1. for the edit you made this morning to your post above:
2. the term 'foss' = fart. so everytime you thank vampire for a post that hass foss inside of it, you'd have called me a fart as well. I don't mind, by all means, but, just to make sure you know.
lol get informed now thats funny
Originally Posted by YOSS
" Hebrew is a member of the Canaanite group of Semitic languages. It was the language of the early Jews, but from 586 BC it started to be replaced by Aramaic. By 70 AD use of Hebrew as an everyday language had largely ceased, but it continued to be used for literary and religious functions, as well as a lingua franca among Jews from different countries."
As posted they are related they are not the same language and where is it written that Hebrew "descended from Aramaic." (your words)
here's a great article for you to learn from YOSS
What is Aramaic and Syriac?
3 September 2012 by Gareth Hughes
11th-century West Syriac Melkite music book from Mount Sinai.Robert Fisk recently wrote an article about Ma‘loula () for the Independent. It is a good article, and I was glad to read it. However, there are a couple of small errors about the Aramaicspoken in Ma‘loula and its neighbouring villages of Bakh‘a (?) and Jubb‘adin (?) in the Anti-Lebanon Mountains of Syria. As someone who works in Aramaic, I tend to read many articles written by journalists touching on the language, and many make the same mistakes. So, I offer this article as a little corrective.
- Aramaic is a Semitic language — Fisk’s article declares “Did Arabic and Hebrew descend from Aramaic? Scholars – I always find that an odd word – are still undecided.” It is a rather silly statement because scholars, and it is always best to be a little more specific, are totally decided that the question of Arabic and Hebrew descending from Aramaic is rather silly. Aramaic, with Arabic and Hebrew, is part of the Semitic branch of Afro-asiatic languages (spoken throughout the Middle East and north-east Africa). All Semitic languages are descended from a hypothetical Proto-Semitic language, which branched off into the various Semitic languages that have existed throughout history. Thus, Aramaic, Arabic and Hebrew do not have parent-child relationships, but more cousinly ones. In fact, Arabic branched off earlier, and so is slightly more distantly related to the other two, with Hebrew and Aramaic having more in common (these both belong to Northwest Semitic group). For example, the greeting of peace in Hebrew is shalom (?), in Arabic is salam (?), and in Aramaic is shlama (? or ?).
- Aramaic has a long and diverse history — A major problem with reporting about Aramaic is that it is often treated as a monolithic language. However, no language stands still: we can see how English has changed from Shakespeare to hip-hop, let alone going back as far as Beowulf. Aramaic has a recorded history that is more than twice as long as that of English. Although, I would reckon that Aramaic has resisted change far better than English has, in different times and places people have spoken and written different Aramaics. Geographically, varieties of Aramaic tend to fall into two branches: the more vigorous Eastern Aramaic in Mesopotamia, and the near extinct Western Aramaic in the Levant. The earliest Aramaic inscriptions come from the tenth century BC. During the latter half of the eight century BC, the conquests of the Neo-Assyrian founder Tiglath-Pileser III, Aramaic became the diplomatic language of the region. Around the year 500 BC, Darius decreed Aramaic as the official language of Achaemenid Persian Empire. The standard Aramaic practised by Achaemenid scribes is known as Official Aramaic. After the conquest of Alexander the Great and the rise of the Seleucid Empire, Greek became the language of power and high society in much of the Levant, while Aramaic continued as a rural language, remaining strong in its Mesopotamian heartland. Thus, most post-Achaemenid Aramaic is written in Mesopotamian dialects. The Aramaic of Ma‘loula is the last living remnant of the western varieties of Aramaic. Greek and Aramaic coexisted for over a millennium, until Arabic gradually became the dominant language of the Middle East.
- Aramaic is one of the original languages of the Bible — The Old Testament (Hebrew Bible) was originally written down in Hebrew, and the New Testament was written in Greek. However, a few parts of the Old Testament were originally written in Aramaic. The largest portion of Aramaic is Daniel 2.4b–7.28, with the rest of the book written in Hebrew. Daniel 2.4 is odd as the text changes from Hebrew to Aramaic mid-flow: ‘And the Chaldaeans said to the king in Aramaic, “O king, live for ever! Tell your servants the dream, and we will reveal the interpretation”’ (where the narration is in Hebrew, then the quoted speech is in Aramaic, but then the narration and everything else continues in Aramaic). Portions of the Book of Ezra are also in Aramaic, as is one sentence in the Prophet Jeremiah, and one word in Genesis. The variety of Aramaic in Daniel and Ezra is post-Achaemenid with many Greek borrowings.
