Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Saprutum Dialects

From:Steg Belsky <draqonfayir@...>
Date:Wednesday, April 25, 2001, 3:17
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"