Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:44:54.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Mehri Participle: Form, Function, and Evolution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2007

Aaron D. Rubin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The verbal form known as the active participle (= AP) is an integral part of the Mehri verbal system, functioning mainly – but not exclusively – as a future tense.1 Yet despite its frequency, recent synopses of the language have given this form very little attention. For example, in the very important sketch of the Modern South Arabian languages by Johnstone (1975), discussion of the AP is limited to less than one sentence (p. 119). In the very useful set of observations by Lonnet (1994a), the AP receives only a little more consideration, about ten lines. In the more recent outline by Simeone-Senelle (1997), the AP also gets about ten lines. All of this is in contrast to the grammar of Jahn (1905), in which the AP (or future, as Jahn calls it) is treated as a basic verbal tense and is included in all paradigm sets.2

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , October 2007 , pp. 381 - 388
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bittner, Maximilian. 1909a. Der gemeinsemitische Ausdruck für ‘Zunge’. WZKM 23: 144–150.Google Scholar
Bittner, Maximilian. 1909b. Studien zur Laut- und Formenlehre der Mehri-Sprache in Südarabien. I. Zum Nomen im engeren Sinne. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 162/5.Google Scholar
Bittner, Maximilian. 1911. Studien zur Laut- und Formenlehre der Mehri-Sprache in Südarabien. II. Zum Verbum. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 168/2.Google Scholar
Brockelmann, Carl. 1908. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen, vol. 1. Berlin: von Reuther.Google Scholar
Christian, V. 1944. Die Stellung des Mehri innerhalb der semitischen Sprachen. Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 222/3.Google Scholar
Dillmann, August. [1907] 1974. Ethiopic Grammar. 2d ed. Revised and edited by Bezold, Carl. Translated by Crichton, James A.. Reprint, Amsterdam: Philo.Google Scholar
Fox, Joshua. 2003. Semitic Noun Patterns. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahn, Alfred. 1905. Grammatik der Mehri-Sprache in Südarabien. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 150/6.Google Scholar
Johnstone, T. M. 1975. The Modern South Arabian Languages. Afroasiatic Linguistics 1:93–121.Google Scholar
Johnstone, T. M.. 1987. Mehri Lexicon and English-Mehri Word-List. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.Google Scholar
Khan, Geoffrey. 1999. A Grammar of Neo-Aramaic: The Dialect of the Jews of Arbel. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khan, Geoffrey. 2002. The Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Qaraqosh. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khan, Geoffrey. 2004. The Jewish Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Sulemaniyya and Ḥalabja. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lonnet, Antoine. 1994. Quelques résultats en linguistique sudarabique moderne. Quaderni di Studi Arabi 11:37–82.Google Scholar
Lonnet, Antoine. 1994b. Le verbe sudarabique moderne: hypothèses sur des tendances. Matériaux arabes et sudarabiques n.s. 6:213–255.Google Scholar
Nöldeke, Theodor. 1904. Compendious Syriac Grammar. 2d ed. Translated by Crichton, James A.. London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
Pennacchietti, Fabrizio A. 1970. La classe degli aggettivi denotativi nelle lingue semitiche e nelle lingue berbere. Annali dell'Istituto Orientale di Napoli 30:285–294.Google Scholar
Pennacchietti, Fabrizio A. 1979. Considerazioni sul morfema plurale -ān dell'etiopico. Atti del Sodalizio Glottologico Milanese 21:60–65.Google Scholar
Rhodokanakis, N. 1910. Zur Formenlehre des Mehri. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 165/1.Google Scholar
Rubin, Aaron D. 2005. Studies in Semitic Grammaticalization. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, M. H. 1927. A Grammar of Mishnaic Hebrew. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Sima, Alexander. 2003. Review of Mehri Texts from Oman, Based on the Field Materials of T. M. Johnstone, by H. Stroomer. Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik 42:88–94.Google Scholar
Simeone-Senelle, Marie-Claude. 1997. The Modern South Arabian Languages. In The Semitic Languages, ed. Hetzron, R., 378–423. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
von Soden, Wolfram. 1995. Grundriss der akkadischen Grammatik. 3d ed. With the assistance of Meyer, W.. Rome: Pontifico Istituto Biblico.Google Scholar
Stroomer, Harry, ed. 1999. Mehri Texts from Oman. Based on the Field Materials of T.M. Johnstone. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Thomas, Bertram. 1937. Four Strange Tongues from Central South Arabia. Proceedings of the British Academy 23:231–331.Google Scholar
Wagner, Ewald. 1953. Syntax der Mehri-Sprache unter Berücksichtigung auch der anderen neusüdarabischen Sprachen. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar