Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The early pronunciations
Not expert of Aramaic am I but there is something to say about its dialectical pronunciation.
When we look at the Greek translations, we see words 'maran ata'. The developed western pronunciation is 'moran', the eastern is 'maran'. I see here that the eastern pronunciation preserved the archaic style of the New Testament writings pronunciations at that time. The internal evidence is most trustworthy for me. What do You think?
Shlama Ivan,

See the Gouden Hoorn, the Journal of Byzantium article by Edip Ayden (a speaker of the Western dialect) titled "A bird's eye view of the Syriac language and literature", Volume 5, issue 1 (summer 1997) here

Edip Ayden Wrote:Eastern and Western Pronunciation

Written Syriac today is almost the same in morphology as the classical Syriac of the fourth century. While the language remained the same, there emerged two dialectical pronunciations of Syriac, usually known as the Eastern and the Western. The Eastern, which is more archaic, is used by the members of the Church of the East. The Western on the other hand, is mainly used by Syrian Orthodox and the Maronites. A clear difference between the Eastern and the Western consists in the pronunciation of original a: the Eastern pronunciation preserves it (e.g. bayta 'house'), while the Western alters it to o (bayto).

Also, see "Notes from Nineveh" by Rev. J. P. Fletcher (the bottom of page 59 and the top of page 60) here:
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Two major dialects of Aramaic: Eastern and Western. The western Aramaic included Hebrew Aramaic. But what about the ancient pronunciation?
Logically, western should produce western. But when we look at maran ata, it matches to the eastern pronunciation. The Greek manuscripts were translated in the west. As we see the ancient western 1st century pronunciation matches more to the modern eastern pronunciation.


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)