Haidar Abboud
@lawzinaj.bsky.social
This account is for my linguistics hobby. I'm interested in Semitic languages (Arabic dialectology, Aramaic (Classical Syriac or modern dialects), Hebrew).
As for myself I long suspected some sort of ʕīsē/Mūsē parallelism to explain the unusual form, not sure what kind of role if any the literature attributes to that.
November 24, 2025 at 10:38 AM
As for myself I long suspected some sort of ʕīsē/Mūsē parallelism to explain the unusual form, not sure what kind of role if any the literature attributes to that.
I think it's regarded as doubtful that عيسى resulted by metathesis. Al-Jallad has an article where iirc he shows an old attestation of the name in Arabic and suggests it was a different name that got matched to Jesus's name due to the phonological similarity, but not as an outcome of metathesis.
November 24, 2025 at 9:53 AM
I think it's regarded as doubtful that عيسى resulted by metathesis. Al-Jallad has an article where iirc he shows an old attestation of the name in Arabic and suggests it was a different name that got matched to Jesus's name due to the phonological similarity, but not as an outcome of metathesis.
Form I & II with a reflexive pronoun (counting that as transitive) then ʕala:
snadət ħāl-e, sənnadət ħāl-e
Form V & VIII with ʕala:
tsənnadət/stanadət
I think all four can express that sense for me.
snadət ħāl-e, sənnadət ħāl-e
Form V & VIII with ʕala:
tsənnadət/stanadət
I think all four can express that sense for me.
November 19, 2025 at 5:04 PM
Form I & II with a reflexive pronoun (counting that as transitive) then ʕala:
snadət ħāl-e, sənnadət ħāl-e
Form V & VIII with ʕala:
tsənnadət/stanadət
I think all four can express that sense for me.
snadət ħāl-e, sənnadət ħāl-e
Form V & VIII with ʕala:
tsənnadət/stanadət
I think all four can express that sense for me.
Doesn't work for me intransitively.
November 19, 2025 at 4:55 PM
Doesn't work for me intransitively.
ʔaymte in our traditional dialect.
Not sure what you exactly mean by “varieties that raise reflexes of -ā“. In our region we also have the names Matte ('Matthew') and Mūse, was under the impression they were retentions of original *-ē.
There's also sawde 'black f.s.', that one does come from *-āʔ.
Not sure what you exactly mean by “varieties that raise reflexes of -ā“. In our region we also have the names Matte ('Matthew') and Mūse, was under the impression they were retentions of original *-ē.
There's also sawde 'black f.s.', that one does come from *-āʔ.
November 17, 2025 at 3:34 PM
ʔaymte in our traditional dialect.
Not sure what you exactly mean by “varieties that raise reflexes of -ā“. In our region we also have the names Matte ('Matthew') and Mūse, was under the impression they were retentions of original *-ē.
There's also sawde 'black f.s.', that one does come from *-āʔ.
Not sure what you exactly mean by “varieties that raise reflexes of -ā“. In our region we also have the names Matte ('Matthew') and Mūse, was under the impression they were retentions of original *-ē.
There's also sawde 'black f.s.', that one does come from *-āʔ.
I'm not even sure if this is NENA or a pronunciation register of literary Syriac. Someone shared the lyrics, I'll have a look later.
November 15, 2025 at 1:58 PM
I'm not even sure if this is NENA or a pronunciation register of literary Syriac. Someone shared the lyrics, I'll have a look later.
Funny, Rūmiyye is also a last name in modern Levantine Arabic, outside of the Christian communities too.
November 14, 2025 at 8:22 PM
Funny, Rūmiyye is also a last name in modern Levantine Arabic, outside of the Christian communities too.
Tbh I'd count the Syrian Bedouin dialects that have that intervening form as Arabian, they are both a geographical as well as a direct social and historical continuation of Arabian dialects. So my initial assumption would be that the intermediate was more widespread.
November 5, 2025 at 4:18 PM
Tbh I'd count the Syrian Bedouin dialects that have that intervening form as Arabian, they are both a geographical as well as a direct social and historical continuation of Arabian dialects. So my initial assumption would be that the intermediate was more widespread.
It is in Behnstedt's Syrian atlas, so it's a combination of insertion + deletion that ends up looking like direct metathesis, which is why calling it ”metathesis“ is confusing to me because it hides this intermediate step. Unless it's a more general process across languages I don't know about.
November 5, 2025 at 4:10 PM
It is in Behnstedt's Syrian atlas, so it's a combination of insertion + deletion that ends up looking like direct metathesis, which is why calling it ”metathesis“ is confusing to me because it hides this intermediate step. Unless it's a more general process across languages I don't know about.
I'm only familiar with the popular meaning of ”metathesis“ as two sounds swapping places, is there another sense I'm missing? Of course you do get dialects preserving the original vowel (gahawa instead of gahwa), so the guttural just moves from a coda to an onset, is that considered ”metathesis“?
November 5, 2025 at 3:53 PM
I'm only familiar with the popular meaning of ”metathesis“ as two sounds swapping places, is there another sense I'm missing? Of course you do get dialects preserving the original vowel (gahawa instead of gahwa), so the guttural just moves from a coda to an onset, is that considered ”metathesis“?
Metathesis, not the ghawa syndrome? Does this dialect have it?
