Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Recent Studies on the Jewish Northeastern Neo-Aramaic Dialects

2006; University of Pennsylvania Press; Volume: 96; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1353/jqr.2006.0047

1553-0604

Adam Carter McCollum,

Archaeology and Historical Studies

Geoffrey Khan. A Grammar of Neo-Aramaic: The Dialect of the Jews of Arbel. Handbook of Oriental Studies. Erste Abteilung, The Near and Middle East 47. Leiden: Brill, 1999. Pp. xx + 586. Yona Sabar. A Jewish Neo-Aramaic Dictionary. Semitica Viva 28. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2002. Pp. ix + 337. Hezy Mutzafi. The Jewish Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Koy Sanjaq (Iraqi Kurdistan). Semitica Viva 32. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2004. Pp. xviii + 260. Scholarly interest in Neo-Aramaic began in the mid-nineteenth century in several articles and even a few monographs; T. Nöldeke's 1868 grammar of the Urmia dialect, for example, and A. J. Maclean's grammar and dictionary of "vernacular Syriac" dialects are often cited. G. Bergsträsser, in his justly famous Introduction to the Semitic Languages1 and elsewhere, deals with Neo-Aramaic and thereby encourages Semitists to resist the temptation to focus on older periods of the Semitic languages in their comparative endeavors. Fortunately the last several decades have seen a tremendous amount of activity in recording, documenting, and analyzing the modern dialects of Aramaic, as is the case with Arabic dialects too. Numerous volumes have appeared in the series Handbuch der Orientalistik (HdO), Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics (SSLL), both of which are published by Brill, and especially Semitica Viva (SV), published by Harrassowitz, which is edited by Otto Jastrow, well known for his work in both [End Page 569] Arabic and Aramaic dialectology.2 I would like to offer here a review of three recently published volumes dealing with this field and to give some brief bibliographical notes as a brief sketch of the state of study into these dialects. The modern Aramaic dialects are generally divided into four different groups: (1) the dialect of Ma'lula and surrounding villages (Western Aramaic); (2) Turoyo (Central or a Western side of Eastern Aramaic); (3) Modern Mandaic (Eastern Aramaic); and (4) Northeastern Neo-Aramaic (Eastern Aramaic), known by the acronym NENA. It is to this last-mentioned group, which is exceptionally widespread and especially diverse, that the dialects treated in the three books under review belong. The several varieties of NENA are quickly approaching extinction and so the recording and detailed treatment of them in these three volumes is especially welcome. I will mention some other Internet resources later in this review but I should note here the Semitisches Tonarchiv at Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg (http://www.semarch.uni-hd.de/index.php4), because located at this site are a great number of sound files from the two grammars dealt with here as well as from very many other similar volumes, especially but not exclusively those from the SV series, that visitors can download (or listen to online) free of charge. Not only Neo-Aramaic but also other modern Semitic languages are represented. Geoffrey Khan, well known for his studies in Arabic (including Judeo-Arabic) and Aramaic, has produced a detailed study of the Jewish Arbel dialect of Neo-Aramaic. It should be noted also that Khan has made comparable grammars for the dialects of Qaraqosh (2002) and Sulemaniyya and Halabja (2004), both in Brill's SSLL series. In the introduction Khan briefly discusses the Jews of Arbel and the surrounding area. He also places the Jewish Arbel dialect within the larger scope of Neo-Aramaic in general and within NENA more specifically, as well as mentions the earlier eastern Jewish Aramaic dialect(s) and Syriac. The Jews who speak and spoke this dialect mostly lived on the plain around Arbel, but it was spoken to some extent within the city itself (p. 5). When this dialect is considered in light of other related dialects, one feature clearly distinguishes it, namely, the particle lā (with long a, unlike the negative marker [End Page 570] with short a). This particle serves to mark aspectual differences in the verbal system (e.g., progressive vs. general present, present perfect vs. preterit). Khan calls this particle "the hallmark of the Arbel...