufrecht 2001, p. 145, "The Aramaic Language originated in ancient Syria at the end of the Late Bronze Age (c. 1500–1200 B.C.), is one of the oldest continually spoken languages in the world.".
Schami, Rafik (25 July 2011).Märchen aus Malula (in German). Carl Hanser. p. 151.ISBN9783446239005.Ich kenne das Dorf nicht, doch gehört habe ich davon. Was ist mit Malula?‹ fragte der festgehaltene Derwisch. >Das letzte Dorf der Aramäer< lachte einer der…
Matras, Yaron; Sakel, Jeanette (2007).Grammatical Borrowing in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. De Gruyter. p. 185.doi:10.1515/9783110199192.ISBN9783110199192.The fact that nearly all Arabic loans in Ma'lula originate from the period before the change from the rural dialect to the city dialect of Damascus shows that the contact between the Aramaeans and the Arabs was intimate…
Arnold, Werner; Behnstedt, P. (1993).Arabisch-aramäische Sprachbeziehungen im Qalamūn (Syrien) (in German). Harassowitz. p. 42.ISBN9783447033268.Die arabischen Dialekte der Aramäer
Arnold, Werner; Behnstedt, P. (1993).Arabisch-aramäische Sprachbeziehungen im Qalamūn (Syrien) (in German). Harassowitz. p. 5.ISBN9783447033268.Die Kontakte zwischen den drei Aramäer-dörfern sind nicht besonders stark.
Arnold, Werner (2006).Lehrbuch des Neuwestaramäischen (in German). Harrassowitz. p. 133.ISBN9783447053136.Aramäern in Ma'lūla
Arnold, Werner (2006).Lehrbuch des Neuwestaramäischen (in German). Harrassowitz. p. 15.ISBN9783447053136.Viele Aramäer arbeiten heute in Damaskus, Beirut oder in den Golfstaaten und verbringen nur die Sommermonate im Dorf.
^Gzella 2021, p. 222: "Despite their divergent creeds and confessional affiliations, they retained their own West or East Syriac ritual prayers and liturgical formulae; on the one hand, there are the West Syriac Orthodox and Syriac Catholics...and also to a lesser degree the similarly Catholic Maronites (where Arabic is increasingly taking over the function of Syriac); one the other hand, there is the Assyrian "Church of the East," which stems from the East Syriac tradition, and...the Chaldean Catholic Church. Additionally, some of the many Christian churches of India belong to the Syriac tradition."
^Myers, Allen C., ed. (1987). "Aramaic".The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans. p. 72.ISBN0-8028-2402-1.It is generally agreed that Aramaic was the common language of Israel in the first century AD. Jesus and his disciples spoke the Galilean dialect, which was distinguished from that of Jerusalem (Matt. 26:73)
^"Aramaic language".Encyclopædia Britannica. 10 April 2024. Retrieved10 May 2024.
^"Did you know".Surayt-Aramaic Online Project. Free University of Berlin.
^Duntsov, Alexey; Häberl, Charles; Loesov, Sergey (2022). "A Modern Western Aramaic Account of the Syrian Civil War".WORD.68 (4):359–394.doi:10.1080/00437956.2022.2084663.
