The relationship between the two components of the construction known in Arabic as الاضافة غير ال... more The relationship between the two components of the construction known in Arabic as الاضافة غير الحقيقية, e.g., الحَسَنُ ٱلْوَجْهِ, Hebrewיְפֵה עֵינַיִם, and Akkadian damqam īnim ‘beautiful-faced/eyed’, is commonly held to be one of nexus: ‘His/her eyes/face are/is beautiful’. The author of the article argues that the relationship is rather that of a verb/(verbal) root with its complement – similar to Arabic تمييز, e.g., حَسَنٌ وَجْهًا ‘He is beautiful, as for his face’. A 1996 article by the author used analytical arguments to prove this; the present article, which is a continuation, does not repeat the analytical arguments, but presents examples contradicting the “Nexus Theory” along with examples unequivocally supporting the “Complement Theory”.
Abstract The essential traits of morphology - stem morphology and other grammatical categories - ... more Abstract The essential traits of morphology - stem morphology and other grammatical categories - are carried almost exclusively by the consonants, while the vowels play only a secondary and marginal role.The main function of the vowels is to resolve consonantal clusters and to enable the consonants to demonstrate their distinctive traits: to enable consonantal gemination - a doubled consonant (except in Ge'ez) must be preceded and followed by a vowel.
Zeitschrift Der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft, 2000
L'A. se donne pour tâche de definir et de circonscrire le concept de mode optatif (qui exprim... more L'A. se donne pour tâche de definir et de circonscrire le concept de mode optatif (qui exprime le souhait) et de decrire les interrelations parmi ses composants dans les langues semitiques classiques. Il montre que dans ces langues, les formes qui expriment le passe expriment egalement l'optatif. Il soutient enfin que les categories marquant l'optatif qui, a premiere vue, ne semblent pas connectees au passe sont egalement des metamorphoses de ce temps
Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale, 2002
Guy Deutscher in his article "The Akkadian Relative Clauses in Cross-Linguistic Perspective&... more Guy Deutscher in his article "The Akkadian Relative Clauses in Cross-Linguistic Perspective", ZA 92 (2002), 86—105 argues that the Akkadian relative marker sa stems from the old Akkadian system su, sa, si, dispensing with su and si, while keeping and expanding sa for general use. The following lines are a reaction to that article. The weakness of his thesis stems from the basic premises it relies upon, and from a superficial conception of fondamental concepts in the syntax of the attribute in Semitic languages in general and particularly in their relative clauses. These concepts are expressed first of ail by his definition of the relative clause: "A relative clause modifies a noun by specifying a state of affairs in which that noun participâtes" (p. 87, Par. I, line lf.). This definition is valid to any kind of nominal attribute such as an adjective or a construent,1 but about the distinct characteristic of the relative clause it says nothing. These concepts can be discerned also in another assertion: "The relative particle simply marks the beginning of the relative clause" (p. 88, 4 lines from bottom),2 and "In the Akkadian system sa only serves to indicate the beginning of the relative clause" (p. 90, Par. II, line 6). As for the author's misconceptions in the field of Semitic languages, the main ones are the premise that the relative clauses in the different languages have necessarily the same origin and that "the original relative clauses in Akkadian and in other Semitic languages must have
I once amused myself with making out a case why Ethiopic should be classified with Hebrew (on acc... more I once amused myself with making out a case why Ethiopic should be classified with Hebrew (on account of many startling lexical resemblances) or with Akkadian (by virtue of similarities in the vocalism of the imperfect-and phonetic developments in Akkadian and Amharic are surprisingly close) or with Syriac (for certain identical syntactical constructions) or Arabic (with like features in the sound pattern and the formation of internal plurals). ULLENDORFF (1961:13) 1 The fact that not all the languages under consideration in this article were spoken at the same time, and that another, temporal, classification exists, stemming to a considerable extent from the attempt to overcome this difficulty, should not concern us here. 2 I refrain from referring to specific studies, as the list is long, cannot and need not be exhaustive. The works and the views they express are basically well-known and need not be repeated.
