Atlas of the Arabic Dialects of Galilee (Israel) (Handbook of Oriental Studies: Section 1; The Near and Middle East) 900441066X, 9789004410664

Citation preview

Atlas of the Arabic Dialects of Galilee (Israel)

Handbook of Oriental Studies Handbuch der Orientalistik section one

The Near and Middle East Edited by Maribel Fierro (Madrid) M. Şükrü Hanioğlu (Princeton) Renata Holod (University of Pennsylvania) Florian Schwarz (Vienna)

VOLUME 135

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/ho1

Atlas of the Arabic Dialects of Galilee (Israel) With Some Data for Adjacent Areas By

Peter Behnstedt Aharon Geva-Kleinberger

LEIDEN | BOSTON

Cover illustration: Map ‘Personal pronouns: 3.pl.c., m.+f.’. Map by author. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Behnstedt, Peter, cartographer, author. | Geva-Kleinberger, Aharon,  author. Title: Atlas of the Arabic dialects of Galilee (Israel) : with some data for  adjacent areas / by Peter Behnstedt, Aharon Geva Kleinberger. Description: Leiden ; Boston : Brill, 2019. | Series: Handbook of oriental  studies. section 1 , ISSN 01699423 ; 135 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2019025589 (print) | LCCN 2019025590 (ebook) |  ISBN 9789004410664 (hardback) | ISBN 9789004411395 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Arabic language—Dialects—Israel—Galilee—Maps. | LCGFT:  Atlases. Classification: LCC G2237.G3E313 (ebook) | LCC G2237.G3E313 B4 2019 (print) |  DDC 492.7/70956945022—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019025589

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. issn 0169-9423 isbn 978-90-04-41066-4 (hardback) isbn 978-90-04-41139-5 (e-book) Copyright 2019 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi, Brill Sense, Hotei Publishing, mentis Verlag, Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh and Wilhelm Fink Verlag. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

Contents



Preface xi General Introduction xii 1 The Questionnaires xiii 2 Representation of Data on the Maps and Commentaries xiii 3 Former Research in the Area xiv Abbreviations xv Index of Arabic-Speaking Localities in the Area, Information about Them and Data Collected There xvi 000 Galilee and Adjacent Areas xxiv 001 Denominations xxv 002 Bedouin Tribes of the Area xxvi

Linguistic Maps and Commentaries 1 Phonology 1 Vowels 5 1.1 Short Vowels 5 1.1.1 Regional Distribution of i – u in Different Lexemes 5 003 1.1.1.1 ‘Mouth’ 7 004 1.1.1.2 ‘Eyelash’ 9 005 1.1.1.3 ‘Instep’ 11 006 1.1.1.4 ‘Mother’ 13 007 1.1.1.5 ‘Week’ 15 008 1.1.1.6 ‘Eyelid’ 17 009 1.1.1.7 ‘Lip’ 19 010 1.1.1.8 ‘Knee’ 21 1.1.1.9 ‘Committee’ 23 011 1.1.1.10 ‘To become, start (auxiliary verb), 1st, 2nd sg., pl.’ 23 012 1.1.1.11 ‘Story’ 24 013 1.1.1.12 ‘Wedding’ 27 014 1.1.1.13 ‘Name’ 29 015 1.1.1.14 /u/ ~ /i/ in t̒ hey̕. pl.c. or pl.m. 31 016 1.1.1.15 ‘Face’ 33 017 1.1.1.16 ‘Shoulder’ 35 018 1.1.1.17 ‘Horn’ 37 019 1.1.1.18 ‘Near, at’ 39 020 1.1.1.19 ‘Under’ 41 021 1.1.1.20 ‘To want’ 43 022 1.1.1.21 ‘Here/there he is’: hayyā, hiyyā, etc. 45 023 1.1.1.22 ‘Year’ 47 1.1.2 Historical Changes 49 024 1.1.2.1 ʔaCCaC > ʔiCCaC 49 025 1.1.2.2 CiCāʔ > CíCa ~ ʔíCCa 53 1.1.2.3 Raising of *a 55 1.1.2.4 Raising of *a in maCCaC, maCCiC, maCāCa, maCCāʔ 55 026 1.1.2.5 ma- ~ mi-: madrasi ~ midrasi, maḥrami ~ miḥrami, etc. 55 027 miḥrami (hand)kerchief’ 56

vi 028 misbaḥa ‘prayer beads’ 57 029 miʕṣara ‘oil-mill’ 58 1.1.2.6 Raising, Fronting of Pretonic *a 61 030 1.1.2.6.1 In ‘honeydew melons’ 61 031 1.1.2.6.2 Raising of *a in CaCCāCa 63 1.1.2.6.3 Treatment of Pretonic *a in *CaCīC 63 1.1.2.6.4 Fronting of *a in CaCāCīC 63 032 šaḥḥāta ‘match’ 64 033 sayyāra ‘car’ 65 1.1.3 Morphophonemics 67 1.1.3.1 Elision of /i/ 67 1.1.3.2 Elision of /a/ in CaCaCa 67 034 1.1.3.2.1 Elision of /a/ in ‘my wife’, ‘his wife’ 69 035 1.1.3.2.2 Elision of /a/ in *maṯalan ‘for instance’ 71 036 1.1.3.2.3 Elision of /a/ in CaCaCa in the Construct as in ‘threshold’, ‘the net of the fisherman’ 73 037 1.1.3.2.4 Elision and Accent in ‘my neck’ 75 1.1.3.2.5 Elision of /a/ in Verb Forms 75 1.1.4  Phonotactics 77 038 1.1.4.1 3rd p. sg. f. perfect, participle sg. f. and suffixation of -vC 77 039 1.1.4.2 Anaptyctic Vowels 79 040 1.1.4.2.1 ‘Hair’, ‘month’ 81 041 ‘Month’ 82 042 1.1.4.2.2 ‘Back’ 85 043 ‘Heel’ 86 044 1.1.4.2.4 baʕad – baʕed 89 1.1.4.2.5 CuCC → CuCuC 89 045 ‘each other’ 90 046 1.1.4.3 Imāla of Feminine Ending -a 93 047 Imāla of Feminine Ending -a: ‘lip’ 94 048 1.1.4.4 Lowering of -i, -u and Diphthongisation in Pause 97 1.2 Long Vowels and Diphthongs 101 049 1.2.1 Reflexes of *ay in *zaytūn, *laymūn 101 050 1.2.2 ā > ē in ‘hour’ 103 051 1.2.3 *ā > ē in ‘yesterday’ 105 052 1.2.4 *ā > ē in ‘ear’ 107 053 1.2.5 māxiḏ ~ mēxiḏ, mākil ~ mēkil 109 054 1.2.6 Lowering of *ū in the Environment of Back Consonants 111 055 dabbūr > dabbōṛ ‘humble-bee’ 112 056 barġūṯ > barġōṯ ‘flea’ 113 057 baṛqūq > baṛqōq ‘anemones’ 114 058 1.2.7 bandōṛa – bandūra 117 059 1.2.8 baqdūnis – baqdōnis 119 1.2.9 Shortening of Unstressed Long Vowels 121 1.3 Consonants 123 060 1.3.1 Qāf 123 061 1.3.1.1 *q > ġ in ‘to be able, can’ 129 062 1.3.2 Kāf 131 1.3.2.1 Conclusions 134 063 1.3.3 Ǧīm 137 065 1.3.3.1 Dissimilation of *š > s in ‘tree’ 141

contents

contents



066 1.3.4 Interdentals 143 067 1.3.4.1 Reflexes of *ḏaqn ‘chin’ 149 068 1.3.4.2 Reflexes of *fax(i)ḏ ‘thigh’ 151 069 1.3.4.3 Reflexes of *ḍirs ‘molar tooth’ 153 070 1.3.4.4 Reflexes of *qunfuḏ ‘hedgehog’ 155 1.3.5. Loss of Emphasis 157 071 1.3.5.1 ‘Chest’ 157 072 1.3.5.2 ‘Zero’ 159 073 1.3.6 Dissimilation of *ʔ- > h- in ʔvʔ or ʔvʕ 161 074 1.3.7 Dissimilation of *n in dunum > dulum 163 075 1.3.8 Progressive Assimilation in *malīḥ > mnīḥ 165 076 1.3.9 Reciprocal Assimilation in -ʕh- → -ḥḥ-: maʕha → maḥḥa, maʕhum → maḥḥum 167 1.4 Conclusion Consonantism 169

2  Morphology 2









Pronouns and Pronominal Suffixes 173 2.1 Independent Personal Pronouns 173 077 2.1.1 1st p. sg. 173 078 2.1.2 2nd p. sg. m.+f. 175 079 2.1.3 3rd p. sg. m.+f. 177 080 2.1.4 1st p. pl. 179 081 2.1.5 2nd p. pl. m.+f. 181 082 2.1.6 3rd p. pl. m.+f. 183 2.2 Pronominal Suffixes 185 083 2.2.1 2nd p. sg. m.+f. 185 084 2.2.2 2nd p. sg. m.+f. negated 187 085 2.2.3 3rd p. sg. m. 189 086 2.2.3.1 3rd p. sg. m. negated 191 087 2.2.4 Suffix Pronoun 3rd p. sg. f. after -C 193 088 2.2.5 2nd p. pl. m.+f. 195 089 2.2.6 3rd p. pl. m.+f.(c.) 197 090 2.2.7 3rd p. pl. c. (m.+f.) negated 199 091 2.3 Relative Pronouns 201 2.4 Demonstrative Pronouns 203 092 2.4.1 Proximal sg. m. 203 093 2.4.2 Proximal sg. f. 205 094 2.4.3 Proximal pl. m.+f. 207 095 2.4.4 Distal sg. m. 209 096 2.4.5 Distal sg.f. 211 097 2.4.6 Distal pl. m.+f. 213 2.5 Demonstrative Adverbs and Presentatives 215 098 2.5.1 ‘Here’ 215 099 2.5.2 ‘Here I am, here he is’ 217 100 2.5.3 ‘There’ 219 101 2.5.4 ‘There he is’ 221 102 2.5.5 Now 223 103 2.5.6 This Way 225 2.6 Other Adverbs 227 104 2.6.1 Last Year 227

vii

viii 105 2.6.2 Next Year 229 106 2.6.3 Straight Ahead 231 2.7 Interrogatives 233 107 2.7.1 What? 233 108 2.7.2 Why? 235 2.7.3 Where? Where to? 237 109 2.7.4 From Where? 237 110 2.7.5 Reflexes of *kayfa ‘how’? 239 111 2.7.6 How Much? How Many? 241 112 2.7.7 When? 243 2.8 Prepositions, Conjunctions 245 113 2.8.1 ‘Inside the house, outside of the house’ 245 114 2.8.2 As, like: miṯl ~ zayy 247 115 2.8.3 ‘Because of, in order to’: minšān ~ ʕašān 249 2.9 Numerals 251 116 2.9.1 ‘One’ 251 117 2.9.2 ‘Three, thirty, eight, eighty’ 253 118 ‘eight’ 254 119 ‘eight’: forms with and without /y/ 255 120 'eight’: forms with plosives 256 121 2.9.3 Numbers from 11–19 259 122 2.9.4 ‘Sixteen’ 261 2.10 Existential Particle 263 123 2.10.1 Existential Particle: ‘there is’ 263 124 2.10.2 Existential Particle: ‘there is not’ 265 2.11 Nominal Forms 267 2.11.1 Maṣdar of Verb Measure II 267 2.11.2 CVCCāy 267 2.11.3 Plural 267 125 2.12 Genitive Exponent 269 2.13 The Verb 271 126 2.13.1 Regular Verb Perfect 3rd. p. sg. f. a- and i-type 271 127 2.13.2 2nd p. pl. m.+f. Perfect 273 128 2.13.3 3rd p. pl. m. (c.) Perfect – 3rd p. pl. m. (c.) Imperfect 275 129 2.13.4 Verb I Endings 3rd p. pl. f. 279 130 2.13.5 Imperfect Prefix 1st p. sg. 281 131 2.13.6 Verb Modifiers Imperfect 283 132 2.13.7.1 Verbs Initial ʔ: Perfect 285 133 2.13.7.2 Verbs Initial ʔ Imperfect: yōkul, yōxuḏ 287 134 2.13.7.2 Verbs initial ʔ imperfect: yōxuḏ 288 135 2.13.7.3 Imperative 291 2.13.8.1 Verbs Initial w, Imperfect 293 136 2.13.8.2 Verbs Initial w Imperfect: ‘to arrive’ 293 137 2.13.8.3 Verbs Initial w Imperfect: ‘to stop’ 295 138 2.13.8.4 Verbs initial w: imperfect: ‘to fall’ 296 139 2.13.8.5 Verbs initial w: imperfect: ‘to swell’ 297 140 2.13.8.6 Verbs initial w: imperfect: ‘to inherit’ 298 141 2.13.8.7 Verbs initial w: imperfect: ‘to contain’ 299 142 2.13.9 Verbs initial y: ‘to become dry’ 302 143 2.13.10 Verbs initial w and y: synopsis 304 144 2.13.11.1 Verbs final y: ‘to read’ 306

contents

contents

145 2.13.11.2 Verbs final y: ‘to stay’ perfect 307 146 2.13.11.3 Verbs Final y: Ending i-type Perfect, 3rd p. sg. f. 311 147 2.13.11.4 Verbs final y: i-type 3rd p. pl. m.+f. perfect  312 148 2.13.12.1 Verb ‘to come’ Perfect 3rd p. sg. m. 315 149 2.13.12.2 Verb ‘to come’ 3rd p. sg. f. Perfect 317 150 2.13.12.3 Synopsis Feminine Ending -it 319 2.13.12.4 Verb ‘to come’ 3rd p. pl. m.+f. Perfect 321 151 2.13.12.5 Verb ‘to come’ Participle sg. m.+ f. 323 2.13.13  Derived Measures 325 152 2.13.13.1 Measure IV Sound Verb Perfect 325 2.13.13.2 Measures V and VI Sound Verb Perfect 327 153 2.13.13.3 Measures VII and VIII Sound Verb Perfect 329 154 2.13.13.4 Imperfect Measures VII and VIII 331 155 2.13.13.5 Measure VII and VIII Imperfect Verbs Final y 333 2.13.13.6 Measures IX and X 335 156 2.13.13.7 Measure X Geminate Verbs 335 157 2.13.13.8 Measure X Hollow Verbs 337

3  Lexicon 3 Nouns 341 3.1 Body Parts 341 3.1.1 For Body Parts, See also Chapter “Phonology”, namely ‘face’, ‘neck’, ‘mouth’, ‘chest’, ‘shoulder’, ‘thigh’, ‘instep’, ‘heel’ 341 158 3.1.2 Forehead 341 159 3.1.3 Temple 343 160 3.1.4 Bump on the Head 345 3.1.5 Ear, see Phonology 347 161 3.1.6 Lobe of the Ear 347 162 3.1.7 Nose 349 3.1.8 Mouth, see Phonology 351 163 3.1.9 Jaw 351 164 3.1.10 Uvula 353 165 3.1.11 Throat 355 3.1.12 Lip, see Phonology 357 3.1.13 Neck, see Phonology 357 166 3.1.14 Nape of the Neck 357 167 3.1.15 Finger and Fingernail 359 168 3.1.16 Thumb 361 3.1.17 Thigh, see Phonology 363 169 3.1.18 Navel 363 3.1.19 Instep, see Phonology 365 170 3.1.20 Sole 365 171 3.1.21 Ankle 367 3.1.22 Heel, see Phonology 369 172 3.1.23 Dwarf 369 3.2 Animals 371 3.2.1 General Remarks 371 173 3.2.2 Herd, Flock 373 174 3.2.3 Bull 375

ix

x









contents

175 3.2.4 Ewe 377 176 3.2.5 Billy-goat 379 177 3.2.6 Frog 381 178 3.2.7 Millepede 383 3.3 Fruit and Vegetables 385 179 3.3.1 Cauliflower 385 3.3.2 Tomatoes, see Phonology: map 058 1.2.7. 117 3.3.3 Parsley, see Phonology: map 059 1.2.8. 119 180 3.3.4 Oranges 386 181 3.3.5 Lemons 387 182 3.3.6 Peaches 391 183 3.3.7 Plums 393 3.4 Various 395 184 3.4.1 Clothes 395 185 3.4.2 Water 397 186 3.4.3 Spoon 399 187 3.4.4 First Breakfast 401 3.5 Adjectives 403 188 3.5.1 Left-Handed 403 189 3.5.2 Stingy 405 190 3.5.3 Sick 407 3.6 Verbs 409 191 3.6.1 To Give 409 192 3.6.2 To Quarrel, to Fight 411 193 3.6.3 To Seize, Grab, Snatch, Catch, Arrest 413 194 3.6.4 Look! 415 195 3.6.5 To Go Down, Descend, Dismount 417 196 3.6.6 He Talks Too Much, He’s a Chatterbox 419

4 Isoglosses and Dialect Groups 421 197 4.1 Salient lexical isoglosses sedentary dialects: maps 162, 169, 173, 179, 182, 188, 193 420 198 4.2 Salient morphological features: maps 82, 90, 92, 110, 126, 133, 135 422 199 4.3 Salient lexical isoglosses sedentary dialects: maps 162, 169, 173, 179, 182, 188, 193 423 200 4.4 The Sedentary Dialect Groups 425 201 4.5 The Bedouin Dialect Groups 429 4.6 Dialectometrical Approach to the Dialects of the Area: Identity Tests 431 202 4.6.1 Identity test with M coefficient, MINMWMAX algorithm 430 203 4.6.2 Identity test: phonetics and phonology with Jaccard similarity coefficient  434 204 4.6.3 Identity test: phonetics and phonology with Ochiai similarity coefficient 435 205 4.6.4 Identity test: morphology  436 206 4.6.5 Identity tests: synthesis phonology and morphology  437 Appendices 439 Bibliography 446 General Index 450

Preface The “Northern Israeli Sprachatlas” project1 was initiated in 1996 with Rafael Talmon, his assistant at the time Aharon Geva-Kleinberger, both from the University of Haifa, Peter Behnstedt and Otto Jastrow from Heidelberg University. Previous fieldwork had already begun in summer 1995. The project was financed by the German-Israeli Foundation (GIF). The atlas was intended as something completely new, namely a “speaking dialect atlas”. The plan was to carry out research in all the Arabic-speaking villages of Northern Israel in order to produce a printed traditional dialect atlas, a collection of texts, a glossary and, at the same time, a digital atlas (not a dialectometrical one) where you just needed a mouse-click on one of the points of investigation and then accessed information on the village or town, including pictures of the place (photos, videos), statistical information (number of inhabitants, religion, etc.), local traditions, local music, and, of course, recordings of the village’s dialect(s) accompanied by transcriptions, and the like. Talmon, the Israeli head of the project, was particularly interested in this part of the project and discussed it with IT experts at the time. This part of the project has never been realised. The project ended in 1998, but resumed thereafter through financing from the ISF (Israeli Science Foundation) with the cooperation of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Simon Hopkins, Aryeh Levin and Ori Shachmon),2 and Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (Roni Henkin). Field work with a questionnaire was undertaken by Behnstedt and Talmon; twenty-four student collaborators were engaged for interviewing, recording and transcriptions3 of the texts collected. A considerable part of the interviews actually available were conducted by Behnstedt, Durēd Zarqāwi and his colleague Falāḥ Ṣbēḥi. Some hundred recordings were made by Geva-Kleinberger from the beginning of the project. Between September 2003 and February 2004 an international team of dialectologists headed by Talmon with W. Arnold, R. Contini, A. Geva-Kleinberger, S. Hopkins, O. Jastrow, J. Khan, A. Levin, S. Procházka, J. Retsö and S. Yoda, worked together at the Institute of Advanced Studies of Jerusalem on a project entitled “Palestinian Dialects”. Following Talmon’s untimeley death in 2004, the collected material remained at the University of Haifa and some of the texts were used for articles written by 1  Talmon 2002. 2  See, for example, Shachmon and Faust 2017. 3  Their transcriptions were often not reliable and had to be counterchecked. This concerns mainly the transcriptions of /ǧ/ ~ /ž/, /q/ ~ /ʔ/ ~ /ʕ/, interdentals or plosives, and the short vowels [e] ~ [i], [o] ~ [u].

Geva-Kleinberger, who headed the project for a while. But a considerable part of the material was no longer locatable in Talmon’s archives. The tedious search for the material in his archives partly explains the relatively late publication of the atlas. Behnstedt, who had collected materials in thirty-two localities had left them in Israel but had made excerpts of twenty-eight of the questionnaires conducted by him in order to be on the safe side. The remaining four questionnaires were only recorded. Most of his original questionnaires are no longer available. The saved data has partly been used for maps of the WAD. In a report in Teîuda 18, Jastrow 2002 writes that the project covered more than 120 Arabic-speaking localities in Lower and Upper Galilee; that the total number of informants consulted (either interviewed or recorded or both) exceeded 700; and that more than 400 cassettes existed with a total of 200 hours of recorded speech. Furthermore, data were collected for approximately thirty pre-1948 villages (villages no longer existing today) with informants now living in other villages of the area. Talmon 2002:69 speaks of 119 localities covered by 204 questionnaires. As a matter of fact, only 141 questionnaires for seventy localities were at our disposal, some of them only dealing with lexicon. All the data available (interviews, recordings and former field work saved by Behnstedt) cover ninety-four localities. There are four questionnaires for localities outside of our area of research. Talmon speaks of 241 transcribed texts; 113 of them were sent to Behnstedt in 1998 with a list entitled “Texts for Behnstedt’s Atlas”. For many of them, the recordings are not available. We are fully aware of the deficiencies of this atlas due to the considerable loss of material which had been collected, but also due to the complexity of the area which perhaps had not been realised right from the beginning by the researchers. The area was (is) difficult. The research which had been undertaken clearly shows the complex and ambivalent relationship of traditional dialectology and sociolinguistics. Finally, we would like to express our thanks to the house of Brill which has kindly accepted the atlas for publication, to Angelika Behnstedt, who has proofread her husband’s maps as usual; to Enam Al-Wer, Hans Goebl, Judith Rosenhouse, Rana Sobeh and Manfred Woidich for some useful suggestions and information, and, last but not least, to Shirley Zauer who has proofread the manuscript three times. Peter Behnstedt and Aharon Geva-Kleinberger Chipiona and Haifa, October 2018

Introduction Within the Levantine dialect continuum, Galilee occupies a special place, some of its dialects showing more affinity with Lebanese and Syrian dialects than other Palestinian dialects. This fact may partly be explained simply by geographical proximity, but may also be explained by the close contact of the Druze with Lebanon and Syria, countries from which many of them had emigrated to Galilee. Not only Druze originating from Lebanon or Syria but also Jews from Ṭabariyya told about contacts with neighbouring Ḥōrān in Syria, and their dialects indeed show some Syrian features, not necessarily ḥōrānian ones. As already pointed out by Talmon (2002:69), the linguistic situation in Galilee had drastically changed since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948: “A great number of pre-1948 villages no longer exist. Large areas were completely evacuated … This was the fate of the Arab population in Tiberias and Haifa as well”. One should add Ṣafad, the Arab population of which as a whole fled from their home town. “Although most of the refugees left for neighboring countries, a substantial number of the remaining Arabic minority of the State of Israel became ‘inner refugees’, namely their villages were ruined, and they were resettled in other Arab localities”. This means that in some localities speakers from several different villages live together. In many cases, “as a result of all these facts, a set of ‘interchangeables’ should be expected in each locality, which adds to the normal, gradual elements of transition, such as generation gap due to mass education, urbanization, and the leveling of dialect differences” (loc. cit). Since 1492, there have been Arabic-speaking Jewish communities in Galilee, namely in Ṣafad, Ṭabariyya, Haifa, Šfaʕamir and li-Bqēʕa. The number of their speakers during the twentieth century amounted to approximately 10,000. They originally came from al-Andalus, with parts of them, called yahūd ʕarab, coming through Morocco. Their dialects meanwhile are practically extinct, but were still vivid twenty years ago. Their speech was basically Palestinian with some Maghrebinian features.4 In restrospect, the whole project, right from the beginning, should have been organised as a sociolinguistically orientated project and not as a project of traditional “dialect geography” or even “dialect archaeology”,5 where one looks for the oldest informant of a locality in order to describe the most original and “purest” dialect of this place as it was done at the beginning of dialect geographical 4  Cf. indefinite article wāḥ il- and numerals 2.9.3. 5  For another type of dialect archaeology, see AGK-7.

studies (cf. Behnstedt-Woidich 2005:59). This, of course, is a “romantic” concept not compatible with actual dialectology. It was indeed one of Talmon’s aims to “reconstruct”6 the dialects of the evacuated villages in 1948 and probably, therefore, the student explorers involved in the project mainly interviewed older people. Out of the thirty questionnaires and recordings of informants from pre-1948 villages mentioned by Jastrow (2002), only a few are at our disposal. We have decided not to use them simply because one cannot be sure whether the informants still spoke the original village dialect given the relative proximity of the dialects of the area to each other. In many localities, often men and women were interviewed or recordings of both sexes were made; also informants of different ages, different denominations and different educational levels could be found. For example, in Akko thirteen persons were interviewed or recorded, amongst them older males, one child, three younger persons, one female born in 1933 and one middle-aged female. Amongst them were younger and older fishermen, but also a high school student. In several localities, quite an impressive number of persons was interviewed or had produced texts. But the informants should have been chosen more calculatedly. In, for example, a town or village where Muslims, Druze and Christians live together, it should have been recommendable to interview older and younger speakers of both sexes and from the three communities. This means at least twelve persons should have been interviewed for one point of investigation.7 This, indeed, never has been the case. See the project of a Dialect Atlas of Tunisia where for every point of investigation four people were interviewed: two females, young and old, two males, young and old (cf. Baccouche – Mejri 2004:17–18). Or, in a place where, in addition to the autochthonous population, some 40% of the inhabitants are refugees from other villages, a comparable sample should have been established. And, of course, in our case, without any restrictions as to field work from the authorities, which is normally the case in Arab countries, a more refined sample could have been chosen, too, taking into consideration education and other criteria. Talmon 2002:71 remarks 6  “We considered it imperative to attempt to reconstruct some of the pre-1948 dialects” (loc. cit.). 7  One could add “20 percent of refugees from village xy”, which would increase the number of persons to be interviewed up to sixteen informants.

xiii

introduction

“Christian Muslim distinction and homogeneity and heterogeneity … have not been sufficiently elucidated by our data”. One is always wiser after the event! 1

The Questionnaires

The questionnaire of some eighty pages in Arabic was compiled by Behnstedt and Talmon during several long night sessions in Haifa. It was tested by Behnstedt himself in thirty-two localities, but it was not completed every time. It was also used by Talmon in three localities. After a while, this questionnaire turned out to be too time-­ consuming and tedious for the student collaborators – with a good informant it needed at least some three hours – and Behnstedt, when already out of the project, was asked to develop a more concise questionnaire of some twenty to thirty pages. While an original version of this questionnaire no longer exists, there are five versions of it, some only with questions on lexical items. And sometimes one has the impression that the questionnaires actually at our disposal were trimmed ad usum studentis, by the student explorers themselves. In some questionnaires, questions about fruits and vegetables are to be found, while in others they are absent. A questionnaire on traditional material culture was developed by Behnstedt in a folklore museum with drawings. It still exists, but was used only once in Miʕilya. One of the reasons why it was not used in other places was the fact that traditional agricultural implements (e.g., old ploughs) only still existed in the memories of older people and that in many places the inhabitants were no longer farmers. What has been related means that there are data collected with the first extensive questionnaire authored by Behnstedt and Talmon, with an abridged questionnaire composed by Behnstedt, with later questionnaires condensed by student explorers. Not only did the student explorers condense the questionnaire during their enquiries – there exist two lexical questionnaires, a short one and a longer one – they also reduced them further by simply omitting questions, most probably depending on their state of concentration at the moment of the enquiry. In some places, interviews only on lexicon had been conducted by the students. In other places, only recordings were made with no interview being conducted, or questionnaires may have been lost. Few interviews on Bedouin dialects are available; there are six locations with the reduced questionnaires and a larger one conducted by Behnstedt. The result is that the data for the area is completely heterogeneous, and in a way chaotic, and that for

an overview atlas quite a lot of data cannot be used because they had been collected only in a part of the area. The original questionnaire contained more than a thousand questions and more than 4, 000 cases to be filled in of which many, however, did not furnish any dialect geographically relevant results since the same designations were used all over the area, such as ṛās ‘head’, biss ‘tomcat’, baṛṛād ‘refrigerator’, taxet ‘bed’, etc. And, of course, questions about conjugations could have been reduced very soon after the enquiry to only some grammatical persons and not a whole paradigm. Jastrow, when in Israel, trained students in transcribing dialect texts, and in a second phase of the project concentrated himself on the dialects of the Muṯallaṯ and the Carmel Coast with a questionnaire of his own focussing on morphology.8 2

Representation of Data on the Maps

Given the rather complicated sociolinguistic situation in the area – but also due to the fact that variety in vocalism often shows no regional patterns but rather an arbitrary distribution across the area – isoglosses are not so often used. Of course, sometimes clear isoglosses do exist and this is indicated either by an isogloss or by a background colour on the map, for example for the map for the distribution of badd and bidd. But in many cases analytical symbols are used. When several pronunciations or forms are indicated on the map for a locality, this normally refers to data from different informants. If variation was found in the speech of the same informant, this is indicated in the commentary. If information was given by the informants that certain peculiarities only applied to younger or older speakers, or men or women, or a religious group (Muslim, Druze, Christian) this is indicated on the map as I = Muslim, D = Druze, C = Christian, O = old generation, Y = young generation, B = Bedouin, etc. See abbreviations. But in many cases, due to lack of more data, we dared not make a statement as to the socio-linguistic distribution of several pronunciations found in the same place, for example with young male and female Christian plosives, an older male Christian interdentals, an old Druze interdentals, a middle-aged male (no religion indicated): interdentals. Since the graphic programme used (Freehand) does not accept unicode characters and since Brill wanted us to use its font, ʕ is used in the text and ‘ on the maps. The same applies for the glottal stop: ʔ in text, ’ on map. 8  His material actually is not locatable.

xiv As for Bedouin dialects, they are underrepresented in the data collected. As has been said, hardly any interviews were conducted with them, mostly texts were recorded which often show heavy interferences from the sedentary dialects, a fact largely described and discussed in Rosenhouse 1984, chap. three. Certain typical Bedouin features, such as the ghawa-syndrome, are simply hinted at but not represented by a map. It seemed to us sufficient to mention it for the map of the reflexes of ʔaCCaC. On map 002, only those Bedouin tribes for which data was elicited are listed. A case in the key with a number in it means that all numbers on the map without a symbol have the same form. For instance, on map 79 the case contains the number “93” and legend ‘hū – hī’. This applies also to numbers 71, 37, etc. The tilde means that these forms are used in other places as parallel forms. If data is not available for a given point of investigation, this point does not appear on the respective map. When in the commentaries we refer to modern Standard Arabic (MSA) or Classical Arabic (CA), this does not mean that we consider these varieties of Arabic as the origin of our dialects. They are simply points of reference or comparison. Since one of the peer-reviewers thought that “most of the very detailed explanations are tedious to read and not very useful” we have abridged some of them and put the “tedious” parts in an appendix. As for the enumerations in the commentaries of Qāf, Kāf and interdentals we thought it, however, useful to have the data next to the map.

introduction

3

Former Research in the Area

Bergstraesser’s (1915) atlas covers quite a few places in Galilee and the Muṯallaṯ, namely Sūlam (89), Yāft inNāṣri (78), Nazareth (77), Haifa (36), Ṭurʕān (69), Šfaʕamir (31), ʕArrābe (60), ir-Rāmi (56), Kufir Yasīf (18), as well as some pre-1948 localities such as Ṣaffūrye or Ṣafad. W. Christie collected material in Žišš (21), ir-Rāmi (56), Kufir Yasīf (18), Šfaʕamir (31), ʕArrābe (60), Yāft in-Nāṣri (78) and some pre-1948 villages. His data was integrated into Bergstraesser’s (1915) atlas. Blanc 1953: XVII–XVII mentions thirty-nine place names, but had conducted fieldwork only in the Druze villages of Kufir Yasīf (18), Busnān (17), Žūlis (19), Žaṯṯ (15), Sažūr (24), ir-Rāmi (56), Bēt Žann (23), li-Bqēʕa (10), li-Mġār (60), Šfaʕamir 31), ʕIsifya (71), Dālyit il-Karmil (73). Palva 1966:21 mentions sixteen villages where he carried out research, amongst them some already covered by other researchers plus Kufir Manda (47), ir-Rummāne (49), li-ʕzēr (66), li-Bʕēne (65), ʕIlabūn (63), Kufir Kanna (68), Mišhad (55), ir-Rēne (76), ʕIlūṭ (75), ʕĒn Māhil (80), li-Ksāl (79), Dabbūrye (82). Research on Bedouin dialects has been conducted by Rosenhouse. In Rosenhouse 1984:55 ff., she lists some forty localities where or near to which Bedouins have settled. The dialects of the Carmel Coast, the Muṯallaṯ, Haifa, Iksāl, Kufir Kariʕ, Nazareth, Ṣafad, Saxnīn, and Ṭabariyya were also covered by O. Jastrow, A. Geva-Kleinberger, M. Nevo, O. Shachmon and N. Faust, A. Havelova and A. Zuʕbi. The atlas reflects mainly data collected between 1995 and 2000. For comparison, of course, former and later research is mentioned.

Abbreviations – AGK = A. Geva-Kleinberger, B. = P. Behnstedt; DZ. = Durēd Zarqāwi and FṢ. = Falāḥ iṣ-Ṣbēḥi, the main student explorers, T. = R. Talmon. – Localities on maps where a Bedouin dialect is spoken are marked by a number in italics. If data was elicited for a Bedouin dialect in or next to a place where a sedentary dialect is spoken as a basic dialect, the Bedouin data are marked by B. C dialects dialects of the Carmel Coast as defined by Jastrow 2004. CA Classical Arabic. G dialects dialects having /g/ for Qāf = “villagers who use the /g/ reflex of q and are found in the southern part of the Northern Israel area” (Talmon 2002:71). M dialects dialects of the Muṯallaṯ (see Jastrow 2009). MSA Modern Standard Arabic. Abbreviations on maps B = Bedouins; C = Christians; D = Druze; I = Muslims; J = Jews; M = men; O = old generation; PF = parallel form; W = women; Y = young generation. “Muslim(s)” in what follows means “male(s)”, “Muslima(s)” = female(s). Iksāl (79); number in brackets refers to number of research point. “Interview” refers to interview conducted with the questionnaires, if not mentioned, data refers to texts recorded = “recording” or transcribed. s. = sentence. I, II, III, etc. = derived verbal measures. Current abbreviations such as f. = feminine, m. = masculine are not listed here. The symbol for the Druze on map one is the Druze star with the five colours representing the five divine universal principles of the Druze faith.

