DOCSLIB.ORG

Akkad Akkadian Language

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Akkad Akkadian Language 697 Akkadian Language 698 Pongratz-Leisten, “Prozession(sstraße),” RLA 11, Lieferung Bibliography: ■ J. Cooper, The Curse of Agade (Baltimore, 1/2 (Berlin/New York 2006) 98–103. ■ E. Weissert, “Royal Md. 1983). ■ D. Frayne, “Geographical Notes on the Land Hunt and Royal Triumph in a Prism Fragment of Ashur- of Akkad,” in From the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea: Studies on banipal (82–5–22,2),” in Assyria 1995 (eds. S. Parpola/R. M. the History of Assyria and Babylonia in Honour of A. K. Gryson Whiting; Helsinki 1997) 339–58. (eds. G. Frame/L. Wilding; Leiden 2004) 103–176. ■ D. R. Beate Pongratz-Leisten Frayne, Sargonic and Gutian Periods (Royal Inscriptions of See also /Astrology, Astronomy: Ancient Near Mesopotamia 2; Toronto 1993). ■ I. J. Gelb, Old Akkadian East Writing and Grammar (Chicago, Ill. 1961). ■ J. Goodnick Westenholz, Legends of the Kings of Akkade (Winona Lake, Ind. 1997). ■ M. Liverani (ed.), Akkad, the First World Empire (Pa- dova 1993). ■ A. Westenholz, “The Old Akkadian Period,” Akkad in id./W. Sallaberger, Akkade-Zeit und Ur III-Zeit (1999), vol. 3 The city of Akkad is mentioned only once in the of Mesopotamien (ed. P. Attinger; OBO 160; Göttingen 1998– Bible (Gen 10 : 10), as belonging with Babylon and 2004) 15–117. Erech (Uruk) to the kingdom of fabulous Nimrod. Mario Liverani The city (in the general area of modern Baghdad) has not yet been located, but it was the capital of a famous dynasty (ca. 2350–2200 BCE) dominating Akkadian Language all of Mesopotamia, conquering the Sumerian city- The name Akkadian derives from the city and the states in the South, submitting Ebla in the far West 3rd-millennium empire of Sargon of Akkad(e). It is and Elam in the far East, and extending from Up- the language of the ancient Assyrians in northern per to Lower Sea (Mediterranean and Persian Gulf). Mesopotamia and the Babylonians in the south. As For the first time, the political project went beyond opposed to the more numerous West Semitic lan- the limits of the city-states (typical of the Sumerian guages, Akkadian forms the East Semitic branch of period) and tried to encompass the entire known the Semitic language family together with Eblaite world (cf. the royal title “king of the four quar- (ca. 2300–2200 BCE). In fact, the oldest known Se- ters”). After a period of successful expansion, the mitic texts are written on clay tablets in the cunei- dynasty was perhaps enfeebled by a climatic crisis form script of Akkadian. Due to this script, origi- and finally submerged by the Gutian invaders. The nally invented for the writing of Sumerian, written destruction of Akkad and its temple E-Ulmash gave Akkadian is a mixture of phonetic signs (syllables origin to a famous “Lamentation.” Since then, the or parts of them), word signs (logograms), and clas- name of Akkad remained attached to the Semitic- sifiers (determinatives) which help in semantic speaking north (vs. Sumer being the south) of identification. Many of the signs were used in all Lower Mesopotamia and eventually became a of these three different ways. Besides, signs are learned synonym for Babylon. But still in Neo-Bab- homophonic (i.e., several discrete signs can pho- ylonian times there was a (minor) town Akkad, and netically be read in the same way, but in translitera- the E-Ulmash temple was still active. The name of the language, “Akkadian” came to designate the tion modern scholars distinguish between them by Eastern Semitic language of Mesopotamia, includ- using diacritical marks, e.g., li, lí, li8; mi, mí) and ing the Babylonian and Assyrian dialects (and is polyphonic (i.e., the same sign can be read in many still used in this sense by Semitists). ways, e.g., the sign UD can be interpreted as ud, tú, The kings of Akkad, especially the founder Sar- lih˚, par, pir or tam, depending on the context). gon and his grand-son Naram-Sin, erected monu- Unlike West Semitic languages, Akkadian never ments (most famous is the stele of Naram-Sin developed into a consonantal writing system, and found in Susa) with inscriptions celebrating their individual consonants cannot be written (cf. the military victories and with lively figurative repre- West Semitic cuneiform alphabet of Ugaritic). An- sentations. These monuments remained visible for other peculiar feature is that Akkadian was written centuries