^Schmidt, Nathaniel (1923). "Early Oriental Studies in Europe and the Work of the American Oriental Society, 1842–1922".Journal of the American Oriental Society.43:1–14.doi:10.2307/593293.JSTOR593293.Hilliger first saw clearly the relation of the so-called Chaldee, Syriac, and Samaritan (1679)
^Lemaire, André (2021-05-25)."A History of Northwest Semitic Epigraphy".An Eye for Form. Penn State University Press. p. 5.doi:10.1515/9781575068879-007 (inactive 1 November 2024).ISBN9781575068879. Retrieved2022-10-05 – via De Gruyter.In his Bilder und Schriften der Vorzeit, Ulrich Friedrich Kopp (1819–21) established the basis of the paleographical development of the Northwest Semitic scripts...{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of November 2024 (link)
^Kopp 1821, p. 226-227 (§168–169): "Irre ich nicht, so hat man die Benennung "phönicische Schrift" bisher etwas zu freygebig gebraucht, den Phöniciern alles gegeben, und den Aramäern nichts gelassen, gleichsam, als ob diese gar nicht hätten schreiben können, oder doch von ihnen nicht ein einziges Denkmal aus ältern Zeiten sich sollte erhalten haben. Selbst Schriften, in welchen sich die aramäische Mund-Art gar nicht verkennen läßt, nennen die Orientalisten phönicisch (§. 195), bloß weil sie noch nicht geahndet haben, daß eine Verschiedenheit vorhanden seyn könne. Ein Haupt-Unterscheidungs-Zeichen – So weit man, ohne auch dasjenige gesehen zu haben, was etwa noch entdeckt werden könnte, vorjetzt durch bloße Induction schließen kann – scheint in den Buchstaben ב, ד, ע und ר zu liegen. Denn so viele phönicische Denkmäler ich auch betrachtet habe; so sind mir doch in keinem einzigen ächt phönicischen diejenigen Gestalten vorgekommen, welche sich oben öffnen (§. 100). Nur bey dem einzigen ע finden sich, wie ich schon erinnert habe, jedoch höchst seltene Ausnahmen, die zuweilen bloß von der Uebereilung des Schreibers herrühren (z.B. im ersten ע der oxforder Inschrift (B.I. S.207). Wir haben sogar oben (§. 159) gesehen, daß selbst noch 153 Jahre nach Christi Geburt, als schon die Schrift in Phönicien sehr ausgeartet war, und in dem ganzen Zeit-Raume vorher, nie ד und ר mit von oben geöffneten Köpfen erscheinen. Dagegen haben diejenigen Denkmäler, auf welchen man sie antrifft, wie ich glaube, auch keinen Anspruch an Pönicier, als Urheber. §. 169 Unter solche gehört vor allen die Inschrift von Carpentras, welche ich hier um so lieber vornehme, als ihre Aechtheit über allen Zweifel erhoben ist... §. 195 Die Schrift darauf nannte man ehemals ägyptisch, welches freylich, weder in Vergleichung mit der ägyptischen Buchstaben-Schrift eine angemessene Benennung, noch der Sprache wegen eine zu wagende Vermuthung war. Schwerlich richtig ist aber auch die bey neuern Gelehrten (Gessenii Gesch. d. hebr. Spr. 139. Bibl. der alt. Literat. VI. 18. Hammer Fund-Grub. V. 277 °°) aufgekommene Benennung "Phönicisch". Ja Hartmann (II. II. 540) nennt sogar unmittelbar nach der ersten malteser diese "eine andere phönicische Inschrift". Schon die Mund-Art, welche nicht phönicisch, sondern aramäisch ist, würde uns vermuthen lassen, daß die Schrift den Aramäern ebenfalls gehöre; wenn nicht in dieser sich zugleich auch Merkmale einer Verschiedenheit von der phönicischen zeigten (s. oben §. 100. 168). Ich habe daher mit gutem Vorbedachte unser Denkmal von Carpentras aus meiner kleinen Sammlung phönicischer Inschriften (B. I. 195) ausgeschlossen. §. 196 Es scheint, als ob zur Zeit des oben (§. 193) mitgetheilten babylonischen Denkmals Aramäer und Phönicier eine und dieselbe Schrift gehabt hätten. Gegen 300 Sahre vor unserer Zeit-Rechnung war aber meiner Vermuthung nach schon eine Trennung eingetreten. Ich sage Vermuthung: denn mein Schluß gründet sich nur auf die einseitige Auslegung folgender Münze, bey welcher man mir vielleicht mehr als einen Einwurf zu machen im Stande ist.."