The basis upon which the proposed thesis stands and from which it grows, is the theory saying, th... more The basis upon which the proposed thesis stands and from which it grows, is the theory saying, that there are three and only three syntactic relationships among the different sentence components-the predicative, attributive (adnominal) and 'objective' (adverbal) 1. The aim of this article is to contend that the latter two relationships, i.e., the attributive and the 'objective' are in actuality two realisations of the same relationship, viz. that the relationship of the object or the adverb to its verb is the same as that of the adnominal attribute to its qualified substantive, and therefore only two relationships exist-the predicative and the attributive. This idea has already been expressed by both Semitist and non-Semitist linguists; I quote here the two who couch their opinion most briefly and succinctly: "L'adverbe est au verbe ce que l'adjectif est au substantif. Il en résulte que, quand on change un substantif en verbe, il faut parallèlement changer l'adjectif en adverbe." L. TESNIERE, Éléments de syntaxe structurale, Paris, 1959, Chap. 32 §18 (=p. 63). A.F.L. Beeston, in his book Written Arabic, Cambridge, 1968, defines the term 'object' (p. 8) as follows: "OBJECT. An element in the sentence having the same relationship to a verb as a qualifier does to a noun, namely that of giving a more ample description of what is intended than the verb alone could: 'drinks wine', 'drinks water', 'sits on a chair', 'sits on the floor' are predicates with a greater degree of precision than 'drinks', 'sits', in the same way that 'black book', 'John's house' are more precise than the nouns 'book', 'house'." This article aims to confirm and illustrate this thesis by means of examples, and to explain several phenomena in the Semitic languages in light of it. 0.1 A perception that identifies both the function and the syntactic position of adnominal and adverbal attributes requires a covering term for both. Rather than invent a new term I prefer to use a familiar one, and 'complement' seems to me to be the closest. By this term I mean an element which is subjected to its 'master', and 'serves' the function of se-And H. ibn Q. worried about riding through the desert (b dHë bIFë 262/-2) 2 By 'genitive' I refer to 'the second term of the annexion structure', 'qualifying term/ entity', 'nomen rectum' (Hebrew ,סומך Arabic tOë •UCÄ); 'the first term of the annexion structure', 'qualified term/entity', 'nomen regens' (Hebrew ,נסמך Arabic •UCÄ) will be referred to as an "annexed (noun)". 3 Numbers separated by a colon refer to the chapter (in the Bible) or Sura (in the Koran) and verse e.g. 2:3 = Ch. 2 verse 3; references to other texts are indicated by page and line with "/" between them; the minus in front of the line number means "from bottom"; Roman numerals refer to volumes (if there are more than one), e.g. (II) 3/4 means (vol.
... The morphological pat-tern of this word is that of an active participle. ... Naturally, the w... more ... The morphological pat-tern of this word is that of an active participle. ... Naturally, the word ndgir is not connected with a verb and consequently it is not a participle (any more ... This conception is seen clearly in Syriac too: an adjective that becomes a substantive or functions as a ...
HE writing of this article was stimulated by several details in A. F. L. Beeston's brilliant ... more HE writing of this article was stimulated by several details in A. F. L. Beeston's brilliant description of the Arabic language, found in Written Arabic; Cambridge, (1968) (WA), and The Arabic Language Today; London, (1970) (ALT). This article intends partly to suggest some minor improvements in Beeston's description and partly to add some supplementary aspects not dealt with by him. These two books deal explicitly (ALT) or implicitly (WA) with modem standard (written) Arabic. However, one cannot but fully agree with the author, that the modern language ?is in its main features modelled on the language of the golden age [i.e. 8th to 11th centuries] writers?), and that since then, apart from the lexicon, ?the structural and morphological features of the language have remained remarkably stable...?> (ALT p. 15). The description presented in these two works is, therefore, fundamentally valid for Arabiyya in general. Thus, although my remarks do not deal particularly with the modern language, it is of such stable features that this article treats.
