Syriac Orthography (A Grammar of the Syriac Language, Volume 1) 9781463235246
This volume, the first in a comprehensive grammar of the Syriac language, is a thematic presentation of orthography in t
390 40 6MB
English Pages 544 [546] Year 2012
Polecaj historie
Citation preview
ܐ
ܬܘܪܨ
Tūrrāṣ Mamllā Orthography
ܐ
ܬܘܪܨ
Tūrrāṣ Mamllā A Grammar of the Syriac Language
Volume 1
Orthography
George Anton Kiraz
9
34 2012
Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2012 by Gorgias Press LLC
All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC.
2012
ܛ
9
ISBN 978-1-4632-0183-8
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Kiraz, George Anton. Syriac orthography / by George Kiraz. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Syriac language--Grammar. I. Title. PJ5423.K58 2012 492'.35--dc23 2012027231 Printed in the United States of America
ܒܐ
ܐ ܣ ܪ
ܐ܁ ܘ
̈ܐ
ܐܕ
̈ܒ
ܐ܁ ܘ ܒ ܐܢ ܘ ܒ ܬ ܙܘܓ ݂
ܒ ܐ ܓܒ ܐ
To my children TABETHA GABRIELLA, SEBASTIAN KENORO, AND LUCIAN NURONO who made Syriac for me a living daily experience and to my wife CHRISTINE who norishes this experience.
ܢ ܐܪܗ ܓ ّ ܓܘ ܠ
ܝ ܗ ܝ ܒܗ ܘ ّܡ ܐ
ܒܐܒ ܗܘ ܓܐ ܐ ܘܒܓ. ܒ ܕ ܢ ܗܕܐ ܗܘ ܐ ܐܣ. ܘ ܝ ܗܕܐ ܗܘ. ܘ ܗܝ ܒܐ ܐ ܗܕܐ ܗܘ ܝ.ܘܐܒ ܐ .ـ ܬܘܪܨ ًܐ
Grammar is the gate through which all students enter.
All knowledge is unattainable without it. It is the foundation without which a building will be shaken. It
guides the inexperienced to the truth. Through the rules of grammar, the misdirected is led to the true path. It is
for this reason that the Malphāne called it ṭūrrāṣ mamllā ‘the correctness of speech’.
Isḥāq al-Shadrāwī (Sciadrensis) (d. 1663)
Contents at a Glance Preface
xix
1. Sources and their Historical Context
1
I. The Graphemic Inventory
29
2. Consonantal Graphemes
31
3. Vowel Graphemes
59
4. Grammatical Graphemes
91
5. Editorial, Liturgical and Musical Graphemes
115
6. Ancient Prosodic Graphemes or Accents
131
7. Numbering Systems
159
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
175
8. Graphotactics
177
9. Writing
209
10. Ductus
227
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation, and Alloglottography
289
11. Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
291
12. Garšūnography II: Syriac as the Source Language
323
13. Nongaršūnographic Adaptations of the Syriac Script
353
14. Alloglottography
359
IV. Technological Developments
363
15. Lithography and Mimeography
365
16. Typewriters
369
17. Digital Typography
377
18. Coding Standards
389
vii
viii
Table of Contents
Contents Preface
xix
Plates and Credits
xxv
Transcription and Transliteration
xxvii
Note on Examples
xxvii
Abbreviations and Symbols
xxix
Bibliography
xxxiii
1. Sources and their Historical Context
1
1.1.
Preliminaries
2
1.2.
Old Syriac Sources
8
1.2.1.
The Consonantal System
8
1.2.2.
The Vocalization System
9
1.2.3.
Other Symbols
1.3.
10
Early Manuscripts
10
1.3.1.
The Consonantal System
11
1.3.2.
The Vocalization System
12
1.3.3.
Other Symbols
12
1.4.
The Classical Grammarians
13
1.5.
The Mašlmānūṯā
15
1.6.
European Grammarians and Philologists
17
1.7.
Late Manuscripts of the Received Tradition
18
1.8.
Chronology of Events
19
ix
x
Table of Contents
I. The Graphemic Inventory
29
2. Consonantal Graphemes
31
2.1.
The Consonantary
31
2.2.
Mnemonics and Consonantal Subsets
34
2.3.
Typology of Consonants
36
2.4.
Grapheme Resemblance
37
2.5.
Orthographic Variations and Spelling Development 40 2.5.1.
Ālāp̱
41
2.5.2.
Waw
44
2.5.3.
Yūḏ
46
2.5.4.
Other Consonants
48
2.6.
Homography
49
2.7.
Frequency of Occurrence
53
2.8.
Alphabetization
55
3. Vowel Graphemes
59
3.1.
The Matres Lectionis System
61
3.2.
The Pointing System
64
3.2.1.
One-Point Vocalization
65
3.2.2.
Multi-Point Vocalization
69
3.2.3.
The Fully Developed Pointing System
70
3.2.4.
Syāme as an /e/ Vowel
73
3.3.
3.4.
Alphabetical Linear Vocalization
73
3.3.1.
Jacob of Edessa
74
3.3.2.
Gabriel Ḥawwā
76
‘Greek’ Nonlinear Vocalization
79
Table of Contents
xi
3.5.
Summary of Phonemic to Graphemic Relationships 83
3.6.
Vowel Names
84
3.7.
Orthographic Variants
87
3.8.
Frequency of Occurrence
90
4. Grammatical Graphemes 4.1.
4.2.
Phonological Graphemes
92
4.1.1.
/d/ vs. /r/ Marker
92
4.1.2.
Sound Deletion Markers
92
4.1.3.
Schwa Markers
96
4.1.4.
Fricatization Markers: Qūššāyā and Rūkkāḵā
100
4.1.5.
Doubling Marker
102
Morphological Graphemes
103
4.2.1.
Verbal Markers
103
4.2.2.
The Plural Marker Syāme
108
4.2.3.
Gender Marking of the Object Pronominal Suffix
4.3.
91
Lexical Markers
5. Editorial, Liturgical and Musical Graphemes
112
113 115
5.1.
Punctuation Graphemes
115
5.2.
Marking Corrections
117
5.3.
Quotation Marks
118
5.4.
Abbreviation Mark
119
5.5.
Textual Marks
126
5.6.
Liturgical and Musical Graphemes
128
xii
Table of Contents
6. Ancient Prosodic Graphemes or Accents 6.1.
6.2.
6.3.
6.4.
Marks above the Line
133
6.1.1.
One-Point Marks above the Line
133
6.1.2.
Two-Point Marks above the Line
138
6.1.3.
Three-Point Marks above the Line
141
Marks below the Line
142
6.2.1.
One-Point Marks below the Line
142
6.2.2.
Two-Point Marks below the Line
147
6.2.3.
Three-Point Marks below the Line
148
Marks upon the Line
149
6.3.1.
One-Point Marks upon the Line
149
6.3.2.
Two-Point Marks upon the Line
150
The Prosodic Marks by Function
7. Numbering Systems 7.1.
7.2.
131
154 159
Old Syriac Numerals
160
7.1.1.
Numerals in Early Inscriptions
160
7.1.2.
Numerals in Manuscripts
163
Alphabetic Numerals
164
7.2.1.
Early Sequential System
164
7.2.2.
Early Additive System
165
7.2.3.
Standard System
166
7.3.
Indic and Arabic Numerals
172
7.4.
Greek and Coptic Letters for Numerals
173
7.5.
Cipher
173
Table of Contents
xiii
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
175
8. Graphotactics
177
8.1.
Background
177
8.2.
The Consonantal Tier
179
8.2.1.
Allography, Cursivity, and Joining
180
8.2.2.
Ligatures
187
8.3.
The Grammatical Tier
193
8.4.
The Disambiguation Tier
195
8.5.
The Vocalism Tier
195
8.6.
The Fricatization Tier
197
8.7.
Well-Formedness Condition
197
8.8.
Orthographic Space
199
8.8.1.
Space on the Consonantal Tier
199
8.8.2.
Inter-Tier Spacing
206
9. Writing
209
9.1.
Medium and Writing Tools
209
9.2.
Directionality
211
9.3.
Scripts
214
9.4.
Line Fillers
220
9.5.
Writing Sequence
224
10. Ductus
227
10.1.
Allographic Resemblance
228
10.2.
Stroke Types
229
10.3.
Graph Anatomy
229
10.4.
Cursivity and Pen Lifting
232
xiv
Table of Contents 10.5.
Ductus Characteristics
233
10.6.
Ālap̱
238
10.7.
Bēṯ
241
10.8.
Gāmal
243
10.9.
Dālaṯ and Rīš
245
10.10. Hē
247
10.11. Waw
249
10.12. Zayn
251
10.13. Ḥēṯ
252
10.14. Ṭēṯ
254
10.15. Yūḏ
257
10.16. Kāp̱
259
10.17. Lāmaḏ
261
10.18. Mīm
264
10.19. Nūn
267
10.20. Simkaṯ
269
10.21. ʿē
271
10.22. Pē
273
10.23. Ṣāḏē
275
10.24. Qāp̱
277
10.25. Rīš
278
10.26. Šīn
279
10.27. Taw
280
10.28. Ligatures
282
10.29. Ductus of Other Graphs
284
Table of Contents
xv
10.29.1. Points
284
10.29.2. Lines
285
10.29.3. ‘Greek’ Vowels
286
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation, and Alloglottography
289
11. Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
291
11.1.
On Garšūnography
291
11.2.
Syro-Arabic
294
11.3.
Syro-Armenian
298
(by Hidemi Takahashi) 11.4.
Syro-Greek
304
11.5.
Syro-Hebrew
306
11.6.
Syro-Kurdish
306
11.7.
Syro-Latin
309
11.8.
Syro-Malayalam
312
11.9.
Syro-Sogdian and Persian
313
(by Nicholas Sims-Williams) 11.9.1. Syro-Sogdian
313
11.9.2. Syro-Persian
316
11.10. Syro-Ottoman
319
(by Benjamin Trigona-Harany) 11.11. Appendix: Syro-English in the Making
321
12. Garšūnography II: Syriac as the Source Language
323
12.1.
Arabo-Syriac
323
12.2.
Armeno-Syriac
325
(by Hidemi Takahashi) 12.3.
Greco-Syriac
326
xvi
Table of Contents 12.4.
Hebrao-Syriac
326
12.5.
Latino-Syriac
329
12.5.1. Ambrosio’s Transcription
329
12.5.2. Widmanstetter’s Transcription
331
12.5.3. Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Transcriptions
12.6.
332
12.5.4. Standard Transcriptions and Transliterations
333
12.5.5. Liturgical Transcriptions
334
12.5.6. Computer Encoding
337
12.5.7. Library Romanization
339
12.5.8. Chat Alphabet
339
Malayalo-Syriac
343
(by Thomas Joseph) 12.7.
Turco-Syriac
346
(by Mark Dickens and Peter Zieme) 13. Nongaršūnographic Adaptations of the Syriac Script
353
13.1.
Christian Palestinian Aramaic
353
13.2.
NENA Neo-Aramaic
354
13.3.
Ṭuroyo Neo-Aramaic
356
14. Alloglottography
359
IV. Technological Developments
363
15. Lithography and Mimeography
365
15.1.
Lithography
365
15.2.
Mimeography
367
Table of Contents 16. Typewriters
xvii 369
16.1.
Underwood Typewriter
369
16.2.
The Adler Typewriter
369
16.3.
Olympia Typewriter
372
16.4.
IBM Typewriter
373
16.5.
Hermes (Potential) Typewriter
373
16.6.
The Ḥujådå Typewriter
374
17. Digital Typography
377
17.1.
Plotter Technology
377
17.2.
Bitmap Fonts: The DOS Era
379
17.3.
Outline Fonts: The Windows Age
382
17.4.
Open-Type Fonts
385
18. Coding Standards
389
18.1.
Language Name Code: ISO 639
389
18.2.
Script Name Codes: ISO 15924
390
18.3.
Grapheme Codes: Unicode (ISO 10646)
390
18.4.
Keyboard Layouts
391
18.4.1. The ‘Standard’ Keyboard
392
18.4.2. The MLS Keyboard
394
18.4.3. The Windows/Meltho Keyboard
394
General Index
397
Authority Index
431
Biblical Citations
443
CV Patterns
445
Grammatical & Technical Terms
447
xviii
Table of Contents
Graph Index
453
Manuscripts Index
461
Word Index
465
Quotations Index
481
Preface The treatment of writing and orthography in Syriac grammars is extremely scanty, and what already exists is dated. T. Nöldeke (1836–1930) devotes only 13 pages to the subject in his 1898 Kurzgefasste Grammatik, undoubtedly the most cited of Syriac grammars. Earlier, R. Duval (1839–1911) covered orthography in more detail in his 1881 Grammaire. C. J. David (1829–1890), Syriac Catholic bishop of Damascus and the only Eastern scholar to compile a comprehensive grammar after Bar ʿEbroyo (1225/6– 1286), devoted an extensive chapter to writing. Well over a century has now passed since these accounts appeared, during which the field of philology gradually became overshadowed by modern linguistics. A linguistically-based field of writing systems emerged half a century ago with the pioneering work of Gelb, followed
by
Sampson,
DeFrancis,
Coulmas,
Rogers,
and
Gnanadesikan, and there is even a monograph on computational models of writing systems by Sproat (see bibliography). This volume, the first in a
ܳ
̱ـ
ܳ ݁ܽܬ ܰ ܘܪܨ
series, attempts to bring the
study of Syriac writing closer to such modern linguistic accounts, while keeping the Syriac scholar in mind. This is not an introductory text, and it is assumed that the reader is already familiar with the Syriac language and its basic grammar. It is written with the intention that it will be followed by a volume on phonology. As such, discussion of the orthography-phonology interface is limited to what is necessary for the description of orthography and writing. Matters that pertain to the phonological system are reserved for the subsequent volume. The reader will no doubt notice that there is a discontinuity in the examples cited from manuscripts (hereinafter, MSS) with a xix
xx
Preface
concentration on early MSS as well as very late ones, but almost nothing in the intervening period. For the early MSS, I have relied on the
ܶ ܰ ـ ݂ ܳ ̈ܐ ܰ̈ܪ ݁ܶܒܐ
before me who had direct access to such MSS
(e.g. Wright, Hatch, Segal). Cited examples from late MSS are not the result of a systematic study of such MSS; rather, observations made while chanting on the gudo. (Fellow deacons: I was not texting; I was merely taking notes!) As for early printed books, I have examined all the illustrations in Coakley’s Typography as well as my private rare book collection. No attempt was made to examine other rare collections. When citing examples, I generously borrowed from earlier grammarians, who in turn borrowed from others, this chain of citation being extremely helpful in determining the history of the grammatical tradition. The presentation here is neither diachronic nor synchronic, but rather thematic. When possible, a diachronic account is given to express the development of the topic at hand (e.g. the vocalization system in Chapter 3). Chapters 9 and 10 on writing and ductus, respectively, are entirely synchronic. I have tried to be descriptive rather than prescriptive, though I could not help but insert a few prescriptive comments here and there! Having said that, as I rely mostly on the grammatical tradition, some statements here might implicitly be prescriptive. The grammatical tradition does not always agree with what one finds in the manuscript tradition. The book is organized as follows: Chapter 1 provides preliminaries and general definitions of terms used throughout the work, as well as a chronological overview of the writing system and its sources. Thereafter, the book is divided into four main parts: Part I gives an account of all Syriac graphemes or symbols. Chapters 2 and 3 are devoted to segmental graphemes; i.e. graphemes which correspond to a phonological segment: the former
Preface
xxi
presents the consonantal system, while the latter the vocalization system. Chapter 4 presents grammatical graphemes that pertain to phonology and morphology. Chapter 5 accounts for editorial marks such as punctuation marks and various editorial signs, as well as signs found in liturgical MSS. Chapter 6 explores ancient accent signs, most of which are hardly used and whose function is not always clear. Chapter 7 presents numbering systems. Part II describes how the graphemes enumerated in Part I are arranged together to form words, and how each grapheme is written. Chapter 8, probably the only chapter to claim originality, presents a theory of graphotactics; i.e. the rules that determine how graphs are arranged together to formulate larger texts. Chapter 9 looks at writing in general, while Chapter 10 examines writing at the graph level, and presents the ductus of each graph from a synchronic perspective. Part III is dedicated to garšūnography, the use of the Syriac script to write other languages (Chapter 11), as well as the use of other scripts to write the Syriac language (Chapter 12). Chapter 13 looks at the adaptation of the Syriac script to write other forms of Aramaic. Finally, Chapter 14 discusses alloglottography, the art of reading Syriac texts in languages other than Syriac. Part IV deals with technological developments post movable type including lithography and mimeography (Chapter 15), typewriters (Chapter 16), and digital typography (Chapter 17). Finally, Chapter 18 discusses coding standards. The book concludes with a number of indices. I have relied on many works of the great scholars who came before me,
ܶ ܺ ̈ ݂ܐ
ܰ ܰ ̈ ܶܐ
to use a liturgical expression. I have not
xxii
Preface
shied from citing many examples from their works,1 and my debt to them will be apparent to the reader. A number of scholars contributed to sections on garšūnography: Mark Dickens and Peter Zieme on Turco-Syriac (12.7), Thomas Joseph on Malayalo-Syriac (12.6), Nicholas Sims-Williams on Syro-Sogdian and Syro-Persian (11.9), Hidemi Takahashi on SyroArmenian (11.3) and Armeno-Syriac (12.2), and Benjamin Trigona-Harany on Syro-Ottoman (11.10). When quoting from these sections, I suggest that scholars follow the same style used for citing chapters within a collection. A draft of the entire work was read by Sebastian P. Brock, Lucas Van Rompay, Chip (J. F.) Coakley, Andreas Juckel, Daniel King, and Hidemi Takahashi. Their comments helped to make the book a better one. Melonie Schmierer of Gorgias Press carefully copy edited the final draft. All mistakes, of course, remain mine. My unfamiliarity with Latin, French, and to a lesser degree German has always been a
ܳ ܳ ܺ ܽ ݂ܬܐ ܰܪ݁ܒ ݂ ܐ
. I am grateful to Daniel
King who translated for me Merx’s Historia, and Adam McCollum who translated for me the first part of Duval’s Grammaire (parts two and three were translated by Michael Penn and Maria Doerfler). I hope to repay them by publishing their translations. Mar Emmanuel Yosip answered questions on matters pertaining to the E. Syr. ductus, Mor Polycarpus Eugene Aydin on matters Ṭuroyo, Daniel Benjamin on matters E. Syr. (and provided his elegant font Assyrian which I use for East Syriac texts), John 1
During my work on this book, my daughter Tabetha published her
first book, My Baby Brother Lucian (2010), during which she learned about citation etiquettes, and original writing versus plagiarism. Shocked when she saw me copying down extensive lexical entries from J. Margoliouth for a section on orthographic variants and homography, she rebuked “
ܶ ܳ ܰ ܺ ݂ ܐstealing from ݂ ̈ܒܐ
?”
Preface
xxiii
Healey on matters Old Syriac, Heleen Murre-van den Berg on matters Neo-Aramaic, Alessandro Mengozzi on matters Garšūnī, and Richard Sproat on matters linguistics. Mar Awa Royel made me aware of Syriac-into-Swāḏāyā alloglottography. Chip Coakley shared his article on the origin of the W. Syr. vocalization system prior to its publication which resulted in a rewrite of my presentation on the topic (q.v. §174). Michael Sokoloff shared with me lists extracted from a database version of his Lexicon which helped me study homography (q.v. §113). David Taylor made available his classroom handouts that pertain to writing. Andreas Juckel,
ܽ ܰ ݂ܒ ܳ ܐ ܘ݂ܰܒ ܐܘܪ ܳ ܐ
, shared with me his vast
knowledge of Syriac MSS over a number of visits. Adam McCollum provided me with numerous examples from MSS he is cataloguing at the Hill Museum & Manuscript Library (HMML). Members of the hugoye-list, the discussion group of Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies, answered many queries. Jack Tannous, Hoda Mitwally, Thomas Carlson, James Walters, and Lev Weitz were very helpful in providing me with electronic versions of publications that I had no access to at the Beth Mardutho Research Library. James Walters collated Serṭā and E. Syr. grapheme examples from MS images for purposes of Chapter 10. My wife Christine adapted the directionality images (§§365, 445) from The Unicode 5.0 Standard (p. 47). Diane Collier made many changes to the Serto Jerusalem font, always on short notice. An anonymous toddler in Seat 29E on flight CO 1502 in early 2010 generously shared with me her coloring pencils when I ran out of ink while proofreading an earlier draft. The team at Gorgias Press ran the operation very efficiently allowing me to indulge myself in a sabbatical during 2010–2011, albeit a part-time one: Christine, Jasmaile, Katie, Doug, Hoda, Erin, Phoebe, Rachel, Mary Ann, and of course my automation creation Flo Chart… thanks for providing a
xxiv
Preface
productive environment at Gorgias that allowed me to play scholar. Various individuals and institutions provided images for the plates: J. F. Coakley, the Beth Mardutho Research Library, the British Library, Haluk Perk Museum, John F. Healey, HMML (thanks to Columba Stewart and Adam McCollum), Christine I. Kiraz, Museum für Asiatische Kunst, and Yale University. Objects from my private collection were photographed by Shehnaz Abdeljaber. These days college kids have a nickname for every subject under the sun. My wife Christine was tutoring some girls at Rutgers University in organic chemistry, or as they called it orgo. I wanted to be hip and cool too, so I began talking about my ortho. Working at times when I should have been giving my children some attention, my then eight-year old daughter Tabetha, a bilingual in Kthobonoyo and English, would often ask, sometimes in frustra-
ܰ ܰ
tion: ‘ ݁ܒ ݁ܐܒܐ, when is
ܳ ܳ ݂ ܰ ܺ ݂ܪܬܘ
ܳ ܳ ܳܳ ܐܪܬܘ ܗ ݂
gonna
ܶ
ܶ ܳ ?’, ܗܘܐ
and ‘
ܳ ܳܗ
?’ I dedicate this work on Syriac ortho to Tabetha
Gabriella, and my sons Sebastian Kenoro and Lucian Nurono. May
ܳ ܽܳ ܽ ܪ
they develop enough passion for ݂ܬܐ
.
At the Beth Mardutho Research Library, Piscataway, N.J. June 5, 2012, Commemoration of the ḥasyo
George Anton Kiraz
Plates and Credits Pl. 1
Top. Old Syriac inscription dated A.D. 73; © John F. Healey; text translation from Drijvers and Healey 193–94. Bottom. The tomb of Naʿʿūm Faʾiq Palak (1863–1930); © Christine I. Kiraz.
Pl. 2
Top. Orpheus Taming Wild Animals; photograph from S. P. Brock and D. G. K. Taylor, The Ancient Aramaic Heritage (The Hidden Pearl: the Syrian Orthodox Church and its Ancient Aramaic Heritage I. Rome: 2001, 177; text translation from Healey, ‘A New Syriac Mosaic Inscription’. Bottom. Text of the Orpheus mosaic; © John F. Healey.
Pl. 3
Old Syriac parchment dated A.D. 9 May 243; © Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University.
Pl. 4
Top. The oldest dated Syriac manuscript; from Hatch, Album. Bottom. A modern Syriac and Garšūnī manuscript; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
Pl. 5
Top. Palimpsest manuscript; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber; photograph from Cureton, Fragments of the Iliad. Bottom. Liturgical manuscript with a musical symbol; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
Pl. 6
The Chronicle of Michael Rabo; photgraph from G. Y. Ibrahim, The Edessa-Aleppo Syriac Codex of the Chronicle of Michael the Great 478 (2009); © the Hill Museum & Manuscript Library, Saint John’s University, MN.
Pl. 7
Top. Syro-Persian garšūnographic Psalter from the Turfan collection; © Museum für Asiatische Kunst, Staatiche Museen zu Berlin, Kunstsammlung Süd- Südost und Zentralasien; thanks to Erica Hunter, Mark Dickens, and Lilla Russell-Smith. Bottom. Lining board; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
Pl. 8
Kṯāḇā ḏ-nūhār šarwāye from a manuscript dated 1889; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
xxv
xxvi Pl. 9
Plates and Credits Top. Syriac incised on metal; © Haluk Perk Museum. Thanks to Haluk Perk and Özcan Geçer. Bottom. Silver Gospel cover; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
Pl. 10
Top. Prima Elementa; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber. Bottom. Syriac print punches; © J. F. Coakley.
Pl. 11
Top. The Maronite Gabriel Ḥawwā invented…; © the Hill Museum & Manuscript Library, Saint John’s University, MN. Bottom. In 1966 Abrohom Nuro proposed…; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
Pl. 12
Top. A plate from Deir al-Zaʿfarān press. Bottom. Lithographic edition of the Šḥīmā from a copy preserved at the Venkadathu Qasheeshe Alexandrayos & Joseph Collection, Kottayam; © George A. Kiraz.
Pl. 13
İntibâh [Awakening]; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
Pl. 14
The Adler Typewriter; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
Pl. 15
Page printed with Multi-Lingual Scholar™; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
Pl. 16
Puzzles; © Shehnaz Abdeljaber.
Transcription and Transliteration IPA equivalences, when applicable, appear in square brackets, [ ].
ܐ ܒ ݂ܒ ܓ ݂ܓ ܔ ܕ ݂ܕ ܗ ܘ ܙ ܚ ܛ ܜ ܝ ܟ
ʔ
݂ܟ ܠ ܡ ܢ ܣ ܥ ܦ ݂ܦ ܨ ̇ܨ ܩ ܪ ܫ ܬ ݂ܬ
b ḇ
[v]
g g̱ j
[Ɣ]
d ḏ
[δ]
h w z ḥ
[ħ]
ṭ
[tˁ]
ẓ
[zˁ]
y
[j]
ḵ
[χ]
l m n s ʕ p p̱ ṣ
[f]
ḍ
[dˁ]
[sˁ]
q r š
[ʃ]
t ṯ
[θ]
schwa ᵊ
k
In addition, ʾ and ʿ are used instead of ʔ and ʕ, respectively, in proper nouns and grammatical terms; e.g. Bar ʿEbroyo, mšaʾʾlānā, Pʿal. Initial ʾ is omitted in kaylā terms; e.g. Ap̱ʿel not ʾAp̱ʿel.
Note on Examples Whenever possible examples are given with full vocalization and rūkkāḵā/qūššāyā marking for uniformity, with the understanding that ancient MSS do not have such markings; e.g.
ܳ ܰ ݂
to illus-
trate the rūkkāḵā point from a MS dated 615, a time when ‘Greek’ vowels did not even exist.
xxvii
Transcription and Transliteration IPA equivalences, when applicable, appear in square brackets, [ ].
ܐ ܒ ݂ܒ ܓ ݂ܓ ܔ ܕ ݂ܕ ܗ ܘ ܙ ܚ ܛ ܜ ܝ ܟ
ʔ
݂ܟ ܠ ܡ ܢ ܣ ܥ ܦ ݂ܦ ܨ ̇ܨ ܩ ܪ ܫ ܬ ݂ܬ
b ḇ
[v]
g g̱ j
[Ɣ]
d ḏ
[δ]
h w z ḥ
[ħ]
ṭ
[tˁ]
ẓ
[zˁ]
y
[j]
ḵ
[χ]
l m n s ʕ p p̱ ṣ
[f]
ḍ
[dˁ]
[sˁ]
q r š
[ʃ]
t ṯ
[θ]
schwa ᵊ
k
In addition, ʾ and ʿ are used instead of ʔ and ʕ, respectively, in proper nouns and grammatical terms; e.g. Bar ʿEbroyo, mšaʾʾlānā, Pʿal. Initial ʾ is omitted in kaylā terms; e.g. Ap̱ʿel not ʾAp̱ʿel.
Note on Examples Whenever possible examples are given with full vocalization and rūkkāḵā/qūššāyā marking for uniformity, with the understanding that ancient MSS do not have such markings; e.g.
ܳ ܰ ݂
to illus-
trate the rūkkāḵā point from a MS dated 615, a time when ‘Greek’ vowels did not even exist.
xxvii
Transcription and Transliteration IPA equivalences, when applicable, appear in square brackets, [ ].
ܐ ܒ ݂ܒ ܓ ݂ܓ ܔ ܕ ݂ܕ ܗ ܘ ܙ ܚ ܛ ܜ ܝ ܟ
ʔ
݂ܟ ܠ ܡ ܢ ܣ ܥ ܦ ݂ܦ ܨ ̇ܨ ܩ ܪ ܫ ܬ ݂ܬ
b ḇ
[v]
g g̱ j
[Ɣ]
d ḏ
[δ]
h w z ḥ
[ħ]
ṭ
[tˁ]
ẓ
[zˁ]
y
[j]
ḵ
[χ]
l m n s ʕ p p̱ ṣ
[f]
ḍ
[dˁ]
[sˁ]
q r š
[ʃ]
t ṯ
[θ]
schwa ᵊ
k
In addition, ʾ and ʿ are used instead of ʔ and ʕ, respectively, in proper nouns and grammatical terms; e.g. Bar ʿEbroyo, mšaʾʾlānā, Pʿal. Initial ʾ is omitted in kaylā terms; e.g. Ap̱ʿel not ʾAp̱ʿel.
Note on Examples Whenever possible examples are given with full vocalization and rūkkāḵā/qūššāyā marking for uniformity, with the understanding that ancient MSS do not have such markings; e.g.
ܳ ܰ ݂
to illus-
trate the rūkkāḵā point from a MS dated 615, a time when ‘Greek’ vowels did not even exist.
xxvii
Abbreviations and Symbols 1st
= 1st person
2nd
= 2nd person
3rd
= 3rd person
abs.
= absolute
act. part. = active participle C
= consonant
Cd
= dual-joining consonant
Cr
= right-joining consonant
cf.
= confer, compare
co.
= column
const. = construct CT
= consonantal tier
DT
= disambiguation tier
E.
= east
e.g.
= exempli gratia, for example
emph. = emphatic f.
= folio
fem.
= feminine
GT
= grammatical tier
i.e.
= id est, that is
illus.
= illustration
impf. = imperfect impt. = imperative IPA
= International Phonetic Alphabet
ln.
= line
masc. = masculine MS
= manuscript
MSS
= manuscripts
n.
= note (in a cited reference to refer to a footnote)
N.p.
= no place, no publisher (in bibliography) xxix
xxx
Abbreviations
opp.
= opposite
p.
= page
pass. part. = passive participle perf.
= perfect
Pl.
= plate
pl.
= plural
q.v.
= quod vide, which see
RQT
= rūkkāḵā and qūššāyā tier
Syr.
= Syriac
V
= Vowel
viz.
= videlicet, that is to say
vs.
= versus
VT
= Vocalism Tier
W.
= West
WFC
= well-formedness condition
P-C
indicates a root or a verb whose first consonant is C; e.g.
ʿ-C L-C
ܐis a P- ܐverb.
indicates a root or a verb whose second consonant is C; e.g. ܬ
ܒis a ʿ- ܘroot.
indicates a root or a verb whose third consonant is C; e.g. is a L- ܥverb.
< > enclose graphemic transliterations. []
enclose phonetic transcriptions.
//
enclose phonemic transcriptions.
{}
enclose morphemic transcriptions.
↗
marks rising intonation.
↘
marks falling intonation.
:
marks a long vowel in a phonetic transcription.
Abbreviations
xxxi
+
joins lexemes or morphemes forming one word.
-
marks syllable boundary.
#
marks word boundary. reads ‘rewrites’, or ‘becomes’ in a rewrite rule.
/
marks a context in a rewrite rule.
ø
represents an empty string.
√
represents a root.
◌
represents a consonant place holder on which a diacritic is placed.
˽
represents space.
*
is Kleene star in regular expressions; uncanonical form.
+
is Kleene plus in regular expressions.
CAPS
indicate orthographic, phonological, or morphological features.
bold
indicates a technical term.
Biblical Books. This work follows SBL’s abbreviations as follows: Gen.
Isa.
Jn.
Exod.
Jer.
Acts
Num.
Lam.
Rom.
Josh.
Ezek.
1–2 Cor.
Judg.
Dan.
Gal.
1–2 Sam.
Amos
Col.
1–2 Kgs.
Mic.
Jas.
Job
Mt.
1–2 Pet.
Ps.
Mk.
Prov.
Lk.
For English translations of Biblical verses, use was made of The Antioch Bible when available:
xxxii
Abbreviations
Childers, Jeff W. (tr.) and George A. Kiraz (ed.). The Syriac Peshiṭta Bible with English Translation, Matthew. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2012. Greenberg, Gillian (tr.), Donald M. Walter (tr.), George A. Kiraz (ed.), Joseph Bali (ed.). The Syriac Peshiṭta Bible with English Translation, Isaiah. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2012. Greenberg, Gillian (tr.), Donald M. Walter (tr.), George A. Kiraz (ed.), Joseph Bali (ed.). The Syriac Peshiṭta Bible with English Translation, The Twelve Prophets. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2012.
Bibliography Last names of grammarians are used in the footnotes throughout; e.g. Duval = Duval’s Traité de Grammaire Syriaque. Initials in references are used only for disambiguation; e.g. the Assemani cousins (J. S. vs. J. A.). In cases where the author has more than one work in the bibliography below or when the abbreviation is not straightforward, the following list can be used as a guide: Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe = Moberg, Le Livre des Splendeurs. BFBS = The New Testament in Syriac (British and Foreign Bible Society). Coakley, Typography = Coakley, The Typography of Syriac. Coakley-Robinson = Coakley, Robinson’s Paradigms. CSD = J. Margoliouth, Compendious Syriac Dictionary. Elia of Ṣoba = Gottheil, A Treatise on Syriac Grammar. GEDSH = Brock et al., Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage. Healey = Healey, Leshono Suryoyo. Kiraz, CESG = Kiraz, Comparative Edition of the Syriac Gospels. Kiraz, Primer = Kiraz, The New Syriac Primer. Manna = Manna, Kitāb al-ʾuṣūl al-jalīla. Mosul Bible = Biblia Sacra Juxta Versionem… Pschitta. Muraoka, CS = Muraoka, Classical Syriac: A Brief Grammar. Muraoka, CS4H = Muraoka, Classical Syriac for Hebraists. Nestle = Nestle, Syriac Grammar with Bibliography. Nöldeke = Nöldeke, Compendious Syriac Grammar. Segal = Segal, The Diacritical Point. Uhlemann = Hutchinson, Uhlemann’s Syriac Grammar. Abbeloos, Jean-Baptiste and Thomas Joseph Lamy. Gregorii Barhebraei Chronicon Ecclesiasticum. 3 vols. Louvain: Excudebat Car. Peeters, 1872–77. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2012.
xxxiii
xxxiv
Bibliography
Abouna, Albert. Qawāʿid al-luğa al-ʾārāmiyya (Grammaire de la langue Araméenne). Irbil: ʿAzīz Nabātī, 2001. [in Arabic] Abramowski, Luise and Alan H. Goodman. A Nestorian Collection of Christological Texts, vol. 1. London: Cambridge University Press, 1972. Acurensis, Josephus [Yūsif al-ʿĀqūrī]. Ğramaṭīqī ʾawkīṯ tūrāṣ mamllā ḏlešānā suryāyā (Grammatica linguae Syriacae.) Rome: Ex Typogr. Sacrae Congreg. de Propaganda Fide, 1647. [in Syro-Arabic] al-ʾAbrāšī, Moḥammad ʿAṭiyya, ʿAli ʿAnānī, and Leon Meḥrez. alMufaṣṣal fī qawāʿid al-luğa al-suryāniyya wa ʾādābihā wa-lmuwāzana bayn al-luğāt al-sāmiyya. Cairo: al-Maṭbaʿa alʾAmīriyya, 1935. [in Arabic] al-Dibs, Joseph. Kṯāḇā ḏ-qūrāḇā ʾa(y)ḵ ʿyāḏā ḏ-ʿīdtā ḏ-ʾanṭīyūḵīya ḏmārūnāye. Beirut: al-Maṭbaʿa al-ʿUmūmiyya al-Kāṯūlīkiyya, 1888. [in Syriac] Al-Jadir, Adil. ‘Numbers and Dating Formulae in the Old Syriac Inscriptions’. Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 6 (2006): 3–17. al-Kafrī, Niʿmatallah. Kitāb mawrid al-taḥqīq fī ʾuṣūl al-ğrāmāṭīq, muḵtaṣar qalīlan. Quzḥayya, 1896. [in Syro-Arabic] al-Khūrī, Mūsā Dīb. Qissat ʾiḵtirāʿ al-ʾarqām, al-ṭarīq al-ṭawīl min al-wāḥid ʾilā al-ṣifr. N.p.: Maṭbaʿat al-Hayʾa al-ʿĀmma al-Sūriyya li-l-Kitāb, 2010. [in Arabic] al-Ḵidma al-ʾilāhiyya fī al-kanīsa al-suryāniyya al-ʾurṯūḏuksiyya. Jerusalem: St. Mark’s Monastery, 1987. [in Syriac and Arabic] Alphabetum Chaldaicum Antiquum Estranghelo Dictum, una cum Alphabeto Syriaco, Oratione Dominicali, Salutatione Angelica, & Symbolo Fidei. Rome: Typis Sacrae Congregationis de Propaganda Fide, 1636. Ambrosio, Teseo. Introductio in Chaldaicam linguam, Syriacam atque Armenicam, & decem alias linguas Introductio. N.p.: n.p., 1539.
Bibliography
xxxv
Amira, Georgius Michaelis. Ğramaṭīqī sūryāytā ʾaw kaldāytā ḏ-p̱ īlīsūp̱ ā w-
ṯewoloğos gewargī breh d-mīḵāʾel men beṯ ʿmīra ʿḏīnāyā mārūnāyā men ṭūrā ḏ-leḇnān, lwāṯ zahyā mʿalyā ʾāp̱ myaqrā kardīnal
gayṭanos (Grammatica syriaca, sive chaldaica). Rome: Typographia Linguarum Externarum, apud Jacobum Lunam, 1596. [in Latin]
Arayathinal, Thomas. Aramaic (Syriac) Grammar. 2 vols. [Mannanam,] Kerala: St. Joseph’s Press, 1957. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2007. Assad, Assad Sauma. Tafsīr mār ʾafrām al-suryānī li-sifr al-takwīn (Mar Ephrem’s Commentary on Genesis, a critical edition with Arabic translation, introduction, and notes). Aleppo: al-Maktaba alSuryāniyya, 2007. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2010. [in Arabic] Assemani, Joseph Aloysius. Codex Liturgicus Ecclesiæ Universæ. 12 vols. Rome: Ex Typographia Komarek, 1749–66. Reprint titled Liturgies of the Universal Church, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2010. Assemani, Joseph Simonius. Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana. 4 vols. Rome: Typis Sacræ Congregationis de Propaganda Fide, 1719–28. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2002. ———. Sancti Patris Nostri Ephraem Syri Opera Omnia. Rome: Apud Joannem Mariam Henricum Salvioni, 1737. Assfalg, Julius. ‘Arabische Handschriften in Syrischer Schrift (Karšūnī)’. In Grundriß der Arabischen Philologie, edited by W. Fischer, 291– 303. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1982. Audo, Thoma. Sīmtā ḏ-lešānā suryāyā (Dictionnaire de la langue chaldéenne). 2 vols. Mosul: Imprimerie des pères dominicains, 1897–[1901].1 Reprint in 1 vol., Chicago: Assyrian Language
1
On the date of vol. 2, see J. F. Coakley and David G. K. Taylor,
‘Syriac Books Printed at the Dominican Press, Mosul’, in Malphono w-
xxxvi
Bibliography and Culture Classes Incorporated, 1978; Stockholm: The Assyrian-Federation in Sweden, 1979; Glane/Losser: Bar Hebraeus Verlag, 1985. Reprint in 2 vols. titled Treasure of the Syriac Language, A Dictionary of Classical Syriac, with a new introduction by G. A. Kiraz and abbreviation list by Y. Unval, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2008. [in Syriac]
Aydin, Ḥanna Nuʿmān. Geḏše w-šaḇṭe d-ṭūr ʿaḇdīn (Gedsche Ushabte d’Turabdin). Glane/Losser: Bar Hebraeus Verlag, 1997. [in Syriac] Aydin, Robert (tr.). Kṯāḇā qādīšā meṭūl ṭlāyē. Glanne/Losser: Bar Hebraeus Verlag; Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2008. [in Syriac] Barsom, Murad (tr.), and Athanasius Yeshue Samuel (ed.). Ma’de’dono: The Book of the Church Festivals. Beirut: n.p., 1984. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press & Beth Antioch Press, 2012. [in Syriac and English] Barsoum, Gabriel. Yārtūṯā sūryāytā, mīmrē, luqāṭē wqūṭāp̱ ē ḥeḵmāṯānāyāṯā
w-mardūṯānāyāṯā ḏa-znīn znīn, vol. 1. Gütersloh: n.p., 2009. [in
Ṭuroyo] Barsoum, Peter. Assyrian Apostolic Church, Prayer, Hymn and Liturgical Service Book. Worcester, MA: St. Mary’s Assyrian Apostolic Church, 1957. Bazzi, Michael. Chaldean Prayers and Hymn. El Cajon, CA: St. Peter Chaldean Catholic Church, 1997. [in Syriac and English] Becker, Adam H. The Fear of God and the Beginning of Wisdom: The School of Nisibis and the Development of Scholastic Culture in Late Antique Mesopotamia. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 2006.
Rabo d-Malphone, Studies in Honor of Sebastian P. Brock, edited by George A. Kiraz, 71–110 (esp. 98–99), Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2008.
Bibliography
xxxvii
Bedjan, Paul. Acta Martyrum et Sanctorum. 6 vols. Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1890–97. Reprint titled Acts of Martyrs and Saints, Acta Martyrum…, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2008. [in Syriac] ———. Homiliae Selectae Mar-Jacobi Sarugensis. 5 vols. Leipzig: William Drugulin, 1902–10. Reprint titled Homilies of Mar Jacob of Sarug, Momiliae Selectae…, 6 vols., Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2006. [in Syriac] Benjamin, Daniel. Kṯāḇā ḏ-ṯūrgāmē w-rūšmā ḏ-ṭeksā ḏ-amšamšānē. Chicago: Daniel Benjamin, 1996. [in Syriac] Bernstein, Georg H. Chrestomathia Syriaca cum Lexico. Leipzig: Cnobloch, 1832. Biblia Sacra Hebraice, Chaldaice, Græce, & Latine… Plantinus excud. Antuerpiæ. 8 vols. Antwerp: 1569–72. Biblia Sacra Juxta Versionem Simplicem quæ dicitur Pschitta. 3 vols. Mosul: Typis Fratrum Prædicatorum, 1887–91. Reprint C. J. David, The Syriac Bible According to the Mosul Edition, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2010. [in Syriac] Bosman, Hendrik Jan and Constantijn J. Sikkel, Format of a PIL Running Text File. Leiden: The Peshitta Institute, 2005. [unpublished report] Boyajy, Gabriel. Everlasting Calendar of the Orthodox Church. New York: College Point, 1914. [in Syro-Ottoman] Briquel Chatonnet, Françoise and Alain Desreumaux. ‘A Study and Characterization of the Syro-Malabar Script’. Journal of Semitic Studies 55, no. 2 (2010): 407–21. Brock, Sebastian P. ‘Limitations of Syriac in Representing Greek’. In The Early Versions of the New Testament, by Bruce Metzger, 83–98. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977. ———. ‘A Fourteenth-century Polyglot Psalter’. In Studies in Philology in Honour of R. J. Williams, edited by G. E. Kadish and G. E. Freeman, 1–15. Toronto: Benben Publications, 1982.
xxxviii
Bibliography
——— ‘Armenian in Syriac Script’. In Armenian Studies: In Memoriam Haïg Berbérian, edited by Dickran Kouymjian, 75–80. Lisbon: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, 1986. ———. Catalogue of Syriac Fragments (New Finds) in the Library of the Monastery of Saint Catherine, Mount Sinai. Athens: Mount Sinai Foundation, 1995. ———. ‘Some Diachronic Features of Classical Syriac’. In Hamlet on a Hill: Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 118), edited by M. F. J. Baasten and W. Th. Van Peursen, 95–111. Leiden; Paris; Dudley, MA: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Oosterse Studies, 2003. ———. ‘Les signatures en chiffres arithmétiques dans les manuscrits syriaques de la British Library’. In Sur les pas des Araméens chrétiens: Mélanges offerts à Alain Desreumaux, edited by F. Briquel Chatonnet and Muriel Debié, 159–67. Paris: Geuthner, 2010. ———. ‘Christian Palestinian Aramaic’. In GEDSH 96. ———. ‘Dawid bar Pawlos’. In GEDSH 116–17. ———. ‘Yaʿqub bar Shakko’. In GEDSH 430–31. ———. ‘Yuḥanān bar Zoʿbi’. In GEDSH 440. ———. ‘Dating Formulae in Syriac Inscriptions and Manuscripts of the 5th and 6th Centuries’. In G. A. Kiraz and Z. Al-Salameen, From Ugarit to Nabataea, Studies in Honour of John F. Healey, 85–106. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2012. Brock, Sebastian P., Aaron Butts, George Kiraz, and Lucas Van Rompay. Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2011. Brock, Sebastian P. and George A. Kiraz. ‘Būḥānā’. In Lectionary of the Syriac Epistles, [edited by George A. Kiraz,] pp. G-J. Glane/ Losser: Bar Hebraeus Verlag, 1991. ———. Ephrem the Syrian, Select Poems. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 2006.
Bibliography
xxxix
Brockelmann, Carl. Syrische Grammatik mit Paradigmen, Literatur, Chrestomathie. Berlin: Reuther & Reichard; New York: Lemcke & Buechner, 1912. Reprinted many times. Budge, Ernest Alfred Thompson. Syrian Anatomy, Pathology and Therapeutics; or, ‘The Book of Medicines’. London: Oxford University Press, 1913. ———. By Nile and Tigris: A Narrative of Journeys in Egypt and Mesopotamia on Behalf of the British Museum Between 1886 and 1913. 2 vols. London: John Murray, 1920. Bugatus, Gaetano. Daniel secundum editionem LXX. Milan: ex typographio Monasterii imperialis S. Ambrosii, 1788. Burkitt, F. Crawford. Evangelion da-Mepharreshe: The Curetonian Version of the Four Gospels, With the Readings of the Sinai Palimpsest and the Early Syriac Patristic Evidence. 2 vols. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1904. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2003. Butts, Aaron M. ‘Papyri, Syriac’. In GEDSH 320–22. ———. Language Change in the Wake of Empire: Syriac in its Greco-Roman Context. [in progress] Cardahi, Gabriel. al-Lubāb, wahwa kitāb fī al-luğa al-ʾārāmiyya alsuryāniyyah al-kaldāniyya (Al-Lobab seu Dictionarium SyroArabicum). 2 vols. Beirut: al-Maṭbaʿa al-Kāṯūlīkiyya, 1887–91. Reprint titled al-Lubab: Syriac-Arabic Dictionary, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2007. [in Syriac and Arabic] ———. Al-Manāhegh seu syntaxis et rhetoricae syrorum institutions. Rome: Ex Typographia Polyglotta, 1903. Caspar, [Widow of] W. Psalmi Davidis Regis & Prophetæ, lingua Syriaca. Leiden: Typographia Erpeniana Linguarum Orientalium, 1625. Ceriani, Antonio M. Codex Syro-Hexaplaris Ambrosianus photolithographice editus (Monumenta sacra et profana 7). Milan: Impensis Bibliothecae Ambrosianae; Augustae Taurinorum et Florentiae: Hermannum Loescher; London: Williams et Norgate, 1874.
xl
Bibliography
———. Translatio Syra Pescitto Veteris Testamenti ex codice Ambrosiano saec. 6 potolithographice edita (Monumenta sacra et profana 6). 2 vols. Milan: A. della Croce, 1876–83. Çiçek, Julius Yeshuʿ (ed.). Kap̱ ā ḏ-habāḇē. Glane/Losser: Bar Hebraeus Verlag, 1981.
———. Kṯāḇā ḏ-ḇeṯ gazā ḏ-neʿmāṯā ḏ-ʿīdtā sūryāytā ṯrīṣaṯ šūḇḥā. Glane/Losser: Barhebraeus Verlag, 1985. ———. Šḥīmā, ṣlawāṯā ḏ-šabṯā šḥīmtā ḏ-ʿīdtā sūryāytā trīṣaṯ šuḇḥā. Glane/Losser: Bar Hebraeus Verlag, 1999. [large format edition] Clemens, Raymond and Timothy Graham. Introduction to Manuscript Studies. Ithaca; London: Cornell University Press, 2007. Coakley, J. F. ‘Edward Breath and the Typography of Syriac’. Harvard Library Bulletin 6, no. 4 (1995): 41–64. ———. Robinson’s Paradigms and Exercises in Syriac Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. ———. The Typography of Syriac: a Historical Catalogue of Printing Types, 1537–1958. New Castle, DE: Oak Knoll Press; London: The British Library, 2006. ———. ‘Assyrian Printers in the U.S.A., 1915–1943: A Preliminary Bibliography’. Aram 21, no. 1/2 (2009): 117–48. ———. ‘When Were the Five Greek Vowel-Signs Introduced into Syriac Writing?’ Journal of Semitic Studies 66, no. 2 (2011): 307–25. ———. ‘Syriac in Library Catalogues’. Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 15, no. 1 (2012): 49–63. Costaz, L. Grammaire syriaque. Beirut: Librairie Orientale, 1955. Reprint, Beirut: Impr. Catholique, 1964. Coulmas, F. Writing Systems: An Introduction to their Linguistic Analysis. Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Cowper, B. Harris. The Principles of Syriac Grammar, translated and abridged from the work of Dr. Hoffmann. London: Williams and Norgate; Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1858. Crinesius, C. Gymnasium Syriacum. Wittenberg: n.p., 1611.
Bibliography
xli
Cross, Frank M. and David N. Freedman. Early Hebrew Orthography: A Study of the Epigraphic Evidence. New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society, 1952. Cureton, William. Fragments of the Iliad of Homer from a Syriac Palimpsest. London: Richard Taylor, 1851. Darlow, Thomas H. and Horace F. Moule. Historical Catalogue of the Printed Editions of the Holy Scripture in the Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society. 4 vols. London: The Bible House, 1903– 1911. Darmo, Thoma. Hudra. 3 vols. Kerala: Mar Narsai Press, 1960–61. [in Syriac] David, C. Joseph [Qlīmīs Yūsuf Dawūd]. Kitāb al-lumʿa al-šahiyya fī naḥw al-luğa al-suryāniyya ʿalā kilā maḏhabay al-ğarbiyyīn wa-lsharqiyyīn (Grammaire de la Langue Araméenne selon les deux dialects Syriaque et Chaldaique). 2 vols. 2nd edition, [edited by Raḥmani?].2 Mosul: Imprimerie des Pères Dominicains, 1896– 98. [in Arabic] De Dieu, L. Apocalypsis Sancti Johannis, ex manuscripto exemplari è bibliotheca clariss, viri Iosephi Scaligeri deprompto. Lugduni Batavorum: Ex typographia Elzeviriana, 1627. Dean, James Elmer. Epiphanius’ Treatise on Weights and Measures, the Syriac Version. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1935. DeFrancis, J. Visible Speech, the Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1989. Degen, Rainer. Altaramäische Grammatik der Inschriften des 10.–8. Jh. V. Chr. (Abhandlungen für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, 38.3), 25– 28. [Mainz]: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft; Wiesbaden: Kommissionsverlag f. Steiner, 1969.
2
For the possible editor of the 2nd edition, published posthumously,
see Kiraz, ‘Lexica and Grammars of the Late Syriac Tradition’ 160.
xlii
Bibliography
Desreumaux, Alain. ‘Comment peut-on écrire en syriaque? ou Des problèmes du scribe devant sa page blanche’. In Manières de penser dans l'Antiquité méditerranéenne et orientale. Mélanges offerts à Francis Schmidt par ses élèves, ses collègues et ses amis, edited by Christophe Batsch and Mădălina Vârtejanu-Joubert, 105– 26. Leiden: Brill, 2009. Dickens Mark and Peter Zieme, ‘Syro-Uigurica I: A Syriac Psalter in Uyghur Script from Turfan’. In Scripts Beyond Borders. A Survey of Allographic Traditions in the Euro-Mediterranean World, edited by J. den Heijer, A. B. Schmidt and T. Pataridze. Leuven: Peeters, forthcoming. Dolabani, Yūḥanna. Kitāb al-ʾasās fī qawāʿid al-luğa al-suryāniyya. Mardin: al-Maṭbaʿa al-Suryāniyya, 1915. [in Arabic] [Dolabani, Yūḥanna], Mušḥāṯā ḏ-mor(y) grīgoryos yūḥanān bar ʿebrāyā map̱ ryānā qadīšā ḏ-maḏnḥā. Jerusalem: al-Maṭbaʿa al-Suryāniyya bi Deir Mar Marqos, 1928. [in Syriac]
Dolabani, Yūḥanna, René Lavenant, Sebastian P. Brock, and Samir Khalil Samir. ‘Catalogue des manuscrits de la bibliothèque de patriarcat syrien orthodoxe à Ḥomṣ (Auj. à Damas)’. Parole de l’Orient 19 (1994): 555–661. Drijvers, Han J. W. and John F. Healey. The Old Syriac Inscriptions of Edessa and Osrhoene, Texts, Translations, and Commentary. Leiden: Brill, 1999. Duval, Rubens. Traité de Grammaire Syriaque. Paris: F. Vieweg, 1881. Ecchellensis, Abraham [Ibrahīm al-Ḥāqillānī]. Linguae Syriacae, sive Chaldaicae perbrevis institution ad eiusdem nationis studiosis. Rome: typis Sac. Cong. de Prop. Fide, 1628. Ewald, Heinrich. Über das syrische Punctationssystem, nach syrischen Handschriften, Abhandlungen zur orientalischen und biblischen Literatur. Göttingen: Dieterrich, 1832.
Bibliography
xliii
———. ‘Weitere Erläuterungen der syrischen Punctation, aus syrischen Handschriften’. Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 1 (1837): 204–12 Fiano, Emanuel. ‘Albonesi Ambrogio degli’. In GEDSH 13–14. Flügel, Gustav. Kitâb Al-Fihrist. Mit Anmerkungen Herausgegeben. 2 vols. Leipzig: Verlag von F. C. W. Vogel, 1872. Gabriel of St. Joseph. Syro-Chaldaic (Aramaic) Grammar. Mannanam, Kerala: St. Joseph's Press, 1961. Gacek, Adam. Arabic Manuscripts, A Vademecum for Readers. Leiden: Brill, 2009. Gelb, Ignace J. A Study of Writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963. Gelston, Anthony. The Eucharistic Prayer of Addai and Mari. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992. Gershevitch, Ilya. ‘The Alloglottography of Old Persian’. Transactions of the Philological Society 77, no. 1 (1979): 114–90. Gnanadesikan, Amalia E. The Writing Revolution: Cuneiform to the Internet. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. Goldsmith, John. Autosegmental and Metrical Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell, 1990. Gottheil, Richard H. A Treatise on Syriac Grammar by Mâr Eliâ of Ṣobhâ. Berlin: Wolf Peiser Verlag, 1887. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2003. ———. ‘A Midrashic poem on the Alphabet Attributed to David bar Paul’. Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und verwandte Gebiete 8 (1893): 86–99. Guidi, Ignatius. Chronica Minora (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium 1–2). Leuven: Secrétariat du CSCO, 1903. Haddad, Benyamin ‘Development of the Numbers over History’. Journal of the Syriac Academy 2 (1976): 221–76. Haralambous, Yannis. ‘Sabra, a Syriac TEX System’. In SyrCOM-95: Proceedings of the First International Forum on Syriac Computing, ed-
xliv
Bibliography ited by George A. Kiraz, 3–23. Cambridge, UK: The Syriac Computing Institute, 1995.
Harrak, Amir. Syriac and Garshuni Inscriptions of Iraq (Recueil des inscriptions syriaques 2). Paris: Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres, 2010. Hary, Benjamin. ‘Judeo-Arabic in Its Sociolinguistic Setting’. Israel Oriental Studies 15 (1995): 129–55. Hatch, William H. P. An Album of Dated Syriac Manuscripts. Boston: The American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1946. Reprint with a Foreword by Lucas Van Rompay, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2002. Healey, John. ‘The Earliest History of the Syriac Script. A Reassessment’. Journal of Semitic Langauges 45 (2000): 55–67. ———. Leshono Suryoyo, First Studies in Syriac (Gorgias Handbooks 2), 2nd edition. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2005. ———. ‘A New Syriac Mosaic Inscription’. Journal of Semitic Studies 51, no. 2 (2006): 313–27. Heller, Chaim. Peshitta in Hebrew Characters with Elucidatory Notes, Part I Genesis. Berlin: Druckerei Gutenberg, 1928. ———. Peshitta in Hebrew Characters with Elucidatory Notes, Part II Exodus. Berlin: Druckerei Gutenberg, 1929. Heva [Ḥawwa], Gabriel. Liber Psalmorum Davidis Idiomate Syro. Rome: Ex Typographia Perri Ferri, 1737. [in Syro-Arabic and Syriac] Hoffmann, Andreas G. Grammaticae Syriacae. Halle: Impensis librariae Orphanotrophei, 1867. Hoffmann, Georg. Opuscula Nestoriana. Kiel: G. von Maack, 1880. Hughes, Gareth. ‘A Guide to Numerals in Syriac’. 5 February 2010. [unpublished working paper] Hunter,
Erica
and
Mark
Dickens,
Verzeichnis
der
Orientalischen
Handschriften in Deutschland 5,2. Syrische Handschriften. Teil 2: Texte der Berliner Turfansammlung. Syriac Texts from the Berlin Turfan Collection. Stuttgart: VOHD, forthcoming.
Bibliography
xlv
Hussmann, Heinrich. Ein syro-melkitisches Tropologion mit altbyzantinischer Notation, Sinai Syr. 261. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1975–78. Hutchinson, Enoch. Uhlemann’s Syriac Grammar. New York: D. Appleton, 1855. Ibrahim, Gregorios Yuhanna. The Edessa-Aleppo Syriac Codex of the Chronicle of Michael the Great (Texts and Translations of the Chronicle of Michael the Great 1). Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2009. Ifrah, Georges. The Universal History of Numbers from Prehistory to the Invention of the Computer. New York: Viking, 1994. Jahn, Johann. Elementa Aramaicae seu Chaldaeo-Syriacae linguae. Vienna: A. Schmid, 1820. Jasim, Peter (ed.). Proceedings of the First Ashurbanipal Library Computer Conference. Chicago: Ashurbanipal Library Press, 1989. Jones, F. Stanley. ‘Early Syriac Pointing in and behind British Museum Additional Manuscript 12150’. In Symposium Syriacum VII (Orientalia Christiana Analecta 256), edited by René Lavenant, 429– 44. Rome: Pontificio Instituto Orientale, 1998. Juckel, Andreas. ‘Introduction to the Ḥarklean Text’. In Comparative Edition of the Syriac Gospels, edited by George A. Kiraz, vol. 1, xxxi– lxxxii. Leiden: Brill, 1996. ———. ‘Masora’. In GEDSH 276–79. Kaplan, Ayda. Paléographie syriaque. Développement d’une méthode d’expertise sur base des manuscrits syriaques de la British Library (Ve–Xe siècles). Ph.D dissertation, Université catholique de Louvain, 2008. ———. ‘Les copistes du manuscrit syriaque BL Add. 12 153 (Homélies de Gregoire de Nazianze)’. Orientalia Christiana Periodica 77, no. 2 (2011), 327–49.
xlvi
Bibliography
Kaufman, Stephen. The Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon, Text Entry and Format Manual. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987. ———. Jacob of Sarug’s Homilies on Elijah. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2009. al-Kfarnissy, Boulos. Ğrāmāṭīq al-luğa al-ʾārāmiyya al-suryāniyya, ṣarf wanaḥw. 2nd edition. Beirut: Maṭbaʿat al-Ruhbāniyya al-Mārūniyya al-Lubnāniyya, 1962. Reprint titled Grammar of the Aramaic Syriac Language, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2005. [in Arabic] King, Daniel. ‘Elements of the Syriac Grammatical Tradition as these Relate to the Origins of Arabic Grammar’. In The Foundations of Arabic Linguistics, Sībawayhi and Early Arabic Grammatical Theory (Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics, 65), edited by Amal Elesha Marogy. Leiden: Brill, forthcoming. Kiraz, George Anton. ‘A Proposed Syriac Computer Keyboard Layout’. In Proceedings of the First Ashurbanipal Library Computer Conference, edited by Peter Jasim. Chicago: Ashurbanipal Library Press, 1989. ———. Alaph Beth Font Kit. User Manual. Los Angeles: Alaph Beth Computer Systems, 1990. ———. ‘Computers: Innovation and New Future to Syriac Studies’. In V Symposium Syriacum 1998, edited by René Lavenant 451–58. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 1990. ———. A Computer-Generated Concordance to the Syriac New Testament. 6 vols. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1993. ———. ‘Automatic Concordance Generation of Syriac Texts’. In VI Symposium Syriacum 1992, edited by René Lavenant, 461–75. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 1994. ———. Introduction to Syriac Spirantization. Losser: Bar Hebraeus Verlag, 1995. [in Arabic, Syriac, and English]
Bibliography
xlvii
———. Comparative Edition of the Syriac Gospels, Aligning the Sinaiticus, Curetonianus, Peshitta and Harklean Versions. 4 vols. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1996. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2004. ———. MELTHO: Syriac OpenType Fonts for Windows XP/2000™ and Windows 95/98/ME™ User Guide Version 1.2. Piscataway: Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute, 2001. [electronic file distributed with the Meltho fonts] ———. The New Syriac Primer, an Introduction to the Syriac Language with a CD (Gorgias Handbooks 9). Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2007. ———, ed. The Searchable and Bookmarked Syriac-English Dictionary: A Searchable PDF of J. Payne Smith’s A Compendious Syriac Dictionary. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2007. [eBook] ———. ‘Lexica and Grammars in the Late Syriac Tradition: The Three Bishops: Audo, Manna, and David’. In Foundations for Syriac Lexicography II, Colloquia of the International Syriac Language Project, edited by P. J. Williams, 155–63. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2009. ———. ‘Forty Years of Syriac Computing’. Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 10, no. 1 (2011): 37–60. ———. ‘Syriac’. In The World Encyclopedia of Calligraphy, edited by Christopher Calderhead and Holly Cohen, 261–62. New York: Sterling: 2011. ———. ‘Taw Mim Semkath’. In GEDSH 397. ———. ‘Yuḥanon Qashisho’. In GEDSH 447. ———. ‘Old Syriac Graphotactics’. Journal of Semitic Studies 57, no. 2 (2012): 231–64. ———. ‘Challenges in Syriac Text Editions using the DOS-based Word Processor Multi-Lingual Scholar’. In The Letter Before the Spirit: The Importance of Text Editions for the Study of the Reception of Aristotle, edited by A. M. I. van Oppenraay. Leiden: Brill, forthcoming.
xlviii
Bibliography
———. ‘Garshunography: Terminology and Some Formal Properties of Writing One Language in the Script of Another’. In Scripts beyond Borders. A Survey of Allographic Traditions in the EuroMediterranean World, edited by J. den Heijer, A. Schmidt, and T. Pataridze. Leuven: Peeters, forthcoming. ———. Garshuni Primer with Chrestomathy. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, forthcoming. Koonammakkal, Thomas. ‘An Introduction to Malayalam Karshon’. The Harp 15 (2002): 99–106. Kreyenbroek, P. G. ‘The Lawîj of Môr Basîliôs Shimʿûn: A Kurdish Christian Text in Syriac Script’. Journal of Kurdish Studies 1 (1995): 29–53. Kṯāḇā ḏ-mazmūre ḏ-ḏāwīḏ malkā wa-nḇīyā. Quzḥayya: 1610. [in Syriac] Kṯāḇā ḏ-qūrāḇā ʾa(y)ḵ ʿyāḏā ḏ-mārūnāye. Rome: 1592–94. [in Syriac] Lahmo dhayé: The Book of the Divine Liturgy According to the Rite of the Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch. Beirut: 2002. [in Syriac and Arabic] Lantschoot, Arnold van. ‘Un texte arménien en lettres syriaques’. In Mélanges Eugène Tisserant III, Orient chrétien, Deuxième partie (Studi e Testi 233) 419–28. Vatican City: 1964. ———. Inventaire des Manuscrits Syriaques des fonds Vatican (490–631), Barberini Oriental et Neofiti. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1965. Löfgren, Ulf. Ludde vo telefon, translated into Ṭūrāyā by Besim Aydin. Estland: Arjovi Förlag, 2010. [in Ṭuroyo] Loopstra, Jonathan Andrew. Patristic Selections in the “Masoretic” Handbooks of the Qarqaptā Tradition. 2 vols. Ph.D. dissertation, The Catholic University of America, 2009. Maggi M. and P. Orsatti, ‘Two Syro-Persian Hymns for Palm Sunday and Maundy Thursday’. In idem (eds.), The Persian language in history (Beiträge zur Iranistik 33), 247–85. Wiesbaden: L. Reichert, 2011.
Bibliography
xlix
Makdasi, Jérémie. Tūrrāṣ mamllā (Grammaire Chaldéenne). Mosul: Imprimerie des pères dominicains, 1889. Reprints, Baghdad: Maṭbaʿat Offset al-Mašriq, 1978; with Arabic translation by Kawṯar Najīb ʿAbd al-ʾAḥad, Irbil: Maṭbaʿat al-Ḥāj Hāšim, 2006; in W. Syr. script edited by Barsaumo Samoil Dogan, Enschede: B. S. Dogan, 1997. [in Syriac] Malki, Joseph A. al-Mabādiʾ al-ʾawwaliyya lil-lahja al-suryāniyya alṭūrāniyya. Qamishli: J. Malki, 2006. [in Arabic] Manna, Awgīn. Kitāb al-ʾuṣūl al-jalīla fī naḥw al-luğa al-ʾārāmiyya ʿalā kilā maḏhabayy al-šarqiyyīn wal-ğarbiyyīn (Cours de Langue Araméenne selon deux dialects Syriaque et Chaldaique). Mosul: Imprimerie des Pères Dominicains, 1886. [in Arabic] ———. Marge peg ̱ y̱ ānāye ḏ-mardūṯā ḏ-ʾārāmāye (Morceaux choisis de
Littérature Araméenne). 2 vols. Mosul: Imprimerie des Pères Dominicains, 1901–02. Reprint, Bagdad: Maṭbaʿat al-Mašriq, 1978. [in Syriac]
Margoliouth, David Samuel. ‘The Syro-Armenian Dialect’. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1898): 839–61. Margoliouth, Jessie P. A Compendious Syriac Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1903. [reprinted many times] Martin, Paulin. ‘Histoire de la ponctuation ou de la massore chez les Syriens’. Journal Asiatique 7 no. 5 (1875): 81–208. Masius, Andreas. Grammatica linguae Syriacae Inventore Atq Avctore. Antwerp: Excudebat Christophorus Plantinus Architypographus Regius, 1573. McCarthy, John. ‘A Prosodic Theory of Nonconcatenative Morphology’. Linguistic Inquiry 12, no. 3 (1981): 207–63. McCollum, Adam. ‘Divine Invocations and Daxologies in Manuscripts of Some Languages of the Christian East’. Hill Museum & Manuscript Library Chronicle. Entry posted May 2, 2011. http://www.hmml. org/news10/AM.htm.
l
Bibliography
Mengozzi, Alessandro. ‘The History of Garshuni as a Writing System: Evidence from the Rabbula Codex’. In CAMSEMUD 2007: Proceedings of the 13th Intalian Meeting of Afro-Asiatic Linguistics, edited by Frederick Mario Fales and Giulia Francesca Grassi, 297– 304. Padova: SARGON, 2010. ———. ‘Sureth’. In GEDSH, 385–86. Merx, Albert. Historia artis grammaticae apud Syros (Abhandlungen für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 9.2). Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1889. Michaelis, Christianus Benedictus. Syriasmus, id est grammatica linguae Syriacae: cum fundamentis necessariis, tum paradigmatibus plenioribus, tum denique ubere syntaxi, et idiomatibus linguae, instructa. Halle: Impensis Orphanotrophei, 1741. Michaelis, Johann David. Ioannis Davidis Michaelis Grammatica Syriaca. Halle: Impensis Orphanotrophei, 1784. Mingana, Alphonse. Clef de la langue araméenne ou grammaire complète et pratique des deux dialectes syriaques occidental et oriental. Mosul: Impr. des Pères Dominicains, 1905. ———. Catalogue of the Mingana Collection of Manuscripts. 3 vols. Cambridge, UK: W. Heffer and Sons, 1933. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2006. Moberg,
Axel.
‘Über
den
griechischen
Ursprung
der
syrischen
Akzentuation’. Le monde oriental 1, no. 2 (1906): 87–100. ———. Le Livre des Splendeurs, la Grande Grammaire de Grégoire Barhebraeus, texte Syriaque édité d’après les manuscrits avec une introduction et des notes (Skrifter utgivna av K. Humanistiska vetenskapssamfundet i Uppsala 4). Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, [etc.],
1922.
Reprint
titled
Kṯāḇā
ḏ-ṣemḥe
ḏ-ʿal
īḏaʿṯā
ğramaṭīqāytā ḏ-lešānā suryāyā (Grammar of the Syriac Language), [Södertälje]:
Utgiven
av
Kommitté, 1983. [in Syriac]
Syrianska
Riksforbundets
Kultur
Bibliography
li
Moller, Garth I. ‘Towards a New Typology of the Syriac Manuscript Alphabet’. Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 14 (1988): 153– 97. Müller-Kessler, Christa and Michael Sokoloff. A Corpus of Christian Palestinian Aramaic. 5 vols. Groningen: STYX Publ, 1996. Muraoka, Takamitsu. Classical Syriac for Hebraists. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1987. ———. Classical Syriac: A Basic Grammar with a Chrestomathy. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1997. Murre-van den Berg, H.L. From a Spoken to a Written Language. The Introduction and Development of Literary Urmia Aramaic in the Nineteenth Century. Publication of the “De Goeje Fund” No. XXVIII, (1999). Leiden, 1999. http://hdl.handle.net/1887/7891. Nadwat tawḥīd al-ḵaṭ al-suryānī / Min buḥūṯ nadwat al-ḵaṭ al-suryānī.3 Baghdad: ʾIttiḥād al-ʾUdabāʾ wal-Kuttāb al-ʿIrāqiyyīn / ʾIttiḥād al-ʾUdabāʾ wal-Kuttāb al-Suryān, 2006. [in Arabic] Nau, François. ‘Notes d’astronomie indienne’. Journal Asiatique 10 (1910): 209–25. Nelson, Paul, George A. Kiraz and Sargon Hasso. ‘Proposal to Encode Syriac in ISO/IEC 10646’. Cupertino, CA: Unicode Technical Committee Meeting, 1998. Nestle, Eberhard. ‘Zur Geschichte der syrischen Punctation’. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 30 (1876): 525–33. ———. Syriac Grammar with Bibliography, Chrestomathy, and Glossary, edited by K. C. Hanson. Berlin: Reuther’s Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1889. Reprint, Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2002. Nöldeke, Theodor. Grammatik der neusyrische Sprache am Urmia-See und in Kurdistan. Leipzig: T. O. Weigel, 1868. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2009.