in the Ekur of Nippur and in other major from left to right. Throughout its long history – temples of Mesopotamia, and they gave rise to pop- attested ca. from the middle of the 3rd millennium ular legends, preserved to us in apocryphal inscrip- (Early Dynastic III) until the 1st century CE – Akka- tions and poems. In the literary tradition, the kings dian was spoken and written in Mesopotamia of Akkad were considered the models for kingship: (roughly today’s Iraq), but the influence of Akka- a positive model in the case of Sargon, always act- dian spread throughout the ancient Near East. The ing according to the divine orders and always victo- so-called Western peripheral Akkadian, for exam- rious; a negative model in the case of the presump- ple, is attested along the Syro-Palestinian coast and tuous and unlucky Naram-Sin. Their fame appears in Anatolia (Alalakh, Amorite Akkadian, Emar, also in their mention in omens and in late chroni- Ugarit; Hattusha). In the east, outside Mesopota- cles. Still in Neo-Babylonian times (the time of the mia, Akkadian is attested in Mitannian Nuzi and Jews’ exile in Babylon), the Chaldean kings were Elamite Susa. The cuneiform writing system of Ak- looking for the foundation inscriptions of the Ak- kadian was adapted by various peoples to write kad kings and even forging charters for temple their own languages, including for example, the privileges in their names. Elamites, Hittites, Hurrians, and Urartians. Akka- Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception vol. 1 Authenticated | [email protected] © Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, 2009 Download Date | 11/24/18 5:46 PM Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception 1 (© Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York 2009) 699 Akkadian Language 700 dian also functioned as an international lingua cases in the singular: subject (nominative: kalbum – franca in the Amarna diplomacy of the late 2nd mil- “dog”), direct object (accusative: kalbam), and geni- lennium BCE. tive (indicating possession and also used after prep- The customary periodization of Old Akkadian ositions: kalbim), but only two (subject and oblique) and its subsequent dialects is as follows: in the plural. The construct form or status construc- – Old Akkadian (ca. 2500–2000 BCE) tus expresses the genitive relationship between two – Old Assyrian (ca. 2000–1700 BCE) nouns by attaching the possessed in as short a form – Old Babylonian (ca. 2000–1600 BCE) as possible to the possessor: kalab sˇarrim (“dog of – Middle Assyrian (ca. 1500–1000 BCE) the king”). Akkadian does not have any definite ar- – Middle Babylonian (ca. 1600–1000 BCE) ticle. Conditions are expressed by the so-called sta- – Neo-Assyrian (ca. 1000–600 BCE) tive. The same personal suffixes can be added to – Neo-Babylonian (ca. 1000–600 BCE) primary nouns (sˇarr-a¯ ku: “I am king”) or verbal ad- – Late Babylonian (ca. 600–100 BCE) jectives (sˇakn-a¯ ku: “I am placed”) that are used as 1. Characteristics. Continuous linguistic changes the predicates of a sentence. occurred during the long history of Akkadian. Old Verbs are conjugated in four tenses (alterna- Akkadian is a practical, collective term for the writ- tively, aspects): Perfect with infixed -t- after the ings of the 3rd millennium which are not linguisti- first root radical (isˇtakan: “He has placed/will have cally uniform. Compared to later dialects, Old Ak- placed”); preterite for the past (isˇkun: “He placed”); kadian still preserved more of the original Semitic present/future (isˇakkan: “He places/will place”), and consonants and archaic forms. Most of the Old As- imperative (sˇukun: “Place!”). The morpheme called syrian texts were unearthed in modern Kültepe the ventive indicates action, mostly motion, in the (eastern Turkey) because of the intensive Assyrian direction of the speaker: illik (“he went”), but il- trading activity in the area. Contrary to Old Babylo- likam (“he came”). Another morpheme -u (subjunc- nian and later dialects, Old Assyrian preserved cer- tive) marks the verb in a subordinate clause. Non- tain adjacent vowels uncontracted. On the other finite forms of the verbs are the infinitive (sˇaka¯ num: hand, most of the modern grammars of Akkadian “to place”), active participle (pa¯ lihum: “one who are based on Old Babylonian. It is considered the fears; worshipper”), and verbal adjective (sˇaknu: classical and ideal form of the language where- “placed”). There