Based on certain linguistic features, the varieties of Aramaic attested after the Persian period are usually divided into a Western and an Eastern branch. It is, however, less easy to pinpoint the origin of these two branches, since already the first textual witnesses of Aramaic exhibit a considerable amount of variation. This paper attempts to reconsider some traits often associated with Eastern Aramaic (less clearly defined than its Western counterpart) from a diachronic point of view and relates them to the distinctive features of Imperial Aramaic. Whereas some of them clearly antedate the fall of the Persian Empire, many others reflect later developments.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 424 | 104 | 26 |
| Full Text Views | 92 | 7 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 300 | 14 | 0 |
Based on certain linguistic features, the varieties of Aramaic attested after the Persian period are usually divided into a Western and an Eastern branch. It is, however, less easy to pinpoint the origin of these two branches, since already the first textual witnesses of Aramaic exhibit a considerable amount of variation. This paper attempts to reconsider some traits often associated with Eastern Aramaic (less clearly defined than its Western counterpart) from a diachronic point of view and relates them to the distinctive features of Imperial Aramaic. Whereas some of them clearly antedate the fall of the Persian Empire, many others reflect later developments.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 424 | 104 | 26 |
| Full Text Views | 92 | 7 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 300 | 14 | 0 |