3
First title is on the title page; second title on book cover.
lii
Bibliography
———. Compendious Syriac Grammar. Translated by James Crichton. London: Williams & Norgate, 1904. Reprint, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2003. Nuro, Abrohom. ʾEsṭrangelāyāṯā šaryāṯā. Beirut: 1966. [booklet, in Syriac and Arabic] ———. Sulaqa. Aleppo: A. Nuro; Hengelo: Hengelo Smit, 1989. [in Syriac] Oberleitner, Andreas. Chrestomathia Syriaca una cum Glossario SyriacoLatino. Vienna: Schmid, 1826. Oez, Mikael. Cyriacus of Tagrit and his Book on Divine Providence. 2 vols. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2012. Ögunc-Schüsche, Bitris. Buyük Ayin (Kuddas). [Augsburg]: Druckerei Blasaditsch, 1977. Palacios, Ludovicus. Grammatica Syriaca. Rome: Desclée, 1954. Palmer, Andrew N. ‘Corpus of Syriac Inscriptions from Tur ʿAbdin and Environs’. Oriens Christiatus 71 (1987): 53–139. ———. ‘The Syriac Letter-Forms of Ṭūr ʿAbdīn and Environs’. Oriens Christianus 73 (1989): 68–89. Penn, Michael P. ‘Monks, Manuscripts and Muslims: Syriac Textual Changes in Reaction to the Rise of Islam’. Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 12, no. 2 (2009): 235–57. Pennacchietti, Fabrizio. ‘Un manoscritto curdo in karshuni da Aradin (Iraq)’. Annali dell'Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli 36 (1976): 548–52. Phillips, George. A Letter of Mār Jacob, Bishop of Edessa, on Syriac Orthography: Also a Tract by the Same Author, and a Discourse by Gregory bar Hebraeus on Syriac Accents. London: Williams and Norgate, 1869. ———. ‘Syriac Accents’. Journal of Philology 9 (1880): 221–29. Postel, Guillaume. Linguarum duodecim characteribus differentium alphabetum, introductio, ac legendi modus longè facilimus. Linguarum
Bibliography
liii
nomina sequens proximè pagella offeret. Prostant Parisiis: Apud Dionysium Lescuier …, [1538]. Pusey, Philip Edward and George Henry Gwilliam. Tetraeuangelium sanctum: juxta simplicem Syrorum versionem ad fidem codicum Massorae, editionum denuo recognitum. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1901. Reprint titled The fourfold Holy Gospel in the Peshitta Syriac version: as revised in accordance with the readings of ancient manuscripts and early editions with an introduction by Andreas Juckel, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2003. Qarabāši, ʿAbd al-Masīḥ Nuʿmān. Zmīrāṯā ḏ-ʿīdtā. Qamišlī: Maṭbaʿat alŠabāb, 1968. [in Syriac] Rahmani, Ignace Ephrem II. al-Mabāḥiṯ al-jaliyya fī al-līturjiyyāt alšarqiyya wal-ğarbiyya, tatanāwal muʿāraḍat baʿḍihā bi-baʿḍ (Les Liturgies Orientales et Occidentales, compares entre elles et étudiées séparément). Charfet, Mont Liban: Imprimerie Patriarcale Syrienne, 1924. [in Arabic] Risius, Geo. al-Kitāb seu Grammatica et Ars Metrica Languæ Syriacæ. Beirut: n.p., 1897. Robinson, Theodore H. Paradigms and exercises in Syriac grammar. 4th edition. Revised by L. H. Brockington. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1962. [reprinted many times] Rödiger, E. ‘Die Syrischen Zahlzeichen’. ZDMG 16 (1862) 555–78. Rogers, Henry. Writing Systems: A Linguistic Approach. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. Rubio, Gonzalo. ‘Writing in Another Tongue: Alloglottography in the Ancient Near East’. In Margins of Writing, Origins of Cultures, edited by Seth L. Sanders (Oriental Institute Seminars 2) 33–66. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 2006. Rudimentum Syriacum. Rome: Paulinus, 1618. Ruska, Julius. Das Quadrivium aus Severus Bar Šakkû’s Buch der Dialoge. Leipzig: W. Drugulin, 1896.
liv
Bibliography
Sabar, Yona. ‘On the Nature of the Oral Translations of the Book of Exodus in Neo-Aramaic’. Maarav 5–6 (1990): 311–17. ———. ‘The Hebrew Bible Vocabulary as Reflected through Traditional Oral Neo-Aramaic Translations’. In Semitic Studies in honor of W. Leslau, edited by A. S. Kaye, vol. II, 1385–1401. Wiesbaden: 1991. Sampson, Geoffrey. Writing Systems: A Linguistic Introduction. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1985. Sauget, J. M. ‘Vestiges d’une célébration Gréco-Syriaque de l’Anaphore de Saint Jacques’. In After Chalcedon, Studies in Theology and Church History offered to Professor Albert Van Roey for his Seventieth Birthday, edited by Carl Laga, Joseph A. Munitiz, and Lucas Van Rompay, 309–45. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters, 1985. Schaaf, Carolus. Lexicon Syriacum Concordantiale. Leiden: Boutesteyn & Luchtmans, 1717. Schmidt, Andrea. ‘Arménien et syriaque’. In Arménie: la magie de l’écrit (exposition, Marseille, Centre de la vieille charité, 27 avril–22 juillet 2007), edited by C. Mutafian, 345–48. Paris: Somogy, 2007. Schwartz, Martin. ‘A Page of a Sogdian Liber Vitae’. In Corolla Iranica: Papers in Honour of Prof. Dr. David Neil MacKenzie, edited by Ronald E. Emmerick and Dieter Weber, 157–66. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1991. Sciadrensis, Isaac [Isḥāq al-Šadrāwī]. Ğramaṭīqī ḏ-lešānā sūryāyā (Grammatica Linguae Syriacae). Rome: Collegio Maronitarum, 1636. [in Syriac] Segal, J. B. The Diacritical Point and the Accents in Syriac. London; New York; Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1953. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2004. ———. ‘Some Syriac Inscriptions of the 2nd–3rd Century A.D’. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 16 (1954): 13–36.
̄ A Historical Introduction’. Journal of Se———. ‘Quššaya and Rukkaka: mitic Studies 34, no. 2 (1989): 483–91.
Bibliography Segert,
Stanislav.
Altaramäische
Grammatik.
lv Leipzig:
Verlag
Enzyklopädie, 1975. Seife, Charles. Zero, The Biography of a Dangerous Idea. New York: Viking Penguin, 2000. Shabo, Eli (ed.). Syriac Reading Lessons by Malfono ʿAbd-Mshiho dQarabash. Midland Park, NJ: Fr. Eli Shabo/Aramaic American Association, 2006. Sims-Williams, Nicholas. ‘Syro-Sogdica III: Syriac elements in Sogdian’. In A Green Leaf: Papers in Honour of Professor Jes P. Asmussen, edited by Werner Sundermann, Jacques Duchesne-Guillemin and Fereydun Vahman, 145–56. Leiden: Brill, 1988. ———. ‘Christian Literature in Middle Iranian Languages’. In The Literature of Pre-Islamic Iran (History of Persian Literature 17), edited by Ronald E. Emmerick and Maria Macuch, 266–87. London: I. B. Tauris, 2009. ———. ‘Early New Persian in Syriac Script: Two Texts from Turfan’. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 74 (2011): 353–74. Sivanand, Sunil and Daniel Benjamin. ‘An Early Aramaic (Syriac) Word Processor under DOS’. Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 14, no. 2 (2011): 307–13. Smith, Robert Payne. Thesaurus Syriacus. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1868–1901. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2007. Sokoloff, Michael. A Syriac Lexicon: A Translation from the Latin; Correction, Expansion, and Update of C. Brockelmann’s Lexicon Syriacum. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns; Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2009. Sproat, Richard. A Computational Theory of Writing Systems (Studies in Natural Language Processing). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Strothmann, W. ‘Die syrische Schreibmaschine’. In Paul de Lagarde und die syrische Kirchengeschichte, edited by Göttinger Arbeitskreis für syrische Kirchengeschichte, 265. Göttingen: Lagarde-Haus, 1968.
lvi
Bibliography
Syriac Modern New Testament. New York: American Bible Society, 1948. Syriac Academy. Mašrūʿ al-ḥarf al-suryāni al-muwaḥḥad. Baghdad: Syriac Academy, 1975. [in Arabic and Syriac] Takahashi, Hidemi and Jos J. S. Weitenberg. ‘The Shorter SyriacArmenian Glossary in Ms. Yale Syriac 9’. Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 10 (2010): 68–83. ———. ‘Bar ʿEbroyo’. In GEDSH 54–56. ———. ‘The Shorter Syriac-Armenian Glossary in MS. Yale Syriac 9; Part 2: Glossary in Transcription/Translation’. Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 14, no. 1 (2011), 87–144. ———. ‘Armenisch-Garschuni (Armenisch in syrischer Schrift)’. In Scripts Beyond Borders. A Survey of Allographic Traditions in the Euro-Mediterranean World, edited by J. den Heijer, A. B. Schmidt and T. Pataridze. Leuven: Peeters, forthcoming. Tannous, Jack. Lovers of Labor at the End of the Ancient World: Syriac Scholars Between Byzantium and Islam. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies; Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, forthcoming. Taylor, David G.K. The Syriac Versions of the De Spiritu Sancto by Basil of Caesarea. Leuven: Peeters, 1999. ———. An Annotated Bibliography of Printed Syriac Lexica. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, forthcoming. Taylor, Isaac. The Alphabet: An Account of the Origin and Development of Letters. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co, 1883. Tekso Dkurobo Aloyoyo. Istanbul: Matbathö dbeth Kilimci, 2001. [in Syriac and Turkish] Teule, Herman. ‘Eliya I of Tirhan’. In GEDSH 141. ———. ‘Eliya of Nisibis’. In GEDSH 143. Thackston, Wheeler M. Introduction to Syriac: An Elementary Grammar with Readings from Syriac Literature. Bethesda, MD: Ibex Publishers, 1999.
Bibliography
lvii
The Aramaic Scriptures Research Society in Israel. The New Covenant Commonly Called The New Testatment, Peshiṭta Aramaic Text with a Hebrew Translation. Jerusalem: The Bible Society, 1986. The Four Gospels in Modern Syriac: Turoyo. New York: American Bible Society, 1995. The New Testament in Syriac. London: The British and Foreign Bible Society, 1950. The Order of Holy Qurbana for the Use of the Faithful. San Jose: Adiabene Publications, 2001. The Service Book of the Holy Qurbana. Udayagiri, Kerala: Seminary Publications, 1994. [in Syriac and English] Tremellius, Immanuel. Testamentum Novum: Est autem interpretatio Syriaca Novi Testamenti. Geneva: Henr. Stephanus, 1569. Trigona-Harany, Benjamin. ‘A Bibliography of Süryânî Periodicals in Ottoman Turkish’. Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 12, no. 2 (2009): 287–300. ———. ‘A Description of Syro-Ottoman’. In Between Religion and Language: Turkish-speaking Christians, Jews and Greek-speaking Muslims and Catholics in the Ottoman Empire (Türk dilleri araştırmaları dizisi 48), edited by Evangelia Balta and Mehmet Ölmez. Istanbul: Eren, 2011. Tullberg [aka Tuliberg], Hampus Kristoffer. Initia linguae syriacae. Lund: Berling, 1837. Tuma, Severus Jacob. Tārīḵ al-kanīsa al-suryāniyya al-hindiyya. Beirut: Maṭābiʿ Faddūl, 1951. [in Arabic; English translation: Ignatius Jacob III, History of the Syriac Church of India, translated by Matti Moosa, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2009] Uhlemann, Friedrich G. Elementarlehre der syrischen Sprache, mit vollständigen Paradigmen, syrischen Lesestücken und dem dazu gehörenden Wörterbuche, für akademische Vorlesungen. Berlin: T. H. Riemann, 1829. [references are made to Hutchinson’s translation]
lviii
Bibliography
Ungnad, Arthur. Syrische Grammatik mit Übungsbuch. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1913. Unicode Consortium. The Unicode Standard, Version 3.0, edited by Joan Aliprand et.al. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 2000. ———. The Unicode Standard, Version 5.0, edited by Julie D. Allen et al. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 2007. Unval, Yuyoqim. [An Abbreviation List of the Sigla in Touma Audo’s Lexicon.] In Treasure of the Syriac Language: A Dictionary of Classical Syriac, by Thomas Audo, vol. 1, 7–15. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2008. [in Syriac] Van Rompay, Lucas. ‘Some Preliminary Remarks on the Origins of Classical Syriac as a Standard Language. The Syriac Version of Eusebius of Caesarea’s Ecclesiastical History’. In Semitic and Cushitic Studies, edited by G. Goldenberg and S. Raz, 70–89. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2004. ———. ‘A Precious Gift to Deir al-Surian (AD 1211): Ms. Vat. Syr. 13’. In Malphono w-Rabo d-Malphone, Studies in Honor of Sebastian P. Brock, edited by George A. Kiraz, 735–49. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2008. ———. ‘Ishoʿyahb bar Malkun’. In GEDSH 219. ———. ‘Mushe of Mardin’. In GEDSH 300–01. Voigt, Rainer. ‘Das Vokalsystem des Syrischen nach Barhebraeus’. Orienst Christianus 81 (1997): 36–69. Wardini, Eli. Neologisms in Modern Literary Syriac: Some Preliminary Results. Master thesis, University of Oslo, 1995. Warfield, Benjamin B. ‘The Massora Among the Syrians, freely translated and adapted from the French of the Abbé J. P. P. Martin’. Hebraica 2, no. 1 (1885): 13–23. Wernberg-Møller, P. ‘Some Scribal and Linguistic Features of the Genesis Part of the Oldest Peshiṭta Manuscript (B.M. Add. 14425)’. Journal of Semitic Studies 13 (1968): 136–61.
Bibliography
lix
Widmanstetter, Johannes. Syriacæ Lingvae Iesv, Christo Eivsqve Matri… Prima Elementa. Vienna: 1555. Wilkinson, Robert J. The Kabbalistic Scholars of the Antwerp Polyglot Bible. Leiden: Brill, 2007. ———. Orientalism, Aramaic and Kabbalah in the Catholic Reformation, the First Printing of the Syriac New Testament. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Wiseman, Nicholas P. Horae syriacae: seu, Commentationes et anecdota res vel litteras syriacas spectantia. Rome: F. Bourliè, 1828. Wright, William. Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum. 3 vols. 1870–72. Reprint, Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2002. Yeates, Thomas. A Syriac Grammar Principally Adapted to the New Testament in that Langauge. London, 1819. Young, R. Shorter catechism agreed upon by the Assembly of Divines at Westminster now for the first time translated into the Syriac language. Edinburgh: Robert Young, 1853. Zitoun, Zeki. The Book of the Divine Mass of the Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch. Sydney: Z. Zitoun, 1992. Zschokke, Hermanno. Institutiones Fundamentales Linguae Aramaicae seu Dialectorum Chaldaicae ac Syriacae. Vienna: Braumueller, 1870.
1. Sources and their Historical Context
The beginning and foundation of orthoepy and orthography are the written letters.
Elia of Ṣoba (975–1046), Tūrrāṣ mamllā
But this book cannot be understood unless one first learns to comprehend the language and interpret the characters in which it is written.
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), Il Saggiatore
§1.
Orthography and the writing system are an integral com-
ponent of linguistic description. They interface closely with phonological description, and, to a lesser extent, with morphological and syntactic descriptions. In recent years, linguists have built on the terminology used for phonology to describe writing systems. Hence, in writing systems one now speaks of graphs, graphemes, and allographs, terms coined to be conceptually analogous with the terms phones, phonemes, and allophones of phonology, and the terms morphs, morphemes, and allomorphs of morphology. In typography, one speaks of glyphs and ligatures. This chapter introduces the terms used in subsequent chapters (1.1) and provides a discussion on the sources (1.2 ff.). Terms and concepts that are confined to one chapter are introduced in that chapter. §2.
Syriac is a dialect of Aramaic with a literature spanning
from the 3rd or 4th century until the present day. The earliest examples of writing come from the area of Edessa and its surroundings in Mesopotamia, which has led scholars to consider Syriac the Aramaic dialect of Edessa. Later, Syriac expanded beyond this
1
2
Sources and their Historical Context
§2.
geographical area to become the main medium of writing for most Christians of the Middle East. §3.
As noted by Coakley, Syriac ‘is the name of a language and
of a script’.1 The script, the earliest example of which in the form of an inscription dated A.D. 6, was used to write not only the Syriac language, but also a wide range of Semitic and non-Semitic languages such as Arabic, Neo-Aramaic, Armenian, Persian, Turkish, Malayalam, and others. As a language, while primarily written in the Syriac script, it has also been written in other scripts. This book is concerned with Syriac as both a language and a script.
1.1.
Preliminaries
§4.
A few technical terms are used throughout the book. A
graph is the most basic unit of written language, and typically corresponds to a letter of the alphabet, a diacritic, a punctuation mark, or a digit. For instance, we say that the Syriac word ‘spot, mark’ consists of three graphs and
ܡ
, ,
< ܡm>. (Angle brackets, , enclose orthographic trans-
literations.) In this case, the initial and final shapes of differ, and, hence, are considered unique graphs. §5.
A grapheme is defined at a more abstract level. It is de-
fined as the minimally significant unit in the writing system. In the word
ܡ
, for example, the first graph is the letter
Mīm; so is the last graph. As their shapes differ, they are considered two separate graphs. But the difference in shape is merely contextual: at the beginning of the word the shape is end the shape is
, but at the
ܡ. This is not considered a significant difference, and for this reason it is said that both graphs, and ܡ, are the 1
ch. 1
Coakley, Typography 4 n. 18.
Sources and their Historical Context
§6.
3
same grapheme . Indeed, they are allographs of the same grapheme realized as variants in writing. §6.
Segmental graphemes pertain to graphemes that are pre-
sent in speech, viz. consonants and vowels. In Syriac writing, however, consonants and vowels are not on equal footing. In fact, the writing system is a consonantary;2 i.e. texts consist primarily of consonantal graphemes. Vowels are rarely written, and in fact were not introduced to the writing system until much later in the history of the language. Hence, the writing system is phonologically underspecified; e.g.
ܢ
‘our Lord’ is read /māran/
where both vowels are lacking in the orthography.3 (Solidi, //, enclose phonemic transcriptions.) This consonantal feature of the writing system may have to do with the morphological nature of the language; viz. its root-and-pattern morphology. In such a system, a consonantal root is rendered into many derivational forms by the imposition of vowels; e.g.
ܒ
can be /kṯaḇ/ ‘he
wrote’, /kāṯeḇ/ ‘he writes’, and /kṯāḇ/ ‘book ABS.’. It is the consonants that give the common semantic specification.
2
Most grammars refer to the consonantal letters as the ‘alphabet’.
Gelb (147 ff.) argued that the West Semitic writing system, at least prior to vocalization, is not alphabetic but rather syllabic, where each consonant represents a CV syllable; so did Segal (7 & 10). However, linguists of writing systems today all agree that our domain here is a consonantary, not a syllabary. 3
This is not too far from modern usage of the English language in
the genre of ‘texting’, where omitting letters saves time and money. The first letters to go are vowels. One finds today advertisements such as FSTR
TXT
for ‘text faster’, which a few decades ago—and most probably in the
future when this genre becomes obsolete—would have made no sense.
4
Sources and their Historical Context
§7.
§7.
Consonantal graphemes are those segmental graphemes
that are part of the ‘alphabet’4 proper; i.e. the consonantary. The consonants are always written on the base line, right-to-left, in a predictable order. For this reason, they are called linear elements. Chapter 1 is devoted to the consonantal system. §8.
Vowel graphemes are those optional segmental graph-
emes that indicate vowels. As they are written above (supralinear) or below (sublinear) the consonantal graphemes, they are called nonlinear elements; e.g. the symbols on Chapter 1 is devoted to the vocalization system. §9.
ܳ ܰܢ
.
Nonsegmental graphemes (called auxiliary marks or signs
by Gelb)5 appear in writing but not in speech. To this category belong punctuation and editorial marks (Chapter 5), as well as digits and numbers (Chapter 7). §10.
Syriac has a wide range of what may be called supra-
segmental graphemes; i.e. graphemes that affect speech beyond a phonological segment. These pertain to a number of linguistic levels that affect pronunciation. Grammatical graphemes (Chapter 4), for instance, are diacritics that encode grammatical information. Some are obligatory, such as the syāme grapheme in
ܰ ̈ ـ ܶܐ
‘kings’ which represents morphological PLURAL (q.v. §225).
Others are optional, such as the supralinear- and sublinear-point graphemes in
ܰ ݁ ݂ ݂ܒ
‘he wrote’ which represent the phonological
features PLOSIVE and FRICATIVE, respectively (q.v. §210), or the diacritical points that distinguish homographs (q.v. §237). Prosodic graphemes (Chapter 6), or accent points, are very ancient points which are also arguably supra-segmental as they mostly 4
I use the term quoted because technically an alphabet consists of
both consonants and vowels, such as the Greek and Latin alphabets. 5
ch. 1
Gelb 248.
Sources and their Historical Context
§12.
5
affect prosody. Their function cannot always be ascertained now with clarity. They were used to instruct the reader on vocalization and intonation, especially in Biblical texts. In earlier periods, these and the punctuation graphemes mentioned above were intertwined. §11.
Graphotactics is the study of the arrangement of graphs,
(cf. with phonotactics, i.e. the study of the arrangement of sounds, and morphotactics, of morphemes). While usually used in western languages to express spelling rules, the term is extended here to study the arrangement of linear and nonlinear graphs which sit on various horizontal tiers or levels. A theory of Syriac graphotactics is proposed in Chapter 1. §12.
Further terms used throughout include the following: Free
graphemes occur independently, such as all consonantal graphemes. Bound graphemes occur only in combination with other graphemes, such as all vowel and grammatical graphemes which cannot stand on their own. The notion of free and bound can be extended to graphs. A polygraph is a sequence of two or more graphemes which represent one phoneme. There exists only one consonantal polygraph in Greek loan words where the Syriac sequence
represents the Greek phoneme /ξ/. Once in
Syriac, however, the Greek phoneme is broken into two Syriac phonemes, /k/ and /s/, as evidenced by the application of phonological processes on one of the phonemes only; e.g. applying fricatization on /k/ in
ܳ ܳܐ
ܰ ݂ܐ
‘foreigner’, from Greek ξένος. A linear
grapheme and a nonlinear grapheme may together form a polygraph in native Syriac words, usually forming vowel phonemes; e.g. the sequence
ܽ < ◌ܘūw> represents the phoneme /ū/ in ݁ ܽ ܳ ܐ
/pūmā/ ‘mouth’. One may even encounter three phonemes in a
ܽ
polygraph as in
ܽ ܽ ܗܘ ̣ ‘he’ (the vowel ◌, the Waw, and the
sublinear point for /ū/). A polyphone occurs when a single
6
Sources and their Historical Context
§12.
grapheme represents more than one phoneme (e.g. the English grapheme representing the phoneme sequence /ks/). Syriac has no polyphones. §13.
In typography, a glyph is a graphical representation of a
written symbol in a particular typeface. While every graph is a glyph, more than one graph can form a unique glyph called a ligature. For instance, the Serṭā graph sequence represented by the ligature
ܐ
is
. Ligatures are of two types:
obligatory ligatures, such as Serṭo , and optional ligatures, such as
for the sequence
. All Syriac ligatures are
nonstructural in the sense that they are not graphemes, nor do they have a place in the alphabetical sequence (unlike the Arabic structural ligature
لا, for the sequence , which has a slot in
the alphabet after the letter Waw.) A sort is a piece of (typically metal) type that represents a particular symbol which may be a graph or a ligature. Some print types, for example, have a single
ܰ
sort that combines a character and a vowel such as ܒ. §14.
As for rule formalism, a formal notation is used amongst
linguists to describe historical change, phonological processes, or sound change. In this notation, A
B
reads ‘A rewrites as B,’ or ‘A changes into B’.6 In diachronic descriptions, A usually describes an earlier form of B. Sometimes the change is bound by contextual constraints. A context is usually specified with the notation A
6
B / X___Y
It is more common to see the operator > instead of
erature. However, borrowing from formal language theory,
in the litis used
here in order to avoid confusion with the grapheme markers . ch. 1
Sources and their Historical Context
§15.
7
which reads ‘A changes into B when preceded by X and followed by Y’ (the slash separates the transformation from the context and the short line where the transformation takes place). Here, X is the preceding context, and Y the following context.7 For instance, in a phonological description, one may say ʔ
y / V___V
which reads ‘the glottal stop /ʔ/ changes into a /y/ when preceded by a vowel and followed by a vowel’ as in W. Syr.
ܶ ܳ ܐܡ
/qoyēm/ where the Ālap̱ is pronounced as if it were Yūḏ. The word boundary symbol, #, may also be used to specify context. In such a case, /___# reads ‘word-finally’, and /#___ reads ‘wordinitially’. §15.
As for dating, the entirety of Syriac literature belongs to
the Christian Era, the first dated writing being from A.D. 6. As such, all dates are A.D. unless explicitly expressed otherwise. When citing examples, the phrase ‘as early as’ simply indicates the earliest example I have personally encountered. A number of dates appear throughout and are listed here for convenience: 6 is the date of the earliest dated inscription, written in Old Syriac. 240–243 is the date of the three legal parchments, also written in Old Syriac. 411 is the date of the earliest dated literary manuscript. 7th century is the period around which one begins to find distinctiveness between E. and W. Syr. 708 Jacob of Edessa dies.
7
The use of left-context and right-context for X and Y, respectively,
is avoided as these terms are more appropriate for left-to-right languages. Using them to describe right-to-left Syriac will no doubt cause confusion.
8
Sources and their Historical Context
§16.
§16.
As already indicated in the preface, the arrangement in
this book is neither diachronic nor synchronic but rather thematic. Statements regarding a particular phenomenon or rule cannot be generalized over periods of time. The dates of examples can sometimes, but not always, be a dating guide. The remainder of this chapter gives a historical narrative of Syriac writing based on the various available historical sources.
1.2.
Old Syriac Sources
§17.
The earliest evidence of Syriac writing comes from Old
Syriac, a form of Syriac that predates Classical Syriac and is known to us from inscriptions, mosaics, coins, and three legal parchments. The earliest dated inscription is from the year 6, while the parchments (three, to be exact) are from the 240s. The following conclusions can be drawn from these texts. 1.2.1.
§18.
The Consonantal System
The twenty-two graphemes of the consonantary are all
present in Old Syriac.8 This period, however, differs from the later Classical Syriac period in graphotactics and ductus. §19.
In terms of allography, the graphemes in Old
Syriac have distinct isolated and final allographs in most instances. One dotless grapheme is used for and , viz.ܖ. §20.
Graphotactically, the joining properties of the graphemes
differ substantially from Classical Syriac. I have demonstrated elsewhere9 that graphemes were quite disjointed in the early periods of Old Syriac and became more joined together over time.
8
For a brief discussion and references to the origins of the Syriac
script, see Drijvers and Healey 1–2. 9
ch. 1
Kiraz, ‘Old Syriac Graphotactics’.
Sources and their Historical Context
§24.
Hence, one finds texts such as
ܒ ܖܚ ܐܖܖ ܫ ܬfor
9
ܒ ܚ ܐܕܪ
‘in the month of March, the year of’10 where the are all disjointed (see Pl. 1). In contrast, at first glance the parchments show a great degree of cursivity in writing, much more so than Classical Syriac (see Pl. 3). Having said that, the graphotactics of the parchments have not been studied in detail. §21.
In terms of writing and ductus, the shape of letters differs
somewhat from one inscription to the next and varies more in different media types. A good description, with charts, is given by Drijvers & Healey.11 In general, letters are closer to Esṭrangelā than Serṭā. For example, is mostly like Esṭrangelā but sometimes approximates Serṭā. Worth noting is the variant shape of which still exists in late MSS as (q.v. §539). §22.
As for orthographic features, is used to represent
Semitic /ś/; e.g.
for
‘twenty’,
ܖܐ
for
ܕܐ
‘witness’. 1.2.2.
§23.
The Vocalization System
Early Old Syriac inscriptions and legal parchments exhibit
orthographic characteristics that may shed light on the early development of the matres lectionis system, the earliest form of vocalization. Here, as in later Classical Syriac, the graphemes ,
ܐ
< ܘw>, and < ܝy> are used to mark vowels.12 No other
marks are known in this period for vowels. §24.
The grapheme
ܘ
is often absent in words which
appear with it in Classical Syriac. In Old Syriac, one finds
ܐ ܩ ܶ݁ ܶ ܽ ܽ for ‘ ܐ ܘܩI shall polish’, ܬ ܩfor ‘ ܬ ܘܩyou/she shall escape’, 10
Inscription As55, ln 1.
11
Drijvers and Healey 5–16.
12
Drijvers and Healey 23.
10
ܐ
Sources and their Historical Context for
ܪ
ܽ ܪܘ ܳ ܐ
‘drawing’. In particular,
§24.
‘all’ is written
without in the parchments and inscriptions, indicating that and ܠ §25.
must have coexisted in Classical Syriac.
The absence of is less frequent in Old Syriac, but
one still finds
ܐ
for
ܬ
ܒ ܳ݁ܰܬ ܺ ݂ ܐ
for
݂ ݁ܶܒ
‘house’,
‘pupil’, and
ܐ
ܘܢ
for
ܕfor ‘ ݁ܺܕ ـ ܽ ܘܢtheirs’, ‘ ݁ ܽ ܪ ܳ ܐchair’. These
examples occur in the inscriptions. The parchments do not seem to have omissions of . §26.
The use of as a mater lectionis seems to have already
developed by the 3rd century. 1.2.3.
Other Symbols
§27.
Old Syriac does not have any graphemes apart from the
consonantary. Even points that distinguish from are absent. Syāme, diacritical points, lines, etc. are all not to be found. §28.
Old Syriac, however, makes use of an ancient Aramaic sys-
tem for numerals which is discussed in §335 ff.
1.3.
Early Manuscripts
§29.
The earliest dated Syriac MS, from 411, sheds some light
on early Syriac writing. It demonstrates that Syriac writing has evolved far beyond Old Syriac, even taking into consideration the fact that the 411 codex is a medium that is substantially different from the Old Syriac media (stone, mosaic, coins, and legal parchments). Not only is the consonantary fully developed in the 411 codex, but one now finds an additional system that augments the consonantary: the diacritical point. It is used for various orthographic and grammatical purposes. Indeed, as King13 suggests, 13
ch. 1
King, ‘Elements of the Syriac Grammatical Tradition’ 190.
Sources and their Historical Context
§32.
11
this can be seen as an indication of the beginnings of the Syriac grammatical tradition. 1.3.1.
The Consonantal System
§30.
The twenty-two graphemes of the consonantary are car-
ried over from Old Syriac, but the graphotactics and ductus differ substantially. In terms of allography, the dotless grapheme
ܖ
is
now expanded into two separate graphemes distinguished by a point:
ܕ
for and
ܪ
for . It seems that this process was
gradual as there are a few cases in the 411 codex where one still finds the dotless ܖ.14 In the MSS of the 5th and 6th centuries, the position of the point with respect to the body of the graph is not fixed; e.g.
ܗܕܐ.
17
graph §31.
ܕ ̣ܥ
for
ܕ ܥ,15
ܓ ܁for ܓ, ܖ ̣ ܗܕܐfor 16
ܕ
It is possible that the point was used in the vicinity of the
ܖand was then anchored to it later on. Graphotactically, by 411 the development of the joining
properties must have already halted. With the sole exception of , which is mostly right-joining in this period (but dualjoining in later periods), the joining properties in 411 agree with later Syriac. §32.
As for the script, the only known script of this period is
what later came to be known as Esṭrangelā. A Serṭā-like script must also have coexisted, as later Serṭā resembles the script in Old Syriac parchments and some early colophons.18
14
Jones, ‘Early Syriac Pointing’ 439.
15
Hatch Pl. I (fol. 40v, co. 1, ln. 14).
16
Hatch Pl. I (fol. 40v, co. 1, ln. 19).
17
BL Add. 17,126, 5th/6th century, fol. 24, ln. 4 from Hatch.
18
Healey, ‘The Early History of the Syriac Script’.
12
Sources and their Historical Context
1.3.2.
§33.
§33.
The Vocalization System
By the early 5th century, the matres lectionis system was
fully developed, yet readers still struggled with the lack of full vocalization. By the time of the 411 codex, a new system had emerged where a diacritical point was used to distinguish homographs. Jones19 claims that most of the pointing in the 411 codex, apart from the first 39 folios, is by a second hand. He points out that there are a few instances in the first 39 folios where a supralinear point on
̇ܐ,
ܐdenotes an /a/ vowel; e.g. ܐ
sublinear point denotes an /e/-like sound; e.g.
̇ܐ, ̇ܐܘ. A
̣ ܕ.
Early MSS of the 5th to 7th centuries demonstrate an ad-
§34.
vanced usage of the diacritical point to mark vowels for purposes of disambiguating homographs (q.v. §139 ff.); e.g.
ܰ ݁ ܳܐ
‘king’ opp.
ܐ
ܳ ̣ for ܶ ݁ ܐ
ܐ
̇
for
‘advice’. By the year 600, one
finds traces of two points within one word (q.v. §147 ff.). During the 8th and 9th centuries, the use of a grapheme that is devoted entirely to a specific phonemic vowel appears; e.g. for /e/, and
ܵ ◌
ܿ ◌ܼ for /a/, ◌ܸ
for /ā/ (q.v. §154 ff.). These marks are seldom
used and are only employed for purposes of disambiguation; i.e. one never finds fully-vocalized texts. By the time of Jacob of Edessa (d. 708), the system was still in flux; had it not been so, Jacob would not have devised his own new vocalization system (for which see §162 ff.). 1.3.3.
§35.
Other Symbols
By the time of the 411 codex, the single diacritical point
was used for a few additional purposes, in even the first 39 folios. In terms of morphological marking, syāme, a pair of supralinear
19
ch. 1
Jones, ‘Early Syriac Pointing’ 439.
Sources and their Historical Context
§40.
13
points, marks plurals (q.v. §225). A single supralinear point
̇
marks the feminine ending on ( ܗq.v. §235). §36.
Lexically, the demonstrative pronoun appears in the 411
codex (in the first 39 folios) with a supralinear point, distinguish it from the personal pronoun
ܗܘ
‘ ̇ܗܘthat’, to
‘he’ which is un-
marked. In later MSS, the personal pronoun would acquire a sublinear point, ̣ܗܘ. §37.
The first 39 folios of the 411 codex also show an early us-
age of a single point as an accent to mark pauses in readings and intonation. The location of the point (above, below, or on the line) is not easy to ascertain in many cases. This system of accent marks is developed further in the MSS of the 6th to 8th centuries. §38.
Another early symbol is the abbreviation mark (q.v.
§255). The early MSS of the 8th or 9th century show traces of this mark. It became common from the 10th century onward. §39.
During the 7th century, the Syro-hexapla of the Old Testa-
ment and the Harqlean of the New Testament were produced. These works used a number of signs to indicate textual choices (q.v. §271).
1.4.
The Classical Grammarians
§40.
The classical grammarians provide another source for our
understanding of the writing system, keeping in mind that the grammatical genre is naturally prescriptive and does not always agree with the manuscript tradition. (Indeed, it is this disagreement that motivates grammarians to write.) The earliest known grammarian is Joseph Ḥūzāyā, a 6th century maqryānā at the
14
Sources and their Historical Context
§40.
school of Nisibis.20 Another grammarian is Thomas the Deacon, who authored a list of accent points during the 7th century. §41.
Jacob of Edessa (d. 708) is the first to write a full gram-
mar, but of more importance for our purposes, a letter on orthography. It is Jacob who informs us about the status of writing during his time, especially the diacritical point system. We can conclude from his writings that, in addition to the one-point system described earlier, a two-point system was used to distinguish three-way homographs (q.v. §147). It is highly unlikely that a full vocalization system using points existed at his time as he found himself in a position to devise a radical vocalization system that made use of letters on the baseline (on equal footing with consonants) to indicate vowels (q.v. §162). Jacob’s system was, however, hardly used. §42.
Other grammarians of this period21 include John the
Stylite, a contemporary of Jacob, whose grammar was a source for later grammarians. Another is Dawid bar Pawlos (8th/9th century)22 who wrote a treatise on the accent points, a short grammar, and a poem on the alphabet. Ḥunayn bar Isḥaq (809–873), one of the prominent translators of the Abbasid period, also wrote a grammar, now lost. The writings of these early grammarians overlap with another genre of grammatical, or rather paragrammatical, literature called the mašlmānūṯā (the so-called ‘Masora’), discussed below. §43.
During and post-mašlmānūṯā literature, in particular dur-
ing the 11th and 13th centuries, a number of grammarians pro20
Becker, The Fear of God and the Beginning of Wisdom.
21
For a discussion, see King, ‘Elements of the Syriac Grammatical
Tradition’ 197–99. 22
ch. 1
Brock ‘Dawid bar Pawlos’, in GEDSH 116–17.
§44.
Sources and their Historical Context
15
duced grammars. These works are more detailed and their concentration on the writing system varies. In general, the later grammarians began their grammars with a discussion on writing: the consonants, vowels, points and other marks. These grammarians include Elias of Tirhan (d. 1049) who, in addition to writing a grammar, wrote three treatises on accents and diacritics,23 Elias of Ṣoba (975–1046), aka Bar Šīnāyā, who wrote a detailed grammar,24 and Joseph bar Malkūn who wrote a treatise on points.25 All of these grammarians were of the E. Syr. tradition. W. Syr. grammarians include Jacob bar Šakko (d. 1241) who wrote a grammar in his Book of Dialogues,26 and Bar ʿEbroyo (1225/6– 1286) who, in addition to writing a comprehensive grammar called Ṣemḥe, composed a metrical grammar.27 Ṣemḥe is the most comprehensive of all classical grammars and is the most detailed amongst them with regards to the writing system.
1.5.
The Mašlmānūṯā
§44.
During the 8th and 9th centuries, perhaps as a result of the
Islamic conquest and the rise of Arabic, a new genre of paragrammatical works began to appear. These were mainly concerned with preserving the readings and orthography of biblical and patristic texts; i.e. the mašlmānūṯā ‘tradition’ (so-called ‘Masora’ by modern scholarship).28 A few MSS of the mašlmānūṯā 23
Teule, ‘Eliya I of Ṭirhan’, in GEDSH 141.
24
Teule, ‘Eliya of Nisibis’, in GEDSH 143.
25
Van Rompay, ‘Ishoʿyahb bar Malkun’, in GEDSH 219.
26
Brock, ‘Yaʿqub bar Shakko’, in GEDSH 430–31; the grammar is
published in Merx 2*-48*. 27
Takahashi, ‘Bar ʿEbroyo’, in GEDSH 54–56.
28
Juckel, ‘Masora’, in GEDSH 276–79; on the history of the term
‘Masora’, see Loopstra, Patristic Selections 30 ff.
16
Sources and their Historical Context
§44.
exist (see Juckel’s list)29 but thus far there has not been a critical edition of their content (which is obviously an arduous task).30 §45.
The MSS of the mašlmānūṯā constitute an important re-
source to the writing system and the phonology of the 8th to 10th centuries. The mašlmānūṯā is basically a list of readings from biblical and patristic texts, marked with diacritical points as well as rūkkāḵā and qūššāyā points (and sometimes ‘Greek’ vowels). Marginal notes give variant readings. These lists are usually appended in the manuscript tradition with the grammatical works of Jacob of Edessa and others. One has to be careful, however, not to over emphasize and over generalize the role of the mašlmānūṯā MSS in the wider Syriac context. Their domain is not the entire Syriac language, but rather a subset of its literature (biblical and patristic texts). The overloaded accent points used in these MSS had already become incomprehensible by the time of Bar ʿEbroyo in the 13th century. §46.
The MSS of this period, even non-mašlmānūṯā MSS, show
the immergence of the ‘Greek’ (W. Syr.) vocalization system (q.v. §174). While traces of the system appear in 8th and 9th-century MSS, their systematic use, according to a recent study by Coakley,31 dates from the 10th century. Here too, the vowels are used only to clarify readings. §47.
While investigating the MSS of the mašlmānūṯā as primary
sources falls beyond the scope of the present work, the information they provide about the writing system is indirectly presented
29 30
Juckel, ‘Masora’, in GEDSH 276. For a discussion on the difficulty of publishing such MSS, see
Loopstra, Patristic Selections 44. 31
ch. 1
Coakley, ‘When were’.
§49.
Sources and their Historical Context
17
here through references to the works of Martin, Merx, and Segal (see bibliography).
1.6.
European Grammarians and Philologists
§48.
Elias bar Abraham, one of the Maronite delegates to the
Fifth Lateran Council (1512–17), taught Syriac to the Italian humanist Theseus Ambrosius (1469–ca. 1540).32 Ambrosius then published his Introductio (see bibliography) in 1539 where he introduced, inter alia, Syriac to Europeans for the very first time. Also during the 16th century, during or shortly after 1549, a Syriac Orthodox priest called Mushe of Mardin33 arrived in Rome. Mushe is primarily known for his collaboration with Johann Widmanstetter in the publication of the editio princeps of the Syriac New Testament. Mushe’s hand, however, can also be seen in Widmanstetter’s Prima Elementa (1555), the first Syriac primer to be published in Europe. Mushe became the tutor of Andreas Masius (1514–1573), another humanist, who then wrote the first systematic grammar of Syriac in a western language.34 §49.
The next few grammars to appear in Europe were mostly
written by Maronites and were based on the Syriac grammatical tradition in conjunction with the European grammatical tradition. Jirjis ʿAmira (d. 1644), who later became Maronite patriarch, wrote, in Latin, a significant Syriac grammar titled Grammatica Syriaca, sive chaldaica (1596). The 17th and 18th centuries witness grammars by C. Crinesius (1611), A. Ecchellensis (1628), J. Acurensis (1647), C. B. Michaelis (1741), and J. D. Michaelis
32
Fiano ‘Albonesi, Teseo Ambrogio degli’, in GEDSH 13–14.
33
Van Rompay, ‘Mushe of Mardin’, in GEDSH 300–01.
34
Masius, Grammatica linguae Syriacae.
18
Sources and their Historical Context
§49.
(1784). Acurensis (Yūsif al-ʿĀqūrī)35 listed grammars by Buṭrus alʿĀqūrī, Mūsā al-ʿNīsī, ʿAmira, Sarkīs al-Rizzī, Yūḥanna al-Ḥaṣrūnī, Isḥāq al-Šadrāwī (Sciadrensis), and Ibrāhīm al-Ḥāqillānī (Ecchellensis). All of these grammars begin with a description of writing, and their coverage of the material varies. They mostly discussed the consonants, vowels, and some orthographic marks such as the diacritical point, syāme, and the serṭūnā. Many such early grammars (which were accessible to me) have been used in this study and are cited throughout. §50.
This period also marks the systematization of the Syriac
scripts and the writing system through printing. Fully vocalized texts begin to appear, probably more often in material printed in the West than in contemporary Syriac MSS in the East. This may be the beginning stages of a later tradition of publishing fully vocalized texts. §51.
The 19th century produced more systematic and detailed
grammars, viz. Nöldeke (1868), Duval (1881), and David (1896). Duval and David wrote in more detail than any previous grammarian on the writing system. As for the complex subject of diacritical and accent points, the most influential work, from the 20th century, is that of Segal (1953). His work provided much of the data on the vocalization and pointing systems found in the present work.
1.7.
Late Manuscripts of the Received Tradition
§52.
In addition to the aforementioned sources, the present
work makes use of data found in late MSS, as late as the 20th century. This is primarily a result of personal familiarity with such MSS and not a systematic study of the late tradition. 35
ch. 1
Acurensis ܕ.
Sources and their Historical Context
§54. §53.
19
Finally, this work also makes use of the undocumented
received tradition. This too stems from personal affinity with the subject matter. In a few cases when the received tradition contradicts statements made by grammarians, this has been indicated in the footnotes.
1.8.
Chronology of Events
§54.
The following is a chronology of events based on the con-
tent of this work; i.e. events that have escaped discussion in this work are not mentioned in the following chronology. It is hoped that this chronology can serve as a ‘bird’s eye’ view of the development of the writing system over the past 20 centuries. 1st Century 6
Earliest known dated Syriac writing in the form of an inscription. Features include the use of Old Syriac numerals [§335], and partial matres lectionis to denote vowels [§131 ff.].
3rd Century 240–3 The earliest Old Syriac texts written on three parchments. 240
The earliest known example of an early alphabetical numbering system [§347].
4th Century Aphrahaṭ, early in the century, composes acrostics that demonstrate the order of the alphabet [§123]. MSS are produced mostly using vellum or parchment [§440]. 5th Century Grammarians and scribes begin to compile lists of homographs, the beginnings of the mašlmānūṯā (i.e. so-called ‘Masora’) [§113].
20
Sources and their Historical Context
§54.
Symbols such as on ܐܘfrom Gr. W [§241].
The point on
< < used to mark scribal errors [§251].
28
Sources and their Historical Context
§55.
or a cross-like symbols used to mark the omission of a word or a phrase [§249]. Small circles marking the end of readings in lectionary MSS [§274]. Greek or Coptic letters used to number quire signatures [§366] Liturgical cross-like graphemes to mark the making of the sign of the cross, and marks for chanting [§275].
ܒ ܬ ܙܒ ܐ ܓܐܘ ܗ ܕ ܘ ܐ܀ ܕ ܒ ܐܘ ܘܗ
ch. 1
I. The Graphemic Inventory Part I aims to give an exhaustive account of all Syriac graphemes. Chapters 2 and 3 cover segmental graphemes; i.e. graphemes that correspond to a phonological segment: Chapter 2 is devoted to the consonantal system, while Chapter 3 gives the development of the vocalization system. Chapter 4 describes suprasegmental graphemes that provide grammatical and lexical markings such as syāme that indicates PLURAL. Chapter 5 covers nonsegmental graphemes; i.e. graphemes that do not correspond to a phonological segment such as punctuation and editorial marks. Chapter 6 gives a catalogue of what has been traditionally called ‘accent points’, marks that mainly affect prosody. Finally, Chapter 7 describes various numbering systems.
29
2. Consonantal Graphemes It is not the language of the Syriacs, therefore—I mean
this Edessene speech—that does not allow them to reproduce foreign sounds, but this system of writing of
theirs on account of its imperfection and its lack of vowels.
Jacob of Edessa (d. 708), On Orthography
2.1.
The Consonantary
§56.
The Syriac ‘alphabet’,1 or rather the consonantary, consists
of twenty two consonants, each represented by a unique grapheme. (Vowels are not considered part of the alphabet proper and are treated in Chapter 1.) Syriac grammarians call the consonants
ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ̈ ܽ ܶ‘ ܐelements’2 ܐܬܘܬܐ ݂ܳ ݂ ܺ ‘signs’, ݂ ܶ ܐ ܶ ‘ ݁ ݂ ̈ ݂ ܳܒ ݂ ܐsigns of writings’,3 or ܗܓ ܳ ܳ ܐ ݂
(from Gr. στοιχεῖον),
ܳ ܳ ܐܬܘܬ ݂̈ ݂
ܳ ܳ ܬܘܬ ݂ ̈ ݂ ‘ ܐsigns of annunciation’.4
As the consonants are always written, as opposed to the optional vowels, the ancient grammarians referred to them written’.5 §57.
ܳ ܺ ݁ ݂ ̈ ݂ ܳܒ ݂ ܐ
‘the
Each of the consonants is assigned a name whose gender is
feminine; e.g.
ܳ ܽ ݂ܕ ݂ ܺܒ ݁ܬܐ
‘Yūḏ with the vowel
◌ܺ’.6
The naming
system is acrophonic in that a letter’s name begins with that same 1
Strictly speaking, the term ‘alphabet’ in writing systems refers to
full fledged alphabets that consist of both consonants and vowels such as the Greek alphabet. 2
David §1; Duval §42; A. Hoffmann I.I.§7.
3
Nestle §2.b.
4
Risius §171.
5
Duval §42.
6
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, intro §3, p. 4.
31
32
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§57.
letter. The names may vary in some grammars. Dālaṯ, for instance, has a W. Syr. variant Waw has an E. Syr. variant
݂ ܰ ݁ܳܕ.7
ܵܘܘ.9
Hē has a variant
̇ܗܘ
Zayn has three variants:
[sic].8
ܶܙ, ܰܙܝ,
ܰܙܐܝ.10 Pē has an orthographic variant ݁ ܶ ܐܐ.11 Rīš hasܰ an E. Syr. variant ܸܪܫRēš.12 Taw has an orthographic variant ݁ܬܐܘ.13 There is
and
also a romanized variation for Ṣāḏē: Çādhē.14 §58.
In Mount Lebanon, consonants whose name is bisyllabic
are pronounced with a second long vowel; e.g. [ʔola:f] (against [ʔo:laf]) for
݂
ܰܳ
ܰ ݁ܳܓ, [dola:ṯ]
, [goma:l] (against [go:mal]) for
(against [do:laṯ]) for
݂ ܰ ݁ܳܕ, etc.15 The encounter of the Maronites
with western Europeans can be seen in the pronunciation in the Introductio by T. Ambrosio (1539) where one finds:
ܰܳ
), ܐܠ
§59.
ܰ ( ܳܓagainst
ܰ ) ܳܓ, etc.16
ܰܳ ( ܐ ܦagainst
The consonants exist in three scripts: Esṭrangelā, Serṭā,
and East Syriac (E. Syr.). The table on the opposite page gives the consonantary in the three scripts, along with their names and phonemic representation. (Scripts are discussed in more detail in §453 ff.)
7
Brockelmann §2; David §1; Nöldeke §1.B; Nestle §2.b.
8
Abouna 29.
9
Brockelmann §2; Costaz §1; David §1.
10
Brockelmann §2; Nöldeke §1.B.
11
Amira 6.
12
Brockelmann §2; David §1; Nöldeke §1.B.
13
Brockelmann §2; Costaz §1; Nöldeke §1.B.
14
Robinson §2.
15
David §1 n. 1.
16
Ambrosio fol. 9a, illus. in Coakley, Typography 154. Acurensis,
however, lists the letters without a long vowel: ch. 2
ܰܳ
,
ܰ ܳܓ, etc.
Esṭrangelā
Serṭā
E. Syriac
The Syriac Consonantary
ܐ ܒ ܓ ܕ ܗ ܘ ܙ ܚ ܛ ܝ ܟ ܠ ܡ ܢ ܣ ܥ ܦ ܨ ܩ ܪ ܫ ܬ
ܐ ܒ ܓ ܕ ܗ ܘ ܙ ܚ ܛ ܝ ܟ ܠ ܡ ܢ ܣ ܥ ܦ ܨ ܩ ܪ ܫ ܬ
ܐ ܒ ܓ ܕ ܗ ܘ ܙ ܚ ܛ ܝ ܟ ܠ ܡ ܢ ܣ ܥ ܦ ܨ ܩ ܪ ܫ ܬ
Name
Ālap̱ Bēth
Phoneme
݂
ܰܳ
݂ ݁ ܶܒ ܰ ݁ ܳܓ ݂ ܰ ݁ ܳܕ ܶܗܐ ܰܘܐܘ ܰܙܐ ݂ ܶ ܶ ݂ ܽ ݂ܕ ݂ ܳ݁ ݂ܰ ܳ ܺ ܽܢ ݂ ܰ݁ ܶ ܶܐ ݁ ܶܐ ܳܨ ݂ ܶܕܐ ܳ ݂ܦ ܺܪ ܺ ܰ ݁ܬܐܘ
Gāmal Dālaṯ Hē Waw Zayn Ḥēṯ Ṭēṯ Yūḏ Kāp̱ Lāmaḏ Mīm Nūn Semkaṯ ʿē Pē Ṣāḏē Qop̱ Rīš Šīn Taw
33
ʔ b g d h w z ḥ (IPA [ħ]) ṭ (pharyngealized [t]) y k l m n s ʕ p ṣ (pharyngealized [s]) q (pharyngealized [k]) r š (IPA [ʃ]) t
34
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§60.
§60.
When written in isolation, especially as numbers, a few
letters are doubled,1 most notably Kāp̱, , and Nūn, . There are cases when Nūn is doubled when combined with other letters in numbers; e.g. page number
‘350’.2 One also comes across
doubled Zayn, ܙܙ, to avoid confusion with ( ܐe.g. page and more rarely doubled ʿē, page
‘ ܬ ܙ447’),3 , to avoid confusion with ( ܠe.g.
‘70’).4 Occasionally, Mīm is also doubled,
§61.
.5
Additional graphemes, mostly adaptations of existing ones,
were introduced in later periods to assist in garšūnographic writing; e.g.
ܔin Syro-Arabic garšūnography. These are introduced
in Part III.
2.2.
Mnemonics and Consonantal Subsets
§62.
Syriac grammarians devised mnemonics (voces memoriales
or memoria technica) to help pupils remember various subsets of consonants. The order of the alphabet is known by the mnemonic
ܰ ܰ
ܰ ܰ
ܺ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܐܒܓ ܗܘܙ
ܰ ܰ ܰـ
/ʔabgad hawwaz ḥaṭṭī
kalaman saʕpaṣ qaršat/6 (note the doubling of in /hawwaz/ and of in /ḥaṭṭī/ even in W. Syr., probably an
ِّ ُح influence from the Arabic usage of the طي
)أَْبَجْد َهَّوْز.
1
Arayathinal §2.3; Costaz §6; Nöldeke §1.C; Uhlemann §1.R.5.
2
Manna, Morceaux choisis de Littérature Araméenne, p.
3
MS Teaneck, Phanqitho, p. ܙ
4
Merx, p.
5
Elia of Ṣoba ܘand ܙ.
.
ܬ.
.
ܒ, ;ܚAmbrosio 9v; Amira 10; Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, iv.1.§3, p. 194; David §1; Niʿmat-allah ; ܓGabriel of St. Joseph 6
Abouna 28; Acurensis
§6; al-Kfarnissy §2; Kiraz, Primer 45; A. Hoffmann §7 (p. 80) gives the variant
ܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ
ܰ
ܽ
ܺ ܰ ܰܰ ܰ ܰ ܐܒܓ ܗܘܙfrom Abraham Ecchellens, p.
5; Manna 7; Makdasi ;ܝRisius §171. ch. 2
Consonantal Graphemes
§68. §63.
35
The set of consonants that undergo fricatization is known
ܳ ܶ ܳ ܳ ݂ ݂ ݁ ݂ ݁ܒ ݂ܳܓ/bg̱āḏkp̱āṯ/; e.g. ݂ ݂ ݁ ݂ ܐܬܘܬ ݁ܒ ݂ܳܓ ݂̈ ݂ ݂ ܶ 7 ‘six bgā ̱ ḏkp̱ āṯ letters’. This mnemonic is also ubiquitous in westܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ in §62 above, the ern grammars. When added to the ܐܒܓ ܗܘܙ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܰܬ... ܗܘܙ ܰ ܰ ܐܒܓ ܰ ܰ /ʔabgad sequence becomes ݂ ܒܓ ݂ ݂ ݂݂݂ 8 hawwaz … saʕpaṣ qaršat ṯaḵaḏ ḇagp ̱ ̱ap/ where the last is the by the mnemonic
Greek π (q.v. §214). §64.
The set of prefixes that precede a stem is known by the
mnemonic
ܳ ܰ݁ ܰ ܶ ܳ ݁ܒ ݂ ܽ ܘܠ/bḏūl/; e.g. ܐܬܘܬ ݁ܒ ݂ ܽ ܘܠ ݂ܐ ݂ ̈ ݂ ܐܪܒ
ܽ ݁ ‘each
of the four bḏūl letters’.9 §65.
The set of impf. and participial prefixes is known by the
mnemonic
ܰ ݂ܰ ܐ
/ʔamnaṯ/; e.g.
ܰ ܰ ݁ ܰܕ ܐ ܰ ݂ ݁ ܰܕ
four ʔamnaṯ [letters] which we have enumerated’.
ܰ݁ ܰ ܐܪܒ
ܶ ܳܗ
‘these
10
§66.
The set of consonants that provide the contextual con-
straints for the application of the mhaggyānā (q.v. §205) and marhṭānā (q.v. §206) is known by the mnemonic or phrase
ܳ ܽ ܗܪܐ
/ʕamlay nūhrā/.11
§67.
Less popular mnemonics include:
ܽ ܺ ܶ ܰܒ ܳ ܬ
cludes all W. Syr. vowels. It appears in print in 1555. §68.
ܰ ̈ܰ
which in-
12
The letters and their place of articulation are known by
the tongue-twisting mnemonic
ܪܕ
ܝ ܙ
ܓ
7
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, iv.2.§1, p. 209; Elia of Ṣoba
8
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, iv.1.§3, p. 194.
9
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, iv.2.§1, p. 209; Elia of Ṣoba
Šakko (in Merx)
ܐܗ
; David §11. ; Jacob bar
̣.
10
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, ii.1.§2, p. 89; Jacob bar Šakko (in Merx)
11
Audo 221b; David §62.
12
Widmanstetter, Prima Elementa; Nestle §3.
̣.
36
I. The Graphemic Inventory
ܒ, and the bgā̱ ḏkp̱ āṯ letters by ܓ ܬܒ
§68.
, where the final
Greek π (q.v. §214).13 §69.
ܦis
The mnemonics, particularly the popular ones, become
morphologically productive, especially as adjectives; e.g.
ܰ ܺ ܐ ݂ ܐ ݁ ܳܐ
ܳ ܳ ܽ ‘ ݂ ܰ ݂ܕܒ ݂ ܽ ̈ܘ ܳ ܳ ݂ ܐ ܶ ܪܘ ݁ ܳ ݂ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܰ ݂ܕܒ ݂ܳܓ ݂ ݁ ̈ ݂ ܳ ݂ ܳ ݂ ܐ ܳ ݁ ܳܒܐthere are [cases] where
14 the bḏūl letters disallow the softening of the bgā ̱ ḏkp̱ āṯ letters’.
2.3.
Typology of Consonants
§70.
Ancient Syriac grammarians spent much time on the clas-
sification of consonants into—sometimes overlapping—categories. The primary division was the distinction between ‘generic letters’ as opposed to
ܰ ܳ ܶ ݁ ݁ܬܘ ݂ ܳ ̈ ܳ ݂ ܐ
ܳ̈ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܐܬܘܬܐ ݂ ܶܓ ܳ ܳ ̈ ݂ ܐ ݂ ݂
‘additional letters’.15
(This distinction is rooted in the grammatical tradition and is still practiced today in seminary schools in the Middle East.) The former group constitute root radicals; e.g. ‘killed’ from √
and
ܠ
ܺ
in
. By extension, Joseph bar Malkūn (13th cen-
tury) called the points that distinguish ‘generic points’.16 The three categories:
ܰ ܳ ܶ ݁ ݁ܬܘ ݂ ܳ ̈ ܳ ݂ ܐ
ܳ ܳ݁ ܽ ܳ ̈ ܰ ݂
A.
ܩ, ܛ,
ܕfrom ܪas ܽ ̈ ܶܐ ݂ ܶܓ ̈ ܳ ܳ ܶܐ
are in turn subdivided into
‘[letters] giving meaning’: the letters in a
word that are the product of a morphological derivation such as
ܺ
in
above, or
from √ܪ B.
.
݂ ܽ ܪ ܳ ܳܐ
ܡin the participial derivation
ܳ ܰ ݁ ܳܪ
‘helper’
‘[letters] for differentiation’: the letters at the
end of words used to avoid homography; e.g. the final ‘one hundred’ against ܐ
ch. 2
ܝ
ܳ
ܳ ܰ
ܐ
in
‘what’, ‘ ݁ܬ݂ܕܐܐspring’ against ‘ ݁ܬ ݂ܳܕܐbreast’.
13
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, iv.1.§3, p. 194; Elia of Ṣoba 26.
14
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, iv.2.§1, p. 209.
15
Jacob bar Šakko (in Merx)
16
Merx 136.
.
ܳ ܐܐ
Consonantal Graphemes
§75. C.
ܳ ݂ܺܓ ܰ ܐ
ܳ ܳ ܶܶ ܐ
37
‘[letters resulting] from etymology’:
letters that are silent in a particular word, but become pronounced in derived forms. The idea being that these letters are retained in the source word for etymological purposes; e.g.
ܳ ܺ ‘cities’, ܕin ݁ ̱ ݁ܬܐ
ܳ ܺ ݂ ܳ ̈ ݂ܬܐ
ܳ ݂ܺ ̱ ݁ ܐ
‘city’
§71.
Letters that constitute prefixes are referred to as
ܳ ݂ܺ ̈ ܳ ݂ ܐ
‘church’
in
‘churches’.
ܳ ܰ ݁ ̈ ܳـ ݂ ܐ
‘fallen [letters]’ as they ‘fall’ before words. These include the
ܰ ( ݁ܒ ݂ ܽ ܘܠq.v. §64) and ݂ ܰ ܐletters (q.v. §65). §72.
ܳ ـ ܳܐ
Letters that constitute morphological suffixes are termed ܽ ܽ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܐܬܘܬ ݂ ̈ ݂ ‘letters of completion’ such as the ܬܘܢin ݁ ݂ ݂ܒ ݁ ܘܢ
§73.
According to sound, letters were classified by ancient
‘you (m.) wrote’.17
ܺ ‘ ܰ ̈ ݁ ܶ ܐthin’ or ‘ ܰ ̈ ܶܐnarrow’, ܰ ܳ ‘ ݂ ܰܒ ̈ܐthick’ or ‘ ݁ ݂ ܳ ̈ܐbroad’, and ‘ ܶ ̈ ܳ ܶܐin between’.18 §74. The letters ܳ ܑ ܳ ܺ that ܳ ̈ ܳ ܳ constitute matres lectionis (ܐ, ܘ, and )ܝare known as ݂ܬܐ to the re݂ ܐܬܘܬܐ ݂ ݂ ‘weak/sick letters’ in contrast ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ܳ ܳ̈ ܺ maining consonants, which are known as ݂ ܐ ـ ܐܬܘܬܐ ݂ ݂ grammarians into three categories:
‘healthy/perfect letters’.
2.4.
Grapheme Resemblance
§75.
A number of graphemes, or graph combinations, resemble
each other in shape.19 The Serṭā graphs
ܐ
and
both vertical but the latter is much shorter; e.g.
ܙ
are
< ܐܙܠʔzl> for
17
Merx 104.
18
Duval §18.
19
Al-Abrāshī et al. 22; Amira 11; Costaz §5; Cowper §4; Healey 4;
A. Hoffmann §4; Kiraz, Primer 210 §11; C. B. Michaelis §II.a; Muraoka, CS4H §2; Muraoka, CS §4; Nöldeke §1.C; Palacios §8; Sciadrensis ܚ.
38
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§75.
ܶ ‘ ܰܐܙܠhe went’. Note that < ܠl>, although as tall as < ܐʔ>, is slanted. (For allographic resemblance, q.v. §485 ff.)
§76.
The graphs
< ܒb> and
resemble each other in all
scripts in initial and medial forms, but not in final or isolated forms,
ܒ
and
distinguished. §77.
, respectively, which are readily
ܟ
The Serṭā graph
< ܓg> resembles final < ܠl> but the
former is written below the line and the latter above it;20 e.g.
‘ ݁ܰܓto put in motion’. §78. The graphs < ܕd> and < ܪr> are in essence homographs distinguished by a sublinear or supralinear point on the glyph ܖ. ̈ ܽ The ancient Syriac grammarians called the two points ܶܐ ܶ ‘ ݁ܶܓ ܳ ܳ ̈ܐgeneric points’ (q.v. §70). §79. The Serṭā graph < ܗh> and < ܘw> both have a bowl (for graph anatomy terminology see §492), but ܗhas an addiܳ tional stroke on the right; e.g. < ܗܘܐhwʔ> for ‘ ܗܘܐto be’. §80. The graphs < ܘw> and < ܩq>, especially in Serṭā, are both rounded with a bowl, but are distinguished by their joining properties (q.v. §377):
is right-joining and ܩis dual-joining; ܳ ܽ e.g. < ܘ ܪܐwqwrʔ> for ‘ ܘ ܪܐand cold’. The distinction is more pronounced in Esṭrangelā ( )ܩ & ܘand E. Syr. ( ܘand )ܩwhere
ܘ
is more angular. Other Serṭā rounded graphemes (with a bowl) include < ܗh> and < ܣs>. §81.
The graph
, in initial and medial forms, can be
confused in combination with itself, with especially in MSS—with .
ch. 2
20
Al-Abrāshī et al. 22.
21
Kiraz, Primer 17.
,21 and—
Consonantal Graphemes
§86.
39
ܺ ܺ ݂ ܳ ܳ ܐ, without vocalization ܐ ܳ ܺ ‘only-begotten’; ܳ ܐ, without vocalization ܐ
Examples include:
‘cord, string’. In late MSS, one finds a small line, ◌̗, under the
< ܝy>, not to be confused with the vowel point (for ܽ which see §154); e.g. ܕ ܼ ܼ ܘܢfor ‘ ݁ܕ ܰ ܰ ̈ ܘܢfor their lives’.22 One
rarely encounters a sublinear point on in the absence of an adjacent when the vowel preceding is not /ī/, although this may be a late phenomenon; e.g. Resurrection’.
23
ܳ ܰܘ ̣ ܳ ݁ ܐ
In Esṭrangelā MSS, the initial and medial graphs
of and < ܚḥ> are easily confused, as in §82.
The graphs
ܠ
and
ܥ
length and sometimes by angle; e.g. §83.
In Esṭrangelā MSS, medial
medial §84.
, as in ܢ Serṭā
‘and the
ܒܐ
ܐ.24
are distinguished by
ܰ
‘on’.
can be confused with .25
< ܦp> and < ܩq> have a bowl, but the former is
higher which results in the counter on the lower-right corner of the graph. §85.
The right-most starting points of the initial graph
and
at the base line, particularly in Esṭrangelā MSS, can
be confused with the sequences
and
,
respectively. §86.
In typography, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish
graphs in some types or fonts, but not in others. For instance, in a Serṭā type made by the London founder Vincent Figgins in 1814
22
MS Paramus, Winter Phanqitho 392, ln. 6.
23
Kṯāḇā ḏ-qūrāḇā ʾ(y)ḵ ʿyāḏā ḏ-mārūnāye 149.
24
MS BL 12,150, f. 154, co. 3, ln 16 from Hatch.
25
MS BL 12,150, f. 154, co. 3, ln 34–35 from Hatch.
40
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§86.
(W36 in Coakley),26 upon which the Meltho font Serto Malankara is based, and are easily confused; this has been somewhat fixed in the Serto Malankara font:
͗
and
Ͳ
. The same two graphs are distinguishable in other types such as the F. Savary de Brèves type from 1612 (W11.C in Coakley)27 upon which the Meltho font Serto Jerusalem is based: and
ܒ
. Another example is from the Meltho font Es-
trangelo Qenneshrin, based on calligraphy by Isa Benjamin, where ͵ and ΄ resemble each other in length. §87.
Yeates is the only grammarian I am aware of who lists the
Serṭā consonants by their similar appearance:
ܬ.ܠ
. .
.
.
(ܘ
. ܕܪ.
= ).
ܒ.ܐ ܙ
28
2.5.
Orthographic Variations and Spelling Development
§88.
While Syriac is generally considered a conservative lan-
guage, particularly with respect to spelling, a number of orthographic variations affect consonants. A few historical developments have been dated by Brock29 and Van Rompay.30 A complete dating of all spelling variations, however, would require an exhaustive study of the manuscript tradition which is beyond the scope of this work. The vast majority of orthographic variants affect the matres lectionis.
ch. 2
26
Coakley, Typography 104–06.
27
Coakley, Typography 59–61.
28
Yeates 2.
29
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’.
30
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’.
Consonantal Graphemes
§90. 2.5.1.
§89.
41
Ālāp̱
Initial /ʔī/ words: in early MSS of the 5th and 6th centuries,
an initial prosthetic is common in initial /ʔī/ words. The is absent in later MSS; e.g.
ܳ ܺ ܐ ݂ܰ ݂ ܐ
ܳ ݂ܺܰ ݂ ܐ
ܺ ܐ ݂ ܰܥ
ܺ ݂ ܰܥ
[ʔīḏaʕ]31 ‘he knew’,
[ʔīḏaʕṯā]32 ‘knowledge’, and many other similar
forms.33 In later E. Syr. texts, a supralinear
ܐappears on ܝ, as in ܑ ܵ ܿ ܑ ܑ ܥǶȦȁ݂ [ʔīšūʕ] ‘Jesus’, Ȯȗdzȁ ݂ ܼ ܼ ‘knowledge’.34 The supralinear ◌ also ܵ ܑܸ ܵ ‘standing’.36 appears intervocalically; e.g. ȐȂȂǹȋ ܑܹ ܵ ‘gird’,35 ȮȌȂȡ §90.
Initial CC words: in early MSS, is common in initial
CC (historically CᵊC) clusters, especially when the first C is . The is absent in later periods (but normally retained in CCV- sequences where the first C is a sibilant); e.g. [rwīḥā]37 (was it [ʔᵊ/a/erwīḥā]?) ‘spacious’,
ܳܳ ܐܪܘܙܐ
ܺ ܐܪܘ ܳ ܐ ܺܪܘ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܳ [rwāzā]38 ܪܘܙܐ
(was it [ʔᵊ/a/erwāzā]?) ‘exultation’. Later vocalization tends to have
◌ܰ,
sometimes
‘document’.39
◌ܶ,
on the ; e.g.
31
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 97.
32
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 97; David §42.
33
CSD includes:
‘month’ (14b),
ܺ ܐ ܺ ݂ ܳ ܳܐ
ܳܐ ܺ ܳ ‘ ܐ ݂ ܶܒto be dried up’ (185b), ݂ ܽܒ ݂ܬܐ ‘only one’ (13a),
ܺ ܰ , ܐܶ ܳ ܳ ܐ ܐܪܘ ܳ ܐ
ܺ ܺ ‘ ܐhe grew’ (14a), ܐ ܰ ܚ ܺ ‘ ܺܐgiving’ (189a), and
others. 34
David §42.
35
Mosul Bible, Isa. 32:11.
36
Mosul Bible, Isa. 37:27.
37
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 98.
38
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 75.
39
CSD includes:
ܐܒ ܳ ܳܪܐ
‘receipt’ (40b),
ܰ ‘ ܷܐ ݁ ܰܒperhaps’ (15a), ܺ ݂ ܳ ܐ ܺ ܰ ‘bridal veil’ (27b), ݁ ܳ ܐ (27b), ܐܪܕ ݂ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܺ ܰ ‘sprinkling’ (30a), ‘ ܐܪ ܐfirmament’ ‘meal’ (12a),
ܰ ܐܓ ܺ ݂ ܳ ܐ
‘ice’ (70b),
ܰ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܺ ݂ܐ
ܰ ܺ ܰ ‘desirable’ ‘ ܐkey’ (27a), ܐܪܓ ݂ܳܓܐ ݂ ܰ ܰ ‘open space’ (28a), ܰܐܪ ܺ ܳ ܐ ܐܪܘ ܳ ܺ ܰ (549b), ‘ ܐܪܬ ݂ ܐtrembling’ (30b),
42
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§91.
This variation also occurs in the Old Syriac Gospels (written in Classical Syriac); e.g. for
ܶ ܶ ̈ܪܓ ݂ ‘feet’ (Jn. 20:12).40
§91.
ܶ ܶ ܳܐܪ ܽ ݂ܬfor ‘ ܳܪ ܽ ݂ܬRuth’ (Mt. 1:5), ܐ̈ܪܓ ݂
The reverse also occurs where words without begin
[ ܐ̱ ܺ ܳ ܐḥrīnā]41 ‘another’ (note that the )ܐ, or after a ݁ܒ ݂ ܽ ܘܠprefix, e.g. ̱ ݁ ̈ ܰ ݂ ݁ܺܒ ̱ ݁ ̈ ܰ ݂ ‘ ݁ܺܒܐin
to acquire one; e.g. ܐ
root is
ܳ ܺ
your (f.) hands’.42 In recent times, this mechanism was utilized in the nomenclature term
ܐ̱ ܽ ܪ ܳ ܳ ܐ
for
ܽ ܪ ܳ ܳܐ
[sūryāyā] ‘Syriac/
Syrian, Assyrian’ probably around the late 19th century. Word medially: early MSS lack but after the 11th or
§92.
12th century, one begins to see an in W. Syr. while E. Syr. retains the original spelling. In all these cases, the is silent;
ܳ ܰ ܵ ܿ ‘dew’,43 after [ā] ݁ܳܓܳܐܙܐopp. ǨǷܵǭܵ ‘to cut ܐopp. ȷȉǻ ܼ ܳ ܰ ݁ )’,44 after [e] ܶ ݂ ܽ ݁ ܳ ܐ [ ܶ ܐ ݂ ܽ ݁ ܐmeḵultā]45 (act. part. of ܓ ‘food’ (note that the root is )ܐand, in a closed syllable, ݁ ܶ ܐ ܳ ܳ ܐ ܳܳܶ opp. ‘ ݁ ܐharp’ which then becomes open in W. Syr. [ke-no-ro] ܳ ܽ ܺ ܳ ܽ ܺ݁ opp. [ken-nā-rā],46 after [ē/ī] ݁ ݂ܬܐ [ ܐ ݂ܬܐkīnūṯā]47 ‘justice’.48 e.g. after [a]
ܰ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܺ ܰ ‘ ܐܪ ܺ ܳ ܐfirmament’ (549b), ‘ ܐܪܬ ݂ ܐtrembling’ (30b), ܐ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܰ ܳ݁ ܶ ‘document’ (39b), ݂ ܺ ܺ ‘ ܐapparently’ (31a), and ‘ ܐ ܐsix’ (31a).
kling’ (30a), 40 41
Kiraz, CESG 345. Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 75; Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’
98. 42
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 75.
43
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 101.
44
CSD 66b.
45
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 75; Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’
98.
ch. 2
46
CSD 202a.
47
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 98.
48
For other examples, see David §42, p. 277.
Consonantal Graphemes
§95.
43
In verbal forms, an inserted is common in the Pʿal impf. of P- ܐverbs; e.g.
ܶܐ ܽ ܪ
opp.
ܶܽ ܪ
‘to bind’ (√
)ܐ.49 It is also ܶܰ ܿ common medially in Ap̱ʿel forms; e.g. ܐ ݂ܐܒopp. Ǭ݂ǻ ܸ ‘ ܼܐhe inܰ ܿ ܳ ܰ ܵ ܵ ܼܿ ‘lifeformed’,50 ܐ ܶܐopp. ǧǹܹȋܼ ‘gives life’,51 ܐ ܳ ܐopp. ǧȏȂǹȋ ܶܰ ܶܰ ܶ ݂ ܶ ݂ ܶ opp. giver’,52 ݁ܐܒܐܫopp. ‘ ݁ܐܒto be evil’ and its reflexive ܐܬܐܒ ܶ ݂ ܶ ݂ ܶ .53 Very rarely the Paʿʿel may have [a] represented by ; ܐܬܒ ܶ ݁ܰܕܐopp. ܶ ‘ ݁ܰܕto designate’.54 e.g. ܳ §93. In the adverbial suffix ݂ ܺ ܐ: -insertion is attested in ܺܳ ܺ ܳ ܺ݁ ܰ the adverbial suffix; e.g. ݂ ܺ ݂ ݂ [ ܰ ݁ ݂ ܐḥattītāʔīṯ]55 (was it [ḥattīṯāyīṯ]?) ‘accurately’.