are four different themes or stems: upon, from Middle Babylonian onward, a literary G or basic (also known as I): ipallah (“He fears”), D Akkadian was based called Standard Babylonian or (II) factitive or intensive: upallah (“He frightens”); Sˇ Hymnal-Epic Dialect. Myths, epics, and many royal (III) causative (usˇasˇkan) “He causes to be placed,” N inscriptions are written in Standard Babylonian. (IV) passive or reflexive (isˇsˇakkan) “It is to be Thousands of Old Babylonian letters discovered in placed.” Further modifications are expressed with Mari in modern Syria form one of the major ar- infixed t, denoting reciprocal or passive, occasion- chives written in Akkadian cuneiform. In Middle ally reflexive, action, and occurring in the first Babylonian and Middle Assyrian, which are both three themes, whereas infixed tan could be placed less well-known dialects than those of the preced- in all four themes denoting repeated or enduring ing and successive periods, case endings lose dis- action.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Akkadian Language
    AKKADIAN LANGUAGE Ass. Lecturer Walaa S. Fanharawi University of Al-Qadisiyah Email: [email protected] Mob. +964-7807542722 Office hours: Wednesday 9-10 and Thursday 11-12 or by appointment Room and date: to be defined Course description and objectives The Akkadian language is the oldest known Semitic language. This fact is of particular importance in the study of Semitic languages in general and Arabic in particular: in fact, Akkadian represents the oldest attestation of a language of the Semitic family, to which the Arabic language also belongs, and its knowledge allows us to better understand a number of features of the Arabic language and to better understand the position of the latter in the family of Semitic languages. Moreover, the study of the languages of ancient Iraq and of the texts in cuneiform writing is extremely important for reconstructing the history of ancient Mesopotamia and the remarkable achievements reached in this part of the ancient world. But the Akkadian language is also interesting in itself, especially in consideration of its long history through several stages: 1. Old Akkadian: the various dialects of Akkadian in use in the III millennium BC. 2. Old Babylon: 2000-1500 BC. 3. Middle Babylon: 1500-1000 BC. 4. Neo-Babylon: 1000-500 BC. 5. Late Babylon: 500 BC – I century AD. 6. Old Assyrian: 2000-1500 BC. 7. Middle Assyrian: 1500-1000 BC. 8. Neo-Assyrian: 1000-600 BC. Methods The basic elements of Akkadian grammar will be taught with lectures. Moreover, passages from Akkadian texts of various kinds (especially, letters) will be read in class, either making use of copies or on photos.
    [Show full text]
  • Close Cousins: Aramaic and Syriac Cognates to Akkadian Lexical Items
    Close cousins: Aramaic and Syriac Cognates to Akkadian Lexical Items Wilfred G. E. Watson Outline 1. Introductory 2. Previous studies von Soden, Kaufmann, Streck, Beaulieu critique: Abraham - Sokoloff Accepted loanwords 3. Theory 4. New examples (classified) 4.1 Aramaic/Syriac provide cognates for Akkadian 4.2 Aramaic/Syriac provide etymology for Akkadian 4.3 Aramaic/Syriac help distinguish between homographs 4.4 Aramaic/Syriac provide meaning of Akkadian 4.5 Akkadian provides meaning of Aramaic/Syriac 4.6 Aramaic, Syriac, Akkadian and other languages 4.7 Difficult equivalences 4.8 Spelling 5. Classes and Statistics classes: plants, food, clothes, vessels, tools, anatomy statistics: percentages of loanwords 6. Conclusions and Further Research Select list of Akkadian words with Aramaic/Syriac cognates 1. Akk. agû (agiu), “a garment” 22. Akk. misissam, messam, “sheep’s 2. Akk. anabu (anapu), “loincloth or kilt?” stomach” 3. Akk. arbānu, “(a plant)” [NOT Akk. urbānu, 23. Akk. misissānu, “a plant” urbanu, “papyrus”] 24. Akk. našappu(m), “a basket” 4. Akk. arsuppu, “a cereal” 25. Akk. pīsu, “winnowing shovel” 5. Akk. arṣabu, arraṣabattu, “a farm tool” 26. Akk. pūqu(m), “buttock” 6. Akk. azannu, azānu, zānu, “quiver” 27. Akk. sannu, “(a fishing net)” 7. Akk. barāmu D: “to make multi-coloured; to 28. Akk. s/zaḫānum, “beam, rafter” weave (coloured cloth)” 29. Akk. sisātu, “(a plant)” 8. Akk. bussumu, “pleasant” (of beer) 30. Akk. ṣapru, “(a spice)” 9. Akk. edēna, “a plant” 31. Akk. ṣētu(m), “bright light, heat” 10. Akk. gāṣiṣu, “gnashing, grinding” 32. EAAkk. ṣumbiru, “(an object)” 11. Akk. gergiltu, “(ring-shaped part of plough)” 33.
