Monday, June 28, 2010

Why is Aramaic so Important?


So in forcing myself to work harder on writing that book, I've decided to do a bit of freestyle thinking aloud on The Aramaic Blog (which after all what else are blogs for?). The bulk of the book itself is about Aramaic in modern times, how it expresses itself in popular culture and why it is such an important family of languages to study. As such, I suppose I should ponder upon the weightiest of those three topics and dive right in:

Why *is* Aramaic so important?

Usually when people answer this question, they start out with something like, "Aramaic has a history that spans over 3000 years and is one of the oldest continually written languages we have on record, blah blah blah..." which is all nice and good, except that it is the kind of dross that 1) can put you to sleep before you can say "lelya tav" and 2) because of this, it appeals to a very small group of people (mainly nerdly and academic individuals such as myself).

What I *need* to do is find a way to make it relevant for a modern readership. Find topics that engage the average individual and give them a sense of ownership towards learning more about the language on their own (in essence, pique their interest so they *want* to learn).

Again, from *this* angle, the stock answer is to say "Well it's the language of Jesus!" That tends to snap up the attention of at least ~2 billion people. But I want to interest more.

Say, "It was the tongue of the ancient rabbis and the language at the very foundation of Modern Judaism" and then you have another ~13.3 million interested.

But if you think about it, those two groups (i.e. adherents to Christianity and Judaism respectively) are the obvious ones. Every Christian has read the words "talitha koumi" or "eli eli lama sabachthani" and wondered, and every Jew has heard the Kaddish recited on various occasions. Who else can find Aramaic *important*?

Say, "Syriac Aramaic had an influence upon early Islam and Nabatean Aramaic's script is the mother of modern Arabic calligraphy," and you might make a handful of Arabic purists very upset, but you also might snag the attention of another ~1.5 billion people.

Then if you say, "Aramaic was one of the languages used to spread early Buddhism," you'll have piqued the curiosity of another ~500 million people.

Putting all of these numbers together, we can see that with our rough estimate, *~4.1 billion people* have some important connection to Aramaic that is related to their *faith* (something which is certainly of personal interest). Out of a world of roughly 6.5 billion people in total, that means that ~2/3rds of individuals upon the face of the earth have an Aramaic influence upon their religion.

This number also doesn't include other vectors for Aramaic's prominence (further writing system influences, the languages of empires that shaped the ancient world, etc.), as well as all of the minority faiths (Mandaism, Zoroastrianism, Kabalism) and even Aramaic's fractured legacy today that rests upon ~2 million Neo-Aramaic speakers.

Because of this large interest, Aramaic has also been given recent attention in the media. Between horribly mistaken tattoos obtained by foolhardy celebrities to movies such as The Passion of the Christ and truly extraordinary claims about interpreting the Lord's Prayer, and "true" meanings behind various Aramaic words, the language has developed a considerable amount of "folklore" in modern times.

But since there is so little reliable information about it which is available to the public, and the almost unbelievable disconnect and separation between Aramaic in the public sphere and the very scholars who study it, we see too many people riding upon the excitement, but failing to do their homework.

That is what I hope to influence in writing such a book. I want to bring Aramaic to the forefront so that the average layman amongst those ~4 billion people can walk away confidently with the tools they need to quench the thirst to learn more on their own.

Peace,
-Steve

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Scraper Sites and Aramaic

For those of you who aren't familiar with them, a "scraper site" is an automated program that roams the Internet, grabbing existing content (which is usually copyrighted) to interleave with links to products and post to a "dummy" blog in a formulated way that manipulates search engine rankings.

For some reason, they love doing weird things with Aramaic. See exhibit A:

Horrible, erroneous misinterpretation! For "Chanel" I'd expect maybe xnl or even $nl. Then again, the consonant sequence nl ("nel," "nal") is rather rare in Aramaic to begin with. Must be some sort of crazy loan. ;-)

Peace,
-Steve

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Translating The "Drashia D-Iahia" - The Mandaic Book of John



(That's pronounced something close to "Drash-ee di-hya," btw.)

Well, the cat is finally out of the bag with the NEH announcing the award of the grant so I can speak freely. :-)

And James McGrath is so blasted quick with his blog that he scooped me on it too! :-)

However since he put it so much better than I could, I simply must steal what he said:

The NEH has announced that it will be funding a grant proposal I [James] wrote for a project to translate the Mandaean Book of John into English. Over the next two years, the focus will be on producing a typed eclectic Mandaic text using the available manuscript evidence, and an English translation. The longer-term goal is to publish the Mandaic text and English translation in a volume that also includes commentary.

My principal collaborator on the project is Dr. Charles Häberl of Rutgers University, an expert in Semitic languages whose doctoral research and first book are on a spoken dialect of Neo-Mandaic. Also involved as a consultant is Dr. April DeConick, well known not only for her contribution to scholarship on the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas, Gnosticism and mysticism in antiquity, but also for her blog, Forbidden Gospels. Steve Caruso, whom you may know from The Aramaic Blog, will also be involved.

(Emphasis mine.)

In other words: This is a big deal. Not only for Aramaic geeks like me and the rest of the team, but for the Mandeans who are very quickly losing their language (Mandaic Aramaic) and culture.

My primary part in all of this (at least as of now) will be dealing with wrangling and typesetting the actual Mandaic text, for which I foresee developing appropriate fonts and typesetting tools etc., as well as creating and tending a website for the book.

In short, I can't get wait to get started! Stay tuned.

Peace,
-Steve

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Interesting Quirk With "kul" in Galilean Aramaic

In looking over the use of kul in Galilean Aramaic, I noticed an interesting quirk of spelling:

It is generally not plene, but plene when it takes on pronominal suffixes.

For example we see in 1025 of the 1075 examples of kul (as a noun) in the Galilean corpus of the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon:

[kl] => 587 
[bkl] => 122
[wkl] => 76
[dkl] => 45
[lkl] => 21
[mkl] => 7
[wbkl] => 4
[dbkl] => 3
[kl`mh] => 2
[wlkl] => 4
[kl@)ymt] => 2
(The above format is [form] => attested number of times. There are a handful of examples not listed here.)

But then we see:
[kwlhwN] => 40
[kwlh] => 32
[kwl)] => 19
[kwlyh] => 8
[kwly] => 8
[dkwl)] => 7
[kwlhN] => 6
[wkwlh] => 5
[wkwlhwN] => 5
[kwlkwN] => 4
[dkwlyh] => 3

Although there are a few exceptions, but as you can see, these are strictly in the minority:
[klhwN] => 6
[klh] => 4
I wonder if anyone else has noticed the same? Time to hit the books.

Peace,
-Steve