ܶ̈ ܺ ܶܺ ܐܐ ܒ opp. ݂ܒ ̈ܐ ݂ ܳ ̈ܳ ܺ ܳ ܽ ܺ ܳ ܽܺ ܳ ܳ ‘prophets’,56 ܐܬܐ ܬܐ ݂ ݂ܒopp. ‘ ݂ ܺܒ ̈ ݂ ܐprophetesses’,57 ܐܘܬܐ ݂ ݂ܒopp. ܶ ܳ ݂ ݂ܒ ܶ ܳ 58 ‘prophecy’. It becomes sometimes ; e.g. ܐ ܐopp. [ ܐܐyāyē] ܽܰ ܽܰ ‘suitable’.59 In suffixes of L-ʔ verbs, one has ̱ ܐܘܘ opp. ̱ ܐܘ ܳ ܽ ܽܰ ܳ ܽ ‘fullness’.60 opp. ̱ ‘ ܘܘthey called me’, ܐܐ opp. ܘܐ §94.
Intervocallically: is preserved in
§95.
Metathesis: metathesis occurs word initially in a few
words, most notably E. Syr.
ܳ ܳ (early MSS also ܵ ܵ opp. W. Syr. ܪܐܙܐ Ǩܐܪܙ
49
CSD 24b.
50
CSD 34a.
51
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 101; Duval §56 n.
52
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 101.
53
CSD 34a.
54
David §33.
55
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 74; Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’
98. 56
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 75.
57
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 75.
58
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 75.
59
CSD 184a.
60
Duval §56.
44
I. The Graphemic Inventory
have
)ܳܳܪܙܐ61
‘sacrament’. Other examples include
‘double’,62 and §96.
§95.
ܳ ܺ ܰ ܳ ܐopp. ܺ ܐ
‘borrowed’.63
ܰ ܐ ݁ܳܐ
opp.
ܰܐ ܳ ܐ
There are a number of lexical variant spellings with and
without . These include E. Syr.
Syr.
ܺ ܐ
§97.
ȊȁȤȒȁܐ opp. W. ܹ ܵ ܸ and ȊȁȤȒȁ ܹܵ
ܶ ܳܐ 64 proper nouns ending in ܶ ܰ ܳ ܰ ‘Israel’ ܰ ܳandܰ many other 65 ܐ, ݂ ݂ opp. Other lexical variants with ܳ ܽ ݂ܺ ‘ ܳ ݂ ܐfirstly’. ܽ ܺ ܳ ݁ܰܓopp. ‘ ݁ܰܓ ܳ ܐtreasure’,67 include ܐܒ ݂ܬܐ opp. ‘ ݂ܒ ݂ܬܐark’,66 ܐܙܐ ݂ ܰ ܐ ݁ ܳ ܐopp. ܰ ݁ ܳ ܐopp. ‘ ܰ ܐ ܳ ܐdouble’.68 (and vice versa): this may occur word-
ܺ ܰ ܶ and ‘ ܺ ܶܟbe ܐܨܦ careful’,69 ܐܪܟ ݂ ܰ and ‘ ܰ ݂ܦbe ݂ ݂ ܺ‘ ݁ܒfortress’,71 ݁ ܰ ܺܐ ݂ ܳܒܐand its rare counterpart ܽ ݁ ܺ ܐand ܳ ܽ ܺ ݁ ‘a storm’.73
initially or medially; e.g.
ܳ ݁ܬܐ ‘ ݁ ܰ ܺ ݂ ܳܒܐsuffering’,72 ܳ long’,70
2.5.2.
§98.
ܳ݁ ܺ݁ ܐܪܬܐ ܒ
and
Waw
In closed syllables: it is frequently absent in closed sylla-
bles in early 6th and 7th century MSS; e.g.
ch. 2
61
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 100.
62
CSD 25b.
63
CSD 31a.
64
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 100; David §42.
65
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 74.
66
Wernberg-Møller, ‘Some Scribal’ 141.
67
Wernberg-Møller, ‘Some Scribal’ 141.
68
CSD 25b.
69
CSD 27a.
70
CSD 29a.
71
CSD 34a.
72
CSD 201a.
73
CSD 202a.
ܒ ܐ
for
ܽ ݂ܒ ܳ ܐ
Consonantal Graphemes
§101.
45
ܽ ܪ ܐfor [ ܪܘ ܳ ܐrušʕā]ܽ75 ‘wickedness’, ܗ ܳ [ ݁ ܽ ܳܪܗkurhānā]76 ‘sickness’, ܐܪ ܐfor [ ܐܘܪ ܳ ܐʔurḥā] ‘way’.77
[šuḇḥā]74 ‘praise’, §99.
for
Open syllables: in a few lexemes, is absent in open
syllables, but usually replaced with ‘falcon’.78
◌ܳ;
e.g.
݁ܽܒ ܺܙ ܳ ܐ
opp.
݁ܳܒ ܺ ܳ ܐ
§100. Morphologically, may be omitted in the perf. 3rd pl. m.; e.g.
ܰ
for
̱
ܰ
‘they mixed’.79
§101. Lexically, the use and non-use of varies in the following cases: A.
݁ܽ ܠ
and
concurrently with
ܽ ܶ ܠ ܽ ݁ and
: it is present in
ܽ ܶ
is more frequent in 5
݁ܽ ܠ
and
ܠ
ܽ ܶ
,
. In early MSS, the presence of
and 6th century MSS than its ab-
th
sence. The reverse is true for post-6th century MSS.80 The reappears in the 20th century, promoted by A. Nuro (q.v. §186),81 but its use remains infrequent. B. is present in the Apocalypse, but word.
݁ܶܓ ـ ܳ ܳ ܐ
82
ܳ
‘ ݁ܶܓrevelation’ when it refers to
with the general meaning of the
ܳ ܽ ݂ ܰܒopp. ܽ ݂ܒ ܽ ݂ܒ ـ ܽ ܘܢand ܽ ݂ ܰܒ ـ ܽ ܘܢ
C. Metathesis occurs in which is productive, as in them’.83 74
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 98.
75
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 98.
76
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 98.
77
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 75.
78
CSD 37b.
79
D. Taylor, The Syriac Versions … Basil of Caesarea 191.
80
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 96.
81
Nuro, Suloko.
82
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 76.
‘against’ ‘against
46
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§102.
D. Orthographically, -doubling occurs in some nominal forms; e.g. ‘fatness’.85 2.5.3.
ܳܳ ܽ݁ ܓ ܘܙ
opp.
ܳܳ ܽ݁ ܓܙ
‘flame’,84
ܳ ݁ܽܕ ܳ ܘܘܗ
opp.
ܳ ݁ܽܕ ܳ ܘܗ
Yūḏ
§102. Morphologically, the suffix of the perfect 3rd fem. pl. is zero in 5th and 6th century MSS, and remains so to this day in E. Syr. In other words, it is a homograph with the 3rd masc. pl.; e.g.
݂ܰ
‘they (f./m.) took’. After the 7th century, W. Syr. began to
distinguish the two forms by adding a silent suffix and syāme; e.g.
̱ ܰ ݂̈ܒ
ܶ ‘ ܶܗthey (f.) took’.86
§103. The suffix of the impf. 3rd fem. sing. was originally zero;
ܽ ܶ ‘ ݁ ܶܬ ݂ ݁ ݂ܘܒshe shall write’. W. Syr. adds the silent suffix ; ܽ e.g. ̱ ܘܒ ݂ ݁ ݂ ݁ܬ. The earliest example is from a 7th century MS, with e.g.
this phenomenon becoming more frequent after the 9th century,
but never normative even today.87 §104. The suffix of the perfect 3rd fem. sing. is normally . By analogy with §102 and §103 above, W. Syr. may sporadically
ܶ ܬܝ ̱ ݂ ܰ ‘ ܐshe said’.88 Other formations include impf. ̱ ‘ ݁ܬ ܰ ݁ ܰܒshe praises’.89
add ; e.g. sing 3rd fem.
§105. Lexically, the use and non-use of varies in the following:
ch. 2
ܺܪ ܳ ܐ
opp. earlier and E. Syr.
ܹܵ ǧȥܪ
‘head’.90 Regardless of
83
D. Taylor, The Syriac Versions … Basil of Caesarea 190.
84
CSD 63b.
85
CSD 85a.
86
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 99.
87
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 100.
88
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 100.
89
D. Taylor, The Syriac Versions … Basil of Caesarea 192.
90
Wernberg-Møller, ‘Some Scribal’ 141.
Consonantal Graphemes
§109.
dialect, is missing in the following:
ܺ ܐ ݁ ܰܓ ݁ ܳ ܐ
‘double door’,
opp.
ܺ ܐܙ ݁ ܰܓ ݁ ܳ ܐ
47
ܺ ܳ ܐ݂ ܳ ݂ܐ
opp.
ܳ ܺ ݂ܐܕ ܳ ݂ ܐ
‘ambassador’. This is more
ܺ ܶ ܐand ‘ ܐܶ ܺ ܳ ܐcircle’.91 ݂ ݂ ܳ݁ ܺ݁ ܺ ܳ 92 Other examples include: ܒvs. ‘ ݁ܒeggshaped’. Someܰ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܽ݁ ܰ ݁ times varies with an ◌ or ◌ܹ vowel; e.g. ܓ ܐ opp. ܳ ܐܓ ܳ ܰ݁ ܶ ܳ ܰܶ ݁ ‘letter’.94 ‘struggle’,93 ܓ ݂ܬܐ ܐopp. ܐܓ ݂ܬܐ ݁ܳܒ݂ܶܒand §106. is sometimes omitted after long ◌ܹ; e.g. ‘ ݁ܳܒ݂ܶܒBabylon’.95 pronounced in Greek loan words; e.g.
ܳܐ ܳܳ݁
§107. is sometimes repeated orthographically, with /ī/; e.g.
݁ܰܒܐ ܺ ܳ ܐ
opp.
݁ܰܒܐ ܺ ܳ ܐ
‘barren’,96 E. Syr.
ܿ ȃǫǭ ܼ ܼ
opp. W. Syr.
ܺ ܓܒ ݂ ܰ
‘my side’.97 Additionally, is inserted in W. Syr. MSS after an
ܵ ܼܿ ǭܹ ‘gehana’.98 ◌ܺ that corresponds to E. Syr. ◌ܹ; e.g. ܳ ܰ ݁ܺܓopp. ǧȎǵ §108. For
, see under .
ܰ ݂ ܐwhen itܰ is used in compounds; same’, and ܳ ݂ ‘ ܐas’ (historically, the
§109. is not written in e.g.
ܰ ݂ ܰ ݂ܐ
and
ܰ ܐ ݂ ݂ܳܐ
‘the
original form may have been without , which was then added to
ܰ ݂ )ܐ.99 It is sometimes missing in modern texts (but very
rarely), though this may be attributed to more phonetic spelling;
ܰ
e.g. ݂ܐܟfor
ܰ ݂ ‘ ܐas’.100
91
CSD 24a.
92
CSD 43a.
93
Brock, personal communication.
94
CSD 12b.
95
CSD 34b.
96
CSD 34a.
97
CSD 58b.
98
David §33.
99
D. Taylor, The Syriac Versions … Basil of Caesarea 184.
100
Brock, personal communication.
48
I. The Graphemic Inventory
2.5.4.
§110.
Other Consonants
§110. There are very few instances when consonants are affected
ܳ ܳ ܳ ܶ ݂ܨܒ ݂ ܐopp. ‘ ܶܨ ݂ ݂ ܐornament’,101 ܶ ݂ܓ ݂ ܐ ܳ ܰ݁ ܳ ܰ ܳ ܶ݁ ܳ݁ ܶ ܳ ܶ opp. ‘ ݂ ݂ ܐdish’,102 ݁ܒ ـ ܐopp. ܒ ‘cup, bowl’, ܐ opp. ܐ ܳ ܰ ݁ ܶ and ‘ ܺܐ ݁ ܰܒ ܳ ܐbuffalo’, ܳ ݁ܶܓopp. ܳ ‘ ݁ܶܓ ـhay’,104 ‘bow’,103 ܐܙܒ ݁ ܐ ̱ ܳ ܰ ݁ ܽ ܘ ܐopp. ‘ ܰܨ ݁ ܽ ܘ ܳ ܐchest’,105 ݁ ݁ܶܓopp. ݁ ‘ ݁ܶܓside’ (abs. of )݁ܰܓ݁ܳܒܐ,106 ̱ ܳ݁ ܶ ܳ݁ ܶ 107 ݂ܒ ܐopp. ‘ ݂ܒ ̱ ܐbrick’. by orthographic variations;
§111. Grammatical (usually morphological) variants also exist with consonants. For instance, may be added to the perf.
ܰ ܰ ܐ ܺ ܽ ܢfor ܺ ‘ ܐacquired’,108 and the 1 pl. ܰ ݂ ܰ ـfor ܰ ݂ ‘we fell’.109 Lexically, one encounters ܰ ( ܰܐDuval ܰ ܶ )ܐfor ܰ ‘we’. In ʿ-weak verbal Eṯpʿel and Ettap̱ʿal forms, gives masc. 3rd pl. suffix; e.g.
early 5th and 6th century MSS frequently have a single as opposed to later spellings;110 e.g. [nettzīʕ]111 ‘be moved’, added’.
ܰܶ ݂ ܰ ݁ܐܬܘ
for
ܰ ܶ ݂ ܰ ݁ܐܬ ݁ܬܘ
ܶ ݁ ܺܙ
for
[ʔettawsap̱]112 ‘was
101
D. Taylor, The Syriac Versions … Basil of Caesarea 190.
102
CSD 242b
103
CSD 229a.
104
CSD 69b.
105
Van Rompay, ‘A Precious Gift to Deir al-Surian’ 737.
106
CSD 58a.
107
CSD 58a.
108
D. Taylor, The Syriac Versions … Basil of Caesarea 192.
109
D. Taylor, The Syriac Versions … Basil of Caesarea 192.
110
Van Rompay, ‘Some Preliminary’ 77; Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’
98–99.
ch. 2
ܶ ݁ ݁ܬܺܙ
111
D. Taylor, The Syriac Versions … Basil of Caesarea 195.
112
D. Taylor, The Syriac Versions … Basil of Caesarea 195.
Consonantal Graphemes
§113.
49
§112. From a synchronic perspective, E. and W. Syriac differ in spelling in a number of ways (bearing in mind that E. Syr. tends to preserve archaic spellings). At the lexemic level, Sokoloff’s dictionary gives 172 E. Syr. variants (against W. Syr. forms), and 80 W. Syr. variants (against E. Syr. forms), a total of 252 variants (only 1.36% of the total lexemes). The CSD gives 112 E. Syr. variants and 41 for W. Syr., a total of 153 variants (or 0.97% of the total lexemes).113
2.6.
Homography
§113. The root-and-pattern (or templatic) nature of Syriac morphology gives rise to an abundance of homographs. Segal has noted:114
The word in Syriac is normally constructed by the addition of one or more of a limited number of formatives to a base of three radical letters. That would in itself have led inevitably to a multiplicity of homographs.
This, coupled with the fact that the writing system is a consonantary and lacks most of the vowels, led to an elaborate system of pointing (discussed in subsequent chapters) in order to alleviate difficulties in reading. Additionally, scribes and grammarians compiled lists of homographs as early as the 6th century to help copyists and authors. Such lists were usually called
ܶܳ ܳ ܳ ܳ ̈ ݂ ܳܕ ܳ ̈ ݂ ܐ ܘ ܶ ݂ ݁ ܰ ݁ ܳ ̈ ܳ ݂ ܐ 113
ܳ ݂ ̈ ݁ܒ
‘words [that are] similar [in form] and
The variants were determined by a search on the strings ‘E-Syr’
and ‘W-Syr’ in G. A. Kiraz (ed.), The Searchable and Bookmarked SyriacEnglish Dictionary. The total number of lexemes, ca. 15,700, was determined by Kristian Heal from a typed version of CSD by counting the number of paragraphs in the document (actually 15,759 paragraphs but some entries are in multiple paragraphs). 114
Segal 7.
50
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§114.
doubtful [in meaning]’.115 A special class of teachers, the
ܳ ܶܐ
ܰ
maqryānē, were entrusted with the task of teaching proper reading.116 §114. Homography exists in Syriac at two levels: consonantal and proper. A consonantal homograph is a string of consonants that represents more than one meaning, but may sound differently after vowels are applied; e.g. the consonants in represent
ܰ ݁ ܳܐ
/malkā/ ‘king’ and
‘advice’. It can be said that
ܐ ̈ ܰ ܶ ݁ graph. (If one was to add ܐ
ܶ ݁ ܳܐ
ܐ
/melkā/
constitutes a two-way homoand
ܶ ̈ ݁ ܶܐ
, it would become a 4-
ܳܳ
is either ‘sand’ or ‘un-
way homograph.) A proper homograph is a vocalized word that represents more than one meaning; e.g.
cle’. Note that proper homographs are a subset of consonantal homographs. Statistically, proper homography is far less frequent than consonantal homography, as vowels are usually not written. Sokoloff’s revision of Brockelmann’s lexicon,117 which contains 18,500 lexemes, has 97 (0.52%) two-way, 28 (0.15%) three-way, 2 (0.01%) four-way, and 1 (0.005%) five-way proper homographs.118 Computing statistics for consonantal homographs is more labor intensive. A random search119 showed ca. 1,675 (9%) two-way consonantal homographs. While the random search re-
115
Duval §63.
116
Segal 9. On the maqryāne, see Becker, The Fear of God and the
Beginning of Wisdom. 117
Sokoloff, A Syriac Lexicon.
118
These numbers were computed by performing a search on the
strings #5, #4, …, #1 in an electronic list of homographs which Sokoloff kindly generated for this purpose. 119
Page 100 and every 100th page thereafter were checked for con-
sonantal homographs. ch. 2
Consonantal Graphemes
§116.
51
sulted in zero three-, four-, or five-way homographs, I have come across (in a different search) at least one five-way consonantal homograph, viz.,
.
§115. Morphologically speaking, homography occurs at three levels: root, lexeme (dictionary entry), and word. Root homographs may not always result in actual homographs. In most cases, however, the root consonants give rise to lexeme homographs in various grammatical categories; e.g. √ ܙܗܪgives rise to the homograph verb
ܰܙܗܪ
‘1to shine, 2to admonish’ and to the
ܳ ܺ adjective ‘ ܙܗ ܐ1illuminated, 2wary’.
§116. Lexeme homographs may be the result of various functions: A. A root homograph that gives rise to other homographs as the case of √ ܙܗܪabove. In the case of verbal homographs, the various senses do not always co-exist in all morphological verbal
ܰ ݁ܒ, for instance, is a three-way homograph. ܶ ܐܬܒ ݁ ݂ ܶ ‘have a bulging Its first sense exists in the Eṯpʿel form ( ܶ ‘ ݁ܰܒto obstruct’). eye’). Its second sense exists in the Paʿʿel form ( ܶ ‘ ݁ܰܒto cause to rot’), Apʿel Its third sense exists in the Paʿʿel ( ̱ ܶ ܰ ܶ ܶ ݁ ( ݂ܐܒalso ‘to cause to rot’), and Eṯpʿel ( ‘ ݂ܐܬܒto rot’) forms. templates. The verb
B. Two nouns, one derived from a Syriac root and the
other a substantive; e.g.
ܶ ܐ ܳܐ
‘command’ from √
ܐand ‘lamb’ ܳ ܳ (also a consonantal homograph with ‘ ܐ ܐshe says’). ܰ ܳ ܽ C. Two substantive nouns; e.g. ‘ ܐܪ ܳ ܐlion’ and ‘leprosy’, ܙܘܙܐ
‘coin’ and ‘type of onion’.
D. Two denominative verbs derived from two different
ܳ ‘ ܰܙ ݂ܓ ܶ ݂ܓto shine’ (from ‘ ܙ ݂ܽܓ ݂ܺܓ ݂ ܐglass’) and ‘to play ܽ ܰ like a child’ (from ܘܓܐ ݂ܳ ‘ ܙ ݂ܓsmall bell’). nouns; e.g.
E. Two nouns that are loan words, sometimes from two
different source languages; e.g.
َ َٔ ). ‘type of plant’ (from Arab. ارطا
ܳ ܰ ‘ ܐܪ ܐvirtue’ (from Gr. ἀρετή) and
52
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§116.
F. Two nouns that become homographs as a result of suf-
ܳ ܽ ܺܰ ܘܬܐ ‘ ܐart ܰ ݂ ܳ ܺ (from ܐ ܐ Arab. )أَمير.
fixation; e.g.
of speaking’ (from √
)ܐ
and ‘emirate’
G. Words of different grammatical categories; e.g.
could be the noun
ܳ ܰ of ݂ ܐ
݂
ܰܶ
(abs. of
‘one thousand’), the verb
and the proper noun
ܰܳ
ܶ
݂ܳܐ
ܶ ܰ ݂
‘ship’), the noun (Ap̱ʿel of √
ܶ ܳ ݂
(abs.
‘to teach’),
‘Ālap̱’. H. A number of lexeme homographs are distinguishable
݂
with fricatization (q.v. §210). The following are consonantal homographs:
ܶ ܰ ‘ ݂ܶܳܐܒܐfather’ and ‘ ݁ܳܐܒܐfruit’ ܰ ‘ ܰ ݂ ܳܐܒ ܳ ܐfeather’ and ‘ ܶ ݁ ܰܐܒ ܳ ܐlead’ ܳ ܳ ݁ ‘roof’ ܐܓ ܳ ܐ ‘wage’ and ܐܓ ܐ ݂ ܳ ܳ ‘?’ and ܐܕܪܐ ܳ ݁ ܳ ‘Holm Oak’ ܐܕܪܐ ݂ܺ ܰ ‘ ܐ ݂ ܳ ܐhand’ and ‘ ܐ ݁ ܳ ܐwhich’.
The following are homographs even with vocalization:120
ܶ ܰ ݁ ܰ (Paʿʿel of ܐܓ ܰ ݁ ܰ (Ap̱ʿel of ݂ܰܓ ܐܓ ݂ܰ ‘to hire’) and ܐܓ lengthen’)
ܽܒ ܪ ݁ ܳ ܐ
‘bowing’ and
ܽܒ ܪ ݂ ܳ ܐ
(the latter being a homo-
graph as well, ‘benediction’ and ‘borax’)
‘ ݁ܽܓ ݁ ܳܒܐwell’ and ‘ ݁ܽܓ ݂ ܳܒܐbeam’ ܳ ݁ ‘ ݁ܰܓleper’ ‘ ݁ܰܓ ݂ ܳ ܳܒܐleprosy’ and ܒܐ ܳ ‘ ܰ ݂ ܽ ݂ܘܬܐjoy’ and ‘ ܰ ݁ ܽ ݂ܘܬܐbride’ ܳ ݁ ܽ ‘idle’ and ܓܒܐ ܳ ݁ ݁ ܽ ‘porter’ ܓܒܐ ݂ ܳ ݂ ܽ ‘stork’ and ܪܒܐ ܳ ݁ ܽ ‘desert’ ܪܒܐ ‘ ܶ ݂ ܳ ܐmercy’ and ‘ ܶ ݁ ܳ ܐshame’ ‘ ܶ ݂ܓ ݁ ܳ ܐdrawing up (of a net)’ and ‘ ܶ ݂ܓ ݁ ܳ ܐscourging’ ‘ ܰ ݂ ܳܒܐthinness’ and ‘ ܰ ݁ ܳܒܐdried up’ ܳ ܳ ‘ ܺ ݂ ܳܐtreasure’ and ‘ ܺ ܳ݁ ܐcomposition’ ݁ ܰ ‘sound’ ܨܘܬܐ ݂ ܰ ‘conversation’ and ܨܘܬܐ 120
ch. 2
‘to
Kiraz, Spirantization 15 (English section).
Consonantal Graphemes
§117.
53
ܳ ܳ݁ ܶ ‘ ܶ ݂ ܐbow’ and ܐ ‘stubble’ ܽ݁ ܳ ܳ݁ ܽ݁ ‘ ܬܘ ܽ ݂ ܳܐthird’ and ‘ ܬܘ ܽ ܳ ܐa 3-year old’ ‘ ݁ܬ ݂ܘܬܐsycamore’ and ‘ ݁ܬ ݁ܘܬܐmulberry’. 2.7.
Frequency of Occurrence
§117. The letters of the alphabet appear in various frequencies in the Syriac corpora. The frequencies of occurrence in the Syriac New Testament corpus are as follows:121 Letter Frequency
ܐ ܒ ܓ ܕ ܗ ܘ ܙ ܚ ܛ ܝ ܟ ܠ ܡ 121
Percentage
64,536
13.9%
19,750
4.3%
4,127
0.9%
29,761
6.4%
25,765
5.5%
47,113
10.1%
2,890
0.6%
10,478
2.3%
3,807
0.8%
41,762
9.0%
13,725
3.0%
34,311
7.4%
29,519
6.4%
This frequency study is based on Kiraz, ‘A Proposed Syriac Com-
puter Keyboard Layout’. The statistics are based on the New Testament corpus which consists of 464,615 characters. Comparing percentages of the results with those posted by David G. K. Taylor for the text the Commentary of Daniel of Ṣalaḥ on the Psalms, vol. 1 (hugoye-list, June 29, 2009) yields striking similarity with an average difference of only 0.01%. Maximum difference is 1.6% for
which may just mean that the
NT text has more suffixes than Daniel of Ṣalaḥ. The next difference is only 1.1% for ܘ.
54
I. The Graphemic Inventory
ܣ ܥ ܦ ܨ ܩ ܪ ܫ ܬ
44,594
9.6%
6,078
1.3%
11,987
2.6%
6,939
1.5%
1,514
0.3%
6,726
1.4%
20,262
4.4%
13,190
2.8%
24,624
5.3%
§118.
Total 464,615 §118. Matres lectionis are among the most frequent, as they play two roles: ܐat 13.9%, ܘat 10.1%, and ܝat 9.0%. §119. Letters that occur in prefixes and suffixes have a higher frequency than others. The letter
just exceeds
ܝ
at 9.6%, not
surprisingly considering that it occurs in imperfect prefixes and
݁ܒ ݂ ܽܘܠletters also occur in higher frequencies than other letters with ܠat 7.4%, ܕat 6.4% and ܒ, the most infrequent amongst them, at 4.3% ( ܘwas mentioned above at 10.1%). The letter ܡis also high at 6.4%, as it is used as a nominal formative. The letter ܗ, found in many suffixes, ranks at 5.5%. The letter ܬ, found in a good number of prefixes and suffixes, invarious suffixes. The
cluding perfect and imperfect verbs and feminine nouns, is surprisingly low in frequency, ranking at 5.3%. The letter
, used
in a number of suffixes, ranks at 3.0%. §120. Among the letters that do not occur in prefixes or suffixes,
ܪis the most frequent at 4.4%. All other letters occur less than 3% as follows: ܫat 2.8%, ܥat 2.6%, ܚat 2.3%, ܦat 1.5%, ܩat 1.4%, ܣat 1.3%, ܓat 0.9%, ܛat 0.8%, ܙܙat 0.6%, and ܨat 0.3%. §121. The ten most frequent letter pairs are (occurs 10,193 times in the NT corpus), (9,851 times),
ch. 2
Consonantal Graphemes
§123.
55
(8,890 times), (6,660 times), (6,249), (6,130 times), (5,425 times), (5,341 times), (5,184 times), and (4,998 times). The sequence occurs in pronouns like
ܶ ݁ ܰ ܶܶ ̱ ܐ, ܐ
ܶ ܳܗ, the interrogative ܶ ܰܐ, the 2nd and 3rd fem. suffixes of
and
the prefect, the 2nd fem. suffix of the imperfect, and the object pronominal 2nd fem. suffix
ܶ.
The frequent sequences and , as well as the
ܽ
sequence , occur in the 3rd masc. suffix ܗܘܢ. The sequence
is probably due to the feminine suffix. The sequences , and constitute lexemes in addition to constituting substrings of other words.
2.8.
Alphabetization
§122. The sequence of letters in the consonantary follows that of the earliest West Semitic consonantary, the first evidence of which appears in an Ugaritic ordered list of the cosmology. The order is:
ܐܒܓܕܗܘܙܚܛܝܟܠܡܢܣܥܦܨܩܪܫܬ §123. The earliest use of the order of the consonants, albeit incomplete, is found in an early alphabetical numbering system in the parchment dated 240 (q.v. §347). A complete ordering of the consonants is found in acrostics by Aphrahaṭ (fl. early 4th century) and Ephrem (d. 373). Dawid bar Pawlos (8th/9th century) composed an acrostic on the alphabet itself.122 Alphabetical word lists were compiled as early as the 6th century. The first author to compile an alphabetical list of words, now lost, was Joseph Ḥūzāyā (d. 500). The first such list to survive was compiled by
122
Gottheil, ‘A Midrashic poem on the Alphabet’.
56
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§123.
ʿNanīšoʿ (650–690), published by G. Hoffmann.123 The order is purely alphabetical; hence, participles are under masc. forms under
ܡ,
impf. 3rd
, and impf. fem. forms are under ܬ.124 There
are also a number of anonymous MSS of such lists; e.g. BL Add. 12,178 which Wright dates to the 9th or 10th century, explicitly mentions alphabetization in its title:
ܰܳ ݂ ݂ ݁ ܶܒ
ܰ
ܳ ̈ ݁ ܰ ݂ ܰܕ
݁ ܰ ܽܨܘ ݁ ܶ ܐ ݂ܕ ܽ ̈ ܶܐ
݂ܳ
ܽ
‘diacritical points arranged alphabeti-
cally’.125 Such lists led to the later compilation of dictionaries arranged alphabetically. §124. The order of words in dictionaries according to root, rather than alphabetically, is a western invention. (In such dictionaries, roots themselves are arranged alphabetically.) Dictionaries arranged by root are found as early as Valentin Schindler (d. 1604) in his Lexicon pentaglotton, Hebraicum, Chaldaicum, Syriacum (1612).126 In this particular work, quadriliteral roots were given separately at the end of each alphabetic section, but later dictionaries incorporated them with trilateral roots. In some dictionaries (e.g. Brockelmann), lexemes are arranged under roots according to morphological forms (Pʿal, Paʿʿel, Ap̱ʿel) rather than the order of the alphabet. Ancient Syriac grammarians did not employ this typology, nor did the medieval Maronite grammarians.127 A. Masius was the first to write a Syriac grammar in Latin making use of the Pʿal, Paʿʿel, and Ap̱ʿel typology.128 The listing of
123
G. Hoffmann, Opuscula Nestoriana.
124
Merx 103.
125
Wright I, 110, no. 5.
126
D. Taylor, An Annotated Bibliography of Printed Syriac Lexica, en-
try under 1612.
ch. 2
127
Merx 103.
128
Masius 15 ff.; Merx 272.
Consonantal Graphemes
§127.
57
words according to rhyme, as is the case in some Arabic lexica (e.g. al-Zubaydī’s tāj al-ʿarūs) is unknown in the Syriac tradition. §125. The order of the alphabet is realized at the graphemic level, allographs having no affect on the sequence. Ligatures have no affect on the sequence either (not even , unlike Arabic
لاthat
has a slot in the alphabet). Similarly, nonlinear graphemes (e.g. vowels) have no affect on alphabetization. §126. In a computational system where ordering strings is useful for indexing and search algorithms, one must make practical choices as to how nonlinear graphemes affect sorting and indexing. Additional choices, when applicable, need to be made for the sorting order of auxiliary graphemes such as the Old Syriac dotless ܖ. One may choose to have them listed directly after, or ca-
nonically equivalent to their respective source forms: Garšūnī with
ܔ
ܓ, Old Syriac ܖwith ܕor ( ܪit was placed after ܕin Unicode,
though Unicode does not assume sorting order per se), and Garšūnī ܜwith ܛ. §127. Ancient grammarians such as Bar ʿEbroyo129 justified the order of the alphabet by classifying letters into different types of sounds (q.v. §73):
ܰ ݁ ݂ ܳ ̈ܐ
‘broad’, and
‘ ܰ ̈ ݁ ܶ ܐthin’ ‘ ܶ ̈ ܳ ܶܐin
or
ܺ ܰ ̈ ܶܐ
‘narrow’,
‘thick’ or
between’. They argued that the
alphabet began with ‘thin/narrow’ sounds ‘thick/broad’ sounds
ܳ ݂ ܰܒ ̈ܐ
ܐ
to
ܛ,
followed by
ܝto ܩ, and the ‘in-between’ sounds ܪto ܬ.130
This idea originated with Dionysius Thrax.
ܒ ܐ
̈ ܐܬܘܬܐ
ܘܕ
̈ ܐܬܘܬܐ ܘ
܀
129
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe iv.1.§3; Sciadrensis ܙ.
130
Duval §18.
ܕ
ܗ
3. Vowel Graphemes Vowel sounds are thick and thin. Again, every word, that is, every member of a clause—where it is thick or
broad in vowel sound, there it takes a point above; where it is fine or thin, it takes a point below. If it is
medium, between fine and thick, and there are two
other words similar to it in spelling, it takes two points, one above and one below.
Jacob of Edessa (d. 708), On Orthography
Now when I was in Rome I saw three Chaldeans [i.e. Maronites]… I saw them reading their Psalter without
points, and asked them, ‘Have you points, or any signs to indicate the vowels?’ and they answered me, ‘No! But
we have been conversant with that language from our youth till now, and, therefore know how to read without points’.
Elias Levita (1469–1549), Massoreth ha-massoreth
§128. Syriac grammarians referred to the vowels using different
ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ܶ ̈ ܐ ‘beats’, ‘ ܰܙܘ ܐmovements [of the ݂ ܳ ‘ ܶ ݁ ݁ܬ ܺܙ ܳ ܽ ݂ܬܐmovements’2 (according to Duval, on
terms:
mouth]’,1 or account that
they are considered movements of the auditory system in order to produce sounds). Early grammarians called them
ܶ ܳ ̈ܐ
,3 not to be
confused with the plural sign which has the same name (for which q.v. §158).
1
David §15; Dulabani 1; Duval §42; al-Kfarnissy §3.
2
Jacob bar Šakko (in Merx, 4th question); Segal 7.
3
Acurensis ;ܒAmira 34; Duval §75.
59
60
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§129.
§129. The earliest system of marking vowels in the Syriac consonantally-biased writing system appears in inscriptions, the earliest of which is from A.D. 6, and legal parchments dated 240– 243. In this system, originally introduced by Aramaeans in the 9th century B.C.,4 vowels were partially marked by three ‘weak’ letters:
ܐ
,
ܘ
, and
ܝ
. The early Aramaic system
applied only to vowels at the end of words, but by the time of the Old Syriac inscriptions it had already been extended to apply in the middle of the word as well. By the time of the 411 MS, an additional system was in place which made use of a single diacritical point to disambiguate homographs. By the time of Jacob of Edessa (d. 708), this system had been extended to use two diacritical points to disambiguate three-way homographs. Jacob, finding a need for a more comprehensive vocalization system, devised special letters to mark vowels, but did not intend for them to be used widely (lest all the MSS of his time become obsolete). Jacob’s system was hardly used, and by the 8th or 9th century a fully developed pointing system had appeared in which each vowel was marked either by two diacritical points, or by a single diacritical point in combination with a mater lectionis. In W. Syr., the pointing system was augmented with a symbolic system where each vowel was marked by a nonlinear symbol (i.e. written above or below letters) derived from Greek letters; hence, ‘Greek’ vocalization. This system, according to a recent study by Coakley,5 was developed in the 10th century (traces of these vowel
4
Early
Segert, Altaramäische Grammatik 62–64; Cross and Freedman, Hebrew
Orthography;
Degen,
Inschriften des 10.-8. Jh. V. Chr. 25–28. 5
ch. 3
Coakley, ‘When were’.
Altaramäische
Grammatik
der
Vowel Graphemes
§131.
61
graphemes can be seen in earlier MSS).6 The timeline of the development of the various vocalization systems is then as follows: A.D.
Event
6
Earliest inscription
100
System used partial matres lectionis
200
240s
Legal parchments
300
Matres lectionis fully developed
400
411
MS Add. 12,150
Single diacritical point
500
Two diacritical points
600
Jacob of Edessa’s linear system (defunct)
700
708
Jacob of Edessa died
800 900
MS Vatican 152
Pointing system fully developed ‘Greek’ vocalization introduced
§130. Each subsequent system was an augmentation to its predecessor, not a replacement. Hence, in W. Syr. one finds the ‘Greek’ system alongside the pointing system, and obviously alongside the matres lectionis system.
3.1.
The Matres Lectionis System
§131. The set of weak letters is known in Syriac as
ܳ ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ܐܬܘܬܐ ݂ ܺ ܳ ݂ܬܐ ݂ ݂
‘weak/sick signs’,7 and in Latin by the term matres lectionis, literally ‘mothers of reading’, a translation from the Hebrew grammatical expression אֵם ְקרִיאָה.
6
Wright III, p. xxx.
7
Bar ʿEbroyo classifies Nūn as weak but not in the sense of matres
lectionis.
62
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§132.
§132. Matres lectionis begin to appear in Old Syriac (for which see §23 ff). As for Classical Syriac,8 the 411 MS shows a fully developed matres lectionis system. §133. represents the following vowels, in order of frequency: A. /ā/, primarily at the end of the word (usually, /ā/ in the middle of a word is unmarked). Almost all emphatic nouns end in /ā/ marked with ; e.g. tan’,
ܒ
/sāṭānā/9 ‘Sa-
ܐ
< ܒ ܐbrʔ> /brā/ ‘son’. The following verbal forms, with √
, also end in /ā/ marked with /ʔ/:
1. Act. part. sing. 3rd fem.; e.g. a. Pʿal ܒܐ
/kāṯbā/ ‘she writes’.
b. Paʿʿel
/mḵattḇā/.
c.
/maḵtḇā/.
ܒܐ Ap̱ʿel ܒܐ
2. Pass. part. sing. fem.; e.g. a. Pʿal ܒܐ
/kṯīḇā/ ‘it is written’.
b. Eṯpʿel c. d. e. f.
ܒܐ /meṯkaṯbā/. Paʿʿel ܒܐ /mḵattḇā/. Eṯpaʿʿal ܒܐ /meṯkattḇā/. Ap̱ʿel ܒܐ /maḵtḇā/. Ettap̱ʿal ܬ ܒܐ /mettaḵtḇā/.
3. Many of the L-ʔ forms (while ʔ is part of the root, it loses its consonantal value); e.g. a. Perf. sing. 3rd masc. ܐ b. Inf. ܐ
ܒ
/meḇkā/.
c. Impt. Paʿʿel
8
ܒ/bḵā/ ‘he cried’.
ܒ ܐ/bakkā/.
Brockelmann §4; Costaz §10; Duval ch. ix; Healey 8; Muraoka,
CS4H §7; Nöldeke §4.A; Palacios §13; Uhlemann §2; Zschokke §3.2. 9
ch. 3
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 154, co. 2, ln 40 from Hatch.
Vowel Graphemes
§133.
d. Impt. Ap̱ʿel forms.
ܐܒ ܐ
63
/ʔaḇkā/, and their reflexive
B. /ē/, at the end of the word, but also in the middle. It appears marked with at the end of most masculine plural nouns; e.g.
̈ܬ ܐ
/ṣawtāp̱ē/10 ‘partakers’. It appears in P-ʔ and P-y verbs; e.g. E. Syr. ȤȋǦȎ ܼܿ ܹ /nēmar/ ‘he shall
say’, W. Syr.
݂ ܰ ܶܐ
/lmēlap̱/ ‘to learn’. It is also present in many of the L-ʔ verbs; e.g. with √ ܒ ܐ: 1. Impf. sing. 3rd masc. ܐ
ܒ
2. Sing. fem. ܐ 3.
4. 5.
/neḇkē/ ‘he shall cry’.
ܬܒ/teḇkē/. Sing. 2 masc. ܬܒ ܐ/teḇkē/. Sing. 1st ܐܒ ܐ/ʔeḇkē/. Pl. 1st ܒ ܐ/neḇkē/, and the nd
corresponding forms in
the remaining measures. Also in act. part. sing. 3rd masc. masc.
ܒ ܐ
/bḵē/, Eṯpʿel
/meṯbakkē/, Ettap̱ʿal ܐ
ܬܒ
ܒ ܐ/bāḵē/; pass. part. sing. 3rd ܒ ܐ /meṯbḵē/, Eṯpaʿʿal ܒ ܐ /mettaḇkē/.
C. E. Syr. /ē/ (= W. Syr. /ī/) in the middle of the word;
e.g. ܐ
ܐ
/kēp̱ā/ (W. Syr. /kīp̱ā/) ‘rock’.11 ܰ ܺܐ/nīmar/ ‘he shall say’. D. /ī/ in W. Syr. P-ʔ verbs; e.g.
Also in Greek loan words; e.g.
ܐ
ܕ
/dīyaṯīqī/ (E.
Syr. /dīyaṯēqē/) from διαθηκη ‘covenant’,
ܐ
ܘ
/qaṯūlīqī/ (in both W. and E. Syr.) from καθολική ‘universal’. These tend to have variant forms that end in . (Note that in Greek η was originally pronounced /ē/ and in the first centuries of the Christian era shifted to /ī/.) E. /a/, both in the middle and at the end of the word. This occurs
in
Greek
loan
words;
e.g.
ܐ
ܕܐ
10
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 154, co. 2, ln 7 from Hatch.
11
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 154, co. 2, ln 32 from Hatch; MS BL Add.
14,425, f. 95, co. 1, ln 27 ff. from Hatch.
64
I. The Graphemic Inventory
/dīyaqonīyya/ from διακονία ‘service’,
ܘܢ
§134.
ܕܐ
/dīyaṭesaron/ from διατεσσάρων ‘diatessaron’.
§134. represents two phonemes, /ū/ and /o/; e.g. /ṭūḇānā šemʕon/
ܢ
12
ܒܐ
‘blessed Simon’.
Both phonemes are collapsed into /ū/ in W. Syr. §135. represents two phonemes, /ī/ and /ē/; e.g.
/qḏīm/13 ‘old’,
/šāwēn/14 ‘deserve’.
§136. Reversely, the list below gives phoneme to grapheme mapping: 1. /a/ is represented by . 2. /ā/ by . 3. /e/ by or < y> (most plural nouns end in ). 4. /ē/ by or < y>. 5. /ī/ by or . 6. /ū/ by . 7. /o/ by . §137. In connection with the use of as matres lectionis, Greek loan words also used to represent Greek /ε/; e.g.
ܶ ݁ ܺ ܽ ܢ
3.2.
λεξικόν ‘lexicon’.
The Pointing System
§138. The origin of the pointing system lies in the disambiguation of homographs (on homography, q.v. §113 ff.). Three stages of development can be identified. In the first stage, already appearing in the 411 MS, a single diacritical point was placed above
ch. 3
12
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 154, co. 3, ln 34–35 from Hatch.
13
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 154, co. 1, ln 6 from Hatch.
14
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 154, co. 1, ln 28 from Hatch.
Vowel Graphemes
§140.
65
or below two-way homographs. The location of the point was not random, but followed specific phonological rules (discussed below). In the second stage, two diacritical points—one supralinear, the other sublinear—were introduced to disambiguate three-way homographs. The two-point system begins to appear, albeit rarely, around 600, and is mentioned in the grammar of Jacob of Edessa (d. 708) quoted at the beginning of this chapter. In the third stage, a more comprehensive pointing system was introduced where each vowel phoneme had its unique pointing grapheme. The third stage was probably developed in the 8th or 9th century, and continues to the present day. 3.2.1.
One-Point Vocalization
§139. This system made use of a single point,15 in later gram-
‘ ݁ ܳ ܽ ܘ ܳ ܐdistinguisher’, ‘ ܽ ̈ ܶܐ ݂ ܳ ܽ ܘ ܶܐdistinctive ܽ ܳ ܶ̈ ܳ ‘distinctive signs’ (where ܶ then had its points’,16 or ܐ ݂ ܘ ܶܐ
mars termed pārūšā
original meaning ‘sign’)17 to disambiguate between homographs.
Disambiguation is always made between two words of the same grammatical category; i.e. when both are nouns, verbs, or prepositions. §140. The system is alluded to in a text attributed to St. Ephrem (d. 373),18 although the attribution is incorrect. Commenting on the word ܐ 15
‘donkeys’, the text reads:
Amira 51 ff.; Duval §63–69; Segal 9. Grammarians who merely
mention the one-point system include Brockelmann §5; Costaz §11; A. Hoffmann I.I. §9, p. 85; Nestle §6.a; Nöldeke §6; Palacios §15; Uhlemann §4; Zschokke §3.3. 16
Nestle §6.a.
17
Duval §71.
18
Martin, ‘Histoire de la ponctuation’ 92; Segal 12; the text is in J.
S. Assemani, Sancti Patris Nostri Ephraem Syri Opera Omnia I, 184.
66
I. The Graphemic Inventory
ܰ݁ ܰ ݁ ܰ ܰ݁ ܶ ܶ ̈ܪܬ ܐܐ ܳ ܶ ݂ ܳ ܺ ̈ܒ ̱݁ ܰܕ ܐ ݁ ܰܒ ̱ܘ ܐ
§141.
ܶܳ ܙܕܩ ܶ ݁ ܰ ܥ ݁ ܰܕ ݂ ܰ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܪ ݁ ܳ ܰܐ ܺܰ ̈ ܰ ݂ ܺ ݁ ܕ ݂ܐܬ ܳ ܘ ݂ܐ ܐ .ܰ ܺ ݂ ܽ ݂ܬܐ
It is necessary to know that up to now we have read in the two testaments ḥemrē and not ḥmārē as some igno-
rant people claim.
As both ḥemrē (the lesser plural) and ḥmārē (the greater plural) are consonantal homographs,19 shown in Esṭrangelā above, the scribe must have used a device to distinguish them in writing. That device was probably the diacritical point, already well attested in the 411 MS. §141. The disambiguation of homographs with the vowels /a ā e/ systemically follows the following rules (rūkkāḵā and qūššāyā points are not indicated in the examples to avoid confusion with the diacritical points, but are shown in the phonological transcription): A. /a e/ vs. /ā/. If the distinction is to be made between the vowels /a/ or /e/ on the one hand, and /ā/ on the other, a single sublinear point marks either /a/ or /e/, while a single supralinear point marks /ā/; e.g. 1. 2.
̣ܒ ܐ ̣ ܐ
/ʕaḇdā/ ‘slave’ and ܐ
/sep̱rā/ ‘book’ vs. ܐ Other common homographs include: 3. 4. 19
20
̇ܒ ̇
/ʕāḇdā/ ‘she makes’. /sāp̱rā/21 ‘scribe’.
̣ܗ ܢ/hēnnūn/22 ‘these’ vs. ̇ܗ ܢ/hānūn/23 ‘those’. ̣ܒ/ḥaḇlā/ ‘cord’ vs. ̇ܒ/ḥḇālā/ ‘corruption’.
For the lesser plural (for 10 or fewer items) and greater plural (for
larger items), see Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe i.5.§2, p. 29; see also Audo 353.
ch. 3
20
MS BL Add. 14,445, f. 3b from Segal 21.
21
MS BL Add. 14,425, f. 136a from Segal 21.
22
MS BL Add. 14,425, f. 3b from Segal 21.
23
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 48b from Segal 21
Vowel Graphemes
§142. 5. 6.
67
̣ ܐ/ʕelṯā/ ‘cause’ vs. ̇ ܐ/ʕlāṯā/ ‘offering’. ̣ ܒܐ/ṭēḇā/ ‘rumor’ vs. ̇ ܒܐ/ṭāḇā/24 ‘good’.
B. /a/ vs. /e/. If the distinction is to be made between /a/ on the one hand, and /e/ on the other, then a single supralinear point marks /a/, while a single sublinear point marks /e/; e.g. 1. 2.
ܐ ̇
̇
/malkā/25 ‘king’ vs. ܐ
/man/27 ‘who?’ vs.
̣
̣
/melkā/26 ‘advice’.
/mēn/28 ‘from’ (/mān/ ‘what
(ABS.)’ takes a supralinear point as well). In verbs, the same distinction must be made between Pʿal, historically Pᵊʿal with schwa, and Paʿʿel forms; e.g. (historically /qᵊṭal/) and
̇
/qaṭṭel/ ‘he killed’.
̣
/qṭal/
§142. The disambiguation of homographs with the vowels vs. their respective diphthongs also employed a single point. As stated earlier (§131 ff.), the letters
ܘand ܝplay two roles: as
pure consonants or as matres lectionis for the vowels /ū/ and /ī/,
respectively. A single supralinear point indicates a consonantal value (i.e. diphthong), while a single sublinear point indicates the vowel sound; e.g. 1.
̇
/sāymīn/ ‘they place’ vs.
placed’ (and all such verbal forms). 2. 3.
̣
/sīmīn/ ‘are
̇ /haw/29 ‘that MASC’ vs. ܗܘ ܗܘ ̣ /hū/30 ‘he’. ܗܝ ̇ /hāy/31 ‘that FEM’ vs. ܗܝ ̣ /hī/32 ‘she’.
24
MS BL Add. 14,431, f. 17b from Segal 21.
25
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 210a from Segal 21.
26
MS BL Add. 14,431, f. 129a from Segal 21.
27
MS BL Add. 14,425, f. 4a from Segal 21.
28
MS BL Add. 14,425, f. 104b from Segal 21.
29
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 211b from Segal 14.
30
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 210a from Segal 14.
31
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 212b from Segal 14.
68
I. The Graphemic Inventory 4. 5.
§143.
ܐ ̇ ܐ/ʔaydā/ ‘which?’ vs. ܐ ̣ ܐ/ʔīḏā/ ‘hand’. ̇ /ʕawlā/33 ‘wicked’ vs. ̣ /ʕūlā/34 ‘infant’ (there is also ̇ /ʕawālā/ ‘wicked person’).
§143. The use of the single point was extended in later periods with derivatives of the homographs, even—as is usually the case—when the derivatives themselves have no homographs; e.g.
̇ /malkūṯā/ ‘kingdom’ from ܐ ܬܐ ̣ ܐ/melkā/36 ‘advice’).37 The point categories: the verb ̣ /ḥlem/ ‘to
̇
/malkā/35 ‘king’ (vs.
also crossed grammatical dream’ took a sublinear
point, but the point was then extended by analogy to
/ḥelmā/.
38
Similarly, the noun
point from the verb ܬ
̣
/ḥḏeṯ/.
̣ ܬܐ
ܐ
̣
/ḥaḏṯā/ ‘new’ inherits the
§144. Although above we attempted to place the diacritical point above or below the consonant that preceded (in the phonological string) the vowel, in MSS it is not uncommon to find the point in various positions. For instance, one may see ‘offering’ (dot above ) or
̇ ܐ
ܐ
̇
/ʕlāṯā/
(dot above ) or between
and . Similarly, one usually finds the point on tween the two letters.
ܗ݀ܘbe-
§145. Reversely, the list below gives phoneme to grapheme mapping: 1. /a/ is indicated by ◌̣ (against /ā/), or ◌̇ (against /e/). 2. /ā/ by ◌̇ (against /a e/).
ch. 3
32
MS BL Add. 14,425, f. 3a from Segal 15.
33
MS BL Add. 17,107, f. 24a from Segal 21.
34
MS BL Add. 17,107, f. 24a from Segal 21.
35
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 210a from Segal 21.
36
MS BL Add. 14,431, f. 129a from Segal 21.
37
Segal 21.
38
Duval §65.
Vowel Graphemes
§148.
69
3. /e/ by ◌̣ (against /a ā/). 4. /ī/ by ̣ܝ.
5. /ū/ by ̣ܘ.
§146. The graphemes ◌̣ and ◌̇ are bound, and have no segmental value of their own. In fact, their segmental value cannot be determined from the base grapheme upon which they are placed; rather, the entire lexeme—and in practice, even a larger context such as a phrase—is required to determine their segmental value. 3.2.2.
Multi-Point Vocalization
§147. By the year 600 one finds, although rarely, traces of two points used to distinguish three- or four- way homographs; e.g. 1.
ܐܬܐ ̣ ̇ /ʔāṯā/ ‘sign’ vs. ̇ܐܬܐ/ʔāṯē/ ‘he comes’ vs. ̣ܐܬܐ/ʔēṯā/ ̇ /ʔīṯē/ ‘I shall come’, the point here ‘he came’ (vs. ܐܬܐ
marks the 1st person, q.v. §221.B.2).39 In the late E. Syr. tradition,
2.
ܬ.
Ǩܐܬ ̤ ‘sign’ appears with two points below
40
̣̇
/man/ ‘indeed’ (Greek μέν) vs.
/mān/ ‘what’ vs.
̣
̇
/man/ ‘who?’ or
/men/ ‘from’.
There is a tendency to use two-dots for the word that belongs to a different grammatical category; e.g. while both
̇ܐܬܐ
/ʔāṯē/ and
̣ܐܬܐ
ܐܬܐ ̣ ̇
or
Ǩܐܬ ̤
/ʔāṯā/ is a noun,
/ʔēṯā/ are verbs. Note that the
position of the points varies in MSS and is not always fixed. §148. From the 7th century onward, two vowels may be indicated within the same word. Two one-point graphemes are used, each representing a distinct vowel, usually ◌̇ for /a/ and ◌̣ for /e/;
̣ ̇ܘܐ
e.g.
/wʕaseq/41 ‘and he lift up’, Paʿʿel
39
MS BL Add. 12,166, f. 159a from Segal 21.
40
Mosul Bible, Isa. 11.10 and elsewhere.
41
MS BL Add. 7,157, f. 144a from Segal 26.
̣ ̇
/paqqeḏ/42 ‘he
70
I. The Graphemic Inventory
commanded’,
̇ ̣ܒ
/mqabbel/43
‘he
§148.
accepts’,
ܘܢ
̣ ̇
/qaṭṭeltūn/44 ‘you fought’. Here too the graphemes ◌̇ and ◌̣ are bound and have no segmental value of their own (q.v. §146). 3.2.3.
The Fully Developed Pointing System
§149. In the fully developed pointing system, a vowel phoneme is represented either by a single two-point grapheme, or a polygraph consisting of a one-point grapheme and a mater lectionis grapheme. §150. The first two-point grapheme to appear marked the vowel /a/. Traces of this grapheme can be found prior to the 7th century, but it appears more frequently by the middle of the century. This two-point grapheme consists of a supralinear point and sublinear point; e.g. ܝ §151.
̣̇
/šarī/45 ‘began’.
After the 7th century, a sublinear two-point grapheme be-
gan to be used exclusively to mark the vowel /e/; e.g. /dḥel/46 ‘he was afraid’,
̤ ̣̇
/qāṭṭel/47 ‘he fought’.
̤ܕ
§152. During the 8th century, two two-point, slanted graphemes emerged. The first was supralinear and marked the vowel /ā/; e.g.
ܵܒ ܐ/bāḵyā/48 ‘she cries’, ܵ
/qām/49 ‘he rose’. The second
was sublinear and marked the vowel /ē/; e.g.
ch. 3
42
MS BL Add. 14,460, f. 34a from Segal 26.
43
MS BL Add. 14,460, f. 12a from Segal 26.
44
MS BL Add. 7,157, f. 103a from Segal 26.
45
MS BL Add. 14,460, f. 14b from Segal 28.
46
MS BL Add. 14,460, f. 14b from Segal 28.
47
MS BL Add. 14,471, f. 2b from Segal 28.
48
MS BL Add. 14,448, f. 1a from Segal 29.
49
MS BL Add. 14,448, f. 1a from Segal 29.
50
MS BL Add. 14,448, f. 78a from Segal 29.
ܹ
/lēh/50 ‘to him’,
Vowel Graphemes
§154.
71
ܬܪܬ ܹ /tartēn/51 ‘two’. The position of the two points with respect
to each other varied, appearing vertically on top of each other as
ܵ ݃ ◌ or ◌݄ (e.g. ‘ ܒܐ ܕܨ ̈ ݄ ܐBook of Ṣemḥē’),52 slanted downwards to ܵ ܵ the left as ◌, or slanted downwards to the right as ◌. In old MSS, the vowels ◌ܸ and ◌ܹ are sometimes interchangeable.53
§153. Parenthetically, in the 8th-century manuscript BL Add. 7157, Greek υ is marked with with
ܣ
;̣ܘ ̣
e.g.
̤ ܘܣ
̤ܘ,
Greek οι with ݄ܘ, and Latin u
κυπρος ‘Cyprus’,
‘Lucius’.54
ܹ ܪ ݄ܐ
κυρηνη ‘Cyrene’,
§154. Later grammarians more or less fixed on seven vowels which now appear in all grammars.55 These are:
ܿ
1. /a/ is indicated by ◌ܼ .
ܵ ܵ ◌ or ◌. /e/ is indicated by ◌ܸ. /ē/ is indicated by ◌ܹ. /ī/ is indicated by ܼܝ. /ū/ is indicated by ܼܘ. ܿ /o/ is indicated by ܘ.
2. /ā/ is indicated by 3. 4. 5.
6. 7. 51
MS BL Add. 14,448, f. 1a from Segal 29.
52
MS HMML SOAH (Syr. Orth. Archdiocese of Homs) 52, p. 1, from
McCollum, ‘Divine Invocations and Doxologies’. 53
Nöldeke §8.
54
Segal 30.
55
Abouna 31; al-Abrāshī et al. 24; Arayathinal §4; Brockelmann §7;
Costaz §12–14; Cowper §11; David §15; Dulabani 2; Duval §70; Elia of Ṣoba 27–28; Gabriel of St. Joseph §15; al-Kfarnissy §3; Healey 141; A. Hoffmann §11; Kiraz, Primer 211 §16; Makdasi
; Manna 8; C. B.
Michaelis §13ff; Mingana 14–23; Muraoka, CS4H §4; Muraoka, CS §4; Nestle §3; Nöldeke §8; Palacios §16; Risius §173; Thackston xx–xxi; Tullberg §4; Uhlemann §3; Ungnad §3; Zschokke §3.3.
72
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§155.
§155. There were various traditions of writing the points. A summary of one particular system is given by Bar ʿEbroyo. His description can be formalized with the following matrix: A. Number of points in a vowel graph. The values are either 1 or 2. B. Position of the vowel graph with respect to the base consonant. Here, Bar ʿEbroyo’s point of reference is the sheet of paper at the time of writing, where the paper is turned 90 degrees counter clockwise (q.v. §449). Hence, a point above a letter such
ܿ ◌
) ݂ ܳ ܡ, not ܰ ܳ݁ above the letter; similarly, ◌ܼ is behind (Syr. )ܒ ݂ ܪ, not below the
as
is described by Bar ʿEbroyo as in front of (Syr.
letter. Elia of Ṣoba (d. ca. 1049) and Bar Šakko (d. 1241),56 how-
ever, give the positions with respect to reading orientation: above and below. C. Obliqueness of two-point graphs. The points may be written slanted (Syr.
ܽ ܺ )݁ܰܒor straight (Syr. )݁ܰܒ ݂ ܺܪ ܽ ܘ.
D. Direction (with a page turned 90 degrees). The values are either upwards (Syr.
݁ ݂ܰ
ܶ
̈ ܰ ݁ ܰ)
or downwards (Syr.
̈ ܰ݁ܰ
).
§156. Unlike the previous pointing system, here the vowel graphemes
ܿ ܵ ܵ ◌ܼ , ◌ (or ◌), ◌ܸ, and ◌ܹ, while still bound (requiring a
base grapheme), have an unambiguous segmental value; i.e. the grapheme
ܿ ◌ܼ represents /a/ even if its base grapheme is missing,
ܵ ◌ represents /ā/, etc. ܿ §157. The vowels ܼܝ, ܼܘ, and ܘform polygraphs. In each case, the
first grapheme is a base character and the second is a diacritic.
56
ch. 3
Jacob bar Šakko (in Merx) ܘ.
Vowel Graphemes
§161. 3.2.4.
73
Syāme as an /e/ Vowel
§158. A. Butts points out that in a few cases syāme represents a final /e/ vowel by analogy with the pronunciation of the masculine plural ending;57 e.g. ܐ
̈ ‘ ܕcovenant’ in ܐ
ܐ ܕܕ ̈ ܐ
‘stranger to the heavenly covenant’58 where the singular is assured by the following adjective that does not have syāme as well as by the witness of other MSS that have
ܕ ܐwithout syāme.59 An̈ other example is ܐ ܐfor Greek Σκήτη,60 where a plural is ruled
out due to the fact that it is a place name.
§159. The use of syāme as an /e/ vowel, rather than a plural marker, also occurs in Syro-Sogdian (q.v. §621). §160. More recently, Nuro’s reform (q.v. §186) implicitly assumes an association between the vowel /e/ and syāme. Nuro instructs that there is no need to mark a masculine plural that ends
ܶ
in /e/ with ◌, as the syāme is sufficient to indicate the vowel.
3.3.
Alphabetical Linear Vocalization
§161. There were two known attempts to introduce linear vocalization; i.e. a method to specify vowels by symbols on the baseline on equal footing with consonants. The first was by Jacob 57
The discussion and example in §158 are courtesy of Aaron M.
Butts (Yale University). For further discussion with additional examples, see his Language Change in the Wake of Empire: Syriac in its Greco-Roman Context (in progress). 58
Syriac History of St. Cyriacus and his Mother Julitta according to
the Syriac MS at the Library of the Royal Asiatic Society, f. 182a, ln. 10, dated 1569. 59
MS Yale Syriac 5, dated 1888, and MS Sachau 222, dated 1881;
Bedjan, Acta Martyrum III, 272, ln. 21. 60
MS Yale Syriac 5.
74
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§161.
of Edessa (d. 708) whose objective was to provide a more accurate way to describe the phonology of the language, but only in pedagogical settings. The second was by the 18th-century Maronite scholar Gabriel Ḥawwā, whose motivation was to simplify the printing of Syriac texts. 3.3.1.
Jacob of Edessa
§162. Jacob of Edessa (d. 708), realizing the need for systematic vocalization, put in place an ‘alphabetical’ system of vocalization; i.e. ‘alphabetical’ in the sense that each vowel has its symbol on an equal footing with consonants. In essence, the use of linear graphemes on equal footing with consonantal graphemes, as in proper alphabets like the Greek alphabet, was a radical departure from the one-point and two-point diacritical systems with which Jacob was familiar (the fully developed pointing system had not yet emerged). Jacob may have modeled his system on Greek or Coptic (per Duval)61 or Mandaic (per Wright).62 He explicitly did not intend his system to become universal, fearing that existing texts would become unreadable:
I have decided that the (vowel) letters are to be added
only to (illustrate) the sense and the arrangement of (these morphological) rules, so that they will demonstrate the variation and the pronunciation of the sounds.
They are not (added) in order to perfect or improve the script.63
In fact, he himself did not use this system in his own grammar, a fragment of which survives.64
ch. 3
61
Duval §72.
62
Nestle §6.b.n.1.
63
Segal 41.
64
Duval §72.
Vowel Graphemes
§166.
75
§163. Jacob enumerated seven vowels, introducing six new symbols, and reusing the letter
ܐfor Zqāp̱ā. Had this system be-
come standard, it would have converted Syriac from a consonantary to an alphabet proper. Jacob’s vowels are:65 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. §164.
for Pṯāḥā; e.g. ܐ ܕfor ‘ ݁ܰܕ ݂ ܳ ܐpure’. ( ܐa regular Ālap̱) for Zqāp̱ā; e.g. ܐ ܕfor ‘ ݁ܰܕ ݂ ܳ ܐpure’. ܳ for long Rḇāṣā; e.g. ܐ ܒfor ‘ ݂ ܶܒ ݁ ܐdill’. for short Rḇāṣā; e.g. for ‘ ݁ ܰ ݁ ܶ ܐidol shrines’. ܳ for Ḥḇāṣā; e.g. ܐ ܕfor ‘ ܳ ݁ܕ ݂ ܺ ݂ ܐpure’. for long ʿṢāṣā; e.g. ܐ ܕfor ‘ ݁ܕ ܽ ݂ܬܐshape’. for short ʿṢāṣā; e.g. ܓܐ for ‘ ݂ ܽ ݂ܳܓܐsponge’. An eighth grapheme, , is found in words like ܐ ܨfor
ܳ ‘ ܨ ܽ ݂ܬܐprayer’, but the quality of the vowel is not clear and may
have been, according to Segal, between o-u and i. By the time of Bar ʿEbroyo, the system had become confused and the vowel
qualities may have changed.66 §165. Hardly anyone made use of Jacob’s vowels. According to tradition, Theophilus of Edessa (d. 785) was the first to use them in his translation of Homer’s Iliad,67 and they re-appear in Bar ʿEbroyo’s Ṣemḥe68 in a discussion on the topic. It is doubtful if anyone else ever used them. §166. These vowels first appeared in print type in the 19th century to print the texts of Jacob of Edessa and Bar ʿEbroyo. They first appeared in digital fonts in 1987 in a bitmap font,69 and 65
Segal 42–43.
66
See Segal 43 n. 1 for a comparison.
67
J. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis I, 64, 521; III 2, 378; Duval
68
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe iv.1.§2, p. 193.
69
Kiraz, Alaph Beth 12–15.
§73.
76
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§166.
again as an outline font by Diane Collier in 2012 for the purposes of this book. 3.3.2.
Gabriel Ḥawwā
§167. Soon after 1701, the Maronite scholar Gabriel Ḥawwā (in Latin Eva or Heva) designed a linear system for vocalization.70 His primary motivation was to simplify printing. Ḥawwā used this system in a 1737 edition of the Psalms printed in Rome (see Pl. 11). Due to the rarity of Heva’s edition, I shall quote his reasoning behind his system from the Garšūnī introduction:71
ܨܦ ܨ
ܢ
ܐܬܒ
ܙܡ ܐܪ
ܒ ܐ ܐܬ ܕܦ
ܐ ܐ ܪܟ
ܗܕܗ .ܐܬ ّ ܐܬܒ
ܐ
ܘ
̈ܒ ܐܬܗܐ ُ ܐ ܘܐ ܐ ܘ (ܐ ܐ ܘ ܘ. ܓ ܘ ܐܪܝ ܘ .
̈
ܐ
ܬ ܒ ܐ
.ܐܬ ܡ ܘܐ . ܐܒ ܐ ܝ ܙܐ ܘܐ:ܐܬ ܙܡ ܘܐ ܐܪ:ܐ ̇ ̈ܒ ܗܕܗ ܪܒܐ ̈ܗ .ܗ ܐܒ ܗ ܨ ܝ ܐ ܡ ܐܪܝ ܒ ܟ )ܘ ܗ ܐܥ ̈ ̈ ܒ ܗ ܐ ܐܥ ܗܕܗ ܘܓ ܗܐ ܕ ܘ ܓ ܐ ܓ ܝ ܓܐܗܕܬ. ̈ܒ ܗܕܗ
ُܒܐ ܬ
ܘ
I have seen that the printing of Syriac is difficult and re-
quires the setting of two lines, one for words (i.e. con-
sonants) and another for vowels, and the scribe is in need of two pens, one for writing (consonants) and a thinner pen for the vowels, and extra care (is necessary)
to place the vowel on its consonant. And many times, he
ch. 3
70
Duval §74; A. Hoffmann §88; J. D. Michaelis 29; Uhlemann §2.R.
71
Heva, Liber Psalmorum Davidis Idiomate Syro 5r ff.
Vowel Graphemes
§168.
77
is required to write (the vowel) upside-down (under the consonant) for lack of space. In order to escape this difficulty, he then omits the vowels and his writing becomes dead, difficult to read. Then the reader encoun-
ters the words whose letters are something, but the pronunciation is multiple as in
( ܒ ܟand many like it): it is
pronounced in six ways with different meaning and
vowels. In this and in others, the reader stumbles and wonders how to read: he errs and becomes embarrassed
and upsets the faithful with him. I have labored so that the reader and the writer and the learned one will be rid of this grave difficulty.
§168. Ḥawwā goes on to describe his system. He employs the matres lectionis, for all five vowels. He achieves this by defining three shapes of not as allographs, but each shape a grapheme in its own right:
ܰ
ܪܐܒfor ‘ ܰ݁ܪܒbig’. ܳ ܳܳ The existing straight, Ālap̱, ܙܐ, for ◌; e.g. ܪܐ ܐfor ‘ ܪ ܐhigh’. ܶ A new Ālap̱ with a hook on the top, , for ◌; e.g. ܪܐܒfor ܶ ݁ ܰ ‘big (pl.)’. ̈ܪܒܐ ܽ ܺ The mater lectionis ܘstands for ◌ and ܝfor ◌. In this
1. The existing curvy Ālap̱, ܐ, for ◌; e.g. 2.
3.
.
system vowels are no longer optional. Ḥawwā describes his system as follows:
ܐܬ
ܙܡ ܗ
ܐܬܒ ܦ ܘ ܳ ܓ. ܬ .ܙܐ. ܘ . ܘ ܐܘ. ܢ ܢ .
ܝ ܘ .ܐܒܐ ًܐ .̇ ܐ
ܬ ܒ ܪܗ ܬ ܐ ܐܢ ܬܨ ܐ ܦ. ܝ. ܘ. ܐ.ܬܗ ܗܕܗ ܘܒ ܘ ܒ ܒܐ ܒ ܐ ܰܠ ܘܐ ܒ ًܐ . ܐ.ܒ ܐ ً . . ܘ.̈ܪܐܙ ܪ ܐ ̇ܨ ܐ.ܽܘ ݂ . ܺܝ. ܘ ܐ. .
I saw fit, with the light of the Almighty, that the five vowels came from the three letters . The
writer is required to write in sequential order, and with
78
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§169.
ease, the letter and its vowel in one pen as in Greek and
ܰ ܐ as in ܐܒܐ, and the straight ܳ ܽ (one) ܙܐas in ̈ܪܐ ܙ, and the hooked as in ܢ. And ܘas in and ܺܝas in .
Latin. I have made the bent .
§169. Ḥawwā’s proposal has allographic and phonological consequences. The allographs of , ܐand ܙܐ, are now graphemes in
their own right. Additionally, loses its phonetic value as a glottal stop /ʔ/ (cf. with English /a/ which is simply a vowel even word initially). §170. According to the introduction, in addition to the 1737 Psalter, Ḥawwā produced a manuscript of the holy liturgy using this system as well as a booklet (perhaps to illustrate the system) in 1711 which Ḥawwā sent to his patriarch with the Apostolic Legate. Ḥawwā claims that he received the endorsements of J. Assemani, as well as the endorsement of his patriarch and bishops when the 1711 booklet was presented to them by the Apostolic Legate. §171. Ḥawwā extended his system further and proposed that it could also be used in the Arabic script to write Arabic, (Ottoman)
Turkish, and Persian. In this system, Arabic ( اbut with a tooth on
the top right) can be used for /a/, ( اwithout a tooth) for /u/, and
the above for /i/.
§172. Ḥawwā incorporates the grapheme in the ligature
. He
preserves syāme, and uses as a hyphen at the end of a line. The following sample, taken from the headings of Psalm 1, illustrates Ḥawwā’s invention:
ܐܒܐ ܕ ܐܙ ̈ܪ .
. ܡ ܐܒܐ ܘܐܒ ܐ ܘܪܘ ܐ ܕ ܕ ܐ ܐ ܒ . ܐܙ ܪܐ ܐܕ ܐ ܐ.ܕܕܐܘ ܐ ܐ ܘܐ ܒ ܐ
A fuller example can be seen on Pl. 11.
ch. 3
Vowel Graphemes
§175.
79
§173. The new glyph, , appears in print type only in the 1737
edition of the Psalms mentioned above. It was designed in a digital OpenType font by Diane Collier for the purposes of this book.
3.4.
‘Greek’ Nonlinear Vocalization
§174. Long after Jacob’s time, probably around the 10th century as proposed most recently by Coakley,72 a nonlinear system of vocalization using symbols derived from Greek was introduced to W. Syr. These symbols came to be called
‘ ܰ ̈ܙܘ ܶܐmovements’. Early
traces of the use of Greek vowels to indicate the pronunciation of Greek proper nouns is first attested in MS BL Add. 14,429, dated 719, where Greek vowels appear on top of the Syriac writing, and the entire proper noun is reproduced entirely in Greek in the margin; e.g.
ܬ
with ε above ܐ, ι above ܝ, ω above ܘ, and
ܐ
ΣΕΦΙΜΩΘ in the margin.73 Coakley notes ‘here the vowels are
limited to names and are not yet part of any system to represent vowels in ordinary Syriac words’. Coakley goes on to demonstrate that the earliest set of MSS to contain the ‘Greek’ vowels we know today date to the 10th century, originating from the area of Melitene, reconquered by Byzantines in 934. In early MSS, signs resemble their Greek original form in shape and orientation, but later took the form we are familiar with today. The orientation of the vowels also varied in early MSS, and even in some of the early print types; e.g.
and .74
§175. The vowels in this system are:75
72
Coakley, ‘When were’.
73
Coakley, ‘When were’ 310.
74
Coakley, Typography 12.
75
Abouna 31; al-Abrāshī et al. 24; Acurensis
ܓ, ;ܝAmbrosio 81–
82v; Amira 32 ff.; Arayathinal §5; Brockelmann §8; Coakley-Robinson
80
I. The Graphemic Inventory 1. /a/, based on Greek Α, is marked by ‘who?’. 2. /ā/, based on Greek Ο, is marked by ‘father’.
§176.
◌ܰ
as in
ܰ
/man/
◌ܳ
as in
ܰ ܳܐܒܐ
/ʔaḇā/
◌ܶ, based ca. ܶ on Greek ܳ ε turned ܳ ܶ as in ܐ ܐ/ʔēmā/, ܨܒ ܐ/ṣeḇṯā/
3. /e/ and /ē/ are marked by 110 degrees clockwise, ‘decoration’. 4. /ī/ is marked by ‘written’.
◌ܺ, based on Greek Η, as in
ܺ
/kṯīḇ/
ܽ ◌, based on Greek ΟΥ (where Ο is the ܽ ܳ ܽ /mūmā/ ‘blemish’. small circle in ◌) as in ܐ ܽ For ◌, the position of O with respect to Y varies in early
5. /ū/ is marked by §176.