    [Show full text]
  • Handbücher Zur Sprach- Und Kommunikations- Wissenschaft
    Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikations- wissenschaft Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science Manuels de linguistique et des sciences de communication Mitbegründet von Gerold Ungeheuer (†) Mitherausgegeben 1985−2001 von Hugo Steger Herausgegeben von / Edited by / Edite´s par Herbert Ernst Wiegand Band 36 De Gruyter Mouton Brought to you by | Pontificio Istituto Biblico (Pontificio Istituto Biblico ) Authenticated | 172.16.1.226 Download Date | 3/2/12 1:49 PM The Semitic Languages An International Handbook Edited by Stefan Weninger In collaboration with Geoffrey Khan Michael P. Streck Janet C. E. Watson De Gruyter Mouton Brought to you by | Pontificio Istituto Biblico (Pontificio Istituto Biblico ) Authenticated | 172.16.1.226 Download Date | 3/2/12 1:49 PM ISBN 978-3-11-018613-0 e-ISBN 978-3-11-025158-6 ISSN 1861-5090 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Semitic languages : an international handbook / edited by Stefan Weninger ; in collaboration with Geoffrey Khan, Michael P. Streck, Janet C. E.Watson. p. cm. Ϫ (Handbooks of linguistics and communication science; 36) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-3-11-018613-0 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Semitic languages Ϫ History Ϫ Handbooks, manuals, etc. 2. Semitic languages Ϫ Grammar Ϫ Handbooks, manuals, etc. I. Weninger, Stefan. II. Khan, Geoffrey. III. Streck, Michael P. IV. Watson, Janet C. E. PJ3014.S46 2012 492Ϫdc23 2011042304 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de. © 2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston Typesetting: META Systems GmbH, Wustermark Printing: Hubert & Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Forgetting the Sumerians in Ancient Iraq Jerrold Cooper Johns Hopkins University
    “I have forgotten my burden of former days!” Forgetting the Sumerians in Ancient Iraq Jerrold Cooper Johns Hopkins University The honor and occasion of an American Oriental Society presidential address cannot but evoke memories. The annual AOS meeting is, after all, the site of many of our earliest schol- arly memories, and more recent ones as well. The memory of my immediate predecessor’s address, a very hard act to follow indeed, remains vivid. Sid Griffiths gave a lucid account of a controversial topic with appeal to a broad audience. His delivery was beautifully attuned to the occasion, and his talk was perfectly timed. At the very first AOS presidential address I attended, the speaker was a bit tipsy, and, ten minutes into his talk, he looked at his watch and said, “Oh, I’ve gone on too long!” and sat down. I also remember a quite different presi- dential address in which, after an hour had passed, the speaker declared, “I know I’ve been talking for a long time, but since this is the first and only time most of you will hear anything about my field, I’ll continue on until you’ve heard all I think you ought to know!” It is but a small move from individual memory to cultural memory, a move I would like to make with a slight twist. As my title announces, the subject of this communication will not be how the ancient Mesopotamians remembered their past, but rather how they managed to forget, or seemed to forget, an important component of their early history.
