Editor: Aaron Butts
Semitic Languages in Contact contains twenty case studies analysing various contact situations involving Semitic languages. The languages treated span from ancient Semitic languages, such as Akkadian, Aramaic, Classical Ethiopic, Hebrew, Phoenician, and Ugaritic, to modern ones, including languages/dialects belonging to the Modern Arabic, Modern South Arabian, Neo-Aramaic, and Neo-Ethiopian branches of the Semitic family. The topics discussed include writing systems, phonology, morphology, syntax, and lexicon. The approaches range from traditional philology to more theoretically-driven linguistics. These diverse studies are united by the theme of language contact. Thus, the volume aims to provide the status quaestionis of the study of language contact among the Semitic languages.
With contributions from A. Al-Jallad, A. Al-Manaser, D. Appleyard, S. Boyd, Y. Breuer, M. Bulakh, D. Calabro, E. Cohen, R. Contini, C. J. Crisostomo, L. Edzard, H. Hardy, U. Horesh, O. Jastrow, L. Kahn, J. Lam, M. Neishtadt, M. Oren, P. Pagano, A. D. Rubin, L. Sayahi, J.Tubach, J. P. Vita, and T. Zewi.
Supplements to Aramaic Studies (STAS) succeeds the series Studies in the Aramaic Interpretation of Scripture (SAIS), the first volume of which was published in 2002. The new series serves as a companion to the journal Aramaic Studies, and like it aims to provide a publishing venue for scholarly studies in all areas related to Aramaic; it is no longer limited to the Targums and other translations of biblical books into Aramaic.
The series now solicits book-length analyses of any literary type or genre composed in Aramaic. These include but are not limited to inscriptions, letters, translations, wisdom literature, legal works and poetry. Studies of spoken Aramaic are also welcome. It seeks works studying any dialect, from Old Aramaic and Imperial Aramaic to Neo-Aramaic, from the Palmyrene and Nabatean dialects through biblical and Qumran Aramaic to the Jewish and Christian dialects of the Late Roman and Byzantine periods, from the Aramaic works found in Egypt to the Babylonian and Mandaic writings of Mesopotamia. Any scholarly approach is welcome: historical, philological, linguistic, exegetical, literary, or theological. Critical editions of primary sources are welcome as well.

Abstract

It is argued that a longstanding crux interpretum can be solved by analyzing the final ī in nedārî (Ex 15:6) as a relic of the feminine morpheme *ī, which is found elsewhere in the Semitic languages. This analysis provides a further piece of evidence in favor of the early dating of Ex 15:1‐18.

In: Vetus Testamentum

Abstract

The present study provides a description of the syntax of the verbless clause in Targum Neophyti I. It begins with several introductory remarks before proceeding to the main portion of the paper, which consists of a description of the two primary patterns for the verbless clause in Neophyti, each of which may be expanded via extraposition of the subject. The study concludes with a brief discussion of the translation technique of Neophyti, arguing that at least in the case of the verbless clause, Targum Neophyti should be considered idiomatic Aramaic syntax and not a calque of the Hebrew Vorlage.

In: Aramaic Studies

The present study analyses the integration of consonants in Greek loanwords in Syriac. It is shown that in the vast majority of cases each Greek consonantal phoneme is represented by a single consonant in Syriac. Correspondences that deviate from this are usually the result of one of two causes. First, a Koinē form of Greek, instead of Attic, likely served as the source for some of the words that prima facie seem to exhibit irregular correspondences. Second, some of the seemingly irregular correspondences are due to secondary developments in Syriac. This study is based on a corpus of more than eight hundred Greek loanwords and their derivatives found in pre-eighth-century Syriac texts that were not translated from Greek.

In: Aramaic Studies