MSS, and even in print types; e.g.
where the O is outside the
Y. Even when O is inside Y, its orientation may vary; e.g. 76
ܽ opp. ◌.77
and
§177. In cases of diphthongs, Greek Υ sometimes combined with symbols other than Ο in mašlmānūṯā (‘Masoretic’) texts;78 e.g. with
◌ܰ to form
; with ◌ܶ to form , and with ◌ܺ to form .
§178. The vowel graphemes are usually supralinear but may also be sublinear, often depending on the glyph descenders of the pre-
12–13; Costaz §12–14; Cowper §11–12; Dulabani §2; Duval §75; Elia of Ṣoba 27–28; Gabriel of St. Joseph §15; Healey 8–9; A. Hoffmann §11; alKfarnissy §3; Kiraz, Primer 46–47, 196, 210 §12; Makdasi
; Manna 8;
J. D. Michaelis §8; Mingana 24 ff.; Muraoka, CS4H §4; Muraoka, CS §4; Nestle §3; Nöldeke §9; Palacios §18 ff.; Risius §173; Sciadrensis Thackston xxi; Tullberg §4; Uhlemann §3; Ungnad §3; Zschokke §3.3.
ch. 3
76
Coakley, Typography 65.
77
Coakley, Typography 34.
78
Loopstra, Patristic Selections 152; Wiseman 192–93.
ff.;
Vowel Graphemes
§181.
81
vious line, or the ascenders or vowel marks of the following line; e.g.
B
A ܳ ܽ ܳ ܽ ܨܒ ܬܐ ܨܒ ܬܐ ܳ ܺ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܬܘܕ ܰ ܐ ܬܘܕ ܐ ܱ ܳ ܺ݁ ݁ ܰ In column A, the ◌ on ܬof ܘܕ ݂ ܐ ܬhits the ܨof the previous line. This is resolved in Column B by placing ◌ ܱ instead on ܬ. In the 1555 NT edition and the accompanying Prima Elementa, the vow-
els and
◌ܻ are invariably sublinear (note the orientation of
◌ܷ, which occurs is some late MSS).
79
, not
This may have been an at-
tempt to mimic the sublinear Arabic kasra. The same system reappears in a few subsequent printed texts from the 17th century onward.80
◌ܺ rarely occurs without as in ‘ ݁ܺܒܳܐܪܐa well’, in which case it usually corresponds to E. Syr. ◌ܹ. Otherwise, ܺ it is usually bound to as in ‘ ݁ܒ ܳ ܐevil one’. ܽ ܳ ܽ݁ §180. The grapheme ◌ is always bound to ; e.g. ܐ ܽ ݁ ‘every’ and ܽ ܶ ‘mouth’. The only two exceptions are ܽ ‘because’, for which there are earlier forms with as in ݁ ܠ ܽ ܶ and ܠ (c.f. §59, §110, §186). §179. The grapheme
§181. The ‘Greek’ vocalization system has coexisted in W. Syr. with the full pointing system, as well as the one-point system unܳ til the present day;81 e.g.
̈ܶ
ܰ ܼ ܿ ‘ ܽ ܼܕܘ ܳ ܳ ̇ ܳܒܐ ̣ ܶ ܶܘܐlet there be ܒܐܪܒ
79
MS Teaneck, Qyāmtā Phanqithā 77 and elsewhere.
80
Crininesius, Gymnasium Syriacum (1611), illus. in Coakley, Typog-
raphy 48; Rudimentum Syriacum (1618), illus. in Coakley, Typography 57; Jahn, Elemnta Aramaicae seu Chaldaeo-Syriacae linguae (1820), illus. in Coakely, Typography 109. The 1824–27 Paris NT seems to have a supralinear 53. 81
◌ܶ
but a sublinear
◌ܻ
uniformly; see illus. in Coakley, Typography
Costaz §15; Nöldeke §10, §13.A; Uhlemann §3.
82
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§181.
a commemoration in the four quarters [of the earth]’:82 the supralinear point on and the sublinear point on belong to the one-point vocalization period; the
ܿ ◌ܼ and ◌ܼ vowels belong to
the fully developed pointing period, and the remaining ‘Greek’ vowels belong to the later period. Print types as early as 1554 (e.g. W2)83 facilitated this by casting the point vowels and the ‘Greek’ vowels on the base characters; e.g. ܢ
ܵ ܳ ܢ
‘Lord, Lord’.
§182. In early MSS, the vowels were sometimes placed on, not before, matres lectionis; e.g.
ܶ ܳ̈ܪ ܶܐ
‘Egyptians’.
85
§183. The position of
ܳ ܰܳ ܶ ܳ ܰܳ ܐ ̈ ܳ ܬܐfor ‘ ܐ ̈ ܳ ݂ܬܐphysicians’,84 ܶ ܳ̈ܪ ܐ
for
ܽ ◌ܺ and ◌ varies until the modern day: some
place it on the preceding consonant, and others on the mater lectionis; e.g.
ܺܒ ܳ ܐopp ‘ ܒ ܺ ܳ ܐevil’ and ܽ ܳ ܐ
opp.
ܽ ܳܐ
‘mouth’. Most
grammarians in their vocalization implicitly prefer placing these vowels on the consonant. David explicitly states so.86 Smith’s Thesaurus Syriacus places tionis.87
ܽ ◌ between the consonant and the mater lec-
§184. The ‘Greek’ vocalization is completely segmental in that each grapheme possesses a unique segmental value; e.g.
◌ܰ always
represents /a/ regardless of the segmental value of the base
ܳ
grapheme with which it occurs, ◌ always represents /ā/, etc. §185. The vowel graphemes are bound in that a vowel cannot appear by itself in texts (apart from scientific or pedagogical texts
ch. 3
82
Çiçek, Šḥīmā 64, ln 16.
83
Coakley, Typography 33.
84
MS Vat. Sir 152, ln 1 from Coakley, ‘When were’ 321.
85
MS Vat. Sir 152, ln 4 from Coakley, ‘When were’ 321.
86
David §30.
87
Coakley, Typography 134.
Vowel Graphemes
§187.
83
of course). One exception I recently encountered is the telephone
ܺ ܺ ܺ ܺ in a Ṭuroyo children’s book.88 ܪܪܪܪ◌◌◌ ܓܓ
sound
§186. One modern reform proposal has had some affect, albeit minor, on contemporary vocalization. Nuro89 argued that since and
ܘ
ܝplay the role of the /ū/ and /ī/ vowels, respectively, the
vowels can be eliminated. He also argued that there is no need to write
◌ܳ
at the end of nouns, or
◌ܶ
at the end of plural nouns
marked with syāme. Hence, one writes
ܺ not ݂ ܳ ܐ and ܠ
‘key’ (
ܶ
ܽ
and
ܽ ܶ
ܪܐ
not
ܽ ܳܪܐ
‘cold’,
݂ܐ , he argues, must be written ܠ
). Nuro claims that if one adopts these rules in ‘vocal-
ized’ texts, then one can be relieved of 70–75% of vowel signs. The proposal did not gain much traction, but was adopted in Aydin’s Children’s Bible,90 and in a new edition of Qarabashi’s primers by Eli Shabo.91
3.5.
Summary of Phonemic to Graphemic Relationships
§187. The following table is a summary of the representation of the various vowel phonemes with their time period, bearing in mind that each historical period incorporates all of the preceding systems, apart from Jacob’s defunct system which is not shown here. In the table, the boundary symbol # indicates that the mater lectionis usually occurs at the end of the word. Parentheses indicate that the mater lectionis was sometimes omitted.
88
Löfgren, Ludde vo telefon 5.
89
Nuro, Suloko 11–12.
90
R. Aydin, Kṯāḇā qādīšā meṭūl ṭlāyē.
91
Shabo, Syriac Reading Lessons.
84
I. The Graphemic Inventory /a/
100
/ā/
/e/
ʔ#
§188.
/ē/
/ī/
/ū/
/o/
ʔ#
(y)
(w)
(w)
y
w
w
̣ܝ
̣ܘ
̇ܘ
200 300
ܿ ◌ܼ ◌ ܿ ◌ܼ
400 500 600
ܿ ◌ ܵ ◌
700 800
◌ܰ
900
◌ܼ
◌ܼ
◌ܸ
◌ܸ ◌ܹ
◌ܳ
◌ܶ
◌ܺ
ܽ ◌
§188. Unlike Arabic sukūn, no symbol is used in Syriac to mark the want of a vowel.92 Cardahi, however, uses the Arabic sukūn in his lexicon and grammar; e.g.
3.6.
ܳ ْܰ ‘ ܗtemple’.93
Vowel Names
§189. Vowel names are known to us from grammatical traditions, which are by no means uniform. Bar ʿEbroyo (d. 1286)94 informs us of seven different traditions. He himself enumerates eight vowels, giving not only their glyph shapes, which he calls
ܶ ܰ ݂ ̈ܐ
‘marks, signs’, but also the manner of writing them (for
which see §155). Bar ʿEbroyo’s vowels are:
ܳ ݁ ܿ ݂ ) ◌ܼ for /a/. ܳ ܳ ܵ Zqāp̱ā ( ◌ )ܙ ݂ ܐfor /ā/. ܳ ܺܰ ܳ Long Rḇāṣā ( ܸ◌ ) ݂ܪܒ ܳ ܐ ܐܪ ݂ ܐfor /e/. ܰ ܳ Short Rḇāṣā ( ) ݂ܪܒ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܳ ܐ for /e:/. ܳ ܺܰ ܳ Long Ḥḇāṣā ( ܼܝ ) ݂ܒ ܳ ܐ ܐܪ ݂ ܐfor /ī/.
1. Pṯāḥā (ܳ ܐ
2. 3.
4. 5.
92
Nestle §6.e; Nöldeke §12.
93
Cardahi, al-Lubāb 304.
94
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, intro §3, p. 4–5; Merx 50; Voigt, ‘Das
Vokalsystem des Syrischen nach Barhebraeus’. ch. 3
Vowel Graphemes
§189.
6. Short Ḥḇāṣā (ܳ ܐ
݂ܳ Short ʿṢāṣā (ܳ ܐ
7. Long ʿṢāṣā (ܐ 8.
85
ܰ ܳܳ ܰܺ ݂ ܹ◌ ) ݂ ܳܒ ܳܐas in ܹ ܐfor /ī/. ܼܘ ) ܨܐ ܐܪfor /ū/. ܰ ݂ ܿܘ ) ܳ ܳܨܐfor /o/.
Using his own vowels as a baseline, Bar ʿEbroyo identified the following variant traditions: A. Jacob of Edessa (d. 708) also enumerates eight vowels,
but he omits Short Rḇāṣā and adds a Middle ʿṢāṣā (ܳ ܐ
whose sign we are not told.
ܳ ܶ ܳ ܳܨܐ
)
B. The Qarqp̱āyē collapse the long and short vowels into one, resulting in five vowels: Pṯāḥā, Zqāp̱ā, Rḇāṣā, Ḥḇāṣā, and
ʿṢāṣā (i.e. the W. Syr. system).
C. Various E. Syr. traditions maintain Pṯāḥā and Zqāp̱ā, but disagree on the remaining vowels: 1. Tradition 1 also maintains eight vowels but uses different names: a. Rḇāṣā is replaced by Zlāmā: Rḇāṣā ʾarīḵā becomes
ܺ ݂ )ܙ ܳ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܰܕ, and ܳ ܳ )ܙ. becomes Zlāmā da-qšē (ܐ ݂ ܰܕ ܶܐ Zlāmā da-pšīq (
Rḇāṣā karyā
b. Ḥḇāṣā is replaced by Yūḏ: Ḥḇāṣā ʾarīḵā becomes
ܳ ܺ ) ܽ ݂ܕ ݂ܒ, and Ḥḇāṣā karyāܰ becomes ܳ݁ ܰ ܰ ܽ Yūḏ masaqtā (ܐ ) ݂ܕor ʾAsāqā ()ܐ ܳ ܳ ܐ.
Yūḏ ḥḇīṣtā (݁ܬܐ
c. ʿṢāṣā is replaced by Waw: ʿṢāṣā ʾarīḵā becomes
ܳ ܺܰ ܰ )ܘܘ, and ܳ݁ ܺ ܰ Waw Rwīḥṯā (ܐ )ܘܘ ܪܘ. Waw ʾalīṣtā (݁ܬܐ
ʿṢāṣā karyā becomes
2. Tradition 2 is based on Tradition 1. It enumerates only seven vowels by collapsing Zlāmā da-qšē and Yūḏ masaqtā of Tradition 1 into a single vowel called ʾAsāqā (ܐ
ܳ ܳ ) ܰܐ.
It maintains the naming convention of Tradi-
tion 1 for the rest of the vowels.
3. Tradition 3 is also based on Tradition 1, and it too enumerates only seven vowels, but collapses both Zlāmā vowels into one and calls it Rḇāṣā.
86
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§190.
4. Tradition 4 also has seven vowels, but collapses the two ʿṢāṣā vowels and calls them Ḥḇāṣā. 5. Tradition 5 maintains only six vowels. It collapses the two Zlāmā vowels into one as well as the two Ḥḇāṣā vowels, and maintains their names. However, ʿṢāṣā ʾarīḵā becomes ʿMāqā (ܐ
ܳ ܳ
) and ʿṢāṣā karyā becomes
ʾAsāqā.
§190. In addition, Severus of Bar Šakko (d. 1241), calls pṯāḥā by
ܳ݁ the name puggāḏā (ܓ ݂ ܳ ܐ
ܽ ݁)
‘bridle’.95 Paul the grammarian and
Jacob of Takrit reserve the term puggāḏā for the /ū/ vowel.96 It is customary in some grammars to call the slanted two-point graph-
ܳ ܶ ܳ ܰ ܳ ◌ܹ is ܶ ݂ܬ ݁ ܳ ܐ
eme šešlā (
‘chain’).97 Hence, ‘lower šešlā’.
ܳ ܶ ܵ ◌ is ܶ ܳ ـ ܳ ܐ
‘upper šešlā’ and
§191. As can be seen from the above confusion, determining the actual meanings of vowel names is difficult. Duval claims that ‘these names are formed according to the position that the affected organs take when pronouncing the vowels’.98 This might be true of Pṯāḥā ‘opening [of the mouth]’, but the others are difficult to ascertain in this manner. Some vowel names describe either the shape of the vowel or the manner of its writing; e.g. ‘oblique’ (Bar ʿEbroyo99 says that the points are written ‘in an oblique manner’, q.v. §153), and
ܳ ܶ
ܙ ܳ ܳܐ ܽ ܺ ݁ܰܒ
‘chain’ for the same
vowel describes how it looks. §192. Despite their classification as ‘long’ and ‘short’ by the ancient grammarians, Syriac vowels tend to mark vowel quality, not
ch. 3
95
David p. 244 n. 1; CSD 435b.
96
Duval §77.
97
Mingana 19–20.
98
Duval §75.
99
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe, intro §3.
Vowel Graphemes
§194.
87
quantity;100 e.g. is short in closed syllables but long in open syllables as in second is long.
ܳ ܳܐ
[māryā:] where the first [ā] is short and the
§193. Later Eastern grammarians provide the following classifi-
ܰ ܳ ‘ ܺܐܪ ݂ ܳ ܐlong’ (rather, an open-syllable vowel) as in ܳ [ḥāܰ ܰ lā] ‘uncle’, ‘ ܺ ܳ ܐtight’ (rather, a closed syllable vowel) as in ݁ ܺ ܳ [mal-kān] ‘our king’, and ݂ ܐ ‘sudden’ (rather, a historical ܰ 101 cation:
schwa) as in
3.7.
[qᵊṭal] ‘to kill’.
Orthographic Variants
§194. A number of orthographic variants take place at the vocalization level, but these are by no means extensive: in most cases, these occur with nominal forms. Some are variants between E. and W. Syr.102 A. Orthographic vowel shift: word-medially, a vocalized
ܐ
was always pronounced [ʔ] in earlier Syriac and until now in E. Syr.; e.g.
ܶ ܐܠ
/šʔel/ ‘he asked’,
ܰ ܶ ܐܠ
/nešʔal/ ‘he shall ask’. In
W. Syr., however, the vowel is moved to the preceding consonant orthographically with the effect that /šel/,
ܶ ܰ ܐܠ
ܐ
becomes silent; e.g.
ܶܐܠ
/nešal/.103 Also with a medial ܐ, when the preceding
vowel is /ī/, the following vowel shifts orthographically from the to the
ܰ ݁ ܺܓ ܳ ܐܐ
;ܝ
e.g.
ܰܗ ܺ ܳ ܐܐ
/hanīyyā/ (E. Syr.
ǨǦܵȂܼȎܼܿܗ
ܐ
/hanīʔā/) ‘sweet’,
ܵ ܿ /sagīyyā/ (E. Syr. ǨǦȂܼǮȑܼ /sagīʔā/) ‘much’. (Note the added
effect of doubling the /y/ in W. Syr.) This shift in W. Syr. may have taken place around the 7th century as by then the
ܐ
was
100
Nestle §6.c; Nöldeke §11.
101
Mingana 31–36.
102
Unless stated otherwise, all examples are from CSD.
103
However, in the received tradition to which I am accustomed,
one writes
ܳ ܺ ܐ
but reads /šʔīlā/, not /šīlā/.
88
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§194.
marked with a diacritical point to indicate its phonetic value (q.v. §202). This shift has syllabification consequences: E. Syr. CVCCVC /nešʔal/ vs. W. Syr. CV-CVC /nešal/. The same rule applies stem-initially.104 In the presence of a
݁ܒ ݂ ܽ ܘܠprefix, the vocalized ܐ
in W. Syr. becomes silent and its vowel is orthographically moved to the last consonant of the preceding prefix; e.g. (E. Syr.
ܵ ܼ ǦȈ ǧȂȈ ܹ
/lʔelīyyā/) ‘to Elijah’,
ܶ ܘ ܺ ܳܐ
ܶ ܺ ܳܐ
/lelīyyā/
/wlelīyyā/ (E. Syr.
ܵ ܼ ǦȈ ǧȂȈ ܹ ܼܿܘ/walʔelīyyā/) ‘and to Elijah’. Note that in the case of two or more ݁ܒ ݂ ܽ ܘܠprefixes, the shift affects not only syllabification, but also increases the number of syllables in the resulting word (three syllables in W. Syr.
ܶ ܰܘ ܺ ܳ ܐ
ܶ ܘ ܺ ܳ ܐ/wle-lī-yyā/, but four in E. Syr.
/wal-ʔe-lī-yyā/). This shift has metrical consequences
which may help us determine a date for the shift in W. Syr.105 One finds in the W. Syr. corpus of Jacob of Sarug (d. 521)106
ܶ ܳ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܶ ܆ ܰܘ ܶ ܺ ܳ ܐ܆ ݂ ܺܒ ܳ ܐ ܰ ݁ܒ
and107
ܺ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܽ ݂ ܘܡ ݁ܬܐ ܰ ܰ܆ ݁ ܰܕ ܽ ܢ ܘܐ ݁ ܰ ܆ ܰ ݂ܘܕܐ ݁ ܰ ܳ ܐ ܺ ܶ ܰܘand ܰܘܕܐ ݁ ܰ ܳ ܐwith four syllables each prior to the shift (ܳ ܐ ݂ ܶ ܺ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܰ ݁ against ܐ ܘand ݂ܘܕܐ ܐwith only three). I have not examined post-6th century texts to further narrow this date.
ܳ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܐ݁ܰܕ ݂ ܐopp. ‘ ܐ݂ܰܕ ݂ ܐearth’,ܰ E. Syr. ܵ ܼܿ opp. W. Syr. ‘ ݁ܳܕ ܳ ܐgift’; E. Syr. ȐȂȋ ܵܐopp. W. Syr. ܺ ‘ ܐAmen’. ǧȏȥܕ B. vs. ; e.g.
This variation is uniform between E. and W. Syr. in all initial CVw nominals; e.g. E. Syr.
ǧȋǶȁ ܼܿ ܵ
opp. W. Syr.
ܰ ܳܐ
104
David §42; Kiraz, Primer 30.
105
Sebastian Brock, personal communication (a conversation on the
road to Pittsburg, PA, 2007).
ch. 3
‘day’.108 In
106
Kaufman, Jacob of Sarug’s Homilies on Elijah 305.
107
Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae II, 650 (no. 57, ln 30).
108
David §20.
Vowel Graphemes
§195.
Greek loan words, Greek α tends to be
89
◌ܰ in W. Syr. but ◌ܵ in E.
ܺ ܺ ݂ ܰ ݁ܕopp. ȃȡȨȁܕ ܹ ܹ ܵ ‘testament’. ܰ ݁ opp. ‘ ݁ܶܓ ݂ܒ ܳ ܐchosen one’, ܰ ݁ ܳ ܐvs. C. vs. , ܓ ݂ܒ ܳ ܐ ܶ ܳܶ ܵ ܼܿ ‘ ݁ ܳ ܐorder’,110ܶ E. Syr. ȷȈܵ ܼܿܐvs. W. Syr. ‘ ܐmourned’, E. Syr. ǩܬܗܪ ܳ vs. W. Syr. ‘ ݁ܬܗܪܐwonder’.111 In some verbs, the vowel of Pʿal forms ܰ ܶ ܰ can be either or ; e.g. ݁ܓ ܢopp. ‘ ݁ܓ ܢto incline’, ܪܟ ݂ ݁ܕ ܶ opp. ܪܟ ݂ ‘ ݁ܕto tread upon’, ܰ opp. ܶ ‘to chew’. ܰ opp. ܺ ܳ ܐ D. vs. (in /ay/ vs. /ī/); e.g. ܳ ܐ
Syr.;109 e.g.
‘dough’.
E. vs. (in /aw/ vs. /ū/)
ܳ݁ ܰ ܐܘܓܐ
opp.
ܳ݁ ܽ ܐܘܓܐ
݂ܳ ܽ ?), ܰܐܘ ܳ ܐopp. ‘ ܽܐܘ ܳ ܐsour buttermilk’. In loan ܐܘܓܐ ܳ ܳ ܰ݁ ܿ ܿ ܵ words, E. Syr. has ܘin place of W. Syr. ;◌ܘe.g. ܣǶȈǶȚ vs. ܣ ܿ ܼ vs. ‘ ܽ ܳܪܘܢchrism’.112 ‘Paul’, ܪܘܢǶȋ ܳ ܳ F. vs. ‘ ܷ݁ܒabstinence’. ܳ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܶ ܳ ̈ ݁ܶܒ G. vs. , e.g. ݁ܒ ܺ ܐopp. ‘ ݁ܒ ܺܙ ܐfalcon’, ܐ ܶ ܽ ̈ ‘ ݁ܶܒincense’. opp. ܵ ܵ Ǹܵ opp. W. Syr. ܽ ܳ ܳ ܐ H. vs E. Syr. ǧȏȑǶ ‘sumac’ (or is it
‘mercy’.
I. vs. , e.g.
ܳ ܳ ݁ܶܒ ݁ ܐopp. ݁ ܐ
‘ ݁ܺܒbottle’.
§195. Vocalic variations may also affect rūkkāḵā and qūššāyā pointing and in turn doubling in E. Syr.; e.g. (with doubled /d/) opp.
ܳ ܳ ݂ܰܐܕ ݂ ܐ/ʔāḏamṯā/ (with soft /ḏ/) ‘earth’.
109
David §37.
110
In the late 1980s, I began to use
ܶ reserving ݁ ܳ ܐ
ܳ ܰ ݁ ܰܐܕ ݂ ܐ/ʔaddamṯā/
ܰ ݁ ܳܐ
for ‘(computer) system’
for liturgical use (motivated by British program vs. pro-
gramme). 111
David §37.
112
David §32.
90
I. The Graphemic Inventory
3.8.
§196.
Frequency of Occurrence
§196. It is not possible to study the frequency of vocalization as one can for the consonantal system (q.v. §117) because most writing is not vocalized. Early MSS tended to vocalize in cases of ambiguity alone, and even then finding a word with more than one point is the exception rather than the norm.113 Biblical and mašlmānūṯā (‘Masoretic’) texts tend to overvocalize. In more recent MSS, E. Syr. MSS tend to be more vocalized than W. Syr. ones. §197. It is only with printed texts that vocalization becomes more normative. Western editions of texts tend not to vocalize, except in cases of ambiguity. Biblical texts are the exception where one finds fully vocalized editions. In modern printing, one still finds that E. Syr. tends to vocalize more than W. Syr. §198. If one is to assume full vocalization, it may be possible to find a ratio between vowels and consonants. Synchronically speaking, syllables in Syriac are of three types: CV, CCV, and CVC. An equal distribution of syllables, if that is indeed the case, would yield a 5-to-3 consonant-to-vowel ratio.
ܐ ܗܐ
113
ch. 3
Segal 6.
̈ ̈ ܙܘ ܐ ܕ ܙܘ ܐ ܢ ܒ ܐ ܒ ܒ ܬܟ܀
ܕ
ܗ
4. Grammatical Graphemes Every point … which is small is for the vowels or syāme;
it is either grammatical, or indicates rūkkāḵā and
qūššāyā; it is either to mark the feminine or gender; or it denotes silence.
Bar Malkūn (fl. 13th century), The Net of Points
§199. Grammatical graphemes are markers to various grammatical levels such as phonology and morphology. Some act as lexical markers. In physical appearance these markers consist either of a single point, two points, or a serṭūnā called
ܳ ܽ ܽ ܶ
ܳ ܽ ܳ ܶ or ܐ ܙ ܪܐ
ܳ ܽ ܶ
‘little line’ (sometimes
‘a little serṭūnā’),1 known in western
grammars as linea occultans ‘hiding line’. They are all nonlinear. The serṭūnā-like marks seem to be late as no mention of them is made by Bar ʿEbroyo in the 13th century (Bar Zoʿbī who flourished in the 13th century mentions the nāg̱ūḏā, §207). The serṭūnā takes various shapes: a horizontal line above a letter, ◌̄, a horizontal line below the letter, ◌̱, an oblique line above the letter, oblique line below a letter, ◌݈.2
݇ ◌, or an
§200. The scope of a grammatical grapheme can range from the base grapheme with which it is associated to the entire word. For instance, the scope of the one-point feminine marker in her’ is local to the letter
ܗ
̇ ܳ
‘to
(i.e. the suffix morpheme), but the
scope of the plural marker syāme is wider and covers the entire word on which it is placed.
1
al-Kfarnissy §5.
2
David §61.
91
92
I. The Graphemic Inventory
4.1.
Phonological Graphemes
4.1.1.
/d/ vs. /r/ Marker
§201. The most ancient point is the one that distinguishes from
§201.
ܪ
ܕ/d/
/r/. While absent in all Old Syriac texts, it is mostly
developed in the 411 codex (q.v. §30).3 In Old Syriac, one finds:
ܐ ܗܐ
ܒ
ܐ ܐ ܖܒ ܒ ܒ ܐ ܖܗ ܐ ܒ ܬ ܘ ܒ ܘ ܬܝ ܘ ܓ ܐ ܒ ܝ
ܐ ܗܐ
ܒ
ܐ ܐ ܪܒ ܒ ܒ ܐ ܪܗ ܐ ܒ ܬ ܘ ܒ ܘ ܬܝ ܘ ܓ ܐ ܒ ܝ
for
‘I, Rabbay, son of ʿAbšalmā, the courier, made for myself this house of eternity, for myself and for my children and for my heirs, and for Gannāyā my son’.4 A few print types have a dotless sort, ܖ, with separate sorts
for the points.5 4.1.2.
Sound Deletion Markers
§202. A one-point grapheme was introduced prior to the 7th century to mark
ܐas either a glottal stop /ʔ/ or a mater lectionis (in
which case it is rendered silent or phonologically deleted).6 A single supralinear point marked ning of the word as in ‘said’, after a prefix as in
ch. 4
ܐas a glottal stop; e.g. at the beginܰ ̇ ܷܐ/ʔēsaq/ ‘I shall ascend’, ܰ ̇ ܷܐ/ʔemar/7 ̱ ̇ ܴܕܐ/dʔāḥ/8 ‘of my brother’, and closing
3
Nestle §6.a; Nöldeke §14.
4
Drijvers and Healey, As7 (D52).
5
Coakley, Typography 61, 68 illus.
6
Segal 10–13.
7
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 47a from Segal 13.
8
MS BL Add. 14,425, f. 3b from Segal 13.
Grammatical Graphemes
§203. a syllable as in point marked
ܐ
93
ܰ ܶ ̇ܐ
/lmeʔlap̱/9 ‘to teach’. A single sublinear ܳ as mater lectionis (i.e. silent); e.g. ̣ܐܐ/mā/10 ‘one
hundred’, and in the enclitic
ܳ ̣ܐ/nā/ as in ܳ ܘܐ ܳ ܒ ܽ ܢ ̣ܐ ܷ ̇ /wʔēnā
ḇḵūn nā/ ‘and I am in you’ (Jn. 14:20). The increase in usage of this point after the 7th century to reaffirm the consonantal quality
of /ʔ/ may indicate that it began to lose its consonantal value, primarily in W. Syr. shortly after the 7th century.11 In later Syriac,
ܳ ܶ‘ ܐI’ where the position ܳ ̣ ܘܐ ̇ ܐ ܒ ܽ ܢ ܐ ܷ .12
this system survives only in the pronoun of the point shifts to the ; e.g.
Also prior to the 7th century, a single supralinear point
§203. marked
ܗas /h/, while a single sublinear point rendered it silent; ܳ e.g. ̇ܗܘܐ/hwā/ (not to be confused with the supralinear point for ܶ ܳ the vowel /ā/ in ̇ ܴܗܘܐ/hāwe/, for which see §141) vs. enclitic ̣ܗܘܐ
/wā/. In Greek loan words, a single sublinear point was used to
indicate that the letter represents Greek spiritus asper, an initial /h/ that was dropped in pronunciation in Hellenistic Greek; e.g.
ܳ ܽ ̣ ܶܗܓ/eg̱mūnā/ ἡγεμών ‘prefect’13 (in the received pronunciaܽ ܶܗܓis pronounced). In later Syriac, indication, the /h/ of ܳ tions of pronounced vs. silent ܗdeveloped in different directions. In E. Syr., a pronounced ܗis marked with two sublinear points as in Ǩ ̤ܗܘ/hwā/, ̤ܗܘ/hū/ ‘he’, and ̤ܗܝ/hī/ ‘she’, while a silent ܗ takes one sublinear point in enclitic Ǩ ̣ܗܘ/wā/, ̣ܗܘ/ū/, and ̣ܗܝ/ī/ (the points are sometimes placed under the consonant that fol-
9
MS BL Add. 14,425, f. 3b from Segal 13.
10
MS BL Add. 14,425, f. 5a from Segal 13.
11
Segal 12, 25.
12
David §68.
13
Segal 13, 26.
94
I. The Graphemic Inventory
lows the
ܗ
§203.
or between them).14 In W. Syr., a pronounced
ܗ
is
either left unmarked or marked by a single sublinear point;15 e.g.
ܶ ܴ ̇ /hāwē/ for which see §141), ܗܘ ܳ ̣ /hwā/ (but ܗܘܐ ܗܘܐ ̣ /hī/; ̣ /hū/, ܗܝ ܳ a silent ܗtakes a small line called mbaṭṭlānā as in ̱ܗܘܐ/wā/, ̱ܗܘ /ū/, ̱ܗܝ/ī/ (q.v. §204). ܳ ܳ ܰ §204. The mḇaṭṭlānā ‘ ݂ܒ ـ ܐthat which makes to cease’ is a
serṭūnā used to mark a silent consonant.16 It is not mentioned in
either of Bar ʿEbroyo’s grammars,17 a testimony to its late appearance. In Western grammars it appears early on with Masius (1573) where it is called, in Latin, virgula ‘virgule’.18 In E. Syr. it takes the form of an oblique line above the silent consonant; e.g.
ܵ ݇ ܼ ȮȏȁȽȋ
/mḏītā/ ‘city’ (there are cases where it takes a similar
ȃ Ȃǫǭܼܿ).19 In W. Syr. it is ܳ݁ a straight line under the silent consonant; e.g. ݂ ܺ ̱ ܐ.20 Historically, the mḇaṭṭlānā was not used with the silent verb suffixes ܘor shape, , in words ending in as in
14
Segal (p. 23) notes that the two sublinear points here act as a ma-
ter lectionis marker for
ܘin which case they are placed under or near the
ܘ. 15
David §§68, 69.1; Nöldeke §17.
16
Abouna 33; al-Abrāshī et al. 24; Amira 40 ff.; Arayathinal §11;
Coakley-Robinson 3; Costaz §20–21; Cowper §21.c; David §§61, 65; Duval §151; Healey 11; A. Hoffmann §20; al-Kfarnissy §5; Kiraz, Primer 70, 211 §19; Makdasi
̣
(pointing mine!); C. B. Michaelis 25; J. D. Micha-
elis §16; Mingana 91–93; Muraoka, CS4H §5; Niʿmatallah ;ܘNöldeke §17; Palacios §32; Sciadrensis §9; Zschokke §4.4.d.
ch. 4
17
David §61.
18
Masius 10.
19
Mosul Bible, Isa. 45:4.
20
David §65.
ܐ
; Thackston xxii; Uhlemann §8; Yeates
Grammatical Graphemes
§204.
;ܝ21
ܰ ݁ ݂ ݂ܒ
e.g.
95
/kṯaḇ/ ‘they wrote’. However, more recent
(probably 20th century printed texts) usage in W. Syr. applies the mḇaṭṭlānā in these contexts yielding
ܰ ܰ ̱ ݁ ݂ ݂ܒ, ̱ ݁ ݂ ݂ ̈ܒ.22 The use of the
mḇaṭṭlānā increased further in the 20th century and one can see the following process:
ܳ ݁ ݂ ݂ܰܒ ̈ ܗܝ
̈ ܗܝ ݁ ݂ ܳ ݂ܰܒ ̈ ݁ ݂ ܳ ݂ܰܒ. ܗܝ ̱ ̱ ̱ ܰ ݂ ‘ ܐ ̱ـas’, though this does
‘his books’
In modern texts, one sometimes finds
not seem to be popular. In general, the mḇaṭṭlānā is used in the following contexts:23
ܐas in ܳ ̱‘ ܐperson’, ‘ ܐ̱ ܳ ܳ ܐthe last’. In poetry, a consonantal initial ܐmay become silent to accommodate ܳ ܰ ܳ ܐܬܐ the meter, in which case it takes a mḇaṭṭlānā; e.g. ܢ ܘ ܰ ̱ ݂ܒ ݂̱ ܺܳ ܳܶ ܶ ܰ instead of ݂ܐܬܐin a 7-syllable phrase (for ̱ ݂ܒsee below).24 ܐ ݂ܐ A. With initial silent
ܰ
ܽ ̱ܗܘ
B. With the enclitics of the demonstrative pronouns; e.g. and
ܺ ̱ܗܝ
ܰ
‘he is not’. When the preceding word ends
ܳ with an ◌, an orthographic (and phonological) change takes place ܳ ◌ܰ; e.g. ‘ ܐܶ ܰ ܗܘ ܐܶ ܳ ܽܗܘI am’. Similarly, ◌ܶ ݂ܶܳ where ◌ ◌ܳ; ܗܕܐ ̱ ܳ ݂ ܳ ‘this (f.) is’. ܗܕܐ ̱ܗܝ ܺܗܝ ܳ C. With the enclitic of the auxiliary verb ‘ ܗܘܐto be’; e.g. ܰ ܳ W. Syr. ‘ ݁ ݂ ݂ܒ ̱ܗܘܐhe had written’ (= E. Syr. Ǩ)̣ܗܘ. ܰ ; e.g. D. With the masc. object pronominal suffix ◌ܘܗܝ ̱ ܳ ‘ ݁ ݂ ݂ ܰܒ ̱ܗܝhis books’. 21
Duval §151.
22
The placement of the mḇaṭṭlānā on suffixes in this manner was
adopted in The Antioch Bible (Gorgias Press). 23
tive of
Costaz (§21) and Coakley-Robinson (69) mark
ܶ ܪܗܛ
ܰ ܗܪܛ ̱ ,
the impera-
‘to run’, with a mḇaṭṭlānā and read it [haṭ]. The received
pronunciation, however, is [harṭ]. The line is a marhṭānā (q.v. §206). In fact, a number of grammars confuse the two marks. (The BFBS edition also marks
ܰ ܗܪܛ ̱ with a serṭūnā (1 Tim. 6:11 and 2 Tim. 2:22), though the
editors may have intended the mark to be a marhṭānā.) 24
Qarabāši, Zmīrāṯā 51.
96
I. The Graphemic Inventory
ܶ
E. With the verb ;ܰܐܙܠe.g.
§205.
ܶ ݂ ̱ ‘ ܰܐܙshe went’.
F. In the contracted form of the pronouns; e.g.
ܶ ܳ
/qārenan/ (note that while the of
is silent, it is not
marked with a mḇaṭṭlānā). G. A number of lexemes with a silent letter; e.g.
ܶ ̈ gave’, ܰ ̱ ܐ wrote’.
‘seas’,
ܳ
̱ـ
ܰ
‘speech’.
H. Recently, with the masc. pl. suffix ;̱ܘe.g.
I. Recently, with the fem. suffix
ܰ ܰ ‘ ݁ ݂ ݂ܒ ݁ ̱ܝyou wrote’, ̱ ‘ ݁ ݂ ݂ ̈ܒthey wrote’, etc. 4.1.3.
;ܝ
ܶ ܳ
̱ܰ
e.g.
ܶ ̱ ݂
ܰ ̱ ݂ܒ
ܰ ̱ ݁ ݂ ݂ܒ
‘he
‘they
‘for you’,
Schwa Markers
§205. The mhaggyānā
ܰ ݁ܓ ܳ ܳ ܐ
‘vowel producer, enunciator’ is a
sublinear horizontal (sometimes oblique) serṭūnā that marks a schwa in a three-consonant cluster.25 The mhaggyānā is used more frequently in E. Syr. than W. Syr. A. In W. Syr., its use, while rare, is optional and not governed by any constraints. When used, it is placed below the first consonant of the cluster; e.g.26 1.
ܳ ܶܕ ̱ ـ ݂ ܐ/deḥᵊlṯā/ ‘fear’ from /deḥlṯā/ (consonant clus-
ter shown in bold). 25
Abouna 34; Acurensis
;ܐ
Amira 40 ff.; Arayathinal §12;
Brockelmann §12; Costaz §23; Cowper §21.b; David §62; Duval §§143– 147; Gabriel of St. Joseph §30; A. Hoffmann §19; al-Kfarnissy §5; Makdasi
̣;
C. B. Michaelis 24; J. D. Michaelis §15; Mingana 89;
Muraoka, CS4H §6; Muraoka, CS §5; Niʿmatallah ; ܙNestle §9.a; Nöldeke §17; Palacios §33; Sciadrensis
; Tullberg §8.2; Uhlemann §7; Yeates
§9; Zschokke §4.4.c.β. 26
Historically, the position of the schwa was after the second con-
sonant of the cluster which explains the fricatization of bgā ̱ ḏkp̱ āṯ consonants; e.g. /deḥlᵊṯā/, /maˁrᵊḇā/, /nesbᵊʕūn/. ch. 4
Grammatical Graphemes
§205.
97
ܶ ݁ ܶ ܐ/ʔešᵊtqel/ ‘was carried’ from /ʔeštqel/.27 ̱ ܰ ܳ 3. ̱ ݂ܒܐ /maʕᵊrḇā/ ‘west’ from /maʕrḇā/. ܽ ܶ ݁ 4. ̱ ܒ ܢ/nesᵊbʕūn/ ‘they shall be full’ from /nesbʕūn/. If the second consonant of the cluster is < ܝy>, an ܺ ܶ ܺ orthographic ◌ is used instead; e.g. ݂ ݂ ܰ ܥ /meṯīḏaʕ/ ‘is known’ ܽ from */meṯyḏaʕ/. If it is < ܘw>, an orthographic ◌ is used; e.g. ܶ ܽ ܽܘܙܘܢ/nerūzūn/ ‘they shall rejoice’ from */nerwzūn/.28 2.
B. E. Syr. adds the constraint that the second of the three-
consonant cluster must be one of the consonants in the mnemonic
ܳ ܽ ܗܪܐ
ܰ ̈ܰ
for the mhaggyānā to apply.29 The serṭūnā is still
placed on the first consonant of the cluster; e.g. 1. Second consonant is : vineyard’ from */karmhūn/.
ܿ ̱ ܿ ܼ /karᵊmhūn/ ‘their ܘܢǵȋȤȅ
2. Second consonant is : rendered’ from */ʔašlmeṯ/.
ܿ ȨȌȉȥܐ ݂ ܹ ̱ܼ
/ʔašᵊlmeṯ/ ‘I sur-
ܵ ̱ ܼܿ ǧǹȎȽȋ
/maḏᵊnḥā/ ‘east’
3. Second consonant is : from */maḏbḥā/. 4. Second consonant is :
ܵ ܵ ̱ ܼܿ /maḥᵊwrānā/ ‘one ǧȎܪǶǹȋ
who makes white’ from */maḥwrānā/. 5. Second consonant is : shine’ from */manhrīn/.
Ȑȁܪǵȏȋ ܼ ̱ ܼܿ
6. Second consonant is : afraid’ from */ʔeṯrheḇ /. 7. Second consonant is :
/manᵊhrīn/ ‘they
ܐܬܪܗܒ ݂ ܸ ̱ܸ
Ȋȅܐܬܐ ܸ݂ ̱ ܸ
/ʔeṯᵊrheḇ/ ‘was
/ʔeṯᵊḵel/ (W. Syr.
/ʔeṯeḵel/) ‘was eaten’ from */ʔeṯʔḵel/. 27
The W. Syr. received tradition I am accustomed to does not use
schwa here: /ʔeštqel/. 28
This is according to David (§63). The received tradition that I am
ܽ
accustomed to reads ܶ ܘܙܘܢ/nerᵊwzūn/. 29
David §63; Mingana 89; Uhlemann §7.R.1 gives the mnemonic in addition to ܚinstead.
98
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§206.
The following E. Syr. exceptions are observed. The mhaggyānā is applied on
ܵ ̱ /deḇᵊḥṯā/ ‘sacrifice’ from /deḇḥṯā/ ȮǹǪܕ ݂ ܸ
despite the fact that the second consonant in the cluster is /ḥ/
ܳ ܽ ܗܪܐ
(not in
ܰ ̈ܰ
). The following words whose second conso-
ܳ ܽ
ܰ ̈ܰ
nant in the cluster are in ܗܪܐ 1.
ܵ ܵ ܼܿ ǧȏǻܗȤȋ
do not take the mhaggyānā:
/marhṭānā/ ‘hastener’ (also the name of one
of the serṭūnā marks introduced below).
2. 3. 4. 5.
ܵ ܵ ܼ ܿ /maʕmḏānā/ ‘baptizer’. ǧȎȽȌȘȋ ܿ ܿ /ṣawrhūn/ ‘their neck’. ܨܘܪܗܘܢ ܼ ܿ ܘܢǵȘǪ݂ ܪܼܘ/rūḇʕhūn/ ‘their quarter’. ܼܿܬܘܪܗܿܘܢ/tawrhūn/ ‘their ox’.
Yūsuf al-ʿĀqūrī30 equates the mhaggyānā with the Arabic tašdīd ‘doubling’. Duval31 also accepts the argument citing MS examples:
ܰ ܰ ̱ܪ
/šaddar/ ‘he sent’,
ܰ ܶ ̱ ܰ ݂ܐܬ/ʔeṯkannaš/ ‘was gathered’.
While this may be a historical usage of the mhaggyānā, I have never seen it and am not aware if this ever became the norm in any period of time. §206. The marhṭānā
ܳ ܰ ܗ ܳܐ
‘hastener’,32 a supralinear slanted
serṭūnā, is the opposite of the mhaggyānā. It is used in E. Syr. to denote the absence of a schwa in a three consonant cluster when the second consonant of the cluster does not belong to consonants
30
Acurensis ܐ.
31
Duval §145.
32
Abouna 33; Acurensis
;ܐ
Arayathinal §13; Brockelmann §12;
David §64; Costaz §24; Cowper §21.a; Duval §§148–50; Gabriel of St. Joseph §30; A. Hoffmann §19; al-Kfarnissy §5. ;الثانيMakdasi
̣;
C. B.
Michaelis 24; J. D. Michaelis §15; Mingana 90; Muraoka, CS4H §6; Muraoka, CS §5; Nestle §9.b; Niʿmatallah ; ܙPalacios §33; Sciadrensis Tullberg §8.2; Uhlemann §7; Ungnad §3; Yeates §9; Zschokke §4.4.C. ch. 4
;
Grammatical Graphemes
§207. in the mnemonic
99
ܳ ܽ ܗܪܐ
ܰ ̈ܰ
ܶ ݁ ݇ܒ ܽ ܢ
/nesbʕūn/ ‘they shall be full’,
. The examples given by David33
place it above the second letter of the consonant cluster using an oblique line; e.g.
/neṯpṣaḥ/ ‘he shall rejoice’. The exception
ܳ ܶ݁ ܕܒ ݂ ܐ ̱݂
ܶ ݂ ݁ ݇ ܰܚ
/deḇᵊḥṯā/
‘sacrifice’ was mentioned in §205. The marhṭānā is used more frequently in E. Syr. than W. Syr. Duval34 states that the marhṭānā is sometimes placed on the first of a two consonantal cluster; e.g.
݇ ݂ ܳ ‘ ܬthree’, ݁ ݇ ܳ
‘you put’.
ܳ
݂ܽ ‘that which draws’,35 a supralinear §207. The nāg̱ūḏā ܓ ݂ ܳܕ ܐ horizontal (sometimes slanted) serṭūnā exclusive to E. Syr., is used in a three consonant cluster across word boundaries where the first consonant in the cluster ends a word and the two remaining consonants begin a word; i.e. C#CC. Its purpose is to indicate that the two words ought to be read together, with the affect that the consonant preceding the word boundary takes a schwa. It is placed, according to David, above the first consonant of the cluster; e.g.
̱ ݂ܰ
̄ ܶ ݁ ܰܒ ݂
/lmeṯbarᵊlnap̱š/ ‘to break myself’. In ܽ ܶ ܳ MSS, however, the location and shape may vary; e.g. ݂ܕ
ܰܳ ܽ
ܳ ݁ ݇ ܽ ܳ ܶ ̈ܰ ܐ ܗ ܢ ܕ
݇ ܳ
/… ḥāšḥīnᵊlḥayye hānūnᵊḏlā … /
where the line is slanted.
36
The nāg̱ūḏā is most useful in poetry where, according to Yuḥanān Bar Zoʿbī37 (fl. 13th century) ‘the nāgū ̱ ḏā serves to com-
33
In his description, however, David states that it is placed on the
first of the consonant cluster. Duval (§148), who uses a supralinear straight line, says the same; e.g.
ܶ ̄ ܶ ‘ ݂ܐܬhe was killed’.
34
Duval §148.
35
David §67; Duval §§152–53; Nestle §9.c; Nöldeke §9.c.
36
MS Bibliothèque nationale, Paris, Arabe 6725 fol. 3r.
37
Brock, ‘Yuḥanān bar Zoʿbi’, in GEDSH 440.
100
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§208.
plete the meter’.38 The same functionality of the nāg̱ūḏā can be ܶܺ ܶܘ expressed by a sublinear point on the first word; e.g. ܳ ܐ ܒ ̈ܐ
ܺ ܬܗ ܺ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܗܝ
ܶ ܰ ̣
/… malelᵊʕlaw …/,39 where the poetic
meter requires a schwa to count as a full vowel. In a few cases, one encounters a text that is modified to cater for synchronic phonological realities. A notable example is the modification of
݁ܒ ܶ ܶܪ ܽ ̱ܗܘ ݂ܒ ܶ ܶܪ
the following verse by Ephrem from meṣ-rēn/ (note the schwa) to
ܺ
ܺ
ܳܗܐ/hā-qṭī-lᵊb ܳܗܐ/hā-qṭī-lūḇ-
meṣ-rēn/ where the schwa disappears and is replaced ortho-
ܽ
graphically by the enclitic ̱ܗܘ.40 §208. The mṭappyānā
ܰ ݁ ܳ ܳܐ
‘that which lies near, closes’41 is
also exclusive to E. Syr., but appears seldom. Like the nāgūḏā, it is an across word boundary marker. It is used in a C#CVC context to indicate the lack of a schwa. It takes the shape of a sublinear horizontal serṭūnā towards the end of the first word; e.g. /bheṯ mēn/ ‘he was embarrassed by me’.
ܶ ܒ ܶ ̱ ݂ܬ
§209. In philological works, while a historical schwa is indicated in Latin transcriptions, Syriac does not have a mechanism to indicate a schwa. David42 and Mingana43 use a supralinear arch, ◌̑;
ܰ̑
e.g. 4.1.4.
/šᵊmaʕ/ ‘listen’. Fricatization Markers: Qūššāyā and Rūkkāḵā
§210. Two graphemes, each consisting of a single point, are used to distinguish the ‘hard’ (plosive) vs. ‘soft’ (fricative) pronuncia-
ch. 4
38
Duval §152; Merx 19.
39
Bedjan, Homiliae Selectae IV, 261.
40
Brock and Kiraz, Ephrem the Syrian 113.
41
David §67; Duval §§152–53.
42
David §57 ff.
43
Mingana 15 ff.
Grammatical Graphemes
§213.
101
ܽ
ܳܳ and tion of bgā ̱ ḏkp̱ āṯ letters, termed in Syriac qūššāyā ܐ ܽ ܳ ܳ ݁ rūkkāḵā ܪܘ ݂ ܐ, respectively.44 Qūššāyā letters have the phones
[b], [g], [d], [k], [p], and [t], and are marked with a single supralinear point. Rūkkāḵā letters have the phones [ḇ] (IPA [v]), [g̱]
(IPA [ɣ]), [ḏ] (IPA [δ]), [ḵ] (IPA [χ]), [p̱] (IPA [f]), and [ṯ] (IPA [θ]) and are marked with a single sublinear point.
§211. Historically, qūššāyā and rūkkāḵā may have been indicated by a slanted line,
◌݈
or
݇ ◌,
rather than a point, a system which
appears only in a 6th-century MS (BL Add. 17104).45 It is used exclusively on less familiar proper nouns; e.g. unlikely that this system was widely used.
݇ ݈ܒ ܐ
,
݈ ݇ܘܕ. It is
§212. The first reported occurrence of the usage of the point is the qūššāyā in
ܽ ܘ ̇ ܽܗܘܢ
/lḏukṯhūn/ ‘to their place’ in MS BL
Add. 17,102, dated 599. Both qūššāyā and rūkkāḵā appear more frequently in MS BL Add. 14471, dated 615; e.g.
ܰ݁ ܶ ‘parable’, ܠ
ܳܳ ܰ /lmētal/ ‘to give’, ـ ݂ ܐ
ܳ ܰ ݂
/maṯlā/
/malp̱ānā/ ‘teacher’.
§213. As in the case of the vowel points of this period (q.v. § 139), the more dominant sound—‘hard’ in this case—takes the
44
Abouna 30; al-Abrāshī et al. 27; Acurensis
(but includes
ܛ
ff.; Ambrosio 74–79
as well); Amira 11; Arayathinal §16 ff.; Bar ʿEbroyo,
Ṣemḥe 282 ff.; Brockelmann §10; Coakley-Robinson 3; Costaz §9; Cowper §§19–20; Duval §19 ff.; Elia of Ṣoba 37 ff.; Gabriel of St. Joseph §9;
ٔ .2; Kiraz, Primer 47–48, Healey 10; A. Hoffmann §18; al-Kfarnissy §4.الاول 211 §21; Makdasi
; Manna 340–41; Masius 8; C. B. Michaelis 21 ff.; J.
D. Michaelis §§2, 12; Mingana 3–4; Muraoka, CS4H §5; Muraoka, CS 5; Nestle §8; Niʿmatallah
;ܗ
Nöldeke §15; Palacios §28 ff.; Risius §178;
Thackston xxiii; Tullberg §14; Uhlemann §5; Ungnad §3; Yeates §§7–8; Zschokke §4.4.a. 45
̄ 484. Segal, ‘Quššaya and Rukkaka’
102
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§213.
supralinear point, and the less dominant one—‘soft’—takes the sublinear point. §214. In later W. Syr., the hard letter /p/ in Greek loan words takes a point in the middle; e.g.
as opposed to
݁ܦ
in
ܰ ܳ ܣ
‘Paul’. Elia of Ṣoba (975–1046) cites a system by which the qūššāyā of /p/ is marked by two points, but there is no evidence that such a system was ever used. Loopstra46 has recently discovered a medial point inside Gāmal, . §215. In W. Syr. MSS after 1007, the qūššāyā and rūkkāḵā points are indicated with red ink instead of black, which becomes a characteristic of W. Syr. MSS until the present day.47 In printed W. Syr. books (usually grammars or liturgical texts), the red color is sometimes substituted by a small circle, the earliest example of which is the 1876 print type of the Dominican Press at Mosul (W57);48 e.g.
ܳ ܳ ̊ ̥ ̥ܳܒܐfor ‘ ݁ ݂ ݂ܳܒܐbook’.49 The introduction of the circle
may have been the innovation of J. David. It was later employed in the Zaʿfarān Press, Mardin.50 §216. In later E. Syr. texts, the soft [f], which is rare, is marked
ܵ ̮ ܼ ‘example’,51 while the hard [p] is unmarked. by ◌̮ as in ǧȒȚǶǻ 4.1.5.
Doubling Marker
§217. Doubling in Syriac, unlike Arabic, is not marked, in lieu of which the qūššāyā point is used.52 46
̄ 485–89. Segal, ‘Quššaya and Rukkaka’
48
Coakley, Typography 140–42.
49
David §11.
50
For instance, the title (and content) in Dolabani’s Kitāb al-ʾasās:
ܳ
ܶ ̥ܐ ̥ܐ 51
ch. 4
Loopstra, Patristic Selections 293–96, 300.
47
. Mingana 3.
Grammatical Graphemes
§219.
103
§218. Cardahi (1845–1931), in his lexicon and grammar,53 uses the Arabic šadda to indicate doubling, as well as the sukūn to indicate the lack of a vowel; e.g.
ܳܐ
ّ ܰ ܶ ْܰ ܕ ‘ ܗthe temple of God’.54
The šadda and sukūn were also used by Risius. It may have been a development introduced at the Maronite College in Rome.
4.2. 4.2.1.
Morphological Graphemes Verbal Markers
§219. The history of marking verbs with diacritical points is very much entwined with the pointing vocalization system (see §128 and §141 ff.). Like the vowel pointing system, its original usage
ܰ
was for homographic disambiguation (q.v. §139); e.g. /qṭal/ ‘he killed’ vs. (m.) killed’ vs.
ܶ
ܷ̇
ܶ ̇ ܴ
/qāṭṭel/ ‘he kills’,
/qeṭleṯ/ ‘I killed’ vs.
ܰ
݀ ܰ ܶ
̣
̣
/qṭalt/ ‘you /qeṭlaṯ/ ‘she
killed’. Later, the points are perceived as pure morphological markers used when the verbs are not homographs; e.g.
ܰ
/ʕal/ ܶ ܳ ‘he entered’ and ̇ ܴܐܠ/ʕāyēl/ ‘he enters’, ̣ /qām/ ‘he rose’ and ܶ ̇ ܴ ܐܡ/qāyēm/ ‘he is rising’, ̇ ܺ /qrīṯ/ ‘I read’ and ݀ ܳ ܬ/qrāṯ/ ‘she
̣
read’. In fact, medieval grammarians perceived them as morphological markers: Masius (1573) has a section titled de punctis, quae temporum personarumque sunt signa & de aliis universe ‘concerning the points, which are signs of tenses and persons & Concerning all other things’;55 Al-Šadrāwī (Sciadrensis, 1636), discusses these
points in a chapter titled
ܶܰ
ܶ ܶ̈
ܽ ̈ ܶܐ ݂ ܰܕ ܰ ݂ ̈ܒ ܶܐ ܰܘ ݁ ܰ ܽܨܘ ݁ ܶ ܐ ݂ܕ
‘on the points which indicate the tenses and persons of verbs’.56
52
Cowper §19; Healey 11; Thackston xxiii.
53
Cardahi, al-Lubāb; Cardahi, Al-Manāhegh.
54
Cardahi, al-Lubāb ܒܐ
55
Masius 11.
56
Sciadrensis
ّ
.
ܒ304.
ܰ
104
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§220.
§220. The basic verbal patterns are marked with a point,57 placed with respect to the first consonant, or between the first
݁ܒ ݂ ܽ ܘܠ
and second consonants. In the presence of
point remains on the radicals. The patterns are: A. Pʿal takes a sublinear point; e.g.
ܰ ܰ ̣ ‘ ܘand he ܺ ܰ ܶ , etc. ̣
ܰ
prefixes, the ‘he killed’,
̣
ܶ
killed’, as do Eṯpʿel forms; e.g.
ܶ ̣ ܐܬ,
B. Paʿʿel takes a supralinear point, usually on the first
radical; e.g.
ܶ ̇ ܱ . impf.
ܶ ̇ ܱ
, impt.
ܶ ̇ ܱ
, act. part.
ܶ ̇ ܱ
,
ܽ ܳ ̇ . By analogy, Eṯpaʿʿal forms take similar points; e.g. inf. ܰ ̇ ܶ ܱ ܺ ̇ ܶ . The Paʿʿel often takes a second sublinear ܱ ܐܬ, ܱ ܶ ̇ 58 point as well; e.g. ̣ ܱ (cf. §148).
C. Ap̱ʿel takes a sublinear point, perhaps due to the absence of a vowel between the first and second radical (analogous to Pʿal forms), though Duval59 speculates that it may be as an an-
tithesis to the Paʿʿel; e.g.
ܶ ܰ ̣ ܐ. In later W. Syr., the impf. takes a
supralinear point (usually between the
prefix and the first
ܶ radical);60 e.g. ̇ ܱ ܐ, as do the act. part. and pass. part. forms; e.g. ܰ ̇ ܰܒand ܰ ̇ ܶܒ, respectively. Hence, the position of the point creates a distinction between Paʿʿel and Ap̱ʿel forms; e.g. = ̇ ܐ Paʿʿel /nšawe/ and = ̇ ܐAp̱ʿel /našwe/. §221. Within the Pʿal conjugation:61 A. Perfect forms whose CV pattern begins with CCVC (historically CᵊCVC) take a sublinear point; e.g.
57
ܰ
(sing. 2nd
David §68; Duval §68; Kiraz, Primer 212 §§23–24; A. Hoffmann
§14; Mingana §97 ff.; Nestle §7.b; Nöldeke §6; Segal 15–18.
ch. 4
̣
58
Duval §68.
59
Duval §68.
60
David §68.
61
Segal 15–19; David §68.
Grammatical Graphemes
§221.
105
ܰ ܰ (sing. 2nd fem.), ̱ (pl. 3rd masc.), ̱̈ ـ ̣ ̣ ̣ (pl. ܽ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܶ ̈ 3rd fem.), ـ ܘܢ ̣ (pl. 2nd masc.), ( ̣ ـpl. 2nd fem.), ̣ masc.),
̱ܝ
ܰ
(pl. 1st).62
B. Perfect forms whose CV pattern is CVCVC, viz., sing. 3rd fem. and sing. 1st, follow different pointing patterns: 1. The sing. 3rd fem. initially took a sublinear point, but
ܰ ܶ ̣
closer to the second radical;63 e.g.
ܰ ܶܘ ̣
‘she killed’,
‘and she fell’.64 As this caused ambiguity with
ܰ
the sing. masc. 2nd
̣
(with a sublinear point
closer to the first radical), a second supralinear point was added on the ܬ. In some MSS, this second point appears to the right of
݁ ݂
...ܐ ܬܐ
;ܬ
e.g.
݁ ܰ ܶܐ ̣ ܘ... ܰ ܬܓ ـ ݂
݁
‘it is clear… and full of justice… de-
scended’.65 Later, the second point was placed to the left of the
ܬ
suffix as in
݀ ܰ ܶ. ̣
David66 cites two
points, one under the ܬ, not to be confused with the
rūkkāḵā point, and another to its left; e.g.
̣݀ ܰ ܶ .
In
later W. Syr., the sublinear point under the second
݀ ܰ ܶ
radical became obsolete, resulting in
with only
one supralinear point.67 In E. Syr., an alternative sys62
David §68 claims that formerly in E. Syr., the second person was
ܿ
marked with a two-point sublinear grapheme; e.g. ȨȉǼȡ ܼ ̤ ‘you killed’. 63
According to Segal (p. 16–17), the point under the sing. 2nd masc.
is after the first letter with schwa, and that of the sing. 3rd fem. is after the first syllable. 64
MS BL Add. 14,425, f. 23b from Segal 16–17.
65
Oez, Cyriacus of Tagrit, vol. 2 f. 3ii (from MS St. Mark 129).
66
David §68.
67
David §68; Duval §69; Mingana 98; Nöldeke §6; Kiraz, Primer
160–61; Thackston xxii; Niʿmatallah
ܗ
puts the points near the line
which may be due to typographical constraints.
106
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§222.
tem developed by which two points were placed under the
ܬsuffix as in ȨȉǼȡ ݀ ̣ , or Ȩȉ ݀ Ǽȡ without the sublinear
point.
2. The sing. 1st takes a supralinear point on the first radi-
ܶ
cal; e.g.
ܷ̇
‘I killed’,
ܶ ̇ܺ ܗ
‘I saw him’.68
Mingana69 puts the point on the second radical; e.g.
ܶ ̇ ܶ . The Mosul edition of the Bible places the point
in various places, sometimes between the second and third radical. C. The impf. forms take a sublinear point; e.g.
ܽ ܶ ܬ ̣ ܠ, ܽ ܢ
ܠ
ܽ ܶ ̣
,
exception is the 1st person which takes ̣ ܶ , etc. The ܽ ܶ ̇ ܐ, by analogy with the perf. ܶ ܷ ̇ .70 a supralinear point, ܠ ܶ ̇ D. The act. part. takes a supralinear point; e.g. ܴ ‘he ܶ kills’, ‘ ܘ ̇ ܴ ܐand he reads’.
E. The pass. part. of the pattern CCīC takes the usual point
under ;ܝe.g.
.
ܼ
F. The impt. takes a sublinear point; e.g.
‘read’,
̣ ܶܒ
‘do’,
̣ܰ
‘take’.
ܠ
G. The infinitive takes a sublinear point; e.g.
ܶ kill’, ̣ ܶܐ
ܽ
ܰ ̣, ̣ ܘ ܰ
‘seeing’.
̣ ܶ
‘to
§222. L-ʔ verbs have their own pointing system: e.g.
ܶ
A. The pass. part. used to take a single sublinear point;
ܰ ̣ , ̣ ܶܐ. In later Syriac, two points called mpaggḏānā ܳ ܳ ݂ ݂ ݁ܓ
‘bridling’ are used,71 one supralinear towards the first radical, and one sublinear towards the second radical; e.g.
ch. 4
̇ ̣ ܶܐ
‘equal’,
̇ ̣ـ ܶ ܐ
68
David §68; Nöldeke §6.
69
Mingana 98.
70
Duval §68.
71
David §68 (without giving the grapheme a name); Duval §67.
‘is
Grammatical Graphemes
§224.
107
able’. These continue to be used to the present day. One even finds it in the plural; e.g. ̣
ܶ ̇
‘full’.72
B. The perf. pl. form is a homograph with the act. part. pl.
masc. form. The former takes a sublinear point, while the latter
̣ܰ
takes the usual supralinear point; e.g. ‘they are worthy MASC.’.73
‘we were even’ vs.
ܶ ܴ̇
§223. The following verbal forms are consonantal homographs, distinguishable by points (examples given with the verb A. CCC
ܶ ̇ ܱ . Note that
perf.
B. CCCt
ܰ
: Pʿal perf.
̇
̣,
act. part.
is still ambiguous.
: Pʿal perf. sing. 3rd fem.
):
ܶ ̇ ܴ;
݀ ܰ ܶ
Paʿʿel
(E. Syr.
ܰ ܿ ܶ ̇ , as well as their Ȩ݀ȉǼȡ ܼ ܸ ), sing. 2nd masc. ܷ ̣ , andܶ sing. 1st ܶ ܰ ܰ ܰ ݀ ̇ ̇ Paʿʿel counterparts , respectively. ܱ and ̣ , and C. The rest of the Pʿal forms and their respective Paʿʿel
forms; e.g. CCCty
ܝ 1
st
ܶ ̇ ܱ.
ܠ
ܽ
D. neCCūC
̇
.
̱ܝ
: for perf. sing. 2nd fem.
ܠ
: Pʿal impf. sing. 3rd masc.
̱ܝ ܠ
As for the homographs resulting from teCCuC
Pʿal impf. sing. 3
rd
fem.
ܠ
ܽ ܶ
ܬ
and sing. 2
nd
masc.
ܰ
and
̣ ܽ ̣
, pl.
ܬ ܶ ܠ, ܽ ܬ ܠ,
there do not seem to be points. This may be the reason that in later Syriac the feminine form appears with a ܝas in
ܽ ܶ
ܬ.
§224. The Ethpaʿʿal impt. takes a serṭūnā to distinguish it from the perfect; e.g. careful’.
74
ܶ ܕܗܪ ̱ ܰ ܐܙ
/ʔezdahᵊr/ opp. perf.
ܰܰܶ ܐܙܕܗܪ
/ʔezdahar/ ‘be
The serṭūnā here is a marhṭānā indicating a schwa, not
mḇaṭṭlānā as some grammars mistakenly state.75 This confusion 72
MS Aqtaš, Winter Phanqitho 89, co. 2, ln. 6.
73
Segal 37.
74
Al-Kfarnissy §5; Niʿmatallah ܘ.
75
Example: Coakley-Robinson 69 (from Robinson 64); Costaz §21.
108
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§224.
between the marhṭānā and mḇaṭṭlānā in Western grammars may date back to Masius’s grammar in 1573 who discusses both phenomena in one section on the virgula.76 A variant shape, exclusively for this purpose in The Antioch Bible. 4.2.2.
݇ ◌, is used
The Plural Marker Syāme
§225. The plural is marked with a two-point supralinear grapheme called syāme
̈ ܳ ܶܐ
‘placements’.77 Medieval and later
grammarians called it rībūy
ܽ ܺ ,78 ܪܒ ܝ
a term unknown to ancient
Syriac grammarians who, instead, used the terms
ܳ ܳ ̈ ܰ ܝ ܰ ݁ ܺܓ ܳ ܐ ܽ ݂ܬܐ
ܶ ̈ܽ ‘plural points’, or ݂ ܐ
ܰ ݁ ܺܓ ܳ ܐܐ
‘plural’,
‘drops’.79 The mark is not
given a name by Masius (1573) who simply names his section on the topic de punctis numeri pluralis.80 ʿAmira (1596) attributes the name syāme to a certain John the Syrian.81 The syāme is probably the most ancient diacritical grapheme, predated only by the point that distinguishes
ܕfrom ܪ. It is absent in early inscriptions and
76
Masius 10–11.
77
Abouna 33; al-Abrāshī et al. 27; Arayathinal §22; Bar ʿEbroyo,
Ṣemḥe 108 ff.; Brockelmann §11; Costaz §17; Cowper §22; David §69; Duval §§66, 136 ff.; Elia of Ṣoba 41 ff.; Gabriel of St. Joseph §35; Healey 10; A. Hoffmann §22; al-Kfarnissy §4. ;الثالثKiraz, Primer 34, 74, 75, 198; Makdasi
; J. D. Michaelis §14; Mingana 94 ff.; Muraoka, CS4H §6;
Muraoka, CS §5; Niʿmatallah
;ܗ
Nöldeke §16.A; Thackston xxii; Yeates
§10; Uhlemann §6; Ungnad §3; Zschokke §4.4.b. 78
C. B. Michaelis 23 and subsequent grammarians, even Duval
(§136). Nestle (§7.a n. 1) claims that the term was borrowed from Hebrew grammarians by the Maronite grammarians; see also Nöldeke p. 10 n. 2.
ch. 4
79
Duval §136; Sciadrensis
80
Masius 11.
81
Amira 48.
.
Grammatical Graphemes
§228.
109
the parchments from 240–243, where one reads ies’,82
ܐܐ
ܕ ܐ ܒ
‘cit-
ܐ
‘700 dinārs’.83 The syāme appears regu-
larly in the 411 MS. §226. The shape of the syāme is two horizontal supralinear points, ◌̈. In the 411 MS, the two points are mostly at the same height. In other MSS, one may see the right point slightly lower than the left point, which becomes more pronounced with ;
ܶ ܳ ـ ‘languages’.84
e.g. ܐ
§227. Syāme can be placed anywhere on the word, though in earlier MSS one finds it more often at the end; e.g.
ܳ ̈ ܶܒܐ
̈ ܴܳܒܐ
ܶ ܳ ݁ ݂ ̈ܒܐ
‘books’. It is usually avoided on tall letters.85 In Serṭā, it
almost never appears on the final ܐ. §228. When placed on ܪ, the syāme and the point of the
ܪblend
together giving a total of two points only, ̈ܪ, regardless of the position of
ܪ
in the word;86 e.g.
ܰ̈ܪ ܶܐ
‘insects’,
‘bodies’. When there is more than one
ܰܘ̈ܪ ܶ ܐ
‘papers’,
݁ ܰ ݂ܓ ܶ ܐ
ܪin a word, the syāme is ܶ ܺ typically placed on the last one;87 e.g. ‘ ܰ ܐtrue’. Early MSS do
not always conform to this and are not consistent. One finds both
forms in the Old Syriac Gospels (in Classical Syriac) even on the same page; e.g. the 5th-century MS Curetanianus has on f. 4r ‘around Jordan’,88 ܐ
ܪܕ
̈
,89 and ܐܪܐ.90
82
Drijvers and Healey, P2 recto, ln. 5.
83
Drijvers and Healey, P1 recto, ln. 9.
84
Duval §136; Cowper §22 n.
85
Nöldeke §16.D.
86
Costaz §18; David §69; Nöldeke §16.D.
87
Abouna 33.
88
Kiraz, CESG I, 29, Mt. 3:5.
89
Kiraz, CESG I, 29, Mt. 3:7.
90
Kiraz, CESG I, 30, Mt. 3:8.
ܕ ̈ ܪܝ
110
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§229.
§229. The syāme is placed on the following morphological forms:91 1. All plural nouns, masculine and feminine; e.g. ‘books’ (masc.),
ܳ ݂ܰ̈ ܳ ݂ ܐ
ܶ ܶ ̈ܐ
‘women’ (fem. without
‘souls’ (fem. with
ܳ ܬܐending).
2. All plural feminine verbs;92 e.g. perf. syāme) vs.
̱̈ ܰ ـ
̱
ܰ
ܳ ݁ ̈ ݂ ݂ ܶܒܐ
ܳ ܬܐending), (without
(with syāme) ‘they killed’ (but
ܽ ܰ ܶ݁ ܰ ܿ ȊǼȡ vs. ̈ ـ ܼ ), ـ ݁ ܘܢ ܽ ܶ vs. ܳ ̈ ܶ ‘they shall kill’, ‘you killed’, impf. ܢ ܶ ܶ ܽ ݁ܬ ܽ ܢvs. ܳ ̈ ‘ ݁ܬyou shall kill’, impt. ̱ vs. ̈ ܽ ‘kill’, act. part. ܺ ܳ vs. ܳ ̈ ܳ ‘they kill’, pass. ̱ ܺ ܺ vs. ܳ ̈ ܺ ‘are killed’. In some early MSS, part. without syāme in E. Syr.
one infrequently finds the syāme on pl. masc. verbs.93 3. All plural feminine adjectives; e.g.
‘ ܬ ܺ ̈ ܳ ܢstrange ones’.
ܳ ܳ ݂ ̈ܒ
‘good ones’,
4. On substantive plural masculine forms ending in
,
but usually not when they function as adjectives,
94
keeping in mind that MSS do not always agree with this distinction; e.g.
ܺ ܳ ܶ ܳ ܐ ܰ ݁ ܺܙܕ ܺ ̈ ܐ ݂ ݁ ܰܒ ݂ ܺ ̱ ݁ ܐ
‘there are
ten righteous ones in the city’ (with syāme), but
ܶ ܐܽ ܢ
ܶ ܳܗ
ܺ ‘ ܰ݁ܺܙܕthese are righteous ones’ (without syāme).
5. Collective nouns may or may not take syāme, though
ܳ ܳܐ ܳ ܳ ܳ ‘ ܰ ܳ ܺ ݂ ܐherd of goats’ (without ܽ syāme), ܳ ̈ܐ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܳ ݂ ܐ ܳܳ ܰ ܶ ‘herd of sheep’ (with syāme), ‘ ̈ܪ ݂ ܳ ܐ ܐܘ ̈ ܐstallions’, ܐ ̱ ̈ ܐ in later Syriac they tend to take it invariably;95 e.g.
‘people’. MSS prior to the 7th century rarely have it,
ch. 4
91
Unless otherwise specified, all examples are from David §69.
92
David §69; Kiraz, Primer 262; Nöldeke §16.B.
93
Assad, Mar Ephrem’s Commentary on Genesis 37.
94
Costaz §19; David §§69, 136; Nöldeke §16.B.
95
David §69; Nestle §7.a; Nöldeke §16.B.
Grammatical Graphemes
§231.
111
but syāme is increasingly used, both in E. and W. Syr., from the 7th and 8th centuries.96 6. According to David, nouns whose singular and plural are homographs take the syāme in the plural only; e.g.
