Pub Date : 2020-11-17DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10012
H. Perng
The manuscript Heb. 110 of the National Library in Paris (=Ms Paris 110) has long been considered by many targumic scholars to be the best manuscript for the Aramaic targums to the Hagiographa, mainly due to its many prominent and consistent Palestinian linguistic features. This article discusses the peculiarities of Ms Paris 110 in comparison with many other earlier manuscripts, and shows that many of its Palestinian and other features do not reflect the original language of the targums, but rather a late tradition characterised by ‘Palestinianisation’ and linguistic editing. This has serious implications for current trends in targumic studies.
巴黎国家图书馆的Heb. 110手稿(=Ms Paris 110)长期以来一直被许多犹太学者认为是《圣徒传》阿拉姆语犹太手稿的最佳手稿，主要是因为它有许多突出和一致的巴勒斯坦语言特征。本文讨论了《巴黎110女士》与许多其他早期手稿相比的特点，并表明它的许多巴勒斯坦语和其他特征并没有反映出原始语言，而是一种以“巴勒斯坦化”和语言编辑为特征的晚期传统。这对目前的逻辑学研究趋势具有严重的影响。
{"title":"Preservation or Correction?","authors":"H. Perng","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The manuscript Heb. 110 of the National Library in Paris (=Ms Paris 110) has long been considered by many targumic scholars to be the best manuscript for the Aramaic targums to the Hagiographa, mainly due to its many prominent and consistent Palestinian linguistic features. This article discusses the peculiarities of Ms Paris 110 in comparison with many other earlier manuscripts, and shows that many of its Palestinian and other features do not reflect the original language of the targums, but rather a late tradition characterised by ‘Palestinianisation’ and linguistic editing. This has serious implications for current trends in targumic studies.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"198-212"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46312641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-17DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10014
Simcha Gross
The provenance of the opening Aramaic portion of the Passover Haggadah has confounded practitioners and scholars for centuries. Little evidence has come to light to explain the origins of this passage or the fluctuations in its attending practices over time. This article argues that additional evidence, found in some neglected Talmudic manuscripts and in incantation bowls, reveals that the core recitational and practical elements of this passage were originally unrelated to Passover or Jewish ritual. Instead, they were part of a recognised social script in late antique Jewish Babylonia that was integrated into the Passover Haggadah. With changes in Babylonian Jewish society, and with the transmission of this section and its associated practices to Jewish communities outside of Babylonia, the original social and cultural context of this sentence was forgotten. Untethered from the setting in which it was culturally legible, it developed through encounters with new actors in different contexts.
{"title":"‘Whoever Is Hungry, Come and Eat’","authors":"Simcha Gross","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10014","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The provenance of the opening Aramaic portion of the Passover Haggadah has confounded practitioners and scholars for centuries. Little evidence has come to light to explain the origins of this passage or the fluctuations in its attending practices over time. This article argues that additional evidence, found in some neglected Talmudic manuscripts and in incantation bowls, reveals that the core recitational and practical elements of this passage were originally unrelated to Passover or Jewish ritual. Instead, they were part of a recognised social script in late antique Jewish Babylonia that was integrated into the Passover Haggadah. With changes in Babylonian Jewish society, and with the transmission of this section and its associated practices to Jewish communities outside of Babylonia, the original social and cultural context of this sentence was forgotten. Untethered from the setting in which it was culturally legible, it developed through encounters with new actors in different contexts.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"171-197"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45492361","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-17DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10006
Lijuan Lin
This article presents a full edition, with translation and detailed commentary, of SyrHT 1 and SyrHT 388, the only two Syriac medical fragments found in Turfan. Based on a re-examination of the original text, this article shows that the Turfan fragments have parallels in Galen’s De compositione medicamentorum secundum locos and contain elements of Hippocratic recipes as well. This adds further evidence that Syriac Christians had brought Hellenistic medical lore to Turfan at an early date.
{"title":"Hippocrates and Galen in Turfan","authors":"Lijuan Lin","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article presents a full edition, with translation and detailed commentary, of SyrHT 1 and SyrHT 388, the only two Syriac medical fragments found in Turfan. Based on a re-examination of the original text, this article shows that the Turfan fragments have parallels in Galen’s De compositione medicamentorum secundum locos and contain elements of Hippocratic recipes as well. This adds further evidence that Syriac Christians had brought Hellenistic medical lore to Turfan at an early date.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"213-239"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43798306","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-17DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10007
Samuel E. Fox, S. Fassberg
On the whole, the verb yhb ‘give’ occurs in suppletion with ntn in Pre-Modern Aramaic: the former is found in the perfect, participle, and imperative, and the latter in the imperfect and infinitive. There are exceptions in some corpora. Only yhb, however, has survived into Neo-Aramaic, where it is attested in all varieties of the language. This article traces the use of both roots in the history of Aramaic and focuses on the different Neo-Aramaic reflexes of yhb. An explanation is offered for the development of the various Neo-Aramaic forms.