- Jesus spoke Aramaic — This is one of the big selling-points of Aramaic for many, and almost every journalist who mentions Aramaic has to make the connection with Jesus. I would too! However, we obviously have no sound recordings of Jesus speaking Aramaic, nor is he alleged to written anything down, except in the dust (John 8.6–9). Jesus’ speaking Aramaic is based on two bits of evidence. Firstly, we know that Aramaic was widely spoken by Jews and their neighbours, particularly among the lower classes. Hebrew and Greek were also important languages, and Jesus would probably have been able to speak them too. Secondly, the Greek New Testamentrecords quite a few Aramaic words and phrases, names and places in transliteration (with no spoken Hebrew). These little fossilised bits of Aramaic are interesting in themselves — ‘talitha qum’, ‘ephphatha’ (actual Aramaic ‘ethpethach’) and ‘eli eli’ or ‘eloi eloi lema sabachthani’ (in Mark 5.41, Mark 7.34, Matthew 27.46 and Mark 15.34 respectively). So, we are pretty sure Jesus spoke Aramaic. However, the Aramaic he would have spoken is clearly different from any Aramaic spoken today. We Christians who speak Aramaic like to say that we speak the language of Jesus, but in practice we all speak slightly different varieties of Aramaic to that spoken by Jesus. It is just not quite so glamourous to admit that we speak a language that is as close as you can get to that spoken by Jesus.
- No gospels were first written in Aramaic — There are people around (in the Internet sense rather than around universities) who will go to great lengths to prove that some of the New Testament was written in Aramaic, and then later translated into Greek. They are wrong.
- People of different religions speak Aramaic — Religion is a big deal, and Aramaic is the language of worship and theology for Christians, Jews and Mandeans. Christians make up the largest religious group among fluent Aramaic speakers. Aramaic as a learned language is used in prayer and study by many more Christians, Jews and Mandeans who do not speak it fluently. As well as liturgical texts in Aramaic for all three religions, a little less than a fifth of the Dead Sea Scrolls are in Aramaic, and the base language of the Talmud is also Aramaic.
- There are a few million Aramaic-speakers today — It is often stated that Aramaic is an extinct language, or that some small group is the last few speakers of Aramaic in the world. However, there are thriving communities of Christian Aramaic-speakers in Chicago and Södertälje, near Stockholm, produced by different waves of refugees. However, the various modern Aramaics are endangered. Chronic turmoil in Aramaic-speaking homelands is a major factor. Also, Aramaic is less useful for everyday life if everyone around you is speaking Turkish, Arabic, Hebrew, Swedish, German or English. The erosion of Jewish modern Aramaics is the most acute — each variety spoken by a small cluster of families from a Mesopotamian village, they have low intelligibility with each other, and most speakers are now in Israel and are giving way to Hebrew. Mandaic in both its classical and modern varieties is severely threatened, as is the Mandean way of life in Iraq and Iran. Mlahso, a Christian Aramaic from southeast Turkey, became extinct upon the death of Ibrahim Hanna in 1998. Turmoil and diaspora has created a koine, or amalgam, language of the previously diverse spectrum of Christian Aramaic tribal dialects spoken from the mountains of southeast Turkey to the plains of northern Iraq. On the more hopeful side, young people are using music (Aramaic hip-hop is pretty good!) and the Internet to keep their language alive, yet still there is major language erosion going on all around Aramaic.