Index of Arabic-Speaking Localities in the Area, Information about Them and Data Collected There Place names are written according to local pronunciation except for internationally known names such as Nazareth, Haifa and Akko. As for the map of the Bedouin tribes of the area, only those for which data are available are listed on the map. For more details, see Rosenhouse 1984:55–56. 1. iš-Šēx Dannūn: 25% of the population at the time of enquiry were said to be autochthonous. Refugees from ʕAmʔa, Ġabsiyyi, ʔImm il-Faraž, Kwīkāt and a few from Kābri. Interview conducted by B. with two young women and three children; their family was originally from Ġabsiyyi which forms a major part of the population. They pretended that all of the inhabitants spoke the same dialect. Second part of an interview conducted by a student with a middle-aged woman was not transcribed. Two recordings of two males (no age indicated, no origin indicated). 2. il-Mazraʕa: interview conducted by B. with informant born in 1942 and his twenty-year-old daughter (high school certificate). Family from Ġabsiyyi. Second short interview conducted by student with male (no further indications). Recordings of male born in 1943. He declared that 85% of the population of il-Mazraʕa were refugees from il-Kābri, Ġabsiyyi, ʕAmʔa, in-Nahār, ʔImm il-Faraž, Kwīkāt and it-Tall. B. was told that 50% of the inhabitants were autochthonous and 50% refugees from Ġabsiyyi. Another person pretended that the inhabitants came from fifteen different villages amongst them il-Ġarsi, idDamūm, Šaʕeb, ʔIqrīṯ, Birʕim, il-Baṣṣa. According to Rana Sobeh, there is a Christian minority. 3. Yaʕra: some 300 Bedouins living in/near Israeli moshav.1 No data collected. According to Rosenhouse 1984:24, ʕArab ʕArāmša. 4. and 5. ʕArab al-ʕArāmša in and around their main abode Ǧurdēḥ. Interview conducted by B. with an eightyyear-old male, his forty-year-old son and two male youngsters. Second short interview conducted by DZ. Materials in Rosenhouse 1982:23–47 and Rosenhouse 1984. 6. Fassūṭa: according to informant at the time of enquiry, 2,700–2,800 inhabitants. Wikipedia: in 2015 the number of inhabitants amounted to 3,026 persons, Christians 1  “Moshav” is a kind of Israeli town or settlement, in particular a type of cooperative agricultural community of individual farms pioneered by the Labour Zionists during the second wave of aliyah.

in the majority (Roman Catholics, a few Maronites). Two short interviews with two males. Two recordings of the same informants. 7. Miʕilya: inhabitants all Christian Catholics. Short interview with younger female. Two recordings of two males born in 1928. Agricultural questionnaire conducted by B. 8. Taršīḥa: according to Wikpedia fused with Hebrew town Maalot and had a population of 20,900 in 2003. In 2001, according to Wikipedia 79.9% of the population was Jewish and other non-Arab, 20% Arab: 8.9% Muslim, 9.9% Christian and 1% Druze. Lexical questionnaire filled out with ʕArab Zunnār. Second lexical questionnaire with more questions filled out with male sedentary. Third interview with lexical, phonological and morphological questions conducted with male. Several recordings of two males, one born in 1929. 9. Kufir Smēʕ: according to Wikipedia, 2,800 inhabitants, Christian, Druze and Muslim. According to Rana Sobeh, there is no Muslim minority. Recordings of Christian male born in 1922; Christian retired high school teacher; of female in her thirties and a Christian without further data. Four recordings of Druze born in 1925. The biggest family in Kufir Smēʕ originates from Lebanon. 10. li-Bqēʕa: according to Wikipedia, inhabitants are Jews, Muslims and Druze. According to Rana Sobeh, there is no Muslim minority. No interview available. Recordings of unnamed female. Recording of unnamed male. Recording of seventy-seven-year-old male. Recording of an artist born in 1951. Recording of unnamed male. 11. Kisra: according to Wikipedia, in 2016 8,342 inhabitants, mostly Druze with a sizable Christian minority. According to Rana Sobeh, there is no Christian minority. At the time of enquiry, there were 3,500 inhabitants according to a local informant. No interview was available. Recording of male Druze born in 1943. Recording of male born in 1898. Recording of elderly male. Recording of Druze born in 1939. 12. Naḥef: according to Wikipedia, 12,338 inhabitants in 2016, only autochthonous population, all Sunnis. Interview conducted by B. with thirty-year-old year waiter (high school certificate), two of his brothers, twenty-five and forty-five years old and their sixty-five-year-old uncle. Second interview conducted by DZ with a fifty-year-old male. Recordings of three unidentified persons, one of them a farmer, according to context.

index of arabic-speaking localities in the area

13. Dēr il-Asad: in 2016, according to Wikipedia, 11,898 inhabitants. Interview conducted by B. with five older Muslims between fifty and sixty-five and one sixty-yearold teacher. 14. Yanūḥ: according to Wikipedia, merged with Žaṯṯ in 1990 with a population of 6,363, predominantly Druze. Short interview conducted by DZ. Recordings of female born in 1947, with four years of school education. Recording of male born in 1943. Recording of Druze born in 1921. 15. Žaṯṯ: according to Wikipedia, 2,700 inhabitants of whom 56% are Christian, 44% Druze. In another source (equally Wikipedia after local source in Hebrew), Žaṯṯ merged with Yanūḥ in 1990. In 2016, it had 6,363 inhabitants “predominantly of the Druze community”. According to Rana Sobeh, there is no Christian minority. Short interview conducted by DZ. Recording of unidentified Druze. Two texts in Blanc 1953:200–204. 16. Yirka: according to Wikipedia, in 2013 15,400 inhabitants, all Druze. Interview conducted by B. with twenty- and twenty-two-year-old students and their approximately fifty-year-old father. Recording of elderly person. Recording of twenty-five-year-old female. Recordings of four males born in 1926, 1930, 1931 and 1941. Recording of three elderly males. Recording of a non-educated female (age unknown). Recording of female elementary school teacher. Recording of male (middle-aged to elderly according to voice). Speaker born in 1930 declared that they came from Mīmis 180 years ago. It is not clear from the context whether this refers to the whole village or only to his family. Mīmis is a village in southern Lebanon in the qaḍā’ Ḥāṣbayyā. 17. Abu Snān: 7,500 inhabitants at the time of enquiry – Muslim 60%, Druze 22%, Christian 18%. Speaker born in 1912 declared that formerly 300 Christians and 300 Druze lived there and that there was one Muslim household. According to Wikipedia, there are actually 12,856 inhabitants. In 1948, refugees came from ʕAmʔa (1 km from Abu Snān), Kwīkāt (1 km from Abu Snān) and Birwe. Bedouins: Nʕēm and Sawāʕid. Interview conducted by B. with three Christian females between thirty and forty years old and one young man. Recording of elderly male, former taxi driver. Recording of Christian male born in 1912. Texts in Blanc 1953:165–192 with Druze born in 1897. Recording of female born in 1945. Recording of Christian male born in 1946. 18. Kufir Yasīf: at the time of enquiry the majority were Christian. According to last census undertaken in 2008, 57% were Christian of different denominations, 40% were Muslim and the rest Druze. Interview conducted by B. with Muslima of about fifty and her two sons of about

xvii twenty years old. Recording of Christian female born in 1918. Recording of Christian male born in 1944. Recording of Druze artist born in 1941. Recording of Muslim doctor born in 1938, married in Nazareth! Recording of female Druze born in 1978. Text told by a Protestant in Christie 1901. 19. Žūlis: according to Wikipedia, 6,209 inhabitants in 2016, all Druze. Short interview conducted by DZ. Recording of male born in 1912. Recording of three males born in 1911, 1926 and 1943. 20. Ḥurfēš: Druze village with 6,160 inhabitants in 2016, according to Wikipedia. About Ḥurfēš, the text in Blanc 1953:210 says: Ḥurfēš is composed of five families. Some are originally from this village, and some are originally from abroad. Take, for instance, the house of Fāris: it is a family that hails from Dayṣūr in the Lebanon where it was accused of murder, so it came to Palestine and settled there. It came in several branches, that is, the branch of Yuwsf iMlāšib and the branch of Rāfš iMlāšib. A part of the children of Yuwsf iMlāšib came to Palestine and settled there in the country, see, and they included the Fāris family in Ḥurfēš, and the first one to come to Ḥurfēš was called ‘iḥmad Ḥasan Fāris. Others settled in Yirka, and those are the forebears of Marzūq Mšaddi, and others called the house of ʕAli lQablān settled in Bīt Žann. Short interview conducted by DZ. Two texts in Blanc 1953:335–340 with males born in 1935 and 1936. Recordings of female born in 1925. Recording of female (no further data). Recordings of female teacher born in 1951. Recording of male born in 1928. 21. iž-Žišš: at the time of enquiry (1996), 2,350 inhabitants, 72% Maronite from Lebanon, 28% Muslim. According to Wikipedia, there are 2,700 inhabitants of whom 56% are Christian, while the rest are Muslim. According to a retired local school teacher, there are three dialects spoken in the village: first the dialect of the autochthonous Christians, which differs somewhat (nawʕan mā) from the dialect of the autochthonous Muslims. The third dialect is the dialect of the refugees from Kufir Birʕim (next village to the west of iž-Žišš) which resembles Lebanese Arabic more than do the dialects of the original inhabitants of the village. The inhabitants of Birʕim are all Maronite. They had to leave their village in 1948 and were promised to be allowed to return, a promise which was never kept. Interview conducted by B. with twenty-year-old Maronite, a Muslim of approximately thirty-five and another Christian informant born in 1914. Recording of the

xviii latter. Texts in Christie 1901:69–72 with Greek Orthodox and a Muslim. Recording of Muslim. Recording of seventythree-year-old Christian retired school teacher. Recording of Catholic taxi driver born in 1937. Recording of Christian born in 1923 (language semi-formal). 22. ir-Riḥaniyyi: at the time of enquiry there were 800 inhabitants (according to Wikipedia, actually 1,000 inhabitants), 80% Circassian, 20% Arab (sixty Arab houses) all from nearby pre-1948 ʕAlma. According to informants, all of them – Circassians and Arabs – are bilingual in Circassian and Arabic. Interview conducted by B. with Arab family: two female students of about twenty years old, their father and a neighbour, both about sixty. 23. Bēt Žānn: according to Wikipedia (2016), 14,500 inhabitants, all Druze. No interview available. Recordings of male born in 1907, a Druze woman born in 1912, with three years of school, a male Druze born in 1898, a male born in 1932, with eight years of school and a šēx born in 1906. 24. Sažūr: at the time of enquiry, about 3,500 inhabitants, all Druze. No interview available. Recordings of ­sixty-three-year-old male, male born in 1934, a doctor born in 1934, an unidentified female (wife of doctor?), another male born in 1934 and a female born in 1943. 25. Ṣafad: seven hours of recordings (not transcribed) with three older females and five older males. 26. ʕAkbara: according to Wikipedia, “an Arab neighbourhood in the municipality of Safed which included in 2010 more than 200 families”. According to informants at the time of enquiry, some 1,500 inhabitants. The old village was destroyed in 1948. Interview (only lexicon) with female (no further data), second short interview with male, both conducted by DZ. Recording of Muslim born in 1940. Two recordings of male born in 1913, originally from Qadīṯa: “a village west of Ṣafad”, the inhabitants of which after some migrations “built themselves a prosperous village on the slopes of the bald mountain on the outskirts of Safad. Their abandoned village was turned into a ‘rural style’ vacation spot” (Benvenisti 2000:207). Short recording of female born in 1965, mother from Qadīṯa. 27. Ṭūba-Zanġariyya: according to Wikipedia (2016), 6,200 Bedouin inhabitants, Lhēb tribe. A little data in Rosenhouse 1984, more data in Rosenhouse 1982. 28 Akko: interview conducted by B. with informants all Muslim, one thirty-year-old employee, one seventyyear-old fisherman, his twenty-five-year-old son, also a fisherman and two sixty-year-old fishermen. Second interview (short version) conducted by student with male. Third interview (short version) conducted with female born in 1933. Two recordings of fisherman born in 1946. Recording of Muslim born in 1943. Recording of Muslim high school student born in 1980. Recording of male born

index of arabic-speaking localities in the area

in 1937. Recording of male (according to voice, middleaged). Recording of fisherman born in 1939. Recording of child. Recording of young male. Recording of male born in 1958. Recordings of middle-aged male and older male. Recording of middle-aged female. 29. il-Maker: 7,500 inhabitants at the time of enquiry. The village had 400 inhabitants in 1948, 50% Muslim and 50% Christian. First wave of “immigration” in 1948 from il-Birwe and il-Manšiyyi (near Akko). Second wave of immigration in 1975 with 2,000 persons mainly from Akko. Interview conducted by B. with authochtonous sixtyfive-year-old Muslim, formerly a teacher. Recording of Muslima born in 1936. Recordings of two Muslims born in 1899 and 1937. 30. iž-Ždayydi fused with Maker in 1989. The fused village in 2009 had 19,500 inhabitants according to Wikipedia, 95% of them are Muslim, the rest Christian. According to information gathered during enquiry, 60% of the inhabitants originate from Birwe. According to Wikipedia, the majority are refugees from Birwe, il-Manšiyye, Birʕim, is-Samuriyye, Lūbya, Iqriṯ, il-Ġabsiyyi, id-Damūn, “wa ġayrihā”. Interview conducted by B. with forty-eight-yearold Muslim school teacher. His family is from Birwe. He said that the inhabitants spoke the same dialect, except that those from Birwe used interdentals. Long interview (2 hours 45 minutes) conducted by T. with middle-aged Christian. Two recordings of Muslim born in 1925. 31. Šfaʕamir: according to Wikipedia (2013), 38,717 inhabitants of whom 59.2% were Muslim, 26.5% Christian and 14.3% Druze. Extensive interview conducted by B. with young female student. Five short interviews with four females of different ages, one older male. Recordings of male Druze born in 1907 and 1927. Recordings of two older females and one middle-aged female. Recording of female Druze born in 1950 with elementary-level schooling. Short text in Christie told by Greek Orthodox. Text in Palva 1966:160–163 told by Greek Orthodox butcher born in 1931 with eight years of school. 32. L-Iḥmēra ʕArab as-Sawāʕid: text told by former mayor, recording not available. He uses a mixture of MSA and dialect. 33. il-Xawālid: text told by male from ʕArab il-Xawālid, recording not available. 34. Ibṭin: text told by male from ʕArab il-ʕAmiriyya, recording not available. There is an interview and a recording of a seventy-two-year-old male originally from the Qarrūn mountain near the Sea of Galilee whose family came to Ibṭin in 1948. According to map 2 in Rosenhouse 1984, Ibṭin is an officially acknowledged Bedouin village. The speaker from Qarrūn uses /g/ for Qāf, declares that the majority of the inhabitants are Bedouin, that he is a

index of arabic-speaking localities in the area

farmer and that his family came from Jordan in Ottoman times. His data should be used cautiously. He partly indicated fallāḥi pronunciations and forms, partly Bedouin ones, e.g., munxāṛ ‘nose’, uṯmi ‘my mouth’, burṭum ‘lip’, ḥinč ‘jaw’, ḏāni – ʔiḏni ‘my ear’, etc. 35. Basmat Ṭabʕōn text told by fifty-five-year-old male from ʕArab in-Nʕēm, recording no longer available. 36. Ḥēfa (Haifa): see AGK-1. Extensive interview conducted by B., but not completed. Cover sheet of questionnaire with information on informants lost. Second interview conducted with female born in 1948. Eleven recordings conducted with females born in 1908, 1931, 1934, 1935, 1939, 1946 and 1962; two other females without further data. Rest of recordings of males of different denominations (without indication of age). 37. Kababīr: Recording of sixty-one-year-old ex-school teacher. See also 1.3.2. 38a. Biʕne Sawāʕid Bedouin: interview conducted by B. with twenty-year-old male employee, two of his brothers and his grandmother. 38b. Biʕne Ḥaḍar: interview conducted by B. with female school teacher born in 1973 and her father, a farmer approximately fifty-five years of age and two younger sisters. Second interview conducted by student with young female. 39. Mažd il-Krūm: interview conducted by B. with DZ, twenty-three years old, two of his brothers twenty and twenty-two years old and his approximately sixty-fiveyear-old uncle. Second interview with male born in 1924, conducted by DZ. Recording of popular poet, born in 1930, with barely any formal education. Recording of a herdsman born in 1932. Recording of older farmer. Recording of unidentified male. Recording of Muslima (no age indicated). 40. Šaʕeb: a local informant related that 45% of the inhabitants were autochthonous and that there were refugees from Miʕār (three kms far from Šaʕeb) 20% and Bedouin Ḥūli 25%. Interview conducted by B. with šaʕbawiyye Muslims, a twenty-nine-year-old photographer with a high school certificate, his brother, a twentytwo-year-old mason, his mother of about sixty and two female relatives of about twenty-five years old. Second interview (only lexicon, conducted by DZ) with older male. The recording over a long period is disturbed by muezzin drowning out the answers of the interviewee. Interviewee declared that he came from Šaʕeb, but lived in Naḥef. Third interview conducted by DZ with older female born in 1948 in Šaʕeb, but moved to Mažd li-Krūm. Data should not be used. Short recording of older Bedouin female. She declared that she was originally from Misʕade on the Golan Heights. Data will be disregarded on map.

xix 41. Saxnīn: according to Wikipedia, 28,556 inhabitants in 2014, 94% Muslim, 5.3% Christian. According to Rosenhouse 1969, in that year there were 7,500 inhabitants. Interview conducted by B. with five younger males and a seventy-year-old informant. Second interview conducted by student with Muslima born in 1930. Recordings of male born in 1952, a male student, female born in 1922, male born in 1918 and three males born in about 1920 and 1930. Several texts in Rosenhouse 1969. Recordings of males born in 1941, two other males (no data). Recording of older female. Recording of male, born in 1926, former teacher of Arabic. Recording of female born in 1975. Recording of young boy. Recording of male born in 1969, with ten years of school. 42. Kabūl: according to al-mawsūʕa al-filisṭīniyya online, there were 5,800 inhabitants in 1990. B.’s informants were all Muslims – one male of about thirty, his eightyeight-year-old father and a middle-aged neighbour. Second interview conducted by DZ with middle-aged male, only lexicon elicited. Recording of female born in 1910. Recording of male born in 1937. 43. Ṭamra: at the time of enquiry had approximately 23,000 inhabitants; 60% of the population are from Dāmūn, Rwēs, ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣, Miʕār, il-Ḥadaṯi. Bedouin Mawāsi, Mrīsāt and Ḥilf settled in the Xillat aš-Šarīf quarter. According to a 2015 census, 32,500 inhabitants, 99.9% Muslim. Interview conducted by B. with two males (one student and his brother), family from Damūn (Dāmūn). Second interview with male (only lexicon elicited, family from Damūn). Third interview with female (only lexicon elicited, family from Dāmūn). Recording of female born in 1928, from Dāmūn and two other females from Dāmūn (no further details). Recording of elderly woman from Dāmūn. Interview with male from Ṭamra born in 1936. Recording of the same person. Recording of female speaker of Bedouin dialect. Recording of older woman. Recording of sixty-eight-year-old male. 44. Kōkab Abu-l-Hēža: interview conducted by B. with twenty-eight-year-old Muslim student and his father of about fifty. Recordings of three males born in 1918, 1934 and 1936. Recording of older female. 45. iḏ̣-Ḏ̣hara: text, recording not available. At the time of enquiry, it consisted only of five houses, all Bedouin li-Ḥǧērāt. The place was supposed to be evacuated and the inhabitants had already constructed houses in Bīr il-Maksūr. 46. Iʕbillīn: according to actual data in Wikipedia, there are 13,000 inhabitants, 54% Muslim, 46% Christians. According to footnote in text, in 1990 7,000 inhabitants: Muslim, Christian and Bedouin. Lexical interview with older female. Lexical interview with Muslim born in 1940,

xx five years of school. Interview with male. Interview with older married couple. Recording of older male. Recording of Orthodox male born in 1942. Recording of male born in 1912. Recording of Christian born in 1912, a local personality and business man. Recording of female born in 1943. Recording of Christian former teacher, local politician and author born in 1931. 47. Kufir Manda: interview conducted by B. with four young Muslims of twenty, twenty-five, twenty-seven and twenty-eight years of age and an older male of about fifty. Questionnaire has been lost. Ten recordings (not transcribed) with male born in 1935. Recording of middle-aged male. Recordings of Muslim male born in 1984. Recordings of his grand-father. Recording of male born in 1918. Recording of thirty-three-year-old male, with four years of school education. Recordings of unnnamed males. Text in Palva 1966: 114–118 told by a teacher born in 1941. 48 iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda: Bedouins from the Ḥǧērāt tribe. Short interview with a male of about fifty conducted by B. Recording of male born in 1920 followed by another person born in 1925. Both are not originally from iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda. First speaker declared that he was from Kufir Manda (47) but now lived in iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda. He did not speak with a real Bedouin dialect, but used /g/ for Qāf and some other Bedouin forms such as ṯimānya w ṯimānīn ‘88’. Second speaker on same recording says that his father was raised among the Ḥǧērāt because his mother’s brothers were from this tribe. He speaks Arabic with some Bedouin features. 49. ir-Rummāni: at the time of enquiry about 800 inhabitants. An internet source indicates 1,000 inhabitants at the present time. Interview with older male conducted by DZ. Lexical interview with eighty-two-year-old male (DZ, very poor acoustic quality). Recording of male born in 1916. Recordings of older male and unidentifed male. Text in Palva 1966:118–124 told by two farmers born in 1936 and 1938 with six and five years of school. 50. Bīr il-Maksūr: only text from speaker from ʕArab li-Ḥǧērāt from il-Mikmān (suburb of Bīr il-Maksūr). Recording not available. 51. Ḥilf: text told by male from ʕArab aṭ-Ṭabbāš, recording not available. 52. il-Kaʕbiyye: text told by seventy-year-old male, recording not available. 53. il-Ḥaǧāǧra (ʕArab al-Ǧawāmis): interview. 54. Bēt Zarzīr: text of seventy-four-year-old male from the al-Ǧawāmis. Recording not available. 55. Mišhad/ʕArab Lhēb: interview. Mišhad/Ḥaḍar: second half of interview with older female. First half not locatable. Recording of male born in

index of arabic-speaking localities in the area

1918. Two recordings of older male. Recording of female born in 1925. 56. ir-Rāmi: in 1997, according to Wikipedia, there were 6,700 inhabitants of whom 51% were Christian, 29% Druze and 20% Muslim. Older Druze informant declared that irRāmi originally was entirely a Druze village and that some 150–160 years ago Christians started to immigrate to the village and that many of the male Druze inhabitants fled to Ǧabal id-Drūz in Syria in order to avoid compulsory military service in the Ottoman army. After 1948, Muslim immigrant workers came from Mažd li-Krūm for seasonal jobs at the olive harvest because there were few jobs in their hometown. They were finally allowed to buy land and settle in ir-Rāmi. Interview with male born in 1920 plus second person with wife (no religion indicated). Interview conducted by B. with female Druze student of about twenty. Interview (only lexicon) conducted by DZ with older female who declared that she was born in Kufr ʕnān. She had to leave the village in 1948 and went to Lebanon where she lived for seven months, then lived in Mažd li-Krūm for another seven moths. She was driven out from this village and went to Jenin. She then left for Jordan, then to Syria to Darʕa. She left for Lebanon where she lived for forty-five years, finally, settling in ir-Rāmi. She can hardly be considered to be a representative of older female speakers from ir-Rāmi. Will be disregarded. Recording of Christian born in 1924. Texts in Blanc 1953:341–350 with two Muslims both born in 1930. Two short texts in Christie 1901 with Greek Orthodox and Druze. Recording of wedding song of Druze female born in 1977. Recordings of male Druze born in 1940. Recording of unidentified male. Recording of Muslim born in 1931. Recordings of two unidentified males. Recording of older female. Recording of older Christian female. Recording of Christian male teacher born in 1956. 57. ʕĒn il-Asad: at the time of enquiry there were about 650 Druze inhabitants, no interview available. The informants declared that the village was about 120 to 130 years old and that the first family to settle there came from ʕIsifya (71), followed by two families from Bēt Ǧānn (23), a family from Ḥurfēš (20) and a family from Kufr Smēʕ (9). Those people had fled to ʕĒn il-Asad because of Ottoman oppression and had hidden there in the forests and the caves. After 1950, families from the Golan Heights/Maǧdal iš-Šams and Ǧabal id-Drūz in Syria settled there. The old man interviewed declared that his grandfather came from Kufr Smēʕ some 120 years ago. 58. ač-Čammāna, Bedouin settlement of Sawāʕid tribe: questionnaire conducted by B. with seventy-year-old male and his son of approximately thirty.

index of arabic-speaking localities in the area

59. Wādi s-Sallāma: text told by fifty-one-year-old male from ʕArab as-Sawāʕid. Recording not available. 60. Mġār: at the time of enquiry there were 16,000 inhabitants with 57% Druze, 25% Christian, 18% Muslim. Interview with unidentified informant(s), recording no longer available. Recordings of male Druze born in 1943, 1980, 1981 and 1983, Christian male born in 1921, a fiftyeight-year-old male, a middle-aged Druze, a thirteen-yearold schoolboy, a fifty-year-old school teacher, an elderly female Druze, a female Druze student of about twentytwo, a female Druze born in 1976, an elderly male, a young female, a female Catholic born in 1939, a schoolboy and his sister and male and female Muslims both born in 1987. 61. ʕArrābi: in 2015, according to Wikipedia, 24,072 inhabitants. A majority of Muslims and a Christian minority, according to Rana Sobeh. Interview conducted by B. with twenty-year-old Muslim student, his father, a sixty-yearold farmer and his fifty-two-year-old mother. Recording of older person, hardly understandable. Recording of male born in 1972. Recording of fourteen-year-old boy. Recording of Muslima born in 1931. Recording of another Muslima (no age indicated). Recording of Muslima born in 1906. 62. Dēr Ḥanna: according to Wikipedia, there were 9,248 inhabitants in 2011 of whom 86% were Muslim and the rest Christian. First interview conducted by B. with unnamed person born in 1940. Second interview conducted by DZ with older Christian female. Third interview conducted by student with Muslim. Recordings of Muslim born in 1937, female Christian (no age indicated), unnamed male and Muslim born in 1964. 63. ʕIlabūn: approximately 3,800 inhabitants at the time of enquiry, 75% Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox, 25% Muslim Nǧēdāt Bedouin. Interview conducted by B. with four females all in their twenties and their approximately forty-five-year-old father. Recordings of two Christians born in 1909 and 1921. Recording Palva 1966:136–139 of Greek Orthodox farmer with no formal education. 64. Wādi l-Ḥammām: Bedouin Gēṭiyya (Rosenhouse 1984:55) interview with male born in 1956. 65 Bʕēne-Nǧēdāt: all inhabitants Muslim, autochthonous population approximately 75% and 25% Bedouin Nǧēdāt. Interview conducted by B. with autochthonous twenty-five-year-old photographer and his sixty-year-old father. Recordings of females born in 1952 and 1968 and of male born in 1908. Text in Palva 1966:132–136 told by farmer born in 1913 with no education and his wife who was born in 1921, also with no education. 66. Liʕzēr: text in Palva 1966:124–132 told by farmer born in 1923, with six years of school, and a worker born in 1933 with no school education.

xxi 67. ir-Rūmi: recording of unnamed male. On map 2 in Rosenhouse 1984, Rūmat Heib listed as officially acknowledged Bedouin village. Informant declares that his family formerly transhumed between Ṣaffūri and ir-Rūmi, that they definitively lived in ir-Rūmi since 1948 and that they had always possessed land in ir-Rūmi. According to his declarations and complaints, he lives in an illegal outskirt of Rūmat Heib = xiribt ir-Rūmi (ten to twelve houses). He speaks a mixed dialect with a Bedouin base: Qāf = /g/, tibiʕdum ‘you go away’, but heavy interferences of sedentary Arabic. 68. Kufir Kanna: according to Wikipedia, the number of inhabitants is 22,500 of whom there are 25% Christians and 75% Muslims. First interview conducted by DZ with older male. Interview with middle-aged male. Interview (only lexicon) with younger female. Fourth interview with middle-aged male (only lexicon). Recordings with female born in 1940, Christian farmer born in 1920, Muslim born in 1934, female Christian born in 1950 and middle-aged male. Last recording of elderly man hardly understandable. 69. Ṭurʕān: according to Wikipedia, 12,000 inhabitants of whom 75% Muslim and 25% Christian. Interview conducted by B. with Christian student of about twenty. Second interview conducted by DZ with elderly Muslim, third with older Muslima and a fourth with a Christian female. Recordings of Muslim kindergarten teacher born in 1952 and of a Christian born in 1910. Text in Palva 1966:140– 142 told by Christian plasterer born in 1943. 70. Ṭabariyya (Tiberias): texts of AGK-2. 71. ʕIsifya: according to Wikipedia, 11,000 inhabitants of whom 80% are Druze, 15% Christian and 5% Muslim. One informant declares that the original inhabitants of ʕIsifya came from the Wādi t-Taym in southern Lebanon. Interview with forty-year-old female (only lexicon). Interview with middle-aged female. Interview with younger female conducted by T. Interview with younger female (only lexicon). Interview with middle- aged female. Interview conducted by B. with middle-aged male (only second half extant). Recordings of females born in 1930, 1931, 1933 and 1964, forty-year-old Druze, ninteenyear-old girl, males born in 1919, 1923, 1930, 1931, 1934 and 1936 (Druze), male born in 1940 (no further data) and an older Christian male. Text in Blanc 1953:161–165 told by male Druze born in 1953. 72. ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣: according to Wikipedia, there were 559 inhabitants in 2008. Most of the inhabitants fled in 1948, but some stayed and founded a new village near the evacuated one, which, however, is not recognised by the authorities. Interview conducted by DZ with middle-aged male. Recordings of male born in 1918 (probably father of interviewed person).

xxii 73. Dālyit il-Karmil or id-Dāl(y)i: at the time of interview, according to informant there were 12, 000 inhabitants, while in 2012 there were 15,847 inhabitants, most of them Druze. Interview (only lexicon) with a seventy-yearold male originally from Umm iz-Zināt (in the neighbourhood of Dālyi). Interview conducted by B. with younger female. Interview with middle-aged male. Recordings of Druze born in 1918, younger male, Druze born in 1969, unidentified male, elderly female, lorry driver born in 1946, older male, Druze born in 1960, Druze female born in 1944, female Druze from Ǧabal id-Drūz/Syria born in 1944 male (no data) and female born in 1920. 74. Ṭamrat il-Marǧ: no data available. 75. ʕIlūṭ: at the time of enquiry there were approximately 5,000 inhabitants, all Muslim. Interview with male born in 1955. Recordings of males born in 1923, 1933 and 1938. Text in Palva 1966:42–154 told by farmer born in 1940, with fourteen years of school. He relates that at the time of enquiry (1963) the village had 1,500 inhabitants, amongst them 200 refugees from Ṣaffūrye.2 76. ir-Rēni: according to Wikipedia, there were 15,900 inhabitants. According to informant, “a little bit more Christians than Muslims”. Three interviews conducted by DZ with elderly and middle-aged males. Recordings of sixty-year-old female, middle-aged male, Muslima born in 1951, female Christian born in 1937, older male, thirty-fiveyear old female Christian and Muslima born in 1935. 77. Nazareth (in-Nāṣri): in 2015 according to Wikipedia, there were 75,726 inhabitants of whom 60% were Muslim, 40% Christian. See Havelova 2000a and Zuʕbi 2005b. Fortythree persons were interviewed and recorded, of them fourteen were Christian females, most of them younger, nine Muslimas, seven Christian men, five Muslims, four females without indication of denomination and four males without indication of denomination. Havelova 2000a:143 presents a similar sample with thirty-six persons interviewed of whom there were twelve Christian women, seven Christian men, thirteen Muslim women and four Muslim men. 78. Yāft in-Nāṣri: in 2006, according to Wikipedia, there were 22,000 inhabitants of whom were 70% Muslim, 30% Christian. Interview with male born in 1917. Partial interview of older female. Third interview of older male. Eight recordings of Christian born in 1925 in neighbouring Maʕlūl (destroyed in 1948). Recording of male born in 1927. Recordings of illiterate Christian female born in 1900, Muslim born in 1922, female born in 1916 (had lived 2  Fn. in Palva 1966:144, “Ṣaffūrye, the ancient Tsippori / Sepphoris, was one of the Arab villages destroyed in 1948, now a Jewish settlement called Tsippori”. Ṣ. lies some 4 or 5 kms north-east of ʕIlūṭ.

index of arabic-speaking localities in the area

for many years in Haifa and Jerusalem, from 1949–1977 in Jordan, then back to Yāft in-Nāṣri) and illiterate Muslim born in 1918. 79. Iksāl: Nevo 1991, 1999. Interview with male born in 1936. Second interview with male born in 1913 (only lexicon). Recordings of female born in 1925, Recording of unnamed female. Text in Palva 1966:154–160 told by clerk born in 1938. 80. ʕĒn Māhil: interview with middle-aged male. Second interview conducted by B. with sixty-year-old farmer. Recordings of imām of the village born in 1938 and of male born in 1926. 81. Kafr Kama: no data collected. In 2015, according to Wikipedia, had a population of 3,188 persons, largely Circassian. 82. Dabbūrye: interview conducted by DZ with middle-aged male. Two interviews with middle-aged males (only lexicon). One of them was originally a speaker of a Bedouin dialect as certain forms suggest: giṣīr ‘short’, ǧimal ‘camel’, wirrǧa ‘frog’. At the end of the interview he declares that he is of Bedouin origin and has lived in the village for thirty-five years. Mostly uses forms from local G dialect. Recordings of females born in 1921 and 1942 in D., but living in Nazareth since 1940 and in Iksāl since 1957 should not be used. Recordings of males born in 1909 and 1911. 83. ʕArab iš-Šibli: interview with male born in 1948. Texts in Rosenhouse 1980:21–39. 84. Umm il-Ġanam: Bedouin Saʕāyda, according to Rosenhouse 1984:56. Interview with male born in 1949. 85. Nēn: according to Wikipedia, 2,171 inhabitants. Interview with seventy-four-year-old male. Interviews with two older males (one only lexicon). Recordings of males, one born in 1944, the other one born in 1928. 86. id-Daḥi, at the time of interview there were 500 inhabitants, all from the Zuʕbi family originating from Sūlam. Interview and recording conducted by DZ with older male. Recording of male born in 1929. Recording of mother and middle-aged daughter. 87. Ṭamra: interview with seventy-year-old male (only lexicon). Interview with illiterate older woman (only lexicon). One recording of older male. He declares that the village was 250–300 years old and that the inhabitants originated from Jordan and Syria and mentions ilYadūde, Darʕa in Ḥōrān/Syria and ir-Rumṯa in Jordan. Parts of them settled in Ṭamra, Nēn, iṭ-Ṭayybe and Sūlam. The origin would be Sūlam. Almost all of the inhabitants belong to the Zuʕbi family. Cantineau 1940, map 3 indicates for il-Yādūde that the Zuʕbīye were the largest family.

xxiii

index of arabic-speaking localities in the area

88. Kufr Miṣr: interview conducted by FṢ with fortyyear-old male. Recording of female. However, she speaks a Bedouin dialect influenced by local G dialect. 89 Sūlam: according to Wikipedia, there were 2,700 inhabitants, all Muslim. At the time of enquiry there were approximately 2,000 inhabitants. Others estimated 2,200 or 2,500. First interview with fifty-five-year-old male conducted by student. Second interview (only lexicon) conducted by DZ with older male. Third interview (only lexicon) conducted by FṢ with elderly speaker who declared that his family was originally from a village in the Jezreel Valley, settled in Sūlam in 1948 and belonged to the ʕArab Turkmān tribe. In conversation at the beginning of the interview, he spoke the local dialect and only used a few typical Bedouin forms such as xašem ‘nose’ (local dialect xušem), but used true Bedouin forms when asked directly. For the ʕArab Turkmān cf. Rosenhouse 1984:56. Fourth interview with elderly male conducted by FṢ. Recordings of two old males and three males born in 1915, 1931 and 1965. One of them declares that three families lived in the village: the Zuʕbiyye, the Maṣārwi [from nearby Kufir Maṣir] and the Turkmān. 90. in-Naʕūra: interview with older male (only lexicon). Second interview conducted by DZ with younger male. Third interview conducted by him with middle-aged to elderly male (only lexicon). He speaks a Bedouin dialect and declares that he was born in the village, but that the tribe was originally from Jordan. Recordings of elderly males, one born in 1930, and one born in 1918 residing in Nazareth since 1953 (but still uses /g/ for Qāf); fifty-yearold female , another elderly female. 91. iṭ-Ṭayybe: two interviews with males, one born in 1975, the other forty-four years old. Third interview with older informant almost not audible due to ambient noise (wind). Fourth and fifth interview conducted by DZ and FṢ with middle-aged males (only lexicon). One interview should not be used since informant after a while declared that he had lived all his life in Nazareth and that his dialect was different from the dialect of iṭ-Ṭayybe. Recordings of middle-aged male, male analphabet born in 1923, male born in 1917 (kuttāb). 92. li-Fredīs: see Jastrow 2009. One of the informants declared that in 1948 only 750 persons lived in the village. After the creation of the state of Israel and the destruction of the surrounding villages, their inhabitants settled in li-Fredīs, the majority of the “immigrants” being from Ṭanṭūra. Another female informant declared that in Ṭanṭūra they had spoken the same dialect.