{"title":"The Verb yhb in Aramaic","authors":"Samuel E. Fox, S. Fassberg","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10007","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 On the whole, the verb yhb ‘give’ occurs in suppletion with ntn in Pre-Modern Aramaic: the former is found in the perfect, participle, and imperative, and the latter in the imperfect and infinitive. There are exceptions in some corpora. Only yhb, however, has survived into Neo-Aramaic, where it is attested in all varieties of the language. This article traces the use of both roots in the history of Aramaic and focuses on the different Neo-Aramaic reflexes of yhb. An explanation is offered for the development of the various Neo-Aramaic forms.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"268-278"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41414640","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-17DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10011
J. Furman
This article examines a Syriac historiographical writing of the late eighth century—the so-called Zuqnin Chronicle, or the Chronicle of Pseudo-Dionysius of Tell Maḥre—and certain lexical features that are found at the end of the work. It is argued that these lexical items were drawn into the chronicle from a colloquial Aramaic language spoken in the vicinity of Amid, and that this colloquial variant is linked with the Neo-Aramaic language Turoyo. In addition, the article offers a methodology for identifying colloquial Aramaic words in the corpus of Classical Syriac literature.
{"title":"The Zuqnin Chronicle as Evidence of Vernacular Aramaic in Eighth-Century Northern Mesopotamia","authors":"J. Furman","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article examines a Syriac historiographical writing of the late eighth century—the so-called Zuqnin Chronicle, or the Chronicle of Pseudo-Dionysius of Tell Maḥre—and certain lexical features that are found at the end of the work. It is argued that these lexical items were drawn into the chronicle from a colloquial Aramaic language spoken in the vicinity of Amid, and that this colloquial variant is linked with the Neo-Aramaic language Turoyo. In addition, the article offers a methodology for identifying colloquial Aramaic words in the corpus of Classical Syriac literature.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"240-267"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41533124","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-07DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10010
Miriam Kahana
This article compares the Targum with Masoretic cantillations. The comparison between the different reading traditions shows agreement in everything concerning the division between one verse and the next. Usually, there is agreement in the division within each verse as well, particularly when both the cantillations and the Targum respond to an ideological or exegetical problem in the text. Juxtaposing the cantillations and the Targum in this manner may also reveal aspects of the stages of development of these two interpretative tools in relation to one another. Comparing Targumim and Babylonian cantillations also strengthens the assessment that the Tiberian system of accents was influenced by the Targum in its division of the verses. In addition, examining the way each verse is divided shows how the Targum seems to prefer a subordinate structure even when it translates paratactic clauses.
{"title":"Targum Jonathan to the Prophets and the Masoretic Cantillations","authors":"Miriam Kahana","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10010","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article compares the Targum with Masoretic cantillations. The comparison between the different reading traditions shows agreement in everything concerning the division between one verse and the next. Usually, there is agreement in the division within each verse as well, particularly when both the cantillations and the Targum respond to an ideological or exegetical problem in the text. Juxtaposing the cantillations and the Targum in this manner may also reveal aspects of the stages of development of these two interpretative tools in relation to one another. Comparing Targumim and Babylonian cantillations also strengthens the assessment that the Tiberian system of accents was influenced by the Targum in its division of the verses. In addition, examining the way each verse is divided shows how the Targum seems to prefer a subordinate structure even when it translates paratactic clauses.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/17455227-bja10010","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42980979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-08DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10003
A. Andrason, D. Hutchison
This article examines the lexical class of interjections in Biblical Aramaic through the framework of an interjectional prototype and its functional (semantic and pragmatic) and formal (phonetic, morphological, and syntactic) characteristics. The authors analyse eight interjectional lexemes or constructional patterns, attested in twenty-four uses, for their compliance to the canonical prototype. The evidence reveals significant variation in the interjections’ canonicity: high canonicity in primary interjections, semi-canonicity in nearly primary interjections, and low canonicity in secondary interjections.
