I'm from Ethiopian love this guy how he pronounced ጨ ቀ and ፅ ጽ I can't get it enough.

regarding one of the aramaic words for year cited in this video ("shetta"), Hebrew speakers will likely know this word with out knowing that they know as it appears in one of the Aramaic parts of the Pessa7 Haggadah (in הא לחמא עניא "Ha La7ma Anya") in the Phrase הָשַׁתָּא הָכָא - לְשָׁנָה הַבָּאָה בְּאַרְעָא דְיִשְׂרָאֵל hashatta hakha - leshana haba'ah be'ar3a di'yisrael ("this year here, for next year (we shall be) in the Land of Israel"). But mostly Israelis won't know the precise meaning of hashatta hakha here, they only know it from context.

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

Right. Thank you for this important comment.

Thanks very much from this speaker of an Indo-European language (Dutch). I never learned any language outside that family (only German, French, English, Latin and Greek) - so I am very interested in this language family very present in Europe.

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

You're very welcome! Akkadian is a great language to begin with IMHO

Thank you for this video. Hope its a first of a series😉

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

Thank you! Happy to say: yes 😊

Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning mass between their ears. hebrew, aramaic, rest of madeup dialect continua only have 22 letters of the 29 protosemitic letters Arabic has all 29. The difference betweeen Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as that between Latin and pig latin or italian. |Classical Arabic | 28 consonants, 29 with Hamza and 6 vowels; some consonants are emphatic or pharyngealized; some vowels are marked with diacritics | Complex system of word formation based on roots and patterns; roots are sequences of consonants that carry the basic meaning of a word; patterns are sequences of vowels and affixes that modify the meaning and function of a word | Flexible word order, but VSO is most common; SVO is also possible; subject and object are marked by case endings (-u for nominative, -a for accusative, -i for genitive); verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different moods and aspects | | Akkadian | 22 consonants and 3 vowels; some consonants are glottalized or palatalized; vowels are not marked | Similar system, but with different roots and patterns; some roots have more than three consonants; some patterns have infixes or reduplication | Fixed word order of SVO; subject and object are not marked by case endings, but by prepositions or word order; verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different tenses and aspects | | Aramaic | 22 consonants and 3 vowels (later variants have more); no emphatic or pharyngealized consonants (except in some dialects); vowels are not marked (except in later variants such as Syriac) | Simple system of word formation based on prefixes and suffixes; some roots or patterns exist, but are less productive than in Arabic or Akkadian | "Semitic" is just mumbled Arabic, really. Imagine English with a third of its letters removed and simplified grammar. That's Aramaic, Hebrew, etc. For example, combine T and D into just T; there's no need to have 2 letters. The same goes for i, e, y - they should all be just y from now on, etc., etc. Arabic is the only corollary to proto-Semitic. In fact, the whole classification of Semitic languages is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning brain. Hebrew, Aramaic, and the rest of these made-up dialect continua only have 22 letters out of the 29 proto-Semitic letters. Arabic has all 29. The difference between Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as the difference between Latin and pig Latin or Italian. "Phoenician" is an Arabic dialect continuum, and not only that, it is pidgin. It is simplified to the point of stupidity. Anyone with a basic knowledge of Arabic would see this clearly. What happened was that Arabic handicapped "scholars" saw the equivalent of Scottish Twitter spelling, with added mumbling due to phonemic mergers (22 letters, not 29), and mistakenly thought they were seeing a different language." Let's start with a simple sentence: ## The house is big Arabic: البيتُ كبيرٌ al-bayt-u kabīr-un Proto-Semitic: *ʔal-bayt-u kabīr-u Hebrew: הבית גדול ha-bayit gadol Akkadian: bītum rabûm Amharic: ቤቱ ገደሉ betu gedelu As can be seen, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (noun-adjective), the same definite article (al-), and the same case endings (-u for nominative). Hebrew and Akkadian have lost the case endings and changed the definite article (ha- and -um respectively). Amharic has changed the word order (adjective-noun) and the definite article (u-). But Arabic is not only similar to Proto-Semitic, it is also pre-Semitic, meaning that it is the original form of Semitic before it split into different branches. This is because Arabic preserves many features that are not found in any other Semitic language, but are found in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. These features include: - The definite article al-, which is derived from the demonstrative pronoun *ʔal- 'that'. This article is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the article n- in Berber and the article p-, t-, n- in Egyptian. - The dual number for nouns and verbs, which is marked by the suffix -ān or -ayn. This number is rare in other Semitic languages, but it is common in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. - The imperfective prefix t- for verbs, which indicates the second person singular feminine or third person plural feminine. This prefix is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the prefix t- in Berber and Egyptian. - The passive voice for verbs, which is marked by the infix t between the first and second root consonants. This voice is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the passive voice in Egyptian and Berber. Finally, a more complex sentence: The letter was written with a pen. Arabic: كُتِبَتِ الرِّسَالَةُ بِالقَلَمِ kutiba-t al-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Proto-Semitic: *kutiba-t ʔal-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Hebrew: המכתב נכתב בעט ha-michtav niktav ba-et Akkadian: šipram šapāru bēlum Egyptian: sḏm.n.f p-ẖry m rnp.t Berber: tturra-t tibratin s uccen Here, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (verb-subject-object), the same passive voice marker (-t-), the same definite article (al-), and the same preposition (bi-). Hebrew has changed the word order (subject-verb-object), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (ha-) and the preposition (ba-). Akkadian has changed the word order (object-subject-verb), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (-um) and the preposition (bēlum). Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing? Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken in a script that had never been used before that is perfect ? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

Wonderful talk. Thank you. There's so much in the grammatic, phonetic, and elements of meaning from triliteral roots that don't map on well to Indo-European languages, to the point that much poetry and punning is lost in translation. I learned this in my study of Arabic many years ago that this video is a pleasant remideder of.