Two interviews with middle-aged males. Recordings of older female, two middle-aged females, male born in 1933, middle-aged fisherman, two middle-aged males, female (no age indicated), male born in 1933 and middle-aged male. 93. Ǧisr iz-Zarga: see Jastrow 2009. Interview with sixtyyear-old female. Recordings of male born in the thirties of the last century, older male, middle-aged fisherman, male born in 1921. 94. li-Mšērfe: two texts with boys born in 1988 (2nd grade), 1985 (5th grade), recording not available. 95. Mqēble: according to Wikipedia, 4,000 inhabitants in 2008, Muslims and Christians. Interviews conducted by DZ with middle-aged female, middle-aged male, elderly male (only lexicon), middle-aged male (only lexicon). Recordings of male born in 1924, male born in 1940, middleaged female, but at time of recording living in Nazareth. Elderly female, another female born in 1920. There are several videos on YouTube with inhabitants of Mqēble: one with two women, one Christian, the other Muslima who speak approximately the same dialect. Another video is with an older Muslim from the Zyadāt family (in Bedouin dress) speaking differently. Another YouTube interview with Christian who declared that the number of inhabitants was about 3,500, among them 140 Christians. This number is also confirmed in interview with the local priest. Another YouTube interview mentions that there are only three Christian families in Mqēble “min zamān”. One of the informants from the Zyadāt family declared that they came from Egypt and first settled in tents. 96. Ṣandala: two interviews conducted by DZ with two elderly males, one born in 1925. Recordings of males born in 1918 and 1928, female born in 1921. One of the informants declares that there is only one family clan in the village, the il-ʕUmari clan. This information appears also in Wikipedia, according to which the number of inhabitants in 2013 was 1,800. The village at the time of enquiry was said to have been founded some 150 years ago and that the inhabitants came from Maryu3 in Eastern Jordan. As for the points of enquiry in the Muṯallaṯ, no further details are given here since they only figure on some maps. The numbers refer to the following places: Mšērfe 94, Zalafe 97, Muṣmuṣ 98, Muʕāwya 99, Imm il-Faḥem 100, ʕĒn is-Sahla 101, ʕArʕara 102, Kufir Kariʕ 103, Bartaʕa 104. 3  Not locatable on available maps.

000 Galilee and Adjacent Areas

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

Maalot-Tar

Upper Galilee Akko

Haifa

ad

Karmi'el

Lower Galilee ariyya

Kr. Kanna

Sea of Galilee

Nazareth

le

Fred s

Jordan

Umm il-F iz-Zarga

Palestinian Territories

Beit She'an

Jenin

000

Galilee and adjacent areas

0

5

10 km

001 Denominations

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

26 56

43

Haifa 34

44 45

51 52 53

72

73

78

79

85 86 89

92

103

001

94 97 100 101

Sea of Galilee

81 82

e

99

ariyya 70

76 80

Nazareth

Israel

93

64

55

75 74

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59 41

46 36 37

57

58

40 42

27

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

104

Jenin

Religious Arabic speaking communities 93

Muslims Druze Christians Jews 0

5

10 km

002 Bedouin Tribes of the Area

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3 7

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8

1 2

9 10

23 24

12

56

43

58

41 44 45

46

36 37

34

35

51 52 53

49 66 67

50

72

74

78

79

85 86

95

83 84

87

89

T

94 97 98 100 101

Sea of Galilee

81 82

92

99

ariyya

76 80

e

93

64

63

69

Nazareth

Israel

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

102

002

65

55

75

73

N

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32

57

59

42

27

26

40

Haifa

22

6

104

Bedouin tribes of the area ©Amiriyya ©A a ms ya ra

Ka©biyye Lh rb N© Sa da

Samniyya Sa id

N T

Zu r N t ©Arab Tu

ibli Xa

id

0

5

10 km

Linguistic Maps and Commentaries

∵

1 Phonology

∵

1 Vowels 1.1

Short Vowels

Phonetically, three short vowels a, i, u are clearly distinguished in all points of investigation. The opposition /a/ – /i/ is of high functional load (see verb measure II, perfect and imperfect, 1st and 3rd p. sg. imperfect: báštġil – bíštġil). As for an opposition /i/ – /u/ which has been merged in several Levantine dialects in certain positions (e.g., in the dialect of Damascus), the elicitation of minimal pairs was not always so easy. Cf. for Hebron, Seeger 1996:67 “i und u werden im allgemeinen sehr klar und deutlich unterschieden artikuliert … Ein Minimalpaar konnte nicht gefunden werden”. As for Ramallah, see Seeger 2013:51 “i und u werden in der Artikulation stets deutlich unterschieden … Der Kontrast zwischen diesen beiden Vokalen wird, wie bereits im Hocharabischen, wenig genutzt. Durch den IV. Stamm der Verba mediae W haben wir immerhin zahlreiche Minimalpaare: kumt ‘ich stand auf’ … kimt ‘ich hob auf …’ ”. For a minimal pair ʔilli – ʔulli in Haifa, see AGK-1:47. For his points of investigation in Lower Galilee Palva 1966:9 indicates “three phonemic vowel qualities, a, i and u”. For Iksāl (also investigated by Palva), see Nevo 2006:35–36 who distinguishes three phonemes and furnishes minimal pairs such as gilli ‘paucity’ – gulli ‘tell (sg. m.) me’, gimt ‘I removed’ – gumt ‘I got up’. Some of the possible minimal pairs suggested to the interviewees were rejected at many points. For instance, mudd ‘a dry measure’ (Wehr 1960) – midd! ‘stretch out!’ was not elicitable (as was the case, for example, in Soukhne, Behnstedt 1994:18), either because the name for the dry measure was unknown, or because in both cases i was pronounced as, for example, in points 1, 2 and 60 midd qamiḥ ‘18 litres of wheat’. Cf. Elihay 2004:309-r who has madd

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/9789004411395_002

[imedd], Bauer 1957:202-r madd, i “strecken”, Dalman 1987: III:14, 101, passim medd for dry measure. But cf. in several points, for example, in 1, muddi ‘space of time’ – middi! ‘stretch out (f.)!’. Another pair proposed was ṣifr ‘zero’ – ṣufr ‘yellow, pl.’. It was rarely confirmed because in ‘zero’ the emphasis was lost in most points of investigation: sifir# ~ sifer# ~ sifər#, for example, in point 1 sifer# ~ ṣufer# (exception is the Bedouin dialect 38 Biʕne ṣifer# – ṣufur#). A more productive minimal pair proposed was qumt ‘I got up’ – qimt ‘I took away’ (confirmed in more than thirty points, for example in 17 ʔumet – ʔimet, 68 qumt – qimt, Bedouin 38 gumt – gimt, cf. above Ramallah and Iksāl).1 In a number of items, the whole area mainly has /u/, namely in kunt ‘I was’ (exceptions are Bedouin dialects with čint), ṛuḥt ‘I went’ (exception is Ṭabariyya AGK2:186,17 riḥt), šuft ‘I saw’, suʔt ‘I drove’, ʔult ‘I said’, kull ‘all, every’, ʔuxt ‘sister’ vs. žibt ‘I brought’ and [i] in the forms mentioned in many Syro-Lebanese dialects. Cf. also Ṣafad kubbe, ʕubṛāni ‘Hebrew’, žubne ‘cheese’ (recordings). Regional Distribution of i – u in Different Lexemes The regional distribution of i or u depends partly, but not necessarily, on the consonantal environment, /u/ being preferred in many dialects in some lexemes in a back or labial consonantal environment. For i- and u-colouring environments in different Arabic dialects, cf. also Blanc 1964:36, Jastrow 1980:104, Arnold 1998:175, Behnstedt 2000:424–425. 1.1.1

1  Cf. also yiḍrab “he should bail himself” (yiṣṭfil) – yuḍrub “he beats”.

6

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

B

1

Akko

28

17 18

16

(Birwi)

43 46 31

36

24

56

60

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

49

53 55

78

Israel

Sea of Galilee

B 82

79

85

e

83 84

87 89

92

93

ariyya 70

76 80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

26

40

34 35

23

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

O Y 9 10

2

O Y

21

20

8

88

91

Jordan

Palestinian Territories Jenin

003

u

i i

mouth

tumm timm um 0

003 1.1.1.1 ‘Mouth’, in MSA fam

5

10 km

Phonology

With m: 003 1.1.1.1 ‘Mouth’ For the different vocalisations such as fam(m), fim(m), fum(m), ṯimm, ṯumm, etc., see WAD I:125 (map 47). Elihay 2004:586-l indicates tumm, temm, Bauer 1957:210r tum(m), rural ṯim(m). /i/ is predominant in our area; tumm in Ṭabariyya AGK-2: 108–9, 168–20, Haifa AGK1:275, iž-Ždayydi (30) autochthonous speakers tumm, informants originally from Birwe: ṯimm. Nazareth three

7 questionnaires tumm. Yāft in-Nāṣre (78) two questionnaires with old and young female speakers ṯimm. For the Bedouin forms of the type ʔiṯum – ʔuṯum, cf. Rosenhouse 1984:281 s.v. ʔṯm and Yemeni Bedouin fum, with suffixes ʔufmī, ʔufmak, ʔufmiš, etc. (Behnstedt 2006:955). The seemingly metathetic forms are explained in Behnstedt 2001:26 by final stress, elision and prothesis: fumák > fmak > ufmak. For our Bedouin dialects, an adaptation to ʔuḏn, ʔiḏn ‘ear’ is equally conceivable.

8

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea Sea Mediterranean

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

21

20

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

15 19

26

16

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

49

53

65 67

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

B

76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

64

63

69

68 55

72

62

61

47 48

60

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

004

u

i i

eyelas

m rum rim m garm 0

004 1.1.1.2 ‘Eyelash’

5

10 km

Phonology

004 1.1.1.2 ‘Eyelash’ In MSA rimš, in Elihay 2004:447-r ramš, no other vocalisation attested. Bauer 1957:364-r rumš. Only twice attested ṛamš in a sedentary dialect and Bedouin dialect of point 38. Forms such as ṛum(u)š with /ṛ/ are either from recordings or questionnaires of B. rum(u)š in texts or questionnaires

9 transcribed by students with no recording available has to be considered cum grano salis since they never noted emphasis of /r/. In point 91 (iṭ-Ṭayybe), besides rimiš in a second questionnaire garmūš was indicated. This recalls the plural rmūš and a form such as gargūš(a) for the auricular cartilage.

10

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

8

B

1 14

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 41

43

Haifa

46 31

36

47 48

62 65

49

69

53

72

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee

80

Nazareth

73

ariyya

B

55 71

64

63

83 84

87 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

005

u

i i

comb, ins

mu mi

0

005 1.1.1.3 ‘Instep’

5

10 km

Phonology

005 1.1.1.3 ‘Instep’ Used in mušṭ il-ʔiǧer ‘comb of the foot’ = ‘instep, metatarsus’, MSA mušt ar-riǧl. For Ṭabariyya, mušṭ is attested as a fish name (AGK-2:32:66–8). Cf. Dalman 1987: VI:351 mušṭ

11 abyaḍ ‘Chromis Tiberiadis’, 359 ‘Kammfisch’, in Oman 1966:375 mešṭ for Egypt, “mušṭ … nome corrente del genere TILAPIA in Palestina e Siria”.

12

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4 6

8 1 14 15

2 18

Akko

28

19

16

11 13 38 39 B

29 30

21

20

B 9 10

23 24

12

25 26

56

40 43

Haifa

46

60

42

41 44

49 35

53

52

Nazareth 78

73

67

69

Sea of Galilee

76 80 82 79

Israel

85

e

83 84

87 89

92

88

90 91

Jordan 94

93

ariyya

55

B

72

65 68

75

71

62

61

47

31

36

27

95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

006

u

i i

mo

'umm 'uµµ 'imm

0

006 1.1.1.4 ‘Mother’

5

10 km

Phonology

006 1.1.1.4 ‘Mother’ MSA ʔumm, Elihay 2004:225-l ʔimm ~ ʔumm, Bauer 1957:212r ʔumm = urban, ʔimm = rural and urban. Nazareth ʔimm ~ ʔumm (less frequent), Haifa ʔimm, AGK-1:267 ʔemm ~

13 ʔimm, Ṭabariyya ʔimm AGK-2:32–2, Iksāl (79) Nevo 2006:36 ʔumm ~ ʔimm. In Bedouin dialects with emphatic /ṃ/, cf. Rosenhouse 1985:60 uṃṃi ‘my mother’.

14

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22

6

8 1 2

Akko

28

17 18

19

9

14

M

21

B

23 26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

41 44

46

53

62

61

47 48

31

36

60

42

65

50

ariyya

76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

79

Israel

85

e

87

91

92

Jordan 95

93

Sea of Galilee

69

68

54

63

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

007

u

i i

w

um© im©a,

0

007 1.1.1.5 ‘Week’

5

10 km

Phonology

007 1.1.1.5 ‘Week’ In MSA ǧumʕa, Elihay 2004:265-r idem. Bauer 1957:366-r ǧumʕa, rural ǧimʕa, Seeger WB online 116 ǧumʕa ~ ǧimʕa. ǧimʕa 19, Haifa žumʕa (AGK-1:277), Iksāl (79) ǧumʕa ~ ǧimʕa (Nevo 2006:36), Ṭabariyya žumʕa (AGK-2:66–3),

15 žumeʕtēn “two weeks” (AGK-2:52–16).2 In Šēx Dannūn (1) žimʕa was classified as “old fashioned”.

2  ‘Number’: the loan in Syrian Arabic nəmra (Ani and Stowasser 1964:160-r), is in Yasīn 2013:1613 numra and is derived there from Italian numero. In Egyptian Arabic, nimra in HB equally from numero. The /i/ in Egyptian Arabic (and some Syrian dialects) is perhaps better explained by French numéro with /y/ > /i/. As for the Levantine form, one could also quote Turkish numara as a possible origin. Where attested, it was found mainly with /u/: numra, pl. numar. Exception is nimra in Bedouin dialect points 4 and 5. A map would be superfluous.

16

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

8

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

16

13 38 39

29 30

B

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46

53

42

41 44

65

55

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

B 75

71

62

61

47 48

31

36

60

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

008

u

i i

eyel

ufn ifn git il-© ba

il-©

0

008 1.1.1.6 ‘Eyelid’

5

10 km

Phonology

With f: 008 1.1.1.6 ‘Eyelid’ MSA ǧafn, Elihay 2004:262-r jifen, Bauer 1957:31-r ǧifn. Except some Bedouin dialects with ǧuf(u)n (ʕArāmša,

17 Zunnāṛ, Ǧawāmīs) all points have forms with /i/, also Sawāʕid Bedouins in points 38, 58 (Bʕēni, Čammāna), Bedouins in point 35 (Ṭabʕōn). ṭabgit il-ʕēn semantically is identical to English ‘lid’ = ‘cover’, cf. ṭabaq in MSA. baṭṭa normally applies to the calf of the leg.

18

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

8 B

1 14

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

26

16

13 38 39

29 30 40 43

Haifa

42

B

56 58

B 41

53

72

55

75

ariyya

B

76 80

Nazareth

82

78

79

Israel

85 86 ©A

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee

69

68

73

64

63 49

34

71

60 62

61

47 48

31

59

B

44

46

36

12

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

009

u

i i iffa iffe iffi uffe uffi

lip a a a

bu

0

009 1.1.1.7 ‘Lip’

5

10 km

Phonology

009 1.1.1.7 ‘Lip’ In MSA, šafa. In point 8 (Taršīḥa) sedentary dialect šiffi, Bedouin dialect šiffa. The true Bedouin form is, however, burṭum. For šalṭūfa, šalṭūfe and šalṭūfi, see WAD I:136: “Für Palästina von BAU-2 als ‘dicke Lippe’ genanntes šalṭūfe wurde in allen Untersuchungspunkten in Galiläa in dieser Bedeutung bestätigt, ist also nicht das Normalwort,

19 ebenso ELI-2 ‘thick, fleshy lip’”. This commentary refers to the data known at the time. In the new available data, in some points it was indicated as the only form without this secondary meaning ‘thick, fleshy’ and without any negative connotation. In point 79 (Iksāl), šalṭūfe was commented with a laugh and labelled as old-fashioned (hāy il-gudmāniyye). For burṭum, see WAD I:135–136.

20

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

B

12

56

B 58

40 43

Haifa

46

42

41 44

65

49

34 53

71 72

78

73

76 80 82

83 84

79

Israel

85

e

87 89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

55

Nazareth

64

63

69

68

75

B

62

61

47 48

31

36

60

88

90 B

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

010

u

i in rukba k a kbe kbi rukbe rukbi

010 1.1.1.8 ‘Knee’

nee be ru bi

rikbe rikbi ri be

0

5

10 km

Phonology

With b: 010 1.1.1.8 ‘Knee’ MSA rukba, Elihay 2004:457-r rukbe, Bauer 1957:176-r rukbe, rural ričbe. rukba in questionnaires conducted by students – recordings not available – with some doubt as

21 for emphasis. In ʕIlabūn (63), in B.’s interview with four female speakers of about twenty and one older male informant: all rukbe, questionnaire conducted by student with two older male informants: rukba. Sūlam (89) questionnaire student rikbe without recording, recording older informant: ṛukḅa, recording another older informant: rikbe.

22

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 7

1 14 15

2 19

Akko

28

16

11 13 38 39 B

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

27

56

57

58

40

60

42

Haifa

41 44 45

46 B

36

47 48

31 53

62

61

65

49

50

69

68

54

63

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

55 76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

84

Israel

87

e

89

92

B

90 91

Jordan 95

93

88

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

011

u

i

become, begin perfect t,

both

a rna

0

011

1.1.1.10 ‘To become, start (auxiliary verb), 1st, 2nd sg., pl.’

5

10 km

23

Phonology

With back consonants The rule /u/ in labial and back environment does not always apply as the forms for ‘mother’ and ‘mouth’ have shown. 1.1.1.9 ‘Committee’ This is also illustrated by the form for ‘committee’, laǧna in MSA, Bauer 1957:178-l laǧne, Seeger WB online 656 laǧne, in Elihay 2004:292-l lajne “see lujne” [301-r]. In our area, the forms laǧna, lažne, lažni, liǧna, ližne, ližni, luǧna, luǧne and lužni were elicited, the forms with /u/ being the most frequent, but since in many localities the question was not asked we omit a map.

011

1.1.1.10 ‘To become, start (auxiliary verb), 1st, 2nd sg., pl.’ In MSA, as in many dialects, the perfect vowel is /i/: ṣirt(u). In our area, ṣurt is by far the dominant form, ṣirt being used mainly in B dialects or G dialects. In Haifa, both vocalisations are used (AGK-1:118), for Ṭabariyya AGK-2:176– 82, 178–90 has ṣirt. Miʕilya (7) recording of male born in 1922: two instances of ṣirt, one of ṣurt. For Šfaʕamir (31), one female informant also used the imperfect with /ū/: yṣīr ~ yṣūr.

24

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea 7

8

1

Akko

28

9 10

14

2

17 18

19

13

29

21

20

B

23 24

12

39

26

27

56

58

40 42

Haifa

46

36

33

31

41

62

47

63

Sea of Galilee

49 66 69

68

ariyya

55 76

71

Nazareth 78

73

82

79

Israel

85

e 92

87 90 91

Jordan 94

93

95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

012

u

i i

story

qu 'u gu ki 0

012

1.1.1.11 ‘Story’

5

10 km

Phonology

012 1.1.1.11 ‘Story’ MSA qiṣṣa, quṣṣa = ‘forelock, lock of hair’ (Wehr 1960). Bauer 1957:133-l ʔuṣṣa, Elihay 2004:433-l “qiṣṣa see quṣṣa” (436-r), Seeger WB online 593 quṣṣa ~ qiṣṣa. In Haifa, ʔuṣṣa ~ ʔiṣṣa (AGK:1:265). Nazareth Muslima teacher (age unknown): ʔuṣṣa, Christian female informant born in 1940: ʔuṣṣa, Christian female housewife from Ḥārt ir-Rūm (sixty-three years old in 1996): ʔuṣṣa, Muslim housewife from il-Ḥāṛā š-šarqiyye, born in 1920: ʔuṣṣa.

25 In the questionnaire under “parts of the house”, {quṣṣa} was included as ‘stone bench (against a wall), in front of the house’. Point 8 Bedouins guṣṣa, sedentary quṣṣa, point 13 ʔuṣṣa. See Seeger WB online 593 quṣṣa ~ qiṣṣa “kleine Erhöhung, die zum Sitzen oder als Ablage dient; Hausterrasse aus Stein oder Fliesen”.

26

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

6 21

7

1

Akko

28

9

14

2

13

30

23

11

17 18

24

12

39 40 41

43

Haifa

D

36

60

44 45

61

47

31

65

49

50

69

68

75

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

76

Nazareth 78

73

Israel 86

e

87

88

B

90

92

Jordan 96

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

013

u i ©iris ©irs ©u ©urs ©uris ©u

013

1.1.1.12 ‘Wedding’

wedding ©ures ©urus

0

5

10 km

Phonology

013 1.1.1.12 ‘Wedding’ MSA ʕurs ~ ʕurus, Elihay 2004:35-r ʕures ~ ʕuros. Commentary in questionnaire Šfaʕamir (31) ʕuris = Druze, ʕurus typical for others. Haifa ʕurus ~ ʕurs (AGK-1 309), ʕurus# (Muslim born in 1934), ʕurus C- (female Christian

27 speaker born in 1946). Kufir Kanna (68) same speaker uses both ʕirs ~ ʕurs. All the forms on map were given in context before a following consonant or in pause. For a further discussion, see “Anaptyctic vowels”.

28

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

40 43

Haifa

31 32

60 62

47

63

ariyya

55

Nazareth 78

76 80 82 79

85 86

e

89

92

94

Sea of Galilee

69

68

Israel

93

B

49 66

75

73

57

61

54

72

56

41 44

50

71

26

59

42

46

36 37

21

20

8

95

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

014

u

i i

nam

'usm 'ism

0

014

1.1.1.13 ‘Name’

5

10 km

Phonology

014 1.1.1.13 ‘Name’ The shift from *i > u most probably has nothing to do with /m/. Cf. qism ~ ʔism ~ gism in the dialects of the area. It is perhaps a backformation out of forms such as šu ʔismu (point 54) > šusmu?, šusmak?, etc., il-šusmu? ~ al-šusmu (Bedouin dialect point 45) ‘what’s his name again?’, attested in several points, or, since often only ʔusmu is attested, it is to be explained by vowel harmony, e.g., in recordings Taršīḥa (8), Kufir Smēʕ (9), Mġār (60) ʔismi ‘my name’ – ʔusmu ‘his name’, Dēr Ḥanna (62) šu ʔismik?, šu ʔismu ~ šu ʔusmu? In iž-Žišš (21), several instances of šu ʔusmu? ‘what’s his name?’ beside ʔismu, also ʔusma ‘her name’. Akko ʔismu ~ b-ʔusmu. Dālyit il-Karmil (73): text in Blanc

29 1953:325–328 ʔismah ~ ʔismha, one male informant born in 1946 always ʔusmo, female Druze born in 1960 ʔusmu, male Druze born in 1944 ʔismu, but several instances of ʔusm (il-balad), male informant born in 1920 šū ʔusmo?, Kōkab Abul-Hēža (44) ʔismu, šu ʔusmu? Nazareth all informants ʔism(u), Zuʕbi 2005a: ʔusmu. ʕIlūṭ (75) ʔismu vs. ʔusumha. Ṭabariyya (AGK-2:325, 92,2) ʔusmo ~ ʔismo, Rāmi (56) ʔismu ~ ʔusmu, Haifa “ʔusum, šu ʔusmu ‘wie heißt er’. ʔisim eher in den Dörfern in der Umgebung Haifas … šu ʔismu “wie heißt er denn’?” (AGK-1:296). ʕIsifya (71) young female Druze rejected ʔusmi and attributed it to the inhabitants of Dālyit il-Karmil (73). Cf. also GvG 199 where ism ~ usm ~ sum are quoted for Old Arabic.

30

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 34

49

51 52 53

65B 67

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99 103 102

015

94 97 98 100 101

Sea of Galilee

76 80

78

93

ariyya

B

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

55

75

B

B

68

54

72

60 62

61

47 48

71

27

57

41 44 45

31 33 32 35

56 59

42

46

36 37

26

58

40 43

21

20

B

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

104

u

i i

, pl.c. or pl.m.

hunni humma, -e, -i hinni, hinnen etc.

0

015

1.1.1.14 /u/ ~ /i/

5

10 km

Phonology

015 1.1.1.14 /u/ ~ /i/ in ‘they’, pl.c. or pl.m. In the personal pronouns hunni ~ hinne, hinni, in sedentary dialects neither have to do with the consonantal environment. For an explanation of the forms with /nn/ and their vocalism, see the discussion in Diem 1971 and Behnstedt 1991. As for Bedouin dialects and ruralite dialects with a Bedouin touch (G dialects), only the masculine forms are indicated on the map. For more details, see II. Morphology, personal pronouns.

31 – Some oddities are ʕušt ‘I have lived’ used by informants from Nazareth, šurke ~ širke ‘company’ in Ṭabariyya (AGK-2:84,24–26). There are more cases of i – u variation as yḥibb ~ yḥubb (e.g., Ṣafad) ‘he loves’, durzi ~ dirzi ‘Druze’, etc. Those and other regional pairs are attested only sporadically. See also forms with u or i in ‘finger’, ‘fingernail’. Another example is Ṣafad ʔubre ‘needle’.

32

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

8 1

9

2

Akko

28

21

20

B

17 18

15

11

16

13 38 39 B

29 30

26

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46

36 34

31 33 32

60

42

41 44 48

65

53 55

78

B 82

79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71 72

62

61

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

016

a

i i

fac

wa h, w wi ih, w wi wi i wi wi 016

1.1.1.15 ‘Face’

wu wu ih

0

5

10 km

Phonology

Regional distribution of a and i 016 1.1.1.15 ‘Face’ The CA form is waǧh. As in other dialects, too, /a/ is fronted to /i/. Cf. Egyptian Arabic wišš, Syrian Arabic where wiǧǧ, wišš and the like are typical of sedentary dialects, whilst waǧh and similars are rather Bedouin dialect forms.

33 For ʕArab Šibli (83), text in Rosenhouse 1980:29 on same line (10) has wuǧh and waǧh. Elihay 2004 623-left indicates wišš as a variant of wujeh. Bauer 1957:134-l has wuǧh ~ wiǧg for fallāḥīn, wiǧǧ for Jerusalem, and wišš for Jaffa and Beirut. Ramallah wiǧh, wiǧǧ, wiǧi (Seeger 2009:275), Seeger WB online 971 wiǧh, wuǧh, wiǧǧ, wiǧi, {wišš}.

34

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

21

20

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

65

49

34 53

72

55

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e 92

B

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

47 48

60

89

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

017

a

i i

shoulder

kat(i)f at(i)f kit(i)f it(i)f

0

017

1.1.1.16 ‘Shoulder’

5

10 km

Phonology

017 1.1.1.16 ‘Shoulder’ In MSA katif ~ kitf, Elihay 2004:281-r kitef, Bauer 267-l kitf, Seeger WB online 511 kitf. The vocalisation with /a/ seems

35 to be exclusively Bedouin or used in ruralite dialects with a strong Bedouin touch (G dialects). The same in Syria (SA map 108).

36

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

B

38 39

B

20

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46

42

41 44

65

49

34 53

C 72

55

71

78

73

B 82

79

Israel

85

e

95

83 84

87 89

92

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

D

64

63

69

68

75

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

90

88

B

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

018

a

i i qa 'a karn ga arn

qirn 'irn kirn girn

qurn kurn

0

018

1.1.1.17 ‘Horn’

5

10 km

Phonology

018 1.1.1.17 ‘Horn’ MSA qarn. Elihay 2004 and Bauer 1957 have only qarn. Seeger WB online 585 qarn ~ qirn. Ṭabariyya ʔirn (AGK2:164, sentence 7). ǧarn in a Bedouin dialect is attested only once. It is the normal form in Syrian Šāwi dialects. In Yirka (16), šahīn was indicated. The form is not attested

37 in Arabic dictionaries consulted (neither Turkish nor Aramaic). In ir-Rāmi (56), šahīn filfil takes the place of qarn filfil. Cf. Seeger WB online 663 s.v. qirn, qarn “gekrümmtes Stück Obst oder Gemüse (Banane, Paprika, Bohne etc.), Schote (Hülse mit Inhalt)” = Elihay 2004:423-r qarn “an elongated piece of fruit (which could be thought to resemble a horn)”.

38

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 34

35

51 52 53

72

65

49 66 67

50

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

60 62

61

54 71

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

36 37

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan 94

93

95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

019

a

i in

e

©ind ©and both

0

019

1.1.1.18 ‘Near, at’

5

10 km

Phonology

019 1.1.1.18 ‘Near, at’ “In some areas, such as Upper Galilee, you may hear the form ʕand as you would in Syria” (Elihay 2004:31-l). In many places in questionnaires and recordings, both forms

39 were indicated, such as Haifa ʕand ~ ʕinna (AGK-1:311). With the pronominal suffix of the 1st p. pl. ʕanna ~ ʕinna almost everywhere.

40

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

28

9 10

14 15 19

16

13 38 39

30

21

20

8

23 24

12

26 56

57

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

46

49

34 35

53

65 67

72

55

75

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

62

61

47 48

31

36

60

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan 95

93

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

020

a

i in t et it at

t et it

0

020 1.1.1.19 ‘Under’

5

10 km

Phonology

020 1.1.1.19 ‘Under’ MSA taḥt, Elihay 2004:542-r taḥet, teḥt, Bauer 1957:322-r, taḥt, rural: tiḥt, Seeger WB online 78 taḥt ~ tiḥt. Where forms were noted such as taḥt before a following vowel and forms such as taḥit before consonant or in pause, only the latter is indicated on the map. Haifa questionnaire taḥit, AGK-1:275 taḥ(i)t. Ṭabariyya taḥt# (AGK-2:42,-8). Ir-Rummāni (49) male speaker born in 1916 tiḥt, second

41 male informant (age unknown) taḥt. Palva 1966:120,6 taḥt îdu. Bʕēni (65) Recording of female born in 1952 tiḥtīha “under her”, Palva 1966:134 end of text: la-taḥet. Point 35 (Basmat Ṭabʕōn, Bedouin dialect) text taḥt ~ taḥit. One would rather expect taḥat. Point 54 (Bēt Zarzīr, Bedouin dialect) taḥtīha ‘under her’. First interview Naḥef (12) tiḥt, second interview first tiḥit mentioned, then taḥit as alternative form.

