Re: Saprutum Dialects

On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 01:35:45 +0000 kam@CARROT.CLARA.NET writes:
> The definitives seem to be a conflation of the Semitic subject
> prefixes used with the imperfect form of the verb, and various
> demonstratives. Cf. Arabic "huwa" - 'he'; "hiya" - 'she' (there are
> corresponding Hebrew & Aramaic forms). The initial "h" here, like
-

Hebrew:
he = hu
she = hi

Aramaic: (at least Babylonian Judeo-Aramaic)
he = ihu
she = ihi

> the Hebrew article could correspond to your "#e-" definitive, but
> why is it used for feminine words? Possibily some connection with
> the fem. possessive suffix "-h"? Does anyone know the origin of the
> Hebrew article? It doesn't seem to occur regularly in Phoenician,
-

i assume that it's probably from the same origin as Arabic _al-_ and
Aramaic _-a_; notice that the Hebrew _ha-_ always geminates the following
consonant, like the Arabic does with 'solar' letters.

> but
> in a short text I'm translating "this city" is rendered HQRT Z where
> the initial H before the root QR "city" + fem. -T would seem to
> reinforce the demonstrative Z. Dunno, anyone here speak Punic?
-

does Punic have _hei hashe'eila_, "the H of questioning"?
Initial H in Hebrew, usually when vocalized with a hhattaf-patahh
(ultrashort /a/), is a question marker and not a definite article.
Reading HQRT Z as Hebrew, it could be _haqeret zeh?_ meaning "is this a
city?"
Or maybe it's just that Punic doesn't use "the" agreement with
demonstratives?


> Keith
-

-Stephen (Steg)
 "say little, and do much"