language in 11th century Jerusalem?
language in 11th century Jerusalem?
I wasn't sure if this counted as an L&L question. What vernacular language would have been spoken by a Jew in Jerusalem in the late 11th century (obviously before they were burnt alive even later in the century)? What stage of that language?
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
The rulers around that time were the Fatimids or something, weren't they? So probably whatever languages they spoke.
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
al-lugha al-franj
[quote="Nortaneous"]Is South Africa better off now than it was a few decades ago?[/quote]
- WeepingElf
- Smeric
- Posts: 1630
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
- Location: Braunschweig, Germany
- Contact:
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
Arabic, I'd wager.
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
- Aurora Rossa
- Smeric
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 11:46 am
- Location: The vendée of America
- Contact:
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
Indeed, that's what everyone else was speaking in the area, were they not?WeepingElf wrote:Arabic, I'd wager.
"There was a particular car I soon came to think of as distinctly St. Louis-ish: a gigantic white S.U.V. with a W. bumper sticker on it for George W. Bush."
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
That's where I'd put my money. That's the language they were speaking there until the 20th century.WeepingElf wrote:Arabic, I'd wager.
vec
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
And that logic is why I believe the jews are still speaking arabic.Eddy wrote:Indeed, that's what everyone else was speaking in the area, were they not?WeepingElf wrote:Arabic, I'd wager.
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
The problem is, the mountainous areas of the levant happen to be a hotspot of linguistic diversity. Hell, there are still people in Lebanon speaking Aramaic. So I don't think "Everyone else was speaking Arabic" is a knock-out argument. Maybe somebody should... I don't know... go to the library?
[quote="Nortaneous"]Is South Africa better off now than it was a few decades ago?[/quote]
- Aurora Rossa
- Smeric
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 11:46 am
- Location: The vendée of America
- Contact:
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
Whoa really? Considering that thousands of years have passed since the heyday of Aramaic, it must have undergone extraordinary amounts of linguistic change. How can we even consider the modern variety the same language as Aramaic spoken over two thousand years ago?brandrinn wrote:The problem is, the mountainous areas of the levant happen to be a hotspot of linguistic diversity. Hell, there are still people in Lebanon speaking Aramaic.
"There was a particular car I soon came to think of as distinctly St. Louis-ish: a gigantic white S.U.V. with a W. bumper sticker on it for George W. Bush."
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
In the same way that speakers of Basque and Chinese consider themselves to speak the same language as 2000 years ago: continuity. Besides, if you actually bothered to read, you'll find that this is addressed in the wikipedia article; modern Aramaic can be argued to be a bunch of related languages (or dialects/varieties).
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
They probably spoke several languages, in different contexts. It's highly likely, unless they lived in isolated all-Jewish villages, that they spoke Medieval Arabic (many famous Jews actually wrote in Arabic; the 9th/10th century scholar Sa`adiah ben Gaon wrote most of his books in Arabic, such as Emunoth veDe`oth or "Beliefs and Doctrinal Knowledge," probably implying that it was the language he most expected people to be able to read) - or at least, spoke it in mixed situations. In non-Gentile settings, I would imagine they used an Aramaic dialect (keep in mind that this is what most of the Gemara of the Talmud is written in; most of the Mishnah is Hebrew), and was supposedly the mother tongue of many Jews even during Jesus' time), though they may have used Hebrew. I'm nearly positive that they used Hebrew for their religious services, prayers, etc.
Obviously, it's not the "same" language - in the same way that Old English and Modern English aren't the same language. But they are also not completely "different" languages i.e. finlay is quite correct. Modern Hebrew is a great example; it sounds nothing like what Mishnaic Hebrew is reconstructed to have sounded like - leaving aside grammatical changes, like the fossilization/lexicalization of the smikhut construction (the same happened in Syriac, though it is still quite productive and rarely lexicalized in Arabic) in favor of a more analytic construction. Note that many forms of written modern Aramaic still use the Syriac abjad, and there's often the sense that speakers consider their languages to be dialects of Syriac (or Mandaic, which uses a greatly altered form of the Syriac abjad).Eddy wrote:Whoa really? Considering that thousands of years have passed since the heyday of Aramaic, it must have undergone extraordinary amounts of linguistic change. How can we even consider the modern variety the same language as Aramaic spoken over two thousand years ago?brandrinn wrote:The problem is, the mountainous areas of the levant happen to be a hotspot of linguistic diversity. Hell, there are still people in Lebanon speaking Aramaic.