42

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 34

31 33 32 35

51 53

47 48

72

73

65

49 66 67

50

68

76 80 82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

78

93

63

69

Nazareth

D

60 62

61

75

D

57

41 44 45

54 71

56 59

42

46

36 37

26

58

40 43

21

20

B

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

021

a

i i baddbiddbaddbidd-

to want

dddd-

waddwiddwudd-

0

021

1.1.1.20 ‘To want’

5

10 km

Phonology

021 1.1.1.20 ‘To want’ There is a clear geographical distribution of the sedentary dialect variants badd- and bidd-. badd- is confined to the North and to be found sporadically in the dialect of the Druze in ʕIsifya (71) and Dālyit il-Karmil (73). The area with badd- represents the southern periphery of the Lebanese badd-area. It might also be considered a ‘Druze isogloss’. Cf. SA map 359 where badd- is also indicated for Ǧabal id-Drūz in Syria. Elihay 2004:84-r only mentions bidd-. Bauer 1957:368-l designates bäddi as Lebanese. – Kisra (11): one text with biddo, all other texts have badd-. – Žaṯṯ (15): text told by Druze: baddun vs. biddak. Other speakers only badd. Blanc 1953:201 biddu (twice), 202 biddu ~ baddu, badd amuwt (= baddi amūt), baddiyš aštġil. – Abu Snān (17): one recording has three instances of baddak, two of biddi. Blanc 1953:180 biddu (twice), baddak (twice). – Haifa (36): bidna > binna (AGK 271); cf. Aleppo minna < binna < bid(d)na idem.

43 – iḏ̣-Ḏ̣hara (45) in one recording biddhin (four instances), biddna (two instances), baddnāš (two instances), wuddhin (one instance). The latter is the original form in this Bedouin dialect. – Bīr il-Maksūr (50): waddu vs. widdu, widdha. – ir-Rāmi (56): recordings only have forms with /a/, Blanc 1953:193, 198 biddak, 198 biddu ~ baddu (twice), baddīš, 199 baddi. – Li-ʕZēr (66): Palva 1966:126 centre: biddi. – ʕIsifya (71) recordings show forms with /a/ and /i/, Blanc 1953:162 f. biddinš, biddu, bidhin, bidda, etc., 208 bidhin, biddak. – Iksāl (79): Nevo 2006:39 biddī ~ biddē. – Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93) recording: widd agullak ~ biddi aʔullak ‘I want to tell you’, widdnāš nʔūl ‘we don’t want to say’ ~ biddku tisʔalūni ‘you want to ask us’. Rosenhouse 1984:338 quotes wuddak, widdi, widha, widdo. In Bedouin dialects having both forms widd- and bidd-, the latter is obviously a loan from sedentary dialects.

44

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

28

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

30

21

20

8

26 56

57

58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

46 B

36

53

49

50

65 67

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

55

75

64

63

69

68

54 71

62

61

47 48

31 35

60

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

022

a

i i

here I am

hiy ni 'iy ni ha ni 'a ni £ani ha a 0

022 1.1.1.21 ‘Here/there he is’: hayyā, hiyyā, etc.

5

10 km

Phonology

022 1.1.1.21 ‘Here/there he is’: hayyā, hiyyā, etc. Elihay 2004:156-r indicates both vocalisations. Forms with /a/ are typical of Bedouin dialects and are more frequent in the C, G and M dialects.

45

46

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

35

51 52 53

72

65

49 66

50

64

63

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan 95

93

B

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

54 71

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

36 37

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

023

a

i i

yea

sane sani sina sine sini 0

023 1.1.1.22 ‘Year’

5

10 km

Phonology

023 1.1.1.22 ‘Year’ – Dēr il-Asad (13) recording of male born in 1925: one instance of sani, seven of sini, ten of sint in construct, five of sintēn. sani is obviously MSA influenced and will be disregarded. Recording of unidentified male: two instances of sini. – Yanūḥ (14) male born in 1943: sine, Druze born in 1921: sini, female born in 1947: sini. – Žūlis (19) male born in 1912: sani, twice sini, sanat, sint, twice sinit. Druze born in 1926 twice sini. Druze born in 1943: sini. Druze born in 1911: twice sini, twice sint.

47 – Ṭabariyya: sini (AGK-2:32). – A recording of female born in 1921 in Dabbūrye (82) living in Nazareth since 1940 has several instances of sane. Will be disregarded. Other informants directly from Nazareth all used sini. Forms with /a/: sane, sani, sant, santēn seem to be typical of the eastern G dialects and of the C dialects. Where sporadically attested elsewhere one has to suppose influence of MSA.

48

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

23 26 13 38 39 B

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41

65

49 B 67

53

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85

e 92

83 84

88

87 89

B

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

60 62

61

34

72

B

44 48

71

21

20

B

90 B

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

024

*a

in reflexes of 'aCCaC only 'aCCaC 'aCCaC mar, xa 'iCCaC only few examples of 'iCCaC attested 'aCCaC 'aswid

both 'aCCaC CCaC 'aCCaC (more frequent) 'iCCaC (more frequent)

iCCaC aC

0

024 1.1.2.1 ʔaCCaC > ʔiCCaC

5

10 km

Phonology

1.1.2 Historical Changes 024 1.1.2.1 ʔaCCaC > ʔiCCaC The subject is dealt with on Talmon map 3 with symbols sometimes difficult to recognise. The map is not complete. It lists in the key seven symbols for: 1) afʕal; 2) ifʕal; 3) faʕal; 4) “dominant afʕal with few ifʕal forms, e.g., aʕma, aʔraʕ, etc., but iʕwar”; 5) “dominant ifʕal with few afʕal forms, e.g., iʕma, iʕraž, etc., but aʕwar”; 6) “dominant faʕal with few afʕal forms, e.g., ʕama, etc. but aṭram”; 7) “dominant faʕal with both ifʕal and afʕal forms, e.g., ʕama, etc., but iʕwar and aṭraš”. The following forms were to be elicited under “defects” and “colours”: ‘blind’, ‘one-eyed’, ‘limping’, ‘limping with a crippled foot’, ‘limping with two crippled feet’, ‘paralyzed’, ‘with a crippled hand’, ‘lefthanded’, ‘deaf’, ‘dumb’, ‘partly bald-headed’, ‘bald-headed due to tinea capitis’ or ‘completely bald’, ‘lisping’ or ‘unable to pronounce a trilled r’, ‘black’, ‘white’, ‘blue’, ‘red’, ‘yellow’, ‘green’. Occasionally, other forms were elicited such as ʔiḥwal ‘cross-eyed’, ʔadgaš ‘partially sighted’, etc. The shift from ʔaCCaC to ʔiCCaC is a phenomenon typical for sedentary rural dialects whilst Bedouin or C, G and M dialects and urban dialects have rather ʔaCCaC and Bedouin dialects in ghawa-syndrome forms CaCaC. In Bauer 1957:269-l, forms with /i/ are designated as typical for rural dialects. Bauer 1970:53, fn. 1 “im Norden Jerusalems: izraʔ blau, iswad schwarz”. Ramallah iswad (Seeger 2009:125) and Seeger WB online 346 iswad. Elihay 2004 does not indicate any forms with i-. In Syria, the shift is sporadically to be found, partly in adjacent Ḥōrān (see SA map 227). In Egypt, the shift is usual in Middle and Upper Egypt, the oases and in the Delta in the Šarqiyyya province, the Šarqiyyya dialects showing many features in common with Palestinian Arabic (Behnstedt-Woidich 1985 maps 338–341). For an explanation for the shift *a > i, see Woidich 1979:85 who explains the forms with initial i- by backformation of context forms with apheresis of the type: *da + áʕma > dá-ʕma “der ist blind” > iʕma, following examples with personal pronouns, perfect of the derived themes, article, relative pronoun with i-, wich is dropped in context. Dialects having maintained ʔaCCaC: – Haifa “Die Maskulina der Farben und Gebrechen bezeichnenden Adjektiva lauten immer auf ʔafʕal und nicht wie bei den Fellachen in der Umgebung von Haifa ʔifʕal: ʔabyaḍ ‘weiß’, ʔaṣfar ‘gelb’, ʔanṭaš ‘Geizhals’, ʔabraṣ ‘rothaarig’” (AGK-1:97/98). This is also indicated on the Talmon map. – Ṭabariyya only ʔaCCaC: ʔabyaḍ (AGK-2:40,-9), ʔasmar (AGK-2:42, s. 11).

49 – Wādi Ḥammām (64, Bedouin dialect) all forms elicited (defects and colours) = ʔaCCaC, no ghawa-forms. – Umm il-Ġanam (84, Bedouin dialect). Attested: ʔaḥwal, ʔaʕma, ʔaʕwar, ʔaʕraǧ, ʔaxṛas, ʔagraʕ ‘completely bald’, ʔaṣlaʕ ‘bald-headed (front part of the head),’3 ʔaltaġ ‘lisping’, ʔaṭraš ‘deaf’, ʔafčaḥ ‘lame, limping with two crippled feet’, ʔaktaʕ ‘with a crippled hand’, all colours such as ʔaswad, no ghawa-forms. – Nāʕūra (90), G dialect, attested: ʔasmaṛ ‘brown’, ʔabyaḏ̣, ‘white’, ʔazrag ‘blue’, ʔaʕwaǧ ‘bent’, but ʔiḥmad ‘Ahmed’. For the B dialect, only forms with ʔ-a and ʕawaṛ ‘oneeyed’, ʕama ‘blind’, ʕaraǧ ‘limping’ are attested. Dialects only with ʔiCCaC attested: – il-Mazraʕa (2): ʔizraʔ, ʔibyaḍ, ʔiswad, ʔifkaḥ, ʔiṭraš, ʔixṛas, ʔiṣlaʕ, ʔiʔṛaʕ, ʔiʕraž, ʔižhaṛ ‘partially sighted’, ʔiʕma. – Miʕilya (7). The data contradict Talmon’s map: “dominant afʕal with few ifʕal forms”. Attested: ʔiḥwal, ʔiʕma, ʔiʕwar, ʔiʕṛaž, ʔixṛas, ʔiqṛaʕ, ʔilṭaġ, ʔiṭraš, ʔifkaḥ, ʔiswad, ʔibyaḍ, ʔizraq. – Taršīḥa (8): ifʕal on Talmon map, attested ʔiʕwaṛ, ʔiʕṛaž, ʔixṛaṣ, ʔiṣlaʕ, ʔifkaḥ, ʔiʔṛaʕ, ʔiṭraš ʔiktaʕ, except hiʔraʕ ‘bald’. Taršīḥa texts: ʔiʕwaṛ. – Kufir Smēʕ (9) texts with several informants: ʔibyaḏ̣, liḥṣān libyaḏ̣, ḥṣān iḥmar, ḥṣān ixḏ̣ar, xām ʔixḏ̣ar, ʔiswad. – Naḥef (12) all defects: ʔifʕal, also on Talmon map, second interview: all colours ʔifʕal. Dēr il-Asad (13), plus ʔižhaṛ ‘partially sighted’, ʔiltaġ ‘lisping’. – Yanūḥ (14) not attested on Talmon map, all defects plus colours ʔifʕal. – Žaṯṯ (15), also ʔiḥwal ‘cross-eyed’, ʔiswad, text 6 in Blanc 1953 ʔixḏ̣ar, iḥmar, iṣfar, ʔizraq, ʔibyaḏ̣. – Yirka (16) ifʕal on Talmon map. – Abu Snān (17), one informant ʔaxḏ̣ar. – iž-Žišš (21) plus ʔiltaġ ‘unable to pronounce a trilled r’. – Bēt Žann (23) in text: iṭṭēr lixḏ̣ar ‘the green bird’. – Maker (29), iž-Ždayydi (30), Biʕne (38), Mažd il-Krūm (39 plus ʔilṯaġ ‘lisping’), Šaʕeb (40), Kabūl (42), Ṭamra (43), Kufir Manda (47), ir-Rāmi (56), ʕArrābi (61), Dēr Ḥanna (62, ʔižhaṛ ‘cross-eyed’), ʕIlabūn (63, plus ʔižhaṛ ‘cross-eyed’), Bʕēne (65, plus ʔižhaṛ ‘cross-eyed’), Ṭurʕān (69, ʔišqam ‘having a speech defect’ = ʔiltaġ, ʔiṣlaʕ ‘bald, front part of head’), ʕIsifya (71) only ʔifʕal attested. – ir-Riḥaniyyi (22): hiʔraʕ ‘bald’, ʔiʕwaṛ, ʔiʕraž, ʔixṛas, ʔiṣlaʕ, ʔiṭraš. 3  The definitions of ʔagraʕ – ʔaṣlaʕ “bald” vary from informant to informant. In point 80, ʔiṣlaʕ was defined as “completely bald”, ʔigraʕ as “bald with some hairs left”.

50 – ʕAkbara (26) no data on Talmon map, all defects ʔifʕal, note: hiʔraʕ ‘bald’4 and ʔifkaḥ ~ ʔifḥaš. – Kōkab (44): ʔiktaʕ ‘with a crippled hand’, ʔiʕwaṛ, iʕṛaž, ʔifkaḥ ~ ʔifkaš ‘lame, limping with two crippled feet’, ʔixṛas, ʔiṭraš, ʔiqṛaʕ, ʔiltaġ ‘unable to pronounce a trilled r’ – ʔaṣlaʕ. The latter may be an ad hoc interference. Will be disregarded on map. On the Talmon map, only ifʕal is indicated. – Mġār (60): no data on Talmon map, several recordings of eight informants, male and female, Christian and Druze: only one example: izzalami liḥmar ‘the red man’. Questionnaire furnishes ʔifʕal forms. Dialects with a mixed system: – Šēx Dannūn (1): ʔaʕma, ʔaṭraš ~ ʔiṭraš, ʔaʔraʕ, ʔaṣlaʕ (with bald forehead) – ʔiʕwar, ʔiʕra ž, ʔifkaḥ, ʔiṭʔaš ‘blear-eyed’, ʔiktaʕ, ʔixṛas, ʔiḥlaṭ ‘bald shaved’, ʔibyaḍ, ʔildaġ ‘unable to pronounce a trilled r’. – Fassūṭa (6) according to Talmon map, “dominant afʕal with few ifʕal forms”. Attested: first middle-aged male speaker: ʔaʕma, ʔaʕwar, ʔafkaḥ, ʔaḥmaṛ, ʔaxṛas, ʔaṭraš, ʔaṣlaʕ ‘bald (front part of the head)’, ʔaʕšaṛ ‘cross-eyed’, ʔiswad; second informant one instance of ʔižhaṛ ‘partially sighted’, third informant: ʔaxṛas, ʔaqṛaʕ, ʔaṭraš, ʔaktaʕ. – Kufir Yasīf (18) ʔaʕwaṛ – ʔiʕṛaž, ʔixṛas, ʔiṣlaʕ, ʔilṯaġ ‘lisping ~ unable to pronounce a trilled r’, ʔiṭraš, ʔifkaḥ. – Ḥurfēš (20) according to Talmon map, “dominant afʕal with few ifʕal forms”. Interview with middle-aged male informant provides ʔiʕma, ʔaʕwaṛ, ʔaḥwal, ʔaxṛas, ʔiṭraš, ʔaṣlaʕ, ʔiqṛaʕ, ʔaswad ~ ʔiswad. Recording of female informant: ʔiswad, ʔismar. – Ṣafad (25) recordings of seven hours with older female and male informants furnish only ʔaḥmaṛ, ʔazraʔ. Talmon map, however, indicates ifʕal. – ʕAkbara (26) interview with middle-aged female: ʔifʕal, middle-aged male ʔafʕal, few instances of ʔifʕal. – Akko (28), according to Talmon map, has “afʕal with few cases of ifʕal”. First questionnaire (middle-aged fisherman) furnishes ʔiʕwaṛ, ʔixṛas, ʔaʕṛaž, ʔaʔṛaʕ, ʔaṣlaʕ, ʔaṭraš, ʔaltaġ ‘unable to pronounce a trilled r’. Second interview (middle-aged male): defects and colours all with /ʔa/. Third interview with female speaker born in 1933: all defects and colours with /ʔa/, also ʔaʕmaš ‘blear-eyed’, ʔaktam ~ ʔaktaʕ ‘with crippled hand’. – Saxnīn (41): ʔaʕṛaž – ʔiqṛaʕ, ʔiṣlaʕ, ʔixṛas, ʔiṭraš, ʔifkaḥ, ʔilṯaġ ‘lisping’.

4  Cf. 1.3.6.

Phonology

– ʕIbillīn (46), according to Talmon map, has ifʕal in all forms or ifʕal “dominant with few afʕal forms, e.g. iʕma, iʕraž etc. but aʕwar”. – Dālyit il-Karmil (73), according to Talmon map, afʕal and “dominant afʕal with few ifʕal forms, e.g. aʕma, aʔraʕ, etc. but iʕwar”. Three interviews show only ʔafʕal forms. Interview with old woman has twice ʔaswid ‘black’, interview with young female ʔaswed (cf. qālet). This has nothing to do with the shift *-aC > -iC, -eC / -oC (ʔaswid, ʔaswed – ʔabyoḏ̣ in some Syrian dialects (SA map 227) or in Cilicia (Procházka 2002:29 aswid). ‘Black’ is an isolated case for this shift. Cf. also Standard Egyptian ʔiswid and SA map 227 iswad in one dialect, the rest of the forms being of the ʔafʕal type. – ʕIlūṭ (75) Talmon map indicates ifʕal with few afʕal forms. This is probably based on interview which has most of the defects as ifʕal, but aʕraž ‘limping’ and aqraʕ ‘bald’, which read aʔraʕ. – Nazareth (77): no data on Talmon map. First interview both ʔafʕal and ʔifʕal for colours. Second interview with female Catholic only ʔafʕal. Third interview with male born in 1984 only ʔafʕal. No instances in recordings. – Yāft in-Nāṣri (78): first questionnaire with male informant born in 1947 furnishes only colours: ʔaswad, ʔabyaḍ, ʔazraq, ʔaṣfar, but ʔiḥmaṛ. In the second interview with a female middle-aged informant, the interviewer asks for the forms using himself /ʔi-/ (ʔiswad, ʔiḥmaṛ, etc.), interviewee answered: ʔaswad, ʔibyaḍ, ʔizraq, ʔaḥmaṛ, ʔaṣfar (the latter also used by interviewer), ʔaṣlaʕ, ʔaṭraš, ʔafkaḥ, ʔaʕma, ʔaʕwaṛ. Twelve texts with six male and female speakers furnish: miṯil tuffāḥ iššām, xadd ʔiḥmar w xadd ʔixḏ̣ar (male speaker born in 1925 in Maʕlūl a neighbouring village destroyed in 1948). A second speaker born there in 1927 left for Haifa after high shool. Interview should not be used. Another speaker uses ʕabd ʔiswad. – Ṭamra (87) recordings and questionnaire: ʔifčaḥ, ʔižgam ‘lisping’, ʔixṛaṣ, ʔiʕraž, ʔiṭraš ~ ʔaṭraš, ʔaqṛaʕ, ʔaṣlaʕ. – Ṣandala (96) interview with older speaker: ʔiktaʕ, ʔixras, ʔaṭraš. Dialects with ʔaCCaC – CaCaC: This applies only to Bedouin dialects: examples: ʔagraʕ ‘bald’ (4, 5, 58), ʔaltaʕ ‘unable to pronounce a trilled r’, ʔagdaʕ ‘with a crippled hand’ (4, 5, 58), ʕawaǧ idem (38), ʕačab idem (48), ʔagṭam idem (53, 84); ḥawal ‘cross-eyed’ (53, 83), ʕama ‘blind’ (4, 5, 53, 83), ʕawaṛ ‘one-eyed’ (4, 5, 53, 83), ʔadgaš ‘partially sighted’ (53), xaṛas ‘dumb’ (4, 5, 48, 53, 58, 82), ʔaṭraš ‘deaf’ (4, 5, 48, 83), ʔaṭram ‘deaf’ (58, 83), ʔaǧgam ‘lisping’, ʔagraṭ ‘having a speech defect’ (48, not defined), ʔafčaḥ ‘limping with two crippled feet’ (4, 5,

Phonology

48, 53, 64, 83, 84), ʔafḥaǧ idem (38, 58), ʔagraʕ ‘completely bald’ (4, 5, 48, 53, 58), ḥamar ‘red’ (4, 5, 83), xaḏ̣ar ‘green’ (4, 5). – Not attested in recordings, no questionnaire: Bqēʕa (10), Kisra (11), Sažūr (24), Li-Ḥmēra (Bedouin 32), il-Xawālid (33, Bedouin) Ibṭin (34, Bedouin), Basmit Ṭabʕōn (35, Bedouin), iḏ̣-Ḏ̣hara (45, Bedouin), ʕArab il-Kaʕbiyye (52, Bedouin), Bēt Zarzīr (54, Bedouin),

51 Šfaʕamir (31, Bedouin), Bīr il-Maksūr (50, Bedouin), Ḥilf (51, Bedouin), il-Kaʕbiyye (52, Bedouin), Bēt Zarzīr (54, Bedouin), Dēr il-Asad (only one recording, no data on Talmon map). Li-ʕzēr (66) only text in Palva 1966 available, no instances. – ʔiʕraǧ in a recording of the dialect of ʕArab il-Ḥamdūn near Dēr Ḥanna (62) must be a loan from the neighbouring sedentary dialect.

52

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9 10

14 15 19

23 24

13 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

8

22

25 26

56

58 60

42

Haifa

46

44

62

61

31

36

49 53

64

65 67

69

68

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

55 76 80

71

Nazareth

82 79

73

Israel

85 86

e 92

89

B

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan 96

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

025

Reflexes of *li

,

, £ura

a, ita ( ite, iti), £ura ba, ' ta, ' h

0

025 1.1.2.2 CiCāʔ > CíCa ~ ʔíCCa

5

10 km

53

Phonology

025 1.1.2.2 CiCāʔ > CíCa ~ ʔíCCa The same rule as described above, according to Woidich 1979:85, applies to libāʔ ‘beastings’ which is represented in the area as liba or ʔílba. For a discussion of comparable Egyptian forms such as íšta ‘winter’, íʕša ‘evening prayer’ in the Šarqiyya province, see Woidich 1979:86 where they are explained as backformations out of context forms. The forms mentioned (ʔíšta, ʔílba, ʔíʕša, ʔíḏṛa), for example, in ʕĒn Māhil (80),5 are typical for the C, G and M dialects, but also attested in some sedentary dialects. As for B dialect 5  When enumerating the four seasons faṣl il-ʔíšta was, however, rejected. One would say faṣl iš-šita.

in point 53, ʔílba is attested, but no similar structures in Rosenhouse 1974:99 with sima ‘heaven’, šita ‘winter’. In Dalman 1987: VI:293, only lebā, libbe6 are attested. One instance of ʔíḏṛā ‘millet’ in Rummāni (49) where also ʔílba is attested, Naʕūṛa ʔíšta, ʔílba. For Iksāl, Nevo 2006:34 quotes iʕša ‘evening’, išta ‘rain’. ʔílba in ʕIsifya (71) probably is a loan from other dialects, ‘winter ~ rain’ is šita. For ʕArab Šibli (83), the questionnaire indicates ilba, Rosenhouse 1980:31 has éš(š)ta “the winter”.

6  In Seeger WB online  740 libbe.

54

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22

6 21

20 1

9

2

Akko

28

17 18

11 19

16

13 38

29

24

12

43

Haifa

57

33

59

42

41 44 45

46

47 48

31

35

65

49

50

53

71

Sea of Galilee

76 80 82 79

Israel

85

e

95

83 84

87 89

92

93

ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

60 62

61

54

72

56

58 40

36 37

26

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

026

*a

u i

schoo

madrasa, -e, -i midrasa, -e, -i both si

0

026 1.1.2.5 ma- ~ mi-: madrasi ~ midrasi, maḥrami ~ miḥrami, etc.

5

10 km

Phonology

1.1.2.3 Raising of *a In Bedouin dialects, *a in a pretonic syllable or the first open syllable of a word is raised to /i/ or /u/ in the environment of front consonants, respectively labials. In sedentary dialects, this shift is rather restricted to some cases. *a in *CaCaC: Raising of *a in *C1aC2aC3 to /i/ or /u/, C1 not being a back consonant such as /x/, /h/, /ḥ/, /ʕ/, /ġ/, is restricted to Bedouin dialects with the types *samak > símač, sabab > síbab ‘reason’ (45, 50) and *bagar > búgaṛ. The phenomenon is well known in all Bedouin dialects of the peninsula and need not be discussed in detail here. It is absent in ruralite C, G and M dialects as, for example, in Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93) bagar. 1.1.2.4

Raising of *a in maCCaC, maCCiC, maCāCa, maCCāʔ In CA, the prefixes ma- and mi- are morphogically distributed, ma- being used with nomina loci et temporis and mi- with nomina instrumenti (Wright 1974:124ff.). But there are exceptions. In Bedouin dialects, *a is often raised to /i/ or /u/ as in miġrib “time of the sunset”,7 miǧlis “council” (Rosenhouse 1984:100). A change which has to be seen within the frame of the general raising of *a in Ca(C)Ca(C), CaCāC(a) structures (samak > simač, bagar > bugar, etc.). Examples from the recordings (texts) are miktab ‘office’ (ʕArab aṭ-Ṭabbāš), mukān ‘place’, muġāra ‘cave’ (ʕArab as-Sawāʕid, mġāṛa in sedentary dialects), miṭraḥ ‘place’ (is-Sawāʕid, li-Ḥǧērāt), mirʕa ‘pasture’ (li-Ḥǧērāt), There are also examples from sedentary dialects: muṭraḥ ‘place’ Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93), Nāʕūra (90), mizbal ‘dung heap’ 7  miġrib also in sedentary dialect of Kufir Sm„ēʕ.

55 Ṭurʕān (69). miṭbax ‘kitchen’ Šfaʕamir (31), Šaʕeb (40), ʕĒn Māhil (80) miṣnaʕ ‘factory’ and minǧal ‘sickle’, minsās ‘ox goad’ following the CA model. As for Iksāl (79), Nevo 2006:46 enumerates quite a lot of cases where mi- corresponds to CA ma-, such as miṭraḥ ‘place’, miʕmal ~ miṣnaʕ ‘factory’. 026 1.1.2.5 ma- ~ mi-: madrasi ~ midrasi, maḥrami ~ miḥrami, etc. As for ‘school’ the data may be blurred somewhat by the fact that ‘school’ is sth. official and consequently a standard pronunciation may be used. Cf. also Nevo 2006:46 “midrasi ‘school’ (k-form: madrasi)”. Recording of Muslim kindergarten teacher born in 1952 from Ṭurʕān has madrasi, text in Palva 1966:140 told by Greek Orthodox plasterer born in 1943 midrasi. Two more forms of this type were supposed to be elicited, namely maḥrama ‘kerchief, handkerchief’ and misbaḥa ‘prayer beads’. These vocalisations are indicated in Wehr 1960. Elihay 2004:310-r, 332-r and 325-r has madrase, maḥrame, masbaḥa, Seeger WB online 157 maḥrama ~ miḥrame, 349 misbaḥa ~ masbaḥa, 250 and passim midrase ~ madrase. In some points, the three forms have an identical prefix, e.g., ma- in Šēx Dannūn (1), mi- in others: midrase, miḥrama, misbaḥa, in others only midrase, misbaḥa were noted vs. maḥrame. In the latter form, /a/ may be favoured by the following /ḥ/. Forms with /u/ are rarely attested, amongst them a rather strange mudṛasi ‘school’. Attested mizraʕa in Naḥef (12), in many places miʕṣara ‘oil mill’, miqbaṛa ‘cemetery’ in Rummāni (49), miṣṭabi ‘bench’ Mišhad (55), mingale ‘manqala-game’ in Nēn (85). The student collaborators added the forms of ‘oil mill’ to be elicited which was not found in the original questionnaire.

56

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

65

49

53

72

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 76 80

Nazareth 78

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

47 48

60

82 79

Israel

83 84

88

85

e

89

92

90 91

Jordan

95

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

027

a

i

(hand)kerchief

me me ma

0

027 miḥrami (hand)kerchief’

5

10 km

57

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 21

20

8 1 2

Akko

28

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41

62

44 47 48

65

53

72

76 80

78

Israel

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

60

82 79

85 86

e

89

92

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

028

a

i

praye

masba misba musba

0

028 misbaḥa ‘prayer beads’

5

10 km

58

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

6 21

7

15 18

Akko

28

Haifa

19

16

13 38 39

24

12

46

64

31

36 37

34 53

68

76 80

Nazareth 78

72

ariyya

55

75

71

Sea of Galilee

69

82 79

83 84

Israel e

89

92

95

93

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

029

a

i i

mi ra ra

0

029 miʕṣara ‘oil-mill’

5

10 km

60

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

8

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

19

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56

40

60

42

Haifa

46 31

36

41 44

62

61

63

48

Sea of Galilee

49

34 53

ariyya

68 55 76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85

e

B

95

87 89

88

90 91

Jordan 96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

030

a

i

honeydew melons

am imm m um

xa xa

0

030 1.1.2.6.1 In ‘honeydew melons’

5

10 km

Phonology

1.1.2.6 Raising, Fronting of Pretonic *a 030 1.1.2.6.1 In ‘honeydew melons’ MSA šammām is attested in many points as šummām, in others šimmām and rarely as šammām. As for ḥarrūš or xarrūš, in some places it was indicated as a synonym of šummām, in others as a green or small honeydew melon. The two forms are not attested in Seeger WB online, nor in Elihay 2004, nor in Bauer 1957. In Dalman 1987: II:282, “eine kurze runde Varietät erwähnt für den Ġuwēr Sonnen) als ḥarūš”. This refers to Sonnen 1927:320–337, mentioned

61 on p. 333. Ġwēr Abu Šūša was a village 8 kms north of Tiberias. In the Arabic internet, on a site for Ghaza as xarrūš ʔaw harrūš (sic!) huwa mina l-faṣīlati l-qaṛaʕiyyati llatī yantamī lahā l-xiyāru wa l-faqqūsu wa lākinnahu ʕibāratun ʕan ṯamaratin min ṯamarāti š-šammāmi llatī tanmū ʕalā šaǧaratin lā tataḥammalu ʔakṯara min ʔiṯnayni ʔaw ṯalāṯati ṯamarātin ʕalayhā kay tuṣbiḥa šammām. wa ʔiḏā ʕalā š-šaǧarati ʔakṯaru min ṯalāṯi ḥabbātin yatimmu qaṭfu z-zāʔidi qabla ʔan yakbura wa yuṭlaqu ʕalayhi ʔismu xarrūš wa laysa šammām.

62

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22

6

8

21 B

1 17 18

Akko

28

16

24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

46 31

56

58 B

40 43

26

42 44

62

61

47

65

63

Sea of Galilee

34 53

ariyya

68

76 80

71

Nazareth

82 79

73

Israel

85

e

87 89

90 91

Jordan Palestinian Territories Jenin

031

a

in *CaC sa su

Ca: ‘carpet’

i i i

0

031

saǧǧāda ‘carpet’

5

10 km

Phonology

031 1.1.2.6.2 Raising of *a in CaCCāCa In most Syrian Bedouin dialects, *a is fronted to /i/ before a following /yy/ as in siyyāṛa ‘car’, ṭiyyāra ‘aeroplane’. This is also the case in northwestern sedentary dialects (see SA map 88). Amazingly, this shift is not attested in the Bedouin dialects of the area, where only sayyāṛa is attested (amongst others points 48, 50, 53, 54, 65). Cf. also Rosenhouse 1984:101 with ṭayyāra, sayyāra. There is variation between sayyāṛa ~ siyyāra in Bqēʕa (10, same speaker), Yirka (16), Kufir Yasīf (18), Akko (28).8 The shift *a to /i/ is quite common in saǧǧāda > sižžāda ‘prayer carpet’,9 for which, strangely enough, sužžādi is attested several times. /u/ is quite common in the form for ‘matches’ where /ḥ/ rather would favour *a. Sporadic instances of /u/, /i/ are ḥukkāyi ‘story’ in Nazareth, Yanūḥ (14), ġullāyi ‘teapot’, buwwābe ‘gate’ (11) and ǧiddāḥa ‘lighter’ in Bedouin dialects.

8  In the texts from Tiberias, there are also instances of otombīl. 9  In point 35, metathetical siddāǧa.

63 1.1.2.6.3 Treatment of Pretonic *a in *CaCīC Contrary to the Ḥōrān dialects in Syria (Cf. SA map 90, Cantineau 1946:303–304) *a in CaCīC is not maintained in all contexts in ruralite C, G and M dialects of the area. As in the other sedentary dialects it was shifted to *i with the *i being elided in a second step: *kaṯīr > čiṯīr > čṯīr. *a is maintained in the environment of back consonants as in ṭarīʔ ‘way’, ʕatīʔ ‘old’, ṭawīl ‘long’ vs. ktīr ‘much’, zbīb ‘raisins’ (Šēx Dannūn point 1); baxīl ‘stingy’, marīḍ ‘ill’, ġarīb ‘strange’, ḍaʕīf ‘slim’, ʕatīq ‘old’ (Fassūṭa 6). In true Bedouin dialects, *a is maintained in the environment of back consonants as above, but raised to /i/ or /u/ elsewhere: ṭarīg, gadīm / čiṯīr, čibīr, zibīb, ṭuwīl (ʕArāmša). 1.1.2.6.4 Fronting of *a in CaCāCīC This is merely a phenomenon in Bedouin dialects such as in point 51 Ǧawāmīs > Ǧiwāmīs ‘name of a Bedouin tribe’, miwālīd ‘date of birth’ (54), giwānīn ~ guwānīn ‘laws’ (31), ṯilāṯīn ‘thirty’, ṯimānīn ‘eighty’, bisātīn ‘gardens’ (52). We will omit a map. In the ʕArāmša dialect, this was not constated, cf. Rosenhouse 1984:103.

64

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

8 1

9

2

Akko

28

20

B

17 18

16

24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

59

42

46

44 47 48

31

36

56

58

40 43

26

34

62

61

65

49

53

Sea of Galilee

69

68

71

63

ariyya

80

Nazareth

82 79

73

Israel 86

e

89

87 90 91

Jordan 95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

032

a

in *CaC a u a

a

m kibr te, kibr ti kabr ta, -i ibr ta

0

032 šaḥḥāta ‘match’

5

10 km

65

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4 6

20

2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15

11

16

29 30

13

9 10

23 24

12

56

57

39 60 42

Haifa

41 44

46

36

32 35

53

47 48 50

62

61

65

49

63

Sea of Galilee

69

ariyya

54 55 76

71

Nazareth

82 79

73

Israel

84

85 86

e

89

92

95

87 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

033

a

i in CaC

c

sa siy

0

033 sayyāra ‘car’

5

10 km

Phonology

1.1.3 Morphophonemics 1.1.3.1 Elision of /i/ In sedentary dialects, diachronically and synchronically i is elided whenever it got/gets into an unstressed open syllable. The exception are geminate verbs of measure II: ymaddid – ymáddidu ‘they stretch’, yǧaddid – yǧáddidu ‘they renew’, or forms with a geminate and a homorganic consonant such as in ǧídditi ‘my grand-mother’.10 These forms have been elicited in almost all points of investigation.11 As for the negated perfect form of verbs i-type, the elision rule in the dialect of Ždayydi (30) does not seem to be clear at first glance. One would expect: šírib – ma širíb+š# → ma širíbiš# as in ḍárab – ma ḍaráb+š # → ma ḍarábiš# or ma ḍárbat+š → ma ḍarbátš# → ma ḍarbátiš#. The accent rule in these negated forms must precede the insertion of the anaptyctic vowel, as sequences such as ḍárabik, ḍárbatik are absolutely acceptable. Since a pretonic *i historically is elided, as for instance in *libist > lbist ‘I have dressed’, the result of šírib + š# should be širíbiš# > šríbiš#. But the form elicited by T. for the i-type is ma šírbiš#. The same form was elicited by B. in Šfaʕamir (31), Kōkab Abu l-Hēža (44), ʕĒn Māhil (80: ma šírbiš, nízliš, líbsiš, ḏ̣íḥkiš, etc.), Ṭurʕān (69) ma šírbiš and also baštġil negated 10  Normally sitti. 11  In the dialect of ʕAwāmra, /i/ is not elided, but the geminate is reduced: imballilīn → imbalilīn, biyḥadditu → biyḥaditu (Woidich 1979:79).

67 baštiġliš and not *baštġil+š → *baštġiliš as one would expect. As for measure I, it seems that in certain dialects a sequence CiCiCiC is simply not acceptable and that elision of the second unaccentuated /i/ follows the insertion of the anaptyctic vowel, the accent therefore remaining in its original position: šírib – šírib+š# → šíribiš# → šírbiš#. One could also suppose a negative suffix -iš thus avoiding the insertion rule of an anaptyctic vowel: šírib – šírib+iš# → šírbiš#. In an interview conducted by B. in Biʕne (38), however, širíbiš# was elicited, also ma kibíriš ‘he did not grow’ in recording ʕIsifya (71). báštġil, neg. baštiġliš (also mništiġliš) still seems more complicated since a basic (and also an historical) form +baštiġil and not +baštġil has to be assumed, consequently +baštiġil + š → baštiġilš → baštiġiliš → baštiġliš with elision of the second /i/ as in šírbiš above. This means that with the bound form an older vocalisation is maintained as in other cases, too, cf. katabu – katabūha. 1.1.3.2 Elision of /a/ an CaCaCa In sedentary dialects, diachronically there is no elision in all points of investigation with nouns of this type, for example, in ṛaqabi ‘neck’ or zalame ‘man’. Bedouin dialects have the well-known forms of the type rguba – zlima. But in most points of investigation there is no parallelism with verb forms as in Syrian Bedouin dialects: rguba – ḏ̣rubat, zlima – čtibat, the verbal forms being of the type kitbat, libsat, kitbam, libsam, etc.

68

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

20 1

18

Akko

28

9 10

14 15

2 16

30

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

26 56

60

Haifa

46

47

31

36

53

50

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 76 80

Nazareth 78

73

63

69

75

71

65

49

83

79

Israel 86

e

89

92

90 91

Jordan

94 93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

034

mara + -cv marati, maratu to, martu mritu mrutu

0

034 1.1.3.2.1 Elision of /a/ in ‘my wife’, ‘his wife’

5

10 km

Phonology

034 1.1.3.2.1 Elision of /a/ in ‘my wife’, ‘his wife’ Where elicitated or where attested in texts there is no elision of /a/: marati, maratu ~ marato. Exceptions are Ṣafad with maṛto (several instances in recordings), Ǧisr iz-Zarga maṛti. Nazareth has both maṛte ~ marate (both forms indicated by different informants). In construct form, /a/

69 is always elided as in maṛt iflān ‘the wife of so and so’, maṛt ʕammi ‘my uncle’s wife’. Bedouin dialects are deviant as usual with mriti, mritu (ʕArāmša), mruti (Ǧawāmīs, Sawāʕid). Since student explorers never noted emphasis of r, no distinction is made on the map between maratu ~ maṛatu.

70

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

6 7

Akko

28

9

14

2

17 18

19

23

16

13

29 30

24

12

39

Haifa

31 32 35

51

41 44 47 48

65

49

50

60 62

61

75

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

55 76 80

Nazareth

82 79

73

63

69

68

54 71

57

59

42

46

36

56

58

40 43

21

20

8

Israel

85 86

e

89

83 84

87 90

92

Jordan 95

93

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

035

Elision of *a in

lan

n, matalan, masalan , matlan

0

035 1.1.3.2.2 Elision of /a/ in *maṯalan ‘for instance’

5

10 km

Phonology

035 1.1.3.2.2 Elision of /a/ in *maṯalan ‘for instance’ In this loan from MSA, /a/ is elided in some dialects as it is in katab+at → katbat, i.e., maṯlan, matlan, a form impossible in other dialect areas such as Egypt or Syria. For

71 Rummāne (49), Palva 1966:120,9 indicates mäṯälän. As for Haifa, cf. AGK-1:50 with maṯalan, masalan for Christians, masan/masalan for Jews and matalan for Muslims. Nazareth matlan (Zuʕbi 2005b:40).

72

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 7

1

9

2

Akko

28

21

20

8

17 18

19

16

13 38 B 39

29 30

12

56

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

42

41

62

44 45 47 B 48

65

49

72

75

Nazareth

55

76 80 82

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

93

ariyya

B

79

73

Sea of Galilee

69

53

71

64

63

95

83 84

87

88

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

036

CaCaCa in the construct tabit iltbit il-b tbat iltabt il©a ilbt al-b

036 1.1.3.2.3 Elision of /a/ in CaCaCa in the Construct as in ‘threshold’, ‘the net of the fisherman’

0

5

10 km

Phonology

036

1.1.3.2.3 Elision of /a/ in CaCaCa in the Construct as in ‘threshold’, ‘the net of the fisherman’ Six varieties occur: – forms without elision and ending -it: ʕátabit il-bāb, šábakit iṣ-ṣayyād. – Forms with elision of /a/ in the penultimate and ending -it: ʕátbit il- bāb, šábkit iṣ-ṣayyād. – Forms with elision of /a/ in the penultimate and ending -at: ʕátbat il- bāb, šábkat iṣ-ṣayyād elicited directly, from recordings: ʕáḍlat il-ʔīd ‘muscle of the arm’ Taršīḥa (8), ráʔbat in-nimir ‘the neck of the leopard’, ṛaqbat ilbaqaṛa ‘the cow’s neck’ Kufir Smēʕ (9), sablat gameḥ ‘an ear of wheat’ Iksāl (79), šaǧrat il-ballūṭ ‘oak tree’ ʕĒn Māhil (80), ráqbat ǧamal ‘a camel’s neck’ Nazareth (77). – Forms with elision of vowel in the ultimate, accent on penultimate: ʕátabt il-bāb.

73 – Forms with elision of vowel in the ultimate, accent on the ultimate: ʕatábt il-bāb. – A variety of the last one are the Bedouin forms ʕtíbt al-bāb and šbúkt aṣ-ṣayyād. Contradictory: – Nēn (85) ʕátabet il-bāb vs. šábket iṣ-ṣayyād. – Dālyit il-Karmil (73) ʕátabt il-bāb in recording. In another recording, šábakit kahraba ‘electricity network’, šábakit ṃayy ‘water supply network’. – ʕIlūṭ (75) interview ʕátbat il-bāb, recording šábakit il-kahraba. – Contradictory Mqēble (95) ḥalmit iḏ-ḏān ‘lobe of the ear’ (interview with middle-aged female) vs. ʕátbat il-bāb in another interview.

74

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9 10

14 15 19

16

23

13 12 38 B 39

30

56

43 46

59

42

41 44

65

49

53 B 71 72

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

D

58

40

Haifa

21

20

8

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

037

CaCaCa + -Cv: elision of /a/ and accent in qba

bati, bati, ti, i qab abti, abti ra ti, ra' i, rag rguba: r

neck

bati

ti 0

037 1.1.3.2.4 Elision and accent in ‘my neck’

5

10 km

Phonology

037 1.1.3.2.4 Elision and Accent in ‘my neck’ The example is used as a type. This includes forms elicited such as šábkatu ‘his net’, báqratu ‘his cow’, šážratu ‘his tree’. – Bqēʕa (10) recording has šažratēn ‘two trees’ which suggests ráqbati. – For Naḥef (12) the first interview conducted by B. indicates báʔṛati ‘my cow’, ráʔbati ‘my neck’, šábkati ‘my net’, šážrati ‘my tree’. Second interview conducted by student with middle-aged informant: ráʔəbti, šábakti, báʔaṛti. – Contradictory: one male informant born in 1954 from Akko (28): ráʔəbti, šabákti, báʔaṛti, baʔartēn, šážaṛti, samákti, samaktēn. – Šfaʕamir (31) contradictory: Druze (first interview): šábakti, báqaṛti, baqaṛtēn, sažáṛti, sámkati, samkatēn. – ʕIbillīn (46) contradictory: interview with male informant: ʕatbat il-bēt, ráʔabti, šábakti, báʔaṛti, šážaṛti, but baʔratēn, samkatēn. One male g-speaker: rágbati, zálmati, bagratēn. Second male g-speaker: ʕatbat il-bēt, bágrati, bagaṛtēn, šábkati, šabaktēn, sážrati. – ir-Rāmi (56 young) female Druze: ṛaʔábti, šabákti, baʔáṛti, šažáṛti, samákti. – Dēr Ḥanna (62) contradictory: questionnaire ráqbati, báqrati, baqratēn, samkatēn. Recording of Muslim born in 1937 baqaṛtēn. – Ṭurʕān (69) contradictory: first interview with female: ṛáqbati, šábkati, báqṛati, sážrati, sámkati, samkatēn. Second interview with older male: ṛáqbati, báqṛati first named, repeated as báqaṛti, samkatēn. Third interview with male Christian student: ṛáqbati, šábkati, báqṛati, šažáṛti, samákti. Fourth interview with female: ráʔbati, báʔrati, baʔartēn, šažáṛti, šažaṛtēn, sámakti, samkatēn. – Ṭabariyya (70) ráʔibta “her neck” (AGK-2:80. s. 60). – ʕIsifya (71) contradictory: first female informant (younger person): ráʔəbti, šábəkti, baʔáṛti, baʔratēn, šažáṛti, samákti, samaktēn, šábakit iṣ-ṣayyād, ʕátabit ilbēt. Second female informant (elderly person): ráqbati, šábkati, báqṛati, baqratēn, šažratēn, samkatēn, šabkat iṣ-ṣayyād, ʕatbat il-bēt. Male informant (middle-aged person, interview conducted by B.): ṛáqbati corrected twice in ṛáqəbti ~ ṛáqəbtey, šabáktey, baqáṛtey, šažáṛti, samákti. Third young female contradictory (interview conducted by B.): ráʔabti, šabákti, baʔárti, šažárti, samákti. Fourth young female Druze (interview conducted by T.): ṛáqbatey, šábkatey, báqṛatey corrected in baqáṛtey, šažáṛtey, samáktey. – Dālyit il-Karmil (73) interview with older male: šabákti, baqáṛti, baqaṛtēn, sažáṛtēn, samákti. Interview with young female: ṛaqábti, baqáṛti, šabákti, šažáṛti, samákti.

75 – ʕIlūṭ (75) contradictory: ṛáʔabti, báʔaṛti, šábakti, šážarti, sámkati, samaktēn, baʔaṛtēn. – Ir-Rēni (76) ráqbati but baqaṛtēn, samaktēn and not baqratēn, samkatēn as in other dialects. – Contradictory Nazareth (77): three interviews rákbati, šábkati, sámkati, šážrati. One interview: ráʔabte, šábikte ~ šabíkte, baʔírte, sámkate ~ samíkte. – Yāft in-Nāṣri (78) recording: zardatēn min zarad ḏ̣ahro ‘two spines from his back’, zaradtēn, min kiṯir šalabitha ‘for her being so pretty’. Interview with older female contradictory: bákaṛti, bakratēn, šábkatu. In second interview with middle-aged female, all forms of type CáCCatV. – ʕĒn Māhil (80) contradictory: rágəbti, šábəktu, bágaṛti, samáčti, bagaṛtēn. Second informant: rágabti, šábkati, bágaṛti, šáǧarti, samáčti. – Not attested for Ṭamra (87), but in text zálmati ‘my husband’ which suggests rágbati. The accent in raqbáta ‘her neck’ (instance from recording) in Bēt Žann (23) and raʔbáta in Kufir Smēʕ (9) is explained by original *raqbátha with accent on the last vCC. Cf. similar forms in Syrian Arabic. – Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93) with contradictory ragábti corrected in əṛgábti, but šabáčti, bagáṛti, saǧáṛti, samáčti, samačtēn. – Mqēble (95) contradictory: rákbati, bákrati but bakratēn corrected in bakartēn. It seems that there is a kind of r-metathesis, the type báqaṛti, baqaṛtēn being preferred to baqṛati, baqṛatēn. A comparison of CaCaCa in construct and with suffix shows that in a number of places there is no parallelism neither as concerns the ending -at or -it nor as for the syllable which is elided. The same applies to ‘my cow’ – ‘two cows’. 1.1.3.2.5 Elision of /a/ in Verb Forms In almost all the sedentary dialects of the area, /a/ is elided in the 3rd p. sg. f. perfect: katab + at → katbat, but not in the 3rd p. pl.: katab+u → katabu. For Haifa, see AGK-1:124 where /a/ is maintained in the dialect of the Jews (katabat – katabu vs. other communities with katbat – katabu). In the material collected in ʕIsifya, three of nine texts contain forms such as ṭalabit ‘she demanded’, fataḥit ‘she opened’, faqadit ‘she lost’, but one of the informants, a female Druze, said that her mother was from Syria (probably Ǧabal id-Drūz) and that her language might be influenced by Syrian Arabic and an older male Druze indicated the Ǧabal id-Drūz as his original home.

76

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

21

1 2

Akko

17 18

16

30

13 12 C 38 I 39

56

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

61

47 48

31

62 65

63

Sea of Galilee

69

71

Nazareth

ariyya

80

73

Israel e

90

Jordan Palestinian Territories Jenin

038

Participle sg.f. + -v:

e is wearing it

s tu

0

038 1.1.4.1 3rd p. sg. f. perfect, participle sg. f. and suffixation of -vC

5

10 km

Phonology

1.1.4 Phonotactics 038 1.1.4.1 3rd p. sg. f. perfect, participle sg. f. and suffixation of -vC In practically all sedentary dialects, the basic verb form is maintained without any elisions and the accent remains on the first syllable: tárkatu ‘she left ihm’, líbsatu ‘she dressed it (him)’, láffatu ‘she wrapped him (it)’, ráddatu ‘she brought it back’, šā́fatu ‘she saw him’, šā́fatak ‘she saw you’, rámatu ‘she threw him’, nísyatu ‘she forgot him’, nā́walatu ‘she handed it over’, šā́waratu ‘she advised him’, ʔázʕažatu ‘she bothered him’, štáratu ‘she bought him’, stáʕmalatu ‘she used him’, etc. The exception is one younger female from Dālyit il-Karmil (73) with ḏ̣arabíto ‘she beat him’, libsíto ‘she dressed it’, kassaríto ‘she broke it’, nawalíto, šawaríto, ʔazʕažíto, štaríto, staʕmalíto, šafíto, etc. The forms were not elicited in the other interviews. During the interview she had declared that her mother was from Syria and that her dialect might be influenced by her mother’s dialect. This may raise some doubt. On the other hand, Dālyit il-Karmil is quite deviant in other respects, for example, with bayyi ‘my father’ or the treatment of CaCaCa + -vC and others. Deviant is also Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93) with libsátu, katlátu, ḏ̣arbátu. The subject is not dealt with in Jastrow 2009. As for Bedouin dialects B. noted in his questionnaire for ʕArāmša: “informants not reliable” and examples ḏ̣urbátu, šā́fatu, líbsatu, labbásatu. In questionnaires of ʕArab Lhēb, ʕArab iš-Šibli, Umm il-Ġanam, Wādi l-Ḥammām for all four only libsatu without accent is noted. Recording not available. No data in Rosenhouse 1984. Interview with Bedouin Sawāʕid has ḏ̣írbatu, líbsatu, šā́fatu. As for the participle sg. f. + -v, three possibilites exist: lābsītu – lābístu – lābsíto. The same forms also exist in Syrian Arabic, but the feminine forms + pronominal suffixes are hardly dealt with in detail or on maps in the

77 sources for Levantine or Syrian Arabic and the question was omitted in the shortened versions of the Galilee questionnaire. For Lebanon, see Feghali 1928:93 kīf šāyeftī-le “dans quel état me vois-tu?”, p. 94 mawš ʕāǧbétne “ne me plaît pas”. For Damascus, see Cowell 1964:268–269 “When a feminine participle is used with a suffix (pronoun, or -l- plus pronoun …), the connective t (163) is used: … lāb’əsthon ‘wearing them’ … ʔənti kātəbtī ‘are you (f.) the one who wrote it (m.)’”. This means that f. participles are treated in the same way as nouns in the construct in opposition to, for example, Egyptian Arabic: labsa – labsā, labsāhum. For participle f. final y: nāsītu ‘she has forgotten him’, part. II: mkassírtu ‘she has broken it (m.)’, mkassərtī ‘you (sg. f.) have broken it (m.)’ parallely to verbal kassartī (ʕĒn Māhil, 80). Both forms were indicated for Šfaʕamir (31): lābsīto – lābísto, 2nd f. lābistī; šārbīto – šāríbto, 2nd f. šāribtī; ḥāṭíṭṭo ‘I (f.) have put it’, ḥāṭiṭṭī ‘you (sg. f.) have put it’; sāʔlīto ~ sāʔílto ‘I (f.), have asked him’, sāʔíltak ‘I (f.) have asked you’, sāʔlītni ‘she has asked me’, but only mistilmīto ‘I (f.) have received it’, not *mistlímto, but 2nd f. sg. mistlimtī; mistaʕmlīto ‘I (f.) have used it’. ʕIsifya (71) hī lābístu ‘she wears it’, 2nd f. lābistī, mkassírtu ‘she has broken it’, mkassirtī ‘you have broken it’, miziʕžitni ‘she has annoyed me’, mizʕižtīni ‘you have annoyed me’. Dālyit il-Karmil (73) lābsíto ‘I am wearing it’ and lābistī ‘you are wearing it’, mkassríto ‘I (f.) have broken it’, mṣallḥíto ‘I (f.) have repaired it’, mištiġlíto ‘I (f.) have worked it’, mistaʕmlíto ‘I (f.) have used it’, mistaġillíto ‘I (f.) have exploited him’, māklíto ‘I (f.) have eaten it’. Ṭurʕān (69) šāríbtu, šāribtī, rākíbtu, rākibtī, šāyíftu, šāyiftī, mṣallíḥtu, mṣallíḥtī, mqāhirtu ‘she has bothered him’, mqāhirtī, mikirmītni ~ mikrímtni ‘she has treated me hospitably’ (IV), miḥiržītni ~ miḥrížtni ‘she has embarrassed me’, mimhíltak ‘she has given you time’, mʕabbītha ‘she has filled it (her)’, etc.

78

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

3 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 36 34

35

51 52 53

42

72

50

60 62

61

65

49 66

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

039

Sea of Galilee

76 80

Nazareth

99

ariyya

55

75

93

64

63

69

68

73

27

57

41 44 45

54 71

56 59

47 48

31 33 32

26

58

40 43

21

20

104

Jenin

Anaptyctic vowel in -C # 35

, etc. Bedouin dialect: ma ma katab #, ma katbat #, baktib # ma bi #, ma ka ti #, bakt # ma b #, ma ka i #, b b#

0

039 1.1.4.2 Anaptyctic vowels

5

10 km

Phonology

039 1.1.4.2 Anaptyctic Vowels The subject is treated in detail in Palva 1966. Here we deal only with final anaptyxis. Cf. also verb derived measures. As for the anaptyctic vowel in negated verb forms with –š, it is i,12 but the conditions for its insertion seem to vary regionally. See Palva 1966:33–35: “When the negative afformative is added to a word ending with two consonants, it is -iš … When the negative afformative is added to a word ending with one consonant, it is sometimes preceded by i, sometimes pronounced without it”. A list follows of the variants in different points of enquiry but only with imperfect forms. For Haifa, see “katab – ma katábš … Endet eine Verbform auf zwei Konsonanten, hat die Negation die Form -iš, z.B. katabt ‘ich schrieb’ → ma katabtiš ‘ich schrieb nicht’” (AGK-1:122–123). But Ṭabariyya tinzáliš! “don’t go down!” (AGK-2–154 s. 6), skintiš “I was not living” (AGK-2:100, s. 13), without anaptyctic vowel: ma tišrabunš “do not drink”13 (AGK-2:32, s. 12). For the Muṯallaṯ, see Jastrow 2004:174 with -iš after –C and –CC: ma-fihmatiš, ma-fhimtiš. As for ʕIsifya (71), a female young Druze in an interview with T. used bišufš ‘he doesn’t see’, baʕrifš ‘I don’t know’, ma katabš ‘he did not write’, ma katbatš ‘she did not write’, ma širibš ‘he did not drink’, ma širbitš ‘she did not drink’, bišṛabš ‘he does not drink’, but ma smiʕtiš ‘I did not hear’, nilbisiš ‘we don’t dress’. In the last example, the anaptyctic vowel is added in order to avoid 12  [e] in Dālyit il-Karmil (73): bišṛabeš “I don’t drink”. 13  Probably “do not drink them!”.

79 a cluster of two sibilants. Older female Druze in short interview used ma katabiš, ma katbatiš. Third elderly female Druze in short interview: ma katabš, ma ʕindakš, ma katabtiš. Middle-aged male Druze in interview with B.: baktibiš, tiktibiš, katabiš, katbatiš, šribiš, širbitiš, but bikassirš, bitkassirš, bafakkirš, basafirš. As for the conditions for the insertion of an anaptyctic vowel in other forms, see Palva 1966:27 ff. There are Arabic dialects in which the anaptyctic vowel partly copies the preceding vowel as, for example, in Sudanese Arabic baḥar ‘sea’, šahar ‘month’, guṭun ‘cotton’, duxun ‘foxtail millet’, girid ‘monkey’, but also kalib ‘dog’. In other dialects, the anaptyctic vowel additionally may depend on the consonantal environment as, for example, in Libyan Arabic nahar “river”, buġal “mule”, šamis “sun”, ʔisim “name”, ġuṣun “branch”, mušuṭ “comb”, but also baṭun “stomach”, ʔaruḍ “land” (Owens 1984:62 ff.). Cf. also Iksāl (79) with ʕaḏ̣um “bone”, ṣaṭul “pail”, ʔaṣul “origin”, daṛub ~ darib “road” (Nevo 2006:41). In Galilean Arabic, rules known from other Arabic dialects often do not apply: “CaCC → CaCaC if C2 is laryngeal and C3 r (ṛ), e.g. ḅaḥaṛ ‘sea … is the case, however, only if the vowel a is pronounced back. The fact is that there are two pronunciations side by side for these words, if C1 is not emphatic, although the pronunciation with ȧ/ä is more uncommon, e.g.: šäher ‘month’” (Palva 1966:30–31). For iṭ-Ṭayybi (91), the first questionnaire has šaʕir, the second šaʕr, recordings of two informants šaʕaṛ. Kufir Smēʕ (9). Kisra (11) and Yanūḥ (14): nahir ‘river’.

80

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

17 18

16

23

11 13 38 B 39

29 30

28

9

14 15 19

21

20

B

26

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

B

35

53

41 44 45

52

65

49

50

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

64

63

55 B

Nazareth

73

B

69

68

75

71

62

61

B

47 48

31

34

72

42

46

36

60

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

040

Anaptyctic vowel

hair

a a©er

0

040 1.1.4.2.1 ‘Hair’, ‘month’

5

10 km

Phonology

r 040 1.1.4.2.1 ‘Hair’, ‘month’ In some places, two pronunciations by different informants were indicated. As for šaʕir it is attested mainly in questionnaires conducted by students and in a few conducted by staff. Other questionnaires and recordings either have šaʕaṛ or šaʕer. Questionnaire Nēn (85) has šaʕr, recording šaʕaṛ. Third interview: question was forgotten. Iṭ-Ṭayybi first questionnaire šaʕir, second šaʕr, recordings of two informants šaʕaṛ. Kafr Miṣr (88) questionnaire student šaʕr, recording of another person šaʕaṛ. This also applies to Sūlam (89). Liʕzēr (66) text Palva 1966:126 šahar.

81 For points 9, 10, 11, 26, 90 and 93, nahir ‘river’ is attested and represented by symbol for šaher. mahir ‘dowry’ is attested in Šaʕeb (40), Mišhad (55), Yāft in-Nāṣri (78, besides šahir), Dabbūryi (82), iṭ-Ṭayybi (91), Ṣandala (96). In iḏ̣Ḏ̣mēda (48), mahid ‘cradle’. There is no parallelism between šaʕaṛ – šahar. For the latter, šaher is more frequent. As for Bedouin dialects, only šaʕaṛ – šahar (šahaṛ) are possible due to the treatment of -CC- if containing a velar, pharyngeal and laryngeal consonant (cf. *gahwa > gahawa > ghawa, *ʔaxḏ̣ar >ʔaxaḏ̣ar > xaḏ̣ar).

82

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea 7

20

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

11 16

13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

26 56

57

58

40 43

Haifa

60

42

41 45

46 B

36

31

61

B

48

72

Nazareth 78

73

ariyya

55

75

71

Sea of Galilee

69

68

54

B

65

49 66

50

62

76 80 82 79

Israel 86

e 92

87

88

90 91

Jordan 95

93

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

041

Anaptyctic vowel

month

ahar, aha aher

0

041 ‘Month’

5

10 km

84

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

21

B

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

60

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

34 53 55

71

ariyya

B

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

Sea of Galilee

69

68

75

64

63

82 79

Israel

85

e

83 84

87 89

92

88

90 91

Jordan 95

93

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

042

Anaptyctic vowel

back

har, ahar her, aher both

0

042 1.1.4.2.2 ‘Back’

5

10 km

Phonology

042 1.1.4.2.2 ‘Back’ What has been said above also applies to ḍahr. Forms such as ḏ̣aher (ḍaher), ḏ̣ahir (ḍahir) are much more frequent and ḏ̣ahar (ḍahar) is mainly restricted to Bedouin dialects. According to different explorers different transcriptions might be found for the same point of investigation (ḍaher ~ ḍahir). Unfortunately, in some places the forms

85 were indicated with a pronominal suffix such as ḏ̣ahri or ḍahru. That a pharyngeal not necessarily produces a back anaptyctic vowel (as is the case in other Arabic dialects) is also shown by place names such as Šaʕeb or Naḥef, or faḥem ‘charcoal’, šaʕeb ‘people’ (Ṣafad). Cf. also kaʕeb ‘heel’.

86

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 12 13 38 B 39

29 40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

60

42

41 44

63

48 53

72

55

76 80

78

82 79

85

e

83 84

87 89

92

93

ariyya

B

Nazareth

Israel

Sea of Galilee

69

68

75

73

64

B

49

34

71

62

61

88

90 91

Jordan

Palestinian Territories Jenin

043

Anaptyctic vowel: ka©ab a©ab a©eb ka©eb ka©ib k©

043 ‘Heel’

e ka©b

0

5

10 km

88

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

6 7

2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

40 43

Haifa

34

31 33 32 35

51

72

56

47 48

B 49 66

50

60 62

61

B

65

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

55 76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

84

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

63

69

68

75

73

57

41 44 45

54 71

26

59

B

42

46

B

36

21

20

8

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

044

Anaptyctic vowel

after, sti

ba©ed ba©ad both

0

044 1.1.4.2.4 baʕad – baʕed

5

10 km

Phonology

044 1.1.4.2.4 baʕad – baʕed To someone more familiar with Syrian or Egyptian Arabic the anaptyctic vowel [i] in forms such as baʕid šahir14 ‘after a month’ and in báʕidna ‘we are still’, báʕiḏ̣na ‘we … each other’ sounds somewhat strange. Cf., for example, Ḥōrān baʕoḏ̣, baʕad (Cantineau 1946:385, 401), Soukhne baʕad bučṛa, baʕadha (Behnstedt 1994:213), or bēn baʕaḏ̣hum, baʕad biži šahrēn, baʕad ma xaṭabt, min baʕad nahōṛ (Behnstedt 2000:616–32, 360–11, 318–2, 302–1). Cf. also Libyan Arabic baʕad ma, f-baʕaḏ̣, Upper Egyptian baʕad kidahuwwa, xadat baʕáḍha (Behnstedt-Woidich 1987:260, 1988:176). For Damascus, Ani-Stowasser 1964:4, 74, however, indicates baʕǝd, baʕǝd ma, baʕ ǝḍkon. In Elihay 2004:67r, baʕed, baʕeḍ. [e] is dominant with ‘after’, ‘still’, whereas the /ḏ̣/ in ‘each other’ favours [a].15 The prevailing pair is baʕed – 14  Always written this way in the texts, not with superscript. 15  Cf. also Amman baʕ aḏ̣ – baʕ id Mion 2013:151–172; 158, 159, 161.

89 baʕaḏ̣; baʕed – baʕeḏ̣ is more frequent than baʕad – baʕaḏ̣. The latter should be expected for Bedouin dialects due to the rule –ʕC– → –ʕa–, (cf. ḏ̣ahar), but the texts hardly provide any examples for –ʕa–, rather baʕid, baʕid mā, baʕidni, baʕidha baʕidna, baʕidhum in 31, 32, 33, 45, 50, 51, 54 and 59, which must be loans from sedentary dialects. There are examples for baʕad, baʕaḏ̣ in Rosenhouse 1984:180–240. Cf. also anaptyctic vowel [e] in sabeʕ maṛṛāt ‘seven times’ (Ṣafad). 1.1.4.2.5 CuCC → CuCuC CuCC → CuCuC “always with only a few exceptions” (Palva 1966:31) and AGK-1:73 “Wenn ein Vokal [u] vorausgeht, hat der Sproßvokal als eine Art Vokalharmonie die Klangfarbe [u]. Beispiele ʕurus ‘Hochzeit’, žuruḥ ‘Wunde’, ʔusum ‘Name’”. See more examples in Palva 1966:31 and examples collected such as ṛumuš, mušuṭ, ǧufun, xušum, muhuṛ.

90

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea 7

1

Akko

28

9

14

2

17 18

19

16

23

11 13 38 39

29

21

20

24

12

26 56

57

40 41

43

Haifa

44

46

B 49 66

63

Sea of Galilee

69

ariyya

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

65

68

54 71

62

61

47 48

31

36

60

82 79

Israel

84

85 86

e

89

92

87

88

90 91

Jordan 95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

045

Anaptyctic vowel

each other

ba , ba©e ba , ba©a both

0

045 ‘each other’

5

10 km

92

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

B

1 2

Akko

28

14 15

17 18

16

11

9 10

23 26

24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

56

40 43

Haifa 34

59

42

41 44 45

46

36 37

51 52 53

72

55

75

Nazareth 78

73

64

B

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B 82

79

85 86

e

89

92

94

63

76 80

Israel

93

B

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

B 31 33 32

57

58

95

83 84

87

88

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

046 Feminine ending

neck

raqabe, ra'abe raqabi, ra'abi raqab aqabi ragaba rguba

not attested, other forms with -i not attested, other forms with -e not attested, other forms with -a

0

046 1.1.4.3 Imāla of Feminine Ending -a

5

10 km

Phonology

046 1.1.4.3 Imāla of Feminine Ending -a The feminine ending in the environment of front consonants is either -i or -e.16 For an example, see map on ‘year’. As for labial consonants, the distribution of -a vs. -e, -i depends on the preceding vowel and emphasis of the labial. Cf. map ‘knee’ with preceding /u/ which may cause emphasis of /b/ and -a vs. the examples given here, namely raqabi (= type: ṛaqabi, raʔabi, etc.) – šiffi. Cf. also the maps in Cantineau 1940:6–13 where a preceding labial consonant if emphatic prevents the imāla: guṣṣa – ʔöbbe, ḥökūṃa – ḥöčūme, etc. šiffe ~ šuffi is not always attested since šalṭūfe ~ šalṭūfi were mentioned in some places. For Haifa, one questionnaire provides raʔabi – šiffe. AGK-1:89– 90 only mentions -i and -a. For Iksāl (79), one interview marks forms with -i, but on recording older male interviewee clearly uses -e: šiffe ‘lip’, ṭaḥūne ‘molar tooth’, ṛukbe ‘knee’. Nevo 2006:48–49 on

16   The -i in kursi ‘chair’ is interpreted as a feminine ending, therefore kursti ‘my chair’, kurstak ‘your chair’, etc., in interviews conducted by B. Cf., also in recording Bʕēne (65) kurst il-malik “the chair (throne) of the king”. The question was omitted in the shortened version of the questionnaire.

93 the other hand writes xaṣwi “testicle”, rukbi (ručbi), xamsi, ṯalāṯi. As for Bedouin dialects apart from ṛguḅa, the conditions for -a or -e (-i) seem to be unclear. Rosenhouse 1984:101 only quotes the ending -a, whereas in our texts we find in a front environment besides -a also -e or -i as in iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda (48): waḥada – xamsi, sitti, Basmat Ṭabʕōn (35): ṣiʕbe, ṯānye, ʕarīše, Šfaʕamir/Bedouin (31): mawžūdi vs. čiṯīra, ʕArab Nǧēdāt (65): zēna, ʕāyše, šākre, mkayyfe, zalame, kaʔībe, ṯalāṯe, ʕēle, kursinna, Li-Ḥmēra (32): hiyye, mustamirre, wirāṯe, badawiyye, namuḏāǧiyye, etc., ʕArab il-Xawālid (32): sane, miyya, dābba, maʕza, garye, xurrafiyye, ṯalaṯmiyye, sitte, čiṯīre, etc., ʕArab li-Ḥžērāt (50): ʕašīri, nisbi, čiṯīri, kbīri, nasmi, mkayyfi, ṯānyi, etc., ʕArab iṭ-Ṭabbāš (51): gidīma, waḥda, xityariyya, išwayya, ḥukūma, nisba, šahriyya, miyya, ḥirāsa, etc., ʕArab as-Sawāʕid/Wādi Sallāma (59): ʕašīra badawiyya, bin-nisbe, sine, hiyya, wādi Sallāme, madrase, mawǧūda, maḥkame, etc. The interview in points 4 and 5 conducted by B. furnishes ṭunṭli ‘uvula’, sbile ‘ear of wheat’, baččīre ‘heifer’, sine ‘year’, but smiča ‘fish’, šbiča ‘net’, ʕtiba ‘threshold’, etc. The material for Bedouin dialects as a whole is too heterogeneous and scarce in order to deduce a rule. Most probably forms with -i are due to the influence of the sedentary dialects.