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it, thank you 😊

@paulthomas281

4 ай бұрын

@stephicath Indo-European languages are all built from the Sanskrit verbal root system and nominal declension system which is a marvel. And Indo-European languages have prefixation which the Afro-Asiatic language family (including Semitic) does not exhibit. Nominal compounding which abounds in German, Ancient Greek and Sanskrit is also lacking in Semitic. And Sanskrit preserves the 5 original simple vowels of human speech: A I R L U. Yes, 'L' is vowel. It is the dental vowel.

@gergelybakos2159

4 ай бұрын

@@paulthomas281 Are not L and R also to be found in the Semitic group as well? Cf. names such as Ur, Sargon, Luz, Jerusalem, Laban, etc. Not speaking of A, I, U which were there in Akkadian, weren't they?

@paulthomas281

4 ай бұрын

Oh really, the R (retroflex vowel) and L (dental vowel) - from where we get the 2 liquid/semivowels in our modern languages - were in Akkadian. I didn't know that! That is fascinating in itself. I believe I tried looking up that information long back, but to no avail. It is important to remember that we in English still use the R vowel in its pure form (unlike German, and unlike every other European language really). The R in 'ribbon', 'rip' are vowels, although English-speakers mistakenly believe these to be consonants. The R in 'crisis' is also a pure vowel just like the R in 'Krishna'. But thank you for the information. Do you have any sources that claim R and L to be vowels in Akkadian? And if you don't mind my asking, do you know any Sanskrit or Ancient Greek? I can recommend some excellent sources for learning Sanskrit if you are interested.@@gergelybakos2159

@paulthomas281

4 ай бұрын

In those words you gave me however, I believe the L in 'Luz', 'Jerusalem', 'Laban' are pronounced like liquids (it's just another term for semi-vowel in linguistics). And so, they are pronounced like our L in English or the L we hear in today's Semitic languages. If 'Laban' should be pronounced with a pure L vowel, then that would indeed sound like a word from Sanskrit. Interesting ...@@gergelybakos2159

That first half was fun & all but I'm not sure I learned a whole lot. But thanks for that demonstration of similarities & their potential significance for a future founded on a greater understanding of a shared culture.

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

Thank you 😊

Thank you for bringing the subject of languages.❤

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

Thank you!

Thank you for this.

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

🙏🙏

very awesome and exciting content , thank you!

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

Our pleasure!

Fascinating. Cheers.

@KEDEMChannel

3 ай бұрын

Thank you 🙏

Todá rabá! Excellent stuff!

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

Thank you! 🙏

While I was at an MAA sectional meeting, I heard that one of those Max planes crashed in Ethiopia. The place has two names, Debre Zeyit in Amharic, which I understood as "words/plague of olive" ("debr" actually means "mountain"), and Bishoftu in Oromo, which meant nothing to me.

@StopTheLiess

3 ай бұрын

Oromo is from the Cushitic language family

People isolated into family groups when the continents broke apart in the days of Peleg and they began speaking different languages because of their isolation from each other. That's when they began spreading around the world from Mesopotamia. I have a good story for you about electric eels... the ones that live in the Amazon River and tributaries. They are traditionally called puraquê. I am from the village of "Puraquê" which is a misnomer. The Americans living there named the place Puraquequara, which was supposed to mean, *"place of the electric eel."* It should have been *"Por aqui quara",* which is understandable if you speak fluent Portuguese. So the name is a place where I am from is mistakenly called "Puraquê" for short. Early on, the native nationals in Brazil began calling the eel, puraquê, since it was broadcasted that way on TV early on. I wish it had been named correctly since the initials would have been PAQ instead of PQQ. PAQ would have been so much better. So the actual name of the eel is *quara,* not puraquê because the puraquê was supposed to be por aqui and it was the quara that was "por aqui", not the puraquê.

Excellent. Thank you.

@KEDEMChannel

3 ай бұрын

You are welcome!

As a speaker of a Romance language who has learned a second one (and picked up bits of a third and fourth), there's no surprise that nearby languages that emerged from a common parent language a millennium or so ago share as many similarities as they do. But in the case of the modern Semitic languages, it's been much longer (at least a millenium earlier) since they emerged, so I'm a bit surprised that they're as similar as they are today. (I would have thought the gap between them would be more like that between the Romance and, say, modern Celtic or Germanic languages...)

a most fascinating fact about the semitic languages is its staying power , from the beginning of civilization to the modern day

Really interesting discussion. The odd upspeak (uptalk?) at the end of most sentences was a bit strange

What about Maltese which is spoken by half a million people and is one of the official languages of the EU?

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

You are absolutely right! A very important and fascinating language.

@stephencachia5561

4 ай бұрын

@@KEDEMChannel grazzi mill-qalb, ħabib. Forsi tista' tipprepara programm dwar l-ilsien Malti wkoll. (Heartfelt thanks, my friend. Perhaps you could prepare a program about the Maltese language as well.) 😊♥️🙏🇲🇹

@BenjaminSuchard

4 ай бұрын

Yes, sorry for the oversight!

@stephencachia5561

4 ай бұрын

@@BenjaminSuchard it's ok, perhaps you can include it in another video 🙂 grazzi ħafna, many thanks

@mujemoabraham6522

3 ай бұрын

@@stephencachia5561 grazzi ħafna grazzi its an Italian word ħafna its an Arabic word Who knows Italian and Arabic languages , he will understand the Maltese well.

Josef Issac Yahuda '' hebrew is Greek ' . Paleo-Hebrew is Paleo-Greek: Part 1: The Alphabet Paperback - Large Print, October 25, 2016 by Travis Wayne Goodsell (Author, Translator). Any questions ??

Very timely reminder.

@cooldogbearbutt3806

4 ай бұрын

The significance is not lost on me either.

You forgot the language called TIGRE which is also a Semetic language spoken by the Tigre ethnic group found only in ERITREA.