لا يرقىء الله عيني من بكى حجراً
ولا شفى وجد من يصبو إلى وتدِ
("May God never dry the tears of those who cry over stones, nor ease the love-pangs of those who yearn for tent-pegs.") - Abu Nawas
ولا شفى وجد من يصبو إلى وتدِ
("May God never dry the tears of those who cry over stones, nor ease the love-pangs of those who yearn for tent-pegs.") - Abu Nawas
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
I'd tentatively agree - probably Arabic in gentilic contexts, and potentially Aramaic in Jewish contexts and Hebrew for religious ceremonies.
كان يا ما كان / يا صمت العشية / قمري هاجر في الصبح بعيدا / في العيون العسلية
tà yi póbo tsùtsùr ciivà dè!
short texts in Cuhbi
Risha Cuhbi grammar
tà yi póbo tsùtsùr ciivà dè!
short texts in Cuhbi
Risha Cuhbi grammar
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
Possibly some Greek-speaking Jewish communities too?
The Marshlandic Scratchpad
Featuring: An Intro to Sociolinguistics
-Sebastic (Semitic)-
-Vlachian/Μλός βλάχεαν-
Featuring: An Intro to Sociolinguistics
-Sebastic (Semitic)-
-Vlachian/Μλός βλάχεαν-
-
- Smeric
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:07 pm
- Location: Miracle, Inc. Headquarters
- Contact:
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
Did the Crusaders speak French or Frankish?brandrinn wrote:al-lugha al-franj
[bɹ̠ˤʷɪs.təɫ]
Nōn quālibet inīquā cupiditāte illectus hoc agō
Yo te pongo en tu lugar...
Taisc mach Daró
Nōn quālibet inīquā cupiditāte illectus hoc agō
Yo te pongo en tu lugar...
Taisc mach Daró
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
Frankish was dead by then, and not all the Crusaders were French. But "franj" became a generic word for them among the Arabs.Bristel wrote:Did the Crusaders speak French or Frankish?brandrinn wrote:al-lugha al-franj
[quote="Nortaneous"]Is South Africa better off now than it was a few decades ago?[/quote]
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
Old French, which is Western Vulgar Latin with Frankish loanwords and influences on grammar.Did the Crusaders speak French or Frankish?
And yeah, not all crusaders were from France. Although, even Richard the Lionheart, despite being the king of England, didn't speak English; he spoke French.
Also, what's "al-lugha"?
-
- Smeric
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:07 pm
- Location: Miracle, Inc. Headquarters
- Contact:
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
Ah, thanks everyone.
For one second, I thought that "al-franj" was from "Franja de Ponent", to which I thought "WTF?" But then cooler heads prevailed, and I translated it.
For one second, I thought that "al-franj" was from "Franja de Ponent", to which I thought "WTF?" But then cooler heads prevailed, and I translated it.
[bɹ̠ˤʷɪs.təɫ]
Nōn quālibet inīquā cupiditāte illectus hoc agō
Yo te pongo en tu lugar...
Taisc mach Daró
Nōn quālibet inīquā cupiditāte illectus hoc agō
Yo te pongo en tu lugar...
Taisc mach Daró
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
If I'm not mistaken, Classical Arabic had "al-lura" <r> = /ʁ/, and /ʁ/ was fronted to /ɣ/ later.
Languages I speak fluentlyPřemysl wrote:Oh god, we truly are nerdy. My first instinct was "why didn't he just use sunt and have it all in Latin?".Kereb wrote:they are nerdissimus inter nerdes
English, עברית
Languages I am studying
العربية, 日本語
Conlangs
Athonian
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
This is wrong (Arabic already has a /r/ phoneme, denoted by <ر>, and there is no evidence in the grammatical literature to suggest that <غ> was ever considered another kind of rhotic). The velar-uvular fricative is reconstructed from Proto-Semitic, and Arabic is one of the few Semitic languages to retain it (it merged with /ʕ/ in almost all others). A realization of Classical /r/ as /ʁ/ is a feature of a small number of dialects, such as the Jewish dialect of Baghdad, and is probably a result of substratum influence from Hebrew or Aramaic.Mr. Z wrote:If I'm not mistaken, Classical Arabic had "al-lura" <r> = /ʁ/, and /ʁ/ was fronted to /ɣ/ later.