The relationship between the two components of the construction known in Arabic as الاضافة غير ال... more The relationship between the two components of the construction known in Arabic as الاضافة غير الحقيقية, e.g., الحَسَنُ ٱلْوَجْهِ, Hebrewיְפֵה עֵינַיִם, and Akkadian damqam īnim ‘beautiful-faced/eyed’, is commonly held to be one of nexus: ‘His/her eyes/face are/is beautiful’. The author of the article argues that the relationship is rather that of a verb/(verbal) root with its complement – similar to Arabic تمييز, e.g., حَسَنٌ وَجْهًا ‘He is beautiful, as for his face’. A 1996 article by the author used analytical arguments to prove this; the present article, which is a continuation, does not repeat the analytical arguments, but presents examples contradicting the “Nexus Theory” along with examples unequivocally supporting the “Complement Theory”.
Abstract The essential traits of morphology - stem morphology and other grammatical categories - ... more Abstract The essential traits of morphology - stem morphology and other grammatical categories - are carried almost exclusively by the consonants, while the vowels play only a secondary and marginal role.The main function of the vowels is to resolve consonantal clusters and to enable the consonants to demonstrate their distinctive traits: to enable consonantal gemination - a doubled consonant (except in Ge'ez) must be preceded and followed by a vowel.
Zeitschrift Der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft, 2000
L'A. se donne pour tâche de definir et de circonscrire le concept de mode optatif (qui exprim... more L'A. se donne pour tâche de definir et de circonscrire le concept de mode optatif (qui exprime le souhait) et de decrire les interrelations parmi ses composants dans les langues semitiques classiques. Il montre que dans ces langues, les formes qui expriment le passe expriment egalement l'optatif. Il soutient enfin que les categories marquant l'optatif qui, a premiere vue, ne semblent pas connectees au passe sont egalement des metamorphoses de ce temps
Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale, 2002
Guy Deutscher in his article "The Akkadian Relative Clauses in Cross-Linguistic Perspective&... more Guy Deutscher in his article "The Akkadian Relative Clauses in Cross-Linguistic Perspective", ZA 92 (2002), 86—105 argues that the Akkadian relative marker sa stems from the old Akkadian system su, sa, si, dispensing with su and si, while keeping and expanding sa for general use. The following lines are a reaction to that article. The weakness of his thesis stems from the basic premises it relies upon, and from a superficial conception of fondamental concepts in the syntax of the attribute in Semitic languages in general and particularly in their relative clauses. These concepts are expressed first of ail by his definition of the relative clause: "A relative clause modifies a noun by specifying a state of affairs in which that noun participâtes" (p. 87, Par. I, line lf.). This definition is valid to any kind of nominal attribute such as an adjective or a construent,1 but about the distinct characteristic of the relative clause it says nothing. These concepts can be discerned also in another assertion: "The relative particle simply marks the beginning of the relative clause" (p. 88, 4 lines from bottom),2 and "In the Akkadian system sa only serves to indicate the beginning of the relative clause" (p. 90, Par. II, line 6). As for the author's misconceptions in the field of Semitic languages, the main ones are the premise that the relative clauses in the different languages have necessarily the same origin and that "the original relative clauses in Akkadian and in other Semitic languages must have
I once amused myself with making out a case why Ethiopic should be classified with Hebrew (on acc... more I once amused myself with making out a case why Ethiopic should be classified with Hebrew (on account of many startling lexical resemblances) or with Akkadian (by virtue of similarities in the vocalism of the imperfect-and phonetic developments in Akkadian and Amharic are surprisingly close) or with Syriac (for certain identical syntactical constructions) or Arabic (with like features in the sound pattern and the formation of internal plurals). ULLENDORFF (1961:13) 1 The fact that not all the languages under consideration in this article were spoken at the same time, and that another, temporal, classification exists, stemming to a considerable extent from the attempt to overcome this difficulty, should not concern us here. 2 I refrain from referring to specific studies, as the list is long, cannot and need not be exhaustive. The works and the views they express are basically well-known and need not be repeated.
