Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-19-2001 at 09:21 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
Shlama Akhay, For a wonderful page about the Akkadian language (the oldest Semitic language, related to but replaced with Aramaic and now extinct), please visit: https://saturn.sron.nl/~jheise/akkadian/ 
From the Encyclopedia Brittanica: Akkadian language also spelled ACCADIAN, also called ASSYRO-BABYLONIAN, extinct Semitic language of the Northern Peripheral group, spoken in Mesopotamia from the 3rd to the 1st millennium BC. 
Akkadian spread across an area extending from the Mediterranean Sea to the Persian Gulf during the time of Sargon (Akkadian Sharrum-kin) of the Akkad dynasty, who reigned from about 2334 to about 2279 BC. By about 2000 Akkadian had supplanted Sumerian as the spoken language of southern Mesopotamia, although Sumerian remained in use as the written language of sacred literature. At about the same time, the Akkadian language divided into the Assyrian dialect, spoken in northern Mesopotamia, and the Babylonian dialect, spoken in southern Mesopotamia. At first the Assyrian dialect was used more extensively, but Babylonian largely supplanted it and became the lingua franca of the Middle East by the 9th century BC. During the 7th and 6th centuries BC, Aramaic gradually began to replace Babylonian as the spoken and written language; after that, Babylonian was still used for writings on mathematics, astronomy, and other learned subjects, but by the 1st century AD it had completely died out. Scholars deciphered the Akkadian language in the 19th century. Akkadian, written in a cuneiform script developed from that of the Sumerians, contained about 600 word and syllable signs. The sound system of the language had 20 consonants and 8 vowels (both long and short a, i, e, and u). Nouns occurred in three cases (nominative, genitive, and accusative), three numbers (singular, dual, and plural), and two genders (masculine and feminine); the feminine was distinguished from the masculine by the addition of the suffix -t or -at to the stem. The verb had two tenses (past and present-future). In 1921 scholars at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago began to compile a standard dictionary of the Akkadian language. By the 1990s most of the 22 planned volumes of this dictionary had been published.
The amazing thing is, Akkadian had all the vowels over 2,500 years before they were implemented in Aramaic and Hebrew! Also strange is the fact that, although a Semitic language, Akkadian was written from left-to-right and had over 600 letters! Fk^rwbw 0ml4
|
|
Print Top | | |
|
James_Trimm
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-19-2001 at 10:06 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #0
Evidence that it is NOT the original language. Psycolgists have learned that the brain functions naturally from right to left. Trimm
|
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-19-2001 at 10:21 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #1
Shlama Akhi Yaqub, Who said it's the 'original' language? I said, and all linguists (East and West, Jew and Gentile) universally agree that Akkadian is the oldest Semitic language. What does that have to do with the 'original' language? The 'original' language is lost after Babel, all men began to speak different tongues - no one group "retained" the "original" language. Wrong cap is on again.....and the brain halves have nothing to do with it. It's pride and nationalism only. "Mighty Tzadok" used to come on this forum and claim that Arabic is the original language of all humanity, and that God speaks only in Arabic. Gee....I wonder if his Arab ethnicity or Muslim religion has anything to do with that? We cannot throw away scientific, archaeological and biblical evidence because "Ish" and "Ishah" have a relationship in Hebrew (no pun intended), or because "Rashi"!!! said this or that. I really don't care what "Rashi" said. You and "Mighty Tzadok" obviously have similiar agendas, and it is plainly evident to all that the motivation behind your ideas is your cultural pride. I have been guilty of that too.....but C'MON akhi! I don't dare to put Aramaic words in Adam's mouth (even though S. Bavli does!) Time to switch caps..... Fk^rwbw 0ml4
|
|
Print Top | | |
|
James_Trimm
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-19-2001 at 10:31 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #2
>Time to switch caps..... What... and take off my kippah?  Trimm
|
|
Print Top | | |
|
James_Trimm
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-19-2001 at 10:41 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #2
Paul, I do not believe the academic world is ready to accept that Adam ever existed, much less speculate about his language. By definition, therefore, when we discuss this topic we have left accademia behind and have entetred an area which cannot be discussed authoritatively from academicly accepted positions. Trimm
|
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-19-2001 at 12:01 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #4
Exactly.  By the way, the 'Ish and 'Ishah wordplay works in the Aramaic as well, with 04n0 (#1428 - "Man") and 04n (#1515 - "Woman" & "Wife"). Fk^rwbw 0ml4
|
|
Print Top | | |
|
James_Trimm
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-19-2001 at 12:31 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #5
you mean "man" 0n40 and "woman" 0ttn0 ? (at least in the Peshitta) actually in Aramaic the words only look alike. In Hebrew the words are: man: $y0 woman: $n0 The word for "man" comes from a root meaninging "to be man-like" The word for "woman" comes from a root meaning "to be weak or soft" In Hebrew the two words look and sound alike but come from two totally different three letter verbal roots. In Aramaic Adam would not be making a pun but just creating a new word as a spin-off of "man". But in Hebrew Adam is making a pun, the new word he has created SOUNDS like the word for "man" but comes from a different three letter root meaning "to be soft or weak." In the Hebrew Adam is making a funny that only works in Hebrew. Now if this really happened then Adam had to have been speaking Hebrew, not Aramaic or Akkadian etc.. Shlama, Trimm
|
|
Print Top | | |
|
Dean Dana
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-20-2001 at 00:13 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #6
James, The word for "Woman" in Hebrew is NOT $n0 as you suggested, rather it IS h40 It is simpy the feminine form of $y0 Adam's statement was testifying that God created the first woman by "taking" her out of mans side. The word play you are suggesting is not part of the original text. You may be confusing something you read in a Midrash with what's actually in the text. Dean Dana
|
|
Print Top | | |
|
Iakov
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-22-2001 at 02:18 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #7
Akhi Dean, Ma-Shlomkha, shmi Iakov. I agree the text does read "u'basar mi'basri l'zot yiqre ISHAH ki me'ISH luqakha-zot". It carries the normal Hebraic feminine ending. Sorry about the block Hebrew script font. I cannot get it to work on here. Ani Mits-ta'er. Shalom Iakov
|
|
Print Top | | |
|
|