About dialects of the Aramaic language

[The Thadman]

Shlama,
When I was reading the Acts, I discovered that apostle Paul was traveling in gentile countries and first of all made contacts with Jews. It is possible that he wrote the Epistles to Jews. I do ask all who knows to amswer my questions (better if with facts and/or references).
1) The Jews in these gentile countries, what language and script did they communicate with Paul?
2) In <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.christusrex.org/www1/pater/images/aramaic1.jpg">http://www.christusrex.org/www1/pater/i ... amaic1.jpg</a><!-- m --> there is Lord's prayer in Hebrew letters. The first two words does not correspond to the words of the Lord's prayer of COE Peshitta text. Is it different dialect or is it a Syriac text translated from some Greek fragment?
3) It is much said about dialects of the Aramaic (I mean first century). What they are in? Is it just difference in pronunciations or some spellings are different or what?
4) In <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aramnaharaim.org/AramaicJesus.htm">http://www.aramnaharaim.org/AramaicJesus.htm</a><!-- m --> it says "At the beginning of the Christian era, Aramaic, in various dialects was the dominant spoken language of Syria and Mesopotamia. It developed a number of literary dialects, known as Palestinian Jewish Aramaic, Samaritan Aramaic, Syro-Palestinian Christian Aramaic, Syriac, Babylonian Talmudic Aramaic, and Mandaic Aramaic. In Galilee[14]and Samaria[15], Aramaic dialects became the day-to-day means of communication." Is there somewhere online explanations what the differences are?

Thank You in advance for the answers. Especially the answer from Paul Younan is expected.
Thank You very much.
Ivan Pavlovich.

1-ish) The evidences for the Aramaic Primacy of Paul's letters are rather striking when compared to the rest of the NT. We find Aramaic wordplay, -poetry-, and scribal mistakes that can only go one way. Some examples:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aramaicnt.org/index.php?PAGE=Site-Index&DIRECTORY=XML-Index/1st-Corinthians">http://www.aramaicnt.org/index.php?PAGE ... orinthians</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aramaicnt.org/index.php?PAGE=Site-Index&DIRECTORY=XML-Index/1st-Timothy">http://www.aramaicnt.org/index.php?PAGE ... st-Timothy</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aramaicnt.org/index.php?PAGE=Site-Index&DIRECTORY=XML-Index/Romans">http://www.aramaicnt.org/index.php?PAGE ... dex/Romans</a><!-- m -->

With these in mind, it seems that he was writing to an Aramaic-speaking audience for (at least) 1st Corinthians, 1st Timothy, and Romans. As to what script, that is still up to debate. It was probably a variant of the script <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.christusrex.org/www1/pater/images/aramaic1.jpg">http://www.christusrex.org/www1/pater/i ... amaic1.jpg</a><!-- m --> is written in, or very VERY early Estrangelo.

2) It's a translation of the text into early Jewish Aramaic, a dialect that was probably around -before- but not during Jesus' life. This is evidence to the "di" particle of the first line, the initial yoodh of the 3rd person future tense, in line 2, etc. It more mimics Old Testament Aramaic rather than 1st Century "vulgar" Judean.

3) Looking over all dialects I know, it's a matter of vowel pronunciation, some vocabulary, and a dash of grammar.

Vowels can be all over the place, and in some Aramaic villages today, you walk 10 miles to the north and you'd think it were a different language, but after 5 minutes of listening carefully, you'd be able to pick out the differences and adapt your dialect to suit your neighbor's ear. Vawols meka i beg defforence en spaech, but relatively little to no difference in written form as Aramaic is usually written without them. Today there are two "main" dialects: "Eastern" and "Western." Eastern voweling can have up to 12 sounds which are closer to the front of the throat (ex. AH as opposed to OH), where Western has 5 which are further back in the throat (ex. OH as opposed to AH). :-)

Vocabulary is the second biggest issue for spoken dialect, but the biggest issue for written Aramaic. For example, Chaldee Aramaic has many Hebrew loan-words, as does Samarian and other Jewish dialects. Syriac, on the other hand, has many Greek influences and Greek loan-words. Aramaic was the English of it's day, as it was, to a degree, a linguistic melting pot, heavily relying on idiom and colloquialisms. :-)

For Grammar, in Chaldee Aramaic, singular masculine plural nouns are marked with an "in" suffix (akin to the Hebrew "im"), where in Syriac Aramaic, singular masculine plural nouns are marked with changing the last vowel to "e." (That's about the ONLY big grammatical difference I can think of between any two dialects). There are also issues of pro- and en-clitics versus seperate forms. The "di" in <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.christusrex.org/www1/pater/images/aramaic1.jpg">http://www.christusrex.org/www1/pater/i ... amaic1.jpg</a><!-- m --> is the seperate form of the modern "d-" proclitic which acts as the genitive particle (among other things :-) ). Additionally, some dialects spell pronouns a bit differently.

Dialects in the 1st Century, outside of the synagogue, need to be reconstructed, for the most part. There are tidbits about what was in use at the time from all over the place, including the Greek of the New Testament. We see such words as "talitha" and "sabachthani," which point to a dialect of Aramaic that was influenced by Syriac (which would be appropriate, as Judea was both interested in, and in conflict with the Greek language, Syriac being the result of such flirtation).

4) I'm actually working on a comparison chart between the dialects you've mentioned. Unfortunately, schoolwork and other projects I'm working on need to come first, but it is going to be an awesome study :-)

Hope this helps!

Shlomo,
-Steve-o