{"title":"Interjections in Biblical Aramaic: A Radial Model","authors":"A. Andrason, D. Hutchison","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article examines the lexical class of interjections in Biblical Aramaic through the framework of an interjectional prototype and its functional (semantic and pragmatic) and formal (phonetic, morphological, and syntactic) characteristics. The authors analyse eight interjectional lexemes or constructional patterns, attested in twenty-four uses, for their compliance to the canonical prototype. The evidence reveals significant variation in the interjections’ canonicity: high canonicity in primary interjections, semi-canonicity in nearly primary interjections, and low canonicity in secondary interjections.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"1-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/17455227-bja10003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48838550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-08DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10005
Philip Michael Forness
Syriac literature exhibits interest in narratives associated with the Maccabees by the fourth century. Seventh-century manuscripts preserve two different Syriac translations of 1 Maccabees. The translation of this book into Syriac is not part of the Peshitta Old Testament translated from the Hebrew Bible in the second century CE. Its dating and the possible context for its production have not yet been the topic of scholarly investigation. This article examines quotations of and allusions to 1 Maccabees in Aphrahat, Ephrem, and the Martyrdom of Simeon bar Ṣabbāʿē. The last of these texts, likely produced in the early fifth century, offers the earliest evidence for a Syriac translation of 1 Maccabees. The production of a Syriac translation of 1 Maccabees in the fourth or perhaps early fifth century reflects efforts of Christian communities around this time to appropriate the Maccabean narrative for their own interests.
{"title":"The First Book of Maccabees in Syriac: Dating and Context","authors":"Philip Michael Forness","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Syriac literature exhibits interest in narratives associated with the Maccabees by the fourth century. Seventh-century manuscripts preserve two different Syriac translations of 1 Maccabees. The translation of this book into Syriac is not part of the Peshitta Old Testament translated from the Hebrew Bible in the second century CE. Its dating and the possible context for its production have not yet been the topic of scholarly investigation. This article examines quotations of and allusions to 1 Maccabees in Aphrahat, Ephrem, and the Martyrdom of Simeon bar Ṣabbāʿē. The last of these texts, likely produced in the early fifth century, offers the earliest evidence for a Syriac translation of 1 Maccabees. The production of a Syriac translation of 1 Maccabees in the fourth or perhaps early fifth century reflects efforts of Christian communities around this time to appropriate the Maccabean narrative for their own interests.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"99-123"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/17455227-bja10005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44091263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-08DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10004
I. Carbajosa
The Syriac version of 1 Macc. that is preserved in Codex Ambrosianus (7a1) is very different from the one attested in the rest of the manuscripts of the Peshitta. This double attestation is typically explained by a hypothesis first put forward by G. Schmidt in 1897 that sees the version of 7a1 (Syr-2) as a revision of the original Syriac translation (Syr-1), which is the one attested in the majority of the manuscripts. This article aims to challenge this theory. In fact, this study shows that there is no relationship between Syr-1 and Syr-2, that is, Syr-2 cannot be considered a revision of Syr-1 (intended to eliminate additions), but must be understood as a new translation made from the Greek. For its part, Syr-1 is characterised by a number of double readings that could be interpreted as the work of an editor who preserves readings from two different Syriac versions of 1 Macc.
{"title":"What is the Relationship between the Two Ancient Syriac Peshitta Versions of 1 Maccabees? A New Proposal that Challenges the Classical Explanation","authors":"I. Carbajosa","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The Syriac version of 1 Macc. that is preserved in Codex Ambrosianus (7a1) is very different from the one attested in the rest of the manuscripts of the Peshitta. This double attestation is typically explained by a hypothesis first put forward by G. Schmidt in 1897 that sees the version of 7a1 (Syr-2) as a revision of the original Syriac translation (Syr-1), which is the one attested in the majority of the manuscripts. This article aims to challenge this theory. In fact, this study shows that there is no relationship between Syr-1 and Syr-2, that is, Syr-2 cannot be considered a revision of Syr-1 (intended to eliminate additions), but must be understood as a new translation made from the Greek. For its part, Syr-1 is characterised by a number of double readings that could be interpreted as the work of an editor who preserves readings from two different Syriac versions of 1 Macc.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"18 1","pages":"64-98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/17455227-bja10004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47783513","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-04-07DOI: 10.1163/17455227-bja10002
E. B. Siegal
Few studies have focused on the Aramaic of the Zohar, and to this day, only one of these presents a completed grammatical analysis. Scholars have dealt at large, however, with the question of whether the Aramaic of the Zohar is artificial or not. I briefly review the history of the literature around this question, then propose my own criteria to examine whether a language of a given text is indeed artificial. Finally, I put this methodology into practice, as I investigate the nature of Zoharic Aramaic by examining specific linguistic phenomena in the relevant corpus.
{"title":"Are Literary Languages Artificial? The Case of the Aramaic of the Zohar","authors":"E. B. Siegal","doi":"10.1163/17455227-bja10002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-bja10002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Few studies have focused on the Aramaic of the Zohar, and to this day, only one of these presents a completed grammatical analysis. Scholars have dealt at large, however, with the question of whether the Aramaic of the Zohar is artificial or not. I briefly review the history of the literature around this question, then propose my own criteria to examine whether a language of a given text is indeed artificial. Finally, I put this methodology into practice, as I investigate the nature of Zoharic Aramaic by examining specific linguistic phenomena in the relevant corpus.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"-1 1","pages":"1-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/17455227-bja10002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42016590","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：