^Kopp 1821, p. S. 182–185: "Es gehört nicht viel dazu, um einzusehen, daß die Mund-Art, welche in dieser Inschrift herrscht, aramäisch sey. Schon de Wörter עבדת קדם ,ברת ,אמרת, u. s . w. verrathen sie. Allein rein Chaldäisch kann man sie nicht nennen; man müßte denn mit O. G. Tychsen zu manchen Vorausseßungen und Uenderungen seine Zuflucht nehmen wollen. [ ] ist nimmermehr chaldäisch; sondern entweder äthiopisch hic, hoc loco, oder das hebräische Demonstrativum. Denn man bemerkt auch ben [ ] die Orthographie, nach welcher [ ] statt [ ] gefegt wird. Ich war einmal in Versuchung das Relativum der Zabier darinnen sinden zu wollen, weil ich [ ] wirklich gedruckt fand. Als ich aber die Handschrift selbst verglich, say' ich bald, daß es ein Druckfehler, statt [ ], war… [ ]. Oyngeachtet die Endigung nicht gewöhnlich im Chaldäischen ist, so findet sich doch in der Ueberseßung des Buches Ruth (III. 10) dieses Wort grade so geschrieben. [ ] Daß dieses Zeit-Wort hier nicht perfectus fuit, wie gewöhnlich, heißen könne, lehrt der Zusammenhang. Es hat aber auch transitive Bedeutung, wie die Wörter-Bücher lehren (Simonis und Gesenius n. 2) und auch das arabische [ ] tamam wird für perfecit, complevit gebraucht. Ich habe mir daher um so weniger ein Gewissen daraus gemacht, ihm die transitive Bedeutung hier beyzulegen, als in dieser Anschrift, in welcher [ ], [ ] und dergleichen an keine Regeln gebundene Wörter vorkommen, es eine Recheit reyn würde, den Sprach-Gebrauch vorschreiben zu wollen. Daß übrigens in [ ] das [ ] für [ ] stehe, siehet man selbst aus dem Chaldäischen der Bibel (Dan. IV. 15. V. 8)."
^Josephus,Antiquities of the Jews, 1.144: "Aram had the Aramites, which the Greeks called Syrians" (Greek:Ἀραμαίους δὲ Ἄραμος ἔσχεν, οὓς Ἕλληνες Σύρους προσαγορεύουσιν
^Strabo,Geographica, 1.2.34: "But it would seem that the view of Poseidonius is best, for here he derives an etymology of the words from the kinship of the peoples and their common characteristics. For the nation of the Armenians and that of the Syrians and Arabians betray a close affinity, not only in their language, but in their mode of life and in their bodily build, and particularly wherever they live as close neighbours. Mesopotamia, which is inhabited by these three nations, gives proof of this, for in the case of these nations the similarity is particularly noticeable. And if, comparing the differences of latitude, there does exist a greater difference between the northern and the southern people of Mesopotamia than between these two peoples and the Syrians in the centre, still the common characteristics prevail. And, too, the Assyrians, the Arians, and the Aramaeans display a certain likeness both to those just mentioned and to each other. Indeed, Poseidonius conjectures that the names of these nations also are akin; for, says he, the people whom we call Syrians are by the Syrians themselves called Arimaeans and Arammaeans; and there is a resemblance between this name and those of the Armenians, the Arabians and the Erembians, since perhaps the ancient Greeks gave the name of Erembians to the Arabians, and since the very etymology of the word "Erembian" contributes to this result".
^Strabo,Geographica, 16.4.27: "Poseidonius says that the Arabians consist of three tribes, that they are situated in succession, one after another, and that this indicates that they are homogeneous with one another, and that for this reason they were called by similar names – one tribe "Armenians," another "Arameans," and another "Arambians." And just as one may suppose that the Arabians were divided into three tribes, according to the differences in the latitudes, which ever vary more and more, so also one may suppose that they used several names instead of one. Neither are those who write "Eremni" plausible; for that name is more peculiarly applicable to the Aethiopians. The poet also mentions "Arimi,"by which, according to Poseidonius, we should interpret the poet as meaning, not some place in Syria or in Cilicia or in some other land, but Syria itself; for the people in Syria are Arameans, though perhaps the Greeks called them Arimaeans or Arimi".
^Joseph, John (2000).The Modern Assyrians of the Middle East: A History of Their Encounter with Western Christian Missions, Archaeologists, and Colonial Powers. Brill. pp. 9–10.ISBN9004116419.The designations Syria and Syrian were derived from Greek usage long before Christianity. When the Greeks became better acquainted with the Near East, especially after Alexander the Great overthrew the Achaemenian empire in the 4th century B.C., they restricted the name Syria to the lands west of the Euphrates. During the 3rd century B.C., when the Hebrew Bible was translated by Jewish scholars into the Greek Septuagint for the use of the Hellenized Jews of Alexandria, the terms for 'Aramean' and 'Aramaic' in the Hebrew Bible, were translated into 'Syrian' and 'the Syrian tongue' respectively. [Footnote: "The Authorized Version of the Bible continued to use the same terms that the Septuagint had adopted. In 1970, the New English Bible, published by Oxford and Cambridge University presses, and translated by biblical scholars drawn from various British universities, went back to the original Hebrew terms, using Aram and Arameans for Syria and Syrians respectively."] In Palestine itself, according to Noldeke, the Jews and later the Christians there referred to their dialect of Aramaic as Syriac; in Babylon, both Greeks and Persians called the Arameans Syrians. The second-century B.C. Greek historian Posidonius, a native of Syria, noted that 'the people we [Greeks] call Syrians were called by the Syrians themselves Arameans….for the people in Syria are Arameans'."
^abNöldeke, 1871, p. 115: "Die Griechen haben den Namen "Aramäer" nie eigentlich gekannt; ausser Posidonius (dem Strabo folgt) nennt ihn uns nur noch ein andrer Orientale, Josephus (Ant. 1, 6, 4). Dass Homer bei den 'Ερεμβοι oder in den Worten eiv 'Αρίμοις an sie dächte, ist sehr unwahrscheinlich. Die Griechen nannten das Volk "Syrer"".
^Quatremère, Étienne Marc (1835)."Mémoire Sur Les Nabatéens".Journal asiatique (in French). Société asiatique:122–27.Les livres du Nouveau Testament furent immédiatement traduits dans fa langue du pays. Or ces livres étaient écrits dans la langue des Grecs, et offraient par conséquent les expressions et les dénominations en usage chez'ce peuple. Or les noms de Syrie, de Syriens se trouvaient souvent employés dans les livres fondamentaux du christianisme. Les habitants des pays situés entre la Méditerranée et l'Euphrate, se voyant désignés par une dénomination qui leur était étrangère, mais qui se trouvait en quelque sorte consacrée par l'autorité des livres qu'ils vénéraient à tant de titres, ne crurent pas sans doute pouvoir rejeter ce nom, et l'adoptèrent sans répugnance. Ils se persuadèrent que, régénérés par un nouveau culte, ils devaient sous tous les rapports devenir un peuple nouveau et abjurer leur nom antique, qui semblait leur rappeler l'idolâtrie à laquelle le christianisme venait de les arracher. Cette conjecture est, si je ne me trompe, confirmée par un fait que je crois décisif. Dans la langue syriaque ecclésiastique, le mot armoïo, ܐܪܡܝܐ, qui ne diffère du nom ancien, ormoïo, ܐܪܡܝܐ, que par une seule voyelle, désigne un païen, un idolâtre. Ainsi s'intrôduisit le nom de Sourioïo, Syrien. Quant à la dénomination Orom, Aram, ou le pays des Araméens, elle fut appliquée de préférence à la contrée que les Grecs et les Latins appelaient Assyrie.
