WithinAramaic studies, several alternative groupings of Neo-Aramaic languages had been proposed by different researchers, and some of those groupings have used the termCentral Neo-Aramaic in a wider meaning, including the widest scope, referring to all Neo-Aramaic languages except forWestern Neo-Aramaic andNeo-Mandaic.[3][4]
Central Neo-Aramaic languages, also known as Western Neo-Syriac languages (represented in red color and shade)
The narrower definition of the term "Central Neo-Aramaic languages" includes only theTuroyo andMlahsô languages, while the wider definition also includes theNortheastern Neo-Aramaic (NENA) group. In an attempt to avoid confusion, the narrower group is sometimes referred to asNorthwestern Neo-Aramaic, and when combined with NENA it is calledNorthern Neo-Aramaic.
Both languages that are belonging to this group are termed asSyriac (ܣܘܪܝܝܐSūryoyo), and refer to the classical language as eitherEdessan (ܐܘܪܗܝܐŪrhoyo) orLiterary (ܟܬܒܢܝܐKthobonoyo). The latter name is particularly used for the revivedClassical Syriac.
The smaller Central, or Northwestern, varieties of Neo-Aramaic are spoken byAssyrian Christians traditionally living in theTur Abdin area of southeastern Turkey and areas around it. Turoyo itself is the closely related group of dialects spoken in Tur Abdin, while Mlahsô is anextinct language once spoken to the north, inDiyarbakır Province.
Other related languages all seem to now be extinct without record. A large number of speakers of these languages have moved toal-Jazira inSyria, particularly the towns ofQamishli andal Hasakah. A number of Turoyo speakers are found indiaspora, with a particularly prominent community inSweden.
The Central Neo-Aramaic languages have a dual heritage. Most immediately, they have grown out of Eastern Aramaic colloquial varieties that were spoken in theTur Abdin region and the surrounding plains for a thousand years. However, they have been influenced byClassical Syriac, which itself was the variety of Eastern Aramaic spoken farther west, in theOsroenian city ofEdessa. Perhaps the proximity of Central Neo-Aramaic to Edessa, and the closeness of their parent languages, meant that they bear a greater similarity to the classical language than do Northeastern Neo-Aramaic varieties.
However, a clearly separate evolution can be seen in Turoyo and Mlahsô. Mlahsô is grammatically similar to the classical language, and continued to use a similartense-aspect system to it. However, Mlahsô developed a distinctively clipped phonological palette and systematically turns /θ/→/s/. On the other hand, Turoyo has a quite similar phonology to Classical Syriac, yet it has developed a radically different grammar, sharing similar features with NENA varieties.
First modern studies of Central Neo-Aramaic dialects were initiated during the 19th century,[5] and by the beginning of the 20th century some attempts were made to expand the use of vernacular (Turoyo) into the literary sphere, still dominated by the prolonged use ofClassical Syriac among educated adherents of theSyriac Orthodox Church. That development was interrupted by the breakout of theFirst World War (1914–1918) and the atrocities committed duringSeyfo (genocide) against various Aramaic-speaking communities, including those in theTur Abdin region.[6] Displacement of local Christian communities from their native regions created several new groups of Turoyo speakers throughoutdiaspora. Those events had a long-lasting impact on future development of Turoyo-speaking communities, affecting all spheres of their life, including culture, language and literature.[5]
Jastrow, Otto (2011)."Ṭuroyo and Mlaḥsô".The Semitic Languages: An International Handbook. Berlin-Boston: Walter de Gruyter. pp. 697–707.ISBN9783110251586.
Tezel, Sina (2015)."Arabic or Ṣūrayt/Ṭūrōyo".Arabic and Semitic Linguistics Contextualized: A Festschrift for Jan Retsö. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. pp. 554–568.
Tezel, Sina (2015)."Neologisms in Ṣūrayt/Ṭūrōyo".Neo-Aramaic in Its Linguistic Context. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press. pp. 100–109.