94

Phonology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22

6 7

1 14

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

25 26

56

57

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36 37

60

42

41 44

62

61

47

65

49 66 67

72

Nazareth 78

76 80 82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

71

B

95

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

047

Feminine ending: iffe iffi if uffe uffi iffa

iffi

not attested, other forms with -i not attested, other forms with -e

0

047 Imāla of Feminine Ending -a: ‘lip’

5

10 km

96

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

28

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 37

34

35

51 52 53

72

74

76 80

81

Nazareth 78

82 79

85 86

e

89

92

94

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Israel

93

64

63

69

68

75

73

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

54 71

27

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

048

Lowering of -i, -u in pause and pausal diphthongisation 'inti 'intiy#, 'intay#, ©indi

'inte# 'intuw# 'intaw# ©ind #, ©in

,

g

0

048 1.1.4.4 Lowering of -i, -u and diphthongisation in pause

5

10 km

Phonology

048

1.1.4.4 Lowering of -i, -u and Diphthongisation in Pause As for Nazareth, see Zuʕbi 2017 with many details. According to her (p. 161), the pausal realisations e, o of short /i/, /u/ and īa, ūa, ēa. ōa, ǭ, ey, ow, aw of long vowels “only occur in the speech of middle-aged and elderly Muslims and elderly Maronite Christians”. Also many details for Nazareth, Kafr Qaraʕ17 and Saxnīn (41) in Shachmon and Faust 2017. In Šēx Dannūn (1), -o for -u was only noted in pronominal and verbal forms: ʔismo ‘his name’, ʕindko ‘near you’, širbo ‘they drank’, yišṛabo ‘they drink’. This is also evident in recording of younger female informant (but not noted in transcription of text!); -o for -u also in recording from Kufir Smēʕ (9) with Christian in pronominal forms -o, -hon. Noted, but not regularly with three thirty- to fortyyear-old female informants and one young man: pronominal suffixes regularly -o, also -ko 2nd p. pl., sometimes with verb forms as ʔakalo, rather regular with -i as in madriste ‘my school’, masbaḥte ‘my prayer beads’, ʕinde ‘near me’, maʕāke ‘with you (sg. f.)’, fiyye ‘in me’. Instances of -i → -e, -u → -o in Kufir Yasīf (18) noted in questionnaire, but not regular except pronominal suffix 3rd p. sg. m. -o (also in context): taʕāle! – taʕālo!, rúkubte ‘my knee’, rúkubto ‘his knee’, katabte ‘you (sg. f.) have written’, tikətbe ‘you (sg. f.) write’, yikətbo ‘they write’, katabo ‘they have written’, katabto ‘you have written’. In Akko, -i → -e and -u → -o was observed with female born in 1933: židde ‘my grandfather’, židdo ‘his grandfather’. Others did not have it. AGK-1 does not mention the like for Haifa. In Šfaʕamir (31), noted in interview with young female with pronouns and verb forms, partly in context: biddko timəsko ‘you will catch’, katabte ‘you (sg. f.) have written’. There is a certain concentration of lowering of -i → -e in and around Nazareth. As for ir-Rēne (76), the phenomenon was observed with Muslima born in 1953: ʕumre ‘my age’, žōze ‘my husband’, duġre ‘straight ahead’. In Ṭurʕān (69), it was observed with women, for example, in marate ‘my wife’. In Fredīs (92), lowering of -i → -e and -u → o in pause was observed with middle-aged housewife: ʔimme ‘my mother’, ʔitǧawwazo ‘they married’. In il-Mišhad (55), the lowering was observed in the speech of an older female as in šalabe ‘nice’, sitte ‘my grandmother’. In Dālyit il-Karmil (73), in an interview with a young female forms such as ʕamme# ‘my paternal uncle’, xāle# ‘my maternal uncle’, also in closed syllables: ma fęšš# ‘there is not’, qālet# ‘she said’, -kon#, -hon#, ma ʕindǫšš# ‘he doesn’t have’. In Mqēble (95), lowering of -i and -u to -e, -o was observed 17  In the Muṯallaṯ.

97 with female speaker, and also in a second interview with a male: for instance, sīde# ‘my grandfather’. As for diphthongisation, see Blanc 1953:46: a great number of speakers show a strong tendency to diphthongize final i into to iy and ay. This is especially true of older and otherwise ‘conservative’ (non-literate and non-urbanized) speakers in R[āmi], BJ [Bēt Žann], Ḥ [Ḥurfēš], B [Biʕne] where only iy viz. [i:], [iy] and [ey] have been noted, and in J [Žišš], Yi [Yirka], Ja [Ǧaṯṯ], Ya [Yanūḥ], KS [Kufir Smēʕ] and [ʕIsifya] where one hears ay viz. [aey], ‫ع‬ [äy] and [ay] side by side with iy … It has never been heard in Kufiryasiyf, a typical Christian village. As for -u → -aw, “it seems not quite as frequent as ay” (p. 47). – Yanūḥ (14) male informant born in 1943 yiṭfay# ~ yiṭfiy _ #, marāʕiy#, ṯāniy#, ʔišiy _ #. Second male informant born in 1921 yaʕnay#, maṣāray#, in context baddkaw tibʕaṯu wlādkaw#, zādaw#. Third female informant born in 1947 ixiwtay#, haǧarūnay#, ʔišay# (also in context), la-ḥālay#, ʔintay ya falān, ḥakatlay ʔimmay, yiqbalaw#, yqullaw#, burubṭaw#, ʔiḏnabaw in context. Recording of female informant born in 1947 maratay ‘my wife’. – Yirka (16) female informant born in 1975 ʔišay#, arāḏ̣ay#, sīday#, ṭaray#, aḥaddiṯkaw ʔaw ʔaḥkīlkaw – #. Male informant born in 1931 maṣāray#, fil-ʕibrānay#, fil-ʕarabay#, yištray#, ʔuxtay#, inḏarray#, yinbāʕaw#, taʕālaw xuḏaw#. Male informant born in 1926: ya rūḥay#, maṣāray#, ʔišay#, ġanay#, ʕišitkaw ‘your life’. Female elementary school teacher born in 1966: yaʕnay#, ʔišay#, yiʕmalaw – #. Other examples from different speakers are yahūday ‘Jew’, durzay ‘Druze’, ʔimmay ‘my mother’, žōzay ‘my husband’. – Žūlis (19) eighty-five-year-old male Druze: ʕumray ‘my age’, ʔismay ‘my name’, ʔawāʕay ‘vessels’, bidaw ‘they started’, ʔintaqalaw ‘they moved’. Similar forms with three males between fifty-three and seventy, not in interview with middle-aged male. – ʕIsifya (71) recording of female informant (older person): ʕindkaw#. Young female Druze in interview conducted by T. with many instances such as ʔimmey# ‘my mother’, sittey# ‘my grandmother’, tūt ʔarḏ̣ey# ‘strawberries’, but baddku tíkitbaw ‘you will write’, ʕindkaw#, maʕākaw# and not *ʕindkow#, *maʕākow#. When asked for the personal pronouns, she distinguished between masculine ʔinti# (< ʔinta) and feminine ʔintey#. The examples mentioned above all contain a historical *-i and it seems that the rule does not apply to forms where

98 -i represents an old *-a. As for -aw, it occurs only with certain categories, namely the verbal endings, the pronoun of the 2nd p. pl., the pronominal suffix of the 2nd p. pl.: katabtaw, katabaw, ʔintaw, ʕindkaw, but not with the pronominal suffix of the 3rd p. sg.: ʕindu, ʔismu, ʔilu, etc. What is striking is the lack of parallelism: -ey# vs. -aw#, and not -ay# – -aw#. As a variant for -aw almost all informants also used -o, but never -ow. – In Dālyit il-Karmil (73), besides -e#, -o# (cf. supra) in interview with male conducted by B. ʔintey#, ʔismey#, ʕindkaw#, sumiʕtey# ‘my reputation’, sumʕitkaw#, ṛúkubtey# ‘my knee’, ṛukbitkaw#. More examples with -ey#, but -aw# (not -ow#). Second interview conducted by T. mainly -e#, -o#, few instances of -ey#, -aw#: žībey#

Phonology

‘bring (f.)!’, biḥbey# ‘he crawls’, ʔintaw#, žibtaw#, ġilaw#. More examples with -ey and -aw. Third interview with female only -i#, but katabtaw#, liʕbitkaw ‘your game’. Fourth interview with older female with exceptions: ʔismay#, ʕindkow# (cf. supra). In one recording of a male, yinhizmaw ‘they flee’. – For Iksāl (79), see Nevo 2006:39f: “Most cases involve i which is an outcome of OA ī or iyy in final syllables”. He mentions lenghtening of -i to -ī, lengthening along with lowering to -ē, diphthongisation to -iy and some cases with lowering of ī or ū in close final syllables such as mawaʕīn → mawaʕēn “clothes”, gūl → gōl “say!”. Lengthening along with lowering is also mentioned in Shachmon and Faust 2017.

100

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

1

9

2

Akko

28

17 18

15 19

23

11

16

24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

43

56 59

42

41 44

46

65

49

34

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

26

58

40

Haifa

21

20

B

63

Sea of Galilee

69

53

ariyya

54 71 72

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel 86

e B

92

95

89

87 90 91

Jordan 96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

049

Reflexes of *z

n

za zit

0

049 1.2.1 Reflexes of *ay in *zaytūn, *laymūn

5

10 km

Phonology

1.2

Long Vowels and Diphthongs

049 1.2.1 Reflexes of *ay in *zaytūn, *laymūn *ay is normally monophthongised to /ē/ in the whole area: bēt ‘house’.18 It seems that pretonic *ay is monophthongised to /a/ in quite a few places which is largely attested by the form for ‘olives’, namely *zaytūn > zatūn, which is common in most Palestinian dialects. In our area, Haifa, Ṣafad and Bedouin dialects are the exception with zitūn, for which see AGK-1:62 with reference to zatūn in Jerusalem in fn. 227. Ramallah has zētūn ~ zatūn (Seeger 2009:109), Elihay 2004:635-l zatūn ~ zaytūn, Seeger WB online 305 idem, Bauer 1957:223-r only zētūn. Cf. also lamūn 18  A female born in 1950 and recorded in Ḥurfēš declared that she was from Ḥāṣbayya in Lebanon. She uses diphthongs in bayt “house”, hawni “here” and /ē/ in kamēn “also”. Will be disregarded.

101 ‘lemons’ and corresponding lexical map. A similar case ist *ʕaynayn > ʕanēn ‘eyes’ in Ḥurfēš (20), ʕanē ‘his eyes’ in Bēt Žann (23) and Kufir Kanna (68), in ʕAkbara (26) *rāyḥīn → rayḥīn → raḥīn ‘going pl.’, Kufir Smēʕ (9) ma laʔanošš ‘we did not find him’. Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93) xamis baḏ̣āt ‘five eggs’, iž-Ždayyde *ʔaylūl > ʔalūl ‘September’. Cf. also in Egyptian Arabic/Fayyūm/Baḥariyya *bayḍāt > baḍāt ‘eggs’ (Behnstedt-Woidich 1988:58–2, 342–3) and fn. 1, p. 346 where this is defined as a general rule for *ay > a, *aw > a in unstressed position (dōr, darēn ‘twice’). In our area, this is not a general rule as is shown, for example, for Iksāl with zatūn vs. ʕenēn “eyes”. Cf. also Nevo 2006:40 “in unstressed syllables the OA diphthongs drop out frequently their second element and take the shape of baganāš ‘we were not’, tġaddatūš ‘you (sg.m.) did not eat lunch’, ḥattanāš ‘we did not put’”; cf. also Rosenhouse 1984:68.

102

N

Phonology

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9 10

14 15 19

16

13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8

23 24

12

25 26

56

57

58

40 43

Haifa 36 34

33

60

42

41 44

61

47

31

Sea of Galilee

69

68

Nazareth 78

73

ariyya

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

95

87 90 91

92

93

63

76 80

71 72

65

49 54

62

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

050 s>©a ©a ©a ©a

a

0

050 1.2.2 ā > ē in ‘hour’

5

10 km

Phonology

050 1.2.2 ā > ē in ‘hour’ Here we deal with an isolated sound change which is also to be found in other Palestinian dialects, for example, Jerusalem (AGK-1:62 fn. 226 sāʕa ~ sēʕa), Bauer 1957:294-l sāʕa, urban dialects also sēʕa, Elihay 2004:459-l sāʕa “alternative form sēʕa”; more examples with sēʕa on p. 476. Hebron sāʕa (Seeger 1996:119), Ramallah sāʕa (Seeger

103 2009:126). sēʕtēn ‘two hours’ also attested for a Bedouin dialect in Basmat Ṭabʕōn (35). For ir-Rāmi (56), recordings have sēʕa, Blanc 1953 in same text sāʕa, sīʕit zamān which read sēʕit zamān. M. Woidich thinks that sēʕa was originally a diminutive *swēʕa. Such a form is actually attested in Tunisian Arabic (Singer 1984:488 swîʕa ~ swayʕa).

104

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

7

2

Akko

28

17 18

9 10

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

30

21

20

8

1

12

56

40

60

42

41

36

33

47 48

31

35

69

68

Sea of Galilee

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

ariyya

B

55 75

73

64

63 49

53

71

62

61

44

Haifa

72

22

6

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

051

i mb>ri (i)mb imbar 'ams 0

051 1.2.3 *ā > ē in ‘yesterday’

5

10 km

Phonology

051 1.2.3 *ā > ē in ‘yesterday’ This is another isolated case of vowel shift and not comparable to say Syrian forms where mbēriḥ must be explained by i-umlaut. Cf. AGK-1:62 who also reports it for Jerusalem. Bauer 1957:135-l quotes embāreḥ, to be pronounced embǟreḥ (“langes ä”), and imbēreḥ for the fallāḥīn. Elihay 2004:343-l indicates mbāreḥ and mbēreḥ “mainly in Galilee”. For the villages of Ramallah, Seeger 2009:21 has mbāriḥ ~ mbēriḥ. For Iksāl (79), the questionnaire provides mbǟreḥ with ǟ = [ɛ:], not to be found in Nevo 2006:55 sub 11.2 “Adverbs of time”. Rosenhouse 1984:112 for Bedouins notes mbēriḥ ~ ams. Since only a few Bedouin dialects have been investigated by questionnaire and mainly texts were recorded, the data situation is rather poor. Forms with √brḥ recorded in Bedouin villages are

105 mbēreḥ in Ibṭin (34), mbǟreḥ in Šibli (83), Mišhad/ʕArab l-Hēb (55), il-Ḥaǧāǧra (53, ʕArab Ǧawāmīs). The latter pronunciation was also recorded in villages with G dialects such as Kr. Miṣr (88). For Nazareth, one questionnaire and three texts from different speakers have mbāriḥ, another questionnaire and one text mbēriḥ. – Ir-Rāmi (56) Blanc 1953:199 mbīriḥ [Blanc writes {ī} for /ē/]. M. Woidich proposes an original diminutive *mbuwayriḥ > *mbayriḥ > mbēriḥ since fuwayʕil is the diminutive of bi-syllable words with long vowel (cf. Fischer 1972:§82b šuwayʕir ‘Dichterchen’ from šāʕir) and since diminutives can often be found with function words (cf. qubayl). The intermediate form mbayriḥ is attested in Syria (SA map 305).

106

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

Y 20

B

Y

O

21 O

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

60

42

41 44 47 48

65

49

34 53

72

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

B

95

93

Sea of Galilee

76 80

78

92

ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

052

i n n n n 'i£in 'i£

052 1.2.4 *ā > ē in ‘ear’

ear widn

0

5

10 km

Phonology

052 1.2.4 *ā > ē in ‘ear’ The sporadic shift *ā > ē in ‘ear’ ḏān > ḏēn is most probably triggered by ʕēn ‘eye’. This also applies to the plural (pseudo-dual) in all sedentary dialects ḏinēn, dinēn and the dual ḏintēn,19 dintēn as ʕinēn, ʕintēn, but the analogy went as far as to the singular only in some dialects. ḏān is a reanalysis of a plural *ʔaḏān with loss of initial pretonic *ʔa-, ḏān thus being identical in form with a singular form such as rās ‘head’. 19  In Dālyit il-Karmil (73), ḏēn with suffix: ḏēnti “my ear”.

107 As for widn in Ṭabariyya (AGK-2:154, s. 23), the form is not attested in Elihay 2004. Bauer 1957:223-r designates it as Bedouin, also Seeger WB online 883 (wiḏn). But the Bedouin dialects of our area have ʔiḏ(i)n, also in the Negev (Shawarbah 2012:362), Bedouin dialects in Syria (SA map 323), Bedouin dialects investigated by Cantineau 1937:216. Perhaps this is one of the Maghrebi elements in this Jewish dialect. Cf. WAD I: 102–103 where forms with w- are characterised as typical for entire North Africa. Corriente 1997, however, does not mention forms with w- for Andalusian Arabic. The form attested on the map in WAD for Palestine is based on Bauer 1957.

108

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8

12

56

B 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

35

42

41 44 47 48

49

65 67 B

55

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

60 62

61

53

71 72

59

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

053

in participle of 'kl, 'x£ , , , ,

m m m m

kil il kil kil

0

053 1.2.5 māxiḏ ~ mēxiḏ, mākil ~ mēkil

5

10 km

Phonology

053 1.2.5 māxiḏ ~ mēxiḏ, mākil ~ mēkil As in mbēriḥ, an i-umlaut is not very probable. For the somewhat enigmatic m-, see GvG I:590 “für einen Einfluß des Part. pass., den R. [Reinhardt] annimmt, fehlt das Muster”. Adaptation of *ʔākil, ʔāxiḏ to the passive participle is also Seeger’s explanation (Seeger 2013:189), i.e., *maʔxiḏ, maʔkil, according to maʔxūḏ, maʔkūl > *mayxiḏ,

109 maykil > mēxiḏ, mēkil. He, indeed, quotes the passive forms mēxūḏ, mēčūl (< *mayxūḏ, maykūl). The latter are characterised in Bauer 1970:27 as “rural”. Cf. also the Libyan personal name Maylūd for Mawlūd, in the Dakhla oasis the village name Mayhūb for Mawhūb (p.c. M. Woidich). Bauer 1970:28 has mōčil for Betǧ. = Bēt Ǧālā. A similar form mōkil p.a. yōkil is given for Kufir Maṣir (88).

110

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

8 1 2

Akko

28

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

46

41 44 47 48

31

36

59

34

61 65

49

53

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

76 80

71

Nazareth

82

73

Israel

85

e

95

87 89

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

054

Lowering of

in

h

36

0

054 1.2.6 Lowering of *ū in the environment of back consonants

5

10 km

Phonology

1.2.6 Lowering of *ū in the Environment of Back Consonants The phenomenon was noted with forms such as *ṣarṣūr > ṣaṛṣōṛ ‘cockroach’,20 ṭabṣūn > ṭabṣōn ‘hyrax’, *dabbūṛ > dabbōṛ ‘humble-bee’, *barġūṯ > baṛġōṯ ‘flea’, baṛqūq > baṛqōq and was elicited by the questionnaire for these forms except ‘hyrax’ which normally is wabaṛ, wabri, etc. With baṛqūq, originally ‘plums’ were intended, but the question in most places was either not understood or interpreted as ‘a blue or red flower’. barqūq in different dictionaries and sources is indicated as “Reine-Claude, grün” (Bauer 1957:229-r), “plums” (Elihay 2004:78-l), idem (Seeger 2009:22), online sources for Galilee also indicated it as “blue anemones”. In AGK-1:91, ḥabbit barʔō(ʔ) “eine Anemone”, Seeger WB online 40 barqūq “Asiatischer Hahnenfuß (Ranunculus asiaticus); Kronen-Anemone (Anemone coronaria); Klatschmohn (Papaver rhoeas)”. In points 38 and 79, the synonyms dōdaḥān, daḥnūn were given. dōdaḥān is found online as a synonym of šaqīqat an-Nuʕmān “a red anemone” (anemone coronaria). Further evidence is: – sāʕōr “young sheep”21 (Rosenhouse 1984: 279, but ʕābūr) 054

20  In ʕĒn Māhil (80), informant declared that there are two types of cockroaches, one called ṣarṣūr ʔabu šawārib to be found in kit­ chens and another, a red one, called ṣarṣūr ʔimm ʕAli. The latter in the Arabic internet a “ladybug”. Cf., however, also Seeger WB online 21 with ʔumm ʕīsa, ʔumm iʕmar for a ‘ladybug’, but also p. 235 xunufse for a ‘dung beetle’, a ‘ladybug’ and a ‘cockroach’. 21  In other dialects, ṣaʕūṛ(a) refers to a two-year-old kid, ʕabūr to a two-year-old lamb.

111 – ʕabōṛ ‘two-year-old lamb’ Šfaʕamir (31, recording), elsewhere elicited as ʕabūr. – balʕūṭ ‘tadpoles’ Yirka (16), balʕōṭ iž-Žišš (22), Seeger WB online 62 balʕūṭ idem, p. 361 šarġūf. – daʕmūs ‘tadpoles’ 13, 38, 39, daʕmūṣ 63, daʕmōs 40. – zaġlūl ‘little dove’ in most points, zaġlōl in 17, 30, 38, 40. – baṛṣōʕ ‘gecko’ point 12. – šallūṭ ‘kick in the ass’ point 28, šallōṭ points 17, 41, 4/5, 38, 62, 12, 1, 13 (not in Elihay 2004, in Seeger WB online 380 šallūṭ ~ šallūt “Tritt in den Hintern, Arschtritt”. Lowering of *ū in a back consonantal environment is also attested for Anatolian Arabic (Jastrow 1978:63–65), Yemen (Behnstedt 2016:32, map 14) and Maghrebi Arabic. In Galilean Arabic, this lowering applies only to * ū > ō, not to *ī > ē as in the other dialects mentioned. It is perhaps better explained by a change of pattern, primarily but not necessarily conditioned by back consonants, and not as a consistent phonological shift. Cf. forms such as ḥardōn ~ ḥarḏōn ‘lizard’ in most points vs. ḥarṯūn in points 4/5, 35, 38, 48, 58, ḥardūn (Bedouin dialects), ǧardōn ~ žardōn ‘rat’ in most points, ǧarṯūn ʕArāmša Bedouins (4, 5), žarbūʕ ‘rat’ vs. ḥardōn ‘lizard’ in ʕIlūṭ (73), ʕankabūt ‘spider’ in most points, šaʕšabōn ‘small spider, not venomous’ (not in Elihay 2004, online as Palestinian for ‘spider’, in Seeger WB online 361 “Webspinne, Spinnengewebe, Spinnennetz”), ʕankabūt ~ ʕankabōt in Seeger WB online 503. It was not attested in forms such as balʕūm, zalʕūm ḥalʔūm ‘throat’. It is rather a feature of sedentary Galilean dialects while Bedouin dialects or ruralite C, G, M dialects mainly have forms with /ū/.

112

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

72

65

49 66 67

53

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86 ©A

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

47 48

60

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

055

Lowering of 36

da da

i

humble

r

0

055 dabbūr > dabbōṛ ‘humble-bee’

5

10 km

113

Phonology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46

36 37

34

31 32

59

42

41 44

65

49

53

72

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

47 48

60

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

056

Lowering of * 36

bar bar

in bar bar

0

056 barġūṯ > barġōṯ ‘flea’

5

10 km

114

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1

9

2

Akko

17 18

15

26

16

13 38 39

29

28

12 58

40 43

Haifa

46

36 34

59 41

42 44

72

65

49

53

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

71

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

21

20

8

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

057

Lowering of 36

ba ba

i q, ba q, ba

anemones

, etc. , etc.

da n area with major concentration of * 0

057 baṛqūq > baṛqōq ‘anemones’

5

10 km

116

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

8 1

9

2

Akko

28

21

B

17 18

16

13 38 39 B

29 30

24

12

25 26 56

58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

60

42

41 44 47 48

65

49

34 35

53

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth 78

73

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

76 80 82 79

Israel

85

e

83

87 89

92

88

B

90 91

Jordan

95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

058

/ in ba ba

omat

ra

0

058 1.2.7 bandōṛa – bandūra

5

10 km

Phonology

058 1.2.7 bandōṛa – bandūra Elihay 2004 74-l: banḍōra. According to Bauer 1957:302-l bandōra is Palestinian, banadūra Lebanese. The latter is still attested sporadically in our area, especially in B dialects, but also in Ramallah bandūra ~ bandōṛa (Seeger 2009:29) and the Negev bandūṛah (Shawarbah 2012:373). ban(a)dōṛa is the current pronunciation in Syria, but there are exceptions such as in-Nabk banadūṛa (Gralla 2006:37).

117 There is a widely quoted anecdote that during the Lebanese civil war “tomatoes” was the shibboleth form in order to distinguish between Lebanese and Palestinian fighters taken prisoner. If somebody said bandōṛa, he was recognised as a Palestinian and shot. Distinguishing between people on the basis of their pronunciation of certain plants is not just an old tradition in the region. Cf. Judges 12, 4–6 but also the Haiti “parsley massacre” in 1937.

118

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

8

21

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

31

65

63

Sea of Galilee

34

J

53

ariyya

68

76 80

71

Nazareth

82 79

73

Israel

85

e

87 89

90

Jordan 95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

059

in ba ba ba ba ba ba

arsley nis, baqd nis nis nis nis nis, ba'd

059 1.2.8 baqdūnis – baqdōnis

s

s

ba

nes (obsolete)

0

5

10 km

Phonology

059 1.2.8 baqdūnis – baqdōnis For the Greek etymology, see WAD II: 270. The Jews in Haifa had two forms: baʔdūnis ~ bahdūnis. In Tel Aviv, there is a restaurant called “Hummus Bahdunes”.

119

Phonology

1.2.9 Shortening of Unstressed Long Vowels Long vowels in unstressed open syllables in sedentary dialects are shortened throughout the area. As for Bedouin dialects, it is only partly attested and possibly due to the influence of sedentary dialects: sāčnīn vs. zitūn (54). Cf. Haifa žābu – ma žabūš (AGK-1:62). Historically, this is already the case in the pattern *CaCāCīC: šalāṭīf > šalaṭīf ‘thick lips’. The area of this shortening reaches far into Syria (cf. SA map 82). As for Lebanon, AGK-1:60, fn. 220 only refers to šāṭrīn. Cf. Šḥīm Fleisch 1974:217 ʔālūlna, māšyīn. Exceptions are long vowels in participial forms of the type lābístu ‘she is wearing it’ where these forms were elicited. Jastrow 2009:234 quotes as another exception for the Carmel Coast the maintaining of long vowels if they are found in a closed syllable: ma šāfhāš ‘he did not see her’. This was also noted for other points of enquiry, e.g., iṭṬayybe (91) sēʕtēn ‘two hours’, iṭ-Ṭamra (87) fātḥīn ‘opening pl. m.’, id-Daḥi (86) bsāʕdūš ‘he doesn’t help him’, ʕIsifya (71) māklāt ‘having eaten pl. f.’, Ṭurʕān (69) māklīnu ‘having eaten it pl. m.’, ʕIlabūn (63) mārqīn ‘passing by pl.

121 m.’, ʕArrābi (61) qāʕdīn ‘staying pl. m.’, Kōkab Abu l-Hēža (44) ʕēltēn ‘two families’, Ždayydi (30) kātbīn ‘having written pl. m.’, kātbāt idem f., ʕAkbara (26) sāknīn ‘living pl. m.’, Žūlis (19) qāʕdīn ‘staying pl. m.’. In overlong syllables in pause, first the long vowels are shortened, then an anaptyctic vowel is inserted. Theoretically, another solution could be the case, cf. Žūlis# ‘place name’, Yūnis# ‘personal name’ and consequently *yqūlš → *yqūliš# ‘he does not say’ would be possible. Such forms are attested, indeed, for ir-Rummāni (49): mā kāniš, mā tšūfiš. But in many other places, first the long vowel is shortened as in tinʔālš# ‘it [she] is not said’ → tinʔálš# and then → tinʔáliš#, minʔūlš# → minʔulš# → minʔúliš# ‘we do not say’, ma ykūnš# → ma ykunš# → ma ykúniš# ‘he is not’. Cf. katbatš# → katbatiš# ‘she has not written’. In many respects, Palestinian Arabic occupies a kind of intermediate position between Syro-Lebanese and Egyptian Arabic. It is part of a dialect continuum between Levantine and Egyptian Arabic. The rules of shortening long vowels are more or less the same as in the Egyptian dialects of the Šarqiyya province with its important Levantine adstratum.

122

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3 7

8 D

C O,D

2

17 18

Akko

19

29 30

14 15 16

40

B

Haifa

B

36 37 B

34

43

35

44 45 47 48 50 54

25 26

O,W 56

27

57

58 D C,Y,W 59 60 D C

41

D 51 52 53

23

Y,M 24 12

O Y

42

46

31 33 32

C 9 10

11 13 38 39 B

W

21

20

B

1

28

22

6

B

B M 61 I C,I B O Y W,Y 63 O B 65 49 66 67 B 69 CW 68 ( ) CIM 62

64

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 D

71

75

C

CW

76 80

Nazareth 78

72

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

88

89

91

Jordan

B

99

93 103

94 97 98 100 101

102

95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

104

060

87 90

e 92

83 84

Reflexes of *q B C CIM D I M

060 1.3.1 Qāf

Bedouins Christians Christian and Muslim men Druze Muslims Men

W CW Y O

Women Christian women Young generation Old generation q '

B

k g g (incl. *g g extinct

)

0

5

10 km

Phonology

1.3 Consonants 060 1.3.1 Qāf il-žins il-laṭīf yaʕni bikūn ʕindu ʔakṯaṛ ʔāl, w ʔulna w ʔālat = “the gentle sex uses more frequently ‘ʔāl’ and ‘ʔulna’ and ‘ʔālat’” (informant from ʕIlūṭ (75) who talked about the differences between Arabic dialects in general and in the area). According to Bergstraesser 1915 map 4, in the cities in Galilee, the use of the glottal stop had already occurred, while the fallāḥīn did not use it. The symbols for /ʔ/ in the key of map 1 in Talmon 2002:73 and partly on the map are damaged. The map also contains data from abandoned villages. – Fassūṭa’s (6) Christian inhabitants actually have /ʔ/. Until 1948, there were two Christian villages, Iqriṯ and Birʕim, very close to Fassūṭa near the Lebanese border. They had /q/. An older male from Iqriṯ interviewed in Fassūṭa indeed pronounced /q/. Also, refugees from both villages who settled in Haifa used to pronounce /q/, although the rest of the Christian population of Haifa uses /ʔ/. – Miʕilya (7): Talmon map indicates /ʔ/. Interview with young female: /q/. Recording of carpenter born in 1922: /q/. Recording of male Christian: /q/. Kufir Smēʕ (9): recordings of three older male Christians, one female Christian born in 1960: /ʔ/. One older Christian mainly /q/, instances of /ʔ/. Three recordings of older Druze: two of them used /q/. Third speaker mainly /q/, instances of /ʔ/: ṛaqbat il-baqaṛa ‘the cow’s neck’, ʔalli ‘he told me’, ʔaddēš ḥaqqu? ‘what’s its price’? – li-Bqēʕa (10): first male speaker is seventy-two years old: /q/. Female (no age indicated): /ʔ/. Male artist born in 1951: /q/. Third male (no further information): /ʔ/. – Kisra (11): not on Talmon map. Recording of Druze born in 1943: /q/. Recording of male born in 1898: /q/. Recording of elderly male Druze: both /q/ and /ʔ/, e.g., qahwe ‘coffee’, baqaṛ ‘cows’, yʔawwis ‘he shoots’, ʔulnālun ‘we told them’, ʔalli ‘he told me’. – Naḥef (12): /ʔ/ on Talmon map and /g/ for Bedouin dialect. Interview conducted by B. with younger and older male informants (questionnaire not available): /ʔ/. Interview conducted by DZ with fifty-year-old male: /ʔ/. Recordings with unnamed males, one female: /ʔ/. Recording of middle-aged to elderly male (according to voice): /q/. – Yirka (16): Talmon map 1 has /q/. Interview conducted by B. with two students and their father. Father consequently used /q/, the sons besides /q/ often /ʔ/,

123 energetically articulated. First recording of older male: /ʔ/, but also unmistakably /ʕ/: ġumiʔ ‘depth’, ʔrūš ‘piasters’, taʕrīban ‘approximately’, baʕaṛ ‘cows’. Many elderly speakers also used /ḥ/ in baḥaṛtēn ‘two cows’. Second recording of female born in 1975, who works as an assistant in kindergarten. The transcribed text consequently shows /q/, but the speaker uses /ʔ/! Third recording of male Druze born in 1931 in transcribed text / / and ‫ع‬ speaker indeed pronounces /ʕ/: baʕaṛ ‘cows’, yʕallib ‘he turns over’, ʕult ‘I said’. Fourth recording is a story sung by an older male person. Uses /q/. /ʔ/ transcribed by / / in fifth recording of older male speaker. Speaker ‫ع‬ sometimes indeed uses /ʕ/, but also /ʔ/. Sixth recording of male born in 1930 has correctly transcribed /q/. Seventh recording of male Druze born in 1946 has correctly transcribed /q/. Eighth recording of three elderly Druze persons only transcription available with mostly / /, two instances of /ʔ/, one of /q/. Ninth recording of ‫ع‬ non-educated female Druze: /q/ in recording and transcription. Tenth recording of older male: /ʔ/. Eleventh recording of elderly male: energetically articulated /ʔ/ and /ʕ/, for example, in ṣadīʕ ‘friend’, tlāʕi ‘you find’. He also uses /ḥ/ in tistaḥbilna ‘she receives us’ and /ḥ/ for /ʕ/ in sabaḥ ʔawlād ‘seven children’. – Abu Snān (17): Talmon map has /ʔ/. Interview conducted by B. with three females between thirty and forty years of age and one young man, all Christians: /ʔ/. Recording of seventy-five-year-old former taxi driver (no religion indicated): /q/. Recording of Christian male born in 1912: /ʔ/. Christian male born in 1946: /ʔ/. Recording of middle-aged male (no religion indicated): /q/, few instances of /ʔ/. When he mentions sabaʕ qrūš ‘seven piasters’, one of audience says: “in Yirka they say sabaʕ ḥrūš”. This is confirmed by another person, the others laughing. See above baḥartēn ‘two cows’. Texts in Blanc 1953:263–284 with Druze born in 1897: /q/. – Kufir Yasīf (18): /ʔ/ on Talmon map. Interview conducted by B. with Muslima of about fifty and their two sons of about twenty years old: /ʔ/. Recording of Christian female born in 1918 and male (no religion indicated) born in 1945: /ʔ/. Recording of older male (no religion indicated): /q/. Druze artist born in 1941 declares: lahžit Kufir Yasīf illi bitmayyizha, lafḏ̣it il-qāf ʔā, xāṣṣatan ʕind aġlab is-sukkān fil-qaryi, mā ʕada rižāl id-dīn, maṛṛāt id-drūz fil-ʔasās, illi biḥāwlu maṛṛāt yulufḏ̣u il-ʔāf qāf. Later he adds that the women of his neighbours who are from Miʕilya pronounce the Qāf /q/. See above. He himself uses /q/. Druze female teacher born in 1978 used /ʔ/.