^Kautzsch, Emil Friedrich (1884). "The Aramaic Language".Hebraica.1 (2):98–115.doi:10.1086/368803.JSTOR527111.The author of Daniel uses the word as a title for the members of the Babylonian guild of priests, as already Herodotus regards oi Xardalot as a designation of the priests of Baal, and the name was subsequently the customary one for the Magians, Astrologers, Soothsayers, etc., of the East. Jerome, however, and those who followed him, confused therewith the use of o'yu, as name of the people; and since, in Dan. II., 4, the "Chaldeans" speak Aramaic, so "Chaldaic" and "Aramaic" were held to be identical. And the matter has stood thus in the "Chaldee grammars" and the "Hebrew and Chaldee lexicons," in spite of all protests,3 up to this day. [Footnote 3: Cf. already Schloezer in Eichhorn's Repertorium, viii. (1781), p. 118 sq.; the correct distinction of East-Aramaic (Syriac) and West-Aramaic (Biblical Aramaic and the language of the Targums) was expressly drawn again by Geiger ZDMG, xviii., 654, and Noeldeke, ibid. xxi., 183 sq,, and particularly xxv., 113 sq. (die Namen der aram. Nation und Sprache.)]
^"Central Assyria, the lands between Assur, Nineveh and Arbela".Assyrian empire builders. 2011-02-02. Archived fromthe original on 2 February 2011.The heartland of Assyria is demarcated by the city of Assur (modern Qala'at Sherqat) in the south, by Nineveh (modern Mosul with the ruin mounds Kuyunjik and Nebi Yunus) in the north and by Arbela (modern Erbil) in the east.
^Kutscher, Eduard (2007). "Aramaic". In Berenbaum, Michael; Skolnik, Fred (eds.).Encyclopaedia Judaica. Vol. 2 (2nd ed.). Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA. p. 342.ISBN978-0-02-865928-2.
^Shaked, Saul (1987)."Aramaic".Encyclopædia Iranica. Vol. 2. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul. pp. 251–52. Retrieved10 October 2018.
^Frye, Richard N.; Driver, G. R. (1955). "Review of G. R. Driver's 'Aramaic Documents of the Fifth Century B. C.'".Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies.18 (3/4): 457.doi:10.2307/2718444.JSTOR2718444.
^Geiger, Wilhelm; Kuhn, Ernst (25 March 2002).Grundriss der iranischen Philologie: Band I. Abteilung 1 [Outline of the Iranian Philology: Volume 1. Division 1.] (in German). Boston: Adamant Media Corporation. p. 249.ISBN978-1421246864.
^Häberl, Charles G. (February 2006). "Iranian Scripts for Aramaic Languages: The Origin of the Mandaic Script".Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research (341):53–62.doi:10.7282/T37D2SGZ.JSTOR25066933.
^Allen C. Myers, ed. (1987). "Aramaic".The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans. p. 72.ISBN0-8028-2402-1.It is generally agreed that Aramaic was the common language of Israel in the first century AD. Jesus and his disciples spoke the Galilean dialect, which was distinguished from that of Jerusalem (Matt. 26:73)
^McNamara, Martin (2011).Targum and New Testament. Mohr Siebeck. p. 186.ISBN9783161508363.a) Old Aramaic from the beginning (through Biblical Aramaic, Nabataean, Palmyrene) down to the established eastern and western branches; b) Middle Aramaic, with two branches, eastern and western; c) Late Aramaic, with the contemporary western (Ma'alula) and eastern branches. This older terminology is still followed by M. Sokoloff in his recent work, A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine Period.'1 A different division, now widely accepted, has been put forward by J. A. Fitzmyer.2 It is as follows: a) Old Aramaic, up to 700 B.C.E.; b) Official Aramaic, 700-300 .c.E.; c) Middle Aramaic, 300 ..E.-200 c.E.; d) Late Aramaic (= Middle Aramaic of Rosenthal's division), with two branches: the eastern branch consisting of Syriac, Mandaic, the Aramaic of the Talmud Babli, the Gaonic Literature and incantation texts found mainly in Nippur; and the western, consisting of Samaritan Aramaic, Christian Palestinian Aramaic, Galilean Aramaic (which some, for example Sokoloff, prefer to call Jewish Palestinian Aramaic) found in the Aramaic portions of the Palestinian Talmud and haggadic midrashim and other sources; e) Modern Aramaic (in its eastern and western [Ma'alula] dialects).