    [Show full text]
  • A Reply to the New Arabia Theory by Ahmad Al-Jallad
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Publications and Research CUNY Central Office 2020 The Case for Early Arabia and Arabic Language: A Reply to the New Arabia Theory by Ahmad al-Jallad Saad D. Abulhab CUNY Central Office How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/oaa_pubs/16 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] The Case for Early Arabia and Arabic Language: A Reply to the New Arabia Theory by Ahmad al-Jallad Saad D. Abulhab (City University of New York) April, 2020 The key aspect of my readings of the texts of ancient Near East languages stems from my evidence-backed conclusion that these languages should be classified and read as early Arabic. I will explore here this central point by replying to a new theory with an opposite understanding of early Arabia and the Arabic language, put forth by Ahmad al-Jallad, a scholar of ancient Near East languages and scripts. In a recent debate with al-Jallad, a self-described Semitic linguist, he proclaimed that exchanging the term 'Semitic' for ‘early Arabic’ or ‘early fuṣḥā’ is “simply a matter of nomenclature.”1 While his interpretation of the term Semitic sounds far more moderate than that of most Western philologists and epigraphists, it is not only fundamentally flawed and misleading, but also counterproductive. Most scholars, unfortunately, continue to misinform their students and the scholarly community by alluding to a so-called Semitic mother language, as a scientific fact.
    [Show full text]
  • The Linguistic Classification of Eblaite: Methods, Problems, and Results
    Originalveröffentlichung in: J.S. Cooper – G.M. Schwartz (Hg.), The Study of the Ancient Near East in the Twenty-First Century. The William Foxwell Albright Centennial Conference, Winona Lake 1996, S. 233-249 The Linguistic Classification of Eblaite: Methods, Problems, and Results MANFRED KREBERNIK Soon after the royal archives from Ebla were unearthed, the nature of the Semitic language contained in the texts from these archives became a much-disputed ques­ tion in the fields of Assyriology and Old Testament studies. It is understandable that the ensuing discussion did not proceed from the beginning in a logical and meth­ odologically clear way. One of the reasons for this was the fact that preliminary, and not always correct, citations from the texts often had to serve as arguments before the first major text publications appeared. Furthermore, the geographical and chro­ nological setting of the settlement itself sometimes resulted in wild speculation. We were confronted with the earliest Semitic texts so far known, and the geographical situation of the site raised hope that the language of these texts might be a precursor of later Northwest Semitic. Therefore, the texts immediately aroused the special in­ terest of scholars of the Old Testament. However, many of the connections between Ebla and the world of the Old Testament claimed in the early stages of Eblaite stud­ ies turned out to be wrong or improbable once more material became accessible and was studied more systematically. Thus, alleged attestations of biblical toponyms or of the name of Yahweh had to be abandoned, and the chronological distance between Ebla and the Bible was better taken into account.
    [Show full text]
  • OLD AKKADIAN WRITING and GRAMMAR Oi.Uchicago.Edu Oi.Uchicago.Edu
    oi.uchicago.edu OLD AKKADIAN WRITING AND GRAMMAR oi.uchicago.edu oi.uchicago.edu MATERIALS FOR THE ASSYRIAN DICTIONARY NO. 2 OLD AKKADIAN WRITING AND GRAMMAR BY I. J. GELB SECOND EDITION, REVISED and ENLARGED THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS CHICAGO, ILLINOIS oi.uchicago.edu The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London The University of Toronto Press, Toronto 5, Canada c, 1952 and 1961 by The University of Chicago. Published 1952. Second Edition Published 1961. PHOTOLITHOPRINTED BY GUSHING - MALLOY, INC. ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1961 oi.uchicago.edu TABLE OF CONTENTS pages I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF OLD AKKADIAN 1-19 A. Definition of Old Akkadian 1. B. Pre-Sargonic Sources 1 C. Sargonic Sources 6 D. Ur III Sources 16 II. OLD AKKADIAN WRITING 20-118 A. Logograms 20 B. Syllabo grams 23 1. Writing of Vowels, "Weak" Consonants, and the Like 24 2. Writing of Stops and Sibilants 28 3. General Remarks 4o C. Auxiliary Marks 43 D. Signs 45 E. Syllabary 46 III. GRAMMAR OF OLD AKKADIAN 119-192 A. Phonology 119 1. Consonants 119 2. Semi-vowels 122 3. Vowels and Diphthongs 123 B. Pronouns 127 1. Personal Pronouns 127 a. Independent 127 b. Suffixal 128 i. With Nouns 128 ii. With Verbs 130 2. Demonstrative Pronouns 132 3. 'Determinative-Relative-Indefinite Pronouns 133 4. Comparative Discussion 134 5. Possessive Pronoun 136 6. Interrogative Pronouns 136 7. Indefinite Pronoun 137 oi.uchicago.edu pages C. Nouns 137 1. Declension 137 a. Gender 137 b. Number 138 c. Case Endings- 139 d.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading Akkadian Cuneiform Using Natural Language Processing
    PLOS ONE RESEARCH ARTICLE Reading Akkadian cuneiform using natural language processing 1 2☯ 2☯ 3 4 Shai GordinID *, Gai Gutherz , Ariel Elazary , Avital Romach , Enrique JimeÂnez , Jonathan Berant2, Yoram Cohen3 1 Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Digital Humanities Ariel Lab, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel, 2 School of Computer Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel, 3 Jacob M. Alkow Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Civilizations, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel, 4 Institute for Assyriology and Hittitology, Ludwig-Maximilians-UniversitaÈt MuÈnchen, Munich, Germany ☯ These authors contributed equally to this work. a1111111111 * [email protected] a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 Abstract a1111111111 In this paper we present a new method for automatic transliteration and segmentation of Unicode cuneiform glyphs using Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques. Cunei- form is one of the earliest known writing system in the world, which documents millennia of OPEN ACCESS human civilizations in the ancient Near East. Hundreds of thousands of cuneiform texts Citation: Gordin S, Gutherz G, Elazary A, Romach were found in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries CE, most of which are written in Akka- A, JimeÂnez E, Berant J, et al. (2020) Reading dian. However, there are still tens of thousands of texts to be published. We use models Akkadian cuneiform using natural language based on machine learning algorithms such as recurrent neural networks (RNN) with an processing. PLoS ONE 15(10): e0240511. https:// accuracy reaching up to 97% for automatically transliterating and segmenting standard Uni- doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240511 code cuneiform glyphs into words. Therefore, our method and results form a major step Editor: Marco Lippi, University of Modena and towards creating a human-machine interface for creating digitized editions.
    [Show full text]
  • Arabic in the Context of Comparative Studies*
    Victor Porkhomovsky Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences; [email protected] Arabic in the context of comparative studies* The paper discusses certain characteristics of Arabic that define its position in Semitic com- parative studies and are determined not only by Arabic language structures at different lev- els, but also by extra-linguistic factors, viz. socio-cultural and psychological. This combina- tion of both linguistic and extra-linguistic factors makes Arabic a special phenomenon among languages of the world. Before discussing the place of Arabic in Semitic studies, I present a brief overview of the history of intra-Semitic comparisons prior to the emergence of contemporary comparative linguistics and to the role of Arabic medieval grammar tradition in this respect. The next section focuses on the role of Arabic as a model for proto-Semitic re- constructions and on the drastic changes that it underwent over the history of comparative Semitic studies. The last section discusses certain specific features of Arabic and Semitic phonetics and lexicon and their correlation with the standard Neogrammarian paradigm of comparative linguistics. These issues deserve special attention, since theories based on these phenomena contradict the standard paradigm of comparative linguistics, and the Arabic language may be regarded as an archetypal case of these phenomena. Keywords: comparative linguistics, Semitic languages, Arabic, Neogrammarian paradigm, regular correspondences, reconstruction, binary opposition, perfective aspect, imperfective aspect, historical typology. In this paper, I would like to discuss the place and role of Arabic in Semitic comparative stud- ies and historical reconstructions. In the beginning we shall focus on the history of intra- Semitic comparisons and the role that Hebrew-Aramaic biblical studies and medieval Arabic grammar traditions play within this framework.