124 – iž-Žišš (21): Talmon map /ʔ/. Interview with twentyyear-old Maronite, a Muslim approximately thirty-five and a Christian informant born in 1914: all /ʔ/. Short text in Christie 1901 told by Greek Orthodox informant: /q/, and longer told by Muslim: /q/. They are no reliable sources, since Christie 1901:92–93 writes that he transcribed both /q/ and /ʔ/ by {q}. Recording of male Catholic taxi driver: /ʔ/. Recording of Christian school teacher born in 1934: /ʔ/, few instances of /q/. – Sažūr (24): Talmon map indicates /q/. Older male speaker in ten-minute recording used mainly /q/, sometimes /ʔ/. Second male speaker born in 1934 in recording had thirty-one instances of /q/, three of /ʔ/. Female speaker (no age indicated, obviously older person), twenty-three instances of /ʔ/, one of /q/. Second female speaker born in 1943 exclusively uses /ʔ/. Third male informant born in 1934 exclusively uses /q/. He explains that formerly the old people all used /ʔ/ and when they tried to speak correctly they produced hypercorrections such as qibri ‘needle’. Nowadays, everybody would pronounce the “ʔiq”. This would also be due to the fact that people were educated, that they married from places such as Šfaʕamir, ʕIsifya, Dālyit il-Karmil, li-Mġār: kulla ṣarat itqūl yaʕni bilqāf. The situation he describes is the opposite of what happens in other localities, namely that /q/ is used by older speakers and /ʔ/ by the younger generation. Annotation in recording made in Šfaʕamir “in Sažūr the women pronounce it /ʔ/, but not the men”. – The same situation as in Sažūr was also reported for ʕArrābe (61): children until the age of ten use /ʔ/, then they switch to /q/. – ʕAkbara (26): no information on Talmon map. Interview with middle- aged female: /ʔ/, interview with middleaged male: /q/. Recording of male born in 1940 from the same family: /ʔ/. – Šfaʕamir (31): interview with middle-aged male Druze: /q/, interview conducted by B. with older male Christian /ʔ/, interview with Bedouin by DZ, FṢ: /g/, interview with male Druze: /q/, recordings of older Druze /q/, text in Palva 1966 told by Christian butcher born in 1931: /ʔ/. – Kabūl (42): Talmon map indicates /q/ and /ʔ/. Remark in B’s questionnaire: “educated speakers use both /q/ and /ʔ/”. Informants of B. declare that the original dialect has (had) /q/, that “immigrants” use both /ʔ/ and /g/. During interviews, older people used /q/, young ones used /ʔ/. Second lexical questionnaire conducted by DZ with forty-year-old male informant only has

Phonology

examples with /ʔ/. Informant of DZ declared that he used /ʔ/, others used /q/. Recording of female speaker born in Kabūl in 1910: /ʔ/. Recording of informant born in 1937: /q/. – Ṭamra (43): Talmon map indicates /q/. All questionnaires and recordings of speakers from Dāmūn: /ʔ/. Interview with older male from Ṭamra: /q/. Recordings of two males, one born in 1920 and one sixty-eight years old have /q/. Old female: /ʔ/. – ʕIbillīn (46): Talmon map indicates /g/ and /ʔ/. /g/ is used in interview and recordings by Muslima born in 1940, originally from the village. Second interview with Muslim (age unknown): /g/. They do not speak a Bedouin dialect. Third interview with female informant (age, religion unknown): /ʔ/. Male informant, Christian, born in 1931 uses /ʔ/ in recording. Second male informant, Christian, born in 1913, /ʔ/ in recording. Second female informant born in 1912: /ʔ/. Third female informant, Christian, born in 1939. Recording should not be used, since she left the village in 1967, lived in Šfaʕamir and has lived in Nazareth since 1990. Short recording of male (Muslim, age unknown): /ʔ/. – il-Mišhad (55): in 2013, according to Wikipedia, had 10,550 inhabitants, all Muslims. Male speaker born in 1918: /q/, female speaker born in 1925 /ʔ/, interview with female speaker (age unknown, according to voice middle-aged): /ʔ/ ~ /k/. Two older males: /ʔ/ ~ /k/ as in ʔabil ‘before’, ʔamḥāt ‘wheat’, ʔalb ‘in the middle of’, kanāni ‘bottles’, tlāki ‘you find’. No data on Talmon map 1. Bedouin (Lhēb) Mišhad: /g/. – ir-Rāmi (56): Talmon map indicates /ʔ/. Interview conducted by B. with young female Druze /ʔ/. She declares that Druze use /q/, Christians /ʔ/, but also younger Druze would use /ʔ/ like her and her sisters, in contrast with her parents who use /q/. Asked why younger Druze “imitate” the parlance of Christians and do not use the fuṣḥa pronunciation of the elders, she said the Christians’ way of speaking sounded more elegant: tīži ʔanʕam. Interview conducted by student with three persons, one female, two males (one born in 1920, no religion indicated): /ʔ/. Recordings of Druze born in 1940: /q/. Recording of seventy-four-year-old male (Druze or Muslim): /q/. Druze born in 1931 interviewed by AGK declared: il-farq bēnna w bēn ixwānna l-masiḥiyyīn, liʔanna sāknīn iḥna wiyyāhun, ʔinnu hunni biḥku fil-ʔāl, ʔiḥna mniḥki fil-qāf. – Mġār (60): on Talmon map /q/. Male Druze born in 1943: /q/. Middle- aged male: /q/. Middle-aged male Druze: /q/. Elderly former farmer: /q/, also used /g/.

Phonology

Fifty-year-old school teacher: /q/. Elderly Druze female: /q/. Female Druze student: /q/. Female Druze, medical secretary born in 1976: /q/. Male Druze born in 1980 and 1981: /q/. Twelve-year-old schoolboy: /q/. Young Christian schoolgirl in 7th grade: /ʔ/. Young woman who had finished school one year earlier: /ʔ/. Christian born in 1921: /q/. Female Catholic born in 1939, farmer’s wife: /ʔ/. Three young schoolboys born in 1987: /ʔ/. Young school girl: /ʔ/. It seems that (younger?) Christians use /ʔ/. – Dēr Ḥanna (62): Talmon map /ʔ/. Interview with Muslim (no further data): /q/. Interview with older female Christian: /ʔ/. Recording of Muslim born in 1937: /q/. Recording of older female Christian: /ʔ/. Recording of unnamed male: ninety-three instances of /q/, fiftysix of /ʔ/. Recordings of Muslim born in 1964: /ʔ/. – ʕIlabūn (63): Talmon map 1 indicates /ʔ/ and obviously for a Bedouin dialect /g/. One text told by a speaker born in 1909 has only /q/, a second text told by a Christian born in 1921 also /q/. Text in Palva 1966:136 ff. told by a Greek Orthodox born in 1910, equally /q/. An interview conducted by B. with four female speakers all of them about twenty years old and their father elicited /ʔ/. – Bʕēni-Nǧēdāt (65): Bedouin on Talmon map: /g/, no other data attested. Recording of female speaker born in 1952 has /q/ throughout. Recording of male speaker born in 1908, equally /q/; female speaker born in 1968, /q/ throughout, text in Palva 1966:132 told by a fiftyyear-old farmer and his forty-two-year-old wife /q/, interview with middle-aged male speaker: /q/. – Li-ʕzēr (66): Palva 1966:124 ff.: /q/. – Kufir Kanna (68): Talmon map indicates /ʔ/ and /g/. Interview with older male: /g/. He declares that the Qāf: ʕind il-Kufir Kanna tgīle, ʕind il-mašāhde22 tīǧi axaff. Second interview with middle-aged male: /g/. Third interview with younger female: /ʔ/. Fourth interview with Muslim: /q/. He declares: muʕḏ̣am is-sittāt il-masiḥiyyāt biḥku bil-ʔāl … w bāqi n-niswān kullayātin biḥku bilgāl, zlām w niswān ʕind il-ʔixwān əl-musəlmīn, ʕind ilmasīḥiyye tamānīn fil-miyye biḥku bil-gāl. Declares that he speaks with the qāl because he was a school teacher. At the time of interview, 17% of the population were Christian, the rest Muslim. – Ṭurʕān (69): /q/ and /ʔ/ on Talmon map. Text told by a female Muslim speaker born in 1952 provides /q/. One text told by Christian born in 1910 also provides /q/. Text in Palva 1966:140 ff. with Greek Orthodox born in 1943 22  Inhabitants of il-Mišhad.

125 equally /q/. Questionnaire with middle-aged female: /ʔ/. She declares that this is her way of speaking and that in school they used to make fun of her pronouncing the qurʔān as ʔurʔān. She confirms that the majority uses /q/. Later in the interview she declares that her mother is from Nazareth, so her pronunciation could be due to her mother and be idiosyncratic. Symbol therefore in brackets on map. Interview with older female /k/ ~ /q/: karkūše ‘lobe of the ear’, more instances of /q/: fōq ‘above’, ṛaqabe ‘neck’. Symbol on map in brackets. Questionnaire with older male /q/ and commentary kull luġatna hōn bil-qāf. Questionnaire conducted by B. with young male student: /q/. – ʕIsifya (71): Talmon map indicates /q/ and /ʔ/. Questionnaire provides /ʔ/, number and age of informants are unknown. Text told by female informant born in 1933 provides /q/. As a matter of fact, approximately 90% of the inhabitants are Druze and use a very energetically pronounced /q/. They are immedialety recognised by the other Druze in the region because of this pronunciation. As for the /ʔ/, it is only used by the Christian minority. – ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣ (72): interview with older male: /k/, sometimes used /q/. The latter will be disregarded on map. Recording of male born in 1918 from the same family: transcribed recording: /q/, speaker used /k/! – ʕIlūṭ (75): Talmon map indicates /q/. Interview with older male has /ʔ/ ~ /ḳ/. Second interview with male born in 1900: /q/. Recording of male born in 1938: /q/. Second recording of male born in 1933: /q/ ~ /k/. He declares that in ʕIlūṭ the Qāf is muraqqaq whilst in Ṣaffūri it would be mufaxxam. He pronounced the word qāf in his own dialect with a rather central /ā/ and the word qāf in the dialect of Ṣaffūri with a back /ǡ/. Third recording of male born in 1923: /k/. Text in Palva 1966:144 ff. has /q/. – ir-Rēni (76): no data on Talmon map. Interview and recording of eighty-one-year-old male: /k/. Second interview with middle-aged informant: /k/ ~ /ʔ/. Third interview with middle-aged male: /k/. Recording of forty-five-year-old female: /k/. Recording of approximately forty-five-year-old Muslim: /k/. Recording of sixty-five-year-old Muslim: /k/. Recording of sixty-yearold Muslima: /k/. Recording of forty-three-year-old Muslima: /k/. Recording of Christian female born in 1937: /ʔ/. Recording of Christian female born in 1961: /ʔ/. – For Nazareth (77), see Havelova 2000a:143: “Reflexes of classical q found in Nazareth among the native Nazarenes are ḳ and hamza”. In fn. 6, “The pronunciation

126 of ḳ is somewhere between q and k”. The distribution Havelova found showed that all Muslim men used ḳ, while out of thirteen Muslim women ten used ḳ and three the glottal stop. Out of the six Christian men, five pronounced ḳ, and only one the glottal stop. Out of the twelve Christian women, only two pronounced ḳ, the majority used the glottal stop. She gives a more refined analysis as to the different Christian denominations. In our sample, ten of twelve Christian women pronounced the glottal stop, only two pronounced ḳ. Three of seven Christian men pronouned ḳ, four of them the glottal stop. Of nine Muslim women six pronounced ḳ, three the glottal stop. The four Muslim men only used ḳ. Several Chi square tests have shown that the differences between the speakers are highly significant and that in both samples the deviation of Christian women is highest. In the corpus of Havelova, the sums of Chi squares with one d.f. are: Christian women 13.5714, Muslim men 8.800, Muslim women 2.000, Christian men 0.0000. In our corpus, the sums of Chi squares with one d.f. are: Christian women, 10.7771, Muslim men 7.500, Muslim women 2.3332, Christian men 0.0000. Havelova 2000a:143 concludes: “… the most hamza speakers are women which can be associated with prestige. In this dialectal area hamza is reported to be a characteristic feature of urban pronunciation and moreover, concerning the gender distinction it is attributed mostly to women”. – Yāft in-Nāṣri (78): “The existence of [g], voiced reflex of qāf in fellāḥi dialects is reported by Christie not only with general indication of our area, but with specific mention of Yāfa, near Nazareth. This information is verified by the recording of a very old Christian female informant from that village” (Talmon 2002:72). This recording was counter-checked. She indeed used forms such as gallu ‘he told him’, galitlu ‘she told him’, but more often /k/: kalb ‘heart’, kalltlu ‘she told him’, kalltla ‘she told her’. Interview conducted by student with male born in 1947: /q/ (recording not available). Interview with two females, old and young: /q/. Interview with another elderly female: /k/. Several recordings of males and females /k/ ~ /ḳ/. According to A. Zuʕbi (p.c.), /g/ is no longer used in the dialect of Yāft in-Nāṣri. – Iksāl (79): see Nevo 2006:31. – Nēn (85) map in Talmon 2002:73 indicates /g/. According to Palva 1995:185, in 1961 “some speakers in the older generation, especially … older women” used /g/. Complete interview with speaker born in 1944 also furnishes /g/. This speaker belongs to the ʕUmari family which claims origin from Ṣandala and which is

Phonology

the second-largest family of the village. In the dialect of Ṣandala, however, /k/ is used. Interview on lexicon with older male speaker from the Zuʕbi family (largest family of the village) has /k/: kabəl ‘before’, kalli ‘he told me’, bikūlu ‘they say’, kunfud ‘hedgehog’, etc. Third male speaker (farmer) also from the ʕUmari family first uses /k/, then declares: niḥki bil-gāf zayy il-maṣarwe. This refers to the inhabitants of Kufir Miṣr (88). In the rest of the interview, he uses /g/. Fourth older speaker of the ʕUmari family also uses /g/. Two speakers from the Zuʕbi family used too many standard forms and /q/ and are not reliable informants. – id-Daḥi (86): no data on Talmon map. Interview with older speaker from the Zuʕbi family: primarily uses /g/, instances of /k/ such as karya ‘village’, manṭika ‘region’. Second speaker born in 1929 from the Zuʕbi family mainly uses /g/ in recording. Two women, mother and daughter, vary between /k/ and /g/. At the end of the recording they reveal that the mother was from Sūlam. Another speaker also declared that the inhabitants of id-Daḥi originated from Sūlam. – Sūlam (89): in five interviews, male speakers of different age mainly used /g/, two of them occasionally used /k/. – iṭ-Ṭayybe (91): analphabet born in 1932 used /g/, as did the men and an older woman sitting around. Interview with female born in 1975, with sixteen years of education: /k/. Interview with forty-four-year-old male: /g/. Interview with older male: /g/. Recording of male born in 1917 (kuttāb): /g/. Recording of older male: /g/. Interview with older male: /ʔ/. After a while he declared that the inhabitants of iṭ-Ṭayybe all speak bil-gāl and that he all his life he had lived in Nazareth. This raises doubts as to the female having used /k/ in interview, according to the transcription. As for iṭ-Ṭayybe, Palva 1966:181–182 mentions a “slightly fronted voiceless retracted velar /ḳ/”. As for /g/, Palva op. cit. 185 mentions it for Iksāl (79), ʕĒn Māhil (80), Dabbūrye (82), Nēn (85) and Sūlam (89). – Fredīs (92) Jastrow 2009:233 /k/. – For Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93), /g/ is used in interview. This is also used in two recordings from different speakers. Another one used /ʔ/. The interview with several older informants (mainly two women speaking) provides /g/. Jastrow 2009:23 has /g/ for both dialect types of Ǧisr izZarga. In a recording conducted by him with a male fisherman from the Ǧurbān family (Ǧisir I dialect), /g/ is the normal pronunciation, but there are instances of /k/: kiriš ‘shark’, kārib, pl. kawārib ‘boat(s)’.

Phonology

– Mqēble (95) in four interviews with three older males and one female: /k/. Older speaker from family of one of the interviewees, however, uses /g/. Recording of farmer born in 1940, older female, female born in 1929, married to a farmer, all: /k/. Recording of older female should not be used. She married a man from Naʕūṛa

127 and lived there for a year, then moved to Nazareth, lived there for a year, then left for Haifa, lived there for two years, then left again for Nazareth and lived there at the time of recording. She uses /k/. The interviews with Christians and Muslims on YouTube all have /k/. Only an elderly Muslim dressed as a Bedouin, from the Zyadāt family, uses /g/. A member of this family was, indeed, recorded in the nineties of the last century and equally used /g/.

128

N

Phonology

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22

6 20 1 14 17 18

Akko

28

19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

26 56

57

58

40 43

Haifa 34

31 32 35

51

62

61

47 48

65

49 66 67

50

Sea of Galilee

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85

e

89

92

95

93

ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

63

69

68

75

71 72

44 45

46

36 37

60 41

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

061

*q

in

o be able, c

only yi dar attested idir, yi dar yi'da yiqda yigda 0

061

1.3.1.1 *q > ġ in ‘to be able, can’

5

10 km

Phonology

061 1.3.1.1 *q > ġ in ‘to be able, can’ The isolated change *q > ġ is mainly attested for imperfect forms (yiġdaṛ, etc.), more rarely for perfect forms (ġidir), sometimes for participle forms ġādre sg.f. (95). It is typical of sedentary dialects. Where attested in bedouin dialects it is most probably a loan pronunciation. As for Palestinian Arabic, it is further more attested in Elihay 147-left as “ġider [yiġdar] – to be able, can – used in Galilee instead of the more widespread qider”. Bauer 179-left indicates it for Galilee and the Jaffa plain. It is also widely attested in sedentary Syrian dialects (SA map 10, only imperfect forms yiġdaṛ, yiġdir). For Egypt see BehnstedtWoidich 1985 Band 1 Einleitung und Anmerkungen zu den Karten:69 fn. 9: “In einigen Orten im Delta (besonders im Osten) wurde yiġdar ‘er kann’ festgestellt, Perf. gidir (in

129 den Baḥariyya-Oasen ġidir/yiġdar)”. This clearly shows that the starting point was the imperfect. Cf. also ġasal, yiġsil [yixsil] “to wash” or xasal, yixsil in Syria (SA map 8). For Akko (28) forms with /ʔ/ were attested for male informants of different ages: tiʔdaṛ “you can”, ʔidirtiš “I could not”, yiʔdar “he can”, btiʔdariš “you cannot”. Liʕzēr (66): byiġdar ~ biġdar (Palva 1966:126,23/24). Kufer Kanna (68) one speaker used bigdar, another one bagdar ~ baġdar ~ tigdar. Ṭurʕān 69 Palva text 6, p. 140,18/23 ʔaġdaṛ, yiġdar. Iksāl (79): Nevo 31 “The dialect has g – ġ variation for OA q in cases deriving from the root q-d-r in Form 1, e.g. ġidrat ~ gidrat ‘she was able’, miš ġādir ‘he is not able’, gidru ‘they (m.) were able’, ma ġdirtiš? lā ma gdirtiš ‘were you (sg.m.) able? No, I was not able’”. Haifa AGK 313 ġidir, yiġdar.

130

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

1 2

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

Akko

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 36 37

34

35

51 52 53

72

65

49 66 67

50

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

83 84

87

89

92

88

90 91

Jordan

O

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

062

64

63

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

54 71

27

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Jenin

Reflexes of *k 36

/k/ / / in Bedouin dialects /k /k / / C, G, M dialects /k /k y / /k / / extinct /q/ fishermen dialect 0

062 1.3.2 Kāf

5

10 km

Phonology

062 1.3.2 Kāf In Akko, only in the dialect of the fishermen is *k generally shifted to /q/, e.g., in samaq ‘fish’, šabaqa ‘net’, qull ‘all’, etc., while *q is shifted to /ʔ/. Their speech probably represents the original dialect of the city. Due to intensive immigration from iž-Ždayydi and other villages of the area, it is restricted to this group of speakers. A similar strange shift is reported for the dialect of the Christians of Nazareth who, some 100 years ago, pronounced a /k/ for *q, but used the glottal stop /ʔ/ for *k, for example, in ʔīf ḥālaʔ? ‘how are you?’. The information comes from Anīs Kildāwi born in Haifa in 1913 who had heard this pronunciation in Nazareth as a child. Cf. Grotzfeld 1967:87 f., in which al-ʕAbdari reports this shift also for Cairene Arabic: ǧumhūruhum yaǧʕalūna l-qāfa wa l-kāfa hamzatan. The question is whether we have here a systematic consonant shift or some idiosyncratic hypercorrections. Cf. supra qibri ‘needle’. Since the reflexes of *q in Nazareth are either /k/ or /ʔ/, perhaps the speaker(s) simply were confused and tried to use a more elegant pronunciation. Bauer 1970:216 reports similar cases of hypercorrections for the inhabitants of Lydda (Lod) such as ʕandaʔ = ʕandak, biddaʔ = biddak, duʔʔāne = dukkāne. The affrication of *k in the environment of front consonants > /č/ is attested in the B dialects, the G dialects northeast of the Muṯallaṯ dialects and the M dialects. As for the M dialects he had investigated, Jastrow 2009:232 states that the shift *k > č is by no means complete, quite to the contrary, there are many words in which the old kāf has not been fronted but is preserved as such, e.g.: … akal ‘he ate’, akli ‘something to eat, a meal’, kull ‘all’. Statistically, there are probably as many words with a shift of kāf to /č/ as words in which kāf has been preserved. The exact conditions for the sound change have not yet been established. It seems to have been triggered by adjacent front vowels including fronted /a/, but there remain many unclear cases. Why, e.g., does /k/ change to č in ḥača ‘he spoke’ but is preserved in akal ‘he ate’? A possible explanation would be the imperfect of akal, namely bōkil ‘he eats’, which has a back vowel preceding the k. As for the situation in the G dialects northeast of the Muṯallaṯ proper, see Palva 1995:185, who mentions it for the dialects of Iksāl (79), ʕĒn Māhil (80), Dabbūrye (82), Nēn (85) and Sūlam (89). In these dialects, the reflexes used by some speakers in the older generation, especially by older women, are /g/ and /č/,

131 or to be more exact, this was the situation in 1961 when I visited the[se] … village[s] … Since in 1961 the slightly fronted, voiceless /ḳ/ was the most usual reflex in the speech of a great majority of speakers, and /č/ was a recessive, stigmatized variant, I suppose that these traits by now may have fallen into disuse. Palva concludes: “In this area, it would be rather natural to attribute the /g/ and the /č/ reflexes to the influence of the neighbouring Bedouin tribes which dominated the Jezreel Valley area until the latter part of the 19th century”. If these pronunciations in the dialects of the sedentary villagers are attributed to dialect contact, then obviously exceptions to a rule could also be explained by various aspects of dialect contact, namely by adaptation to another dialect which can be incomplete (ʔakal vs. ḥača) or hyperadaptation such as čūʕ, pl. čwāʕ ‘elbow(s)’ or ṛučba ‘knee’. The enquiries in the nineties of last century and the beginning of this century furnished the following data. – Kababīr (37) is a special case. It is “a mixed neighbourhood of Jews and Ahmadi Muslim Arabs in Haifa, Israel. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community was founded in the 19th century, originating in India and settled in Kababīr. Most of the families who were displaced to Kababīr are originally from the village of Niʕlin near Jerusalem. One of the biggest and most well known family is the Odeh’s family” (Wikipedia sub voce). There is a recording of sixty-one-year-old former school teacher ʕUmar Maḥmūd ʕŌde. He spoke a mixture of MSA and dialect and used /č/ in Čababīr, Čanada (Canada). In the rest of the recording, he only used /k/. He related that the village was founded in 1835 by ʕŌde in-Nada from a village in the qaḍāʔ Ramallah called Miʕlīn, which is Niʕlīn. The family of the founder co-mingled with people from iṭ-Ṭīra (Ṭīrat Karmel). On maps 7 and 8 in Seeger 2013, /č/ is attested for Niʕlīn. – ʕIbillīn (46) speakers of Bedouin origin used /g/ quite consistently during interviews, but only used a few instances of /č/. Only čānat was used in the first interview, all other forms elicited /k/. Second interview has no instances of /č/, the third interview has čabeš ‘ram’. – ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣ (72) recording of speaker born in 1918, refugee (without indication of original home), uses čān, yimčin, in other cases /k/. Interview with male from the same family (no age indicated, according to voice older):23 ʔifčaḥ ‘limping’, hēč ‘this way’. No other instances.

23  He uses halkēt for “now” which hints at an origin from central Palestine.

132

Phonology

– In ʕIlūṭ (75), there is a tendency amongst speakers to use a palatalised [ky] such as in kyalb ‘dog’. But Palva 1966:144ff. does not mention this phenomenon. One of the informants in ʕIlūṭ reported that speakers from Mžēdil and Maʕlūl pronounce the Kāf ča. Both are pre1948 villages and their inhabitants fled to Nazareth. – Yāft in-Nāṣri (78)24 is a special case where questionnaires and recordings offer a rather confused picture. One questionnaire completed with a male Christian speaker born in 1947, with seven years of schooling, furnishes only forms with /k/. He used /q/ for Qāf. Second short questionnaire with elderly female shows /q/ ~ /k/ for Qāf, no examples for Kāf. Third interview with young male: Kāf = /k/ ~ /ʔ/, no instances of /č/ for Kāf. Short recording of eleven minutes with older male Qāf = /k/, Kāf = /k/ (hēk, kēf, yiḥki, etc.). Recording of five minutes (fairy tale) with apparently very old woman on same tape. She vacillates between /g/ and /k/ for Qāf. She does not speak a B dialect. Instances for /č/: ʔanṭīč ‘I give you (f.)’, ḥača, hēč ‘this way’. Second questionnaire with older female who used /k/ for Kāf, sometimes /q/, no instances of /č/. Recording of an illiterate Christian female speaker born in 1900, who has always lived in Yāft in-Nāṣri. She uses /g/ and /č/ and obviously speaks a G dialect. Her family name is Marǧiyyi which hints at an origin from Marǧ Ibn ʕAmir (Jezreel Valley). This is the “very old Christian female informant” mentioned in Talmon 2002:72. A speaker born in 1922 mainly uses /k/ for Kāf, but also twice ʔanṭīč ‘I give you’, hēč ‘this way’, čam ‘several’, čēf ~ čīf? ‘how?’, but kitfu ‘his shoulder’. A doubtful informant is a female Christian speaker born in 1916, who grew up in the Nazareth orphanage, and lived for many years in Haifa, then in Jerusalem, Bēt Ǧāla and also in Jordan, returning to Yāft in-Nāṣri in 1977. She used /q/ for Qāf and /k/ for Kāf (hēk, ktīr, kbīr, baḥki, etc.). A Muslim informant born in 1918 used /q/ for Qāf and /č/ in čēl ‘a liquid measure’, biḥičmū ‘they judge him’, ḥāčmi ‘governing (f.)’, ḥičim “governance”, tārči ‘having left (f.)’, kinn ~ činn ‘as if’, čīf? ‘how?’, aqullič ‘I tell you’, hēč ‘this way’, but kṯīr ‘much’. According to Amal iz-Zuʕbi (p.c.) from Nazareth, /g/ and /č/ are no longer used in the dialect of Yāft in-Nāṣri, now a suburb of Nazareth. – Iksāl (79): The most recent and reliable data are those of Nevo 2006:29–30. As for Nevo’s description, /č/ seems to be predominant and the distribution of the two sounds /k/ and /č/ seems to be similar to that of, for example, the Bedouin dialects, such as /k/ in back

environment, /č/ in front environment with cases of paradigmatc levelling. The situation is, however, to some extent contradictory. For instance, in kṯīr ‘much’ one would rather expect čṯīr. But the form could be explained by the fact that it is such a common form in all the dialects of the area and therefore just a transregional pronunciation is used. čūʕ, pl. čwāʕ ‘elbow(s)’ is extraordinary. As for ‘knee’, there is some hesitation between rukbi and ručbi. – ʕĒn Māhil (80): recording of speaker born in 1938 (imām of his village) with forms such as kān, kānu, katabli, kēf. One instance of /č/ in činn gāl ‘as if he said’. Recording of farmer born in 1926 with forms such as nkitt ‘we shake (the olive tree)’, btiḥki ‘you talk’, hēk (more frequent) ~ hēka ~ hēč ~ hēča ‘this way’, kbīr ‘big’, ibtičbaṛ ‘she grows’, bikbaṛ ‘he grows’, kṯīr ‘much’, kišik ‘dried butter-milk mixed with wheatmeal, sikki ~ sičči ‘ploughshare’, kēf ‘how?’, misčab ‘patch, bed for tobacco plant’,25 č-čayy ‘the cauterisation’, yičwu b-rágbatu ‘they cauterise him on his neck’, čin ‘as if’ (several instances), kīs ‘bag’. Questionnaire completed with male informant born in 1966 has kitif ‘shoulder’, corrected in čitif, čaffe ~ čafft il-ʔīd ‘palm of the hand’, čafft il-ʔiǧer ’instep’, čaʕeb ‘heel’, ifčaḥ ‘limping’, ičtaʕ ‘with a crippled hand’, bičir ‘young bull’, baččīre ‘heifer’, kabeš ‘ram’, hēča ‘this way’, hiyyāči ‘here you (sg. f.) are!’, hiyyāčin! ‘here you (pl. f.) are!’, haḏīk ‘that one (f.)’, ʕindič ‘you (sg. f.) have’, čēf? ‘how?’, ručubti ‘my knee’, samačtēn ‘two fishes’, ʔačram ‘he treated in a hospitable way’, ḥača ‘he talked’, bača ‘he cried’. Questionnaire conducted by B. with middleaged male informant: čitif, pl. čtāf ‘shoulder(s)’, čaff, pl. čfūf ‘palm of the hand’, ṛukbe ‘knee’, ʔifčaḥ, f. fačḥa, pl. fičḥān ‘limping (with distorted feet)’, mčallale ‘women’s head adornment’, dīč, pl. dyūč ‘cock(s)’, etc. Informant does not avoid /č/, but rejects čibrīt ‘matches’, čīs ‘bag’, čṯīr ‘much’, siččīne ‘knife’, misčīn ‘poor’. Dabbūrye (82): recording of female speaker born in 1942 but married in Iksāl since 1957 cannot be used. She uses -ič in forms such as aǧīblič ‘I bring you’. Second recording of female speaker born in 1921 but living in Nazareth since 1940 cannot be used. Third recording of speaker born in 1909 provided kbirit, kibir, kānat, kān, yimkin, mirčin, hēča. Fourth recording of male speaker born in 1911 supplied: dabačna l-katil fīhin ‘we gave them a hiding’, dabačtlak fīhin, various forms of ‘to be’ such as kān ‘he was’, kānat ‘she was’, kānu ‘they were’, hēk ‘this way’, kṯīr ‘much’, kēf? ‘how?’. Questionnaire with middle-aged male speaker supplied: kaffe ~ kafft il-ʔīd ‘palm of the hand’, kaʕeb ‘heel’, kasīḥ ~

24  About 70% of the population is Muslim, the rest Christian.

25  From Aramaic miškabtā, according to Seeger WB online 372 .

Phonology

mkarsaḥ ‘lame, limping’, kabiš ‘ram’, but ʔifčaḥ ‘limping’, baččīre ‘heifer’, hēč (in spontaneous utterance, but when asked for, twice hēk!), kēf ~ čēf ‘how?’, and when interrogated, biḥči ‘he talks’ (spontaneous utterance). Interview with older speaker not original from Dabbūrye, settled down there thirty years ago and married to a woman originally from Ṣaffūryi. Should not be used. Last interview with older person (formerly farmer) from the oldest families of the village (ʔiḥna ʔasās il-balad hāy): ḥanak ‘jaw’, kitif ‘shoulder’, kaff ‘palm of the hand’, mkarsaḥ ‘lame’, bakkīre ‘heifer’, kabiš ‘ram’. When asked for ‘dog’, speaker answers kalb. DZ asks “do you say kalb or čalb?”. Interviewee: ʔiḥna bingūl čalb! When asked for ‘cock’, his first answer is dīk. DZ repeats dīk or dīč? Interviewee: lā dīk! fī dīč, ǡ dīč. Asked kinne or činne? ‘daughter-in-law’, he confirms činne. This clearly shows that the informant is not reliable, but he is not to be blamed for his answers. Speaking in terms of pragmatics, he acted naturally. He first gave koiné forms, evidently because /č/ is stigmatised. It was only when the interviewer proposed to him another possibility that he indicated the true dialectal pronunciation which he would use in another context, namely speaking with insiders. For interviewing techniques, this shows that the interviewer should have some foreknowledge and propose a choice of answers to the interviewee. – Nēn (85): complete questionnaire with forty-oneyear-old male informant: kitef, kabeš, kaff, kaʕeb, kasīḥ, hēk, ḥaka, baka, hayyātik, haḏīki, but: kēf ~ čēf, ʔifčaḥ. Second interview with forty-one-year-old male only ʔifčaḥ and kēf ~ čēf, the latter in brackets. Recording of male born in 1928 repeatedly uses čanūn ‘oven’, but otherwise has /k/ as in kēf? ‘how?’, birke ‘pond’, ʔaḥki ‘I tell’, etc. Recordings of three other male informants from the two main families of the village have no instances of /č/, only /k/ as in kṯīr ‘much’, kān ‘he was’, hēk(a) ‘this way’, etc. – Id-Daḥi (86): Two long recordings of speaker born in 1929: no instances of /č/. Questionnaire with same informant: he used /k/, but when asked at the end of the interviews whether he said kalib or čalib admitted: “some say kalib, some say čalib”. Recording of female older informant: no instances of /č/. – Ṭamra (87): One transcribed lexical questionnaire is not reliable. Recording not available. Recording of lexical questionnaire with older male informant: kitef, ktāf, kasīḥa ‘lame’, sikkīn ‘knife’, dīč ‘cock’, spontaneous utterance: čbīr ‘big’. Recording of middle-aged male speaker: kān, kṯīr, kbīr, čēf? (several times), hēč, ḥača, čbīr (several instances). Questionnaire with analphabetical woman (no age indicated, eleven children): ktāfak ‘your shoulders’, čaffe ‘palm of the hand’, baččīre ‘heifer’,

133 kabeš ‘ram’, čalib ‘dog’, činni ‘daughter-in-law’, spontaneously hēč(a) ‘this way’ (several times), čbīr ‘big’, tidbič ‘she dances’. – Kufir Maṣir (88): interview with forty-year-old male informant: kitef, ktāf, kafft il-ʔīd, kaffet il-ʔiǧer, čaʕeb, ʔifčaḥ, kasīḥ, baččīre, kabeš, hēč, hiyyāč ‘here you (sg. f.) are!’, haḏīč, kēf ~ čēf, ʕindčin, ʕindčinniš, ḥača, but baka, yinkawi. Recording of female informant (made in 2004, no age indicated) with instances of /č/, but informant obviously speaks a B dialect as is shown by verb forms such as yīǧim, yibātam and čint, činna. – Sūlam (89): first questionnaire with fifty-five-year-old male: no instances of /č/. Second interview with male (older according to voice): at first no instances of /k/, when answering question for ‘heifer’, calls it bakkīre (male voice in background: baččīre). When asked “do you say kalib or čalib?”, confirms čalib and adds čalbe for the female. He rejects dīč ‘cock’ also other forms such as čṯīr ḥači ‘chatter box’. At the end of the interview he declares that only older people would use the ʔič. Third interview with speaker, born in Sūlam, who declares that he is originally from il-ʕAwadi in the Jezreel Valley (Marǧ Ibn ʕĀmir) and that the family came to Sūlam in 1948.. The family belongs to the ʕArab Turkmān.26 He responds to the questionnaire in a broad Bedouin dialect and consequently uses /č/. Short recording of older male: no instances of /č/. Recording of speaker born in 1915: no instances of /č/. Two recordings of speaker born in 1931: one instance of /č/ in hēč. – Naʕūra (90): first recording of speaker born in 1930 (uses /g/ for Qāf), no instances of /č/. Second interview with younger male informant. Informant is not reliable, uses only /k/ and /ʔ/ for Qāf. Second interview with middleaged male. Used /g/ for Qāf, no instances of /č/. – Iṭ-Ṭayybe (91): lexical questionnaire (only in written form from 1998) with female informant born in 1975, with sixteen years of education: ḥanak, kitif, kaff, rukbi, kaʕib, ʔifkaḥ, hēka, kīf, ʕindik, ʕindkin, rikbit, samkat, šabkat, mēkil, yibki, yiḥki. Informant uses /k/ for Kāf. Second lexical questionnaire not transcribed with male informant aged forty-four: čaff, ʔifčaḥ, kasīḥ, kabeš, baččīre, hēč, hiyyāč! ‘here you are!’, hiyyāči! ‘here you (f.) are!’, čalib, dīč, haḏīč. Informant uses /g/ for Qāf. Complete questionnaire, not transcribed, middleaged speaker, often hardly audible due to strong wind disturbing recording: no instances of /č/. Recording 26  Cf. Rosenhouse 1984:56: “Most of the tribes detailed here are small, heterogeneous, unrelated genealogically, and not always of really Bedouin origin. Some are Tourkemens, or of Fallāhi origin”.

