Below the Tigris: The Neo-Aramaic Dialects of Ṭur ʿAbdin and Mlaḥsó

Abstract

TheNeo-Aramaic dialects of Ṭur ʿAbdin (‘Ṭuroyo’) andMlaḥsó constitute a separate subgroup in Southeast Turkey called Central Neo-Aramaic. In terms of alignment, dialects of Ṭur ʿAbdin are typologically similar to the Southeastern Trans-Zab Jewish varieties of nena. The now extinct dialect of Mlaḥsó, in turn, is similar to Christian nena dialects in SE Turkey such as Borb-Ruma (Bohtan) aswell as Jewish dialects of IranianAzerbaijan, such as J. Urmi. Ṭur ʿAbdinNeoAramaic dialects are much less diverse than their Northeastern Neo-Aramaic kin, but there are somenotable differences among them.Wewill contrast them with the Trans-Zab Jewish dialects of nena and conclude with a comparison of Mlaḥsó with Ṭur ʿAbdin and nena dialects in general. Amajor difference betweenCentral andNortheasternNeo-Aramaic is found in the verbal stems andderivations, sinceCentralNeo-Aramaic is characterized by an extensive system of verbal derivations. Each stem derivation (i–iv) has its own mediopassive pendant (iM–ivM), e.g. stem iM məfṣoḥ-o ‘She is happy’. In addition, stem i verbs also include a special ‘perfective’ pattern CaCiC, i.e. qaṭil-, e.g. damix-o ‘She slept’, which will be represented by its historical origin *qaṭṭilfor *CaCCiC, e.g.damixo< *dammiḵå, to avoid confusingwith thenena qaṭəl-base, which corresponds to Central qoṭəl-. The Neo-Aramaic dialects of Ṭur ʿAbdin and Mlaḥsó differ greatly in the usage of these bases. Hemmauer and Waltisberg (2006) and, recently in more detail, Waltisberg (2016) argue that the preterit in Ṭuroyo is essentially tripartite. The distinction in verbal stems between intransitive and transitive clauses plays a key role in their argumentation. Amore nuanced viewwill be offered here: ergative alignment is indeed manifested in Neo-Aramaic dialects of Ṭur ʿAbdin, at least in termsof pro-indexes and, to someextent, also prepositionalmarking.The latter is more distinctly ergative than what is found in nena. Recently, Coghill (2016, 84–90) and Khan (2017, 894–895) also briefly treated alignment in Ṭuroyo and Mlaḥsó in comparison with nena, and their observations are comparable to mine.