- Aramaic is written in a number of different scripts — It is not straightforward to answer the question which script Aramaic is written in. The earliest inscriptions use a modified Phoenician script, which was used by many Northwest Semitic languages. Official Aramaic developed a formal, chancery script that was adopted by Jews for writing both Aramaic and Hebrew. What we think of today as Hebrew script (?) is the descendent of Official Aramaic script. In Daniel 2.4, when the language changes from Hebrew to Aramaic, there is no change of script. In the first century BC, the cursive Aramaic script of the city of Edessa began its development, which was taken up by Christian Aramaic-speakers, and is known as Syriac script (?). Other cursive Aramaic scripts were developed for Mandaic, Nabatean and Palmyrene. Cursive Nabatean and Syriac were influential in the development of Arabic script (?). When Robert Fisk asks about Aramaic being the forerunner of Hebrew and Arabic, he is clearly confusing the history of development of writing systems with the languages themselves, which, to be fair, is not an uncommon mistake. Syriac script has been found on Turkic gravestones in Central Asia as well as on a Tang Dynasty inscription in China.
- How do Syriac, Chaldean and Assyrian fit in with Aramaic? — Different varieties of Aramaic have their own names, and names of the varieties often bear a relation to the speakers’ ethnic and religious identity. The Syriac identity is almost synonymous with Christian speakers of Aramaic. As Christianity was adopted by many Aramaic speakers the name ‘Aramean’ came to be associated with their pagan past (armaya means ‘pagan’ in Classical Syriac), and so the Greek translation of ‘Aram’, which is ‘Syria’, was adopted. Many Christian Aramaic-speakers now refer to themselves as Assyrian in reference to Northern Mesopotamia, which long remained known as Assyria after the fall of the Neo-Assyrian Empire (interestingly they often spell it ‘As-’ after the Greek spelling or ‘Ash-’ after the Akkadian spelling, rather than ‘Ath-’ the historical Aramaic spelling). Modern Christian Aramaic varieties called Assyrian should not be confused with the ancient variety of Akkadian known as Assyrian, which is a very different Semitic language. The term Chaldean or Chaldee is quite confusing, it belonged to the Semitic people of the Southern Mesopotamian marshes who founded the Neo-Babylonian Empire in 620 BC. Seeing as the Book of Daniel is set during the final years of this empire, St Jerome chose to use the word ‘Chaldee’ to describe Biblical Aramaic (I have an old Aramaic dictionary that is charmingly titled A Chaldee Lexicon). After the fall of this empire, the term came to refer to the scribal class of Achaemenid Babylon, which led ‘Chaldean’ to becoming a byword for ‘magician’. The term received renewed use when a split in the Church of the East led to one bishop Yuhannan Sulaqa being consecrated as ‘Patriarch of the Chaldeans’ by the Pope in Rome in 1553, based on Jerome’s use of the term for the Aramaic language. This identity continues to be used by East Syriac-rite Catholics, and is occasionally used to refer to their dialects of Aramaic.
Who would claim to be that, who was not.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
thanked for this post
It's this priest cum researcher's opinion. He finds the theory silly, but that cause others (linguists, scientists etc.) believe it is true, only his opinion differs. that's your source?
But here Sammy, since I tend to be funny as you say above, if you prefer to call Aramaic, Hebrew & Arabic mere cousins and no parenting relationship between them, then they all descended from one place: Phoenician.
So take your pick, I'm willing to compromise.
Here, did you read your own article?
When it comes to Bible study, it's script that matters.
Aramaic is written in a number of different scripts — It is not straightforward to answer the question which script Aramaic is written in. The earliest inscriptions use a modified Phoenician script, which was used by many Northwest Semitic languages. Official Aramaic developed a formal, chancery script that was adopted by Jews for writing both Aramaic and Hebrew. What we think of today as Hebrew script (?) is the descendent of Official Aramaic script. In Daniel 2.4, when the language changes from Hebrew to Aramaic, there is no change of script. In the first century BC, the cursive Aramaic script of the city of Edessa began its development, which was taken up by Christian Aramaic-speakers, and is known as Syriac script (?). Other cursive Aramaic scripts were developed for Mandaic, Nabatean and Palmyrene. Cursive Nabatean and Syriac were influential in the development of Arabic script (?). When Robert Fisk asks about Aramaic being the forerunner of Hebrew and Arabic, he is clearly confusing the history of development of writing systems with the languages themselves, which, to be fair, is not an uncommon mistake.
The question should be did you read it
Originally Posted by YOSS
from the article
All Semitic languages are descended from a hypothetical Proto-Semitic language, which branched off into the various Semitic languages that have existed throughout history. Thus, Aramaic, Arabic and Hebrew do not have parent-child relationships, but more cousinly ones.