The basis upon which the proposed thesis stands and from which it grows, is the theory saying, th... more The basis upon which the proposed thesis stands and from which it grows, is the theory saying, that there are three and only three syntactic relationships among the different sentence components-the predicative, attributive (adnominal) and 'objective' (adverbal) 1. The aim of this article is to contend that the latter two relationships, i.e., the attributive and the 'objective' are in actuality two realisations of the same relationship, viz. that the relationship of the object or the adverb to its verb is the same as that of the adnominal attribute to its qualified substantive, and therefore only two relationships exist-the predicative and the attributive. This idea has already been expressed by both Semitist and non-Semitist linguists; I quote here the two who couch their opinion most briefly and succinctly: "L'adverbe est au verbe ce que l'adjectif est au substantif. Il en résulte que, quand on change un substantif en verbe, il faut parallèlement changer l'adjectif en adverbe." L. TESNIERE, Éléments de syntaxe structurale, Paris, 1959, Chap. 32 §18 (=p. 63). A.F.L. Beeston, in his book Written Arabic, Cambridge, 1968, defines the term 'object' (p. 8) as follows: "OBJECT. An element in the sentence having the same relationship to a verb as a qualifier does to a noun, namely that of giving a more ample description of what is intended than the verb alone could: 'drinks wine', 'drinks water', 'sits on a chair', 'sits on the floor' are predicates with a greater degree of precision than 'drinks', 'sits', in the same way that 'black book', 'John's house' are more precise than the nouns 'book', 'house'." This article aims to confirm and illustrate this thesis by means of examples, and to explain several phenomena in the Semitic languages in light of it. 0.1 A perception that identifies both the function and the syntactic position of adnominal and adverbal attributes requires a covering term for both. Rather than invent a new term I prefer to use a familiar one, and 'complement' seems to me to be the closest. By this term I mean an element which is subjected to its 'master', and 'serves' the function of se-And H. ibn Q. worried about riding through the desert (b dHë bIFë 262/-2) 2 By 'genitive' I refer to 'the second term of the annexion structure', 'qualifying term/ entity', 'nomen rectum' (Hebrew ,סומך Arabic tOë •UCÄ); 'the first term of the annexion structure', 'qualified term/entity', 'nomen regens' (Hebrew ,נסמך Arabic •UCÄ) will be referred to as an "annexed (noun)". 3 Numbers separated by a colon refer to the chapter (in the Bible) or Sura (in the Koran) and verse e.g. 2:3 = Ch. 2 verse 3; references to other texts are indicated by page and line with "/" between them; the minus in front of the line number means "from bottom"; Roman numerals refer to volumes (if there are more than one), e.g. (II) 3/4 means (vol.
... The morphological pat-tern of this word is that of an active participle. ... Naturally, the w... more ... The morphological pat-tern of this word is that of an active participle. ... Naturally, the word ndgir is not connected with a verb and consequently it is not a participle (any more ... This conception is seen clearly in Syriac too: an adjective that becomes a substantive or functions as a ...
HE writing of this article was stimulated by several details in A. F. L. Beeston's brilliant ... more HE writing of this article was stimulated by several details in A. F. L. Beeston's brilliant description of the Arabic language, found in Written Arabic; Cambridge, (1968) (WA), and The Arabic Language Today; London, (1970) (ALT). This article intends partly to suggest some minor improvements in Beeston's description and partly to add some supplementary aspects not dealt with by him. These two books deal explicitly (ALT) or implicitly (WA) with modem standard (written) Arabic. However, one cannot but fully agree with the author, that the modern language ?is in its main features modelled on the language of the golden age [i.e. 8th to 11th centuries] writers?), and that since then, apart from the lexicon, ?the structural and morphological features of the language have remained remarkably stable...?> (ALT p. 15). The description presented in these two works is, therefore, fundamentally valid for Arabiyya in general. Thus, although my remarks do not deal particularly with the modern language, it is of such stable features that this article treats.
Uploads
Papers by Amikam Gai