@BenjaminSuchard

4 ай бұрын

19:17 :)

@davidcooper177

4 ай бұрын

@@BenjaminSuchard thanks

@A21221

3 ай бұрын

@@BenjaminSuchard Thanks for mentioning that! My mother tongue is Tigre but I also speak Tigrinya fluently and Arabic to some degree. I was surprised that many words are shared between Ethio-Semitic languages and Hebrew, and are somehow absent in Arabic. I also find it interesting that the sound transformation of ḫ to ḥ is also present in ancient languages, like Phoenician and ancient Hebrew.

@davidcooper177

2 ай бұрын

@@A21221 I am confused 🤔! You have European first and last name indicating that you might not be a native of Eritrea. How did you learn Tigrigna and Tigre?

The historical record shows that everyone spread out from Mesopotamia. Ancient history is essential for everyone to know, especially the sixteen original civilizations… from the sixteen grandsons of Noah. It’s necessary to learn ancient history before trying to learn science. 1. The first inhabitants of Italy (K) Tubal 2. Thracians (L) Tiras 3. Siberians (N) Meshek 4. East Asians (O) Magog 5. Medes (PQ) Madai 6.. Western Europeans (R) Gomer 7. Mediterranean Greek sea people (T) Javan 8. Hebrews and Arabic (IJ) Arphaxad 9. Elamites (H) Elam 10. Assyrians (G) Asshur 11. Arameans (F1) Aram 12. Lydians (F2) Lud 13. Cushites (AB, C) Cush 14. Egyptians (E3) Mitzrayim 15. Canaanites (E2, D) Canaan 16. Original North African Phoenicians (E1) Phut The D haplogroup descendants of Canaan migrated east through Tibet all the way to Japan. The C haplogroup descendants of Nimrod migrated to South Asia, the Pacific, Mongolia and all the way to the Americas along with Q haplogroup descendants of Madai ancestor of the Medes. The A maternal mtDNA haplogroup belonging to the N lineage accompanied the Q paternal haplogroup in the Americas. The C&D maternal haplogroups belong to the M lineage. The B maternal haplogroup seems to have crossed the Pacific Ocean. The Mediterranean paternal R1b and the maternal X2a also found in Galilee represent an Atlantic crossing of the Phoenicians in the days of King Solomon considering also the Mediterranean paternal haplogroups of T, G, I1, I2, J1, J2, E and B in addition to the R1b in Native American Populations. J1 and J2 is Arabs and Jews. (I1 is Dan, I2 is Asher) Of course there is the Cohen modal haplotype of J1 P58 which identifies the IJ lineage of Hebrews and Arabs that are descended from Arphaxad. J2 M172 is the descendants of the House of David and Solomon.

From Somalia / in Ethiopia you have group of south Arabian semetic langueges from Geez - Tigrinya- Amaharic- also Adari and Gurage...the have similarities to Arabic like numbers 5 amsa - khamsa 7 Saba'a - Sabca .. Sky= Samaa etc... these semetic languages are heavily Cushitic influenced and majority of semetic speakers are of Cushitic origin but adopted southern Arabian semetic langueges like which Sabian fromYeman / Oman/ Socotra.. CUSHITIC OMOTIC SOMALI-Afar Bilen - Saho the low land Cushitic langueges are similar. They have feminine gender with - (Ta) and make goes with ( Ka). Also the Afar Somali Dir clans have unique haplogroup T- 1 while Majority Kushites are E1B1 Ev-20

@StopTheLiess

3 ай бұрын

No we’re not especiallyTigray

Latin helps a lot with many Western European languages.

The guest seems to agree with the host that any Israeli school student can understand the Mesha Moabite stone. This is absurd. This would only be possibly true if it were transliterated into the Hebrew script now taught in Israel. It would be interesting to know if a Samaritan child can read and understand the Mesha stone.

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

You are right. They probably referred to the reading of the transliteration (although interestingly, teaching of the original Hebrew script became quite popular in Israeli schools so many kids are able to read it directly from the source).

@danielwurmser

2 ай бұрын

Transcribing between alphabets is not a big deal. We read from the Mesha Stele in Hebrew School in Baltimore in the 1970s.

@stephenfisher3721

2 ай бұрын

@@danielwurmser כל הכבוד as they say these days. How do you write כל הכבוד in the ancient script?

@danielwurmser

2 ай бұрын

@@stephenfisher3721 Just noticing this now. There is a chart on the Wikipedia page for Paleohebrew that has the transcriptions, so it is easy to write by hand, but let me see if I can manage with a font. Does this work? 𐤊𐤋 𐤄𐤊𐤁𐤅𐤃

@KateGladstone

4 күн бұрын

@stephenfisher3721 @danielwurmser 𐤊𐤋 𐤄𐤊𐤁𐤅𐤃

“The ancient Turanian/TUR/ Turkish speaking people’s language is/ was ATA language. Polat Kaya yahoo papers and Kamil Kartal güneş-dil akademisi. “

Can we talk about how Arabic is the master of all Semitic languages?

Ask Kamil Kartalgunes-dil akademi.

Arabic is a Daugther of Aramaic like Russian letters ore Cyrilic is originaly from Greek Cyrril the Great and his Brother Methodius were Bulgars and they were Missionairies and Preach Orthodox Christianty to the Slavs like Serbia Russia Slovakia etc.

@TheUnique69able

3 күн бұрын

Arabic is not a daughter of Aramaic, they are sister languages

@ZenatiOmar

3 күн бұрын

@@TheUnique69able no arabic letters are Aramaic in Origine

@TheUnique69able

3 күн бұрын

@@ZenatiOmar what does the script have to do with the language?

Caxton Nyahela :Many scholars have ignore Bantu language for centuries.Bantu language is both Semetic and Afro Asiatic,it has many Hebrew and Arabic words.Its offshoot Kiswahili is purely Afro Asiatic.Kindly avoid the mistake of isolating the Bantu ,keeping them outside the Semetic house, how do you keep more than 400 million Black Bantu Semites from the Semetic house.Your study approach leaves a monumental gap about Semetic languages.