You claim Hebrew descended from Aramaic........it did not .
We are speaking of the time of Jesus and that statement of yours "When it comes to Bible study, it's script that matters" is not supported.
In the 1st century (time of Jesus) religious discussion, argument ect was in Hebrew...so the language that was used was indeed Hebrew.
I never said Aramaic was not used, but it is not the only language spoken in the First Century and not the only language of Jesus as some claim.
Lastly the article is explicit that Hebrew did not descend from Aramaic and although related is a separate spoken language.
Read on for your mistaken thinking
"When Robert Fisk asks about Aramaic being the forerunner of Hebrew and Arabic, he is clearly confusing the history of development of writing systems with the languages themselves, which, to be fair, is not an uncommon mistake."
Time to go shopping the chickpeas are soaked and cooked 3 hours now to make the family hummus an old family recipe brought back from the Holy land.
Last edited by Samaritan; 16-02-2014 at 02:10 AM.
Who would claim to be that, who was not.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Welcome vampire to chasing your nightmare to the religion section and insulting him here too. it's not same as political my dear. For politics are traitorous and complex and are ultimately lies, so you can roam free insulting everyone with a more than a half chance of never being proven right or wrong (in ur case mostly wrong, but its besides the point).
Lol , really funny from you foss , now you're parroting my same sentences and using them . No wonder , you have a vampire's complex since long ago .
I can roam freely because i'm a humble vampire and genius educated foss , not running around showing ignorance , jealousy , idiocy , stupidity like you do ...
Here's my strength , here's your weakness .
In here my dear, it's ultimately ultimate truth, you take your insulting chances, but expect very thick damaging walls.
I like when indecent people victimize themselves , lol ... Keep this attitude and you'll see .
Back to subject, Jesus being the Son is One with the Holy Spirit, but to be specific, it was the Holy Spirit that gave the disciples this capability. You project through your reply that you know anything about that, and you don't even know what those tongues of fire mean, their effect, and how it is that the disciples can speak 'all languages'...
Back to the subject foss , needless to say that your answer shows ignorance and lack of the Trinity basics , lol ..
Why don't you say this thread is basically non sense and useless , and now you have discovered it the hard way , lol ..
Now Jesus the Jew , the Resurrection and the Life cannot understand Aramaic or Phoenician , really pathetic , and you have the nerves to argue Sam Bro with useless hallucinations of an ignorant ...
You only know how to insult and give the impression you understand. For example, your previous post, Socrates never had a biography.
Why don't you read and understand before you throw silly comments and useless non sense posts , Is your target fame of the 14 000 posts and 4000 thanked and 300 power of a humble vampire ? ...haha , you're exposed to a 6000 years old vampire ....
Anyway , see carefully your ignorance ... Did Jesus write 300 000 biography about himself , looool ..
I wonder if you have enough brain to understand your mistakes ..
It's very easy to stand by the Bible and scream: you ignorant this is best book. Good for you vampire, now leave the why it is so to someone else, cause you're ill equipped to go that far.
What's left of a zilch credibility for you to throw a silly conclusion , loool ... Have a nice nightmare ..
wow where did you get that from? I can read it lol. Yes it is early Serto (or Serta) script.
Originally Posted by Samaritan
The modern syriac serto is very similar to that but a little more rounder.
Who would claim to be that, who was not.
Utter nonsense, all of it. wow. Can anyone tell me what vampire did here? he answers by clicking reply. anyone can see an actual answer in his reply?
Originally Posted by vampire
vampire you kiss Sammy's Israeli boot often, as you do in here too, how about your friend @Samaritan; explain to us what you are talking about?
How did you show your understanding of what you said about disciples speaking all languages. how you said jesus gave them that, but its more specifically holy spirit.
How did you refute the accusation of ignorance when you said Socrates has a bibliography, while he does not.
Can anyone explain what vampire did ? hey I'll take even one of your clones. yalla. it would be interesting to see.
Vampire seriously please take a vacation; you're pushing the extreme of not making sense, you remind me of The Phoenix, when he said the end is "BOUM"... I'm worried for you.
I actually feel no offense from your insults of 'foss' or accusations of this & that... I feel sorry for you vampire, I hope you get well soon.