November 5, 2025 at 2:36 PM
Metathesis, not the ghawa syndrome? Does this dialect have it?
also seen irregularly in the participles rēħa (f.s.)/rēħīn (pl.) < rāyħa/rāyħīn in some Levantine dialects, as well as possibly in ʕayle/ʕēle ('family') if it descends from a CA-like ʕāʔilah
November 2, 2025 at 4:30 PM
also seen irregularly in the participles rēħa (f.s.)/rēħīn (pl.) < rāyħa/rāyħīn in some Levantine dialects, as well as possibly in ʕayle/ʕēle ('family') if it descends from a CA-like ʕāʔilah
Some Latakia Arabic speakers also have ”šāyef kīf“ ('you see how?') as a question tag, I'm pretty sure I've heard „garbled“ forms of that as well.
November 2, 2025 at 2:15 PM
Some Latakia Arabic speakers also have ”šāyef kīf“ ('you see how?') as a question tag, I'm pretty sure I've heard „garbled“ forms of that as well.
Yes it is most likely this. In some words the dropping of a final consonant became generalized enough that it is now a valid context form, notable examples for that are the participle rāye <*rāyeħ or the imperative xō/xē <*xōd/xēd ('take m.s.').
November 2, 2025 at 2:03 PM
Yes it is most likely this. In some words the dropping of a final consonant became generalized enough that it is now a valid context form, notable examples for that are the participle rāye <*rāyeħ or the imperative xō/xē <*xōd/xēd ('take m.s.').
Yep speakers often don't reflect emphasis spread & voicing assimilation in writing (except for first grade children who produce the most authentic spellings). For many speakers, the actual pronunciation should be written as قظضي if we were to follow the vernacular spelling norms.
November 1, 2025 at 6:31 PM
Yep speakers often don't reflect emphasis spread & voicing assimilation in writing (except for first grade children who produce the most authentic spellings). For many speakers, the actual pronunciation should be written as قظضي if we were to follow the vernacular spelling norms.
Oh and maybe you could see the literary spelling ضابط for the (Turkish-influenced?) pronunciation ẓābeṭ/zābeṭ 'officer' (the mainstream Levantine Ar pronunciation is ḍābeṭ these days, unlike مزبوط which wasn't ”restored”). But I think it's a rather rare exception.
November 1, 2025 at 4:02 PM
Oh and maybe you could see the literary spelling ضابط for the (Turkish-influenced?) pronunciation ẓābeṭ/zābeṭ 'officer' (the mainstream Levantine Ar pronunciation is ḍābeṭ these days, unlike مزبوط which wasn't ”restored”). But I think it's a rather rare exception.
Btw I think for some Lebanese speakers emphatic consonants are barely there at all, so I suppose in that case one could also see ظ for [z].
November 1, 2025 at 3:56 PM
Btw I think for some Lebanese speakers emphatic consonants are barely there at all, so I suppose in that case one could also see ظ for [z].
And there's one case where ص can stand for [z]: the literary spelling صغير for the native form zɣīr, but speakers who say that also often spell it زغير.
November 1, 2025 at 3:43 PM
And there's one case where ص can stand for [z]: the literary spelling صغير for the native form zɣīr, but speakers who say that also often spell it زغير.
There are ones with ض? 😄
[zˤ] is of course most often spelled ظ, but can't think of any where [z] is spelled with it either.
There's at least one word where [zˤ] can be spelled with ز, it comes from *ḍ (probably via Turkish or sth): مزبوط, but some speakers do say it with [z].
[zˤ] is of course most often spelled ظ, but can't think of any where [z] is spelled with it either.
There's at least one word where [zˤ] can be spelled with ز, it comes from *ḍ (probably via Turkish or sth): مزبوط, but some speakers do say it with [z].
November 1, 2025 at 3:40 PM
There are ones with ض? 😄
[zˤ] is of course most often spelled ظ, but can't think of any where [z] is spelled with it either.
There's at least one word where [zˤ] can be spelled with ز, it comes from *ḍ (probably via Turkish or sth): مزبوط, but some speakers do say it with [z].
[zˤ] is of course most often spelled ظ, but can't think of any where [z] is spelled with it either.
There's at least one word where [zˤ] can be spelled with ز, it comes from *ḍ (probably via Turkish or sth): مزبوط, but some speakers do say it with [z].
Yes it's yəktə́bo indeed.
I think the traditional form II with object pronouns beginning with a vowel places the stress differently (ykássro 'he breaks it') but these days many speakers say ykassə́ro.
Form III has ṣā́lħo ('they reconciled with') vs ṣāláħo ('he reconciled with him').
I think the traditional form II with object pronouns beginning with a vowel places the stress differently (ykássro 'he breaks it') but these days many speakers say ykassə́ro.
Form III has ṣā́lħo ('they reconciled with') vs ṣāláħo ('he reconciled with him').
October 31, 2025 at 8:14 PM
Yes it's yəktə́bo indeed.
I think the traditional form II with object pronouns beginning with a vowel places the stress differently (ykássro 'he breaks it') but these days many speakers say ykassə́ro.
Form III has ṣā́lħo ('they reconciled with') vs ṣāláħo ('he reconciled with him').
I think the traditional form II with object pronouns beginning with a vowel places the stress differently (ykássro 'he breaks it') but these days many speakers say ykassə́ro.
Form III has ṣā́lħo ('they reconciled with') vs ṣāláħo ('he reconciled with him').