@wachuku1

4 ай бұрын

Bantu languages uncontroversially belong to the Niger-Congo phylum. This includes Swahili despite the fact that it has a large layer of Semitic influence in the form of Arabic loans. Swahili from the standpoint of pronouns, morphology, phonology, syntax, and core vocabulary is very typically Bantu, and *very* obviously not Semitic. In terms of verbal morphology, Swahili is agglutinative, while Arabic is fusional and makes very extensive use of non-concatenative morphology, which is basically alien to Bantu languages. In terms of nominal morphology, it has a non-sex-gender based gender system that has almost 20 classes with extensive agreement across targets, which is alien to Semitic. Bantu languages themselves are clearly related to very diverged groups of languages in Western and parts of Central Africa, such as Àkan, Mossi, and Gbeya, and the time-depth uniting Bantu to these languages stretches back well beyond 6,000 years. You will even see more idiosyncratic similarities between Swahili and Fulani than you will between Swahili and Arabic despite Fulani being even more different from Bantu than any of the languages I mentioned before. This should also show that Bantu’s lineage ultimately stems from prehistoric West Africa rather than West Asia. Neither Swahili nor Bantu are Semitic, so there’s no reason to look at them to better understand the history of Semitic.

@Moshie71

3 ай бұрын

So which of you two is correct? Instead arguing on YT, please provide your source material - I’m sure we’ll all appreciate that.

@caxtonnyahela5608

3 ай бұрын

Caxton Nyahela:Thanks Dr.Benjamin.Iam Bantu and my clans ancient pre Christian and pre Islamic names are Hebrew.My name Nyahela AKA Nyaela is related to Hebrew names Ismael, Rael,Israel.We also have Maelo and Maela which are Hebrew and Semetic,have nothing to do with Kiswahili. Like my clan,Hebrews have unisex words and names.Bantus are Semetic by lineage and with time,we will be proved right,we are not imposters.The Niger Congo approach was just a hypothesis that was used deliberately to destroy the Bantu Semetic identity.

@wachuku1

3 ай бұрын

@@Moshie71 Rest assured, the Bantu and Semitic families are simply not similar enough to warrant any special genealogical relationship. This opinion is mainstream, and the inclusion of Swahili strictly within the Bantu family, and under the broader Niger-Congo classification, is uncontroversial. Saying otherwise is, in fact, very much odd. Swahili itself is mentioned regularly in any given piece of literature specifically addressing Bantu. As for a demonstration of similarities with distant African languages to the exclusion of any Semitic language, one may look at the Swahili human plural prefix wa- within its gender system. This prefix comes from the Proto-Bantu human plural prefix *ba-, which is transparently comparable in form and meaning to the Fulani human plural suffix -ɓe. These are all also related to the 3rd person plural pronouns in all these languages. There is nothing bearing any formal similarity to these markers in any Semitic or even any Afro-Asiatic language whatsoever. For Semitic’s non-concatenative morphology, there are bi- or tri-consonantal roots providing a very basic meaning through which a vocalic template is interspersed, often with affixes to further modify the meanings. For example, in Arabic, there’s the root k-t-b, from which one gets “kitāb” (book),” “kutub” (books),” “katab-“(wrote) “maktab” (office/desk) and “kuttayib” (booklet). This is not only unlike what one would see in any Bantu or Niger-Congo language, but is, in fact, highly unusual cross-linguistically. This necessarily speaks to the fact that that these two entities (Bantu or Swahili v. Semitic) are cut from different cloths.

@gailascari

3 ай бұрын

Gbeya of Central African Rep is Ubangui language, not at all Bantu.

“Tarihi Türk, is also called THE TURKISH ERA, divided into ages of 10 000 years each, and into periods of 60, 12 and 10 years each, the total predestined duration of the EARTH being 300 000 ages, the period of twelve years is the one commonly used: in it each year receives the name of an animal. Redhouse Dictionary. Polat Kaya. “ Turkish is the oldest perfectly constructed language on the planet Earth.

Funny thing is that Palestinians say that Jews are a foreign, European population colonizing their (Arab) land. This shows beyond any doubt that Jews are indigenous to that region. Even European Jews always preserved Hebrew as their language of prayer. How would they speak a semitic language if they did not originate from the Middle East?

@ahmadjuwayni6256

4 ай бұрын

Looks like you haven't read history... a large number of jews are Europeans and converted to Judaism and then learned the hebrew language needed for ritual... learning a language doesn't make you an ethnic semite... how foolish a thing to suggest is that... Read about the Khazars and Ashekhanazis who converted go Judaism... its just history...

@wachuku1

4 ай бұрын

⁠@@ahmadjuwayni6256The Khazar Hypothesis really is not correct. Seemingly the vast majority of Jewish groups incorporated non-Jewish groups living in their vicinity. But, the overwhelming majority of Jewish groups genuinely descend from Bronze Age Southern Levantine populations. Even for Ashkenazi Jews, who undoubtedly have large amounts of European ancestry, they are generally between 40% and 55% derived from these Levantine populations, which is why it’s not especially hard to find distinctly Middle Eastern-looking Ashkenazi Jews. That figure can reach about 60% in some groups if one incorporates Ancestry from other parts of the Middle East and North Africa. You can use population genetic testing software like qpAdm or Global25 to verify this. I personally know some who look basically no different from what one would expect a Middle Easterner to look like. Another reason why the Khazar Hypothesis isn’t correct is that the European ancestry in Ashkenazis is mostly North Italian, with a smaller amount stemming from Central Europe. associated with

@mahirabdulahi4131

5 күн бұрын

Modern Hebrew is a created language in the last century.

The Hebrew is a new created form. It is not the ancient Hebrew

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

Respectfully, this is not correct. In fact, Modern Hebrew speakers can easily read and understand Classical/Biblical Hebrew.

@aikidik251

15 күн бұрын

Always downplaying Hebrew for known Arabic reasons. Modern Hebrew uses biblical Hebrew plenty enough. So this comment is wrong.

Im Turkish and understand most of the words. You dont need to be Semitic or Israeli Khazarian Jew to understand it too.

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

Cool! Teşekkürler!

@talisikid1618

4 ай бұрын

Khazarian? No. Just Jewish.

@Aristotle675

4 ай бұрын

70% inflation rate failed state

@atidfelixcastillo-najerala6891

3 ай бұрын

Remember: most israelíes are descendents of the middle eastern Jews, ethnically cleansed from Arab lands in the 59s &60s

@mrgsnv3632

3 ай бұрын

Khazars were a Turkic tribe that lived in the south of modern-day Russia and got assimilated around 1000 years ago. No idea why you brought them up.

I don't know why it's so hard to just openly state that the single language in Eden was Hebrew? It's clear Moses didn't give us a translation of a foreign name into Hebrew: instead God gave Adam a Hebrew name; Adam gave his wife a Hebrew name: and all 20 generations from Adam to Abraham have Hebrew names.

@Darisiabgal7573

4 ай бұрын

Semetic is part of the Afroasiatic language family, there seems to be ties to the very first encountered, the Mar.tu, linked to the coastal region near the Lebanese/Syrian border on the mediterranean. The oldest cultural site we have sits between lebanon and the other branches of semetic speakers in Africa (and the "Hamite" branch) is Natufia, which later developed into Jericho. Eden was a land between the Tigris and Euphrates, there are two theories that scholars think the author of the story is referring to, the upper Euphrates, which is close to the Tigris near the Ararat mnts, and the lower mesopotamia. Heres the problem, the upper and middle Tigris was occupied by Hassuna culture, which evolved into the Samarrah culture. The Samarrah culture appears, at least in the pottery culture related to the early Ubaid culture (Tell ubaid, Eridu, Tell el-ouelli). And in fact up into the Jemdet Nasr period there appears to be trade between the lake Van region and Tell Shemshara that may have been traders in mineral resources for lower mesopotamia. The language that comes out of lower mesopotamia is not AfroAsiatic, but Sumerian . . .This period begins about 7590 years ago, so before any conceivable biblical chronology. The Ubaid peoples were planters, they probably had cattle, and probably traded for goats with people from Zagros mnts (protoElamites). The Mar.tu had sheep, but, the Sumerian likely had cattle, as the ox was symbolic of divity in their culture. Up the Euphrates river, there was Halaf culture, there are transitional sites up the Tirgis river that bridge Halaf and Obaid, as well as sites near the Zagros that feed the middle tigris. Halaf culture dissappears as it appears many people migrated into Uruk period culture. It is in this period that Semetic speakers probably started moving down the Euphrates and were encountering Sumerians, between 6200 and 5000 years ago. Though what I think Halaf became long distant traders for goods and in the copper age being able to tender copper or to places like Bad Tibera would have made a person well-off enough to have a house in a cities trading quaters. Within the vacuum of this the Semitic peoples moved down the Euphrates and encountered the Sumerians. We originally recognize their culture by their gods. The high god of the Mar.Tu (Amorites) was Amurru. As the sumerians move up the Euphrates there were difficulties, they encounter a god of the bible, Dagan, who was kind of a fertility/father god. We then encounter the next god, Anah (Biblical Anath, Anat). This goddess is more significant to Jewish legend as there is at least one settlement in Israel called Beth Anath, but also it was the god of one of the Judges, Shamgar. Anat is also the wife of Y--H according to text left by Elephantine Jews. Ok so, what about the god of the bible where does that god come from, isnt it Semetic.? The early Israelite high god was 'l (El, ,אֵל, 'il) he is identified in the canaanite literature as the head of the divine council, he is also identified in the Cunieform literature as his Ugarit name𐎛𐎍 is cognate with 𒀭 which is easily identified with 𒀭𒀭 of dingir Anu, the high god of Sumer, and principle diety of Uruk before 2340 BCE. An was the celestial sky, he is in ugaritic and hebrew culture the bull of the heavens, the father of the gods in ugaritic and sumer, and the god of the fathers in all three. And so this leaves Y--H, there are supicisions of where the people of this god come from. My opinion they come from SW Arabia, from the region between Edom and Yemen. There maybe Mesopotamian precedent for the god, as legand posits sages of this god came from the red sea, but as many late bronze age/early iron age gods are mergers between two gods (e.g. Attar-Kemos) . So my opinion is that Y--H is a chimera between Ea (Enki, Ia, Yah) and a god like Sa'anite god Wa'ad. So that while El does come from mesopotamia, Uruk is far from being the oldest settlement, Eridu has title of the oldest surviving settlement, its early gods were elementals, Abzu (the waters beneath the Earth in the story of Noah) and his wife (Tiamat in the Enuma Elis, Tahom in the bible). They give rise to Nammu the creater goddess who parthenogenetically gives rise to Enki. We can see from this that the biblical authors are stirring mythical mesopotamian elements into their foundational myths, so why should they not be mixed into the story of Adam and Eve. Think Babylonian Exile and stories the Jehudites heard as they went to different cities.

@cooldogbearbutt3806

4 ай бұрын

He-bro, more like. Are you serious, Jeremy Castro?! 😂 I don't think linguistics is for you. Or history. Or other foundations of knowledge. 😅 But seriously, why is it important for you to believe that?

@cooldogbearbutt3806

4 ай бұрын

@@Darisiabgal7573 Hi Ray, know of you via Centre Place. Such a full & sensible, nuanced answer to such a crude assertion!

@jeremycastro9700

4 ай бұрын

@@Darisiabgal7573 Afro-Asiatic is originally known as Hamitic, and Proto-Indo European is originally known as Japhetic. Why is Semitic called so? Noah's three sons: 1) Shem (Semitic) 2) Ham (Hamitic) 3) Japheth (Japhetic) What is the shared relationship between these three names? They're all Hebrew in origin, that includes their father Noah and all ten generations going back to Adam have Hebrew names.

@agnelomascarenhas8990

4 ай бұрын

Genesis is outright fiction. Adam, Abraham, Moses are not historical characters, no evidence. You are mixing your faith and fables with history and linguistics.

Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha". It's the word Isa PBUH used. Sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا) Jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes as will be explained. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. "protosemetic" Alphabet (29), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining protoS 29th is a س written in a different position, but was shoehorned to obfuscate. "Semitic" is just mumbled Arabic, really. Imagine English with a third of its letters removed and simplified grammar. That's Aramaic, Hebrew, etc. For example, combine T and D into just T; there's no need to have 2 letters. The same goes for i, e, y - they should all be just y from now on, etc., etc. Arabic is the only corollary to proto-Semitic. In fact, the whole classification of Semitic languages is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning brain. Hebrew, Aramaic, and the rest of these made-up dialect continua only have 22 letters out of the 29 proto-Semitic letters. Arabic has all 29. The difference between Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as the difference between Latin and pig Latin or Italian. "Phoenician" is an Arabic dialect continuum, and not only that, it is pidgin. It is simplified to the point of stupidity. Anyone with a basic knowledge of Arabic would see this clearly. What happened was that Arabic handicapped "scholars" saw the equivalent of Scottish Twitter spelling, with added mumbling due to phonemic mergers (22 letters, not 29), and mistakenly thought they were seeing a different language." This kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, and then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.real

@mznxbcv12345

4 ай бұрын

Languages degrade, they do not "evolve". It is a tool for thinking, not communication, it is what seperates other lifeforms from humans. The mere fact that translation is even possible underlies a common origin for all languages, orca whales seperated from their birth pod are unable to communicate with other whales if they get adopted, they are only able to track the others visually. Classical Arabic has largest phonemic inventories among semitic languages. It has 28 consonants (29 with Hamza) and 6 vowels (3 short and 3 long). Some of these sounds are rare or absent in other semitic languages. For example, - Classical Arabic has two pharyngeal consonants /ʕ/ (ع) and /ħ/ (ح). These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic). - Classical Arabic has two emphatic consonants /sˤ/ (ص) and /dˤ/ (ض) These sounds are found only in some semitic languages (Hebrew and Amharic), but not in others (Akkadian and Aramaic). - Classical Arabic has two glottal consonants /ʔ/ (ء) and /h/ (ه), which are produced by opening and closing the glottis ). Akkadian has lost the glottal stop /ʔ/, while Aramaic has lost both the glottal stop and the glottal fricative /h/. - Classical Arabic has six vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, /æ /, /e/, /o/, which can be short or long. Akkadian has only three vowel phonemes /a/, /i/, /u/, which can be short or long, while Aramaic has only two vowel phonemes /a/ and /i/, which can be short or long. Textual criticism in christianity began when the bible was first translated into european vernavular in the 16th century (was translated into Arabic in the 19th century), it reached a professional level around the 19-20th century and is still ongoing today, In Islam however it started in the first century. Unlike the Quran, the hadith are transmitted oral accounts which were written 2-3 centuries after they happened and even in the canonical collections of Bukhari and Muslim there are several narrations of the same hadith due to some people paraphrasing and others forgetting part of it. Most of the hadith are without context, this is not to take from the value of hadith as in practice it was the first serious endeavor of having authentication of the historical record. The hadith are transmitted by way of chains of narration, x heard from y who heard from z that .... took place, a study of who x, who y, and who z were and whether what they are saying is true by checking what others had said about them and whether they had indeed met those who they are purported to have taken the accounts from began and so the first "peer review" mechanism took place, all before the internet in the 2nd and 3rd centuries fo the hijra, which unlike the christian calendar has been continously kept, the current gregorian calendar for example was first instanced int he year 535 CE by Dionysius Exiguus, the 25th of December in addition for example being the pagan holdiay of the roman deirty 'Sol Invictus' is clearly shown in the "Chronograph of 354", the earliest christian calendar predating the current one, but I digress, the writing down of hadith was forbidden by the prophet himself for the aforementioned issue (people forgetting, paraphrasing, taking words out of context) only the Quran was ordered to have been written and linguistically they are too far apart, it is clear that the Matn of the hadith, the substance or the wording was altered as the language used seems to be more modern in many instances (Arabic had not changed in any significant way since the Abbassids, 1200 years ago sound as "modern" as things written in the last 50 years. Arabic is the oldest continuously spoken language in the world, the only possible corollary, chinese, has script which has no relation to the actual language hence why Japanese and old vietnamese use it, event the script itself was only codified in the 1700s in the kangxi emperor's dictionary. A miracle in plainsight blinded by familiarity). Hadith for example has several levels of correctness, from Hasan which means "well" to rejected as pertains to the Matn or the substance of the hadith itself, The isnad of the Hadith or the chains of transmission / citation also have varying levels from Marfu' meaning quoted without having actually met any of the people in the transmission chain or a second hand account or Mudalas meaning plagarised from another transmitter of hadith without citing and Marfud meaning outright rejected for various reasons, there is another layer of complexity here called ilm-aa-rijal, the study of the bibilogrophy of those in the chains of transmission themselves and their soundness whether objectively by crosschecking where they lived and whome they met or subjectively by seeing what their peers said about them regarding their character Those unaware of the aforementioned would not only have not been allowed to cite hadith it would have been a criminal offense and there are hadith which clearly contradict one another and one ought not be citing hadith without knowing all other hadith from the colossal hadith collections that were written, even the earliest hadith collection, Musannaf Abdel Razaq Al-Sanani ( 137-211H / 744- 827 CE) and Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah ( 159H-235H / 775-849 CE). for instance had over 53,000 hadith with their chains of transmissions included ahas yet to be translated into English . Yes, Bukhari and Muslim are taken the most correct as they had the most narrow criterion, but an enormous study is required before citing either one of them. Later scholars such an Al-Darqutni show that there were mistakes made. I say later here though he is still over a millennium old this seriousness of scholarship was the first endeavor of its kind in human history, what became today known as university degrees started with the institutions giving "ijaza" or certificate t transmit hadith and talk about it , indeed they are the origins of the University system we know today. There are texts from the 800's CE debating whether, if one for example were to take a log of wood that was not theirs, make a column out of it and have it as a foundation of a house, later the original owner of the column comes back and demands the log to be retrieved into his custody and refuse monetary compensation ought the judge comply, tear down the structure and give him the log or ought he enforce a monetary compensation. this was 1200 years. Property rights were taken that seriously, you could not simply handwave it and enforce a monetary compensation as that property in question was not attained by proper channels, hence it' s ownership and how much ought be the compensation for it is judicated by its owner and no one else has the right to, not the governor or even the caliph. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". This scientific method of studying hadith and jurisprudence was developed and already in practice in the 2nd and third centuries of the hijra (around 800 CE) back when most of europe did not have a written script for their vernacular, enormous encyclopedia such as the 40 volume history of Al-Tabari which, averages 400 pages per volume (and is only one of his works) were written, the only corollary of which in the west would have been the "decline and Fall of The Roman Empire" by Edward Gibbons in the 1700s, considered a watershed, a monument of its time, with a span that would have hardly constituted a volume and a half of Al-Tabari's encyclopedia and written a millennium later, indeed over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel speaks volumes as to whom civilisation ought to be ascribed to if one were to compare camps. Both the renaissance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the The Republic of Arabic Letters: Islam and the European Enlightenment by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By Jonathan Lyons) Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing? Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? What started this intellectual revolution, what started this sharp contrast between before Islam and after it, what started the real Enlightenment of humanity? God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

@KEDEMChannel

4 ай бұрын

@@mznxbcv12345 Thank you for your elaborated and learned contribution. We believe that languages do evolve in terms of their relevance and function in actual reality. if a language dose not evolve, the people stop using it and you get situations such as diglossia.

@mznxbcv12345

4 ай бұрын

Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). |Classical Arabic | 28 consonants, 29 with Hamza and 6 vowels; some consonants are emphatic or pharyngealized; some vowels are marked with diacritics | Complex system of word formation based on roots and patterns; roots are sequences of consonants that carry the basic meaning of a word; patterns are sequences of vowels and affixes that modify the meaning and function of a word | Flexible word order, but VSO is most common; SVO is also possible; subject and object are marked by case endings (-u for nominative, -a for accusative, -i for genitive); verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different moods and aspects | | Akkadian | 22 consonants and 3 vowels; some consonants are glottalized or palatalized; vowels are not marked | Similar system, but with different roots and patterns; some roots have more than three consonants; some patterns have infixes or reduplication | Fixed word order of SVO; subject and object are not marked by case endings, but by prepositions or word order; verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different tenses and aspects | | Aramaic | 22 consonants and 3 vowels (later variants have more); no emphatic or pharyngealized consonants (except in some dialects); vowels are not marked (except in later variants such as Syriac) | Simple system of word formation based on prefixes and suffixes; some roots or patterns exist, but are less productive than in Arabic or Akkadian | - Arabic has three cases for nouns: nominative, accusative, and genitive. These cases are marked by suffixes that are the same as the "Proto-Semitic" endings: -u for nominative, -a for accusative, and -i for genitive. Other Semitic languages have lost these case endings or reduced them to one or two forms. For example, Akkadian has only two cases: nominative and genitive-accusative. Hebrew has no case endings at all. - Arabic has two genders for nouns: masculine and feminine. These genders are marked by suffixes that are the same as the "Proto-Semitic" endings: -u for masculine and -at for feminine. Other Semitic languages have changed these gender endings or lost them altogether. For example, Akkadian has changed the feminine ending to -t or -at . Hebrew has lost the masculine ending and changed the feminine ending to -a or -t . - Arabic has two numbers for nouns: singular and plural. These numbers are marked by suffixes that are the same as the "Proto-Semitic" endings: -u for singular and -ūn or -īn for plural. Other Semitic languages have changed these number endings or developed other ways of forming plurals. For example, Akkadian has changed the plural ending to -ū or -ī . Hebrew has developed a broken plural system, where the plural is formed by changing the internal vowels of the noun. - Arabic has a complex verbal system that includes ten main forms (awzān) that indicate different meanings and functions. These forms are derived from the root-and-pattern morphology, where the consonants of the root fill the slots of the pattern. For example, the root k-t-b means "write" and can form different verbs such as kataba "he wrote", kattaba "he made (someone) write", kātaba "he corresponded", aktaba "he dictated", iktataba "he subscribed", etc. Other Semitic languages have simpler verbal systems that include fewer forms and meanings. For example, Hebrew has only seven main forms (binyanim) that indicate different meanings and functions. - Arabic has a flexible word order that can be verb-subject-object (VSO), subject-verb-object (SVO), or verb-object-subject (VOS). The word order can be changed to emphasize different elements of the sentence or to create different styles of speech or writing. Other Semitic languages have more rigid word orders that are usually subject-verb-object (SVO) or verb-subject-object (VSO). The word order can be changed only for specific purposes, such as topicalization or focus. some examples of phrases in each language that illustrate their differences. It shows that classical Arabic has more complex and varied forms of expression than the other languages. Comparing Arabic with the reconstructed "Proto-Semitic" will show how Arabic preserves features that are lost or changed in other Semitic languages Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same definite article (al-), the same case endings (-u for nominative), the same passive voice marker (-t-), and the same preposition (bi-), same object suffixes (-ka for masculine and -ki for feminine). Hebrew lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (ha-) and the preposition (ba-), changed the object suffixes (-cha for masculine and -ach for feminine). Akkadian has lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (-um) and the preposition (bēlum), the object suffixes (-ak for masculine and -ekh for feminine). But Arabic is not only similar to "Proto-Semitic", it is also pre-Semitic, meaning that it is the original form of Semitic before it split into different branches. This is because Arabic preserves many features that are not found in any other Semitic language, but are found in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. These features include: - The definite article al-, which is derived from the demonstrative pronoun *ʔal- 'that'. This article is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the article n- in Berber and the article p-, t-, n- in Egyptian. - The dual number for nouns and verbs, which is marked by the suffix -ān or -ayn. This number is rare in other Semitic languages, but it is common in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. - The imperfective prefix t- for verbs, which indicates the second person singular feminine or third person plural feminine. This prefix is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the prefix t- in Berber and Egyptian. - The passive voice for verbs, which is marked by the infix t between the first and second root consonants. This voice is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the passive voice in Egyptian and Berber. These examples show that classical Arabic has more consonants and vowels than other "semitic" languages, and that it preserves some sounds that were lost or changed in other semitic languages. This means that classical Arabic can encode more information in a given unit of speech than other semitic languages, and that it is not only closer to the original sound system of protosemitic., it predates it. We can see that classical Arabic has more grammatical features than the other languages, such as case endings, mood endings, and root and pattern system. These features make classical Arabic more expressive and precise than the other languages, as it can convey more information and nuances in a single word or phrase. Classical Arabic is also more flexible than the other languages, as it can use different word orders and verb forms to emphasize different aspects of the sentence. Classical Arabic is therefore older and more original than the other languages. How is this possible? God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