    [Show full text]
  • Assyria - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia 11/5/09 12:28 PM
    Assyria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 11/5/09 12:28 PM Assyria From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Ancient Assyria was a civilization centered on the Upper Tigris river, in Mesopotamia Mesopotamia (Iraq), that came to rule regional empires a number of times in history. It was named for its original capital, the ancient city of Assur (Akkadian: Aššur; Arabic: .(Atur ݏݏݏݏ ,Ašur ݏݏݏݏ :Aššûr, Aramaic אַשור :Aššûr; Hebrew ﺃﺷﻮﺭ The term Assyria can also refer to the geographic region or heartland where these empires were centered. During the Old Assyrian period (20th to 15th c. BCE, Assur controlled much of Euphrates · Tigris Upper Mesopotamia. In the Middle Assyrian period (15th to 10th c. BCE), its Sumer influence waned and was subsequently regained in a series of conquests. The Neo- Eridu · Kish · Uruk · Ur Lagash · Nippur · Ngirsu Assyrian Empire of the Early Iron Age (911 – 612 BCE) expanded further, and Elam under Ashurbanipal (r. 668 – 627 BCE) for a few decades controlled all of the Susa Fertile Crescent, as well as Egypt, before succumbing to Neo-Babylonian and Akkadian Empire Median expansion, which were in turn conquered by the Persian Empire. Akkad · Mari Amorites Isin · Larsa Contents Babylonia Babylon · Chaldea 1 Early history Assyria Assur · Nimrud 2 Old Assyrian city-states and kingdoms Dur-Sharrukin · Nineveh 2.1 City state of Ashur Hittites · Kassites 2.2 Kingdom of Shamshi-Adad I Ararat / Mitanni 2.3 Assyria reduced to vassal states Chronology 3 Middle Assyrian period Mesopotamia 3.1 Ashur-uballit I Sumer (king list)
    [Show full text]
  • Word Segmentation for Akkadian Cuneiform, an Ancient Writing System and a Language Used for About 3 Millennia in the Ancient Near East
    Akkadian Word Segmentation Timo Homburg M.Sc., Dr. Christian Chiarcos Institute for Computer Science Goethe University, Robert-Mayer-Str. 10, 60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany [email protected], [email protected] Abstract We present experiments on word segmentation for Akkadian cuneiform, an ancient writing system and a language used for about 3 millennia in the ancient Near East. To our best knowledge, this is the first study of this kind applied to either the Akkadian language or the cuneiform writing system. As a logosyllabic writing system, cuneiform structurally resembles Eastern Asian writing systems, so, we employ word segmentation algorithms originally developed for Chinese and Japanese. We describe results of rule-based algorithms, dictionary-based algorithms, statistical and machine learning approaches. Our results may indicate possible promising steps in cuneiform word segmentation that can create and improve natural language processing in this area. Keywords: Assyriology, Cuneiform, Akkadian, Chinese, Word Segmentation, Machine Learning 1. Introduction ( dan) (Gelb, 1957, p.8, Da-an--ri vs. Dan-r-ri). Word segmentation is the most elementary task in natural We primarily consider the Akkadian language, the domi- language processing of written language. In most alpha- nant language of the Ancient Near East from the 3rd to the betical writing systems, this task is commonly referred to 1st millennium BCE. Originally spoken in Mesopotamia, it as tokenization and can be easily solved through the inter- became the lingua franca in the Near East during the 2nd pretation of orthographical markers for word and sentence m. BCE, with an extensive body of material comparable boundaries, e.g., white spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Joseph Halévy, Racial Scholarship and the “Sumerian Problem”
    philological encounters 2 (2017) 321-345 brill.com/phen Joseph Halévy, Racial Scholarship and the “Sumerian Problem” Netanel Anor Freie Universität Berlin [email protected] Abstract This article deals with the different racial approaches that influenced the academic debate known as “The Sumerian problem”. The so-called “problem” under discussion was the racial affiliation of the inventors of the first writing system, the cuneiform script. The notion of ‘race’, which tied religion, language and culture into one essence, played a key role here. Some scholars were eager to prove the “non-Semitic character” of such a major invention. Others were convinced that only “Semites” inhabited an- cient Babylonia and thus were the only possible inventors of writing. The focus of this paper is Joseph Halévy, who was the determined leader of the “anti-Sumerist” camp. This article will show that Halévy shared many essentialist views with his anti-Semitic protagonists. He did this by applying a ‘pro-Semitic’ approach to the ‘Sumerian-problem’. * I owe thanks to Nathan Wasserman of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, who first intro- duced me to this topic. Thanks are also due to Steven Aschheim of the Hebrew University and Udi Greenberg, now at Dartmouth College, who gave me important guidelines in this field of fin du siècle intellectual history. Some of the ideas here were published in the Hebrew review Hayo Haya in 2008. Since then, many new sources have become available to me. In this regard, I owe thanks to Markham J. Geller of the Freie Universität Berlin who directed me to some of Halévy’s correspondence kept in the collection of Irving L.
    [Show full text]