ܳ ‘ ܐ̱ ܳ ̈ ܐpeople’, ‘ ܰ ܳ ܐ ݂ܕ ܽ ܳ ܐupper part of ܰ the brain’, ‘ ̈ ܳ ܐheaven’. Early MSS, however, are not ܐ̱ ܳ ܳ ܐ
‘human’,
consistent.
7. Feminine numbers tend to take syāme especially in later Syriac though one sometimes finds them without;97 e.g. it on tens
ܶ݁ ܰ݁ ܶ ܶ ܰ ݁ ܬ̈ܪܬ, ܐ ‘ ܬnineteen’.ܳ One may also find ܳ ܺ ̈ ݁ and hundreds; e.g. ݂ ‘ ܬthirty’, ‘ ̈ ܐܐone
hundred’. MSS, however, are not consistent in this regard. 8. Numbers (masculine and feminine) that take the object pronominal suffixes;98 e.g.
ܰ ‘ ݁ܬ ܳ ݂ ̈ ݁ ܽ ܢyou three’.
݁ܬ ܰ̈ܪ ܽ ܘܢ
‘both of them’,
9. The following prepositions with suffixes: out’ as in of’ as in
݂ ܳ ‘ ݁ܶܒ ـwith-
ܺ ‘in the sight ̈ ܳ ܘܗܝ ̱ ܰ ݂ ‘ ݁ܶܒ ـwithout him’, ̈ ܰ ܺ ‘in my sight’, ‘ ݂ ܳ ܪaround’ as in ݁ ݂ ܳ ܰ̈ܪ
‘around you’.
ܺܳ ـ ܺ ‘ ܰ ܽ ݂ܘܬre-
§230. The syāme is not placed on the following plurals: ‘forever’,
ܺ݁
cently’.99
ܽ ݁ܰܕ
‘true’,
ܺ ܽ ݂ܕ
‘formerly’,
§231. In compounds, the syāme tends to be placed on the first word; e.g.
ܶ ܳ ̈ܳ ݁ ܰ ݂ ‘ ܒwords’, ‘ ݁ܳܒ ݁ ̈ܝ ܶ ݂ ܳ ܐschools’.
96
Brock, ‘Some Diachronic’ 101.
97
David §69; Nöldeke §16.B.
98
David §69; Nöldeke §16.B.
99
David §69.
112
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§232.
§232. Contradictory examples, however, do occur in early texts; e.g. on a masc. verb wall’,100
ܽ ܳܪܐ
ܳ ܰ ‘ ݁ܰܬ̈ܪ ܽ ̱ܗܝthe water broke the ܗܘܘ ܰ ̈ܐ
ܶ ̱ ̈ ܰ ݁ ‘ ܐthey (m.) found’.101
§233. In printed texts, the use of syāme remains uniform even in fully vocalized texts. Only one E. Syr. print type by Shmuel David is known to have omitted the points for purposes of simplification.102 §234. The following algorithm was used for the placement of syāme in my Concordance: if the word contains ܪ, it was placed upon it. Otherwise, the algorithm looped from the penultimate letter (preferably, the last letter should not take syāme) back to the first. If a consonant was found that did not already have a vowel mark upon it, it takes syāme. If this loop does not succeed in finding a consonant that is free from vowels, then the algorithm loops again from the penultimate letter to the first searching for the shortest consonant, and places syāme on that consonant. 4.2.3.
Gender Marking of the Object Pronominal Suffix
§235. The object pronominal suffix in the sing. fem. form, marked with a supralinear point; e.g. to
ܳ ܶܒ
̇ ܳ ܳܒ
‘his book’ (without a point).
biguation as
ܒ
103
ܗ, is
‘her book’ as opposed
The function is disam-
can go both ways. Historically, the supralinear
point may have indicated that the
ܗ
in the feminine form was
fully pronounced, while that of the masculine form was not (cf. §
100
Guidi, Chronica Minora 1.
101
Nöldeke §16.C.
102
Coakley, Typography 238–40.
103
David §68; Cowper §17; C. B. Michaelis 22; J. D. Michaelis §13;
Nöldeke §6. ch. 4
Grammatical Graphemes
§237.
113
203), though this cannot be acertained. Even if this was the case, later markup seems to be purely morphological even when there is no ambiguity; e.g. when the stem is plural as in
̈ܰ ܳ books’ (sing. ܒ ̱ܗܝ
).104
̇ ̈ ܳ ܶܒ
‘her
§236. This point is absent in early inscriptions and the parchments dated 240–243; e.g.
ܒ ܒ
‘ ܘto do with her’,105
ܕ
‘ ܕin the year’.106 It was fully developed by 411.
ܐ 4.3.
Lexical Markers
§237. The original use of the diacritical point was to disambiguate between lexemes (q.v. §113 ff.).107 Common pairs are:
ܺ ܰ ‘ ܐ ̣ ܳ ܐhand’ opp. ‘ ܐ ̇ ܳ ܐwhich’. ̣ܳ ܺ ‘wolf’ (with rūkkāḵā ܕܐܒܐ ̣ܳ ݂ ܺ ) opp. ܕܐܒܐ ܕܐܒܐ ܴ̇ ܰ ‘ ܺܕ ̣ ܳ ܐjudgment’ opp. ‘ ܰܕ ̇ ܴ ܳ ܐjudge’. ‘ ̣ ܶܗ ܶ ܽ ܢthese’ opp. ‘ ̇ ܴܗ ܽ ܢthose’. ‘ ̣ ܳܒܐnews’ opp. ‘ ̇ ܴ ܳܒܐgood’. ‘ ̣ ܶ ـ ܳ ܐcounsel’ opp. ‘ ̇ ܱ ـ ܳ ܐking’. ݂ ܽ ܱ ̇ ‘who is’ opp. ܰ ܴ ̇ ‘what is’ ‘ ̣ܶ ܳ ܐbook’ opp. ‘ ̇ ܴ ܳ ܐscribe’. ܳ ‘ ܰ ̣ܒ ܳ ܐslave’ opp. ‘ ̇ܒ ܳ ܐdeed’. ܳ ܳ ‘ ̣ ܶ ـ ܐcause’ opp. ‘ ܴ̇ ܐoffering’. ‘ ܶܨ ̣ ܳ ܐbird’ opp. ‘ ̇ܰܨ ܳ ܐmorning’.
104
Segal 13.
105
Drijvers and Healey, P1 R12
106
Drijvers and Healey, P2, R14
107
‘of the father’.
Arayathinal §23; Brockelmann §6; Coakley-Robinson 2; David
§68; Gabriel of St. Joseph §37; Healey 10; Kiraz, Primer 181, 211 §22; C. B. Michaelis 22; Mingana 100–01; Muraoka, CS4H §6; Niʿmatallah Nöldeke §7; Sciadrensis Ungnad §3.
;ܠ
;ܗ
Thackston xxii; Tullberg §8.1; Yeates §8;
114
I. The Graphemic Inventory
̣ܰـ ܳܐ
‘completed’ opp. ܐ
ܳ ܰ ̣
ܳ ܴ̇ ـ
§238.
‘peace’.
ܳ ܰ ܴ̇
‘unjust’ opp. ܳ ܽ ̇ ܴ ܳ ‘sign’ opp. common 4-way homographs are: ܐܬܐ ̣ܳ ܶ ‘infant’.108 Two ܶ ܺ ‘ ̣ܐܬܐcame’ opp. ‘ ̇ ܴܐܬܐcomes’109 opp. ‘ ݂ ܷ ̇ܐܬܐI shall come’ (late E. Syriac marks Ǩܐܬ ̤ ‘sign’110 with two sublinear points), and ܱ ̇ ‘who?’ opp. ܶ ̣ ‘from’ opp. ̣̇ ‘Greek μέν’,111 and ܳ ‘what’.
§238. A common triplet is:
‘iniquity’ opp.
§239. In derivative nominals, the diacritical point sometimes remains even when no homograph exists; e.g.
ܳ ̇ ܱ ـ ܽ ܬܐ
‘king-
ܳ ܳ ܶ dom’ from ‘ ̇ ܱ ـ ܐking’ opp. ‘ ̣ ـ ܐcounsel’ where there is no ܳ ܽ ܶ such word as * ـ ܬܐ. ݀ and ̇ take a point between §240. The words 112
and , respectively, at least in late W. Syr. MSS. The point may be a residue from the full spelling
̇ܠ
and
̇ܠ
. In other
words, the was dropped, but its point was retained.
ܳ ◌ܰ ّ , from Greek ω, is used only in ‘ ّܐܘO’, to disambiguate it from ‘ ܐܘor’.113 The diacritic sometimes appears as §241. The grapheme ◌̃, ◌̆, or ◌̂.114
ܘܐܕ ܐ
ܐ ܕܥ ܐܘ ܐ ܗ ܐ܀
̈ـܐ ܓ ܓ ܒ
ܕ
ܗ
108
David §68.
109
MS BL Add. 17,176, f. 49a from Segal 22.
110
Mosul Bible, Isa. 66:19 vs. 66:15.
111
MS BL Add. 12,166, f. 159a from Segal 22.
112
MS BL Add. 12,150, f. 210a from Segal 21.
113
Amira 40; David §69; Brockelmann §8; Costaz §25; Duval §155;
al-Kfarnissy §5. ;الثالثC. B. Michaelis 24; J. D. Michaelis §13; Mingana 102; Nöldeke §9; Uhlemann §7.R.2.c; Ungnad §3. 114
ch. 4
Wright III, xxviii.
5. Editorial, Liturgical and Musical Graphemes
Since the chanters stood in a circle around the lectern [gūḏā], the writing for some of them was completely upside down. Hence, we had to be able to read upside down … and being probably the youngest member of
the choir, I was often pushed around by the others to
take my place in the circle where I had to read upside down!
5.1.
Jabra Ibrahim Jabra (1991–1994), The First Well
Punctuation Graphemes
§242. A few of the historical prosodic marks (which are discussed in Chapter 6), survive and are used almost exclusively for purposes of punctuation. These are linear point-based graphemes which consist of one to four points each:1 A. A period-like one-point grapheme is the most common and describes a pause usually at the end of a phrase or sentence. B. Minor phrases and pauses are marked with two-point graphemes in various shapes: vertical : , and slanted three-point grapheme,
܆and ܇.
A
, appears in MSS and a number of print
types (e.g. W36 dated 1814 and W45 dated 1836).2
1
Arayathinal §24; Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe 308 ff.; Brockelmann §18;
Coakley-Robinson 2; Costaz §26; Cowper §23; Gabriel of St. Joseph §39; Healey 12; al-Kfarnissy §4. ;الخامسKiraz, Primer 67, 128, 212 §§25–28; J. D. Michaelis §17; Muraoka, CS4H §6; Nöldeke §18; Tullberg §9; Yeates §11; Uhlemann §10; Ungnad §3; Zschokke §7. 2
Coakley, Typography 104 illus., 120 illus.
115
116
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§243.
C. The end of a paragraph or chapter is marked with a four-point grapheme
܀,
though paragraphing within chapters is
quite rare in MSS and is introduced later in critical editions and modern texts. Various allographs of the four-point grapheme are known, including
.3
§243. Linearity vs. nonlinearity is not always consistent in MSS and printed books. The two-point grapheme in appear as .ܺ ̣ܐ
ܺ ܳ ܐ܆
can also
, where one point is below the last letter of the 4
word, and the other is next to it. §244. Recent printed texts incorporate the western comma, semicolon, exclamation mark, and question mark taken from Arabic: the comma is ، , the semicolon is ؛, the exclamation mark is !,5 and the question mark is
( ؟an early instance of which, from
1890, is used by Bedjan).6 In recent texts published in Europe, one sometimes finds the western question mark, ?. All these punctuation marks are used in an ad hoc manner as no systematic system is in place (cf. with English punctuation). §245. In the introduction to my Concordance,7 I tried to use a minor pause, colon,
܆
for a major pause equivalent to comma,
܇for : for
. (point on the line) for period, and ( ܁a supralinear point)
in a conjunctive series (q.v. §289).
3
Costaz §26; Palacios §35; for variant symbols introduced in
printed books, see Kṯāḇā ḏ-qūrāḇā ʾa(y)ḵ ʿyāḏā ḏ-mārūnāye (1592–94), 149 from Coakley, Typography 44.
ch. 5
4
BFBS, Mt. 1:1.
5
Arayathinal §24.
6
Bedjan, Acta Martyrum I, vii.
7
Kiraz, Concordance I, xxv-xxxiii.
§249.
Editorial, Liturgical and Musical Graphemes
117
§246. In some printed books, an inverted semicolon, ؛,
marks the end of an interrogative sentence.8
5.2.
Marking Corrections
§247. In MSS, a three-point nonlinear grapheme marks scribal errors such as a change in the order of letters or words;9 e.g.
݆ܺ ܶ ܰ ݆ـfor ܺ ܰ ܶ ‘they acted cunningly’, ܰ ܳ ܳ ݆ ܐ ܺ ݆ ܳ ܐfor ܳܰ ܳ ܺ ܳܐ ܐ ‘Christ, God’. The three-point grapheme may also ݅݅ ̈ ̈ appear above the letters; e.g. ܐܓ ܘܝfor ‘ ܐ ݁ܓ ܗܝhis trials’. In
more recent MSS, one may encounter an arrow in a second hand
to denote the correction, an indication that modern readers may ܰ ®ܶ ܰ ݆ܒ ܳ ܐ not be familiar with the three-point grapheme; e.g. ݆ ܓ for
ܶ ݁ ܰܓ ܰ ݂ܒ ܳ ܐ
‘from within the tomb’.10 Letters are sometimes
used instead to mark the order of words; e.g.
ܳ ܗ ܳܒܐ ܳ ܬ
ܳ ̱( ܕ ܰ ܶܙ ܐwith a small on top of and a small ܶ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܳ . on top of ) for ܳ ̱ ݂ܬ ܗ ܳ ܰ ݁ܒܐ ݂ܕ ݂ ܙ ܐ
§248. Similarly, a point is placed in some MSS above each letter that should be deleted.11 §249. A vertical line, |, an asterisk, or a cross, marks the omission of a word or phrase which is then inserted in the margin par-
ܳ ܰ ܳܳ ܳ ܰ |ܕ where the missing word ܓܒ ܐ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܰܓ݂ܒ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܰܕ. In most cases the margin for ܐ ݂
allel to the edge; e.g. appears in the
ܳܐ
errors are caused by homoeoarcton or homoeoteleuton, scribal
8
David §§137–61; Nestle §12.
9
Nestle §10; Wright III, 28.
10
ܐ 11
MS Teaneck, Qyomto Phanqitho, New Sunday, Saphro, Qolo , stanza 3. Nestle §10.
ܐ
118
I. The Graphemic Inventory
§249.
omission caused when two words in close proximity have the same letters at the beginning or end, respectively.12
5.3.
Quotation Marks
§250. An ancient mark called mḇaṭṭlānā (not to be confused with the silent marker mḇaṭṭlānā for which see §204) or mzahhrānā may have been used to introduce quotations. See §309 for details. §251. A diple is used to mark a noteworthy citation or quotation.13 It takes various forms: . Hook, the right portion of the Serṭā ܗ.
Leg refers to the two vertical lines upon which Estrangelā
ܐsits.
232
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§493.
Neck, the vertical short shaft in Esṭrangelā and Serṭā
ܫ
ܦwhich rests on the base, and upon
which the body of the graph rests.
Shaft is the main vertical, or near vertical, stroke of letters such as ܐand
.
Spine is a curving stroke that appears in Esṭrangelā
ܨand Serṭā ܛ.
Stem is the main stroke in a graph.
Tail is the denticle at the end of final or standalone letters. It is found in most graphs.
Terminal is the end of a vertical line without a foot as in Serṭā ܐas opposed to
.
10.4. Cursivity and Pen Lifting §493. Although the three scripts are all cursive, the term ‘cursive’ requires some qualification. In Latin cursive calligraphy, the scribe lifts the pen from the surface of writing at the end of a word, and revisits the same word only to dot the i and cross the t. In Syriac, the scribe lifts the pen not only after each right-joining ch. 10
Ductus
§496.
233
grapheme, but also within some graphs; e.g. Serṭā
(q.v. §539).
In reality, then, the script is quasi-cursive. §494. I shall call graphemes whose medial or final form requires the lifting of the pen to initiate the graph pen-lifting. For instance, in writing
ܺ ݂ ܳܒܐ
‘thin’, one writes
stroke, then the pen is lifted to write but
ܝ
cursively in one
ܒܐ. Here, ܒis pen-lifting,
non pen-lifting. The pen-lifting property is mostly gra-
phemic within the same script. There are, however, a few graphemes whose allographs have different pen-lifting properties. Serṭā is such a grapheme. Its initial and medial forms are penlifting, but the final and isolated forms are non pen-lifting (q.v. § 539). Pen-lifting does not hold across scripts; e.g. the grapheme is pen-lifting in Esṭrangelā, but non pen-lifting in Serṭā.
10.5. Ductus Characteristics §495. The ductus presented here is an approximation, taking into consideration the received tradition. While emphasis is on the book hand, characteristics of the documentary hand are pointed out when they differ from the book hand. §496. The Esṭrangelā ductus is based on my own hand. It has the following characteristics. A. Ductus with respect to allographs. Out of the eight rightjoining graphemes (viz., and
ܙ
ܐ, ܕ, ܗ, ܘ, ܙ, ܨ, ܪ, and )ܬ, only ܗ
have a ductus for the stand-alone graph that differs
slightly from that of the final graph, due to the connectivity with the preceding graph; otherwise, the ductus of the two graphs is identical. As for the dual-joining graphemes,
ܝ
and
have a
separate ductus for each of their respective allographs. The graphemes
ܓ, ܚ, ܣ, and ܩhave a separate ductus for
the isolated and initial graphs on the one hand, and the
234
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§497.
medial and final graphs on the other. The graphemes and
ܡ
ܟ
have a separate ductus for the initial and medial
graphs on the one hand, and the isolated and final graphs on the other. Finally, the graphemes B.
ܒ, ܛ, ܠ, ܥ, ܦ, and
ܫhave one ductus across all of their respective allographs. Pen-lifting property. The graphemes ܐ, ܒ, ܕ/ܪ, ܛ, ܟ, ܦ and ܫare pen-lifting, while the remaining graphemes are not.
C. Number of strokes. The grapheme
ܫ
drawn in three strokes. The graphemes
is the only one
ܐ, ܗ, ܠ, ܡ, and ܥ
are drawn in two strokes. The rest of the graphemes are drawn in a single stroke. D. Equivalence with Serṭā. The following graphemes share the same basic ductus with their respective Serṭā graphemes, bearing in mind that the final shape in both scripts differs: ܒ, ܛ, ܠ, ܓ, ܙ,
, ܣ, and
ܦ.
E. Equivalence with E. Syr. The following graphemes share the same basic ductus with their respective E. Syr. graphemes, bearing in mind that the final shape in both scripts differs:
ܘ, ܚ, ܠ,
, and ܥ.
§497. The Serṭā ductus is also based on my own hand. It has the following characteristics. A. Ductus with respect to allographs. Out of the eight rightjoining graphemes (viz. ܐ, ܕ,
and
ܗ, ܘ, ܙ, ܨ, ܪ, and )ܬ, ܐ, ܕ, ܘ, ܙ, ܪ,
ܬhave a ductus for the stand-alone graph that differs
slightly from that of the final graph, due to the connectivity with the preceding graph; in the two graphs is identical.
ܗand ܨthe ductus of
As for the dual-joining graphemes, ductus for each of its respective allographs.
ch. 10
has a separate
Ductus
§499.
The graphemes ܓ, ܛ, ܣ, and
235
ܩhave a separate ductus
for the isolated and initial graphs on the one hand, and the medial and final graphs on the other. The graphemes
ܟ, ܠ, ܡ, and ܥhave a separate ductus for the initial and
medial graphs on the one hand, and the isolated and final graphs on the other. Finally, the graphemes
and
ܫ
ܒ, ܚ, ܛ, ܝ, ܦ,
have one ductus across all of their respective al-
lographs. B. Pen-lifting property. The graphemes
ܐ, ܗ,
,
ܡ,
and
and
ܥ
ܦ
are pen-lifting, while all of the remaining graphemes are not. C. Number of strokes. The graphemes
ܗ, ܠ, ܡ,
are
drawn in two strokes. The rest of the graphemes are drawn in a single stroke. §498. The E. Syr. ductus is based on the hand of Mar Emanuel Yosip of Toronto. It has the following characteristics. A. The ductus does not seem to have any allographic variations. B. Pen-lifting property. The graphemes
ܗ, ܘ,
and
ܙ
are pen-
lifting, while all of the remaining graphemes are non penlifting. C. Number of strokes. The grapheme strokes. The graphemes
ܓ
is drawn in four
ܣand ܩare drawn in three strokes. The graphemes ܐ, ܒ, ܕ/ܪ, ܗ, ܛ, ܠ, ܡ, ȐȎ, ܥ, ܦ, ܫ, and ܬare drawn in two strokes. The rest of the graphemes
are drawn in a single stroke.
§499. When describing the ductus, I shall proceed as follows: First, each type style or script is presented in a numbered section (e.g. §502 for Esṭrangelā Ālap̱, §503 for Serṭā Ālap̱, etc.). The description of each script begins by stating its joining (viz. rightjoining or dual-joining) and pen-lifting properties. If the al-
236
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§499.
lographs differ in ductus, each ductus is itemized, in bold, as A, B, etc. When a graph is drawn by more than one stroke, the strokes are numbered, in bold, as 1, 2, etc. Minor allographic variations that do not affect ductus, if any, are itemized under i for isolated, ii for initial, iii for medial, and iv for final. Illustrations are given from the following Meltho fonts:6 Estrangelo Edessa,7 Serto Jerusalem,8 and East Syriac Adiabene.9 6
Kiraz, MELTHO.
7
It is based on types from an Ohioan press, probably designed after
a 1954 Esṭrangelā Monotype font. The Monotype font was designed with the assistance of R. Draguet (1896–1980), and in turn is based on an 1851 type used in Esṭrangelo Talada of the Meltho font set. An electronic version was designed by George A. Kiraz in 1986 for MultiLingual Scholar™ from which the Meltho OpenType font is derived (Coakley, personal communication). 8
This is the oldest type in existence that is still used most popularly
in fonts. The original design dates back to a type associated with the diplomat and printer of Arabic, Savary de Bréves (1560–1628), sometime before 1614 (W11.C in Coakley). The type was acquired by the Imprimerie Catholique in Beirut from the Imprimerie Nationale in Paris in the second half of the 19th century. It was also acquired by the press of St. Mark’s Syriac Orthodox monastery in Jerusalem, from which the font was designed. It was designed as a computer font first in 1996 for MultiLingual Scholar™, and then redesigned for an OpenType font for Meltho (Coakley, personal communication). 9
This type was used in the Assyrian press in Mosul, and its design
is derived from a type that goes back to designer Drugulin ca. 1880. Most computer fonts are derived from this type. This particular font is derived from a bitmap font designed in 1996 for Multi-Lingual Scholar™ with the help of Mar Emanuel Yosip of the Assyrian Church of the East. For the history of this E. Syr. type, see Coakley, ‘Edward Breath’. ch. 10
Ductus
§501.
237
§500. In addition, images from MSS are given for each script to illustrate historical developments (but this is by no means an exhaustive diachronic treatment). In the case of Esṭrangelā, the following MSS were chosen, all from the British Library: 1. Add. 12,150 (Edessa, dated 411). It is the first dated Syriac manuscript and illustrates the earliest forms of Esṭrangelā. 2. Add. 12,153 (Zeugma, dated 844/5). It was written by two scribes at the time of the emergence of the Serṭā script. The first scribe, who wrote ff. 1–42, used Serṭā, while the second scribe began in Serṭā but soon after, on f. 43v, changed to Estrangelā, only to revert to Serṭā on f. 152. 3. Add. 8,729 (Edessa, dated 1230). It represents the renaissance of Estrangelā, initiated in the 10th century by John, bishop of Qarṭmīn. For Serṭā, the following MSS were chosen, also from the British Library: 1. Add. 12,153 mentioned above, dated 844/5. 2. Add. 17,231 (Deir al-Suryān, dated 1483/4). For E. Syr., the following MSS were chosen: 1. Vatican Syr. 186 (near Mosul, dated 1477). While traces of E. Syr. can be seen in earlier MSS in Hatch’s Album, this is the earliest exemplar that can demonstrate clearly the E. Syr. ductus for most of the graphs. 2. Cambridge Add. MS. 1975 (dated 1586) is the latest MS in Hatch’s Album that demonstrates clear E. Syr. ductus. References to MSS are by year; e.g. ‘see 844/5’ is a reference to MS BL Add. 12,153. §501. While the direction of Syriac writing is top-to-bottom (q.v. §449), the ductus below expresses stroke direction in the term of
238
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§501.
the horizontal left-to-right text as it is read. Hence, it is said that Serṭā ܐis written top-to-bottom, not left-to-right.
10.6. Ālap̱ §502. Esṭrangelā Ālap̱ is a right-joining, pen-lifting grapheme. The same ductus applies to both allographs. It consists of a horizontal shaft and two legs. It is drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3 draws the horizontal shaft and the first leg of the graph. It begins half-way between the mean and ascender lines at pt 1, moves downward and to the left to pt 2, then makes a sharp turn and continues downward to pt 3, ending either on, or slightly below, the baseline. In some hands, the stroke is clubbed at pt 1 (see 411, 844/5, and 1230 below). The portion between points 1 and 2 forms the horizontal shaft, and that between points 2 and 3 the first leg. 2. Stroke 4-5 draws the second leg. It starts slightly below the mean line at pt 4 where it joins the first stroke, moving downward at an angle to pt 5 (which may be clubbed as in 844/5 below), ending either on, or slightly above, the baseline. In most hands, the first portion of the stroke near pt 4 is thinner than the rest of the stroke. The distance between points 2 and 4 varies, sometimes within the same word. The order of the two strokes is attested in a very late manuscript where the second stroke is missing.10 The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
iv. Final graph. It meets the joiner line at the baseline. It is not unusual for the slope of the second leg to vary depend-
10
ch. 10
Çiçek, Šḥīmā 79, ln 8.
Ductus
§503.
239
ing on the preceding graph and the space necessary for justification.
An additional third horizontal stroke starting from pt 5 and moving to the right is present in some hands (e.g. 1230). Point 2 may have a serif (e.g. 1230). §503. Serṭā Ālap̱ is non pen-lifting when connected to the preceding graph. The two allographs differ in ductus. A. Isolated graph. It consists of a vertical curved shaft. It is drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1 around the ascender line, and moves downward in a curved manner passing by points 2 and 3, and finally terminates at pt 4 (the terminal) just below the base line. The stroke is at its thinnest between points 2 and 3. B. Final graph. It is drawn in one broken stroke. It consists of a vertical straight shaft and a foot. The stroke begins at pt 1 at the baseline as a continuation of the preceding graph, and moves vertically upward to pt 3, passing by pt 2. It then traces itself downward passing by pt 2 for the second time. At pt 4, it diverges slightly to the left and moves to pt 5 below the base line. The portion between points 1 and 4 forms the foot. The portion between points 3 and 4 forms the shaft. Serṭā Ālap̱ in its final graph has a variant that creates a counter on the shaft portion, . In this case, after reaching pt 3,
240
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§504.
the stroke, rather than tracing itself back, moves down and towards the right creating a second shaft in the form of a loop. In this case, both shafts are more or less in the shape of an arc. This variant is first attested in a print type in 1647.11 This variation also occurs in the ligature for .
§504. East Syriac Ālap̱ is also non pen-lifting as in Serṭā. Both allographs have the same ductus. Like Serṭā Ālap̱, it consists of a
vertical curved shaft (but with distinct curvature) and a foot. It is drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2 draws the foot. It begins at the baseline and moves horizontally to the left to pt 2.
2. Stroke 3-4-5 draws the shaft. It begins between the mean and ascender lines, but closer to the former, at pt 3, moves downwards and to the right to pt 4, then down to pt 5 where it terminates just below the baseline. There are no allographic variations.
11
ch. 10
Acurensis
.
Ductus
§505.
241
10.7. Bēṯ §505. Esṭrangelā Bēṯ is a dual-joining, pen-lifting grapheme. The same ductus applies to all four allographs. It is drawn in one broken stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1 just around the mean line. It moves a short distance to the left to pt 2, then traces itself back to pt 1 and continues to pt 3. At pt 2, the pen moves down slightly, down creating a clubbed end. At pt 3, the stroke curves and changes direction downward to the baseline at pt 4. Then, it changes direction again and moves horizontally to the left. The distance between points 2 and 3 and between points 4 and 5 vary depending on justification needs, but the vertical distance between points 3 and 4 is usually stable and varies little within one hand. Allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. It terminates with a tail at pt 6.
ii. Initial graph. It terminates at pt 5. iii. Medial graph. Pt 4 meets the joining line from the preceding graph. iv. Final graph. Pt 4 meets the joining line from the preceding graph, and terminates with a tail at pt 6.
The crotch at points 3 and 4 is more angular in later Esṭrangelā (e.g. 844/5 and 1230 as opposed to 411). Pt 4 may have a serif (e.g. 1230).
242
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§506.
§506. Serṭā Bēṯ is drawn with a similar ductus but is rather curvier.
§507. E. Syr. Bēṯ is non pen-lifting. It is drawn with a distinct ductus in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3 begins at the baseline, moves vertically upwards to pt 2, then changes direction and moves horizontally to pt 3. 2. Stroke 1-4-5 begins at the baseline and moves horizontally to the left to pt 4 terminating with the tail at pt 5. The tail is obviously missing in initial and medial graphs.
ch. 10
Ductus
§508.
243
10.8. Gāmal §508. Esṭrangelā Gāmal is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of the isolated and initial graphs on the one hand, and the medial and final graphs on the other differ. A. Isolated and initial graphs. They are drawn in one broken stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1 above the mean line. It moves in a slope downward to pt 2 on or around the baseline, where the angle of the slope decreases. The stroke continues to pt 3 where the direction is reversed, moving upward. First the stroke traces itself back to pt 4, then departs and moves to the left towards pt 5. The stroke at pt 1 is usually thicker than pt 2 or is clubbed. The area of the crotch at points 2 and 4 varies from hand to hand. The descent at pt 3 varies in length and can exceed the descender line, sometimes touching graphs on the following line (the short descender above was dictated by digital typographical constraints). The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. Terminates at point 6 either with a tail or a clubbed ending.
ii. Initial graph. Terminates at pt 5. The slope from pt 3 to pt 5 may differ depending on the position of the following graph. B. Medial and final graphs. They are drawn in one broken stroke. It starts at the baseline as a continuation of the preceding graph. It moves upward to pt 2 (= pt 1 in A), then traces itself back to pt 1 (= pt 2 in A), then to pt 3, etc. The allographic variations are: iii. Medial graph. As ii above. iv. Final graph. As i above.
244
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§509.
The images above are initial graphs followed by Yuḏ. Pt 3 has a circle in late Esṭrangelā (e.g. 1230). §509. Serṭā Gāmal is drawn with a similar ductus. Pt 1 is usually below the mean line. Points 2 and 4 do not meet; hence, the stroke is not broken. The crotch at pt 3 is open. The tail at pt 6 is well above the baseline, just under the mean line.
§510. E. Syr. Gāmal is drawn with a different ductus in four strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2 begins at the baseline and moves upwards terminating at pt 2 halfway between the mean line and the ascender line. 2. Stroke 3-4 also begins at the baseline (where pt 3 = pt 1) and moves horizontally to the left terminating at pt 4. 3. Stroke 5-1 begins at the bottom part of the graph at pt 5 and moves upwards terminating at pt 1. 4. Stroke 5-5 creates the clubbed end at pt 5.
ch. 10
Ductus
§511.
245
10.9. Dālaṯ and Rīš §511. Esṭrangelā Dālaṯ and Rīš are both right-joining, pen-lifting graphemes. They are distinguished by a sublinear point for the Dālaṯ and a supralinear point for the Rīš; otherwise, they are identical in ductus. Both allographs have the same ductus. In a documentary hand, it is drawn in one stroke beginning at pt 1 around the mean line, moving to the right to pt 2, then changing direction downward to pt 3. In book hand, and especially if the tip at pt 2 is desired, it is drawn in two stokes: 1-2, then 2-3. The point is not always exactly circular. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
iv. Final graph. It meets the joiner line at the baseline.
In earlier hands, one finds two distinct forms of the graph: an Esṭrangelā-like ܖ, and a Serṭā-like ܖ. In the 411 manuscript, the
former appears mostly word-initially, whether acting as a prefix or part of the morphological stem, while the latter appears within the word. The graphs are more angular at pt 2 in later hands.
246
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§512.
§512. Serṭā Dālaṯ and Rīš are non pen-lifting. Their ductus differs substantially from Esṭrangelā. Additionally, the Serṭā isolated graphs differ from their final counterparts in ductus and shape. A. Isolated graph. It is drawn in one circular stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1 at the baseline, then moves in a clockwise circular motion through points 2, 3, and 4. At pt 4, the stroke moves back to pt 1. Then, another circle begins inside the first one in an inner spiral manner. This is repeated ca. five to eight times (in documentary hand) until the upper part of the graph is filled. After the penultimate circle (which ends at pt 4), a final circle is drawn but at the outer edge, and then moves from pt 4 down to pt 5. Finally, the point is drawn below the body of the graph for Dālāṯ and above for Rīš. B. Final graph. It is drawn in one broken stroke. It begins at the baseline as a continuation of the joiner line and moves up to pt 2. It then makes a sharp turn and moves downward and terminates at pt 3. The point is then drawn.
§513. E. Syr. Dālaṯ and Rīš are also non pen-lifting. They are drawn with two strokes in addition to the point. 1. Stroke 1-2 begins at the baseline at pt 1 and moves horizontally to the left terminating at pt 2. 2. Stroke 1-3-4 begins at the same point as the
ch. 10
Ductus
§514.
247
first stroke, moves upwards, passes by pt 3 and terminates at pt 4 at or near the mean line. This point is then drawn.
10.10.Hē §514. Esṭrangelā Hē is a right-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of the isolated graph differs from that of the final graph. A. Isolated graph. It is drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3-4-5-6 begins at pt 1 on the baseline. It moves to the right to pt 2 where it curves and begins to move upward to pt 3 near the mean line. There it curves again and moves to the left to pt 5, passing by pt 4 where it is slightly lower creating a concave effect. At pt 5, it curves yet again and begins moving in a circular counterclockwise motion ending at pt 6 on the baseline. While the outside of the portion between points 2 and 4 is curved, it is more circular on the inside. Points 3 and 5 are relatively, though not always, at the same height. 2. Stroke 4-7 is a vertical shaft that drops from pt 4 to pt 7, and sometimes extends below the baseline. B. Final graph. It is also drawn in two strokes, but the first is broken. It starts at pt 1 as a continuation of the preceding graph moving to the left to pt 2 (= pt 1 in A), then traces itself back to pt 1 (=pt 2 in A), then to pt 3, etc. The second stroke is as in A.
248
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§515.
The counter between points 5 and 6 is sometimes filled in 411. Points 2 and 3 tend to be more angular in later hands, while points 5 and 6 remain curved. §515. Serṭā Hē is pen-lifting. Both allographs share the same ductus. It consists of a hook and a bowl, drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3 creates the hook. It begins at pt 1 about half way between the baseline and the mean line. It moves up to pt 2, then makes a sharp turn moving downward and terminating at pt 2 slightly under the baseline. 2. Stroke 1-4-5-6-1 draws the bowl. It begins at pt 1, moves in a counterclockwise motion, passing by points 4, 5 and 6. It terminates at pt 1.
§516. E. Syr. Hē is also pen-lifting. It consists of a hook and a bowl, and is drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2 creates the hook. It begins at pt 1 and moves vertically downward terminating at pt 2 just below the baseline. 2. Stroke 1-3-4-5 begins at the same point as the ch. 10
Ductus
§517.
249
first stroke, moves horizontally to the left to pt 3, then continues in a counter-clockwise manner and terminates at pt 5. In the case of a ligature, an additional stroke draws the beginning at pt 6 and terminating at pt 8 passing by pt 7.
10.11.Waw §517. Esṭrangelā Waw is a right-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus is identical in both allographs. It consists of a bowl. It is drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at the baseline at pt 1 and moves upward in a counterclockwise circular motion passing by pt 2 at or above the mean line, and ending up at pt 3 at the baseline. In some hands, there is a tip at the end of the stroke right above the baseline. The area of the counter inside the graph varies even within the same hand. In many hands, the identical to the bowl of ܗ. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
iv. Final graph. It meets the joiner line at the baseline.
ܘ
is
250
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§518.
Quite often, pt 1 is below the mean line in the isolated graph. §518. Serṭā Waw is non pen-lifting. The ductus of the isolated graph differs from that of the final graph. A. Isolated graph. It is similar to Serṭā Hē but without the hook. It is drawn in one stroke beginning at pt 1, then moving counterclockwise to form a circle, passing by pt 2 at the mean line, then points 3 and 4. It terminates at pt 1. The graph can also be written in a clockwise manner. B. Final graph. It is also drawn in one stroke, but in a clockwise manner. The stroke begins at pt 1 as a continuation of the preceding graph. It moves to the left to pt 2 and then begins drawing the bowl, passing by points 3 and 4. It terminates at pt 2.
§519. E. Syr. Waw is drawn in a similar manner to the Serṭā isolated graph in a counterclockwise movement.
ch. 10
Ductus
§521.
251
10.12.Zayn §520. Esṭrangelā Zayn is a right-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of the isolated graph differs from that of the final graph in documentary hand, but not in book hand. It is drawn in one stroke. A. Isolated graph. The stroke begins on or around the mean line at pt 1, and moves downward to slightly below the baseline at pt 2. The stroke is usually clubbed at pt 1, and the portion in the middle is thinner than the edges. The slope of the stroke varies from one hand to another, and sometimes within the same hand. B. Final graph. The stroke becomes broken in documentary hand. It begins at the joiner line at pt 1, moves up to pt 2 (= pt 1 A), then traces itself back to pt 1, ending at pt 3 (=pt 2 in A). In book hand, the stroke is equivalent to the standalone graph meeting the joiner line at pt 1.
§521. Serṭā Zayn. The ductus is similar to that of Esṭrangelā.
252
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§522.
§522. E. Syr. Zayn is pen-lifting. It is drawn in one stroke in addition to filling the counter created by the stroke. It begins at pt 1 at or just above the baseline, then moves up to pt 2, then down through pt 3, terminating at pt 4. This stroke creates a counter between points 1, 2, and 3 which is then filled.
10.13.Ḥēṯ §523. Esṭrangelā Ḥēṯ is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of the isolated and initial graphs on the one hand, and the medial and final graphs on the other differ. It consists of two joined denticles.
ch. 10
§524.
Ductus
253
A. Isolated and initial graphs. They are drawn in one broken stroke. The stroke begins at or slightly under the mean line at pt 1, moving downward towards the baseline where it curves at pt 2 and changes direction to the left. At pt 3, the stroke moves upward to pt 4, and then traces itself back to pt 3, finishing the stroke at pt 5 with a tail. The height of points 1 and 4 is usually the same. The portion between points 1 and 2 form the first denticle, while that between 3 and 4 the second. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
ii. Initial graph. Terminates without a tail at pt 5. B. Initial and final graphs. They are also drawn in one broken stroke, but here the stroke begins at the joiner line at pt 1. It then moves up to pt 2 (= pt 1 in A), then traces itself back and moves to pt 3, etc. Here, the movements 1-2-3 and 3-43-5 are identical. The allographic variations are: iii. Medial graph. As ii above. iv. Final graph. As i above.
§524. Serṭā Ḥēṯ is non pen-lifting. All allographs share the same ductus. It is drawn in one broken stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1, moves up slightly to pt 2, then back to pt 1 passing by pt 3. Then it traces itself to pt 3. The same movements are repeated starting from pt 3. In other words, the
254
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§525.
movements 1-2-3-1-3 and 3-4-5-3-5 are identical. Finally, the tail is drawn passing by pt 6 and terminating at pt 7.
§525. E. Syr. Ḥēṯ is drawn in a similar manner.
10.14.Ṭēṯ §526. Esṭrangelā Ṭēṯ is a dual-joining, pen-lifting grapheme. The same ductus applies to all four allographs. It consists of a shaft above the baseline, and a bowl below the baseline. It is drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at or above the ascender line and moves downward to pt 2 just above the descender line. Then it takes a sharp turn towards pt 3 on the baseline, followed by another sharp turn left to create a line on the baseline ending
ch. 10
Ductus
§527.
255
with the tail at pt 4. The top part of the stroke at pt 1 is usually clubbed. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
ii. Initial graph. As above but does not have a tail at pt 4. iii. Medial graph. As ii but the scribe needs to start pt 1 at a good distance to ensure that pt 3 meets the joiner line from the preceding graph. iv. Final graph. As i with the caveat in iii.
§527. Serṭā Ṭēṯ is non pen-lifting. The ductus of the isolated and initial graphs on the one hand, and the medial and final graphs on the other differ. It consists of a spine above the baseline and a bowl below the baseline. A. Isolated and initial graphs. They are drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1 around the ascender line, then moves slightly to the right and downward to pt 2, and continues to pt 3 around the baseline. It continues to draw a bowl below the base line passing by points 4, 5, and 6, then terminates with the tail at pt 7. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
ii. Initial graph. After pt 6, it begins drawing the joiner line as in . When followed by
ܠor ܥ, the direction of the
stroke at pt 6 becomes a slanted line as if to begin writing the following graph; e.g.
as opposed to ܐ.
256
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§528.
B. Medial and final graphs. These are also drawn in one stroke. It begins at the baseline as a continuation of the preceding graph at pt 1, then moves upward and to the left to pt 2 (= pt 1 in A), then continues as in A. In many hands, the height of pt 2 here is less than pt 1 in A. The allographic variations are: iii. Medial graph. As ii above. iv. Final graph. As ii above with the caveat in iii.
§528. E. Syr. Ṭēṯ is non pen-lifting. While its shape is similar to that of Esṭrangelā, it is drawn with a different ductus consisting of two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2 draws the base stroke of the graph from pt 1 to pt 2. 2. Stroke 1-3-4 also begins at pt 1, moves down to pt 3, then changes direction and moves up to pt 4.
ch. 10
§529.
Ductus
257
10.15.Yūḏ §529. Esṭrangelā Yūḏ is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. The initial and medial graphs share the same ductus, but the other allographs have their own ductus. It consists of one denticle. A. Isolated graph. It is drawn in one stroke. The stroke is curved in the shape of an arc. It begins between the baseline and mean line at pt 1, and ends below the baseline at pt 3, passing by pt 2. B. Initial graph. It is drawn in one stroke. The ductus is similar to the first part of . The stroke begins at pt 1, moves down to pt 2 at the baseline, then to the left terminating at pt 3. C. Medial graph. It is drawn in one broken stroke. It begins at the joiner line at pt 1, moves up to pt 2, traces itself back down to the baseline, then moves left terminating at pt 3. D. Final graph. It begins at the joiner line at pt 1, moves up to pt 2 (= pt 1 in A), then traces itself back down terminating at pt 3.
258
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§530.
In early MSS, the upper portion at pt 1 is circular giving the graph the shape of a Sertā-like Dālaṯ or Rīš,
( ܖe.g. 411 and
844/5). In later Esṭrangelā, the standalone shape is similar to Sertā
( ܝsee below). In some cases at the end of a line, ܝcreates a
ligature when preceded by a standalone poses, in which case the
ܗ
for justification pur-
ܝis realized as a final graph rather than
a standalone graph (q.v. E. Syr. ligature under §392). An example is shown below from the 411 MS (c. 3, ln 24).
§530. Serṭā Yūḏ is also a right-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme that is drawn like Serṭā Ḥēṯ (q.v. §524), but consists of only one denticle instead of two. All four allographs share the same ductus. The stroke begins at pt 1, moves up slightly to pt 2, then back to pt 1 passing by pt 3. Then it traces itself to pt 3. Finally, the tail is drawn passing by pt 4 and terminating at pt 5.
§531. E. Syr. Yūḏ is drawn in a similar manner.
ch. 10
Ductus
§532.
259
10.16.Kāp̱ §532. Esṭrangelā Kāp̱ is a dual-joining, pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of the initial and medial graphs on the one hand, and the initial and final graphs on the other, differ. A. Initial and medial graphs. These are drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1 below the mean line, then moves upward to pt 2 slightly above the mean line where it takes a sharp turn and moves downward to pt 3 at the baseline. There, it moves to the left and ends at pt 4. The allographic variations are: ii. Initial graph. As above. iii. Medial graph. As ii but pt 1 must start at a distance to permit pt 3 to meet the joiner line from the preceding graph. B. Isolated and final graphs. These are also drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at the far left of the graph at pt 1 around the mean line. It moves down in a counterclockwise manner to pt 2 where is begins to move up again towards pt 3. At pt 4, the stroke moves direction again and moves downward and ends on or below the descender line at pt 4. Usually points 1 and 3 are of the same height. Pt 4 in most MSS extends well below the descender line. The stroke is usually clubbed at pt 1 and is quite thin at pt 4. The allographic variations are:
260 i.
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§533.
Isolated graph. As above.
iv. Final graph. As i with the caveat in iii above.
The crotch at pt 2 is more filled in the 411 hand, and less angular in the 844/5 hand.
§533. Serṭā Kāp̱ is also a dual-joining, pen-lifting grapheme.
A. Initial and medial graphs. These are drawn as in Esṭrangelā.
B. Isolated and final graphs. It consists of a
ܝ
shape on the baseline and a shaft below the base-
line. It is drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-5 draws the main body of the graph that looks like Serṭā
( ܝq.v. §530). 2. Stroke 4-6 draws a shaft
below the baseline from pt 4 at the baseline to pt 6 around the descender line.
ch. 10
Ductus
§535.
261
§534. E. Syr. Kāp̱. In the initial and medial graphs, it is drawn as above. The ductus differs in the isolated and final graphs. A. Isolated graph. It is drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3-4-5-6 begins at the baseline and moves up to pt 2. It traverses points 3-4-5 and terminates at pt 6. 2. Stroke 1-7 begins at pt 1 and moves down and terminates at pt 7. B. Final Graph. The final graph, ȇ, is drawn in
one stroke. It begins at pt 1 at the baseline, moves up to pt 2. Then it changes directions and moves to the left to pt 3, and then down to pt 4, terminating at pt 5.
10.17.Lāmaḏ §535. Esṭrangelā Lāmaḏ is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. All four allographs share the same ductus. It consists of a shaft and a base. It is drawn in two strokes.
262
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§536.
1. Stroke 1-2 begins at the baseline at pt 1, and moves upward to pt 2, just above the ascender line. The stroke is usually clubbed at pt 2. This portion constitutes the shaft. 2. Stroke 1-3 begins at pt 1 as well and moves left terminating with a tail at pt 3. This portion, excluding the tail, constitutes the base. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
ii. Initial graph. As i but without the tail. The length of the second stroke depends on the height of the following graph. iii. Medial graph. As ii noting that pt 1 meets the joiner line of the preceding graph. iv. Final graph. As iii with a tail.
The length of the first stroke varies substantially from one hand to another (e.g. quite tall in 411, but short in 844/5). In the case of a short first stroke, a long second stroke causes confusion with < ܥʕ> as in 1230.
One sometimes finds additional otiose associated with
Lāmaḏ, extending from the top tip of the first stroke. An elaborate example appears in Pl. 8. §536. Serṭā Lāmaḏ is also a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. Unlike Esṭrangelā, the ductus of the Serṭā initial and medial graphs on the one hand, and the isolated and final graphs on the other differ.
ch. 10
Ductus
§537.
263
A. Initial and medial graphs. These are drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2 draws a shaft beginning at pt 1 at the baseline, then moves upward terminating at pt 2 just below the ascender line. 2. Stroke 3-4-5, in book hand, begins at pt 3 touching the first stroke just above the baseline. It then moves down to the baseline to pt 4, then to the left terminating at pt 5. The length of the second stroke between points 4 and 5 depends on the height of the following graph, especially in MSS; e.g. short in
, but longer in
. In documentary hand, the second stroke
simply goes from pt 1 to pt 5. B. Isolated and final graphs. These are also drawn in two strokes. The ductus is similar up to pt 4. The second stroke then turns upwards and terminates at pt 5 to create a second shaft parallel to the first.
§537. E. Syr. Lāmaḏ is written as in Esṭrangelā.
264
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§538.
10.18.Mīm §538. Esṭrangelā Mīm is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of the initial and medial graphs on the one hand, and the isolated and final graphs on the other differ. A. Initial and medial graphs. These are drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3-4-5 begins on or slightly above the baseline at pt 1, moves to the right to pt 2, then up to pt 3 near the mean line where it turns to the left. It then continues to pt 4 and moves slightly upward to pt 5. It is usually clubbed at pt 5. 2. Stroke 6-7-8 starts at pt 6 and moves down to the baseline. In the initial and medial forms, it turns left at the baseline at pt 7 to start the joiner line, and ends at point 8. The length between points 7 and 8 depends on the height of the next graph and justification requirements. The allographic variations are: ii. Initial graph. As above. iii. Medial graph. As i, but pt 2 meets the joiner line from the preceding graph. B. Isolated and final graphs. These are also drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3-4-5-6 begins around the mean line and moves in circular counterclockwise motion through points 2, 3, and 4. At pt 5 it moves slightly up and ends at pt 6. 2. Stroke 7-8 is a straight line. The allograph variations are: i. ch. 10
Isolated graph. As above.
Ductus
§539.
265
iv. Final graph. As i noting that pt 3 meets the joiner line from the preceding graph.
The length of the strokes varies extensively from one hand to another. In many hands (though not the one illustrated here), all four allographs share the same ductus for the first stroke. §539. Serṭā Mīm is also a dual-joining, but pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of the initial and medial graphs on the one hand, and the isolated and final graphs on the other differ. A. Initial and medial graphs. These are drawn in two strokes. 1. It begins at pt 1 half way between the baseline and the mean line. It first creates a circle moving clockwise through points 2, 3 and 4. At pt 4, it moves in the form of a shaft to pt 5. 2. It begins at pt 4 at the baseline, then moves to the left and terminates at pt 6.
266
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§540.
B. Isolated and final graphs. They are drawn in one stroke. It begins with the same ductus as A (from pt 1 until 5). At pt 5, it changes direction sharply and moves down to pt 6 just above the descender line. A variant form of ,
ܐ
ܓ
for
ܓܽ ܰ ܳܐ
and
ܰ ܐ̈
,
for
appears in MSS;12 e.g.
ܰ ̈ ܶܐ
in the MS of the
Chronicle of Michael Rabo (a regular mīm appears throughout in Chabot’s edition).13
§540. E. Syr. Mīm is non pen-lifting. The ductus of the initial and medial graphs on the one hand, and the isolated and final graphs on the other differ. A. Initial and medial graphs. These are drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3-4 begins at pt 1 at the baseline, moves up to pt 2 and curves to pt 3, at which point it moves up and terminates at pt 4 just above the mean line. 2. Stroke 1-5-6 starts at pt 1, moves to the left to pt 5 at which point it makes a denticle, then it continues to the left terminating at pt 6.
12
Wright III, xxx.
13
Examples are found in Ibrahim, The Edessa-Aleppo Syriac Codex of
the Chronicle of Michael the Great: 35);
̈ ܐ
ܐ
ܓ
‘coffin’ (p. 149, co. 3, ln.
‘nations’ (p. 150, co. 1, ln. 38). I am grateful to Mor
Polycarpus E. Aydin for pointing out these instances. ch. 10
§541.
Ductus
267
B. Isolated and final graphs. These are drawn in three strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3 begins at pt 1 just above the mean line, moves upwards to pt 2, then to the left terminating at pt 3 just above the mean line. 2. Stroke 1-4 begins at pt 1 and moves to the left on the baseline terminating at pt 4. 3. Stroke 54-6 begins at pt 5 and moves down to pt 6, passing by pt 4.
10.19.Nūn §541. Esṭrangelā Nūn is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. Each of the four allographs has its own ductus. A. Initial graph. The stroke begins above the mean line at pt 1, moves downward, slightly to the right to the baseline at pt 2 where it makes a sharp turn to the left to create the joiner line ending at pt 3. B. Medial graph. The medial graph is drawn differently in the documentary hand than the book hand. In the former, it begins at the joining line at pt 2, moves up to pt 1, then traces itself back to pt 2, then to pt 3. In the book hand, the joiner line already extends to pt 3 or beyond (depending on the following graphs) and the stroke simply starts at pt 1 and ends at pt 2. C. Final graph. The stroke begins at the joiner line at pt 1. In a documentary hand, it simply moves to pt 2, then down to pt 4 around the descender line. In a book hand, it is drawn in two
268
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§542.
strokes: 1. Stroke 1-2-4 as in the documentary hand. 2. Stroke 13-2 starts at 1, moves up slightly to 3, then down to 2 in a fashion similar to the Serṭā . D.
Isolated
graph.
The
stand-alone
graph begins at the baseline at pt 1. In a documentary hand, it moves in a slope and ends at pt 3 above the descender line. In a formal hand, it is clubbed at pt 1 through one or two strokes from pt 1 to pt 2. Then a final hairstroke is used between points 2 and 3.
The standalone stroke is sometimes otiose and can underline the entire word as in ܘܢ
( ܒ411 MS, column 3, ln 28).
§542. Serṭā Nūn is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. Each of the four allographs has its own ductus similar to the respective one in Esṭrangelā.
ch. 10
§544.
Ductus
269
§543. E. Syr. Nūn is non pen-lifting. The ductus of the initial and medial graphs differs from Serṭā, but the remaining graphs have a similar ductus as Esṭrangelā and Serṭā. A. Initial and medial graphs. These are drawn in three strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2 begins at pt 1 and moves up to terminate at pt 2 at the mean line. 2. Stroke 3-1 begins at pt 3 (just to the left of pt 2) and moves down and terminates at pt 1. 3. Stroke 1-4 begins at pt 1 and draws a line at the baseline terminating at pt 4.
10.20.Simkaṯ §544. Esṭrangelā Simkaṯ is a dual-joining (post-7th century, q.v. § 378), non pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of the isolated and initial graphs on the one hand, and the medial and final graphs on the other differ. It consists of two bowls. A. Isolated and initial graphs. These are drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins in the middle of the graph at pt 1 right on the baseline. It moves in a clockwise circular motion to pt 2, slightly
270
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§545.
under the mean line, then back to pt 1 passing through pt 3. From pt 1, it moves again in a clockwise circular motion passing through pt 4 and ending up at pt 1. Note that in some hands pt 4 is higher than pt 2, sometimes reaching above the mean line. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
ii. Initial graph. As i when right-joining. When dual-joining, after terminating at pt 1, the stroke continues to the left on the baseline to form a joiner line to the next graph. B. Medial and final forms. They are also drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at the joiner line at pt 1, moves to the left to pt 2 (= pt 1 in A), then to pt 3 (= pt 2 in A), etc. The allographic variations are: iii. Medial graph. As above, with the caveat in ii. iv. Final graph. As above.
While
ܣis right-joining in 411, the next graph sometimes
attaches to it, although not through a joiner line; e.g.
ܒ
(411,
col. 2, ln 29). §545. Serṭā Simkaṯ is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus is similar to that of Esṭrangelā with the exception of a tail. After the stroke ends at pt 1 (for which see above under Esṭrangelā), it moves to the left to pt 6, then draws the tail terminating at pt 7. There is a swash version with a tail extended under the
ch. 10
Ductus
§547. baseline at pt 1; e.g.
271
.14 This form appears in MSS, a few print
types as early as 1627 (W13),15 as well as some digital type.16
§546. E. Syr. Simkaṯ is non pen-lifting. It is drawn in three strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3-4 begins at pt 1, moves upwards to pt 2, passes by pt 3, and terminates at pt 4 at the baseline. 2. Stroke 1-4-5-6-3-4 begins at pt 1, moves to the left to pt 4, at which point it begins to move in a clockwise motion passing by points 5, 6, and 3, and finally terminates at pt 4. 3. Stroke 7-8 begins at pt 7 and moves to the left and terminates at pt 8.
10.21.ʿē §547. Esṭrangelā ʿē is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. All four allographs share the same ductus which is similar to that of
ܠ. It consists of a short shaft and a base. It is drawn in two
strokes.
14
Coakley, Typography 12.
15
Coakley, Typography 64–66; illus. 65.
16
Kiraz, Alaph Beth 12–14.
272
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§548.
1. Stroke 1-2 begins at the baseline at pt 1, and moves upward to pt 2, just above the mean line. The stroke at pt 1 is sometimes clubbed. 2. Stroke 1-3 begins at pt 1 and moves left to pt 3 drawing a tail. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
ii. Initial graph. As i but without a tail. The length of the second stroke depends on the height of the following graph. iii. Medial graph. As ii, and pt 1 meets the joiner line of the preceding graph. iv. Final graph. As i, noting that pt 1 meets the joiner line. The distance between points 1 and 3 is dictated by the justification requirements. The crotch is filled in some hands (e.g. 411).
§548. Serṭā ʿē is non pen-lifting. Unlike Esṭrangelā, the ductus of the Serṭā initial and medial graphs on the one hand, and the isolated and final graphs on the other differ. The ductus is exactly like that of Serṭā Lāmaḏ, repeated below for convenience. A. Initial and medial graphs. These are drawn in two strokes. 1. It begins at pt 1 at the baseline and draws a shaft upward terminating at pt 2 around the mean line.
ch. 10
Ductus
§550.
273
2. Stroke 2 begins at pt 3 touching the first stroke just above the baseline. It then moves down to the base line to pt 4, then to the left terminating at pt 5. B. Isolated and final graphs. These are also drawn in two strokes. The ductus is similar up to pt 4. The second stroke then turns upwards and terminates at pt 5 to create a second shaft parallel to the first one.
§549. E. Syr. ʿē is drawn similar to Esṭrangelā in two strokes.
10.22.Pē §550. Esṭrangelā Pē is a dual-joining, pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of all four allographs is similar. It is drawn in one stroke.
274
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§551.
The stroke begins at pt 1 just under the mean line. It moves in circular form to pt 2, then to pt 3 between the mean line and the ascender line, but closer to the former. From pt 3, it moves in a shaft-like form to pt 4 at the base line. The base stroke is then drawn from pt 4 to pt 5 to form the tail. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated form. As above.
ii. Initial form, as i but without the tail. iii. Medial graph. The scribe must position pt 1 in such a manner that pt 4 meets the joiner line. iv. Final graph. As iii with the tail.
§551. Serṭā Pē is drawn as in Esṭrangelā.
ch. 10
Ductus
§553.
275
§552. E. Syr. Pē has a different ductus. It is drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3-4 begins at pt 1, moves upwards to pt 2, and makes a serif then moves in a counterclockwise manner to pt 3 and terminates at pt 4. 2. Stroke 1-5 begins at pt 1 and moves on the baseline to the left terminating at pt 5.
10.23.Ṣāḏē §553. Esṭrangelā Ṣāḏē is a right-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. Both allographs have the same ductus. It consists of a dentical on the baseline, a spine below the baseline, and a horizontal shaft at the descender line. It is drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1 on the baseline, then moves upward to pt 2 then downward to pt 3, then back to pt 1 creating a Sertā initial
-
like dentical. It then moves to the left to pt 3, then slightly upward to pt 4. Then it curves down to pt 5 well below the descender line creating the spine. It then changes direction and draws a horizontal shaft terminating at pt 6. The final part between points 5 and 6 becomes thinner as the stroke approaches its end. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
iv. Final graph. Pt 1 meets the joiner line of the preceding graph.
276
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§554.
While right-joining, there are frequent instances in early MSS where the isolated form connects to the next graph, but without a joiner line; e.g. ܨܒin 411. §554. Serṭā Ṣāḏē is non pen-lifting. Both allographs have the same ductus. It is drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at the base line at pt 1. Like Serṭā Dālaṯ, the part above the baseline is drawn in circular counterclockwise motion passing by points 2 and 3, and back to pt 1. After two to four circular motions, the stroke, from pt 3, moves down to pt 4 to form the spine of the letter, and then to points 5 and 6 to form the lower body. In MSS, it is not uncommon to find the lower part of Ṣāḏē extends well beyond the descender line.
§555. E. Syr. Ṣāḏē has a ductus similar to Esṭrangelā.
ch. 10
Ductus
§556.
277
10.24.Qāp̱ §556. Esṭrangelā Qāp̱ is a dual-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. The ductus of the isolated and initial graphs on the one hand, and the medial and final graphs on the other differ. It consists of a bowl. A. Isolated and initial graphs. These are drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1 on the baseline, moves in clockwise motion passing by pt 2 then 3, then 4. At pt 4, a tail is drawn ending at pt 5. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graph. As above.
ii. Initial graph. As i without the tail. B. Medial and final graphs. The medial form begins at the joiner line at pt 1, then moves to pt 2 (= pt 1 in A), etc. The allographic variations are: iii.
Medial graph. As above without the tail.
iv. Final graph. As above.
278
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§557.
§557. Serṭā Qāp̱ is non pen-lifting.
It is drawn in a ductus similar to Esṭrangelā Qāp̱. In book hand, the main body of the graph is a replica of Serṭā Waw drawn with a stroke on its own. A second stroke draws the line starting at pt 5 and terminates with the tail at pt 5. In
documentary hand, the entire graph is drawn in one stroke.
§558. E. Syr. Qāp̱ has a ductus that differs from the above. It is drawn in three strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3 begins at pt 1 moves up to pt 2 and then to the left and terminates at pt 3. 2. Stroke 1-4-3 begins at pt 1, moves to the left to pt 4, and then upwards terminating at pt 3. 3. Stroke 4-5 begins at pt 4 and moves to the left terminating at pt 5.
10.25.Rīš §559. For Rīš, see under Dālaṯ, 10.9.
ch. 10
Ductus
§561.
279
10.26.Šīn §560. Esṭrangelā Šīn is a dual-joining, pen-lifting grapheme. The same ductus applies to all four allographs. It is drawn in three strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2 draws the base upon which the body sits. The stroke is clubbed at pt 1. 2. Stroke 3-4 draws the neck. 3. Stroke 5-3-6 is an arc that forms the upper part of the graph. It begins at pt 5, moves down slightly to pt 3, then up to pt 6 in a symmetrical manner. The allographic variations are: i.
Isolated graphs. As above.
ii. Initial graph. The second stroke terminates at the baseline. iii. Medial graph. As ii; pt 1 is not clubbed and is a continuation of the preceding graph. iv. Final graph. As i with the caveat in iii regarding pt 1.
§561. Serṭā Šīn is also a dual-joining, pen-lifting grapheme. The same ductus applies to all four allographs. It is drawn in one circular stroke. The stroke begins at the baseline at pt 1, then moves up to pt 2 just under the mean line, then back to the baseline at pt 3, and back to pt 1. This counterclockwise motion is repeated five to eight times in a circular, inner spiral until the body of the graph is filled, terminating at pt 1. Then a straight
280
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§562.
line is drawn from pt 1 to pt 3, and finally to pt 4 to create the tail. In book hand, there is a tiny crotch in the middle of the body at the baseline.
§562. E. Syr. Šīn has a ductus of its own consisting of two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3-4 begins at pt 1, moves slightly to the left then up to pt 2 where it makes a denticle, then down to pt 3 and terminates at pt 4. 2. Stroke 5-6 begins at pt 5 and moves to the left terminating at pt 6.
10.27.Taw §563. Esṭrangelā Taw is a right-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme. Both allographs have the same ductus. It is drawn in one stroke. The stroke begins at pt 1 just under the baseline, and moves up to pt 2 at or slightly under the mean line. It then moves to pt 3 at the baseline, then pt 4, then up to pt 5. The stroke is clubbed
ch. 10
Ductus
§564.
281
at pt 5 in some book hands.
The counter is sometimes filled and sometimes empty, as in 411. One also frequently encounters no space between the right-joining Taw and the graph that follows as in
ܒـܐ ـ ܘ ܬـܐ.
(note the joiner line in )ܐ. In print type, and modern calligraphy, a loop was introduced for ornamental purposes, first in the 1886 Dominican Press type (S17),17 and a few subsequent types.18 It appears in Estrangelo Qenneshrin of the Meltho fonts as ܬ. §564. Serṭā Taw is also a right-joining, non pen-lifting grapheme, but the two allographs differ in ductus. A. Isolated graph. It is drawn in one stroke. It begins at pt 1 around the ascender line and moves downward to pt 2 at the baseline creating a shaft. Then it moves to the right to create the base terminating at pt 3. B. Final graph. It is also drawn in one stroke. First, a joining stroke is drawn from the baseline at pt 1 to the top of the main body at pt 2 (= pt 1 in A). Then the stroke moves downward to pt 3
17
Coakley, Typography 179.
18
S19 from 1887 (Coakley, Typography 181–82) and S26 from 1948
(Coakley, Typography 189).
282
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§565.
(= pt 2 in A) creating the shaft, then the base terminating at pt 4 (= pt 3 in A). The height of pt 2 here is lower than A. The shaft is arc-shaped.
§565. E. Syr. Taw has a unique ductus consisting of two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3-4 begins at the base line and moves upwards to pt 2 just above the mean line, then down to pt 3, and slightly to the right terminating at pt 4. 2. Stroke 5-6 begins at pt 5, and moves to the right and slightly down terminating at pt 6 just under the baseline.
10.28.Ligatures §566. Serṭā Lāmaḏ-Ālap̱. When followed by ܐ, the shape and ductus of Serṭā Lāmaḏ changes considerably. A. Isolated graph. It is drawn in one broken stroke. It begins at pt 1 at the ascender line and moves downward to pt 2 at the baseline forming the first shaft. It then creates the base from pt 2 to pt 3, then moves upwards to create the second
ch. 10
Ductus
§567.
283
shaft all the way to pt 4. The stroke then traces itself back from pt 4 to pt 3, and finally draws a tail below the base line terminating at pt 5. B. Final graph. It is drawn in one broken stroke. It begins at the baseline at pt 1 as a continuation of the preceding graph, then moves to the left to pt 2, then upwards to pt 3 (= pt 1 in A) to form the first shaft. The stroke then traces itself to pt 2, then moves to the left to pt 4 (= pt 3 in A), etc. A variation of
exists when a loop is drawn when going
down from pt 5 back to pt 4; e.g. . §567. E. Syr. Taw-Ālap̱. There are two forms of this ligature, each written with its own ductus. A. Form I (right). It is drawn in three strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2 begins at pt 1 at the baseline and moves upwards and terminates at pt 2 under the mean line. 2. Stroke 3-4-5 begins at pt 3 just above the baseline, moves down to pt 4 below the baseline, then moves upwards and terminates at pt 5. 3. Stroke 6-7 begins at pt 6 above the mean line, makes a clockwise circular motion, and then moves down and terminates at pt 7 under the baseline. B. Form II (left). It is drawn in four strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3 begins at pt 1 at the baseline, moves up in a counterclockwise manner, passing by pt 2, and terminating at pt 3. 2. Stroke 4-5 begins at pt 4 (just to the right of pt 3) and draws a horizontal line terminating at pt 5. 3. Stroke 6-7 begins at pt 6 and draws a line terminating at pt 7 above the mean line. 4. Stroke 8-9 begins at pt 8 and moves down to pt 9, making a circular motion at pt 8 giving the effect of a clubbed stroke. Notice that this stroke is the same as stroke 3 in Form I.
284
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§568.
§568. E. Syr. ligatures with final Yūḏ. There are two ligatures with final Yūḏ: He-Yūḏ and Taw-Yūḏ. The Yūḏ in both is drawn in the same manner in one stroke. See §516.
10.29.Ductus of Other Graphs 10.29.1. Points
§569. Single point graphemes. A single point can be drawn in different ways, as a circle, oval, or even a square. Some scribes differentiated the function of the point by size and sometimes color. For
instance,
one-point
vowel
graphs tend to be circular and bold in W. Syr. MSS, while twopoint graphs tend to be hairstrokes19. In the Meltho fonts, for example, a general point is circular (a), a vowel point is oval (b), and a fricatization point is circular and smaller (c). In some formal hands, the vowel point is drawn as a hairstroke, while in others the full width of the nib is used. §570. Syāme. First, the left point is drawn, followed by the right point. In most hands, formal and documentary, the second point is lower than the first one, though in most types the points are at equal height.
19
ch. 10
David §30.
§574.
Ductus
285
§571. Two-point nonlinear vowels. The vowel is drawn by a supralinear point, then a sublinear point. In many hands the sublinear point is to the left of the supralinear point. The vowel is drawn by two supralinear points from right to left, the first higher than the second. The vowel is drawn by two sublinear points from left to right. The vowel is drawn by two sublinear points from right to left, with the first point being higher. In many formal hands, especially in W. Syr. MSS, these points are all done with hairstrokes. §572. Punctuation points. These are drawn in the order shown. Their shape differs from one hand to another, being either circular, triangular, or in the shape of a diamond. In the case of a five-point paragraph marker,
܀, the fifth point is drawn
at the end, usually in a different color. 10.29.2. Lines
§573. Serṭūnā. The serṭūnā can be straight, ◌̄, or slanted,
݇ ◌ or ◌݈,
and can be supralinear or sublin-
ear. When straight, it is drawn from left to right (a). The slanted supralinear version is drawn topto-bottom, right-to-left (b). The slanted sublinear version is drawn top-to-bottom, left-to-right. The width of the stroke may vary from one hand to another. §574. Liturgical Line Graph. It can be drawn in various ways. One way is to draw the main shaft from pt 1 to pt 2 upward. Then the cross bars
286
II. Graphotactics, Writing, and Ductus
§574.
from top to bottom, where each cross bar is drawn from the upper right point to its lower left point. In most MSS, the cross bars are in color. 10.29.3. ‘Greek’ Vowels
§575.
◌ܰ and ◌ܱ. These are drawn in two strokes.
1. Stroke 1-2 draws a horizontal shaft from topto-bottom, right-to-left. 2. Stroke 3-4-5 meets the first stroke at pt 1, moves up to pt 4 and back to the first stroke meeting it at pt 5. The sublinear version is drawn in a similar manner. §576.
ܳ ◌ and ◌ܴ. These are drawn in one stroke. It begins at pt 1,
moves up to pt 2, curves to pt 3, and then down terminating at pt 4. The counter is sometimes filled in MSS.
§577.
◌ܶ and ◌ܷ. These are drawn in two strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2-3
draws an arc. 2. Stroke 2-4 draws a small shaft from top-to-bottom. The orientation, or angular position, of the graph with respect to pt 2 differs from one hand to another.
§578.
◌ܺ and ◌ܻ. It is drawn in three strokes. 1. Stroke 1-2 draws a
shaft. 2. Stroke 3-4 draws a parallel shaft. Stroke 5-6 draws a cross bar connecting both shafts. The orientation of the graph differs substantially from hand to hand. Sometimes the parallel shafts are horizontal as in
ch. 10
ܺ ◌.
Ductus
§579. §579.
287
ܽ ◌ and ◌ܾ. These are drawn in two strokes and a point. 1.
Stroke 1-2 draws a shaft. 2. Stroke 3-4 draws a perpendicular shaft with respect to the first one joining it at pt 3. A point, shown in some types as a circle, is then drawn inside the graph. In some hands the point is above the second stroke,
while in others, as in here, it is below.
ܓ ܐܓ ܣ ̈ ܐ܀
ܒ
ܘܛ ܝ ܐ ܗ ܕ ܐ ܒ ܟ ܗܘ ܕ ܛ ܘܨ ܐܒ
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation, and Alloglottography
Part III is dedicated to garšūnography (or garshunography) and script adaptations. Garšūnography is a system for writing one language in a script that is sociolinguistically associated with another language; i.e. what is traditionally called Garšūnī. Chapter 11 covers cases when Syriac is the target script in which languages other than Syriac are written, while Chapter 12 covers cases where Syriac is the source language and is written in scripts other than the Syriac script. Chapter 13 discusses nongaršūnographic script adaptations when the Syriac script is being used to write other forms of Aramaic; viz. Christian Palestinian Aramaic and Neo-Aramaic. Finally, Chapter 14 presents a related topic, alloglottography, when Syriac texts are read in other languages, usually in liturgical settings. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography
289
11. Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
Scripts, either in our lands or in neighboring lands, are
either complete and perfect, or lacking and imperfect. Complete scripts have a written letter for each sound as
in Greek, Latin, Coptic, and Armenian. Incomplete scripts do not have a written symbol for each sound as in Hebrew, Syriac, and Arabic.
Bar ʿEbroyo (d. 1286), Ṣemḥē
11.1. On Garšūnography §580. I have recently proposed elsewhere1 to use the term garšūnography to refer to the writing of one language (called the source language) in the script of another (called the target script) in specific sociolinguistic settings: 1. when the source language is already associated with a script that is perceived to be its own, and 2. there exists a readership which is either unfamiliar with the script of the source language or prefers, for whatever reason, to use the target script over the script of the source language. Traditionally, writing Arabic in the Syriac script is called Garšūni, from which the term garšūnography was coined. The term garšūnography, however, does not imply a specific source language or a specific target script. These are specified by modifiers; e.g. Syro-Arabic garšūnography is Arabic text written in the Syriac script, and Armeno-Syriac garšūnography is Syriac text written in the Armenian script.
1
Kiraz, ‘Garshunography’.
291
292
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §581.
§581. Extending this terminology to the graphemic level, I proposed to use the term garšūnographeme to refer to graphemes which have been adapted for purposes of garšūnography; e.g. the adaptation of Syriac
ܓinto the garšūnographeme ܔto indicated
جin Syro-Arabic garšūnography. Its allographic variants, ܔ, ܔ, ܔ, and , are called allogaršūnographs. Arabic
§582. The Syriac writing system was adapted for the writing of other languages, some Semitic, even Aramaic, but others not. The Aramaic languages (viz. Christian Palestinian Aramaic and NeoAramaic) did not have independent writing systems and hence are not strictly-speaking garšūnographic. These are discussed in Chapter 13. The other languages did not lack a script that is considered sociolinguistically its own, but rather, Syriac Christians preferred to use their own script to write other languages for their own use (e.g. Arabic, Ottoman Turkish), and to transmit their literature in missionary settings (e.g. Sogdian, Malayalam). In all cases, the entire writing system was borrowed: the symbol set, phoneme values (augmented to cater for non-Syriac phonemes), writing direction, ligatures, and graphotactics. Known languages covered by Syriac garšūnography include Arabic, Armenian, Greek, Kurdish, Latin, Malayalam, Persian, Sogdian, and Ottoman Turkish. §583. Garšūnography exists in two modes: transliteration and transcription. Transliteration is a direct mapping of one writing system into another at the grapheme (not graph) level; e.g. Arabic
كتب
=
ܒ
‘to write’. That the mapping is
graphemic is clear from the preceding example: while Arabic is dual-joining with four allographs, Syriac is rightjoining with only two allographs and the graphotactics of each script works independently. Transcription is the mapping of the sounds of one language into the graphemes of another at the phoneme level; e.g. Greek τῆς σῆς = ch. 11
.
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
§585.
293
§584. As the Syriac graphemic repository does not cover all the graphemes (in the case of transliteration) or phonemes (in the case of transcription) of the source languages, Syriac garšūnography remedies this with a number of extensions: A. The bgā ̱ ḏkp̱ āṯ diacritics. These provided for plosivefricative pairs; e.g. ݁ܕand ݂ܕfor Arabic < دd> and < ذδ>,
respectively. As the supra- and sublinear points are optional, the
mapping gives rise to ambiguities: Syriac corresponds to both Arabic and . B. Nonlinear graphemes from the Syriac graphemic inventory. These are graphemes already used in Syriac for other purposes, but are now redefined to express foreign graphemes or phonemes; e.g. the points in
̇ܨ
and
ܜfor Arabic < ضḍ> and ظ
, respectively. Additional nonlinear graphemes are also introduced; e.g. the tilde ݆ܒfor Ottoman Turkish پ.
C. New linear graphemes—or garšūnographemes as I call
them—were introduced exclusively for purposes of garšūnographic writing; e.g. adding a stroke (sometimes a filling in MSS) in
ܔfor Arabic < جj>. This is related to the augmentation of
existing consonantal graphemes to represent sounds with phonological features similar to those of the original grapheme; e.g. extending
ܓto ܮin Sogdian.
D. Graphemes borrowed from the script of the source language, as in the case of Syro-Malayalam. §585. While there is some degree of uniformity within each garšūnographic system, variations are common, especially in transcription systems and most notably in vowels. This is mostly due to the fact that the written text does not always represent a standard form of the source language. Rather, it is usually a representation of local dialects. This makes it more difficult to read garšūnographic texts, as one needs to be familiar not only with
294
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §585.
the basics of a language but also with its various regional dialects. Keeping this in mind, the discussion below aims at giving an approximation of each of the garšūnographic systems.
11.2. Syro-Arabic §586. Syro-Arabic2 is a transliteration scheme. The first occurrence is in a note, written in 1154 in the Rabula Gospels codex (folio 7b). Syro-Arabic texts were popular in medieval times and continue to be used, though in a minimal fashion, until the modern day. (I used to transliterate all of my high school notes, even for physics and biology, in Garšūnī in the early 1980s. Alas, I no longer have these texts) The exact number of Syro-Arabic MSS is not known, but is probably in several thousands. Syro-Arabic appears first in printed text, albeit a few phrases here and there, in Ambrosio’s Introductio in 1539 which includes, in addition to biblical verses, some verses from the Qurʾān when introducing Arabic.3 The first printed text in Syro-Arabic is a catechism from 1580.4 §587. Each Arabic grapheme is represented by its counterpart in Syriac at the graphemic level. As Syriac only has 22 graphemes, as opposed to the Arabic inventory of 29 graphemes, four methods are used to extend the Syriac writing system:5
݂ܒ
A. By extending the bg̱āḏkp̱ āṯ letters (with the exception of and ̇ܦwhich do not have Arabic counterparts): ܓ ݂ maps to غ
2
Amira 22 ff.; Assfalg, ‘Arabische Handschriften in Syrischer Schrift
(Karšūnī)’; Mengozzi, ‘The History of Garshuni as a Writing System’. 3
Ambrosio 38v ff., Quran verses 84.
4
Coakley, Typography 38.
5
Coakley, Typography 14.
ch. 11
§590.
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
(in some texts, one finds a supralinear point instead,6
to خ, and ݂ܬto ث.
295
) ݁ܓ, ݂ܕto ذ, ݂ܟ
̈
B. By extending the syāme on ܗfor tā marbūṭa.
C. By adding a point inside ܜfor ظ, and on top of ̇ܨfor ض. D. By adding a stroke (or a filling) inside
ܔ
for
ج.
In
typography, when such a glyph is not available, the Arabic kasra is sometimes substituted; e.g. ܙܝ
ܓ ِ
‘New Jersey’.7
§588. The optionality of Arabic diacritics is carried over in SyroArabic. Vowel marks are usually not present in most Syro-Arabic texts. When present, it is usually the Arabic vowels that are used, not the Syriac vowels, though rare cases of Syriac vowels (both points and ‘Greek’ symbols) can be found. The Arabic diacritics hamza (the earliest I found in print type is from 18888 though earlier examples must exist), madda, shadda (first attested in print type in the Quzḥayya Psalter of 1610),9 and sukūn can also be found in Syro-Arabic texts. §589. Word spacing generally follows the Arabic writing tradition, but there are some cases of Syriac influence. One, for instance, finds
ܘfor وكل شئand
ܘfor ( وكل منq.v. §425).
§590. The following gives the mapping of Arabic graphemes to their Syriac counterparts:10
ܐrepresents < اʔ> ʾalif including its variations: ٔا, ٕا, ٓا, etc. In some cases the hamza or the madda appears on top of the ܐ. ܒrepresents < بb> bā. 6
Harrak, Syriac and Garshuni Inscriptions, vol. 1, 43
7
Barsom and Samuel, Ma’de’dono [5].
8
al-Dibs, Kṯāḇā ḏ-qūrāḇā from Coakley, Typography 142.
9
Coakley, Typography 47; Duval §12.
10
Costaz §3 n. 1.
296
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §590.
ܓrepresents both ج
jīm and
or a filling, sometimes in red in MSS,
< غʁ> g̱en. A stroke,
ܔ,11 is used more precisely for < جj> jīm, while a rūkkāḵā point, ܓ ݂ , marks < غʁ> g̱en. (Abouna gives a variant for ܓ ̰ .)12 ܕrepresents both < دd> dāl and < ذδ> ḏāl. Wellexecuted texts apply the qūššāyā point for , ݁ܕ, and a rūkkāḵā point for , ݂ܕ. ܗrepresents both < هh> hā and ةtā marbūṭa (q.v. under ܬ
below), a case in point for classifying Syro-Arabic as transliteration rather than transcription. When tā marbūṭa is marked, the
̈
syāme points are sometimes used, ܗ.
ܘrepresents < وw> wāw and its variation with hamza, ؤ. ܙrepresents < زz> zayn. ܚrepresents < حḥ> ḥā. ܛrepresents < طṭ> ṭā and < ظẓ> ẓā. More precisely, ظ is represented by ܜ, but sometimes ̇ܛ13 or ̣ܛ.14 ܝrepresents < يy> yā and its variation with hamza, ئ (see Pl. 1), including its use as ʾalif maksūra. represents both
ك
kāf and
خ
χā, the
distinction made in well-executed texts with the use of the rūkkāḵā and qūššāyā points,
ܠ
represents
frequently used.
ل
݁ ݁ and ݂ ݂ , respectively.
lām. The Serṭā ligature
ܡrepresents < مm> mīm. ܢrepresents < نn> nūn. ܣrepresents < سs> sīn. ܥrepresents < عʕ> ʿayn.
11
J. D. Michaelis §2.
12
Abouna 30.
13
Abouna 30; A. Hoffmann I.I. §7 (p. 81); Zschokke §4.
14
Costaz §3 n. 1.
ch. 11
for
لا
is
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
§592.
ܦrepresents < فf> fā. ܨrepresents < صṣ>
ṣād and
ض
297
ḍād, the
distinction made in well-executed texts with the use of a point above ̇ܨfor the latter.
ܩrepresents < قq> qāf. ܪrepresents < رr> rā. ܫrepresents < شš> šīn. ܬrepresents < تt> and < ثṯ>, the distinction made in well-executed texts with the use of rūkkāḵā and qūššāyā points, ݁ܬ and ݂ܬ, respectively. It is not uncommon to find ܬfor tā marbūṭa or ̈ܗfor tā. §591. Dialectical variation has its own effect, especially in making emphatic letters and their nonemphatic counterparts somewhat interchangeable; e.g. ܛfor ت, and ܣfor ص.15
§592. The following text,16 and its decoding into the Arabic script, serves as an illustration:
ً ܨ ̈ܗ
ܐ ܐ.ܐ ܕܝ َ ܐܢ ܨ ܗ ܐܪ َ ݁ ܆ ܐ ܝ ܐ ܆ ܘܐܔ ܒܓ ݁ ̇ ܐ ܐܘ ܬ ܆ ܘܐ ̇ َܒܐ ܐ َ ܐ ݁ܒ ݁ ݁ ̇ܟ܆ ܘܐ ܡ ܒ ܐܪܐܕܬ ݁ܟ܆ ܐ ܘܐ ܒ ܐ ̇ ܐܪܝ ̇ ܘ ܟ ̇ ܐ ݁ َܐ ܝ ܐ .ܪ ܪܒ ܪܝ ܘ ݂ ܝ ܘܒ ݁ܪܟ ܐ ܐ ݁ ܘ ܐ ̇ ܒ ܒ ̇ ܐܔ ̇ ܆ ݁ ܒ ܐ ݁ ݁ܟ ܘܔ ݁ܕܟ܆ ܘܐ ݁ ܐ ݁ ܆ ܘܐܒ ܘ ܘܐ ̈ ݀ܘ ܕܘ ܘ ܔ ܗ ܐܬܝ ݁ ܘ ܬܝ܆ ܘ ܝ ܘ ݁ ܒܐܢ ܐ ܒ ݁ ̇ ܐ ܘ [܆ ܐsic] ݂ܬܝ ݁ ݁ ݁ ݁ ݁ ܐܕܬܟ ܐܬܟ ̇ ܐ ܬ ܒ ܔ ݁ܟ܆ ܒܐܢ ܐ ܓ ܘ ܐ ݁ܟ܆ ܘܒܐܢ ܐ ܐ ً ܓ ܟ܆ ܘ ܐ
15
Harrak, Syriac and Garshuni Inscriptions 43.
16
MS Beth Mardutho, undated (a note in the binding gives 1705).
298
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §593.
ܔ ܘܐ ݁ ܐܡ ܘܐ ܘ ܐܪ
݁ܐܕܟ ܘ ݁ܟ܆ ܢ . ܐܒ ܐ ܒ ܐ صلاة بغير اعطيني )ٔاعطني( يا الله.سمعان العامودي ً َ صلاه مار َ انير )ٔانر( عقلي،اليك َ ( واجمع ظميري )ضميري،طياشة لكي ، واشكر نعمتك،(اطلب منك بامانة ما اوعدتني )وعدتني انعم علي بتطهير قلبي واظبط )واضبط( افكاري،وافهم ارادتك في النظر اليك وحدك لانك انت َيا رب نوري ومخلصي لانك اله، نعم يا الهي اجمعني كلي لك،وبنورك اعاين النور ، واب ومعلم برافتك وجودك،وما لك بطبعك واستحقاقك وكنزي وعريسي وفردوسي وشجرة حياتي،وانت عوني وقوتي بان اسير، فانعم علي بان احبك كما يستحق مجدك،وملكوتي وبان لا،بمرظاتك )برضاك؟( كما تستحق سيادتك ومواعيدك لان لك المجد، ولا اعمل غير مرادك وحدك،احب غيرك .والاكرام والاوقار )والوقار( الى ابد الابدين امين ݁
ٔاعطينيfor MSA ٔاعطني, and ٔانيرfor ٔانر. Also note the dialectal variant واظبطfor MSA واضبط. §593. Note the use of colloquial
§594. Related to Syro-Arabic, a number of loan words entered the Syriac language with a similar transliteration mechanism; e.g. for Arabic
ܽ syriacized; e.g. ܳܙܐ
خليفة
‘Caliph’. Some words have simply been
for Arabic
‘ موزbanana’.
11.3. Syro-Armenian By Hidemi Takahashi
§595. Syro-Armenian17 is a transcription scheme. While isolated Armenian words and proper names occur early on in Syriac texts, 17
See also D. S. Margoliouth, ‘The Syro-Armenian Dialect’; Lant-
shoot, ‘Un texte arménien en lettres syriaques’; Brock, ‘Armenian in Syriac Script’; Takahashi and Weitenberg, ‘The Shorter Syriac-Armenian ch. 11
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
§596.
299
continuous Armenian texts written in Syriac script are attested only from the 16th century onwards. All the known examples of Armenian Garšūnī are in Serṭā. The earliest is the rather clumsily transcribed text of the Armenian Our Father in MS. Mingana, Syr. 44 (dated 1574–75), fol. 132r (which, incidentally, is followed on the reverse side of the folio by the Our Father in Latin, in Syriac script). A more developed system of transcription is found in three 17th-century MSS of Syriac-Armenian lexica where the Armenian entries too are all written in Syriac script, namely MS. Harvard, Syr. 54 (dated 1658–59, the Syriac-Arabic lexicon of Bar Bahlul with the originally Arabic portions translated into Armenian), MS. Cairo, Franciscan Centre of Christian Oriental Studies, Syr. 11 (dated 1665/6, the Arabic-Syriac lexicon of Elia of Ṣoba, here in the order Syriac-Arabic, with the addition of Armenian equivalents in a third column), and MS. Yale, Syr. 9 (probably 17th-century, contains a Syriac-Armenian lexicon of unknown origin, as well as an excerpt from Elias’ lexicon in Syriac and Armenian, without the Arabic), as well as in Vatican, Syr. 544 (dated 1711–12), which contains a hymn (boʿuto) of Jacob of Sarug, the Creed and the Gloria in Armenian Garšūnī. The Armenian represented in the three lexicographical MSS is not literary Armenian, but a spoken dialect, no doubt that of the region around Amid and Gargar, where the MSS originated. §596. The transcription scheme used in these four MSS (H = Harvard, C = Cairo, Y = Yale, V = Vatican) may be presented as follows:
ܐ
is used word-initially in words beginning with vowels,
and elsewhere as mater lectionis.
Glossary in Ms. Yale Syriac 9’ and ‘The Shorter […]; Part 2: Glossary in Transcription/Translation’; Takahashi, ‘Armenisch-Garschuni’.
300
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §596.
ܒusually represents պ [b]. ̣ܒis used in C for վ [v] and ւ [v]. ݆ܒis used in C for բ [pʰ]. ̇ܓusually represents կ [g]. ܓ ̣ usually represents ղ [ʁ]. ܔis used to represent ջ [tʃʰ], ճ [dʒ], չ [tʃʰ] and ժ [ʒ]. ܓ ݆ is used to represent [ چtʃ] in loan words from Persian
and Turkish, and in C also for ջ [tʃʰ] and չ [tʃʰ].
ܕusually represents տ [d]. ܗusually represents հ [h];
and is sometimes also used
word-finally as mater lectionis.
ܘis used for վ [v] and ւ [v]; and as mater lectionis. ܙand ̣ܙusually represents զ [z]. ̇ܙusually represents ծ [dz]. ݆ܙis used in V for ծ [dz] and ձ [tsʰ]. ܝis used for յ [j]; and as mater lectionis. ̇ܟusually represents գ [kʰ] and ք [kʰ]. ̣ܟusually represents խ [χ]. ܠusually represents լ [l]. ܡusually represents մ [m]. ܢusually represents ն [n]. ܣusually represents ս [s]; but is used in V for ց [tsʰ]. ̇ܣusually represents ց [tsʰ] and ձ [tsʰ]; but is used in V
for ս [s].
݅ܣis used in V for ձ [tsʰ]. ܦand ̇ܦusually represent փ [pʰ] and բ [pʰ]. (with a horizontal stroke) is sometimes used for փ [pʰ]
and բ [pʰ].
̣ܦis used ֆ [f], which is a rare sound in Armenian. ݆ܦis used in C for [ پp] in loan words from Persian and
Turkish.
ܪusually represents ր [ɾ] and ռ [ɾ]. ch. 11
§598.
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
301
ܫusually represents շ [ʃ]. ݅ܫand ݆ܫare used for ժ [ʒ], ջ [tʃʰ] and չ [tʃʰ]. ܬusually represents դ [tʰ] and թ [tʰ]. §597. The Armenian vowels are represented as follows:
ܰ
ܰ
ա [a] is usually represented by ◌ and ◌ܐ.
ܶ
ܶ
ե [ɛ] is usually represented by ◌ (or ◌ܸ) and ( ◌ܐor )ܸ◌ܐ. է [ɛ] can be represented by
◌ܶ, ܶ◌ܐ,
and
ܶ◌ܗ.
In verbal
endings it is represented, regularly in H and Y, and often in C, by
ܰ◌ܐ,
which seems to indicate a dialectal pronunciation of the
ending as [æ]. The unusual combination
ܷܰ◌ܐ
(and
)ܱܶ◌ܗ
with two
vowel signs attached to a single consonant is also sometimes used in C (again, probably indicating a pronunciation as [æ]) – e.g. C
ܰ (hrǣ), cf. Y 232.1.2, ܗܪܐ ܰ (hrâ): ‘push!’ (Modern Western ܗܪܐ ܷ ܶ Armenian հրէ՛, hɾɛ); C 211.11: ( ̇ ̱ ܱܘܗśərwæh), cf. Y 233.12.2: ( ̱ ܰܘܐsərwâ): ‘scatter!’ (ցրուէ՛, tsʰǝɾvɛ). 206.3,
ը [ǝ] is usually either not indicated or indicated by a
stroke resembling mhaggyānā. It is sometimes represented, word-
ܶ
ܰ◌ܐ. ܺ ի [i] is usually represented by ( ◌ܝor ܼܝ-). ܵ ܳ ո [o] is usually represented by ◌ (or ◌), and occasionally ܳ (especially in C) by ( ◌ܘwhich, however, may also stand for ով
ܺ , and, word-finally, by initially, by ܐand ܐܝ
[ov]).
ܽ
ու [u] is usually represented by ( ◌ܘor ܼܘ-).
§598. There is no regularity in the use of the matres lectionis (especially the word-internal )ܐ, so that the same word can appear, within the same manuscript, with and without it.
ܘ
and
ܝ
are
usually written where they are expected, but C frequently dispenses even with these. In the examples below, the presence of the matres lectionis will be indicated through the use of the circumflex accent.
302
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §599. The matres lectionis may also appear in the ‘wrong’ places
in the transcription of Armenian loan words from Arabic, e.g. C 49.2, 4:
ܰ
ܼ
,
Arabic sulṭān, wazīr). §599. The letters represent
ܿ ܻ ܼܘܐܙ
(sûlṭan, wâzîr, ‘Sultan’, ‘minister’, for
ܚ, ܛ, ܜ, ܥ, ܩ,
Armenian
loan
and
words
ܨ
are regularly used to from
Arabic
(and
Persian/Turkish). They are also used in certain native Armenian words. The use or non-use of these letters varies between, and sometimes within, MSS. Sometimes, they appear where they do not in the original language. §600. The scheme described above allows each Armenian consonant to be represented by a single Syriac letter with additional signs. This was not the case in the Our Father in MS. Mingana Syr. 44, where letters such as [tsʰ] are represented by two Syriac letters. Such representation of a single Armenian letter using two Syriac letters is still sometimes encountered in the Cairo manuscript; e.g.
( ܶܘweṭs) ‘six’ (վեց, vɛtsʰ) ܽ ܿ C 311.9: ( ܼ ܘܢmaṭzûn) ‘curdled milk’ (մածուն, madzun) ܿ ܿ C 215.6: ( ܬ ܼ ܼ ܸܐtsânǣ) ‘sow!’ (ցանէ՛, tsʰanɛ!); cf. Y ܰ 234.12.1: ̇ ܱ ܐ, śânâ) C 197.12:
§601. The following illustrative text is taken from the Armenian colophon of the Harvard manuscript, Syr. 54, fol. 372v, a33–b14:
ܶ ̇ ܻ ܰܐܣ ܐ ܼ ܻ ܽ ܢ ܽܐܘܪ ܰ ܐ ܽ ܪܒ ܿ ܼ ܻܒ ܻܒ ܰܗ ܰ ܐܪ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܶ ܸܳ ܰ ̇ ܰܐ ܽ ܳ ̇ ܘܪܐ ܺܓ ܷ ܻ ܐܓ ܻ ܓ ܱ ̇ ܐܪܬ ܐܪ ܼ ܰ ܼ ܰ ܻ ܓ ܬܐ ܘܐܘ ܼ ܗ ̇ ܱܐ ܽ ܰܘܐܙ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܰ ̇ ̇ܪܦ ܒܐܕܪ ̇ ܻ ܒ ـ ̇ ܸ ܐ ܳ ܳܗ ̇ ܽ ܢ ܻܘܐ ܐ ܻܐ ܰ ܕܐܟ ܳ ܻܐ ̇ ܰ ܼ ܰܐ ܻܐ ܰ ܻ ܐ. ܻ ܸ ܰ ܓܐܘܪ ܐ ܴ ܼ ܰ ܰ ܻ ܐܓ ܼܳ ܰ ܶ ܿ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܐܣ ̇ ܘܓ ܱ ̇ ̇ ܶ ܶܐܕܢ ܗܐ ܼ ܺ ̇ ܬܟ ܐܣ ܬܘ ܼ ܻܳ ܼ ܸ ܼ̇ܪܟ ܶ ܸ ܓ ܿ ܐܪ ܰ ܰ ̇ ܰ ܗܒܐ ̇ ܰ ܐ ̇ ܷ ܽ ܢ ܓ ܼ ܻ ܰ ܘ ܼ ܸ ̇ ܬܐ ܔ ܸ̇ ̇ ܰ ܐ ܴ ̇ ܐܕܐܣ ܻ ܰܐ ̇ ܷ ܰ ܳܗ ܴ ܪ ܐ ܽ ܰ ܣ ܳ ܿ ܼ ܐ ܼܳ ܰܐ ̇ ܸ ܰܪܪ ܶ ̇ ܿ ܼ ܻܬ ܽ ܕܓܐ ܐܪ ̇ ̇ ܐܣ ܽ ܬܘ ܼܽܘ ܻ ܼ ܰ ܰܒ ̇ ̇ ܷ ܬ ܰܐ ܽ ܢ ܘ ܳ ܼ ܰܕܐܪܘ ܸ
ch. 11
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
§601.
ܰ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܽ ܶ ̇ܓ ܺ ܰܐ ܶܐܕܢ ܓ ܬ ̇ ܼ ܽ ܢ ܐܪ ܻܐ ܻ ܐܘ ܱ ̇ ̇ܪܦ ܷ ܰ ܳ ܽ ̇ܓ ܬܐܢ ܰ ܰ ܐܓ ܻ ̇ ܷ ܶܢ ܳ ܓܐܘܪ ܐ ܰ ܸ ܻ ܳܗ ܘܐܘ ܴ ܻ ܱ ܼ ܼ ܳ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܰ ̇ ܰ ܰܒ ـ ̇ ܸ ܐ ܻ ̇ ܸ ̇ ܳ ܐܓ ܘ ܷ ̇ ܰ ܐܓ ܻ ܻܐ ܻ ܝ ܼ ̇ܪܦ ܼ ܘܐܙ ܽ ܐܣ ܼ ܬܘ ̇ ܽ ̇ܪܦ ܰ ܝ ܐܒ ܰ ܐ ܽ ܶ ܰܔܐ ܰ ܰ ܼܘ ܰܘ ܽ ܰ ܗܙܐܪ ܘܐ ܰܐ ܰܗܪ ܘܬ ܰܐ ܽ ܢ ܰܰ ܕܐܪܘܢ ܰ ܶ ܔ ܶ ܳ ܐ ̇ ܱ ܰ ܶܪܢ ܻ ܻ ܰ ܰ ܘܣ ܰ ܘܬ ܰܐ ܽ ܢ ̇ ܶ ܘ ܻ̇ ܻ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܐ ̇ ܰ ܕܐܪܝ ܐ ܐܢ ܐܓ ܗܪ ܼ ܳ ܘܐܙ ܻ ܻ ܳ ܰ ̇ ܰܐ ܽ ܿ ܳ ܴ ܰ ܰ ܘܪܐ ܳ ܐܓ ܷ ܻ ܘܐܓ ܱ ̇ ܼ ܬܘܢ ܐܪ ܼ ܺ ̇ ܓܐܘܪ ܼ ܼ ܳ ܓ ܬܐ ܫ ܐ ܐܒ ܢ ܕܒ ܐ
ܳ ܐܪ ܽܢ
kresî as ʾḵsîqûn ûrpâyû / rbn [syr.: rabban] ḥabîbîn
hamâr, mer hokâḡen / [35] ortîn. or gartâ w-ûsnî oḡrmî
/ perâ wrâ kroḡîn hokûn w-îšâ / îr sûrp bâdaraknîn,
bâlkeh / asdwâż oḡormî maḡâwor aprēmîn. yâ îm ʿazîz
aḵprdâk, înğ / [40] aden hâyek wgartek as tûḵt, / mî maḵtrek kroḡîn, or es / krâked ğîm, hbâ krâkednûn /
odâś goḵnîm, wmasek / tê ḵolâyâ krerr. menż martîm / [45] mnâśer, halwor ašwnûs losâ / bakser. tanâsûn wyoṯ
dârû dḡâyî, / or kreśy as tûḵtû. ûmîš // [1] ğenîm amen
sûrṗ gartaśḡnûn, / or înğ aden or gartân w-ûsnîn / oḡormî peren maḡâwor ʾprēmîn / hokûn, balkeh asdwâż
oḡrmy / [5] îrî śer sûrṗ aḡtow. kreśî / as tûḵt ʿzyz sûrṗ
mry [syr.: mār] / abḥâyû meğâ sandḵtow wank, / hazâr
w-înâ harîr wtanâsûn / dârûn meğnek askandren, / [10]
wkîrîsdosâ [in marg.: yiwer hazâr w-înâ harîr] weś harîr wtanâsûn / dârî. asdwâż oḡormî / an martûn, or gartâ
w-oḡormî perâ / wrâ maḡâwor krôḡîn. ʾmyn. / abwn dbšmyʾ ntqdš [syr.: amīn abūn d-ba-šmayyā netqaddaš]
I wrote this lexicon for the sake of Rabban Ḥabib of Urfa, our spiritual son. May whoever reads [it] and
learns [from it] bring a ‘[Lord] Have Mercy’ upon the
soul of the scribe and remember him [in] the holy liturgy, so that God may have mercy on the sinner
Ephrem. O my dear brethren, whenever you see and
read this book, do not blame the scribe, for I am not [lit. who I am not] a learned man – therefore I bow at the
303
304
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §602. feet of the learned – and do not say that the letters are
ugly. I have become [lit. I remained, I am left] an old [lit. big] man; the light of [my] old eyes have failed. I, who wrote this book, was seventy-seven years old [lit.
son of seventy-seven years]. I beg all the holy readers, whenever they read [it] and learn [from it], to bring a
‘Have Mercy’ upon the soul of the sinner Ephrem, so that God may have mercy on him through your holy
prayer. I wrote this book in [the monastery] of the beloved saint Mor Abḥay, the monastery with the ladders,
in the year 1970 [reckoned] from Alexander, and from Christ 670 [sic; in marg.: ‘in addition, 1900’]. May God have mercy on that man who reads and brings a ‘Have Mercy’ on the sinful scribe. Amen. Our Father…
11.4. Syro-Greek §602. Syro-Greek is a transcription scheme. Its usage is quite limited considering that non-Chalcedonian Syriac Christians hardly used Greek as a daily or liturgical language. Having said that, a few examples exist, mostly in Chalcedonian liturgical settings. The earliest example is a palimpsest leaf in the Mingana collection (MS 659),18 which Mingana dates to ca. 1000 (lower writing dated ca. 600). There are also fragments from the Anaphora of St. James that date between the 9th and 11th centuries, preserved in the Damascus Museum. A 16th or 17th century Maronite MS (Vat. Syr. 477)19 is also known.
18
Mingana, Catalogue of the Mingana Collection III, 94.
19
Lantschoot, Inventaire des Manuscrits Syriaques 13–14.
ch. 11
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
§604.
305
§603. J. M. Sauget20 provides an analysis of the Damascus fragments, a summary of which follows: The mapping of Greek consonants to their Syriac counterparts is straightforward: β =
ܒ, γ = ܓ, δ = ܕ, ζ = ܙ, θ = ܬ, κ = ܩ, λ = ܠ, μ = ܡ, ν = , ρ = ܪ, σ = ܣ, τ = ܛ, and χ = . Both π and φ are represented by ܦ. The letters ξ and ψ are represented by the monograms
and
, respectively. A
repetition of a Greek consonant is not doubled in Syriac (as is expected in a transcription system); e.g. ἀλλά =
̇ܐ ̇ܐ. This even
holds across word boundaries; e.g. τῆς σῆς =
. Vowels
pose more challenges:
ܐhas no phonetic value of its own, but is
used to mark other vowels, especially at the beginning of words, and is used with a diacritic (e.g. α =
̇ܐ,
ε and αι =
ܝ ;)̣ܐ
represents ι, η and ει which were all pronounced /i/ in later times;
ܘrepresents various o/u/ou sounds (see Sauget for details).
It is worth noting that the rubrics are given in Syriac. The following example (taken from Sauget’s edition III, lines 24–30) illustrates this system:
ܐ ̣ܐ
ܐ ܨ ܬܐ ܕ ܒ ܐ ܘ ܡ ܘ ܢ ̣ܐ: ̇ ܗ ̣ܐܘܣ ̇ܐܓ ̇ܐ ̇ܐ ̣ܐܘܣ ̣ܐ ܀ ̇ܐܪܐܣ ̣ܐ ̣ܐܘ ܘ
ܪ ܐ ̇ ܪ ܐ ܒ ܘܐ ܢ ̣ܐ ̣ܐ ̣ܐ ̇ܐܪܕ ̇ܐܣ
‘The priest bows his head in front of the altar, prays the prayer of the bowing of the head, and he says at its con-
clusion: καὶ πλήρωσον τὰ στóμα ἡμων αἰνέσεως καì τà χείλη ἀγαλλιάσεως καὶ τὰς καρδιὰς χαρᾶς καì εὐφροσύνης.
§604. Independent of Syro-Greek, a number of Greek words, especially technical terms, entered the Syriac language as loan
20
Sauget, ‘Vestiges d’une celebration Gréco-Syriaque de l’Anaphore
de Saint Jacques’ 311–12.
306
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §604.
words.21 Some assimilate very well into the language to the degree that a Syriac user who is not acquainted with Greek may not realize the foreign origin of such words; e.g. τάξις which has become productive:
ܶ݁ܰ
ܶ ݁ ܳܐ
‘order’ from
‘he ordered’,
‘was ordered’, and even the late 20th century neologisms ‘[computer] system’, and
ܰ ܳ ݁ܰ ݁ ܐ
ܰ ݁ ܰ ܶ ݂ܐܬ ܰ ݁ ܳܐ
‘(a political) organization’.
The mapping from Greek into Syriac is similar to the above garšūnographic mapping. It is common, however, that for certain words of Greek origin, there exist various orthographical varia-
ܳ ܽ ܰܐ ܰܐ, ܰܐ ܰܐ ܽ ܰܪܐ, ܰܐ ܽ ܳܪܐ, ܪܐ ݂ ݂ ܶ ܽ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܽ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܽ ܰ ܰ inter alia, with pl. ܐ ܐ ݂ ̈ܪܐ, ܐ ܐ ݂ ̈ܪܐܣ, ܐ ܐ ݂ ̈ܪܣ, etc.
tions in Syriac; e.g. ἀνάφορά gives rise to
11.5. Syro-Hebrew §605. Writing Hebrew in the Syriac script is very rare and limited to glosses; e.g. in a 14th-century polyglot Psalter, MS Cambridge Or. 929. Examples can be found in Brock’s treatment of this polyglot.22
11.6. Syro-Kurdish §606. Syro-Kurdish23 is a transcription scheme, though transliteration features do occur as Kurdish is typically written in Arabic script (and hence there are influences from Syro-Arabic). The number of Kurdish texts in Syriac script is not known, but the tradition continued well into the 20th century. A notable example
21
Brock, ‘Limitations of Syriac in Representing Greek’ 83–98; Duval
§62; Loopstra, Patristic Selections 297. 22 23
Brock, ‘A Fourteenth-century Polyglot Psalter’. Pennacchietti, ‘Un manoscritto curdo in karshuni da Aradin
(Iraq)’. I thank Gregory Kessel for this reference. ch. 11
§607.
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
307
is the 18th-century poem Lawîj,24 attributed to Basilios Shimʿun (1695–1740), Maphrian of Ṭur ʿAbdin, which forms the basis of the following discussion. Lawîj is written in the Serṭo script. §607. Kreyenbroek25 provides approximated equivalences of the Syriac graphemes with the phonemes of Modern Standard Kurmancî as follows: ‘Oh’.
ܳ ܐis used as mater lectionis; e.g. ܰ ܰܗ ܰ ܐfor haydane,
for Lo
ܒrepresents [b] or [v], and occasionally [p]. The distinc-
tion between [b] and [v] is made with the use of standard rūkkāḵā and qūššāyā points: ݁ܒfor [b] and ݂ܒfor [v].
ܓrepresents a number of phonemes: when unmarked, it represents [dzh] or [tsh] (MSK c, ç). With a stroke, ܔ, it repre-
sents [dzh] or [tsh] (MSK c, ç). The qūššāyā and rūkkāḵā points
[ ݁ܓg] and [ ݂ܓʁ], respectively. Finally, a three-point sublinear grapheme is used for ܓ ݆ [ġ]. ܕrepresents [d] and [δ]. ܗrepresents [h], but also may be nil in MSK, in which ܰ ݁ ܰܕdenge case it must have had a sub-dialect /h/ sound; e.g. ܓ ܶ ܽ ݁ guhê ‘ears’. ܰ ݅ܰ ܰ ‘sound’, ܗܙܗܐܢhejan, ܓ ܗܗ ܘrepresents [w] and is used as mater lectionis. ܙrepresents [z] and Arabic [ḍ] in loan words. ݅ܙrepresents [zh] MSK j. are used for
24
For the Syriac text see Çiçek, Kap̱ ā ḏ-habāḇē. Translations were
made into Syriac by Qurillos Jacob, Arabic (from the Syriac) by Dionisius Behnam Jajawi (1954, published in qaṣīdat al-Lāvij al-latī naẓamahā bil luğa al-fārisiyya [sic] al-muṯallaṯ al-raḥamāt al-mafiryān mār šimʿūn almaniʿmī, [2011/12]), and Ṭuroyo by G. Barsoum (Yārtūṯā sūryāytā 86– 96). 25
Kreyenbroek ‘The Lawîj of Môr Basîliôs Shimʿûn’.
308
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §608.
ܚrepresents [ḥ]. ܛis used in Arabic loan words, in which case it represents
[ṭ], and [t].
ܝrepresents [y] and is used as mater lectionis. represents [k] and [χ]; more precisely,
[k], while
݂݂
݁ ݁
represents
represents [χ].
ܠrepresents [l]. ܡrepresents [m]. ܢrepresents [n]. ܣrepresents [s]. ܥrepresents Arabic [ عʕ] in loan words. ܦrepresents [p], [f], and sometimes [v]; more precisely, ݂ܦfor [f] and [v], and ݆ܦfor [v]. ܨrepresents Arabic [ṣ] in loan words. ܩrepresents [q]. ܪrepresents [r]. ܫrepresents [ş]. ܬrepresents [t].
The use of Syriac vowels is more complex and very incon-
sistent, representing, in most cases, regional dialects rather than MSK; e.g.
◌ܰ
for MSK /a/ (e.g.
ܰ ܰܗ ܰ ܐ
haydane), /e/ (e.g.
ܰ ݂ܐܦ
ev
ܶܶ ܶ ݁ ܰܕdengê ‘this’); for /a/ ݂ ܐaxir ‘end (of times)’, /e/ (e.g. ܓ ܶ ܰ ‘sound’), /u/ (e.g. ܶܙܪzurna ‘zurna (musical instrument)’), /i/ ܗܢ ܺ ܺ çi ‘what?’), etc. hin ‘some’; ◌ for /i/ (e.g. ܔ Finally, a sublinear line on ܘas a prefix indicates the conܰ junction û ‘and’; e.g. ܘܐܦ ݂ ̱ û ev ‘and this’. Its function is closer to ◌ܶ
the marhṭānā (q.v. §206).
§608. The first stanza of Lawîj is given below as an example with its transcription and translation from Kreyenbroek.
ch. 11
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
§610.
ܺܔ ܶܗܢ،
ܰ ܘܐܦ ݂ ̱ . ܰ ܺܔ ܰܗ ܰ ܐ ܺܰ ܰ ܘܒ ܽ ܺܪ ܰ ܐ ܰ ܘܙܪ ܶ ̱ . ܰ ܰܙ ܰ ܐ
ܰ ܘܐܦ ݂̱ ܶ݁ ܰ ܓ ܶܶ ܶ ݅ܕ، ݂ ܕܒ ܢ ܐ
Lo, ev çi denge û ev çi haydane
309
ܰ ܳ ݂ܐܦ ܺܔ ܰܕ ݁ ܰܓ ܰ ܽܓ ܪܓ ܰ ܗ ܰ ܰ ܐ ܶ ̱ ،ܕܒ ݅ܶܢ ܺ ܰ ܐ ܰ ܰ ܗ ܶ ܘܗܢ
û ev çi gurgure li ‘ezmana
dengȇ nefîr û zurna û burîzane
hin dibȇjin qiyamete, û hin dibûjin axir zemane. Oh, what sound is this and what warning? And what rumbling is this in the skies?
It is the sound of the flute, the zurna and the burîzan.
Some say it is the resurrection, and some say it is the end of time.
11.7. Syro-Latin §609. Latin written in the Syriac script is a result of the rise of Roman-rite communities from within the Syriac churches. The earliest known examples are from the 16th century and tend to transcribe Latin prayers in Syriac for the benefit of Catholic Syriac Christians, either Maronite or Chaldean. Maronites used Serṭā while Chaldeans used the E. Syr. script. Mingana 110 (f. 106a) contains the Pater Noster, the Ave Maria, and the Gloria Patri in E. Syr. Takahashi26 has found that Mingana 44 (f. 132b) also contains the Pater Noster but in W. Syr., copied by a certain Ephrem in Deir al-Zaʿfarān in 1574–75. Vat. Syr. 491 (ff. 108b-109b) contains the hymn Pange lingua. §610. Following is the Pater Noster from Mingana 44 and Mingana 110:
26
ܰܒܐܬܪ ܵ ܪ ܺ ܐ ܔܐ ܽ ܵ ܰ ܐ ܺ ܶܔܐܬܘܪ ܵܰ ܵ ܘ ܿ ܸܐܬ ܼܒ َ ܪ ܶ ܽܘ ܰ ܘ ܼ ܘܣ ܬܘܐ
Takahashi, personal communication.
310
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §611.
ܰ ܵܵ ܵ ܸ ܺܬܪܐ ܕ ܒ ܐܕ ܐ ܰܪܐ ܵ
ܶܔܐ ܺ ̇ ܬܐ ݁ ܵ ݁ [̇ ܐ ܶ ܳ ܪ]ܘܡ ܵ ܶ ܺ ܸܐܬ ܺܕ ܺ ܕܒ ܷ ܰܽܐ ܒ ܳ ܕܘ ܐ ܳ ܰ ܳ ܸܐܬ ܻ ܣ ݁ ܐ ܸ ܹ ܐ ܹ ܒ ܸܐ ܨ ܬܐ ܕܐܒ ܢ ܕܒ ܐ ܒ ܐ ܵ ܐ ܼ ܵ ܵܐ ܵ ܿ ܼ ܐ ܸ ܐ ܿ ܼ ܼ ܼܝ ܹܗ ܼ ܿ ̰ܓ ܵ َ ݁ ݁ ܼ ̃ܓ ܼ ܿ ܿܘܪ ܬܘܡ ܼ ܵ ܼ ݁ ܼ ݁ ܘ ܐܣ ܬܘܘܐ ܼ ݁ ܿ ݁ܬ ܼ ܿ ̃ܓ ݂ ܿ ܼܐ ݁ ܼ ܼ ܬܪܐ ܿ ܿ ܿ ܐ ܵܐ ܡ ܸ ܘܬܝ ܕ ܼ ܿ ܐ ܡ ܕ ܐ ܼ ݁ܒ ܼ ܗܘܕ ܼ ݁ ݁ ܹܐ ܿ ݁ ܵ ܕܼ ܼ ܹ ܿܣ ܼ ܕܐܒ ܼ ܵ ܐܪ ܼ ݁ܒ ܣ ܵ ܐ ܿ ݁ ܿ ܵ ܐ ݁ ܐ ܵ ܐܨ ܿ ܘ ܼ ܹ ܼ ܸ ܹ ܹ ܵ ܵ ܿ ܵ ܵ ܐܹ ܀ ܼ ܹܒ ܐ ܐܨ ܐ ܹ ܸܐܬ ܐ ܵ ܕ ܰܐ ܵ ܹܽܪܘ ܶ ܶ ܺ
[The Lord’s Parayer in the Latin Language] Pater noster, qui es in cœlis; sanctificatur nomen tuum: Adveniat regnum tuum; fiat voluntas tua,
sicut in cœlo, et in terra.
Panem nostrum cotidianum da nobis hodie: Et dimitte nobis debita nostra,
sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris: et ne nos inducas in tentationem: sed libera nos a malo. Amen.
In the case of Mingana 110, the text in italics represents two omissions in the Syriac transcriptions due to clear cases of homeoteleuton. §611. Independent of garšūnography, a few loan words have entered the Syriac language from European languages. In the classical period, a few Latin words entered Syriac, and in the modern
ch. 11
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
§612.
311
period, the first interaction of Syriac and English probably took place in the late 19th century in the form of communications between the Syriac Church in the Middle East and British India. Here, some technical terms may have entered the language. One
[‘ ܰ ݂ܒ ܶ ܐletter] covers’; e.g. ܰ ܒ ܶ ܐ ܰ ‘ ݂ܰܕ ܰ ܺܪthe covers that we send you
known instance is the use of
ܰ ܺ ݂ ܽ ܢ ܐ ݂ ܽ ܘܢ ܶ ܳ ܐ ܒ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܐ
are ten in number’27 (this may be a figurative borrowing from Syriac
ܰ ݂ܒ ܳ ܐ
‘tomb’ from
݂ ܰܒ
‘to gather, fill, insert’?).28 Words that
entered directly from English or other European languages into
ܺ ܳ ܰܐ ܬ ܳ ܐ/tīyyā/, piano ܳ cassette ܰ ܐ ܶ ܬܐ/kasetā/ (ܗ
Modern Literary Syriac include tea /pyanā/ and
ܳ ܒ ܰܐ
/byanā/,
probably silent). Some neologisms entered Syriac via Arabic; e.g. English bus
ܰܒ ܳ ܐ.29
باص
A surprising spelling is
ܸܬܠ ݂ ܰ ܐܦ
‘telegraph’ where Latin turned into Ottoman Turkish
غwhich in turn turned into Syriac ݂ܟrather than ݂ܓ.30
§612. Due to Arabic, through which many modern neologisms entered Syriac, the phoneme /p/ is more likely to appear as rather than
ܦ
Similarly, the phoneme /v/ appears as
ܳ ݁ ܶ̈ Soviet Union > ݁ ܶܐ e.g. film ܺ ـܳܐ.
27
بوليس
; e.g. police
ܽ ܽ ܳ ݂ ܳ ܐ ݂ܕ
ܦ
rather than
;݂ܒ
ܒ ܺ ܽܒ.
e.g.
. As expected, /f/ appears as
;ܦ
Letter from Matta Konat to Patriarch Elias III/IV, February 10,
1894 (copy in the G. A. Kiraz Collection, Beth Mardutho Research Library). I am grateful to Baby Varghese who identified the word for me. 28
ܰ
Audo (p. 399a) under
ܶ ݂ ̈ ܽ ܰ ݂ܕ. ܘܕܐ ܰܘ
ܶ ܶ ܰ ܰܒ: ܺ ܐ ̈ ܐ ܘ ݂ ܰ ̈ ܐ
ܰ ݂ ܶ ܶܡ ܐ
ܰ ܺܒ.ܳ ܐ
. ܶܰ
29
Wardini, Neologisms in Modern Literary Syriac.
30
HMML Mor Gabriel 52, title page, from A. McCollum, ‘Divine In-
vocations and Doxologies’.
312
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §613.
§613. The phoneme /k/ appears as traditional e.g. America
ܰ ܰ ܐ ܶ ܺ ܰ ܐand ܐ ܶ ܺ ܰ ܐ, folklore
ܪ
ܩbut also as ;ܟ .
ܛand othersܰ as ܬ ܰ ܰ ܐܘand even in the same word; e.g. Australia ܐ ܰ ܶ ܐܘ ܰܪ ܰ ܐ. It appears as ܬmore frequently; e.g. liters ܺ ̈ܪܐ ܳ ܺ ), (Gr. λίτρα had already entered Syriac much earlier as ܐ ܽ studio ܘܕ ܳ ܐ. §614. The phoneme /t/ sometimes appears as
11.8. Syro-Malayalam §615.
Syro-Malayalam is known as Karson by Malayalees from
Garšūnī.31 The earliest known Syro-Malayalam texts date to the 17th century. Earlier MSS, if they existed, may have vanished during the post-Diamper period when MSS were systematically destroyed. The texts mostly employ the E. Syr. script, with Serṭā becoming more popular amongst the W. Syr. churches later on. §616.
A unique feature of Syro-Malayalam is the incorporation
of old Malayalam consonantal graphemes. The exact number of these graphemes has not yet been finalized. While some grammars list six or eight, Koonammakkal gives sixteen and hopes to find more. §617.
In addition, a sublinear line, ◌̱ (but sometimes supralinear)
is used to denote doubling. §618.
Another feature of Syro-Malayalam is that Syriac loan
words usually maintain their original Syriac orthography.
31
Duval §12; Gabriel of St. Joseph §§5, 11. For a treatment of the
topic, see Koonammakkal, ‘An Introduction to Malayalam Karshon’. ch. 11
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
§620.
313
11.9. Syro-Sogdian and Persian By Nicholas Sims-Williams 11.9.1.
Syro-Sogdian
§619. Around the 8th to 11th centuries, and possibly even a little later, an extended version of the Syriac writing system was used by the Christian community in the Turfan oasis (Xinjiang, western China) to write Sogdian. Almost all of the texts in question come from the monastery site of Bulayïq, just north of Turfan; a few were found at other sites nearby. All of them are now preserved in the Berlin Turfan collection, the great majority being available online.32 No such texts have been found in the homeland of the Sogdian language, the region around Samarqand in present-day Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, though Christian communities are known to have existed in this area. §620. In addition to the usual Syriac letters, the Sogdian texts usually employ three extra letters (i.e. [ʒ]), (i.e. [χ]), and , these being adapted from < ܙz>,
, and
< ܦp>, respectively. In one or two MSS, probably under the influence of Persian orthography (see §626), the fricative [γ] is represented by the letter < ܮğ>, an adaptation of
ܓ
. In
their graphotactics (i.e. joining rules) these graphemes follow those upon which they are based, though it should be noted that does not have a special final form comparable to Syriac
ܟ.
In some MSS the letter is often accompanied by a re-
dundant subscript point, perhaps a vestige of an earlier system in which [f] was represented, as in Syriac, by
with rūkkāḵā. Apart from this special case, the rukkāḵā and qūššāyā points are
32
http://www.bbaw.de/forschung/turfanforschung/dta/n/
dta_n_index.html, checked Dec 1, 2011.
314
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §620.
hardly ever used. On the other hand, combinations of the E. Syr. vowel points with matres lectionis are very common in some MSS, in particular
ܹܝ
for [ē/e],
usually preceded by word, and
ܿ ◌ܼ
ܼܝ
for [ī/i],
ܿܘ
for [ō/o],
ܼܘ
for [ū/u], all
when they occur at the beginning of a
ܐ
for [ă]. In initial position, pointing is sometimes
[ ܵܐā] and [ ܿ ܼܐă], but, since long [ā] is ܵ ܐin all positions, ◌ is seldom used for
employed to distinguish usually represented by internal [ā].
§621. In some MSS, syāme is used to indicate that a final
ܐ
stands for [ē] rather than [ā]. §622. Syriac words and names are usually taken into Sogdian in their Syriac spelling, with occasional modifications at the end of the word as a result of their incorporation into the Sogdian system of inflection.33 Except in Syriac and other foreign words, the letters
< ܗh>, < ܚḥ>, < ܟk>, and < ܠl> are seldom used.34 Sogdian [t] and [k] are generally represented by < ܛṭ> and ܩ , respectively, while < ܬt> is used for [θ].35 In Sogdian, the voiced plosives [b], [d], [g] generally occur only after nasalized vowels, as allophones of their voiceless equivalents [p], [t], [k]. Consequently, the letters
< ܦp>, < ܛṭ>, and < ܩq> are used for [b], [d], and [g] as well as for [p], [t], and [k], while ܒ and < ܕd> more often (though not exclusively) represent
fricatives [v] and [ð], respectively. In the case of the velar series, however, [γ] is usually represented by Syriac after a nasal is represented by either
< ܥʕ>, while [g] < ܓg> or < ܩq>. Fi-
33
See Sims-Williams, ‘Syro-Sogdica III: Syriac elements in Sogdian’.
34
One unexplained exception is the native word [kaθ] ‘city’, which
may be written either 35
.
In some manuscripts, however, < ܬt> is used for [t] and [d] as
well as for [θ]. ch. 11
or
§625.
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
nally, Sogdian uses Syriac
< ܨṣ>
315
to represent [č], its allophone
[ǰ] (after nasalized vowels), and occasionally [ʦ], as in
ܨ
[pãǰaʦ] ‘fifteen’. §623. In view of the differences between Syriac and Sogdian in the usage and pronunciation of certain letters, the conventions for transliterating Sogdian differ from those which are generally used for Syriac. Note in particular the following transliterations: t, = ܬθ, = ܥγ, and
=ܛ
= ܨc.
§624. In addition to the phonetic characters, some Sogdian texts in Syriac script make use of a special symbol to represent the word ət, əti, iti ‘and; that’. The form in question, which looks like a sequence of Syriac letters,
or
, may be transliterated either
as ‘&’, in recognition of its function, or as ‘ZY’, in recognition of its origin: it is in fact borrowed from the Sogdian national script, where ZY is a logogram derived from the Aramaic relative zy.36 §625. The following text illustrates the system (n153 verso, lines 7–10 = Luke 16.13, edited by F. W. K. Müller, Soghdische Texte I, Abhandlungen der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1912, No. 2, Berlin 1913, 44–45.): Text:
ȤȚ ǽȎܐܘȨțȁ Ǩ ܕܘȃȎܘ ܹ ǧǼȡ ǽȡ ȃܹǼȏǪ ǽȒȂȎ ܹ ȃȢȂǼǪܕ ܕܐܪܛ ܐܛȃǼȦȁ ܼ ܼ ܼ ܼ ܝǶȁ ܼ ǩdzȡ ܛǦȚ .ȃȥ ܼ Ȝȑ .ǧȁȨȂǼȚ ȃȢȂǼǪܕ ܐܛȃǼȎܘ ܩǦȁȤȚܝ ܙǶȁ ܼ ܼ ܼ ܼ ǩdzȡ .ܪܝ ܼ ȃǪ ܼ ܐܛȃȂȘǪ ܼ ܼ ȃǪ ܼ ȃȥ ܼ Ȝȑ ȤȚ ǧȌȥ ǧȡǦǼȎ ܘǧǼȡ ȃȎ ܹ ܀܀ȃȋܐȤȗ ܹ Transliteration:
nys̤ t bnty̤ qt qtʾ wny̤ dwʾ xypθʾwnt pr spxšỵ. pʾt qdʾ ywỵ žỵštỵ dʾrt ʾt dbtỵqỵ frỵ. qdʾ ywỵ zpryʾq wntỵ ʾt
36
See Schwartz, ‘A page of a Sogdian Liber Vitae’.
316
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §626. dbtỵqỵ ptyθyʾ. ny̤ qtʾ wntʾqʾ šmʾx pr spxšỵ bỵ bγỵỵ ʾṭ bỵ γrʾmy܀ ̤ ܀
Approximate phonetic interpretation:
nēst vãdē kət ktā wanē ðwā χēpθāwãd par spaχšī.
pāt kðā yō’ī žištī ðārt ət ðvtīkī frī. kðā yō’ī zparyāk
wãdī ət ðvtīkī ptīθyā. nē ktā wãdākā šmāχ par spaχšī vī vaγī’ī ət vī γrāmē. Translation:
There is no servant who might be able to serve two masters, for either he hates one and loves the other or he honours one and despises the other. You will not be able to serve both God and wealth. 11.9.2.
Syro-Persian
§626. The Sogdian orthographic system described above was eventually adapted for writing New Persian, as is shown by two fragmentary texts from the Turfan oasis, a bilingual Syriac– Persian Psalter and a pharmacological handbook. The Psalm fragments have been published several times, most recently by Sims-Williams 2011, where they are accompanied by the first edition of the pharmacological text.37 These texts, which may date from around the 10th century, employ the Sogdian letters and ; the absence of the letter may be due to chance, since the sound [ʒ] is quite rare in Persian. These texts also display some typical Sogdian conventions such as the use of Syriac
ܨ
to represent [č] and [ǰ]. However, many other conven-
tions differ from those of Sogdian, probably to a large extent because of the need to represent the sounds of the many Arabic loan words in Persian. Syriac, as a Semitic language, provided suitable
37
ch. 11
N. Sims-Williams, ‘Early New Persian in Syriac script’.
§628.
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
317
graphemes to denote many of the Arabic consonants. For exam-
ܚwas used for Arabic حand ܩfor Arabic ;قit is likely that ܛand ܥwere also used to represent the equivalent Arabic ple,
consonants, although no examples occur in the extant fragments. This may be the reason why the letters
ܩ, ܛ,
and
used, as in Sogdian, for [k], [t], and [γ]. Instead,
ܥwere not < ܟk> was
used for [k],38
ܬwas used for [t],39 and a new letter < ܮğ>, an adaptation of ܓ, was created to represent [γ].40 Another new letter ܭ, an adaptation of ܒ, represents the fricative [v] or [β] (corresponding to ڤin the Arabic orthography of Early New
Persian), while the fricative [ð] is indicated either by
< ݂ܕδ>, i.e.
with rukkāḵā, or, more ambiguously, by ܕ, which can also represent [d].
§627. The notation of vowels by means of the E. Syr. vowel points and/or matres lectionis is similar to that used in Sogdian,
ܵ ◌ (without )ܐ or even left unmarked, while [ē/e] can be indicated by ܹ◌ܐ, ܐ ܹ , or except that internal [ā] is sometimes indicated by
perhaps simply ( ܐas an alternative to ܹܝor )ܝ.
§628. An interesting feature of the pharmacological text is the use of the ancient Aramaic symbols for numerals, e.g. ( ܙi.e. ) ‘3’. 38
It should be noted that the Persian word ke ‘who, which, that’ is
written in the Psalter as , i.e. as a separate word but with the nonfinal form of Syriac ܟ. 39
The meaningless statement in Sims-Williams, ‘Early New Persian
in Syriac Script’ 354, that [t] is represented “by means of tau ṭ” is of course a misprint. 40
As pointed out in §620, the letter
< ܮğ> is also attested in
one or two Sogdian manuscripts, probably under the influence of Persian orthography.
318
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §629.
§629. Finally, it is worth noting that Persian texts written in Syriac script are also known from Iran. These western texts make no use of the Sogdian and other special characters described above and it is clear that their orthographical system (or systems) developed quite independently from that employed in the texts of the Turfan oasis.41 §630.
The following bilingual text illustrates the system used in
the Persian texts from Turfan.42 In the translation, the Syriac text is shown in italics.
ܿ ȍȎǦȥǶȚ ܼܿ ܵ ܪdzȎ ܼܐǩ ܵܖȧȎǦȏȌȥܕܘ ܼܿ ܵ ܼ Ȥȋ ܘ.ǨܬܬǵǪ Ps. 131.18 ܼܿ ܼܕܘȇȁܼܿ ȤǪ ܘ.ȃȥܕǶȡ ǧțȘȎ ȼǶǪ ܗܝǶȉȗܡ܀ ܘȤȥܼܿ ܸ ܀ȍȂȅǦȚ ܼ ܩdzǫȋ ܘܕܘܘܡ ܼ ܼ ȃȑܘ ܼ Ƚȑ Ȑȁ ܘܬܪܬȐȁȨȈ ܘܬǨǦȋ ܕPs. 132 ܿ ܿ ܿ ܼܿ ܢ ܼܝ ܼܪܡȨȦǭܙǦǪ ܀ȊǫǫǪ ܕǧȌȗ ܕǵȂȎǶȚ Ȋȗ ܼ ܼ ȤǪ ȽȁǦȌȎ ܿ ȨȂǪ ܕȤȌȘȌȈ ܗܘܘ ܼ ȐȁdzȁȨȗ ǩdzǹȅܭܹܠ܀ ܐǧǪܵ ܼܐܙȅ ܵ ܼܿ ǩܘܕǵȁ ܘȊȁȤȒȁ ȐȦȂȎǦȋ ܦdzȎȼǶǪ ܼ ܼ ȨȑܐǴܵȂȚ ܐܝȠȆȂȚ ܿ ǩܘܕǵȁ ܘȊȁȤȒ[ȁ] ܗܝǦǮȎܐ ܢȨȥܕܐ ܼ ܼ ܿ ܀ǶȆȂȎ ܼ ܘܨܘ ܼ ȇȂȎ ܹ ܼܨܘ.ȤȂțȥ ǧȋ ܘǬǻ ǧȋ Ps. 132.1 Ps. 131.18: … shame. And His enemies I shall clothe
with shame—and upon Him my holiness shall flourish— and my purity shall be doubled.
Ps. 132: One hundred and thirty-second. One hundred and
thirty-second. He reveals the return of the people which
(was) in Babylon. He reveals the return of the people
from Babylon. Those of the house of Israel and Judah were ready to dwell together. (Those of) the house of Israel and
41
See Maggi and Orsatti, ‘Two Syro-Persian Hymns for Palm Sun-
day and Maundy Thursday’, as well as earlier publications cited there. 42
Folio 1, recto, from the Syriac–Persian Psalter (Sims-Williams,
‘Early New Persian in Syriac Script’ 353–61). ch. 11
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
§633.
319
Judah were prepared to have (their) habitation together.
Ps. 132.1: How good and how excellent (it is)—How good
and how excellent (it is).
11.10.Syro-Ottoman By Benjamin Trigona-Harany
§631. Ottoman Turkish written in the Serṭā script emerged around the 17th or 18th century in MSS and in the 19th century in printed publications, although other Turkic dialects had previously been written in the Syriac alphabet. Syro-Ottoman was occasionally used internally by the Syriac Orthodox Church, but its use peaked during the period between 1910 and 1940, when it was employed in a number of periodicals published in the Ottoman Empire, the United States and Lebanon.43 Although it became much less important as a medium after this period, Syro-Ottoman could still be found in correspondence, religious texts and books in the following decades. §632. Standard Ottoman Turkish was written in the Arabic alphabet using different orthographic practices for words of Arabic, Persian and Turkish origin. Syro-Ottoman mostly used identical one-to-one mapping between Arabic and Syriac graphemes as in standard Syro-Arabic, with the addition of diacritical points to mark sounds not present in Arabic but found in either Persian or Turkish. §633. Therefore, in addition to all the mappings employed in Syro-Arabic, the following may be found in Syro-Ottoman (with modern Turkish equivalents): 43
گ = ̇ܓ
= g/ğ,
=غ = ܓg/ğ, = ܔ
Trigona-Harany ‘A Bibliography of Süryânî Periodicals in Otto-
man Turkish’.
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §633. Syro-Ottoman
= j.ژ
=
݅ܙ
and
= p,پ
=
݆ܒ = ç,چ
=
320
ܔ = c,ج ݆
deviates only slightly from this direct scheme, for example in the
(often simplyگ
handling of , which can be represented by
in Syro-Ottoman.ܢ in Ottoman Turkish but always byن ) orك
§634. Following is an example from šur Yusuf’s Mürşid-i Âsûriyûn (January 1909, no. 1): Text:
ܔ ܐ ܐܺ ܒ ܐܔ ܢ ݆ ܐ ܽܒ ܪ ܐܒ ܐ ܘܐܪ ܪ ܘܐ ܐ
ܳ ܰ ܒ ݂ܳܬܐܢ ݁ ܺܐܕ ܐܘ ܝ ،ܘ ܰ ܒ ܐܪܐ ܐܘ ܝ ܐ ܕܗ ܐ ܨܐܕܦ ܐ ܗ ܰ ܰܬ ܺ ܐ ܰ ܒ ݂ܬܢ ܐ ܐܪ ܒ ܽ ̇ ܒ ܐܘ ܪܙ، ܒ ܒ ݂ܬ ܐܘ ݂ܓ ܕܗ ݁ ܳ ܐ ̣ܪ ܝ ܐ ̇ ܐ ܐ ܺ ܪ. ܐܘ ܢ ܒ ܳ ݂ܓ ܒ ܗ ܘܐ ّ ܰ ܩ ، ܐ ܰ ܐܘ ܪ ܰ ݁ ،ܔܒܐ ܶ ܐ ܘܒ ܗ ܒܒ ،ܔܒܐ ܒ ܝ ܐܕ ܐ ܐ ، ܼ ܼ ݂ ܐ ܗ َ݁ܓ ܘܪ ܪ ܐ ܒ ܗ ܐ ܐܦ ܐܘ ܗ ܙ ݂ܓ ܽ ܽ ܪ . ܒ ܓܔ ܢ ܒ ݂ ܒ ܗ ݁ܓ ܒ ݁ ݆
݂ܬ ܢ ܗ ܒ ܓ ܔܒܐ ܐܕ ܐ ٓ ܪ :ܐܝ
Transliteration into the Arabic script:
مجلس مبعوثان كشاد اولندی ,ومبعوثلرن اسامیسی نشر اولندی ایسهده انلر اراسنده بر بیله سریانی مبعوثن اسمنه تصادف ایدهمدیكمز اچون پك عارلنوپ مضظرب اولیورز, عجبا سریانیلرده مبعوث اولمغه لایق ادمن بولنمامسیدر .یوقسه اكثریتی اعضا قزانمق رقابتنده واقع اولان بر مغلوبیتمیدرٓ :ای سریانیلر ,حقوق ملیه ظایع اولیور ,عجبا فرقنه واریورمیسنز ,عجبا بونن سببی كشف ایدوبده حقوقنزی ادعا ایتمهیی خاطره كتوریورمیسنز ,یوقسه هنوز غفلت اویقوسنه طالوبده اطرف واكنافده كلوپ كچندن بیخبرمی بولنیورسنز.
ch. 11
§635.
Garšūnography I: Syriac as the Target Script
321
Transcription into the Latin script:
Meclis-i mebûsân küşâd olundu, ve mebûsların esâmîsi neşr olundu ise de onlar arasında bir bile Süryânî me-
bûsun ismine tesâdif edemediğimiz için pek ârlanıp
muztarib olunuyoruz, acabâ Süryânîlerde mebûs olmağa lâyık adamın bulunmamasındır. Yoksa ekseriyyeti azâ kazanmak rekâbetinde vâki olan bir mağlûbiyet midir:
Ey Süryânîler, hukûk-ı milliye zâyi oluyor, acabâ farkına
varıyor musunuz, acabâ bunun sebebi keşf edip de hukûkunuzu iddiâ etmeyi hâtıra götürüyor musunuz.
Yoksa henûz gaflet uykusuna dalıp da etrâf ve eknâfta gelip geçenden bîhaber mi bulunuyorsunuz. Translation:
Parliament has convened and the names of the members
have been printed, but amongst them we have not come
across the name of even a single Süryânî, and conse-
quently we are saddened and dismayed. Is it that no deserving Süryânî parliamentarian could be found? Or in
the competition to be a member, was this an [electoral]
defeat? O Süryânî, we are losing our national rights, are
you even aware? I wonder if you are trying to find the reason and to secure what is rightfully yours. Or are you
still ignorantly sleeping, unaware of what is happening around you?
11.11.Appendix: Syro-English in the Making §635. I have been experimenting with Syro-English, an example of which follows:
ّܰ ܰܐ،̇ ܪܕ ݂ ܺܕ ̱ܝ ܳ ݂ܶ ܰ ، ܶ ـܒܐ ܐܦ ݂ ܺܕ ܶ ܶ ܬܘܓ ݂ ܶ ܪ ܰܒܐܝ ܽ ܰܐ ܕ ܰ ܰܘ ̱ ܐ ݂ܕܘܪ ܺܘ ݂ ݂ ܶܕܐ ܳ ݂ ܰܕܐܬ ܺܘܝ ܶ ܐܝ ܐܘ
ܳ ܽ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܓ ܕ ܐܦ ܐܠ ܐ ܼ ܿ :ܰܨ ݂ ܰܬܐ ݂ ܰܕ ـ ܐ ܺ ݂ ܳ ̣ ܰܐܘܪ ܐ ܳ ݂ ܺܪܕܝ ܶ ݂ܒ ̈ ܬܘ ܒ ܘܪܕܝ ܰ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܰܕܐܬ ܺ ݁ ܘܡ ܐܠ ܺܓ ܺ ݂ ܶܕܐ ݅ܶ ܐ ܐܦ ܿ ݂ܒ ̱ ܺܘܝ ܶ ܐܝ ܓ ܼ ܰ ܰ ܺ ݁ ܐ ܳܗ ܺ ܐ ܺܕ ݂ ܰܒܐ ܹ ܐܦ
322
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §635.
ܰ ܳ ܰ ܬܘ ݂ ܺܕܝ ܐ ܬܘ ܰܕܐܝ ܐܘ ܺ ܺܒ ܓ ܬܢ ݂ܬܐ ܺ݁ ܺ ܗܘ ̇ ܐܠ، ̇ ܬܘ ݂ ܰܕܐܝ ܗܘ ܺ ܐ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܐܕܘܪܒ ̱ ܽܗܘ ܐܙ ܐܦ ܰܘ، ܓ ݂ܒ ܹ ݂ ܀ ܗ ܐ ܘܒ ܒ،ܺܘ ݂ ݂ ܺܕܝ
ܰ ܓ ܳ ܺܪܝ ܐ ܼܿ ܢ ܐ ܐ،ܓ ܘܕ ܰ ܰܒ ܐ
The prayer of peace. God of all and Lord, account these our unworthy selves to be worthy of this salvation, that
freed from all guilt and united together by the chain of love we may greet one another with the holy and divine
kiss of peace and that we may offer glory and thanks to Thee and to Thy Only-begotten Son and to Thy Holy
Spirit, all Holy and good, and adorable and life-giving, Who is of one substance with Thee, now and at all times, forever.
ܐ ܬܘ
ch. 11
ܘ ܒ ܘܗܝ ܗ ܕܣ ܒ ܘܟ܀
ܓ
ܕ
ܗ
12. Garšūnography II: Syriac as the Source Language
I have found that it is much easier for our boys and girls to learn church prayers, hymns, liturgy and rituals,
when English characters are used instead of our alpha-
bet. At the same time, however, we must do our utmost to teach our mother language to our children.
Peter Barsoum (1896–1963)
§636. This chapter discusses garšūnographic systems where Syriac is the source language. Syriac has been written in other scripts for a variety of reasons: to represent Syriac sounds in pedagogical settings, to represent Syriac writing in scholarly publications where either a Syriac type is not available or a wider audience is desired (e.g. scholarly transliterations and transcriptions), and to represent Syriac (liturgical) texts for Syriac Christians who can no longer read the Syriac script. The following discussion is organized by script in alphabetical order.
12.1. Arabo-Syriac §637. While Syro-Arabic is a transliteration system, Arabo-Syriac is a transcription system. There are some cases found in MSS;1 e.g. a MS from Homs2 dated 1546/7 contains Elia of Ṣoba’s Kitāb alturjumān in three columns: Syriac, Arabic (in the Arabic script), and Syriac glosses in the Arabic script in the third column. For the most part, liturgical texts began to be written in the Arabic script 1
G. Khan, personal communication; A. McCollum, personal com-
munication. 2
MS HMML Syr. Orth. Archdiocese of Homs 56.
323
324
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §637.
during the 20th century by the various Syriac Christian arabophone communities.
بfor ݁ ܒ, دfor ܕ, هfor ܗ, وfor ܘ, زfor ܙܙ, حfor ( ܚinterestingly, Bazzi3 also uses حfor E. Syr., not )خ, طfor ܛ, يfor ܝ, كfor , لfor ܠ, مfor ܡ, نfor , سfor ܣ, عfor ܥ, فfor ݂ܦfor [f] (but پfor [p] in E. Syr.), صfor ܨ, قfor ܩ, رfor ܪ, شfor ܫ, and ت for ܬ. The Syriac grapheme has a number of variations: ج, ڃ, ڭ,4 or گ. The soft bg̱āḏkp̱ āṯ letters are mapped to their Arabic phonemic counterparts: وfor ( ݂ܒin E. Syr. only), غfor ܓ ݂ , ذfor ݂ܕ, ݁ خfor ݂ ݂ , and ثfor [ ܦ( ݂ܬp] is no longer being used in W. Syr.). §638. The mapping of the consonants is straightforward:
§639. Vowels, as usual, cause most of the variation. In closed syllables, the short Arabic vowels are used:
◌ِ
for
◌ܶ.
◌َ for ◌ܰ, ◌ُ for ◌ܳ, and
In open syllables, matres lectionis are used, sometimes
( َ◌اor ٓاword-initially) ܽ ܺ ܰ ܳ for long ◌, ُ◌وfor ◌, يfor ◌ܝ, and وfor ◌ܘ. The sukūn is used to combined with their Arabic short vowels: mark the lack of a vowel.
§640. Having said that, huge variations exist as illustrated with the following example:5
ܰ ܳܰ ܰ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܰ ܳܰ ܶ ܳ ܐ ܰ ܺ ܳܐ ܐ ܺ ܀ ܒ ܐܒܐ ܘܒ ܐ ܘܪܘ ܐ1 ݂ ܐ ܳ ܰܒ ܳ ݂ܟ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܐ ܶ ܶ ݂ ܆ ܰܘ ݂ ܳ ܡ ܺܒܐܡ ܺܕ ܳ ݂ ܶ ܓ ܶ ݂ܬ܆ ܰ ـ ܐ2 ݂ ܺ ܰ ܽ ܺ ܳ ܰ ݂ ݂ܳ ܀ ܕ ܐ ْ قاديشو شاريرو ٓ ِامين܀ ُ ِ وروحو ُ ُ ٓ حاذ ْ ِْ 1 ُ ْ وبرو ُ ِ الوهو ُ ْ َ بشم ٓ ُابو ُ َ .سغدث ُ ْ َ .علث ْ ِ ْ ِ ديلوخ ْ ِ ِ الوهو شمايونو ُ ُ ْ ملكو ْ ُ وقذوم بيم ْ ُ َْْ 2 ُ ُ ٓ لبيتوخ ْ ِ ْ َ كول لوخ܀ ْ ُ دحطيث ْ حاسو ِلي ُ
ܰ ܳ ܳܐ
3
Bazzi, Chaldean Prayers and Hymns.
4
David §12.
5
Lahmo dhayé 42. The variants are from al-Ḵidma al-ʾilāhiyya fī al-
kanīsa al-suryāniyya al-ʾurṯūḏuksiyya 23. ch. 12
Garšūnography II: Syriac as the Source Language
§642.
325
ْ ] حاذ ْ َ; بشم ُ ِ ] قاديشو ُ ِ َ ; حاذ ْ ِ ْ ] بشيم ْ ِ ْ ; وروحو ;ٓابو ]ُٓابو ُ ْ ] وروحو ُ ُ ; قاديشو الوهو ُ ُ ٔ( ۤاmadda extending above شاريرو ;)لو ُ ُ ٓ ] لوهو ُ ِ ] اريرو ُ ِ َش. ِ ِ ; وقذوم ُ ْ َ ] وقذوم ُ َ ; ;ِبيم ]بيم ْ ِ ِ ] عيليث 2 لبيتوخ ْ ُ ْ َ ْ ] لبيتوخ ُ ْ َ ْ ; الوهو ُ ُ ٓ ] علث ;ٓالوهو ُ ِ ; سغدث ْ ِ ْ ِ ] سغذيث ْ ِ ْ ِ ; شمايونو ديلوخ ُ ُ ْ ] شمايونو ُ ُ َ ْ ; كول ْ ] ;كول ْ ُ ] ديلوخ ِ َ ; لوخ ْ ِ ْ َ ] دحطيث دحطيث ْ ُ ] لوخ. 1
12.2. Armeno-Syriac By Hidemi Takahashi
§641. An instance of Syriac being written in Armenian script6 is found in an undated portion of a manuscript that contains miscellaneous pieces dated between 1569 and 1852, and is now housed in the Matenedaran in Yerevan (no. 4618). On folio 126 of the manuscript, we find the Trisagion in Greek, Syriac, Georgian and Persian, all written in Armenian script. The Syriac part reads as follows: Ղադիշատ ալօհօ ղադիշատ հայլ թանօ ղադիշատ լօմօ ութօ։ էսէ տըլըփըդ հըլօֆայն ու արահամալէ ʁɑdiʃɑt ɑloho, ʁɑdiʃɑt hɑjl tʰɑno, ʁɑdiʃɑt lomo utʰo, ɛsɛ tǝlǝpʰǝd hǝlofɑjn, u ɑrɑhɑmɑlɛ.7
§642. The vowels (e.g. in /ʔalāhā/) indicate that the Syriac transcribed is W. Syr., and the formula transcribed, with the addition of the words
݂ܰܳـ
݁ ܶܕܐܨ ܶ ݂ܒ, that it is Syriac Orthodox. The way
in which the consonants , , and are transcribed indicates that the copyist was a speaker of Eastern Armenian. No attempt is made in the Armenian transcription to distinguish between
ܗand ( ܚboth transcribed as հ ), and ܬand ( ܛboth
transcribed as տ ). The inaccuracies in the transcription (e.g.
6
Schmidt, ‘Arménien et syriaque’.
7
The transcription is according to Modern Eastern Armenian pro-
nunciation.
326
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §642.
ܰ ܶ )8 and the way in which the words are ܰ ܐܬܪ ݂ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܳ divided at the wrong places (e.g. lomo utʰo for ݂ܬܐ ) suggest
u arɑhɑmɑlɛ for
ܰ
that the copyist did not know Syriac, and was either copying from another manuscript or writing down what he had heard (a similar process takes place in Syro-Latin garšūnography, c.f. §609).
12.3. Greco-Syriac §643. In some early grammars, one occasionally comes across examples of Syriac written in Greek characters;9 e.g. the Lord’s Prayer:
12.4. Hebrao-Syriac §644. Writing Syriac in the Hebrew script is a European phenomenon.10 This is first found in Widmanstetter’s Prima Elementa11 where Syriac texts were transcribed in Hebrew and Latin characters. In 1569 Immanuel Tremellius (1510–1580), an Italian Jew-
Note the insertion of /a/ between
8
ܰ ܶ ܰ ܐܬܪ ݂
and
ܰ
, which agrees
with the received pronunciation. 9
Yeates p. 17.
10
I chose the term ‘Hebrao-Syriac’ over Judaeo-Syriac (analogous
with Judaeo-Arabic) because these texts were produced mostly by Christian and this was not a Jewish phenomenon. 11
ch. 12
Widmanstetter, Syriacæ Lingvae… Prima Elementa (Vienna, 1555).
§645.
Garšūnography II: Syriac as the Source Language
327
ish convert to Christianity, published the Syriac New Testament in Hebrew script due to the lack of Syriac type in Geneva.12 The Antwerp Polyglot (1569–72)13 included the Syriac text of the New Testament in the Syriac script, and repeated the same text in the Hebrew script. This was aimed at converting Jews to Christianity, which explains why other Syriac New Testament editions appeared in this manner later on, sometimes only with Hebrew characters, even in cases when a Syriac type was available.14 Even at the time of the publication of the editio princeps of the NT in 1555, Widmanstetter pointed out that his edition was suitable for the conversion of the Jews. §645. Biblical editions in the Hebrew script include the following:15 A. A New Testament published at the C. Plantin press in Antwerp (1574, reprinted from vol. 5 of the polyglot). B. A miniature edition of the same (Antwerp, 1575). C. A (not the) Paris polyglot (1584, reissued in 1586) probably due to the lack of Syriac type. D. The Nuremberg polyglot (1599).
12
… Testamentum Novum… Est autem interpretatio Syriaca Novi
Testamenti… Antore Immanuele Tremellio (Geneva, 1569); for a description, see Darlow and Moule, Historical Catalogue of the Printed Editions of the Holy Scripture II, 1530–31. 13
Biblia Sacra Hebraice, Chaldaice, Græce, & Latine… Plantinus ex-
cud. Antuerpiæ, 8 vols. (1569–72); the Syriac text appears in vol. 5. 14
For a discussion, see Wilkinson, Orientalism, Aramaic and Kab-
balah in the Catholic Reformation, esp. 81 & 179; Wilkinson, The Kabbalistic Scholars of the Antwerp Polyglot Bible. 15
For editions up to 1910, see Darlow and Moule, 1526–53.
328
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §646. E. The Epistle of Titus and Galatians by C. Crinesius (Wit-
tenberg, 1613). F. An edition of 1 John in Syriac characters as well as Hebrew characters by M. Trost (Cöthen, 1621, reprinted 1632). G. The Gospel of Mark (Köthen, 1622). H. Revelation in both Syriac and Hebrew characters in L. de Dieu’s Critica Sacra (Amsterdam, 1693). I. Acts, Romans, and 1 and 2 Corinthians edited by J. H. Callenberg (Halle, 1747). §646. The NT was published by the London Jews’ Society in 1836 in Hebrew characters for the use of the Hasidic and Kabalistic Jews. An edition of the Old Testament, aimed at Jewish scholars, was initiated in 1928 with the publication of Genesis by Chaim (Hayyim) Heller ‘with elucidatory notes’ in Hebrew (Exodus appeared in 1929; no other volume appeared).16 The most recent publication is the 1986 edition of the Peshiṭtā NT in Hebrew characters, also aimed at Jews, by the Bible Society in Israel.17 §647. In addition to the above texts, note must be made of a crucifix painting at the Stockholm Cathedral by David Klöcker Ehrenstrahl (1628–1698) with the traditional sign above Christ written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, except that what appears in Hebrew script is actually Syriac (the sign above the thief on the left is in Syriac script and reads ing).
16
ܬ
ܐ
ܒ ܒ
(Rīsh in paint-
Heller, Peshitta in Hebrew Characters with Elucidatory Notes, Part I
Genesis; Heller, Peshitta… Part II Exodus. 17
The Aramaic Scriptures Research Society in Israel, The New Cove-
nant Commonly Called The New Testamen. ch. 12
Garšūnography II: Syriac as the Source Language
§650.
329
§648. Some early grammars,18 starting with Widmanstetter, also provided reading samples in the Hebrew script.
12.5. Latino-Syriac §649. The use of the Latin script to write Syriac is by far the most extensive. Texts range from early transcriptions teaching Europeans the Syriac language in the 16th century, to the computer encoding of Syriac texts in the Latin script prior to the inclusion of Syriac in Unicode. To this category also belong the various scholarly transliteration and transcription schemes, the use of the Latin script by the Syriac Christian communities to represent their liturgical texts in diaspora communities, and most recently the use of the Latin script in mobile devices, or what is called ‘chat’ orthography, for the writing of emails, texting, and social networking. 12.5.1.
Ambrosio’s Transcription
§650. A very early published transcription of Syriac into Latin appears in Ambrosio’s Introductio in 1539,19 which was only preceded a year earlier by a list of the Syriac alphabet, with transcription, by Postel.20 The consonants, apart from
ܐ
and
ܥ,
are
18
Yeates 17–18.
19
Ambrosio fol. 9r.
20
Postel, Linguarum Duodecim Characteribus, [ca. p. 18–20]. Here,
the consonants, apart from ܐand
ܥ, are represented by Latin (differences with Ambrosio’s system are italicized). Postel also gives a transcription of the Lord’s prayer which does not agree with his own list but tells us how he perceived to have heard the prayer: 1
A bon debismaia nitlza das smech, 2 tata makhutach. Nehuah
tzebnach ech
3
debismaia aph beara heb lan lachma
4
desanl-
330
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §650.
represented by Latin . Masius21 followed the same system in his 1753 grammar. Soon after,
ܩlost its value to other Latin graphemes (q.v. §
652); but reappeared in later scholarly transcriptions (q.v.
§662). Ambrosio’s work went beyond simple mapping to Latin graphemes. He had a plan to add supralinear symbols, lines and points, in order to distinguish emphatic sounds, for instance between
and
ܩ. It is for this reason that Merx22 calls him ‘the
founder of modern transcription’.
§651. Earlier unpublished transcriptions, however, were also made, as the following anecdote demonstrates:23 During the Fifth Lateran Council (1512–1517), a Chaldean priest celebrated the divine liturgy in Rome. He was not permitted to do so until his liturgical rite was understood by his hosts. Ambrosio, who was asked to translate the Chaldean rite, sought the help of Joseph Gallus, the son of Pope Julius II’s physician. Gallus transcribed the exact words of the Chaldean priest verbatim into his own language, which could have been French, as well as Latin.
zanen iomna vesabuclan
can
6
hatohin echena deaph chann saba
lehatin. Vela ta-alan lenisaiona
matul dedilech. alamin amen.
2
5
8
7
ela phetzn min bissa,
hi malchu-ta vehailla vetasbuchta
ech] Syr. text has
ܐ
for
ܰ ܐ ݁ ܰ ܳ ܐ.
7
phetzn] Syr.
9
alem
with
ligature.
Postel also gives in Syriac letters and transcription what may be the first known instance of the Ave Maria in Syriac. 21
Masius 5.
22
Merx 269.
23
Merx 270.
ch. 12
§659.
Garšūnography II: Syriac as the Source Language
12.5.2.
Widmanstetter’s Transcription
331
§652. Widmanstetter, in his 1555 Prima Elementa, represents the consonants, apart from ܐ, with Latin (note that ܩis now ).
◌ܰ and ܿ ܵ ◌ܼ , for ◌ܳ and ◌, for ◌ܶ and ◌ܸ, for ◌ܺ and ◌ܹ, and ܽ for ◌. §653. The five Syriac vowels were transcribed as for
§654. Final /an/ is represented by Latin ; e.g. for
ܳ ܰ ܢ, for ܶ
, for
ܰ ܰܬ.
§655. Examples of proper nouns include for
syllable is omitted (unless it is a typographical error); viz. for
ܺ ݂ ݂ ( ܰܘinstead of or ).
§657. The marking of bgāḏkp̱ āṯ sounds is rare, but one finds for ܳ ܺ example for ܗܒ ݂ ܰ , for ݁ ܐܪܐ, for ܳ ݂ ܽܒ ݂ ܳܕ ܐ. §658. The system is a mixture of transcription and transliteration, though close to transliteration; e.g. for /ḥoyes/, but for
ܰ ܘ ܰ ܬ ܳ ܝ/wšartaḥoy/.
ܰ ̱ܐ
/at/ and for
§659. The below example illustrates this system:
ܽ ܵ ܽ ܳܘܪܐ ܰܕ ܳ ܡ ܐ ܰ ܨ ܳܬܐ ܕ ܷ ܰ ܰ ܳܰ ܽ ܒ ܳ ܐ ܳܒܐ ܘ ܰ ܒ ܳ ܐ ܰܘ ܽ ܳܘ ܳ ܐ ܰ ܻ ܳ ܐ܀ ܽܐ ܳ ܐ ܵ ܳ ܐ ܰ ܳ ܐ ܰ .ܙ ܳ ܳ ܟ ܘ ܰ ܒ ܳ ܘ ܰ ـ ܽ ܬܟ ܳ ܳܘܪܐ ܵ ܳܗ ܳ ܕ ܳ ܶܒ ܳ ܳ ܽ ܰ ܒ ܰ ̈ ܘ ܳ ܽܓ ̈ ܰܕ ܘ ܰ ܰܬ ܳ ܝ ܒܒ ̈ܪ ܳ ܟ ܘ ̈ܒ ܰ ܟ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܰ ܰ ܳ ܷܐܣ ܐ ܘ ܷ ܰܪ ܰ ܰܐ. ܳ ܕ ܳ ܒ ܳ ܢ ܘ ܷ ̈ܪ ܳ ܰ ܰ ܰ ܓܒ ـ ܳ ܐ ̈ ܰ ܕܓܒ ̈ ܐ ̇ ܽ ܳـ ܳܐܒܐ.ܰ ̈ ܻ ܳ ܐ ܻ ݂ ܰ ܽ ܰܘܒ ܳ ܐ ܘܪܘ ܳ ܐ ܰ ܻ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܰ ܳ ܻ ܐ ܻ ܀ ܐ
ܵ
ܶ ܳ ܐܣ
332
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §660. Zzlutho dàal pothuro dakdom mechultho
Schucho labo vlabro valrucho kadischo. Aschro morio
aloho zionthoch vsabàoch vmaliothoch, àal pothuro hono dtaiebth làabdaik vsogudaik vscharthachoihi
bburcothoch vtobothoch dlo àobron vlo meschthariõ,
cad choes anth vmethracham anth àal culoh guiltho
dagbali idaik kadischotho, abo vabro vrucho kadischo làolam àolmin Amin. 12.5.3.
Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Transcriptions
§660. German-style transcriptions continued in use for some time. The following Syriac consonants have more-or-less consistent mappings:
= ܒLatin , < = ܓg>, < = ܕd>, = ܗh, < = ܙܙz>, < = ܛt>, < = ܠl>, < = ܡm>, = , = ܣ , and < = ܪr>. The rest of the consonants vary from one transcription to another:
A. In virtually all transcriptions I have encountered,
ܥare not usually represented as consonants.
ܐand
B. Waw continues to be Latin in most systems. I
have seen it once as in Wiseman. C. Ḥeṯ continues to be Latin . In some texts, also Latin .24
݂
is
D. Yūḏ continues to be Latin for the most part, but one also encounters .25 E. Kāp̱ remains mostly Latin , but one finds as well though rarely.26 F. Pē is mostly the original
, but one finds sented as (not ).27
݂ܦrepre-
24
For example in Oberleitner, Chrestomathia Syriaca (1826) 291.
25
For example in the type specimen Alphabetum Chaldaicum (1636).
26
Alphabetum Chaldaicum.
27
Oberleitner, Chrestomathia Syriaca 290.
ch. 12
Garšūnography II: Syriac as the Source Language
§662.
333
G. Ṣāḏē varies from one system to another. Widmanstetter’s becomes ,28 ,29 ,30 and .31 H. Qāp̱ varies between Ambrosio’s 32 and Widmanstetter’s 33 but is mostly . I. Šīn continues to be throughout. It becomes anglicized to only in Yeates. 12.5.4.
Standard Transcriptions and Transliterations
§661. By the (late) 19th century, a somewhat standardized system of transcription and transliteration had emerged. The majority of consonants had a clear counterpart in the Latin script, be it in transcription or transliteration mode. These include: ,
ܓ
= ,
ܕ
Widmanstetter’s ), = ,
< = ܡm>, , and < ܬt>.
= ,
ܗ
= h,
ܘ
= ܒLatin
= (against
< = ܙܙz>, < = ܝy>, = , ܠ = , < = ܣs>, < = ܦp>, = ܪ
§662. Emphatic sounds are represented by their Latin nonemphatic counterparts with a sublinear point. These are: < = ܚḥ>,
ܛ
= ,
ܨ
. The only exception is emphatic
represented by (not ).
ܩ
28
Alphabetum Chaldaicum.
29
Cowper §6; A. Hoffmann §7.
30
C. B. Michaelis; J. B. Michaelis; Uhlemann; Yeates 1–3.
31
which is
A. Hoffmann §7; Oberleitner, Chrestomathia Syriaca 291;
Zschokke 1–2. 32 33
Alphabetum Chaldaicum; C. B. Michaelis. A. Hoffmann §7; J. B. Michaelis; Uhelemann; Yeates 1–3;
Zschokke 1–2.
334
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §663.
§663. The grapheme
ܫ, whose sound constitutes a polygraph in
most European languages, is represented by . One also finds instances of . §664.
Finally,
ܐ
and
ܥ
came to be represented by various
apostrophe-like symbols such as and , respectively, with many variations, culminating in IPA and . These symbols may have been derived from Greek breathing marks.34 §665. The marking of bg̱āḏkp̱ āṯ consonants took various forms. In one system, the hard (plosive) sounds are unmarked, while the soft (fricatives) are marked with [h], sometimes in superscript form; e.g. or . Another system uses a sublinear line for soft sounds, with an (optional) supralin̄ ̱āḏkp ̄ ̱āṯ>. ear line for hard ones; e.g. or , < = ܝy>, = (but also )39, < = ܠl>, < = ܡm>, = , < = ܣs>, ܦ = in W. Syr. but
in E. Syr., < = ܪr>, and < ܬt>. §669. Emphatic sounds are usually reduced to their Latin nonemphatic counterparts without additional marking: (but in E. Syr.),
ܛ
= ,
ܨ
ܚ
=
. Emphatic
represented by (especially when
ܩ
is
= ), but is
sometimes represented by . Sometimes one encounters a special diacritic; e.g. or for ܚ. §670. The glottal stop is usually ignored;
ܥis usually ignored as
well, but is sometimes marked syllable initially with an apostrophe. The marking of bg̱āḏkp̱ āṯ is minimal, and when marked is used with the respective consonant, though ad hoc dia§671.
critics are sometimes used as well such as for Turkish readers, ܓ ݂ is represented by .
݂.
For
§672. E. Syr. texts mark doubling; e.g. ȧȁdzȡ .
35
P. Barsoum, Assyrian Apostolic Church, Prayer, Hymn and Liturgical
Service Book. 36
Ögunc, Buyük Ayin.
37
Tekso Dkurobo Aloyoyo.
38
The Service Book of the Holy Qurbana 24.
39
Especially in P. Barsoum.
336
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §673.
§673. Similar transcription schemes are used by diaspora communities for the titles of books; e.g. Gedshe Ushabte for
ܶ ܶܓ ̈ ܐ
ܶ ܘ ܰ ̈ܒ ܐ40 in Numan Aydin’s book title (1997). This also appears on building signs; e.g. for ܒ ܐ ܬ̈ܪ ܝ (note the neologism
as well) on the front of a building
in Kerala. §674. The following example illustrates various transcriptions for the qadīš:
ܳ ܳ ܺ ܰ ܰ ܺ ܶ ܰ ܺ ܆ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܐ ܰ ـ ݂ ܳ ܆ ܰܗܘ ܰܕ ܶ ܳ ܰ ܶ ̈ܐ ܶ ܰ ܘܐܬܐ܆ ݂ ܳ ܕܐܬܐ ݂ ܶ ݂ ܺ ܶܐܘ ܰ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܰܒ ܘ ܶ ܐ܆ ܒ.ܰܘܐܪ ܳ ܐ ܶ ܬ ̈ܒ ܳ ܰ ݂ ܳ ܗ ܬ ܽܒ ܐ ܰܒ ܰ ܘ ܶ ܐ܀.ܰܒ ܶ ܕ ܳ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܐ English1: W. Syr.41
Cadeesh, Cadeesh, Cadeesh, moryo hayeltono haw damlen shmayo warao men Teshibhote, oushano bam-
rowme, breekh deto wote bashme dmoryo aloh[an], Teshbohtho bamrowme. English2: W. Syr.42
Qadeesh, Qadeesh Qadeesh. Moryo Hayelthono, haw
damlen shmayo war’o men teshebhothe. Oooshano bamrawmeh, breech detho wothe bashmeh dmoryo [] teshboohto bamrawmeh. English3: E. Syr.43
Qad’deesh Qad’deesh Qad’deesh. Mar’ya khayl’thana (haw) dam’lin sh’may’ya o’ar’aa min tishb’kha’the…
40
N. Aydin, Geḏše w-šaḇṭe ḏ-ṭūr ʿaḇdīn.
41
P. Barsoum, 34.
42
Zeki Zitoun, The Book of the Divine Mass of the Syrian Orthodox
Church of Antioch 57. 43
The Order of Holy Qurbana for the Use of the Faithful 22. The text
has been adapted to match the W. Syr. text for comparative purposes: haw] taken from p. 38; tish’bokh’ta] p. 17. ch. 12
Garšūnography II: Syriac as the Source Language
§677.
337
Oshaa’na bam’raome… b’reekh d’ith’tha o’ate bash’meh d’Marya Alaha. tish’bokh’ta bam’rao’meh. Turkish:44
Kadiş Kadiş Kadiş moryo [aloho] hayeltonö. Hav damlen şmayö var’o men teşebhothe, uşanö bamravme, briĥ dethö vothe başme dmoryo [] teşbuhtö bamravme.
12.5.6.
Computer Encoding
§675. Prior to the inclusion of Syriac in Unicode (for which q.v. §771), scholarly projects that required data entry of Syriac texts relied on symbols within the ASCII set. These one-to-one transliteration schemes were graphemic and provided one-to-one mapping between Syriac graphemes and ASCII symbols. As long as the encoding was known, one was able to convert texts from one encoding to another easily. §676. The earliest known encoding into ASCII was done at UCLA when a database was created for Brockelmann’s Lexicon in the 1960s.45 The encoding of this database is unknown.46 Following are some known schemes: §677. The Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon: the scheme was devised in 1985 by S. Kaufman.47 The consonants are represented by . The Latin grapheme was used for ܨbecause it was used in earlier grammars (e.g.
Robinson48 called it Çādhē), and because it was the only 44
Tekso Dkurobo Alohoyo, 13.
45
Kiraz, ‘Forty Years of Syriac Computing’ 37.
46
Stanislav Segert (personal communication) attempted to find the
data upon his arrival to UCLA but was not successful. 47
Kaufman, The Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon, Text Entry and
Format Manual. 48
Robinson 4.
338
III. Garšūnography, Adaptation & Alloglottography §677.
remaining grapheme looking like on the keyboard. The scheme aimed at a simple encoding without resorting to diacritics.49 §678. The Way International/SEDRA database:50 the scheme was originally devised by The Way International for their Concordance database probably in the 1970s. The consonants are represented by . This is the original transcription of The Way International, from whom the database was first acquired. The rationale was to make data entry easy for someone who does not know any Syriac: Latin , ,
ܘ
resembles
ܛis tall and so is Latin , Esṭrangelā ܝresembles
looks like an inverted (which has nothing to do
with Ambrosio’s ), straightened, and
ܨ
would look like if the tail is
ܫis on the key of the Hebrew keyboard.
In 1990, I extended the system for my Concordance. Vowels are represented by . In addition, | \ ~, etc. 18.4.2.
The MLS Keyboard
§784. The Alaph Beth Syriac fonts for MLS6 opted for an Arabiclike keyboard as a ‘standard’ keyboard for practical purposes, as well as a phonetic keyboard. It was assumed that users would either be from the Arab world or western countries. The former group would prefer to remain within the bounds of their Arabic keyboard layout. The rationale was to make typing an easy process in multi-lingual documents (which could include Latin-based languages as well as Arabic). 18.4.3.
The Windows/Meltho Keyboard
§785. The Windows/Meltho7 keyboard layouts were borrowed from the Alaph Beth MLS keyboards with minor modifications. 6
Kiraz, Alaph Beth.
7
Kiraz, MELTHO.
ch. 18
Coding Standards
§786.
395
The function keys could not be used as they had other functions in Microsoft Word; instead, vowels and other marks were placed on the shift keys. §786.
̈ ܝ
ٔ ܐ
ܘܐ. ܝ
ܐ ܐܘܪܬ ܐ܀
ܐܘܪܬܘܓ ܐܘܪ
ܕ
ܗ
General Index Unmarked numbers refer to page numbers, while those prefixed with § to paragraph numbers. References to footnotes are given in the format
“ch. a n. b” where a is the chapter number and b is the footnote number
within that chapter; e.g., Al-Jeloo below is found in chapter 17, footnote
11. A guide indicating the page number where each chapter begins is given in the footer. A
acrostics §123
on the alphabet 21
Abbasid §42
abbreviation mark §255 ff., §481, Pl. 6
act. part.
pointing of §223
Acurensis, J.
earliest record 21
see al-ʿĀqūrī
first printed example 24 in early MSS §38
see also under Authority Index
Adair, James §759
length §259
address
with numerals §355
and mnaḥḥṯā §311
abbreviations xxix, 26, §260
adjectives
common §266
Abdeljaber, Shehnaz xxiv–xxvi Abed, Dawod §759
and syāme §229
Adler Corporation §744 Adler typewriter §744
Abouna, Albert
adverbial suffix
on ܓ ̰ §590
see also under Authority Index
Al-Abrāshī
see under Authority Index
accents §281 ff.
affirmative
and sāmkā gnīḇā §315 ̱ Akhrass, Roger ch. 12 n. 55 Aland, Kurt
Alaph Beth Computer Systems
in 411 codex §37
fonts 26, §748, §757, §759,
lists §287
§777, §784
points §10
keyboard §785
signs xxi
algorithms §126
Achaemenid §723
syāme placement §234
acronyms 26, §263
ʾalif maksūra §590
acrophonic §57 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
§93
Adler typewriter §744
catalogue §288
ch. 7: 159
ܳ ݂ ܺܐ
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
398
Indices
Al-Jeloo, Nicholas ch. 17 n. 11
anatomy of graphs §491 ff.
alloglottography xxi, xxiii, §723
angle brackets §254, §273
allographs §1, §5, §168, §275,
annunciation §299
allogaršūnographs §581
with garšūnography §731 §376, §485 ff., §581
and alphabetization §125 and ductus §496 ff.
in Ḥawwā’s vowels §169 in Malayalo-Syriac §699
of prosodic graphemes §286
allography §485 ff.
and spacing §434
annotations 25
Antioch Bible xxxi, §224, ch. 4 n. 22
Antithesis
and mnaḥḥṯā §311
and taḥtāyā §320
Antwerp §645
Polyglot 24, §273, §363, §644
cursivity §377 ff. early MSS §30
joining properties §377 ff. Old Syriac §19
Ap̱ʿel xxvii, 24, §92, §116, §124, §133, §220
Aphrahaṭ §54, §123 Apocalypse §101
allomorphs §1
apodosis
allophones §1
and šrāy tašʿīṯā §331
Alpha-3 codes §766 Alpha-4 codes §768
alphabet §4, §7, §54, §56, ch. 2 n.
and šūḥlāp taḥtāyā §320 and šwayā §330
1
Apostolic Legate §170
of Bardaiṣan 20, §367
Apple Macintosh §754
and ligatures §13
apostrophe §664, §670
alphabetization §122 ff.
al-ʿĀqūrī, Buṭrus §49
Alqosh §713
on numerals §334, §353
Alquṣrī, K. §462
see also under Authority Index
Ambrosian library §734
Ambrosio, Teseo 23, §48, §58,
Arabic §3, §188, §582, §§586–87,
§637, §718, §752, ch. 10 n. 8
§586, §651
alloglottography §724
transcription §650
and Esṭrangelā §453
see also under Authority Index
and Melkite script §457
Amid §595, Pl. 8
and Syro-Ottoman §632
ʿAmira, Jirjis §49
and Syro-Persian §626
on numerals §353
chat alphabet §687
on syāme §225
doubling §217, §205
see also under Authority Index
font §758
Amsterdam §645, §744
garšūnography §582
Anaphora §275
glyphs §758
of St. James §602, ch. 5 n. 39
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
Ḥawwā vowels §171 ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index
399 script §580, §641
kasra §178
vowels §597
keyboards §778 lexica §124
Armeno-Syriac xxii, 23, §580, §641
loan words §594
ascender §178, §§491–92
arrow §247
liturgical texts 26
ASCII 26, §675
MLS §757
Ashurbanipal Library 26, §777
neologisms 26
Ashurbanipal software §759
into Syriac §611
numbers 24
punctuation marks 25, §244, §775
Asia §700
Asiria §264
Assemani, Joseph
on Esṭrangelā §453
rise of §44
on Ḥawwā vowels §170
šadda §218 script §606
association line §398, §405
taṭwīl §472
Assyrian (font) xxii
Assyria’s Letters font series §759
sukūn §218 Arabic numerals 26, §273, §363 directionality §448
Assyrian
Church of the East 26, §455, §752, ch. 10 n. 9
pagination 24
Neo-Aramaic §767
verse numbers 24
typewriter §744, §747
Arabic Windows §758 arabophone §637
Assyrian Youth Group of Victoria
Aramaeans §129
Assyrian Web font §759
§759
Arabo-Syriac 23, §637 Aramaic xxi, §2, §129, §582, §767 alloglottography §723
asteriscus 21, §271
numerals §333
asterisk §249, §273
relative zy §624
astronomy §334
script §452, §701 tattoos 27
Aramaic Word Processor §755, §759
Arayathinal
see under Authority Index
arithmetic §334
ch. 14: 359
Audo, Thoma §262
Australia §747, §759 AutoCAD §753
auxiliary marks §9
Modern Western §597
ch. 13: p. 353
Auckland §744
72, §405
garšūnography §582
ch. 2: 31
Athanasius Matta §735
autosegmental phonology §§371–
alloglottography §724
ch. 8: 177
Atari §754
Autograph Printing §737
Armenian §3
ch. 1: p. 1
Assyrians §713, §743
Assyriska Riksförbundet §748
inscriptions §461
ch. 7: 159
Assyriankid.com Pl. 16
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
400
Indices Bar Šīnāyā
Ave Maria §609, ch. 12 n. 20 Aydin, Numan §673
Aydin, Polycarpus Eugene xxii, ch. 10 n. 13, ch. 12 n. 60
see Elia of Ṣoba
see also under Authority Index
Bar Sāg̱ed Pl. 2 Bar Zoʿbī 23
Aydin, Robert §186
on nāg̱ūḏā §199, §207
B
on tāḵsā §306
Bardaisan, alphabet of 20, §367
Baars, W.
baseline §41, §283, §491
typewriter §744
Basilios Shimʿun 24, §606
Babai of Nisibis §702
Baghdad §453, §455, §462
bāṯar ʿelāyā §323
Bahi, Elia §758
Bedjan
bḏūlāyā §461
Syriac Academy 26
color editions §443
Bahro Suryoyo §740
question mark 25, §244
bāḵūyā §312
bar §278
Beinecke Rare Book and Manu-
Bar ʿEbroyo xix, xxvii, 23, §43,
Beirut ch. 10 n. 8
script Library xxv, Pl. 3
Bar Bahlul §595 §45, §127
Belgium §744
Benjamin, Daniel xxii, §755, §763,
accents §282
directionality §449
ch. 16 n. 11
Jacob of Edessa vowels
typewriter §747
fonts §755
Esṭrangelā §453 §§164–65
Berlin §701
numerals §359
Beth Gazo §270, §280
Turfan collection §619
mḇaṭṭlānā §309
Beth Mardutho Research Library
reṯmā §302
xxiii, xxiv, 27, §736, §744,
vowel names §189
§762, ch. 5 n. 24, ch. 10 n. 1
writing points §155
Bezier curves §758
zlāmā §191
see also under Authority Index
Bar Hebraeus Verlag §740, §757
BFBS ch. 4 n. 23
bg̱āḏkp̱ āṯ §404, ch. 4 n. 26
Bar Malkūn §43, §70
in garšūnography §584
Bar Šakko §43
in Syro-Arabic §587
on accents §282
in NENA §714
on accents §282
in Ṭuroyo §719
on writing points §155
transcription §657, §665,
on vowel names §190
tier §374
see also under Authority Index
§671
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
bib Pl. 16 ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index
401 Romanization §681
Bible Society §646
typewriter §744, Pl. 14
biblical MSS §261
Brockelmann, Carl §114, §124
and vocalization §196
encoding of lexicon §676
biblical texts §10, §44
see also under Authority Index
accents §281
broken stroke §489
special signs §272
Buddhism §§700–701, ch. 12 n. 73
bibliography xxxiii
Budge, Ernest
bidirectional §429, §448
directionality §449
bilingual §447
lining §444
binding direction §447
writing sequence §479
biology §586
Bulayïq §619
bitmap fonts §754 ff., §757 black §275
in abbreviation mark §255 ink §215
business documents §483
Butts, Aaron §158, ch. 3 n. 57 Byzantine Neums §280 Byzantines §174
blue §443
body §492
C
Böhmisch, Franz ch. 16 n. 9 book hand §483, §495
Çādhē §57
bound
CALAP §679
graph §146, §148
California §757
graphemes §12
Callenberg, J. H. §645
Greek vowels §185
calligraphy §442
boundary symbol §14, §187
calligraphers §484
boʿuto
calligraphic schools §484
in Syro-Armenian §595
Cambridge §751
bowl §79, §492
Canada §759
Boyaji, Gabriel §739, Pl. 13
capitalization
and taqlab §358
in chat alphabet §689
Brackets
Cardahi, Gabriel
angle §273
doubling marker §218
square §273
use of šadda 25
breathing marks §664
use of sukūn 25
Brīḵyešūʿ Pl. 9
want of vowels §188
British India §611
Carlson, Thomas xxiii
British Library xxiv
Brock, Sebastian xxv, xxii, §88, §756, ch. 17 n. 5
Catholic §609
Central Asia §700, §703 Ceriani, Antonio
on Syro-Hebrew §605
lithography §734
Chabot, Jean-Baptiste §538 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
402
Indices
Chalcedon §457
on letter forms §376
Chaldeans 59, §455, §609, §651
Romanization §680
on W. Syr. vowels §129, §174
Chalcedonian Christians §602
Underwood typewriter §743
Chamoun, Joseph ch. 9 n. 49, ch. 12 n. 68
coda §699
chandrakkala §699
code switching
chanting marks 28
in chat writing §688
Chart, Flo xxiv chat
see also under Authority Index
coding standards xxi, §764 ff. coins §17, §29
alphabet 27, §682
collectives
orthography §649
and syāme §229
chemistry xxiv
Cherry, Ashur §759
Collier, Diane xxiii, §166, §173
Chicago 26, §759, §777
colophons §32, §367, §477, §733
colon 25
Chibo, David §759
China §619, §700, ch. 12 n. 73
and Serṭā §454
Chinese §452
color §443
Christian Palestinian Aramaic 20,
comma 25, §244
Christ’s College §751
§457, §582, §709 ff.
columns 20, §446, Pl. 6 combining diacritical marks §773 command
MSS 22
and ʿelāyā §328
Christianity §644
and pāqūḏā §300
Christians §2
compound numbers §349 ff.
chronograms §355
compounds §109
chronology of events §54
spacing §424
Church of the East §700
syāme §231
CIA §265
Çiçek, J. Y. §740
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon
circle §215, §274
computational systems §126
§677
cipher §367 ff.
Computer Assisted Linguistic
circular stroke §489
Analysis of the Peshitta §679
circumfixes §667
computer §682
and spacing §415
encoding §649, §675 ff.
citation mark §251
fonts §741
classical grammarians §40 ff.
Classical Syriac §§17–18, §24, §132, §228
clubbed stroke §490
Coakley, J.F. xx, xxii–xxiv, xxvi, §3, §46
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
technology §750
computus §358, §739 concatenation §424 conjunction §289
ܳܶ ܐand sāmkā
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
§314
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index
ܘ
§292, §311, §325, §417
and šūḥlāp̱ mḥayyḏānā §310 consonant §220 cluster §205
Cranbury §724 Creed
in Syro-Armenian §595
Crininesius, C. §49, §645
critical editions §242, §273
and syāme §234
cross §249, §269, §275
consonantal
cross-like symbols
graphemes §§7–8, §12
crossbar §492
root §6
crotch §492
system xxi, §7
crucifix painting 24
in early MSS §30 ff.
CSCO §374
in Old Syriac §18 ff.
tier §374, §375, §481
consonantary §6, §7, §27, §56 ff., §113, ch. 1 n. 2
Coulmas, F. xix Cowper
see also under Authority Index
cursivity §493 ff., §753
as numerals §345
of Old Syriac §20
in early MSS §30
Cyrillic
consonants §§6–7, §49
in MLS §757
typology §70 ff.
and NENA script §712
Romanization §681
context
D
following §14
preceding §14
dagger §273
contraction §260
Dallas Museum Pl. 2
and mḇaṭlānā §204
Damascus xix, §280, §726, §758
and spacing §420
Museum §602
Coptic §162
letters as quire numbers 28 numerals §366
Daniel of Ṣalaḥ ch. 2 n. 137
Darius the Great §723 dash Pl. 5
copyists §113
dates §334
CorelDraw §758
dating §15
corpora §117
David, C. J. xix, §51
cosmology §122
on circle for fricatization 25,
Costaz, L.
§215
on numerals §353
on marhṭānā §206
see also under Authority Index
on nāgū ̱ ḏā §207
Cöthen §645
on numerals §353
counter §492 CPA
on pointing on § ܬ221 on schwa 25
see Christian Palestinian Ara-
on schwa marker §209
maic
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
403
on syāme & collectives §229 ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
404
Indices on vowel position §183
see also under Authority Index
David, Shmuel §233, §461 Davodian, Michael §759
David bar Pawlos 21, §42, §123 de Bréves, Savary ch. 10 n. 8
Diamper §615
diaspora 25–26, §649, §668, §724 Dickens, Mark xxii, xxv
on Turco-Syriac §700 ff.
Dictionaries
alphabetization §124
arrangement by root 24
de Dieu, L. §645 deacons xx
digits §4, §9
decorative grapheme §469
digital phototypesetting §752
and Unicode §775
decimal system §337
digital typography §386, §749 ff.,
Deir al-Suryān §499
Pl. 15
Dayr al-Zaʿfarān §609
line fillers §474
press xxvi, §736, §738
DeFrancis, J. xix
Dionysius Geevarghese §724
demonstrative
diphthongs §177
Dionysius Thrax §127
deletion markers §202 ff.
Romanization §681
and mḥawwyānā §294
diple §251
demonstrative pronoun
direct speech
in 411 codex §36
and mqīmānā §327
and mḇaṭlānā §204
and pāsūqā §324
den Biesen, Kees ch. 16 n. 7
and sāmkā §314
typewriters §744
denominative verbs §116
direction, writing §582
denticle §492
descender §178, §398, §491, §492
and accent names §283 of points §155
descriptive vs. prescriptive xx
directionality §445
diacritic §4
disambiguation §34, §138
diachronic xx, §14, §16
diacritical points §10, §45, §49,
and numerals §365
tier §374, §400, §481
§51, §129, §140, §400
discourse
in MSS §29, §§33–34
disjointed graphemes §20
disambiguation §237
and accents §283
Jacob of Edessa’s time §41 Old Syriac §27
dismay
and mḏammrānā §304
position of §144
dittography §477
color of §443
Doerfler, Maria xxii
diacritical signs §10, §677
documentary hand §483, §495
position of §433
Dominican Press §215
in garšūnography §584
DOS §754 ff., §758, Pl. 15
dialects §585 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
dot matrix printers §757 ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index doubled letters §59
405
Easter dates §358, ch. 7 n.
doubling
Ebied, Rifaat
and § ܘ101
and vowel variants §195 in NENA §715
in Syro-Malayalam §617
typewriter §744
Ecchellensis, Abraham §49
see also al-Ḥaqillānī, Ibrahīm
see also under Authority Index
in Ṭuroyo §718
Edavazhikkal, Philipose §733,
transcription of §671
Edessa 20, §2, §453, §499, Pl. 2
§735
marker §217
Edison, Thomas §737
downstroke §489
editorial marks xxi, §9
downwards points §155 Draguet, R.
Esṭrangelā font ch. 10 n. 7
Drijvers xxv, §21
Ehrenstrahl, David Klöcker 24, §647
ʿelāyā §328
and bāṯar ʿelāyā §323
Drugulin ch. 10 n. 9
and mnaḥḥṯā §311
dual-joining §378, §761
and sāmkā §314
graphemes §496 ff
and sāmkā gā ̱ rūrā §316 Elephantine papyri §335, §339
ductus xxi–xxii, §18, §484 in early MSS §30
Elia of Nisibis
of Old Syriac §21
Dolabani
see under Authority Index
Dura Pl. 3
see Elia of Ṣoba
Elia of Ṣoba 1, 22, §43
lexicon §595, §637
on writing points §155
Duval, Rubens xix, xxii, §51, §111, §162
see also under Authority Index
on accents §281
Elia the Maronite scribe §458
on mhaggyānā §205
Elias of Tirhan §43
Elias bar Abraham §48
on marhṭānā §206
on mzīʿānā rabbā §293
on numerals §§353–54
on reṯmā §302
on rāhṭā §305
on taḥtāyā ḏaṯlāṯ §322
on šūḥlāp̱ ʿeṣyānā §299
on verbal markers §220
email §649
on word joining line §430
emphasis
on vowel names §191
see also under Authority Index
Emerald City Fontworks §759 and ʿeṣyānā §299
and sāmkā §314
E
and taḥtāyā ḏaṯlāṯ §322
emphatic letters §591
East Syriac xxii–xxiii
encoding of §679
grammarians §43
in chat alphabet §683
script 23, §455 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
406
Indices in Malayalo-Syriac §692
transcription of §662, §669
enclitics
ܳ § ̣ܐ202 ܗ22 ̱ܽܗܘ20
and ʿelāyā §328
and sāmkā §314
Eṯpaʿʿal §133, §220 pointing §224
Eṯpʿel §111, §133, §220
ʿeṭrā
and spacing §420
ܳ ܗܘܐ
ʿeṣyānā §292, §299
in poetry §207
and alloglottography §726
§§203–04
etymology §70
encoding §649, §675 ff., §683
Euphrates Pl. 1
and mḇaṭlānā §204
English xxiv, §254, §263, §265, §373, §611, §752
alloglottography §724
Eumnath, Jasmaile xxiii Europe §48, §244 European
grammarians §48 ff.
code switching ch. 8 n. 46 punctuation §244 readers §668
languages & neologisms 26 punctuation marks 25
Europeans §58
entreaty §287
Eva, Gabriel
and mṣallyānā §313
see Ḥawwā, Gabriel
Ephrem (scribe from Dayr al-
Everson, Michael 27, §766, §770
Zaʿfarān) §609
Ephrem the Syrian §123, §140, §207, §702
Epiphanius §272
Ewald, Heinrich
on accents §281
exclamation
and ʿelāyā §328
Eshai Shimmon §747
and mnaḥḥṯā §311
Esṭrangelā §21, §59, §279, §453
and mqallsānā §296
and unified scripts §461
and mqīmānā §327
and vowels §459
and pāqūḏā §300
falls out of use 21
and taḥtāyā ḏaṯlāṯ §322
in headings §458
mark 25, §244
in early MSS §32
and tāḵsā §306
in text editions 25
F
ISO code of §770 revival of 22
typewriter Ḥujådå §748
Esṭrangelā fonts
Facebook ch. 12 n. 65–66
Fāʾiq, Naʿʿūm xxv, §§738–739, Pl. 1
Estrangelo Nisibin ch. 8 n. 15
Falla, Terry
Esṭrangelo Talada ch. 10 n. 7
Fifth Lateran Council §48
Estrangelo Qenneshrin §85 Monotype ch. 10 n. 7 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
typewriter §744
Figgins, Vincent §85 ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index
407
Final letters §4, §19, §376
Gamma Productions §757, §759
foliation §334
Gargar §595
Gansu province ch. 12 n. 73
Flower Hill Cemetery Pl. 1
Garšūnī xxiii, xxv, §126, §167,
following context §14
§492, §580, §615, Pl. 4
Fontographer §758 fonts §474
Jacob of Edessa vowels §166 Meltho 27
garšūnographemes §581, §584, §719
garšūnography xxi–xxii, §580 ff., §708
MLS 26
in Unicode §774
multi-lingual 27
with alloglottography §731
OpenType 27
gārūrā §289
outline §460
Geçer, Özcan xxvi
foot §492
formal hand §482
formal language theory ch. 1 n. 6 formalism §14
Gelb, Ignace xix, §9
Gelston, Anthony §756 gender §415
marker §235 ff.
Fortran §751
Geneva §644
free graphemes §12
Georgia ch. 17 n. 10
French xxii, §651
Georgian §641
and chat alphabet §684
German xxii, §254
frequency §374
readers §668
of consonants §117 ff.
Germany §747, §759
of vowels §196 ff.
Ghazal, Pierre ch. 12 n. 62
and keyboards §778
Fribourg University §746
fricative §10, §210, §620, §665
fricatization §12, §63, ch. 4 n. 26 and homography §116
in Malayalo-Syriac §695 markers §210 ff.
Gibson, M.
color editions §443
Girgis, Ann Mary xxiii Gloria Patri §609
in Syro-Armenian §595
glottal stop 20, §14
transcription §670
tier §404 ff., §481
function keys §782
glyph §1, §13, §757, §761
fuṣḥā Arabic §731
Gnanadesikan, Amalia xix
G
Goldsmith, John §372
descenders §178
in Microsoft Word §785
gold (color) §443
Gorgias Press xxii–xxiii
Gabriel, Robert ch. 12 n. 61
gospel cover xxvi
Gabriel of St. Joseph
see under Authority Index
gospels
and alloglottography §727
Gallus, Joseph §651 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
408
Indices Malayalam §699
Göttingen concordances 26, §750 grammarians xx, §40 ff., §56,
§113, §124, §§127–28, §219, §225
Syro-Sogdian §620
graphs §1, §4
arrangement of §11 linear §11
East Syriac §43
nonlinear §11
European §48 ff.
Greco-Syriac §643
on accents §282, §288
Greek §162, §448, §641, §647,
West Syriac §43
grammars §215, §454
§664
alphabet §162, ch. 1 n. 4, ch.
grammatical category §116, §139,
2 n. 1
§143, §373
and mḥayyḏānā §310
and points §147
garšūnography §582
grammatical
Hellenistic §203
graphemes §10, §199 ff.,
in MLS §757
§200, §714
in quire numbers 28
tier §374, §396, §481
letters & vowels §129
graphemes xx, §1, §5, §6, §10,
loan words §12, §105, §133,
§13, §27, §371, §584
§136, §194, §203, §214
and garšūnography §583
mythology Pl. 2
bound §12
numerals §366
consonantal §§7–8, §12
suffix
dual-joining 21 free §12
ܘܣ
§470
vocalization §129, §174 ff.,
grammatical xxi
§401
linear §12
ܰ ܳ
Greek vowels (◌, ◌, etc.) 22, §45,
linear vowel §162
§461
nonlinear §12
alongside pointing §130
nonsegmental §9
green §443
prosodic §10
gūḏā xx, §279, §334
obligatory §10
Griffin, Catherine §756
resemblance of §75 ff.
reading direction §451
segmental §6, §§7–8
Gutenberg §461
supra-segmental §10
Gutturals
vowel §8
in Malayalo-Syriac §692
graphemic §675
H
repository §584
graphotactics xxi, §11, §18, §582 in early MSS §§30–31
hairline stroke §490
in Old Syriac §20
Halle §645
in parchments §20 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
Ḥaddad, Benjamin §462
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index Haluk Perk Museum xxiv, xxvi, Pl. 9
409
Hindu numerals §362 HMML
see Hill Museum & Manuscript
hamza §588, §590
Library
in chat alphabet §687
handwriting §402
Hoffmann §123
Harqlean 21, §39, §271
Holland §757
Harun, Yacub §753
Homer §165, Pl. 5
Hasidic §646
homoeoteleuton §249, §610
Haralambous, Yannis 26, §760 Harrak, Amir §483, ch. 12 n. 72
see also under Authority Index see also Netherlands, The
homoeoarcton §249
Harvard §744
al-Ḥaṣrūnī, Yūḥanna §49
Hasso, Sargon 26, §259, §762,
homographs §10, §138, §§140–41, §143, §219, §222
2-way earliest record 20
§771
3-way 21, §41, §147
Hatch, William xx, §441, §499
4-way §147
columns §446
consonantal §223
Ḥawwā, Gabriel xxvi, 24, §161,
disambiguation of §129, §219
§167 ff., §479, Pl. 11
in early MSS §§33–34
headings 23, §453, §458
lists of §54, §113
outline writing in §460
homography xxiii, §113 ff.
Heal, Kristian ch. 2 n. 129
Healey, John xxii–xxiii, §21
see also under Authority Index
Hebrao-Syriac §644 ff.
over ‘Judaeo-Syriac’ ch. 12 n. 10
Hebrew §131, §647, §681
and alloglottography §725 and keyboards §778
script §644
137, ch. 9 n. 50, ch. 16 n. 2, ch. 16 n. 7–9.
Ḥujådå ch. 16 n. 12
Ḥunayn bar Isḥaq §42, §445
Hunter, Erica xxv
Hussmann, Heinrich §280
Heller, Chaim (Hayyim) §646 Hermes typewriter §747 heterodoxy §252
hymns §270
hyphen §172
in chat alphabet §683
hyphenation §465
Heva, Gabriel
hypolemniscus §271
see Ḥawwā, Gabriel
Hill Museum & Manuscript Library xxiii–xxvi
ch. 13: p. 353
hugoye-list xxiii, §744, ch. 2 n.
and alloglottography §726
Hellenistic Greek §203
ch. 1: p. 1
Ḥudrā §702
ḥusāyā
and šwāyā ch. 6 n. 64
in MLS §757
ch. 7: 159
hook §492
I IBM electronic typewriter §746
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
410
Indices
IBM Personal Computer §754 Ibn al-Nadīm §455
Internet §759
interrogative 25, §121, §287 and mnaḥḥṯā §311
on Esṭrangelā §453
and pāqūḏā §300
identity §694
and tāḵsā §306
Iliad §165
sentence §246
imperfect §415
prefixes §65
Imprimerie Catholique ch. 10 n. 8 Imprimerie Nationale ch. 10 n. 8, Pl. 10
intervocalic §720
İntibâh xxvi, Pl. 13
intonation §10, §281, §287 and mqallsānā §296
and mqīmānā §327
indexing §126
and mšaʾʾlānā §297
Indian numerals 21, 26, §362,
and mzīʿānā §292
§364
and nāp̱ šā §319
and directionality §448
and pāqūḏā §300
Indian Orthodox §454 infinitive §221
and qārūyā §301
initial letters §4, §264, §376
and sāmkā §314
ink 22, §215, §443
and sāmkā gārūrā §316 ̱ and šūḥlāp ʿelāyā §328
Inner Mongolia §700
inscriptions §17, §21, §§24–25, §54
and šwayā §330
in 411 codex §37
CPA §457
inverted commas §254
lack of syāme §225
Iraqi Museum §483
lack of point on § ܗ236
Iraq §763
Ishtar Web §759
and Serṭā §454 vowels §129
writing direction ch. 9 n. 12
inseparable prefixes §§416–17
Islamic conquest §44 ISO §764
630 language names §765 639-2 Alpha-3 §766
and spacing §415
639-3 §767
inseparable suffixes §416
639-6 Alpha-4 §768
Institut für neutestamentliche
10646 grapheme codes §771
Textforschung §744
15924 script codes §769
Interjection
isolated letters §19, §376
and mḥawwyānā §294
and qārūyā §301
International Organization for Standardization
J Jacob bar Šakko
see ISO
see Bar Šakko
International Systems Consultancy
see also under Authority Index
§759
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index
411
Jacob III, Patriarch
John the Grammaticus §252
Jacob of Edessa xxiv, 21–22, 59,
John the Syrian §225
on lithography §735 §15, §34, §45, §291
letter on orthography §41 on accents §282
John the Stylite §42 joiner line §433
joining properties §384 of CPA §711
of early MSS §31
on gārūrā §289
of Old Syriac §20
on mḇakkyānā §317
on mḇaṭṭlānā (accent) §309
of parchments §20
on mhappḵānā §326
joining words
on mḥayyḏānā §310 on mp̱ īsānā §295
and rāhṭā ḏp̱ āseq §308 Jollie, Angelina 27
on pāsūqā §324
Jönköping §748
on mḥawwyānā §294
and rāhṭā ḏḵarteh §307
on mqallsānā §296
Jones, F. S. §33
on qārūyā §301
Joseph bar Malkun
on qawmā §325
see Bar Malkūn
on rāhṭā ḏp̱ āseq §305
Joseph Ḥūzāyā §40, §123
on šrāy tašʿīṯā §331
Joseph, Thomas xxii
on Malayalo-Syriac §691 ff.
on šūḥlāp ʿelāyā §328
on šūḥlāp̱ gārūrā §289
on šūḥlāp̱ mḥayyḏānā §310 on šūḥlāp̱ sāmkā §314
Juckel, Andreas xxii–xxiii, §44,
§744, ch. 12 n. 67, ch. 16 n. 6.
on šūḥlāp šwayā §330
Judaeo-Arabic ch. 12 n. 10
on vowels §129
Julius II, Pope §651
Judaeo-Syriac ch. 12 n. 10
on šūḥlāp taḥtāyā §320
jussive
on pointing §138
and mnaḥḥṯā §311
on vowel names §189
vowel system §162 ff.
vowel system in fonts §757
Jacob of Sarug §194, §595
on vowel names §190
Kabalistic §646
Jazirah §731
Kampen Theological Seminary
Jenner, Konrad ch. 16 n. 2
§744
Jerusalem §442, ch. 10 n. 8
Kanna, Youaw T. §747
Jewish §646, ch. 12 n. 10
Kaplan, Ayda §484, ch. 12 n. 70
Jews conversion 24, §644
Karim, Cyril Ephrem §724
John of Qarṭmin
Esṭrangelā revival 22, §453
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
justification §472, §474
K
Jacob of Takrit
ch. 7: 159
and pāqūḏā §300
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
Karson §615
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
412
Indices Kthobonoyo xxiv, ch. 8 n. 46
kashida §§472–74, §762
Kurdish 24, §606
in Unicode §775
alloglottography §724
kasra §178, §587
garšūnography §582
Kaufhold, Hubert
typewriter §744
Kurdistan §462
CAL encoding §677
Kuwait §747
Kurmancî, Modern Standard §607
Kaufman, Stephen kaylā xxvii
L
Kazakhstan §700
Kerala 24, §457, Pl. 12
L-ʔ forms §94, §133, §409
kerning §761
pointing of §222
keyboard §677
lamentation
layouts §777 ff.
and tāḵsā §306
al-Kfarnissy
laser printers §757
on Esṭrangelā §453
see also under Authority Index
Khalloul-Risha, Amir ch. 12 n. 65 Khamis, ʿAbdulaḥad Pl. 8
Lasercomp §756
Lateran Council §651
Latin xxii, §49, §131, §167, §595,
§609, §644, §647, §650, §712
Khara-Khoto §700
alphabet ch. 1 n. 4
Khoshaba, Tony §759
garšūnography §582
King, Daniel xxii, §29
graphemes 25
Kiraz, Christine xxiii–xxv, ch. 9 n.
in MLS §757
13
script 23, 26, §448
Kiraz, George A. 26, §771, Pl. 14, Pl. 16
transcriptions §209, §582
Latino-Syriac §649
children ch. 8 n. 46
see also under Authority Index
Kiraz, Lucian Nurono xxiv
Lawîj §606
Lebanon §631
lectionary §261, §274, §752
Kiraz, Sebastian Kenoro xxiv
mark (small circle) 28
Kiraz, Tabetha xxiv
Koonammakkal, Thomas §616 Köthen §645
left-context ch. 1 n. 7
left-to-right §448, §501 leg §492
Kottayam xxvi, §724, §733
Kourieh, Qlimis Daniel ch. 12 n. 71
legal parchments
see parchments
Leiden Peshitta edition §679, §759
al-Koury, Asmar §740
Lejoly, Abbé Raymond
Kreyenbroek, P. G.
typewriter §744
on Syro-Kurdish §607
lemniscus §271
Krinetzki
typewriter §744
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index letter
pairs and frequency §121 sequences §262
liturgical graphemes §274 ff., §757 liturgical texts, 25–26, §215 loan words §116, §596
Arabic into Armenian §§598–
letterpress §461
99
Lettinga, J. P.
Arabic into Kurdish §607
typewriter §744
Arabic into Syriac §594
Levita, Elias 59
English into Syriac §611
Lewis, A. S.
Greek into Syriac §12, §105,
color editions §443
§133, §136, §194, §203, §214,
lexeme §114, §416
§604
lexica §454
Latin into Syriac §611
Bar Bahlul §595
Persian into Armenian §599
Elias of Nisibis §595
Syriac into Malayalam §618
Syriac-Armenian §595
Syriac into Sogdian §622
lexical markers §199, §237 ff. Library of Congress §681
library Romanization §680 ff.
ligatures §1, §13, §376, §387 ff., §582, §761
alphabetization §13, §125 ductus of §566 ff.
nonstructural §13
Turkish into Armenian §599
logogram §624
London Jews’ Society §646 Loopstra, Jonathan §214 lunar year ch. 7 n. 22
Lundeen, Steven J. §759
M
obligatory §13
ordering of §394 ff.
macron §667
optional §13
madda §588, §590
Lind, James §737
Maḏnḥāyā §455
line fillers §463 ff.
Maiberger
linea occultans §199
typewriter §744
linear
Makdasi
graphs §11
see under Authority Index
grapheme §7, §12
Malabar §735
vocalization 24, §161 ff.
linearity vs. nonlinearity §243
Malayalam §3, §582, §616, §668, §691
lingua franca §703, §723
and alloglottography §724
lining board §444, Pl. 8
and garšūnography §582
Linotype §461, §740, §749 list
graphotactics §699 script §692
and pāsūqā §324
lithography xxi, xxvi, 25, §732 ff., Pl. 12
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
413
Malayalee §615, §684
Malayalo-Syriac xxii, 25, §691 ff. Malick, David G. 481 n. 1
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
414
Indices Masora
Mandaic §162, §700, §701 Manna
see also under Authority Index
Maʿnū Pl. 1
see mašlmānūṯā
Matenedaran §641 mathematics §334
matres lectionis 20, §23, §26, §74,
Maphrian §606
§129, §131 ff., §182, §402
maqryānā §40, ch. 2 n. 132
and frequency §118
Mar Thoma Church §735
in early MSS §33
Marcus, Isho §763
in Ḥawwā’s vowels §168
Mardin §215, §262, ch. 10 n. 1, Pl.
in Old Syriac §23, §54
12
in Syro-Armenian §598
margin 24, §249, §273, §468
in Syro-Kurdish §607
marginal notes §45
mḇakkyānā §317
Margoliouth, Mrs.
mḇaṭṭlānā (the accent) §309
on tāḵsā §306
mḇaṭṭlānā (the line) 23, §224, ch. 4
marhṭānā 23, §206
ܰ and ܗܪܛ ̱ ܳ ch.ܽ 4 n.ܰ 23 ̈ܰ context ܗܪܐ
n. 22
§66
in Syro-Kurdish §607
in NENA §715
Marietta ch. 17 n. 10
Maronite 59, §48–49, §58, §454,
ܰ
and ܗܪܛ ̱ ch. 4 n. 23
in Ṭuroyo §717
with quotation mark §250
§602, §609
McCarthy, John §372, §401
grammarians §124, §353
mḏammrānā §304
College §218 scribe §458
Martin, Ricky 27
media types §21
accents §281
medial letters §376
word joining line §430
Masius, Andreas 24, §48, §124 and syāme §225
marhṭānā vs. mḇaṭṭlānā §224 on mḇaṭṭlānā §204
on verbal markers §219 see also under Authority Index
mašlmānūṯā (‘Masora’) §42 ff., §54, §177
accent §299
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 14: 359
medicine §342
medium of writing §439 ff. Melbourne §759
Melitene 22, §174 script 22, §457
Meltho fonts 27, §85, §390, §474,
§760, §762, §777, ch. 8 n. 15, ch. 10 n. 7 ff.
Meltho keyboard §785
vocalization §196
ch. 8: 177
medical texts §344
Melkite §280
transcription §650
ch. 1: p. 1
mean line §491
Media Center Stuttgart Pl. 16
Martin, Paulin §47
ch. 7: 159
McCollum, Adam xxii–xxiv
memoria technica §62 ff.
Mengozzi, Alessandro xxiii ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index
415
Mingana
Merx xxii, §47
morphological pointing §221
on accents §281
schwa 25
on Ambrosio §650
schwa marker §209
see also under Authority Index
Mesopotamia §2
see also under Authority Index
metal as medium xxvi , §439, Pl. 9
missionaries §582, §713
metdammrānā §304
MLS
metathesis §95, §101 meṯkaššp̱ ānā §318 metobelus 21
mnemonics §62 ff.
and productivity §69
metrical grammar §43
mnīḥānā §312
mettaḵšp̱ ānā §313 mhaggyānā 23, §205, §206
ܳ ܽ
ܰ ̈ܰ
in NENA §715
see Multi-Lingual Scholar™
mnaḥḥṯā §311
Metonic cycle ch. 7 n. 22
context ܗܪܐ
Mitwally, Hoda xxiii
§66
mobile devices 27, §649, §682 Modern Literary Syriac acronyms §263
Modern Standard Kurmancî §607
in Syro-Armenian §597
Modern Western Armenian §597
mhappḵānā §326
Mongol era §703
mḥawwyānā §294 mḥayyḏānā §310
Michael Rabā, Chronicle of Pl. 6 abbreviation mark §538 columns §446
Mongolia §700
Mongolian §452 monograms
in Syro-Greek §603
Michaelis, C. B. §49
Monotype §461, §740, §749, §756,
Michaelis, J. D. §49
Montreal §753
see also under Authority Index
ch. 10 n. 7
Mor Ignatius Elias III Dayro §724
on Esṭrangelā §453 on numerals §353
see also under Authority Index
Microsoft §§757–58, §761
morphemes §1, §371, §373, §416 arrangement of §11 spacing §415
Windows 2000 27, §777
morphological description §1
Word word-spacing §429
morphological marking
Word §474
Middle East 25–26, §2, §364, §447, §611, §724, §740
mimeography xxi, 25, §737 ff., Pl. 12
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
in 411 codex §35
morphology xxi, §1, §199, §371 root-and-pattern §6
Windows §758
Middle Persian §703
ch. 7: 159
morphological graphemes §219 ff.
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
morphosyntactic §728
morphotactics §11, §371 morph §1
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
416
Indices
mosaics §17, §29, Pl. 2, Pl. 16 as writing medium §439
Mosul §215, §221, §499, ch. 10 n. 9
Museum für Asiatische Kunst,
Staatiche Museen zu Berlin xxiv–xxv, Pl. 7
Mushe of Mardin 23, §48 musical
Mount Lebanon §58
graphemes xxv, §274 ff., Pl. 5
mourning
notation §280
and mḇakkyānā §317
movable type xxi, §738, §749, Pl. 12
pattern §276
mzahhrānā §309
mzīʿānā §292, §293, §322
mp̱ īsānā §295 mqallsānā §291, §296
and mqīmānā §327
and nīšā §298
mqarqsānā §326
and rāhṭā ḏḵarteh §307
mqīmānā §327
and reṯmā §302
and pelgūṯ mqīmānā §329
and sāmkā §314
and sāmkā §314
and sāmkā gārūrā §316 ̱ and zawgā gn īḇā §303 ̱
msabbʿānā §324
mšaʾʾlānā xxvii, §294, §297
mzīʿānā rabbā §293
and pāqūḏā §300
and tāḵsā §306
and reṯmā §302
mṣallyānā §313, §318
N
msandlānā §303 msaqqʿānā §317
N.V. Handelmij Adr. Koller & Van
mṭappyānā 23, §208
Os §744
multicolumn page §446
Nabu Publishing §759
multi-lingual
nāgūḏā 23, §207 ̱
font 27
web browsing software 27
Multi-Lingual Scholar™ xxvi, 26,
§474, §748, §757, ch. 10 n. 7 ff., Pl. 15
and poetry §207
Naḥay Pl. 1
name initials 26 ʿNanīšoʿ §123
nāp̱ šā §286, §319 Narsai §702
fonts §434, §460, §758 keyboard §784
Nayis, Philoxenus Mattias ch. 12 n.
multipage §447
58
multi-tier framework §373
neck §492
Münster §744
negative clause
Muraoka
see also under Authority Index
Murre-van den Berg, Heleen xxiii,
and sāmkā gnīḇā §315 ̱ Nelson, Paul 26, §259, §762, §771, ch. 8 n. 10
ch. 13 n. 10
variable-length abbreviation mark 27
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index phonology §372
NENA 23, §712 ff., §767
see also Neo-Aramaic
Neo-Aramaic xxiii, §3, §582, §712 ff.
vocalization §174 ff.
nonlinearity vs. linearity §243 nonsegmental graphemes §9 nonstructural ligatures §13
in Unicode §773
Northern Iraq §462
Romanization §681
notation §14
neologisms 26, §604, §611 Nestle
see under Authority Index
Netherlands, The §724
nouns §139
and points §147 and syāme §229
number §415
see also Holland
numbering systems xxi, §54
Neums §280
Indian 21
New Jersey §263, §724, Pl. 1 New Persian §703
New Testament §39, §117, §271, §644–45, §703
sequential alphabetical 20
numbers §9
and abbreviation mark §257 and syāme §229
editio princeps of Syriac §48 in Hebrew script 24
on keyboards §783
numerals §333
New York Pl. 13
alphabetic §345 ff.
newspapers §738
directionality §365
nib §442, §490
Old Syriac §54
Niʿmatallah
in inscriptions §335 ff.
see under Authority Index
nīšā §298
in MSS §342 ff.
Nuremberg polyglot §645
al-ʿNīsī, Mūsā §49
Nuro, Abrohom xxvi
Nisibis §702
on syāme and /e/ §160
Nöldeke, Theodor §51
script reform 26, §461, §462,
NENA §713
Pl. 11
on numerals §353
vocalization reform 26, §186
see also under Authority Index
nomenclature §91
O
nominal formatives
and frequency §119
nongaršūnographic system §708
nonlinear graphemes §8, §12, §714 and alphabetization §125
nonlinear
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 14: 359
object pronominal suffixes §419 obligatoriness §374
oblique line §206
orthography §372
ch. 8: 177
object marker § ܠ417
obligatory ligatures §13
morphology §372
ch. 1: p. 1
obelus 21, §271
obligatory graphemes §10
graphs §11
ch. 7: 159
417
obliqueness of points §155 ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
418
Indices orthographic variation
Oceania §747
in consonants §88 ff.
OCLC §680
in vowels §194
offset printing §740 Ojala, Doug xxiii
Old Syriac xxiii, §15, §§17–18, §23, §30
allography in §19
orthographic word §416
orthography-phonology xix otiose stroke §490
and line fillers §463
consonantal system §18 ff.
Ottoman Empire §631
ductus of §21
Ottoman Turkish §263, §582, §631
cursivity in §20
Ottoman Turkey §738
and Ḥawwā vowels §171
graphotactics §20 inscriptions xxv
inscriptions and vowels §129 joining properties §20 matres lectionis §132
garšūnography §582
outline
fonts §460, §758 writing §460
numerical system §54, §335
overlining §255
vocalization system §23 ff.
Oxford Computing Centre §756
parchments xxv, §32 writing §§20–21
Old Syriac Gospels §90, §228
red for §443
Ӧztaş, Eliyo §449, Pl. 8
Old Testament §39, §271, §342,
P
Old Uyghur 23, §700
P- ܝforms §133
§646, §734
P- ܐforms §92, §133
Olympia typewriter §745
Paʿʿel 24, §92, §116, §124, §133,
omissions §249
§148, §220
mark 28
pointing of §141, §223
Ontario §759
OpenType fonts 27, §§434–35,
§§474–75, §760, §761, ch. 10 n. 7 ff.
pagination §334, §360, §363
using Arabic numerals 26
Pʿal xxvii, 24, §92, §124, §133, §141, §194, §§220–21
and ligatures §394
pointing of §141, §223
operating system 27
Palacios
optional ligatures §13
see under Authority Index
Oraha, Yakob Ishak §759
Palak, Naʿʿūm Faʾiq
organic chemistry xxiv
orientation of vowels §§174–76 ornaments §443
see Faʾiq, Naʿʿūm
paleography §484 Palestine §709
Orpheus xxv, Pl. 2
Palestinian Syriac §709
orthodoxy §252
see also Christian Palestinian
orthographic space §411 ff. ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
Aramaic ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index line filling §471
palimpsest xxv, 22, §441, Pl. 5 in Syro-Greek §602
Palmer, Andrew ch. 12 n. 57, ch. 17 n. 2
419
spacing §417
Passau University §744 pāsūqā §324
and bāṯar ʿelāyā §323
plotter §751
and ʿelāyā §328
Pampady §724
and mnīḥānā §312
Pange lingua §609
and mqīmānā §327
paper 22
and lithography §732
and rāhṭā §305
as writing medium §441,
and rāhṭā ḏp̱ āseq §308
and rāhṭā ḏlā pāseq §305
and mimeography §737
and sāmkā §314
§439
and šrāy tašʿīṯā §331
pāqūḏā §294, §300
and šwayā §330
and sāmkā §314
and taḥtāyā §320
para-grammatical works §44
para-grammatical, literature §42
and tāḵsā §306
paragraph §242
Pater Noster §§609–10
paraxtonos §289
Pauline Epistles
paragraphing §242
Paul bar ʿAnqa §453
parchments §15, §17, §§24–25,
§29, §32, §54, §123, §129, §483, Pl. 3
and alloglottography §727
pause §281
and rāhṭā §305
and Serṭā §454
and rāhṭā ḏp̱ āseq §308
as writing medium §§439–40 graphotactics §20
and tāḵsā §306
in 411 codex §37
joining properties §20
PC Paintbrush ch. 17 n. 10
lack of syāme §225
pelgūṯ mqīmānā §329
lack of point on § ܗ236
PCX file §758, ch. 17 n. 10 pen 22, §442, §479
parenthesis §273
parenthetic phrase
and šūḥlāp taḥtāyā §320
Paris polyglot §645 Paris ch. 10 n. 8
Parsnegar word processor §759 participial prefixes §65
Penn, Michael xxii
perfect §102, §104, §119, §221, §224, §415
pointing §223
Perk, Haluk xxvi, Pl. 9
§253, §292, §311
Persian §3, §641
and nīšā §298
ܰ
strokes §489
period §242
particles §416
ܕ ܕ
lifting §493 ff.
and alloglottography §723
§253
and Ḥawwā vowels §171
compound §424 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
420
Indices and Syro-Ottoman §632
plural marker §128, §225 ff.
orthography §620
poems §276
and Unicode §772
see also syāme
poetry and nāg̱ūḏā §207
garšūnography §582
pointing system §113
personal pronoun §36
origin of §138
Peshitta Institute
points
typewriter at §744
ductus of §569 ff.
Peshiṭtā §441, §459, §734
position of §147
Peter III/IV, Ignatius §414 Phanqitho §279, §334
pharmacological handbook §626 philologists §48 ff.
phoneme §1, §12, §134, §138, §371, §§582–84
polyglot §645
Syro-Hebrew Psalter §605
polygraph §12, §149, §663, §157
polyphone §12
possessive §417
pronoun §418
phonemic
Postel §650, ch. 12 n. 20
representation §59 transcriptions §6
Phonemic-to-graphemic relationships §187 ff.
preceding context §14 prefixes §71, §220
and frequency §§119–20
prepositions §139, §§416–17,
phones §1
prescriptive §40
phonological
vs. descriptive xx
description §1
print punches xxvi
features §584
print types §13, §414, §714
graphemes §201 ff.
for §173
processes §12, §14
representation §478
for § ܖ201
segment xx, §10
for abbreviation mark §258
phonology xix, xxi, §1, §6, §45,
for Jacob of Edessa vowels
§161, §199, §371
§166
phonotactics §11, §371
for punctuation §242
photocopiers §740
for syāme §233
phototypesetting 26, §752
printed books xx
physics §586
and vocalization §197
Piscataway xxiv, ch. 5 n. 24
line filling §472
pixels §757
printers §763
Plantin §645
printing §50, §402
plosive §10, §210, §665
script reform 26
plosive-fricative pairs §584
simplification §161, §167
plotter technology 26, §750
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
productive morphology §604 pronominal suffix §204 ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index pronouns §121, §416
421
Qarabashi, Abdulmasīḥ §186
and mḇaṭlānā §204
pronunciation §10
Qarqp̱ āyē on vowel names §189
proper noun §470
qārūyā §301
and chronograms §355
Qarṭmīn §499
and fricatization §211
Qasha, Boutros §462
transcription §655
qawmā §325
prosodic
Qocho §700
allographs §286
quadriliteral roots §124
features §281
graphemes §10, §281 ff., §286
Quanzhou §700 question
and ʿelāyā §328
marks as punctuation §242
and mḇaṭṭlānā (accent) §309
points catalogue §288
prosody §10
and tāḵsā §306 mark §244
prosthetic ʔ 20
quill 20, §442
protasis
quire signatures §334, §342, §366
and šwayā §330
quotation marks §250 ff.
and taḥtāyā šḥīmā §321
quotations 20
Protestants §735
Psalm/Psalter xxv, 59, §167, §172, §605, §626, §§702–03, ch. 2
Qurʾān in Garšūni §586
qūššāyā xxvii, §45, §210 ff., §374, §404, §590
n. 137
and doubling §217
PtLebanon1 font §758
and vowel variants §195
PtSyr2 font §758
encoding §678
punches xxvi, Pl. 10
in Nuro’s reform §461
punctuation xxi, §4, §§9–10, §242
in Syro-Kurdish §607
ff.
in Syro-Sogdian §620
and line fillers §464
in Unicode §773
Arabic 25, §775
red ink 22
European 25
Quzḥayya Psalter §390, §423,
gārūrā §289
§588
on keyboards §783
R
pūrʿānā §284
Purdy and Macintosh 26, §752 Puzzles xxvi, Pl. 16
Rabo, Gabriel ch. 16 n. 6 typewriter §744
Rabula Gospels §586
Q
radicals §220
and pointing §221
Qalʿat Nijm Pl. 1 qāle §270
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
422
Indices al-Rizzī, Sarkīs §49
rāhṭā §305
doubling marker §218
and rāhṭā ḏḵarteh §307
see also under Authority Index
and rāhṭā ḏp̱ āseq §308
rāhṭā ḏḵarteh
Risius
rāhṭā ḏḵarteh §307
Robinson §677
rāhṭā ḏp̱ āseq §305, §308
Rogers, Henry xix
see al-Rizzī
and rāhṭā ḏp̱ āseq §308
see also under Authority Index
rāhṭā ḏlā pāseq §305
Ransmayer & Rodrian §§744–45 rare books xx
Roham, Eustathius Matta ch. 12 n. 69
ratio between vowels and conso-
Romanization §680 ff.
reading §44
Rome §48, §218, §651
nants §198
Roman-rite §609
Romeny, Bas ter Haar §744, ch. 16
orientation §155
n. 2, 481
recitation marks §283, §289 red ink 22, 25, §481, Pl. 6
in abbreviation mark §255 in fricatization §215
root §6
homographs §115
in dictionaries §124
reed pen §442
root-and-pattern morphology §6,
reform §462
Royal Asiatic Society ch. 3 n. 58
§113
reflexive §133
Royel, Awa xxiii
Abrohom Nuro §186
rubrics 23, §443, §703
script 26
Ruḥana, Michael ch. 17 n. 9
vocalization 26
refrain §270
rūkkāḵā xxvii, §45, §210 ff., §374,
reprehension
and vowel variants §195
§404, §590
relative pronoun § ܕ417
earliest record 20
and tāḵsā §306
encoding §678
reṯmā §302
in Nuro’s reform §461
and nīšā §298
in red ink 22
rhyme
in Syro-Kurdish §607
in dictionaries §124
in Syro-Sogdian §620
rībūy §225
in Unicode §773
right-context ch. 1 n. 7
right-joining §378, §761
rule formalism §14
right-to-left §7, §448, §758
Russell-Smith, Lilla xxv
runic alphabet §701
graphemes §496 ff.
Rutgers University xxiv
rīš qāle §691
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index S
423 markers §205 ff.
position ch. 4 n. 26
Sabra (TeX package) §760
Sciadrensis
šadda §218
see al-Šadrāwī
al-Šadrāwī [v], §49
see also under Authority Index
on scripts §453
scribal errors 27, §247
on verbal markers §219
see also under Authority Index
scribes §113, §140, §442, §481 and directionality §449
Saint John’s University xxv–xxvi
and lining §444
Saley, Richard A. ch. 16 n. 8
and spacing §435
typewriter §744
script §453 ff.
Samarqand §619
adaptation xxi, §708 ff.
sāmkā §314
in early MSS §32
and mqīmānā §327
reform & unification 26, §461
and mšaʾʾlānā §297
Seattle §759
and nāp̱ šā §319
SEDRA database §678
and taḥtāyā §320
Segal, J. B. §51, §113, §164
sāmkā g̱ārūrā §316
on accents §281, §288
sāmkā gnīḇā §315 ̱
on precedence of syāme §374
Sampson, Geoffrey xix
see also under Authority Index
Šardunaḥa Pl. 1
Segert, Stanislav ch. 12 n. 46
Satan §450
segment §10
Sauget, J. M.
segmental graphemes xx, §§7–8
on Syro-Greek §603
segmental value
Savary de Brèves §85
of ◌̣ and ◌̇ §146
Sawmā, Ḥzael ch. 17 n. 9
ܰ
of ◌ etc. vowels §184
SBL xxix
of point vowels §156
Schindler, Valentin §124
segments §478
Schmierer, Melonie xxii
Seife, Charles
scholarly editions §453
on numerals §362
ScholarTeX §760
semantic specification §6
school of Nisibis §40
schwa xxvii, 25, §141, §224, ch. 4 n. 27
semicolon 25, §244 inverted §246
Semirechye §700
absence of §206
Semitic §3, §372, §582
and mṭappyānā §208
Senefelder, Alois §732
and nāgū ̱ ḏā §207
Serrin Pl. 1
and šwāyā ch. 6 n. 64
Serṭā xxiii, 23, §13, §21, §32,
in NENA §715
§454, §458
in transcriptions §209
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
in Syro-Latin §609 ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
424
Indices ISO code §770
Sims-Williams, Nicholas xxii, 27,
typewriter §748
Sinai §457
Serto Jerusalem xxiii, §85,
ʿṣīr §299
§619 ff., §772
replaces Esṭrangelā 21 Serṭā fonts
§390, §394, §475 spacing §435
Serto Jerusalem Outline §460 Serto Kharput §390
Singapore §747 Sivanand, Sunil §755 skin
as writing medium §440
slanted
line §211
Serto Malankara §85
points §152, §155
Serto Quzhayya §758
serṭūnā §49, §224, §678
social networking §649
ductus §573
sociolinguistic features
ܰ
sociolinguistics §580, §708
and ܗܪܛ ̱ ch. 4 n. 23
opp. mḇaṭṭlānā accent §309
Severus of Antioch
against John the Grammaticus §252, Pl. 5
in chat writing §688
software 26
Sogdian §582, §619, §701, §703 and garšūnography §582 and Unicode §772
Severus Bar Šakko
sokdiddy ch. 12 n. 63
see Bar Šakko
Sokoloff, Michael xxiii , §112,
Severus Sebokht 21
§114
Indic numbers §362
solar year ch. 7 n. 22
Shabo, Eli §186, §724
solidi §6
shadda 25, §588
sort (printing) §13, §461
in Ṭuroyo §718
for ܖ, § ܪ & ܕ201
shaft §492
Shields, Erin xxiii
sorting §126
Šḥīmā (the book) xxvi
source language §580, §584
Shields, Rachel xxiii
sound change §14
šḥīmā (the accent) §324
Soviet Union §612
sibilants
space
Malayalo-Syriac §693
and abbreviations §267
sigla §261
spacing §411 ff.
signatures
speech §6, §§9–10
abbreviations 26
SPEdessa font §759
numbering 28
spelling §11, §88 ff.
Old Syriac numbers 21
spine §492
silver
spiritus asper §203
gospel cover xxvi, Pl. 9
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
Sproat, Richard xix, xxiii square brackets §273 ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index
425
sudoku 27,§361
šrāy tašʿīṯā §331
suffixes §418
and šūḥlāp šwayā §330
St. Catherine §457
§ ܽܗܘܢ121 ܝ-suffix 21–22 ܶ §121
St. James ch. 5 n. 39
St. Mark’s Monastery §442, §449 press ch. 10 n. 8
and abbreviation mark §256,
standalone letters §376
§260, §268
standardization of software 26
and frequency §§119–20
stanzas §270
and mḇaṭṭlānā ch. 4 n. 22
stem §492
and reṯmā §302
stencil §737
and spacing §415
Stewart, Columba xxiv
Stockholm Cathedral 24, §647 stone §29
and lithography §732
as writing medium §439
Stott, Katie xxiii
stroke types §489 ff. Strothmann, Werner
and syāme §229 marker §235 ff.
suffixation §116
šūḥlāp ʿelāyā §328
šūḥlāp̱ ʿeṣyānā §299 šūḥlāp̱ gārūrā §289 šūḥlāp̱ sāmkā §314 šūḥlāp šwayā §330
typewriter §744
Stutgart Pl. 16
šūḥlāp̱ taḥtāyā §320 and mḇakkyānā §317
subject §284
supralinear §8
stylus for lining §444
sukūn 25, §188, §218, §588, §639
sublinear §8
accents §289 ff.
horizontal line §353
arch as schwa marker §209
line (mhaggyānā) §205
line (marhṭānā) §206
line (mṭappyānā) §208
line (nāgū ̱ ḏā) §207
point §10, §12, §220
point §10
point (nāgūḏā) §207 ̱
point in 411 codex §33, §36
point in 411 codex §33
point on § ܐ202
point on § ܐ202
point on § ܗ203
tilde §714
point Rūkkāḵā §210
point on § ܗ203
point on ܗsuffix §235
virgule §353
tilde §714
vowels §178
two-points §225
subordinate clause §298
verbal markers §220
and mnaḥḥṯā §311
vowels §178
substantives §116
supra-segmental graphemes §10
and syāme §229
Sūrayt §712
šūddāyā §284 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
426
Indices
surprise
symbols xx, §13
suryani font §758
synodic year ch. 7 n. 22
synchronic xx–xxi, §16, §112
and mḏammrānā §304
syntactic descriptions §1
suryani2 font §758
syntax §371
suspension §260, §470
Syria Pl. 1
suuryooyoo ch. 12 n. 64 Swadāyā
and alloglottography §724,
Syriac
glyphs §758 language §3
§728
script §3
šwayā §330, ch. 6 n. 64
churches §609
Sweden §740, §748 Switzerland §746
syāme §10, §49, §225 ff., §374, §396, §678
̈
literature §15
Syriac Academy of Baghdad 26, §462
Syriac Catholic §454
and Garšūni § ܗ590
and rāhṭā §305
as an /e/ vowel §158 ff. ductus of §570
Syriac Orthodox §414, §454, §631,
§642, §694, §726, §735, §758, ch. 12 n. 64
earliest record of 20
Syriac Orthodox Patriarchal Ar-
floating §398
Syriac Orthodox Patriarchal Library
in collective nouns 21
Syro-Arabic 23, §§580–81, §586
chive §262
encoding of §679
§280
in 411 codex §35
ff., Pl. 13
in fonts §762
in Garšūni §587
first printed example 24
in NENA §§714–15
influence on Syro-Kurdish
in Unicode §774
in Ḥawwā’s vowels §172
§606
in Old Syriac §27
Syro-Armenian xxii, 23, §595 ff.
in Unicode §773 scope §200
Syro-English §635
position §227
Syro-Hebrew §605
Syro-Greek 22, §602 ff.
shape §226
Syro-hexapla 21, §39, §271, §734
Sydney §747
Syro-Kurdish 24, §606 ff.
syllabary ch. 1 n. 2
Syro-Latin 23, §609 ff.
syllabification
Syro-Malabar §455
Malayalo-Syriac §699
script 24, §457
syllable
Syro-Malankara §454
and mnīḥānā §312 and reṯmā §302
and vocalization ratio §198 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
Syro-Malayalam 24, §584, §615 ff.
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index
427
Syro-Ottoman xxii, 24–25, §631,
Teitel, Peter §744, ch. 16 n. 4, ch.
Syro-Persian xxii, xxv, 22, §626 ff.,
Telkepe §713
§738, Pl. 13
Pl. 7
16 n. 10
Temiz (Malle), Barsawmo §748 templatic morphology §113
numerals §344 Unicode 27
Syro-Sogdian xxii, 21, §619 ff.
syāme as an /e/ vowel §159 Unicode 27
tense §373
Terakkiyât-ı Mekteb-i Süryânî §263
terminal §492
TeX §760
T
text critical symbols 25
tā marbūṭa §587, §590, §758
text editions
taḥtāyā §320, §322
texting §649, ch. 1 n. 3
in Esṭrangelā 25
tactics §371
TeX-XeT 26, §760
and mšaʾʾlānā §297
Thackston
and nīšā §298
see under Authority Index
and tāḵsā §306
theograph §393, §757
taḥtāyā ḏaṯlāṯ §322
Theophilus of Edessa 22
taḥtāyā šḥīmā §321
using Jacob of Edessa vowels
tail §492
§165
Tajikistan §619
Takahashi, Hidemi xxii, §609 on Armeno-Syriac §641
on Syro-Armenian §595 ff.
Takrit §483
Thomas the Deacon §40
tiers §11, §373, §374, §478 tilde
tāḵsā §306
break §480
as line filler §463
in garšūnography §584
Tan, Mesut §759
in NENA §714
Tannous, Jack xxiii taqlab §739
Timothy Isaac Pl. 8
tašdīd §205
tlāytā
taṭwīl §472
TMS
Taw Mīm Simkath §263, Pl. 1
tone §281, §303
tlāṯā nuqzē §322
target script §580 tattoos 27
and Unicode §775
and alloglottography §726 see Taw Mīm Simkath
Taylor, David G.K. xxiii, xxv, ch. 2
tools of writing §439 ff.
Teaneck §724
transcription §584, §637, §649,
n. 137, ch. 12 n. 59
top-to-bottom §501 §658, §681
technological developments xxi
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
chat alphabet §683 ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
428
Indices typesetter §481
garšūnography §583
and line fillers §463
German-style §660
and spacing §435
phonemic §6
typewriters xxi, xxvi, 26, §461,
scholarly 25
§742 ff., Pl. 4, Pl. 14
standard §661
Transjordan §709
transliteration 25, §584, §649, §658, §675
typographical data §761
typography §1, §13, §453, §587 digital xxi, §749 ff.
graph resemblance §85
chat alphabet §683
typology of consonants §70 ff.
garšūnography §583 standard §661
U
Tremellius, Immanuel §644
Trigona-Harany, Benjamin xxii on Syro-Ottoman §631
UCLA §676, ch. 12 n. 46 Ugaritic §122
trilateral roots §124
Uhlemann
Trinity §393
see under Authority Index
Trisagion §641
underlying representation §398
Trost, M. §645
Underwood typewriter §743
TrueType fonts §758, §761
Ungand
Tullberg
see under Authority Index
Ṭur ʿAbdin 22, §606
see under Authority Index
Unicode 26–27, §649, §675, §760, §771
and Esṭrangelā revival §453
abbreviation mark §256
Turco-Syriac xxii, 23, §700 ff.
Turfan xxv, 22–23, §619, §626, §§700–03, Pl. 7
and sorting §126
Unicode Consortium 26, ch. 5 n. 22
Old Syriac numbers 21
unification of scripts 26, §461
Turkic dialects §631
United States §265, §631, §739, Pl.
Turkish §3, §668, §671
and alloglottography §724 and Syro-Ottoman §632
loan words in Armenian §596
Turks §700
Ṭuroyo xxii, 27, §185, §712, §717, §767
and alloglottography §724,
13
upside-down writing §450 upstroke §489
upwards points §155 Ürek, Martina Pl. 16 Urmia §713 USA
see United States
§728
Uyghur 23, §700
type styles §453
Uzbekistan §619
chat alphabet §684
script ch. 12 n. 73
typeface §13 ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
Üzel, Aram ch. 12 n. 56 ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
General Index V
429 one-point §139 ff.
pointing system §149 ff.
van Damme, Dirk
voces memoriales §62 ff.
typewriter §746
vowel graphemes §8
van Ginkel, Jan ch. 9 n. 50
van Peursen, W.T. ch. 12 n. 52
vowels §6, §8, §49
alphabetization §125
van Roey, Albert
Arabo-Syriac §639
typewriter §744
Armenian §597
Van Rompay, Lucas xxii, §88, ch.
ductus of §575 ff.
12 n. 54
frequency of §196 ff.
variant readings §45
ܰ ܳ
Greek (◌, ◌, etc.) §174 ff.
vellum §54
imposition of §6
as medium §440
length §192
Venkadathu Qasheeshe Alexan-
matres lectionis §23
drayos & Joseph Collection
names §189 ff.
xxvi
orientation §§174–76
verbs §139, §219, §284
position §182
and points §147
quality §192
and spacing §421
quantity §192
markers §219 ff.
Romanization §681
patterns §220
shift §194, §424
verse divisions 24
supralinear §178
versification 24
Syro-Kurdish §607
vertical line §249
Turco-Syriac Uyghur §706
vertical writing §449
vigesimal system §337
W
violet §443
ʿ-weak forms §111
virgule §204, §224, §353
Walters, James xxiii
vocalism
Way International §678
morpheme §373
tier §374, §401, §481
Weitz, Lev xxiii
§10, §374, §461
West New York Pl. 1
vocalization system xx–xxi, §8,
ܰ ܳ Greek (◌, ◌, etc.)
§174 ff.
in early MSS §33 ff.
well-formedness condition §405 West Syriac grammarians §43 Western Neo-Aramaic §767
lack of §33
Wickham, Lionel
multi-point §147 ff.
Widmanstetter 23, §48, §644, §648
typewriter §744
linear §161 ff.
transcription §652, §660, Pl.
nonlinear §174 ff.
10
Old Syriac §23 ff.
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
430
Indices Y
Windows
2000 §259, §757, §761
yāheḇ ṭūḇā §291, §296
keyboard §785
Yahwe §393
operating system §758
Yale University xxiv–xxv, ch. 3 n.
Winter, Alan
57, Pl. 3
plotter §751
Yeates, Thomas §87
Wittenberg §645
transcription §660
wonderment
see also under Authority Index
and mḏammrānā §304
yellow §443
wood word
as a writing medium §439 boundary & nāgū ̱ ḏā §207 boundary symbol §14
Yerevan §641
Yosip, Emmanuel xxii, ch. 10 n. 9 Youhanna, Phoebe xxiii
YouTube §684, ch. 12 n. 64 Yusuf, šur §634, §738
spacing §423 ff.
spacing in Garšūni §589 spacing in Ṭuroyo §721
Yuwaqim, Cyril §735
Z
wrapping §429
Words of the Institution §275
Zaʿfarān Press §215
Wright, William xx, §123, §162
zawʿā §290, §330
Greek numerals §366
zawgā ʿelāyā §306
wrapping §429
Coptic numerals §366
zāqūrā §310
zawgā ḏḏāmē lʿeṣyānā §299
and zawgā gnīḇā §303 ̱ zawgā gn īḇā §303 ̱
writing xxi, §9
Old Syriac §§20–21 tools §439 ff.
Zschokke
sequence §478 ff.
zero suffix §102
see under Authority Index
groups §382
Zhetysu §700
system §1, §§5–6, §40
Zieme, Peter xxii
on Turco-Syriac §700 ff.
X
ZSoft Corporation ch. 17 n. 10
x-height §491
al-Zubaydī §124
Xinjiang §619
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Authority Index The following index provides cross references from the major grammars
and sources used in this study. References are made to chapter footnotes.
9v (ch. 2, n. 22)
Abouna
38v ff. (ch. 11, n. 3)
28 (ch. 2, n. 22)
74–79 (ch. 4, n. 44)
29 (ch. 2, n. 8)
81–82v (ch. 3, n. 75)
30 (ch. 4, n. 44; ch. 11, n. 12; ch. 11, n. 13)
31 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75) 33 (ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n. 32;
132 ff.(ch. 7, n. 11)
Amira
2 (ch. 9, n. 41) 6 (ch. 2, n. 11)
ch. 4, n. 77; ch. 4, n. 87;
10 (ch. 2, n. 22)
ch. 5, n. 16)
11 (ch. 2, n. 35; ch. 4, n. 44)
34 (ch. 4, n. 25)
12 ff. (ch. 7, n. 11)
al-Abrāshī et al.
22 (ch. 7, n. 15)
22 (ch. 2, n. 35–36)
22 ff. (ch. 11, n. 2)
24 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75;
24 (ch. 8, n. 16)
ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 5, n. 16)
32 ff. (ch. 3, n. 75)
27 (ch. 4, n. 44; ch. 4, n. 77)
34 (ch. 3, n. 3)
Acurensis
( ܒch. 2, n. 22; ch. 3, n. 3) ( ܓch. 3, n. 75) ( ܕch. 1, n. 35) ( ܚch. 2, n. 22) ( ܝch. 3, n. 75) ( ܐch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 30; ch. 4, n. 32)
40 (ch. 4, n. 113)
40 ff. (ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n. 25)
48 (ch. 4, n. 81)
51 ff. (ch. 3, n. 15)
Arayathinal
§2.1 (ch. 8, n. 9)
§2.2 (ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 21)
ff. (ch. 4, n. 44; ch. 10, n.
§2.3 (ch. 2, n. 17)
11)
§2.4 (ch. 8, n. 39)
ff. (ch. 7, n. 11)
§2.6 (ch. 7, n. 11)
ff. (ch. 7, n. 16)
§4 (ch. 3, n. 55)
ff. (ch. 7, n. 2)
§5 (ch. 3, n. 75)
Ambrosio
§11 (ch. 4, n. 16)
9r (ch. 2, n. 16)
§12 (ch. 4, n. 25)
9r (ch. 12, n. 19) ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
432
Indices §13 (ch. 4, n. 32)
4–16 (ch. 9, n. 23; ch. 10, n.
§22 (ch. 4, n. 77)
5 n. 12 (ch. 9, n. 26)
§24 (ch. 5, n. 1; ch. 5, n. 5)
11 (ch. 8, n. 26; ch. 8, n. 68)
3)
§16 ff. (ch. 4, n. 44)
8–9 (ch. 9, n. 38)
§23 (ch. 4, n. 107)
12 (ch. 3, n. 74; ch. 10, n. 14)
Bar ʿEbroyo, Ṣemḥe
14 (ch. 11, n. 5)
intro §3, p. 4 (ch. 2, n. 6)
17 n. 56 (ch. 8, n. 4)
intro §3, p. 4–5 (ch. 3, n. 94)
20 (ch. 9, n. 52)
intro §3 (ch. 3, n. 99)
21 (ch. 8, n. 72)
intro §3, p. 4 (ch. 9, n. 20)
21–22 (ch. 8, n. 71)
i.5.§2, p. 29 (ch. 3, n. 19)
29–30 (ch. 8, n. 30)
ii.1.§2, p. 89 (ch. 2, n. 26)
33 (ch. 3, n. 83; ch. 8, n. 17;
iv.1.§2, p. 193 (ch. 3, n. 68)
ch. 8, n. 18)
iv.1.§3 (ch. 2, n. 145)
iv.1.§3, p. 194 (ch. 2, n. 22;
34 (ch. 3, n. 77)
iv.2.§1, p. 209 (ch. 2, n. 23;
36 (ch. 8, n. 37)
35 (ch. 5, n. 35; ch. 7, n. 33)
ch. 2, n. 24; ch. 2, n. 29)
37 (ch. 5, n. 36; ch. 7, n. 32)
ch. 2, n. 25; ch. 2, n. 30;
38 (ch. 11, n. 4)
ch. 8, n. 62)
40–43 (ch. 8, n. 31)
108 ff. (ch. 4, n. 77)
44 (ch. 5, n. 3)
282 ff. (ch. 4, n. 44)
45 (ch. 8, n. 32)
308 ff. (ch. 5, n. 1)
46 (ch. 5, n. 20; ch. 8, n. 22;
Brockelmann
ch. 8, n. 51)
§2 (ch. 2, n. 7; ch. 2, n. 9; ch.
2, n. 10; ch. 2, n. 12; ch.
47 (ch. 11, n. 9)
8, n. 21; ch. 8, n. 35; ch.
57 (ch. 8, n. 28)
48 (ch. 9, n. 56)
2, n. 13; ch. 8, n. 16; ch.
58 (ch. 8, n. 29)
8, n. 39)
59 (ch. 2, n. 43)
§3 (ch. 8, n. 52)
60 (ch. 2, n. 43)
§4 (ch. 3, n. 8)
61 (ch. 2, n. 43; ch. 4, n. 5)
§5 (ch. 3, n. 15)
64 (ch. 7, n. 26)
§6 (ch. 4, n. 107)
64–66 (ch. 10, n. 15)
§7 (ch. 3, n. 55)
65 (ch. 3, n. 76)
§8 (ch. 3, n. 75; ch. 4, n. 113)
68 (ch. 4, n. 5)
§10 (ch. 4, n. 44)
69–71 (ch. 8, n. 34)
§11 (ch. 4, n. 77)
73–74 (ch. 8, n. 33)
§12 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32)
104 (ch. 2, n. 42; ch. 5, n. 2)
§18 (ch. 5, n. 1)
105 (ch. 2, n. 42)
Coakley, Typography
106 (ch. 2, n. 42)
4 n. 18. (ch. 1, n. 1)
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Authority Index
433
120 (ch. 5, n. 2)
§10 (ch. 3, n. 8)
139 (ch. 8, n. 44)
§12–14 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n.
§11 (ch. 3, n. 15)
134 (ch. 3, n. 87)
75)
140–42 (ch. 4, n. 48) 142 (ch. 11, n. 8)
§15 (ch. 3, n. 81)
153 (ch. 5, n. 26)
§18 (ch. 4, n. 86)
§17 (ch. 4, n. 77)
149 (ch. 9, n. 9)
§19 (ch. 4, n. 94)
162 (ch. 8, n. 12)
§20–21 (ch. 4, n. 16)
164 (ch. 5, n. 37)
§21 (ch. 4, n. 23; ch. 4, n. 75)
166 (ch. 8, n. 13)
§22 (ch. 5, n. 16)
174 (ch. 13, n. 3)
§23 (ch. 4, n. 25)
178 (ch. 13, n. 2)
§24 (ch. 4, n. 32)
179 (ch. 10, n. 17)
§25 (ch. 4, n. 113)
181–82 (ch. 10, n. 18) 183–84 (ch. 9, n. 42)
189 (ch. 8, n. 14; ch. 10, n. 18)
§26 (ch. 5, n. 1; ch. 5, n. 3)
Cowper
§1 (ch. 8, n. 5)
§4 (ch. 2, n. 35)
191 n. 4 (ch. 13, n. 7)
§5 (ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 21;
194–96. (ch. 8, n. 40)
ch. 8, n. 35)
223 (ch. 8, n. 41)
§6 (ch. 8, n. 9; ch. 12, n. 29)
238–40 (ch. 4, n. 102; ch. 9,
§9 (ch. 7, n. 11)
n. 43)
§11 (ch. 3, n. 55)
Coakley-Robinson
§11–12 (ch. 3, n. 75)
2 (ch. 4, n. 107; ch. 5, n. 1;
§17 (ch. 4, n. 103)
ch. 5, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 9;
§19 (ch. 4, n. 52)
ch. 8, n. 16)
§§19–20 (ch. 4, n. 44)
3 (ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n. 44)
§21
12–13 (ch. 3, n. 75)
69 (ch. 4, n. 23; ch. 4, n. 75)
a (ch. 4, n. 32)
b (ch. 4, n. 25)
Costaz
c (ch. 4, n. 16)
§1 (ch. 2, n. 9; ch. 2, n. 13)
d (ch. 5, n. 16)
§3 (ch. 9, n. 23)
§3 n. 1 (ch. 11, n. 10; ch. 11,
§22 (ch. 4, n. 77)
§4 (ch. 8, n. 5)
§23 (ch. 5, n. 1)
§22 n (ch. 4, n. 84)
n. 14)
§5 (ch. 2, n. 35)
§6 (ch. 2, n. 17; ch. 8, n. 16;
David
§1 (ch. 2, n. 2; ch. 2, n. 7; ch. 2, n. 9; ch. 2, n. 12; ch.
ch. 8, n. 21; ch. 8, n. 24;
2, n. 22)
ch. 8, n. 52)
§1 n. 1 (ch. 2, n. 15)
§9 (ch. 4, n. 44) ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
434
Indices §2 (ch. 8, n. 9)
§11 (ch. 2, n. 23; ch. 4, n. 49)
Dulabani
1 (ch. 3, n. 1)
2 (ch. 3, n. 55)
§12 (ch. 12, n. 4)
§15 (ch. 3, n. 1; ch. 3, n. 55) §20 (ch. 3, n. 108)
§30 (ch. 3, n. 86; ch. 8, n. 43;
§2 (ch. 3, n. 75)
Duval
§1 (ch. 9, n. 7) §2 (ch. 9, n. 2)
ch. 10, n. 19)
§3 (ch. 9, n. 4)
§32 (ch. 3, n. 112)
§4 (ch. 9, n. 14; ch. 9, n. 19)
§33 (ch. 2, n. 70; ch. 2, n.
§6 (ch. 8, n. 9)
114; ch. 8, n. 27)
§9 (ch. 9, n. 29; ch. 9, n. 41)
§37 (ch. 3, n. 109; ch. 3, n.
§11 (ch. 9, n. 36)
111)
§12 (ch. 11, n. 9; ch. 11, n.
§42 (ch. 2, n. 50; ch. 3, n.
31)
104)
§13 (ch. 8, n. 21; ch. 8, n. 24;
§57 ff. (ch. 4, n. 42)
ch. 8, n. 42)
§61 (ch. 4, n. 2; ch. 4, n. 16–
§16 (ch. 7, n. 9)
17)
§17 (ch. 7, n. 13; ch. 7, n. 20)
§61 ff. (ch. 6, n. 7)
§18 (ch. 2, n. 34; ch. 2, n.
§62 (ch. 2, n. 27; ch. 4, n. 25)
146)
§63 (ch. 4, n. 28–29)
§19 ff. (ch. 4, n. 44)
§64 (ch. 4, n. 32)
§42 (ch. 2, n. 2; ch. 2, n. 5;
§65 (ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n. 20)
ch. 3, n. 1)
§67 (ch. 4, n. 35; ch. 4, n. 41)
§56 (ch. 2, n. 76)
§68 (ch. 4, n. 12; ch. 4, n. 15;
§63 (ch. 2, n. 131)
ch. 4, n. 57; ch. 4, n. 60–
§63–69 (ch. 3, n. 15)
62; ch. 4, n. 66–68; ch.
§65 (ch. 3, n. 38)
4, n. 71; ch. 4, n. 103;
§66 (ch. 4, n. 77)
ch. 4, n. 107–08)
§67 (ch. 4, n. 71)
§69 (ch. 4, n. 77; ch. 4, n. 86;
§68 (ch. 4, n. 57; ch. 4, n. 58;
ch. 4, n. 91–92; ch. 4, n.
ch. 4, n. 59; ch. 4, n. 70)
95; ch. 4, n. 97–99; ch.
§69 (ch. 4, n. 67)
4, n. 94; ch. 4, n. 113)
§70 (ch. 3, n. 55)
§69.1 (ch. 4, n. 15)
§71 (ch. 3, n. 17)
§70 (ch. 8, n. 45; ch. 8, n. 52;
§72 (ch. 3, n. 61; ch. 3, n. 64)
ch. 8, n. 55)
§73 (ch. 3, n. 67)
§70.4 (ch. 5, n. 16; ch. 9, n.
§74 (ch. 3, n. 70)
46)
§75 (ch. 3, n. 3; ch. 3, n. 75;
§136 (ch. 4, n. 94)
ch. 3, n. 98)
§137–61 (ch. 5, n. 8)
§77 (ch. 3, n. 96)
p. 244 n. 1 (ch. 3, n. 95) ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Authority Index
435
§136 (ch. 4, n. 77–79; ch. 4,
§170, 29 (ch. 6, n. 43; ch. 6,
§§143–147 (ch. 4, n. 25)
§170, 30 (ch. 6, n. 23)
§148 (ch. 4, n. 33–34)
§170, 33 (ch. 6, n. 40)
n. 51)
n. 84)
§170, 32 (ch. 6, n. 39)
§145 (ch. 4, n. 31)
§170, 34 (ch. 6, n. 59)
§§148–50 (ch. 4, n. 32)
§170, 35 (ch. 6, n. 32)
§151 (ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n.
§170, 36 (ch. 6, n. 34)
21)
§170, 90 (ch. 6, n. 14)
§152 (ch. 4, n. 38)
§171 (ch. 6, n. 10)
§§152–53 (ch. 4, n. 35; ch. 4,
§174, 5 (ch. 6, n. 62)
n. 41)
§154 (ch. 8, n. 69)
ch. ix (ch. 3, n. 8)
§155 (ch. 4, n. 113; ch. 5, n.
Ecchellens
§163 (ch. 6, n. 9)
Elia of Ṣoba
16)
§170, 1 (ch. 6, n. 30; ch. 6, n.
5 (ch. 2, n. 22) 26 (ch. 2, n. 29)
27–28 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n.
56)
75)
§170, 1, 9 (ch. 6, n. 28) §170, 2 (ch. 6, n. 65)
37 ff. (ch. 4, n. 44)
§170, 4 (ch. 6, n. 61)
44–45 (ch. 6, n. 29)
41 ff. (ch. 4, n. 77)
§170, 3 (ch. 6, n. 53)
45 (ch. 6, n. 53; ch. 6, n. 61)
§170, 5 (ch. 6, n. 66)
45–46 (ch. 6, n. 56)
§170, 10 (ch. 6, n. 46) §170, 11 (ch. 6, n. 47)
( ܘch. 2, n. 21) ( ܙch. 2, n. 21)
§170, 12 (ch. 6, n. 58)
§170, 13 (ch. 6, n. 37)
§170, 13, 35 (ch. 6, n. 32)
§170, 14 (ch. 6, n. 33; ch. 6, n. 36)
(ch. 2, n. 25)
(ch. 2, n. 23)
Gabriel of St. Joseph
§5 (ch. 11, n. 31)
§170, 15 (ch. 6, n. 31)
§6 (ch. 2, n. 22)
§170, 16 (ch. 6, n. 41)
§9 (ch. 4, n. 44)
§170, 17 (ch. 6, n. 38)
§10 (ch. 7, n. 11)
§170, 18 (ch. 6, n. 13)
§11 (ch. 8, n. 5; ch. 11, n. 31)
§170, 21 (ch. 6, n. 25)
§11.e (ch. 8, n. 39)
§170, 23 (ch. 6, n. 50)
§12 (ch. 9, n. 51)
§170, 24 (ch. 6, n. 26)
§15 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75)
§170, 25 (ch. 6, n. 21)
§30 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32)
§170, 26 (ch. 6, n. 16)
§35 (ch. 4, n. 77)
§170, 27 (ch. 6, n. 27)
§37 (ch. 4, n. 107)
§170, 28 (ch. 6, n. 19) ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
§39 (ch. 5, n. 1) ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
436
Indices ٔ .2 (ch. 4, n. 44) §4.الاول
Healey
4 (ch. 2, n. 35; ch. 8, n. 21;
§4.( الثالثch. 4, n. 77)
8 (ch. 3, n. 8)
§5 (ch. 4, n. 1; ch. 4, n. 16;
ch. 8, n. 39)
§4.( الخامسch. 5, n. 1)
8–9 (ch. 3, n. 75)
ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 74)
12 (ch. 5, n. 1)
ٔ (ch. 5, n. 16) §5.الاول
10 (ch. 4, n. 44; ch. 4, n. 77; ch. 4, n. 107)
11 (ch. 4, n. 16)
§5.( الثالثch. 4, n. 113) §5.( الثانيch. 4, n. 32)
Kiraz, Primer
141 (ch. 3, n. 55)
17 (ch. 2, n. 37)
§4 (ch. 8, n. 16)
23 (ch. 8, n. 16)
§11 (ch. 4, n. 52)
30 (ch. 3, n. 104)
Hoffmann, A.
34 (ch. 4, n. 77)
§4 (ch. 2, n. 35)
45 (ch. 2, n. 22)
§7 (ch. 2, n. 2; ch. 2, n. 22;
46–47 (ch. 3, n. 75)
ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 24;
47–48 (ch. 4, n. 44)
ch. 8, n. 35; ch. 11, n.
67 (ch. 5, n. 1)
13; ch. 12, n. 29; ch. 12,
70 (ch. 4, n. 16)
n. 31; ch. 12, n. 33)
74–75 (ch. 4, n. 77)
§8, p. 43 (ch. 7, n. 6)
124–25 (ch. 7, n. 11)
§8, pp. 81–82 (ch. 7, n. 11)
128 (ch. 5, n. 1)
§8, p. 82 (ch. 7, n. 14; ch. 7,
160–61 (ch. 4, n. 67)
n. 21)
164 (ch. 8, n. 52)
§9, p. 85 (ch. 3, n. 15)
181 (ch. 4, n. 107)
§11 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75)
192 (ch. 7, n. 11)
§14 (ch. 4, n. 57)
196 (ch. 3, n. 75)
§18 (ch. 4, n. 44)
196 (ch. 8, n. 24–25)
§19 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32)
198 (ch. 4, n. 77)
§20 (ch. 4, n. 16)
210 §11 (ch. 2, n. 35)
§21 (ch. 5, n. 16)
210 §12 (ch. 3, n. 75)
§22 (ch. 4, n. 77)
211 §16 (ch. 3, n. 55)
§88 (ch. 3, n. 70)
211 §19 (ch. 4, n. 16)
Jacob bar Šakko
211 §20 (ch. 5, n. 16)
211 §21 (ch. 4, n. 44)
( ܘch. 3, n. 56)
211 §22 (ch. 4, n. 107)
(ch. 2, n. 31)
̣
212 §§23–24 (ch. 4, n. 57)
(ch. 2, n. 25–26)
212 §§25–28 (ch. 5, n. 1)
al-Kfarnissy
212 §29 (ch. 8, n. 16)
§2 (ch. 2, n. 22; ch. 9, n. 27)
212 §30 (ch. 8, n. 21; ch. 8, n.
§3 (ch. 3, n. 1; ch. 3, n. 55;
24–25)
ch. 3, n. 75)
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Authority Index 25 (ch. 4, n. 16)
212 §31 (ch. 8, n. 35)
§II.a (ch. 2, n. 35)
262 (ch. 4, n. 92)
§II.e (ch. 8, n. 5)
Makdasi
( ܝch. 2, n. 22)
(ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75)
(ch. 4, n. 77)
̣ Manna
§13 ff. (ch. 3, n. 55)
Michaelis, J. B.
§2 (ch. 4, n. 44; ch. 8, n. 16;
ch. 8, n. 21; ch. 8, n. 35;
(ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n. 25;
ch. 11, n. 11)
ch. 4, n. 32)
§4 (ch. 7, n. 12)
(ch. 4, n. 44)
§5 (ch. 9, n. 23)
§8 (ch. 3, n. 75)
7 (ch. 2, n. 22)
§12 (ch. 4, n. 44)
8 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75)
§13 (ch. 4, n. 103; ch. 4, n.
340–41 (ch. 4, n. 44)
113)
Masius
5 (ch. 12, n. 21)
§14 (ch. 4, n. 77)
10 (ch. 4, n. 18)
§16 (ch. 4, n. 16)
§15 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32)
8 (ch. 4, n. 44)
§17 (ch. 5, n. 1)
10–11 (ch. 4, n. 76)
§17 (ch. 6, n. 16; ch. 6, n. 19;
11 (ch. 4, n. 55; ch. 4, n. 80) Merx
437
ch. 6, n. 21–22; ch. 6, n.
15 ff. (ch. 2, n. 144)
26–27; ch. 6, n. 30; ch.
6, n. 53; ch. 6, n. 56; ch.
19 (ch. 4, n. 38)
6, n. 61; ch. 6, n. 65)
50 (ch. 3, n. 94)
103 (ch. 2, n. 140; ch. 2, n. 143)
29 (ch. 3, n. 70)
Mingana
2 (ch. 8, n. 9)
104 (ch. 2, n. 33)
3 (ch. 4, n. 51)
136 (ch. 2, n. 32)
3–4 (ch. 4, n. 44)
269 (ch. 12, n. 22)
10 (ch. 8, n. 48; ch. 8, n. 52)
270 (ch. 12, n. 23)
14–23 (ch. 3, n. 55)
272 (ch. 2, n. 144)
15 ff. (ch. 4, n. 43)
(ch. 2, n. 20)
19–20 (ch. 3, n. 97)
Michaelis, C. B.
24 ff. (ch. 3, n. 75)
3 (ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 21;
31 (ch. 8, n. 49)
ch. 8, n. 35)
31–36 (ch. 3, n. 101)
21 ff. (ch. 4, n. 44)
89 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 29)
22 (ch. 4, n. 103; ch. 4, n.
90 (ch. 4, n. 32)
107)
91–93 (ch. 4, n. 16)
23 (ch. 4, n. 78)
94 ff. (ch. 4, n. 77)
24 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32;
97 ff. (ch. 4, n. 57)
ch. 4, n. 113)
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
438
Indices 98 (ch. 4, n. 67; ch. 4, n. 69) 100–01 (ch. 4, n. 107) 102 (ch. 4, n. 113)
§13 (ch. 7, n. 31)
Niʿmatallah
( ܓch. 2, n. 22) ( ܗch. 4, n. 44; ch. 4, n. 67;
Muraoka, CS
§2 (ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 21;
ch. 4, n. 77; ch. 4, n.
ch. 8, n. 39)
107)
§4 (ch. 2, n. 35; ch. 3, n. 55;
( ܘch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n. 74;
§5 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32;
( ܙch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32)
ch. 3, n. 75)
ch. 4, n. 44; ch. 4, n. 77)
Muraoka, CS4H
ch. 5, n. 16)
Nöldeke
§1.A (ch. 9, n. 23)
§2 (ch. 2, n. 35)
§1.B (ch. 2, n. 7; ch. 2, n. 10;
§4 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75)
ch. 2, n. 12–13; ch. 8, n.
§5 (ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n. 44)
5)
§6 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32;
§1.C (ch. 2, n. 17; ch. 2, n. 35;
ch. 4, n. 77; ch. 4, n.
ch. 8, n. 16)
107; ch. 5, n. 1)
§3 (ch. 8, n. 52)
§7 (ch. 3, n. 8)
§4.A (ch. 3, n. 8)
Nestle
§6 (ch. 3, n. 15; ch. 4, n. 57;
§2.b (ch. 2, n. 3; ch. 2, n. 7;
ch. 4, n. 67; ch. 4, n. 68;
ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 21)
ch. 4, n. 103)
§3 (ch. 2, n. 28; ch. 3, n. 55;
§7 (ch. 4, n. 107)
§6.a (ch. 3, n. 15–16; ch. 4, n.
§9 (ch. 3, n. 75; ch. 4, n. 113)
ch. 3, n. 75)
§8 (ch. 3, n. 53; ch. 3, n. 55)
3)
§9.c (ch. 4, n. 35)
§6.b.n.1 (ch. 3, n. 62)
§10 (ch. 3, n. 81)
§6.c (ch. 3, n. 100)
§11 (ch. 3, n. 100)
§6.e (ch. 3, n. 92)
§12 (ch. 3, n. 92)
§7.a (ch. 4, n. 95)
§13.A (ch. 3, n. 81)
§7.a n. 1 (ch. 4, n. 78)
§14 (ch. 4, n. 3)
§7.b (ch. 4, n. 57)
§15 (ch. 4, n. 44)
§8 (ch. 4, n. 44)
§16.A (ch. 4, n. 77)
§9.a (ch. 4, n. 25)
§16.B (ch. 4, n. 92; ch. 4, n.
§9.b (ch. 4, n. 32)
94–95; ch. 4, n. 97–98)
§9.c (ch. 4, n. 35)
§16.C (ch. 4, n. 101)
§10 (ch. 5, n. 9; ch. 5, n. 11;
§17 (ch. 4, n. 15–16; ch. 4, n.
§9.d (ch. 5, n. 16)
§16.D (ch. 4, n. 85–86)
ch. 5, n. 13)
25)
§12 (ch. 5, n. 8)
§18 (ch. 5, n. 1)
§13 (ch. 7, n. 11) ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
p. 10 n. 2 (ch. 4, n. 78) ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Authority Index
7 (ch. 2, n. 130; ch. 3, n. 2)
Appendix, 316–17 (ch. 7, n.
9 (ch. 3, n. 15)
9)
Palacios
10–13 (ch. 4, n. 6)
12 (ch. 3, n. 18; ch. 4, n. 11)
§6 (ch. 8, n. 9)
13 (ch. 4, n. 7–10; ch. 4, n.
§7 (ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 21)
13; ch. 4, n. 104)
§8 (ch. 2, n. 35)
§13 (ch. 3, n. 8)
14 (ch. 3, n. 29–31)
§16 (ch. 3, n. 55)
15–18 (ch. 4, n. 57)
15 (ch. 3, n. 32)
§15 (ch. 3, n. 15)
15–19 (ch. 4, n. 61)
§18 ff. (ch. 3, n. 75)
16–17 (ch. 4, n. 63–64)
§28 ff. (ch. 4, n. 44)
21 (ch. 3, n. 20–28; ch. 3, n.
§32 (ch. 4, n. 16)
33–37; ch. 3, n. 39; ch.
§33 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32)
4, n. 112)
§35 (ch. 5, n. 3; ch. 6, n. 53;
22 (ch. 4, n. 109; ch. 4, n.
ch. 6, n. 56; ch. 6, n. 61;
111)
ch. 6, n. 65)
Risius
23 (ch. 4, n. 14) 25 (ch. 4, n. 11)
§171 (ch. 2, n. 4; ch. 2, n. 22)
26 (ch. 3, n. 41–44)
§173 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n.
26 (ch. 4, n. 13)
75)
28 (ch. 3, n. 45–47)
§178 (ch. 4, n. 44)
29 (ch. 3, n. 48–51)
Robinson
30 (ch. 3, n. 54)
§2 (ch. 2, n. 14)
37 (ch. 4, n. 73)
4 (ch. 12, n. 48)
41 (ch. 3, n. 63)
64 (ch. 4, n. 75)
42–43 (ch. 3, n. 65)
Sciadrensis
43 n. 1 (ch. 3, n. 66)
( ܓch. 9, n. 23–24; ch. 9, n.
59 (ch. 6, n. 7)
41)
68 (ch. 6, n. 22)
( ܙch. 2, n. 145) ( ܚch. 2, n. 35) ܚff. (ch. 7, n. 11) ܐ
68–69 (ch. 6, n. 26)
69–70 (ch. 6, n. 24)
70 (ch. 6, n. 31; ch. 6, n. 35)
ff. (ch. 3, n. 75)
71 (ch. 6, n. 30)
(ch. 4, n. 16)
72 (ch. 6, n. 41)
(ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32)
72–73 (ch. 6, n. 45)
(ch. 4, n. 79)
73 (ch. 6, n. 43; ch. 6, n. 56)
(ch. 4, n. 56)
Segal
439
74 (ch. 6, n. 53; ch. 6, n. 61)
( ܠch. 4, n. 107)
75 (ch. 6, n. 65)
81–83 (ch. 6, n. 17)
5 (ch. 8, n. 3)
83 (ch. 6, n. 18)
6 (ch. 3, n. 113) ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
440
Indices 84–85 (ch. 6, n. 28)
133–34 (ch. 6, n. 57)
86 (ch. 6, n. 22)
135–36 (ch. 6, n. 67)
135 (ch. 6, n. 65)
85–86 (ch. 6, n. 23)
138 (ch. 6, n. 14)
87–89 (ch. 6, n. 26)
139 (ch. 6, n. 40; ch. 6, n. 47)
89–90 (ch. 6, n. 30)
140 (ch. 6, n. 50; 58–59)
90–92 (ch. 6, n. 24)
141 (ch. 6, n. 66)
92–94 (ch. 6, n. 35)
Thackston
94–95 (ch. 6, n. 29)
xxi (ch. 3, n. 75)
96–97 (ch. 6, n. 61)
xxii (ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n. 67;
97 (ch. 6, n. 55)
ch. 4, n. 77; ch. 4, n.
98–99 (ch. 6, n. 31)
107)
99–100 (ch. 6, n. 36)
100–01 (ch. 6, n. 37)
xxiii (ch. 4, n. 44; ch. 4, n. 52)
103 (ch. 6, n. 49)
xx–xxi (ch. 3, n. 55)
xxiii (ch. 7, n. 11)
101–03 (ch. 6, n. 45)
Tullberg
104 (ch. 6, n. 48)
§2 (ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 35)
104–06 (ch. 6, n. 41)
§3 (ch. 7, n. 11)
107 (ch. 6, n. 42)
§4 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75)
107–08 (ch. 6, n. 46)
§8.1 (ch. 4, n. 107)
108 (ch. 6, n. 11; ch. 6, n. 52)
§8.2 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32)
109 (ch. 6, n. 12; ch. 6, n. 53)
§9 (ch. 5, n. 1)
110 (ch. 6, n. 54)
§14 (ch. 4, n. 44)
111–13 (ch. 6, n. 56)
Uhlemann
113–15 (ch. 6, n. 65)
§1 (ch. 8, n. 5; ch. 8, n. 9)
115–17 (ch. 6, n. 60)
§1.R.2 (ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n.
117 (ch. 6, n. 63)
21; ch. 8, n. 35)
122 (ch. 6, n. 15)
§1.R.5 (ch. 2, n. 17; ch. 7, n.
123 (ch. 6, n. 13)
11; ch. 7, n. 21)
124 (ch. 6, n. 19; ch. 6, n. 22;
§2 (ch. 3, n. 8)
ch. 6, n. 26)
§2.R (ch. 3, n. 70)
125 (ch. 6, n. 20; ch. 6, n. 27)
§3 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75;
125–26 (ch. 6, n. 21)
ch. 3, n. 81)
126 (ch. 6, n. 13; ch. 6, n. 61) 127–28 (ch. 6, n. 35)
§4 (ch. 3, n. 15)
129 (ch. 6, n. 44)
§6 (ch. 4, n. 77)
§5 (ch. 4, n. 44)
128 (ch. 6, n. 31)
§7 (ch. 4, n. 25; ch. 4, n. 32)
129–30 (ch. 6, n. 39)
§7.R.1 (ch. 4, n. 29)
130–32 (ch. 6, n. 38)
§7.R.2.b (ch. 5, n. 16)
132 (ch. 6, n. 30; ch. 6, n. 53)
§7.R.2.c (ch. 4, n. 113)
132–33 (ch. 6, n. 51) ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Authority Index 2 (ch. 2, n. 44)
§8 (ch. 4, n. 16)
p. 17 (ch. 12, n. 9)
§10 (ch. 5, n. 1)
Ungnad
§3 (ch. 3, n. 55; ch. 3, n. 75;
Zschokke
§1.2 (ch. 8, n. 9)
§1.3 (ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, n. 24;
ch. 4, n. 32; ch. 4, n. 44;
ch. 8, n. 35)
ch. 4, n. 77; ch. 4, n.
§3.2 (ch. 3, n. 8)
107; ch. 4, n. 113; ch. 5,
§3.3 (ch. 3, n. 15; ch. 3, n. 55;
n. 1; ch. 8, n. 16; ch. 8, Yeates
ch. 3, n. 75)
n. 21)
§4 (ch. 11, n. 13)
§4.4.a (ch. 4, n. 44)
§2 (ch. 8, n. 5; ch. 8, n. 16;
§4.4.b (ch. 4, n. 77)
ch. 8, n. 24; ch. 8, n. 35)
§4.4.c (ch. 4, n. 32)
§§7–8 (ch. 4, n. 44)
§4.4.c.β (ch. 4, n. 25)
§8 (ch. 4, n. 107)
§4.4.d (ch. 4, n. 16)
§9 (ch. 4, n. 16; ch. 4, n. 25;
§4.4.e.α (ch. 5, n. 16)
ch. 4, n. 32)
§5 (ch. 7, n. 11; ch. 7, n. 21)
§10 (ch. 4, n. 77)
§7 (ch. 5, n. 1; ch. 5, n. 33)
§11 (ch. 5, n. 1)
§12 (ch. 7, n. 6)
1–3 (ch. 12, n. 30)
1–2 (ch. 12, n. 31)
1–3 (ch. 12, n. 33)
1–2 (ch. 12, n. 33)
17–18 (ch. 12, n. 18)
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
441
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Biblical Citations Gen. 6:4
Gen. 8:13
Gen. 31:43 Gen. 32:9
§331
Ps. 2:6
§311
§314
Ps. 66:2
§312
§297, §302
Gen. 49:9
§289
Exod. 5:21
§311
Exod. 14:31
Exod. 10:7 Exod. 16:3
Exod. 31:15 Exod. 34:6
Prov. 23:15
§327
§314
Isa. 1:20
§330
§311
§327
§316
Ruth 1:20
§314
§292
2 Sam. 14:7
§327
1 Kgs. 8:17
§328
§298
Job 34:7
§300, §328
Ps. 1:6
§292, §314 ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
Isa. 10:30
§305
Isa. 26:2
§300
Isa. 32:11 Isa. 37:27 Isa. 40:21
ch. 2 n. 52
§311
§328
Isa. 58:13
§298
Isa. 65:12
ch. 9 n. 55
Isa. 65:18
§308
ch. 9 n. 53
ch. 9 n. 54 ch. 9 n. 48
Isa. 66:15
ch. 4 n. 110
Jer. 22:18
§324
Isa. 66:19
ch. 15: 365
ch. 2 n. 51
Isa. 48:1
Isa. 62:5
ch. 3: 59
ch. 3 n. 40
ch. 4 n. 19
Isa. 55:13
ch. 9: 209
§300
Isa. 45:4
Isa. 46:12
§324
2 Kgs. 12:16
§323
Isa. 11:10
§314
§306
Isa. 1:21
Isa. 1:24
§304
2 Sam. 3:16
ch. 13: p. 353
§305
§306
Judg. 14:4
ch. 1: p. 1
§314
Ps. 143/4:14
§306
§297
ch. 7: 159
Ps. 123/4:7
§328
Josh. 9:8
1 Kgs. 18:34
§296
Ps. 132/3:1
§303
2 Sam. 12:13
§306
Ps. 112:1
Ps. 116/7: 1
§321
Num. 36:3
2 Sam. 1:19
§307
Ps. 78:20
§317
Gen. 43:7 Gen. 47:9
Ps. 51:1
§325
ch. 4 n. 110
Jer. 52:34
§306
Lam. 1:12
§290
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
444
Indices
Lam. 2:20
§327
Lk. 11:31
Ezek. 36:22
§327
Jn 1:30
Lam. 3:55
Ezek. 36:32 Dan. 4:31 Dan. 11:4
§299
Jn. 1:1
§308
§314
§294
Jn. 1:42
§314
§299
Jn. 1:46
§306
Jn. 11:56
§305
§315
§311
Jn. 14:20
§202
Jn. 20:12
§90
Dan. 12:8
§297, §324
Amos 2:7
§314
Acts 9:17
§320
Mic. 1:5
§327
Acts 27:24
§305
Acts 25:10
§300
Rom. 1:30
§324
ch. 4 n. 88
1 Cor. 15:42
§310
ch. 4 n. 90
Gal. 3:1
§305
Mt. 11:4
§319
Gal. 5:22
Mt. 12:42
§299
Mt. 1:1
ch. 5 n. 4
Mt. 1:2
§299
Mt. 3:5
Mt. 1:5
Mt. 3:7 Mt. 3:8
Mt. 7:5
Mt. 12:3
Mt. 25:34
§90
ch. 4 n. 89 §330
§302 §301
Mk. 16:6
§292
Lk 9:38
§295
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
Rom. 8:38
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
§314
Gal. 4:10
§289
Col. 1:2
§311
1 Tim. 6:11
ch. 4 n. 23
2 Tim. 2:22
ch. 4 n. 23
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
§300
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
CV Patterns CCC
CCCt
CCCty CCīC
§223
§223
§223 §221
CCVC
§221
CVCVC
§221
teCCuC
§223
CᵊCVC
neCCūC
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
§221 §223
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Grammatical & Technical Terms Arab. ‘ تطويلelongation’ §472
ِ ِ ْٕ Arab. انجيلي
ْ َ ‘script of the سطر
gospel’ §453
tion’ §72
ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ܐܬܘܬܐ ݂ ݂ ‘signs’ §56 ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ܽ ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ܐܬܘܬܐ ܐܘܪܗ ݂ ܐ ݂ ݂ ‘Edessan letters’ §453
Greek
ܳ̈ ܳ ܳ ܳ ܐܬܘܬܐ ݂ ܶܓ ܳ ܳ ̈ ݂ ܐ ݂ ݂ ‘generic letters’ §70 ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ܰ ݂ ݂ ܬܘܬܐ ܳ ܕܒ ݁ ܰܕ ݂ ݂ ‘ ܐBardaiṣan Alphabet’
ἀπόδοσις §284
παροξύτονος §289 πρóτασις §284
§367
στρογγύλος §453
Persian
ܳ ܳ ܽ ܐܬܘܬ ݂ ̈ ݂ ‘letters of comple-
ܳ ـ ܳܐ
Arabic
‘ كشيدهdrawn out’
ܳ ܺـ ̈ ܳ ݂ ܐ
ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ܐܬܘܬܐ ݂ ݂ ‘healthy/perfect
letters’ §74
ܳ ܳ ̈ܳ ܳ ܐܬܘܬܐ ݂ ܺ ܳ ݂ܬܐ ݂ ݂ ‘weak/sick signs’
§472
§74,
§131
Syriac
ܐ
ܒ
§ ܐܒܐ ܣ271 ܶ ܳ ‘ ݂ܐܒ ܳ ܐ ݂ܕ ݂ ܳ ܰ ݁ ܐpen of bird’ §442 ܳ ‘ ݂ܐܕ ܳ ܐform’ §453 ܐܘ ܐὀξεία ‘acute’ §272 ܣ ܐܘἀστερίσκος ‘asterisk’
‘ ܒܐܪ ܐgrave’ §272 § ݁ܒ ݂ ܽܘܠ220
§271 ݂ܰ ܰܐthe mnemonic §65, §71 ܽ ܶ ݂̈ ܶܐ ‘ ܐelements’ §56 ܳ ܶ݁ ܰ ܶ ܓ ‘ ܐEstrangelā’ §§453–54 ܳ‘ ܰܐ ܳ ܐvowel name’ §189 ܰ ‘ ܺܐܪ ݂ ܳ ܐlong’ §193 ܶ ݂ ̈ ܳ ݂ ܳ ‘signs of annunciation’ ܗܓ ܳ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܐܬܘܬ §56 ܳ ܳ ̈ ܺ ݁ ̈ܳ ܳ ܐܬܘܬ ݂ ݂ܒ ݂ ܐ ݂ ݂ ‘signs of writings’
and abbreviation mark §257 and frequency §119 and numerals §355 and quotation marks §254 and spacing §417 and vowel shift §194 in Nuro’s reform §461
݁ܒ ݂ ܽ ܘ ܳ ܳ ܐNuro’s bdūl marker §461 ‘ ݁ ܳܒ ݂ ܽ ܳ ܐweeping’ §312 ‘ ܒ ܐshort’ §272 ܰ ‘ ݁ ܳܒ ݂ ܪ ܶ ܳ ـ ܳ ܐafter ʿelāyā’ §323
§56
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
448
Indices
ܓ ‘ ܳܓ ܽ ܳܘܪܐdrawing out’
ܺ ܳܐ §289
ܛ ܰ ܽ ܒ ܳܐ ̈ ݂ ܶܐ
ܕ ‘ ܕܐ ܐܐrough’ §272 ܳ ‘ ݁ܕ ܽ ݂ܬܐink’ §443 ܗ ܶ ܳ݁ ܰ ‘members’ ܗܕ ̈ ܐ
§284
ܳ ݁ ܰ ‘pair’ §330 ܙܘܓܐ ܳ ܰ ‘mournful pair’ §303 ܙܘܓܐ ݂ ܳܒ ݂ ܽ ܳ ܐ ܳܙܘܓܐ ܓ ܺ ݂ܒܐ ܰ ݂ ܳ ݁ ‘furtive pair’ §303 ܳܙܘܓܐ ݂ ݂ ܳܕܕ ܶ ܐ ܶ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܰ ‘pair that resembles ʿeṣyānā’ §299
ܳ ݁ ܰ ‘upper pair’ §306 ܙܘܓܐ ܶ ܳ ـ ܳ ܐ ܳ‘ ܰܙܘ ܐmovement’ §128, §174, §290 ‘ ܙ ܳ ܳ ܐoblique’ §191 ܽ ܺ ‘ ݁ ܰܒwriting in oblique manner’ §155
ܺ ݂ § ܙ ܳ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܰܕ189 § ܙ ܳ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܰܕ189 ܽ ‘ ܳܙweaver’ §310 ܳ § ܙ189
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
§282 ܳ‘ ܳ ܶ ݂ܒ ܽ ݂ܒܐgiving the appellation ‘Blessed’’ §291, §296
ܳ § ܽ ݂ܕ ݂ ܺܒ ݁ܬܐ189 ܳ § ܽ ݂ܕ ܰ ܰ ݁ ܐ189
ܟ ‘ ݁ ܽ ܳܪ ܳ ܐquire signature’ §342 ܳ ܺ ‘ ݁ ݂ ̈ ݂ ܳܒ ݂ ܐthe written’ §56 ܠ
̈ ܰ ݁ ܰ ‘upwards’ §155 ݁ ݂ܰ ̈ ܰ ݁ ܰ ‘downwards’ §155 ܺ ‘ ܺ ܓ ܰ ܐlithography’ §733 ܶ
ܡ ‘ ܐ ܐlong’ ݂ ܰܒ ܳ ـ ܳ ܐ
§272
accent ‘annulling’ §309 silent marker ‘that which makes to cease’ §204
݂ ܰܒ ݁ ܳ ܳ ܐ ܳ ܳ ݂ܰ ܰ ݂ ܳ ܳܐ ܰ ݁ܓ ܳ ܳ ܐ
ܚ ܰ § ݂ ܳܒ ܳ ܐ ܺܐܪ ݂ ܳ ܐ189 § ݂ ܳܒ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܰ ܳ ܐ189 ‘ ܶ ݂ܒ ܳ ܐink’ §443 ܺ ݂ܳܐ ‘sudden’ §193 ch. 1: p. 1
‘drops’ §225
ܶ ‘ ܰ ݂ ̈ܐmarks, signs’ §189 ‘ ܰ ݂ ̈ ܶܐ ܽ ̈ ܳ ܶܐsymbols of points’
ܙ
ch. 7: 159
‘printing’ §733
ܝ
ܘ ܳ ܺܰ ܰ ݁ܬܐ ‘ ܘܘnarrow waw’ §189 ܳ݁ ܺ ܰ ‘ ܘܘ ܪܘ ܐbroad waw’ §189
ܶܐ ܳܪܐ ݂ܳܐ
‘tight’ §193
‘causing to weep’ §317 ‘amazement’ §304 ‘Eastern’ §455 ‘vowel producer,
enunciator’ §205 ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Grammatical & Technical Terms
‘ ܰ ݁ ݂ ܳ ܳ ܐinverting’ §326 ܳ ܰ ‘warning’ §309 ܳ ܗܪ ‘ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܐcausing movement’ §292 ܳ ݁ ܰ ‘ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܐcausing greater moveܪܒܐ ܰ ܳ ܳܐ ܳ ݂ܳ ܰ ܰ ݁ ܳ ܳܐ
ment’ §293 ‘uniting’ §310 ‘that which lies near, closes’ §208
meaning’ §70
‘ ܰ ܳ ܶܐteacher of reading’ §113 ‘ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܐgoing around’ §326 ܳ ‘ ܰ ܗ ܳ ܐhastener’ §206 ‘ ܰ ܐ ܳ ܳ ܐinterrogative’ §283, §297 ܳ ‘ ܰ ـ ܳ ܽ ݂ܬܐtradition’ §299 ܳ ܳ ‘ ܶ ݁ ݁ ܰܕamazement’ §304 ‘ ܶ ݂ ݁ ܰ ݂ ܳ ܳ ܐsupplicating’ §318 ܰ ܳ ‘ ܶ ݁ ݁ܬܘ ݂ ܳ ̈ ܳ ݂ ܐadditional letters’ §70
‘movements’ §128
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
‘that which draws’ §199, §207
§70,
§78
ܳ ‘ ܰ ݂ ܐlowerer’ §311 ‘ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܐgiving rest’ §312 ‘ ܰ ݁ܒ ܳ ܳ ܐsatisfying’ §324 ܰ ܶ ܳ ܳܐ ‘of sides’ §460 ܳ‘ ܰ ݁ ܳ ܐmaking sandals’ §303 ‘ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܐcrouching’ §317 ‘ ܰ ݂ ܳܒ ܳ ܐWestern’ §454 ܳ ܳ ݂ ‘ ݂ ܰ ݁ܓbridling’ §222 ‘ ݂ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܐof supplication’ §295 ܳ ‘ ܰ ݁ ̈ ܳ ـ ݂ ܐfallen [letters]’ §71 ‘ ܰ ܳ ܳ ܐof prayer’ §313, §318 ‘ ܶ ̈ ܳ ܶܐin between’ §73, §127 ‘ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܐcausing to stand’ §327 ‘ ܰ ـ ܳ ܳ ܐlaudatory’ §296 ܳ ܳ݁ ܽ ܳ ̈ ܰ ‘[letters] giving ݂
ch. 7: 159
ܢ ܳ ݂ܽܓ ݂ ܳܕܐ
‘supplicating’ §313
‘ ܽ ̈ ܶܐpoints’ §282 ‘ ܽ ̈ ܶܐ ݂ ܶܓ ̈ ܳ ܳ ܶܐgeneric points’
‘demonstrator’ §294
ܳ ܶ ݁ ݁ ܺܬܙ ܳ ܽ ݂ܬܐ
ܰ ܶ ݁ ݁ܬ ̣ ݂ ܳ ܳ ܐ
449
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ܽ ̈ ܶܐ ݂ܕ ݂ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܐ
‘points of compari-
son’ §282
ܽ ̈ ܶܐ ݂ ܳ ܽ ܘ ܶܐ
‘distinctive points’
§139
‘ ܺ ܳ ܐsign’ §298 ‘ ܺ ̈ ܶܐ ݂ܕ ݂ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܐsigns of comparison’ §282
‘ ܳ ݂ ܳ ܐthrowing down’ ‘ ܰ ̈ ݁ ܶ ܐthin’ §73, §127 ܳ ܳ ‘ ܳ ̈ ݂ ܐbeats’ §128
§319
ܣ ‘ ̈ ܳ ܶ ܐplacements’ §128, §225 ‘ ܳ ݁ ܳ ܐsupporting’ §314 ‘ ܳ ݁ ܳ ܐ ݂ܓ ܺ ݂ܳܒܐfurtive sāmkā’ §315 ‘ ܳ ݁ ܳ ܐ ݂ܳܓ ܽ ܳܘܪܐsāmkā that stretches’ §316 ܳ ܶ ‘ ܐlinear’ §454 ܳ‘ ܶ ܳ ܐ ܙ ܽ ܪܐa little serṭūnā’ §199 ܳ ܳ ‘ ܶ ܐ ݂ ܺ ܐsimple/common linear’ §454 ܳ ܽ ܶ ‘little line’ §199 ܳ ܽ ܽ ܶ ‘little, little line’ §199
ܥ ܳ ݂ ܰܒ ̈ܐ ܶ ܳ ـ ܳܐ
‘thick’ §73, §127 ‘upper’ §328, §283
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
450
Indices
‘ ܳ ܳ ܐa vowel name’ §189 ‘ ݂ ܺ ݂ ܳ ܐdoubled, outline’ §460 ܳ ‘ ݂ ܺ ݂ ݁ ܐdouble’ §460 ‘ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܐresisting, compelling’ §299 ‘ ܺ ܳ ܐpressed, contracted’ §314 ܺ ‘squeezed’ §299 ܳ‘ ܳ ܳܨܐ ܰ ܺܐܪ ݂ ܐlong ʿṣāṣā’ §189 ‘ ܳ ܳܨܐ ݂ ܰ ܳ ܐshort ʿṣāṣā’ §189 ‘ ܳ ܳܨܐ ܶ ܳ ܳ ܐmiddle ʿṣāṣā’ §189 ܦ ܐܪܐ
‘paroxytone’ §289
‘ ݁ ܽ ݁ ܳܓ ݂ ܳ ܐbridle’ §190 ‘ ݁ ܽ ̈ ܳ ܶ ܐcomparisons’ §282 ‘ ݁ ܽ ܪ ܳ ܳ ܐretribution’ §284, §320 ܽ ݁ ܶ ݁ ‘half mqīmānā’ ـܓ ݂ܬ ܺ ܳ ܳ ܐ §329
‘ ݁ ܳ ܽ ܳ ܐbreaker’ §324 ‘ ݁ ܳ ܽ ݂ ܳܕܐcommanding’ §283, §300 ‘ ݁ ܳ ܽ ܘ ܳ ܐdistinguisher’ §139 ܐ ‘circumflex’ §272 ܶ‘ ݁ ܶ ݂ ܳ ̈ܓ ܐclauses’ §284 ݂ ܳ ݁ ݂ ܳ ܐthe vowel §189 ܰ ‘ ݁ ݂ ܳ ̈ܐbroad’ §73, §127 ܩ ‘ ݂ ܳ ܡbefore’ §155 ܳ ‘ ܽ ̈ ܳ ݂ܬܐsayings’ §284 ܽ ܳ ܳ ܐch. 6 n. 21 ‘ ܰ ܳ ܐstanding’ §325 ‘ ܽ ܳ ܳ ܐhard’ §210 ܺ ‘ ܰ ̈ ܶܐnarrow’ §73, §127 ‘ ܰ ܳ ܐpen’ §442 ‘ ܳ ܽ ܘ ܳ ܐcalling’ §301
ܪ
ܽ ܺ =syāme §225 ܪܒ ܝ ܰ ܳ ܪܒ ܳ ܐ ܺܐܪ ݂ ܳ ܐ ݂ ‘long rḇāṣā’ §189 ܳ ݂ ‘short rḇāṣā’ §189 ܳܪܒ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܰ ܐ ܳ ‘ ܳܪܗ ܐrunner’ §305 ܶ ܳ ‘ ܳܪܗ ܐ ݂ܕ ݂ ܰ ݁ܬܗrāhṭā of the thumb’ §307 ܶ ܳ ܳ ‘ ܳܪܗ ܳ ܐ ݂ܕa I that does not pause’ §305
ܶ ܳ ݂ ‘ ܳܪܗ ܳ ܐ ݂ܕa rāhṭā that pauses’ §305, §308
ܽ ‘ ܪܘ ݁ ܳ ݂ ܳ ܐsoft’ §210 ‘ ܶ ݂ܪܬ ܳ ܐutterance’ §302 ܫ ܽ ݁ ܳܕ ܳ ܐ/‘ ܽ ݂ ܳܘܕ ܳ ܐpromise’ §284, §321 ‘ ܽ ܳ ݂ ݁ ܳܓ ܽ ܳܘܪܐvariant of gārūrā’ ܳ ݂ܳ ܰ ܳ ݁ ܳܐ ܶ ܳ ـ ܳܐ ܶ ܳ ܳܐ ̈ ܰ ܳܐ
§289
݂ܳ ܽ
‘variant of
mḥayyḏānā’ §310
݂ܳ
ܽ
§314
݂ܳ
ܽ
§328
݂ܳ
§299
݂ܳ
§330
ܳ ܰ ܳ ݂ ݁ܬ ݁ ܳ ܐ
‘variant of sāmkā’
ܽ
‘variant of ʿelāyā’
ܽ
‘variant of ʿeṣyānā’
ܽ
‘variant of šwayā’ ‘variant of taḥtāyā’
§320
‘ ̈ ܰ ܳ ܐleveled’ §330 ܶ ‘sign’ §139 ܶ‘ ̈ ܳ ܐnames’ §282 ܶ ‘ ܳ ̈ ܐ ݂ ܳ ܽ ܘ ܶܐdistinctive signs’ §139
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Grammatical & Technical Terms
ܰ ܳ ܳ ܝ ݁ܬ ܺ ݂ ܐ
‘termination of narra-
tive’ §331
451
ܳ ܰ ‘ ݁ܬ ݁ ܳ ܐsimple taḥtāyā’
ܺ ܳܐ
§321
ܳ ‘ ܰ ܳ ݂ ܐdetached’ §461 ܳ ܶ ‘chain’ §§190–91 ܳ‘ ܶ ܳ ܶ ܳ ـ ܐupper šešlā’ §190 ܳ ܰ ܳ ‘ ܶ ݂ܬ ݁ ܳ ܐlower šešlā’ §190
ܳ ‘ ݁ܬ ݂ ܳ ܶ ܐmoderator’ §306 ‘ ܬ ܳ ݂ ܳ̈ܪܗ ܐthree rāhṭē’ §305 ܳ ‘ ݁ܬ ܳ ݂ ܐ ܽ ̈ ܶܐthree points’ §322 ‘ ܬtaqlab (computus)’ §358,
ܬ ܳ ݁ ܳܐ ݂ ܳ
‘ ݁ ܰܒ ݂ ܺܪ ܽ ܘwriting in a straight man-
ܰ ‘ ݁ܬlower’ §320, §283 ܳ ܰ ‘ ݁ܬ ݁ ܳ ܐ ݂ ܰ ݂ܕܬtaḥtāyā of three
ch. 7 n.
ner’ §155
points’ §322
ch. 1: p. 1
ch. 7: 159
ch. 13: p. 353
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
Graph Index !
§244
%
§466
(
25, §273
)
25, §273
*
24, 28, §273; encoding syāme §678
?
§244
[
24–25, §273
]
24–25, §273
_
encoding serṭūnā §678
25, §273
«
§254
»
§254
⌈
25, §273
⌉
§273
†
24, §273
◌
§397
ܧ
§584, §596, §633 §591 §587
ch. 13: p. 353
§584, §587 §633 §591 §584, §587 §584, §587 §587, §633 §633 §633
§711
Greek
§590
ch. 1: p. 1
§584
CPA
§171
ch. 7: 159
§587
§596, §633
Armenian
، §244 ؛25, §244, §246 ؟25, §244 ۰,۱,…,۸,۹ §364
پ ت ث
خ د ذ ژ ص ض ظ غ گ ن
چ
See under §§596–97
Arabic
ٕا
§581, §584, §587, §633
See also under §590
0,1,…,9 §363
ا
ج
ch. 2: 31
ch. 8: 177
ch. 14: 359
ch. 3: 59
ch. 9: 209
ch. 15: 365
Α
§175
α
§194, §366
β
§366
γ
§366
ε
§136, §§174–75
η
§133
Η
§175
ι
§174
Ο
§§175–76
οι
§153
ch. 4: 91
ch. 10: 227
ch. 16: 369
ch. 5: 115
ch. 11:291
ch. 17: 377
ch. 6: 131
ch. 12: 323
ch. 18: 389
454
Indices Linear: 3 Points
ΟΥ §175 π
§63, §68
υ
§153
Y
§§176–77
ω
§174
Linear: 4 Points
܀
IPA
x
§12
§242 §242
—: 27, §251
Latin §153
§242
Linear: Symbols
see p. xxvii
u
§242
see also under §649 ff.
Malayalam
\̣̇
27, §251
|
28, §249, §273
~
(tilde) as line filler §463
܋ ܌ ܍
§271 §271 §271, §275
see §691 ff.
÷ §271
Syriac
ˈ
(bḏūlāyā) §461
§242
§252