I think you're confusing Pre-Mishnaic Hebrew with Arabic. Modern Hebrew has the development /r/>/ʁ/, but this happened after the merging of */ɣ/ and */ʕ/ into /ʕ/. For example, Arabic مغرب /maɣrib/ "sunset, evening," Hebrew מעריב /maʕăriv>maʔaʁiv/ "evening."
لا يرقىء الله عيني من بكى حجراً
ولا شفى وجد من يصبو إلى وتدِ
("May God never dry the tears of those who cry over stones, nor ease the love-pangs of those who yearn for tent-pegs.") - Abu Nawas
ولا شفى وجد من يصبو إلى وتدِ
("May God never dry the tears of those who cry over stones, nor ease the love-pangs of those who yearn for tent-pegs.") - Abu Nawas
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
No, you misunderstood me. I'm not saying that the Classical Arabic rhotic was an uvular fricative; I just used <r> to represent it here, because that's easier than using some diacritical thing. AFAIK, Arabic /ɣ/ was /ʁ/ in Classical Arabic; ر is unrelated, and I used <r> simply because I perceive /ʁ/ as <r>, being a native Hebrew speaker. I'm sorry for the confusion; but am I not right about the /ʁ/ >/ɣ/ thing?Khvaragh wrote:This is wrong (Arabic already has a /r/ phoneme, denoted by <ر>, and there is no evidence in the grammatical literature to suggest that <غ> was ever considered another kind of rhotic). The velar-uvular fricative is reconstructed from Proto-Semitic, and Arabic is one of the few Semitic languages to retain it (it merged with /ʕ/ in almost all others). A realization of Classical /r/ as /ʁ/ is a feature of a small number of dialects, such as the Jewish dialect of Baghdad, and is probably a result of substratum influence from Hebrew or Aramaic.Mr. Z wrote:If I'm not mistaken, Classical Arabic had "al-lura" <r> = /ʁ/, and /ʁ/ was fronted to /ɣ/ later.
I think you're confusing Pre-Mishnaic Hebrew with Arabic. Modern Hebrew has the development /r/>/ʁ/, but this happened after the merging of */ɣ/ and */ʕ/ into /ʕ/. For example, Arabic مغرب /maɣrib/ "sunset, evening," Hebrew מעריב /maʕăriv>maʔaʁiv/ "evening."
Languages I speak fluentlyPřemysl wrote:Oh god, we truly are nerdy. My first instinct was "why didn't he just use sunt and have it all in Latin?".Kereb wrote:they are nerdissimus inter nerdes
English, עברית
Languages I am studying
العربية, 日本語
Conlangs
Athonian
Re: language in 11th century Jerusalem?
Ok then, but <r> is really not a good way to represent this sound, because Arabic already has an /r/ phoneme which is typically transliterated as <r>. You can easily transliterate /ɣ/, without diacritics, as <gh>. Yes, غ is typically analyzed as having been realized as [ʁ] in Classical Arabic, but honestly, I think the distinction is rather unimportant, because no Semitic language (that I'm aware of) has a phonemic distinction between /ʁ/ and /ɣ/ (the Baghdadi dialect is an extremely marginal example IMO). Whether that phoneme is now realized as [ɣ] is another question; IMO, I wouldn't say it's across the board, but [ɣ] is definitely dominant in some dialects, like Egyptian and Levantine for example. On the other hand, some Gulf and Moroccan I've heard has the realization much closer to or at [ʁ].Mr. Z wrote: No, you misunderstood me. I'm not saying that the Classical Arabic rhotic was an uvular fricative; I just used <r> to represent it here, because that's easier than using some diacritical thing. AFAIK, Arabic /ɣ/ was /ʁ/ in Classical Arabic; ر is unrelated, and I used <r> simply because I perceive /ʁ/ as <r>, being a native Hebrew speaker. I'm sorry for the confusion; but am I not right about the /ʁ/ >/ɣ/ thing?
لا يرقىء الله عيني من بكى حجراً
ولا شفى وجد من يصبو إلى وتدِ
("May God never dry the tears of those who cry over stones, nor ease the love-pangs of those who yearn for tent-pegs.") - Abu Nawas
ولا شفى وجد من يصبو إلى وتدِ
("May God never dry the tears of those who cry over stones, nor ease the love-pangs of those who yearn for tent-pegs.") - Abu Nawas