2004
DOI: 10.1163/9789047413585
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Jewish Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Sulemaniyya and Ḥalabja

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, remarkably, it is possible, though highly exceptional, for differential object marking to involve both ergative indexing and accusative prepositional marking of the object. Khan (2004a) offers the following example, unique within his entire corpus. Although, strictly speaking, the verb is ditransitive, it proves the possible combination for transitive verbs.…”
Section: 313mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thus, remarkably, it is possible, though highly exceptional, for differential object marking to involve both ergative indexing and accusative prepositional marking of the object. Khan (2004a) offers the following example, unique within his entire corpus. Although, strictly speaking, the verb is ditransitive, it proves the possible combination for transitive verbs.…”
Section: 313mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dependent first/second person object markers, for example, cannot be combined with dependent a markers in the Jewish dialect of Sulemaniyya (Khan 2004a), which is part of the Southeastern Trans-Zab cluster. When the object is of first or second person reference, it must be expressed independently.…”
Section: 323mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such ergative constructions can have a topical subject postposed to express cohesion, e.g. (69) ʾıńty-a-wa-le ʾaxon-ı̀| take-OBJ.3FS-PST-ERG.3MS brother-my "My brother had taken it away" (R:105) (J. Sulemaniyya: Khan 2004) LD constructions with experiencer arguments such as (68) do not exhibit any evidence of structural reanalysis, but the initial item behaves syntactically like a grammatical subject due to the inherent semantic properties of the arguments of the clause. Such inherent properties condition its behaviour like a grammatical subject on both the left and right periphery of the clause.…”
Section: Motivations For Ldmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…xalusta rabt-ăké 'the elder sister' (J. Suleimaniya Aramaic) sister:FS big:FS-DEF (Khan, 2004a(Khan, : 232, 2007: 202) b. birā gawr-aká 'the elder brother' (Central Kurdish) brother:MS big-DEF (MacKenzie, 1961: 64) Yet the morphosyntax is rather different. In Aramaic, the plural noun takes the same definite suffix, as in gur-ăké "the men" from indefinite gur-e "men" vs. gor-ăké "the man" from indefinite gora "(a) man", whereas in Kurdish the plurality is expressed on the article by -ān, compare Sorani pyāw-ak-ān "the men" from pyāw-ān.…”
Section: Kurdish Variation Within Eastern Neo-aramaicmentioning
confidence: 99%