^Reynolds, Gabriel Said (28 September 2007).The Qur'an in Its Historical Context. Routledge. p. 59.ISBN9781134109456.…. Palestinian Aramaic also began to be written for the first time (Coptic was written in an adapted Greek script and Palestinian Aramaic in a modified Estrangelo….
^Arabic in Context. Brill. 6 June 2017. p. 338.ISBN9789004343047.For the Aramaic-speaking Christian communities of Sinai, Palestine or Trans-Jordan, Christian Palestinian Aramaic was the dominant language in local churches; for Syria and Mesopotamia, it was rather Syriac.…
^Arman Akopian (11 December 2017). "Other branches of Syriac Christianity: Melkites and Maronites".Introduction to Aramean and Syriac Studies. Gorgias Press. p. 573.ISBN9781463238933.The main center of Aramaic-speaking Melkites was Palestine. During the 5th-6th centuries, they were engaged in literary, mainly translation work in the local Western Aramaic dialect, known as "Palestinian Christian Aramaic", using a script closely resembling the cursive Estrangela of Osrhoene. Palestinian Melkites were mostly Jewish converts to Christianity, who had a long tradition of using Palestinian Aramaic dialects as literary languages. Closely associated with the Palestinian Melkites were the Melkites of Transjordan, who also used Palestinian Christian Aramaic. Another community of Aramaic-speaking Melkites existed in the vicinity of Antioch and parts of Syria. These Melkites used Classical Syriac as a written language, the common literary language of the overwhelming majority of Christian Arameans.
^Emran El-Badawi (2013).The Qur'an and the Aramaic Gospel Traditions. Routledge. p. 35.ISBN9781317929338.However, what truly distinguishes the CPA Gospels from the Syriac ones is the strong influence that Greek Biblical tradi- tions had upon it. This is evident, for example, in the syntax of the Gospel passages and even in the spelling of proper nouns, both of which duplicate the Greek Gospels. Therefore, unlike Syriac where "Jesus" is spelled īšū', in CPA it is spelled īsūs.
Arnold, Werner (2012)."Western Neo-Aramaic".The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 685–96.ISBN9783110251586.
Berlin, Adele; et al., eds. (2011). "Aramaic".The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion (Second ed.). Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press. p. 64.ISBN9780199730049.
Coghill, Eleanor (2007)."Fieldwork in Neo-Aramaic"(PDF).Languages of Iraq: Ancient and Modern. Cambridge: The British School of Archaeology in Iraq. pp. 115–22. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on 2019-08-02. Retrieved2021-02-08.
Creason, Stuart (2008)."Aramaic"(PDF).The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 108–44.
Fales, Frederick M. (2012)."Old Aramaic".The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 555–73.ISBN9783110251586.
Greenfield, Jonas C. (1995). "Aramaic and the Jews". In Geller, M.C.; Greenfield, J.C.; Weizman, M.P. (eds.).Studia Aramaica: New Sources and New Approaches. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 1–18.ISBN978-0-19-922194-3.
Gzella, Holger (2012a)."Imperial Aramaic".The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 574–86.ISBN9783110251586.
Gzella, Holger (2012b)."Late Imperial Aramaic".The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 598–609.ISBN9783110251586.
Gzella, Holger (2021).Aramaic. A History of the First World Language. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.ISBN9780802877482.
Häberl, Charles G. (2012)."Neo-Mandaic".The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 725–37.ISBN9783110251586.
Jastrow, Otto (2012)."Ṭuroyo and Mlaḥsô".The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 697–707.ISBN9783110251586.
Tal, Abraham (2012)."Samaritan Aramaic".The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 619–28.ISBN9783110251586.
Tezel, Sina (2015)."Arabic or Ṣūrayt/Ṭūrōyo".Arabic and Semitic Linguistics Contextualized: A Festschrift for Jan Retsö. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 554–68.
Tezel, Sina (2015)."Neologisms in Ṣūrayt/Ṭūrōyo".Neo-Aramaic in Its Linguistic Context. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. pp. 100–09.
.jpg)
.svg)
