18.07.2013 Views

The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

COOK <strong>The</strong> Language of Onqelos and Jonathan 151<br />

/za-bear<strong>in</strong>g forms. (In the Late <strong>Aramaic</strong> period, the ha- prefix spreads<br />

to all dialects.)<br />

Pronom<strong>in</strong>al suffixes on nouns and verbs also present a mixed<br />

picture. <strong>The</strong> masc. s<strong>in</strong>g, suffix on masc. pi. nouns is as follows:<br />

Qumran Palmyrene Syriac Onq/Jon<br />

-why -why/-yh -why -why<br />

<strong>The</strong> fern. s<strong>in</strong>g, suffix on s<strong>in</strong>gular nouns presents a somewhat different<br />

picture:<br />

Qumran Palmyrene Syriac Onq/Jon<br />

-h' -h -ah -ah<br />

Only <strong>in</strong> Qumran <strong>Aramaic</strong> is the f<strong>in</strong>al vowel written. <strong>The</strong> defective<br />

orthography of Palmyrene leaves us <strong>in</strong> the dark about whether the<br />

f<strong>in</strong>al vowel was pronounced or not. Both Syriac and Onqelos and<br />

Jonathan have vocalized texts. <strong>The</strong> vocalization does not go back to the<br />

Middle <strong>Aramaic</strong> period, however, so purely on the basis of the consonantal<br />

texts one might be able to argue for a f<strong>in</strong>al long vowel on those<br />

dialects before vocalization on the basis of later pronunciation was<br />

added. In Onqelos and Jonathan's case, however, the consonantal<br />

orthography often does preserve a long vowel, so it seems likely that<br />

if the vocalization here matched that of Qumran <strong>Aramaic</strong>, it would<br />

have been preserved. <strong>The</strong> next category—fem. s<strong>in</strong>g, suffixes on pi.<br />

nouns—is a good example of the preservation of long vowels <strong>in</strong><br />

Onqelos and Jonathan:<br />

Qumran Palmyrene Syriac Onq/Jon<br />

-yh' -yh -eh -aha<br />

Aside from the different realization of the diphthong, here Onqelos<br />

and Jonathan co<strong>in</strong>cide with Qumran <strong>Aramaic</strong> rather than with Syriac<br />

or Palmyrene.<br />

<strong>The</strong> <strong>in</strong>flection of the imperfect presents a different set of problems.<br />

<strong>Aramaic</strong> once had a double series of the imperfect: one <strong>in</strong>dicative, and<br />

one precative. <strong>The</strong> latter series <strong>in</strong> some dialects had the preformative<br />

<strong>in</strong> /-, as we see <strong>in</strong> the Tell Fekherye <strong>in</strong>scription. In the other dialects,<br />

the preformative was y-, but the precatives cont<strong>in</strong>ued to be dist<strong>in</strong>guishable<br />

by other marks: the 3rd masc. pi. end<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> -M, not -un\ the<br />

2nd fem. s<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong> -f, not -fn; the variation between the end<strong>in</strong>g yodh<br />

(precative) and he (<strong>in</strong>dicative) <strong>in</strong> the 3rd masc./fem. s<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong> f<strong>in</strong>alweak<br />

verbs, the absence of the energic nun on precative forms with

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!