@aisaketakau7824

4 ай бұрын

inspite of this impressive. exposition , there are a lot of factual errors , eg hebrew ,phoenician and aramaic were well developed long before. the quranic arabic was put into it's wriiten form ,

@mznxbcv12345

3 ай бұрын

The exactness in Arabic can be seen from the roots and patterns for example, the root كتب (k-t-b) can be used to create words such as: -kitaab - book -kutub - books -kaatib - writer -kitaabah - writing -kataba - he wrote -kutiba - it was written -aktubu - I write -yaktubu - he writes -maktab - office -maktuub - written -yaktubu - he writes -kutbah - sermon -maktabah - library All of these words have a common relation to the concept of writing, while they differ in their meaning and function, they are epistemologically related This means that Arabic can create new words from existing symbols without changing their logical form or content. Arabic has epistemology in the etymology itself without requiring outside inpput. Both etymology, ontology and epistemology are inbuilt. This can only be true if a language without outside intervention (and no human design can achieve this) if Arabic was the first language and language here refers to tool for cognition. No other language poses this, indeed it is this very system which Arabic grammarians developed from analysing the syntax of the Quran which was used to decipher all the ancient texts. Arabic itself began being studied in europe in the 17th century to translate the "old testament" and along the way came the decipherment of the other ancient scripts Aramaic has merged the "Proto-Semitic" sounds /s/ and /ʃ/ into /s/, while Arabic has kept them separate as /s/ and /ʃ/. Similarly, Aramaic has merged /θ/ and /t/ into /t/, while Arabic has kept them separate as /θ/ and /t/. Now the alphabets of Arabic and Hebrew. Arabic has separate letters for /s/ (س), /sh/ (ش), /ṣ/ (ص), /ḍ/ (ض), /t/ (ت), /th/ (ث), /ṭ/ (ط), /ẓ/ (ظ), while Hebrew has merged them into /s/ (ס), /sh/ (ש), /ts/ (צ). The phonemic mergers that occurred in Hebrew are as follows: aleph, he, heth, and ayin merged into /ʔ/; beth, waw*, and yodh merged into /v/; gimel and ghayin merged into /ɡ/; daleth and teth merged into /d/; kaph and qoph merged into /k/; pe and fe merged into /f/; resh and sin merged into /ʃ/; taw and sade merged into /s/. These mergers reduce the number of possible sound combinations and words in Aramaic and hebrew, and since they come form the one origin, Aramaic and Hebrew can be seen as a coarse-grained version of Arabic. Arabic has a rich and complex morphology, especially in its verb system, Aramaic, on the other hand, has a simpler morphology in its verb system. Arabic verbs have three main aspects: tense (past, present, future), mood (indicative, subjunctive, jussive, imperative), and voice (active, passive), Aramaic verbs have only two aspects: perfective (completed action) and imperfective (ongoing or future action). Arabic verbs have two numbers (singular, plural), two genders (masculine, feminine), three persons (first, second, third), Aramaic verbs also have two numbers (singular, plural), but only one gender (common) and one person (third). Arabic verbs have two main patterns: sound and weak. Sound verbs have three consonantal roots that do not change, while weak verbs have one or more vowels in their roots that change depending on the aspect, mood, voice, number, gender, and person. For example, the sound verb kataba (he wrote) has the root k-t-b, while the weak verb raa'a (he saw) has the root r-w-y. These patterns result in hundreds of possible verb forms in Arabic, Aramaic verbs also have two numbers (singular, plural), but only one gender (common) and one person (third). Furthermore, Aramaic verbs have only one pattern: sound. Weak verbs are rare or nonexistent in Aramaic. For example, the verb katab (he wrote) has the same root as in Arabic k-t-b, but there is no equivalent for raa'a in Aramaic. Arabic has a flexible and free syntax, where the word order can vary depending on the focus, emphasis, or style of the speaker or writer. Arabic sentences can have three main word orders: verb-subject-object (VSO), subject-verb-object (SVO), or object-verb-subject (OVS). For example, the sentence "He wrote a book" can be expressed in Arabic as kataba kitaaban (VSO), huwa kataba kitaaban (SVO), kitaaban kataba (OVS). Each word order can convey a different nuance or implication in Arabic. Aramaic, however, has a rigid and fixed syntax, where the word order is usually subject-object-verb (SOV). Aramaic sentences rarely deviate from this word order, and any variation is usually marked by special particles or conjunctions. For example, the sentence "He wrote a book" can only be expressed in Aramaic as hu ktab sefer (SOV). Any other word order would be ungrammatical or unnatural in Aramaic. These differences mean that Arabic has more possible word forms and meanings than Aramaic, , all this means is that Aramaic is a simplified pidgin of Arabic, a lossy compression of a lossless original (protosemitic/Arabic). Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.