134 (middle-aged speaker) uses forms such as hēk, kānat, kīf, sakan, but mentions dīč and comments: bi-maṭraḥ il-kāf barḏ̣u ʔič. laʔ miš kull il-ḥalāt, yaʕni bikūl ‘kursi’ … bikūl samač … il-ʔič nafsha, ma tġayyarat. In the following lexical enquiry, he declared that he had lived in Nazareth all his life! Lexical inquiry with middle-aged informant not transcribed: ḥanač ‘jaw’, kitef; kaff corrected in čaff, čaʕeb, ʔifčaḥ. This speaker, however, uses /g/ for Kāf and not /k/. Short text, speaker born in 1917, traditional education (kuttāb): two instances of /č/: bačbariš ʕalē, čbīr. – Fredīs (92): see Jastrow 2009:233 with examples ḥača, akal, šafūč ‘they saw you (f.)’. Interviews furnish čitif, čaʕeb ~ čaʕab, čbīr, ḏačar, hēč, etc. Interesting is /č/ in a back environment due to paradigmatic levelling as in ʔifčaḥ, fačḥa, fučuḥ, ‘limping’, čān, yčūn, čṯīr, ʔačṯaṛ, min čuṯur ma ‘for so much’, but also in cases like čōm, pl. ʔačwām ‘heap’, čursi ‘chair’, čūsa ‘zucchini’, tufruč ‘you rub’, tufurču ‘you rub it’. – Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93), see Jastrow 2009. – Mšērfe (94) only two texts available with two males born in 1985, 1988: čṯīr, čayyafat, ič-čbīri vs. kalb, ʔaklat, kān. – Mqēble (95): interview with middle-aged female: ḏānič ‘your (f.) ear’, ḏinēč ‘your (f.) ears’, kitef ‘shoulder’, kūʕ ‘elbow’ corrected in čūʕ (others present laughing), čaffe ’palm of the hand’, čarše ‘belly’, rukbe ‘knee’ corrected in ričbe, ʔifčaḥ ‘with twisted foot’, časīḥa ‘cripple’, ʔičtaʕ ‘with a crippled hand’, baččīre ‘heifer’, hēč ‘this way’, mā ʕindčīš ‘you (f.) don’t have’, ričibti ‘my knee’, šabači ‘net’, ḥača ‘he told’, masačto ‘I seized him’, but kalit ‘I ate’, mākle ‘having eaten (f.)’. Interview with male: only instances of /k/. When asked “do you say kalb or čalb?” informant replies “I say kalib, there are others who say čalb”. He remarks that č would be rather rare. Interview with older male: kitef, kūʕ corrected in čūʕ, kasīḥa, ʔiktaʕ, mkarsaḥ, baččīra, čalb, dīč, činne ‘daughter-in-law’, čṯīr ḥači. No instances of /č/ in recordings on YouTube from Mqēble. – Ṣandala (96) interview with older male: kitef, kaff, biḥki, bakkīre, hēk ~ hēč ~ hēča, haḏīč, ma ʕandkīš, kēf (čēf was rejected), dīk, kṯīr ḥaki ‘chatterbox’, kalb (čalb was rejected). Second interview (only lexicon) with older male: kitef, kaff. In spontaneous utterances: ḥakēt, bniḥči, kbīr ~ čbīr, ktīr ~ čṯīr, bičūn ‘he is’, čēf?, hēč. Recording of male born in 1928: hēč, činha ‘as if she’, ḥačīhum ‘their speech’, tišči ‘you complain’, kān ~ čān, kānat. Recording of male born in 1908: kān, kānat, kānu. Recording of male (no age indicated), yraččbūha ‘they made her mount [on the horse]’, rāčbe ‘mounted f.’, kānat, ma kaniš ‘there was not’, kānu, hēk ~ hēč. Recording of female born

Phonology

in 1921: čayyyafna ‘we had fun’, yčayyfu (m.), yčayyfin (f.) ‘they have fun’, čin ‘as if’, yidibčin ‘they (f.) dance’, ndarbič ‘we play the drum’, durbačče ‘drum’, čēf? ‘how?’, čān and more examples for /č/. Recording of male born in 1925: ičṯīr, šikil (female had šičil), milč. 1.3.2.1 Conclusions 1) As Jastrow 2009:232 has stated, the shift *k > č in the Muṯallaṯ dialects is far from being systematic. It certainly started in the environment of front vowels, but paradigmatic levelling partly has led to this unsystematic distribution. kunt ‘I was’, ykūn ‘he is’ prevent *kān > čān as is the case in Bedouin dialects (čān, činit). Therefore, all our dialects have kān. On the other hand, also due to paradigmatic levelling, we find /č/ in back and labial environments where one would expect /k/ such as čawa, yičwu ‘to cauterise’ or ḥača, yiḥču ‘to speak’. 2) Another possible explanation for this unsystematic distribution of /k/ and /č/ may be dialect contact and incomplete accommodation and cases such as čūʕ ‘elbow’ (Mqēble, 95), ṛučḅa ‘knee’, čursi ‘chair’ (Fredīs, 92) by hyper-adaptation. See Trudgill 1986:58, 62 “transfer mixed dialects”, 66 “hyperdialectisms”. 3) As has already been stated in Behnstedt-Woidich 1985:30–31, the interview situation especially within the framework of more “superficial” fieldwork for a dialect atlas is always somewhat “formal”, and a deeper contact between dialectologist and the informants is not possible. This can mean that prestige forms are used, that stigmatised pronunciations are avoided, that often “true” dialectal forms are used side by side with more prestigious transregional forms. This, of course, may also explain a certain lack of consistency in the data as for the shift *k > č. Furthermore, most of the informants interviewed were males. 4) The avoidance of stigmatised forms or pronunciations, or their being mixed with other forms during the interview or the recording, does not necessarily mean that the respective forms and pronunciations are recessive in the dialect when being used among the ʔaṣḥāb al-lahǧa. Therefore, Palva’s 1995:185 statement “I suppose that these traits by now may have fallen into disuse” (see above) has to be regarded cum grano salis. Research undertaken more than thirty years after his field work has shown that /č/ was still in use! Dialects are often more resistant than one thinks. Cf. the dialect of Soukhne (Behnstedt 1994:XVI).

136

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea Sea Mediterranean

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

B C

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

29 30

28

D

9 10

23

11 OM 13 12 38 39

24

B B

36 37

34

43

35

44 45

71 72

55

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

95

83 84

87

89

92

94

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

78

93

64

B

Nazareth

73

B,O

69

68

54

60

B 63 65

49 66 67

75

B

62

61

50

27

57

41 47 48

51 52 53

56 59

42

46

31 33 32

26

58

40

Haifa

21

20

8

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

063 / / both, / / more frequent both, more frequent both attested equally

Spe ll

aff arter

0

063 1.3.3 Ǧīm

5

10 km

Phonology

063 1.3.3 Ǧīm The pronunciation /ž/ was originally found in the coastal area. With the construction of main roads from Haifa northwards and eastwards, and especially between Akko and Ṣafad, this pronunciation gradually spread along new trade routes. For example, points 49, 66, 69 are situated on or near road no. 77 to Ṭabariyya. The configuration in the north from Akko to Ṣafad corresponds approximately to road no. 85. The northern coast thus continues a coastal Levantine isogloss reaching from coastal Syria through Lebanon, Galilee and southwards, even until Gaza.27 Actually, it is considered by younger speakers as being more prestigious. For several localities, both pronunciations, /ǧ/ and /ž/, were noted with informants of different ages, religion and sex. In order to determine the pronunciation(s) of a point of investigation with quite some variation, as noted in the foreword, a more sociolinguistically orientated research with much more informants should have been carried out with a representative sample of the local population as for age, sex, religion, education, external contacts, etc. 27  See map 64, p. 155 in Behnstedt-Woidich 2005. In Gaza, however, /ž/ is an innovation brought into the town by refugees from Yaffa. Cf. Arnold 2004:35 and, as for /g/ – /ʔ/, Cotter 2004.

137 Where two pronunciations were elicited, the dominant pronunciation (according to the data collected notabene!) is indicated by colour on the left side of the symbol. Equal distribution by another symbol. See key. As for Haifa (36), cf. AGK-1:51, according to whom /ǧ/ was brought into the town by rural immigrants during the first half of last century. /ǧ/ is still used in the eastern quarter of Haifa Ḥallīṣa populated by a mixture of refugees from the southern Carmel and immigrants from other areas such as Nablus who arrived in 1930. For more details see appendix. The map 064 gives a clearer impression of the distribution area of /ž/ simply by omitting the places where variation with /ǧ/ was attested; /ž/ seems to win ground. As for the texts of Bedouin dialects with recordings no longer available, there is reason to doubt as for /ž/, since the transcriptions of students often show {ǧ} where in reality the recording has /ž/ or vice versa. Normally, in oriental Bedouin Arabic the pronunciation /g/ of Qāf goes with /ǧ/ (or /y/) for Ǧīm. But see also above Kufir Kanna (a ruralite dialect with Bedouin features) with /g/ – /ž/ and Rosenhouse 1984:8: “However, ž is also used in some rural sedentary dialects in the Eastern dialects, e.g., in Lebanon and Israel, where it is also partly acquired by the semi-nomadic Bedouins”.

138

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 37

34

35

51 52 53

72

65

49 66 67

50

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

064

94 97 98 100 101

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

93

64

63

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

54 71

27

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Jenin

m Distribution area of

0

063 1.3.3.1 Distribution area of /ž/

5

10 km

140

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 21

8

B

1

9 10

2

Akko

28

17 18

16

13 38 39

29 30

B

23 24

12

26 56

58

40 43

Haifa

60

42

41 44

46

47 48

31

62

61

65

49 66

J

63

Sea of Galilee

69

53

ariyya

54

72

55

75

71

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85

e

87 89

92

94 93

95

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

065

Dissimilation of a a

s in

r

zazara

sa sa sa 0

065 1.3.3.1 Dissimilation of *š > s in ‘tree’

5

10 km

Phonology

065 1.3.3.1 Dissimilation of *š > s in ‘tree’ As for the disimilation of *š to /s/ before a following fricative of affricate as in *šaǧara ~ šažara > saǧaṛa ~ sažaṛa, see Elihay 2004:465-r “sajar … a variant colloquial form

141 of the word šajar*, heard in the Galilee region and elsewhere”. Bauer 1957:42-l designates saǧar as “urban”, šaǧaṛ as “rural”. This is perhaps a typo.

142

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

Birwe

Haifa 37

56

57

41

65

49 66 67

50

55

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

94 97 98 100 101

ariyya

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

102

066

Sea of Galilee

O Y, W

76 80

78

93

64

63

B

Nazareth

73

C

69

68

75

60 62

61

47 48

71

27

58

54

72

26

24

12

44 45

46

Y O

23

59

42

D 31 33 32 34 51 52 35 53

36

9 10

40 43

B

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8

104

Interdentals

Y O W

t, d, (s, z, ) Young generation Old generation Women

D

Druze

C

Christians Bedouins

B

0

066 1.3.4 Interdentals

5

10 km

Phonology

066 1.3.4 Interdentals The subject is dealt with on map 2 in Talmon 2002:74. But the symbols are not very clearly distinguishable. One symbol is not explained in the key, namely rectangle with lower half in black, upper half in white. Another symbol lacking in the key, rectangle with dot in the centre, obviously designates Bedouin dialects. – Il-Mazraʕa (2): Talmon map indicates interdentals. Interview conducted by B. with a male born in 1943 and his twenty-year-old daughter, family originating from il-Ġabsiyyi: plosives. Second interview with male (no further data): interdentals, but speaker uses plosives with numbers and daʔen ‘chin’, faxed ‘thigh’. This speaker uses xušem for ‘nose’ which is not typical of the area. Recording of male (no further data): forty-four instances of plosives and /ẓ/, forty-one instances of interdentals. Male born in 1943: thirty-seven instances of plosives including /ẓ/ and /z/ in maẓbūṭ, kaza, seventeen instances of interdentals. – Fassūṭa (6): the symbol, as mentioned above, is not explained in the key. Recording of male speaker born in 1928: only interdentals. Lexical questionnaire with this informant: twenty-two instances of interdentals, eleven with plosives. Short recording of male informant born in 1938: three instances of interdentals and three of plosives. Lexical questionnaire with same informant furnishes eighteen instances with interdentals and twenty-three with plosives, among them ḍars ‘molar tooth’, daʔen ‘chin’, faxed, pl. fxād, for which see the following maps. – Miʕilya (7): Talmon map indicates interdentals. Interview with female younger speaker vacillates between interdentals and plosives (more frequent). Recording of male born in 1922: interdentals. Second recording of male Christian born in 1929: interdentals. Third recording of Christian born in 1928: interdentals. Recording of father, mother and son: interdentals. – Taršīḥa (8): Talmon map indicates interdentals. Interview with fifty-year-old male: interdentals. Second interview with male: plosives. Recording of male born in 1929: interdentals. Recording of older male: interdentals. – Kufir Smēʕ (9): according to Wikipedia, around 2,800 inhabitants, Druze, Christian and Muslim. No interview conducted. Two recordings of Christian born in 1922, four years of school: twenty-one instances of interdentals, eleven of plosives. Recordings of retired Christian high school teacher: interdentals. Recording of female relative born in 1960: interdentals. Recordings of two older Druze, one born in 1925: interdentals. – Naḥef (12): according to Talmon map interdentals. First interview with younger male: interdentals. Second

143 interview with middle-aged male speaker: partly interdentals, partly plosives. Three recordings of males: interdentals. – Yanūḥ (14): no data on Talmon map. Middle-aged male speaker in interview partly uses interdentals, partly plosives, especially with numbers. Three recordings with two males, one female: interdentals. – Žaṯṯ (15): no data on Talmon map. Interview: middleaged speaker uses both interdentals and plosives. Unidentified Druze uses interdentals. Texts 5 and 6 in Blanc 1953: interdentals. – Abu Snān (17): Talmon map has plosives. Interview with Christian informants (three females of thirty to forty, one young male): plosives. Recording of seventyfive-year-old former taxi driver (no religion indicated): interdentals. Recording of Christian male born in 1912: interdentals. Recording of male born in 1945 (no religion indicated): interdentals. Texts in Blanc 1953 with Druze born in 1897: interdentals. – Kufir Yasīf (18, the majority are Christians): Talmon map indicates plosives. Interview with fifty-year-old Muslima and her two sons: plosives. Second interview with older Muslim: plosives. Recording of Christian born in 1940: mainly plosives, some instances of interdentals. Recording of Christian female born in 1918; plosives. Recording of Druze born in 1941: interdentals. Female Druze born in 1978: mainly plosives, few instances of interdentals. Short text in Christie told by Protestant: interdentals. – Žūlis (19): no data on Talmon map. Interview with middle-aged male: interdentals, but rather plosives with numbers: tnēn, tlāte, tmāne, ṭnāšar, tlaṭṭāš, tmanṭāš, ṯalaṯīn, tamanīn and ṯamanmiyye. Recordings of males born in 1912, 1926 and 1943: interdentals. – iž-Žišš (21): interdentals on Talmon map. Older Muslim informants in interview used interdentals, younger ones plosives. The texts in Christie 1901:69–72 with a Greek Orthodox and a Muslim have plosives. Recording of male born in 1914: interdentals. Recording of male (no age indicated): plosives. Recording of retired teacher born in 1934: plosives. Recording of Christian taxidriver born in 1937: six instances of interdentals, four of plosives. Recording of Christian retired teacher born in 1924: seventeen instances of interdentals, twenty-eight of plosives. – ʕAkbara (26): no data on Talmon map. Interviews with middle-aged male and female informants: interdentals, but male uses plosives with numbers: tnēn, talāte, tamānye, talaṭṭāš, etc.28 28  Also in other recordings, where, besides interdentals, plosives were used, it was often the case with numbers. A similar case

144

Phonology

– Šfaʕamir (31): Talmon map indicates both plosives and interdentals. Interview with young female: plosives. Interview with middle-aged female: plosives. Interview with young female; plosives. Interview with middleaged female: plosives. Interview with older female: plosives. Interview with male (age unknown): interdentals. Recording of Druze born in 1927: interdentals. Interview with Druze born in 1907: interdentals. Recording of middle-aged female: plosives. Recording of female (age unknown): interdentals. Recording of young female: plosives. Interview with female Druze born in 1950 (elementary school): interdentals. Christie 1901 text told by Greek Orthodox: interdentals. Recording from Palva 1966 with Greek Orthodox butcher, born in 1931, three years of schooling: interdentals. – Il-Biʕne (38): interdentals and plosives on Talmon map. Interview conducted by B. with female school teacher born in 1973 and young man supplies plosives. Her parents and two younger sisters present the use of interdentals. The teacher declares that school children use plosives, but that the majority of the speakers use interdentals. Interview conducted by DZ with young female: plosives. Interdentals in local Bedouin dialect of the Sawāʕid. – Mažd li-Krūm (39): Talmon map indicates interdentals. Interdentals also in interview conducted by B. Second interview conducted by DZ: informant uses interdentals, but plosives with some of the numbers: itnēn, tālāṯe, talatt-iyyām, talatīn, ṯamanīn, tamāne, iṭnāʕš, talaṯmiyye. – Šaʕeb (40): Talmon map indicates interdentals. Interview conducted by B. with old ḥaǧǧe and their twenty-two- and twenty-nine-year-old grandsons (the latter with high school certificate): interdentals. Second interview conducted by DZ: older male informant in interview uses more plosives than interdentals. Recording of female (no age indicated) has more interdentals than plosives. Recording of female born in 1935: interdentals. Recording of male: interdentals. – Kabūl (42): interdentals on Talmon map. Remark in B’s questionnaire “informants do not always use interdentals”. Informants were one male about thirty, his father eighty-eight, and a middle-aged neighbour. Second lexical questionnaire conducted by student with fortyyear-old male informant: interdentals. Recording of was observed in Syria in a village near Aleppo where a Bedouin dialect is spoken, but where the informants used plosives with numbers. This was explained through the proximitiy of the next big market-place, namely the town of Aleppo, where plosives are used and the fact that during market activities numbers are of a high functional load.

female speaker born in 1910: twenty-two instances with interdentals, sixteen with plosives. Recording of male informant born in 1937: interdentals. – Iʕbillīn (46): Talmon map indicates both plosives and interdentals. Interview with male using /g/ for Qāf elicits mainly plosives, few instances of interdentals. Second interview with male using /g/: more interdentals than plosives. Interview with middle-aged couple both using /ʔ/ for Qāf: mainly plosives, few instances of interdentals. Interview with female born in 1940 using /g/: plosives. Short recording of male; /ʔ/, plosives. Recording of female born in 1939 in the village, who lived there until 1967, then in Šfaʕamir, in 1990 married in Nazareth. She uses /ʔ/ and plosives. Should be treated with reservations. Recording of Orthodox female born in 1942: /ʔ/, plosives. Short recording of female born in 1912: /ʔ/, plosives. Recording of Christian former farmer born in 1913, formerly farmer, four years of school, local personality and business man: /ʔ/, plosives. – Kufir Manda (47): Talmon map indicates interdentals. Eight recordings of speaker born in 1935: interdentals and a few instances of plosives, especially with numbers. Recording of second male, seventy-seven years of age: mainly interdentals, a few instances of plosives, e.g., tnēn, talāta, talatīn, talat miyye, arḍ, waḍeʕ. Recording of schoolboy born in 1984: interdentals. – Mišhad (55): interdentals, according to Talmon map. Older female in second part of interview29 partly uses interdentals, more often plosives: maṯalan ‘for example’, ṭnāšar ‘twelve’, ṯintēn ‘two (f.)’, ṯalaṯ ‘three’, ṯalaṭṭāšar ‘thirteen’, kṯīr ‘much’, aktaṛ ‘more’, ḍḥikət ‘I laughed’, inḍarab ‘he was beaten’, riḍi, birḍa ‘to agree’, bifḍa ‘he becomes empty’, bimḍi ‘he signs’, ibyaḏ̣/bēḏ̣a/ bīḏ̣ ‘white’. First recording of older male: only interdentals. Second recording of older male: mainly interdentals but several times arḍ, arāḍi ‘land(s)’, bil-ʔiḍāfe ‘additionally’, ḍarar ‘damage’, axadūha ‘they took her’. Third recording of female born in 1925: interdentals. Fourth recording of male born in 1918: interdentals. – ir-Rāmi (56): rectangle on Talmon map with lower half in black, upper half in white. Symbol is not explained in key. Lexical questionnaire with male born in 1920: plosives. Interview with young Christian female: plosives. Interview with elderly female born in pre-1948 Kufr ʕInān: interdentals. Recording of Christian informant born in 1924: interdentals. Recording in Blanc 1953:341–50 with two Muslims born in 1930: interdentals. Christie 1901 text told by Greek-Catholic: plosives. Christie 1901 text told by Druze: interdentals. Recording 29  First part is lost.

Phonology

of male Druze born in 1940: interdentals, sometimes plosives, especially /ḍ/. Recording of Muslim born in 1931: interdentals. Recording of older Muslim: interdentals. Recording of old female: interdentals and plosives. Recording of elderly female: interdentals. Interview with Christian male born in 1956: interdentals and plosives. – Dēr Ḥanna (62): according to Talmon map interdentals. Lexical questionnaire with middle-aged Christian woman: mostly plosives, some instances of interdentals (hāḏa, ḏān). Another complete questionnaire with Muslim: interdentals. Three male informants (one born in 1937, one no age indicated, one born in 1964), one female speaker (no age indicated): all interdentals, but one of them uses plosives with numbers and sometimes /ḍ/. – ʕIlabūn (63): according to Talmon map, both interdentals and plosives. Lexical interview conducted with two males born in 1936 and 1941; interdentals. They speak a Bedouin dialect as forms such as ʔuṯum ‘mouth’, ʔiḏin ‘ear’, ʕung ‘neck’, etc., suggest. Interview with elderly Christian male and four female Christians all about twenty: plosives. Recording of Muslim born in 1909: interdentals. Recording of male Christian born in 1921: interdentals. Recording in Palva 1966 with Christian farmer born in 1919 (no formal education): interdentals. More data is needed for determinating any sociolinguistic distribution of the variants. – Kufir Kanna (68): according to Talmon map, plosives. First interview with male (age unknown): interdentals. Second interview with male (older person): interdentals, sometimes plosives: dān ~ ḏān ‘ear’. Third interview with female (age unknown): plosives. Fourth interview with young female: plosives. The two females also use /ʔ/ for Qāf unlike all the other informants who use /g/. Recording of Christian farmer born in 1920: interdentals. Recording of female born in 1940: interdentals. Recording of male Muslim born in 1934: interdentals. Recording of older male (age unknown): plosives. Recording of Christian female born in 1950: plosives. Recording of older male: interdentals. – Ṭurʕān (69) interview with Christian male student: plosives. He declares that the use of interdentals depends on the denomination and the age. Older people would use interdentals: il-ʔiḍḍ ʔaxaff min il-ʔiḏ̣ḏ̣, minšān hēk bitlāʔi l-banāt bistaʕəmlu l-ʔiḍḍ ʔaktaṛ min il-ʔiḏ̣ḏ̣. It would depend on the person and there are families which use the ʔiḏ̣ḏ̣ instead of the ʔiḍḍ. il-ʔiḏ̣ḏ̣ bitdill ʕala l-fallaḥiyye ʔakṯaṛ, ʕala l-qaṛawiyye ʔakṯaṛ. Older Muslims and Christians would rather use interdentals, the younger generation would use plosives. Interview

145 with older Muslim: interdentals. Interview with older female: interdentals. Interview with middle-aged Christian woman: plosives. Recording of Muslima kindergarten teacher born in 1952: interdentals. Recording in Palva 1966 of Greek Orthodox plasterer, born in 1943, nine years of school: interdentals. Christian born in 1910 reciting an elegy: interdentals. – ʕIsifya (71): Talmon map indicates plosives and interdentals. Lexical questionnaire completed with forty-year-old female informant contains seventeen instances of plosives and two of interdentals. Recordings of three female and eight male speakers, born in 1930, 1933, 1934, 1936, 1955 and 1964, one speaker without indication of age: all interdentals. Blanc 1953:257ff. male informant born in 1907, recorded in 1953: interdentals. – ʕIlūṭ (75): plosives on Talmon map. Questionnaire furnishes plosives. The text in Palva 1966:144–154, however, has interdentals. One recording of male speaker born in 1938: interdentals and plosives (frequently ʔarḍ ‘soil’); second male speaker born in 1938: interdentals; third speaker born in 1923, story recorded in 1949 in Damascus according to commentary on transcription: interdentals and plosives. The inhabitants of the village consist of autochthonous and refugees from Ṣaffūrye (Palva 1966:144). – ir-Rēni (76): interview and recording of eighty-oneyear-old male: interdentals more frequent. Second interview with middle-aged male: plosives. Third interview with middle-aged male: plosives. Recording of sixty-five-year-old male: mainly plosives, few instances of interdentals. Recording of forty-five-year-old female: mainly plosives, few instances of interdentals. Recording of female Christian born in 1937: plosives. Recording of approximately forty-five-year-old male: interdentals. Recording of thirty-five-year-old Christian female: plosives. Recording of forty-three-year-old Muslima: interdentals. – ʕĒn Māhil (80): three interviews and two recordings with different males: all interdentals. Middle-aged informant, however, used plosives with numbers besides interdentals: tnēn, talāti, tamanyi, etc. – Dabbūrye (82): two recordings of older persons have interdentals. Map in Talmon 2002:74 shows interdentals, but middle-aged male informant in interview often replaces them by plosives. – Nēn (85): interdentals, according to Talmon map. Interview with forty-year-old male: interdentals. Second interview conducted by DZ with older male: mainly interdentals, occasionally plosives as in mrīḍ ‘ill’, ḍaʕīf ‘slim’, ḍufdaʕa ‘frog’, kunfud ‘hedgehog’, mitl ‘as’. Short recording of male born in 1944: interdentals as in

146 ṯanawiyya ‘secondary school’, ṯalaṯ ‘three’, nōxuḏ ‘we take’, hāḏ̣a ‘this one’, but also ḍuhər ‘noon’. Recording of male born in 1928: interdentals, but also tnēn ‘two’, axadha ‘he took her’, nōxud ‘we take’, yōxdu ‘they take’. Recording of male born in 1944: interdentals. – Ṭamra (87): interview with seventy-year-old male: interdentals. Second interview with older informant: interdentals. Recording of analphabetic female: interdentals. Recording of older male: interdentals, some instances of plosives as in kitrat ‘she grew’, bēḍa ‘white’. – Sūlam (89): first interview with fifty-five-year-old male: interdentals; second interview with male (older, according to voice): plosives. – Naʕūṛa (90): in interview male born in 1930 uses interdentals, sometimes plosives, also in recordings. Second interview with younger person: interdentals but plosives with numbers. Recording of old woman: interdentals. Recording of female born in 1955: partly interdentals, partly plosives; elderly male: interdentals. – iṭ-Ṭayybe (91): interview with analphabet born in 1932, uses interdentals and plosives at about 50% each. Interview with male born in 1975: interdentals, few cases of plosives. – li-Fredīs (92): according to Jastrow 2009:231, interdentals are maintained. Recording of seventy-three-yearold woman: interdentals, few instances of plosives, for

Phonology

example, talāta w talatīn. Recording of male born in 1933: interdentals and instances of plosives in equal distribution; also uses more /k/ instead of /č/ and sometimes /ž/ instead of /ǧ/. – Mqēble (95): interview with older male: vacillations between interdentals and plosives: dān ‘ear’, ḏrāʕ ‘arm’, tōb ‘garment’. – Ṣandala (96): interview with elderly male informant: mainly uses interdentals, some instances of plosives: tamanye, ṭnāš, tamanṭāš, talatt-asabīʕ, barḍu. Second interview with speaker born in 1925: mainly interdentals, some instances of plosives and sibilants: tāni, kṯīr ~ ktīr ~ čtīr, mrīḍ, maẓbūṭ, ḍafāḍiʕ. Recording of five males, one born in 1928: more interdentals, fewer plosives; second one also born in 1928: almost only plosives, few instances of interdentals. But he had declared that he had lived for twenty years in Haifa. Recording of third informant born in 1933: uses more interdentals than plosives. Recording of male born in 1908: only interdentals. At the end of the recording, the first speaker declares that “all his life” he had lived in Haifa and that only after 1948 had he returned to Ṣandala. Recording of female born in 1921: thirty-three instances of interdentals, three of plosives. Recording of speaker born in 1925: eleven instances of interdentals.

148

N

Phonology

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56

40 42

Haifa

46 31

36

41 61 47 48

49 66 67

34 35

53

62 65 69

68

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

55 76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

Israel

82 79

85

e 92

87

88

90 91

Jordan

Palestinian Territories Jenin

067

Interdentals: reflexes of *£aqn interdentals extant: £aqn, etc. interdentals extant: daqn, etc. no interdentals: daqn, etc. ya, li

0

067 1.3.4.1 Reflexes of *ḏaqn ‘chin’

5

10 km

Phonology

067 1.3.4.1 Reflexes of *ḏaqn ‘chin’ In most dialects of the area which have maintained interdentals, *ḏ in *ḏaq(a)n has been shifted to /d/.30 This isolated shift is quite wide-spread in Arabic dialects having maintained the interdentals. For some Yemeni and Syrian dialects, see Behnstedt 1992:384, Soukhne dagn (Behnstedt 1994:257), map 319 in SA where ḏaqn is attested only once. 30  For Ṭabariyya, see AGK-2:160 first line daʔn ‘“beard’”.

149 For Tunisia/Marāzīg, see Boris 1958:176 degen “menton”, for Takrouna Marçais-Guiga 1959 II:1300 daqna s.v. “{dqn} (< {ḏqn}; comme, semble-t-il dans tous les parlers arabes du Maghreb, même ceux qui ont conservé l’interdentale ḏ)”. As for Palestinian Arabic, Bauer 1957:173-r quotes it as ḏaʔen and for urban speakers with /d/. For Ramallah, Seeger 2009:90 has ḏaqn (which read ḏakn).

150

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

21

20

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56

40 43

Haifa

46

35

42

41 44

65

49

53

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e B

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

71 72

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

83 84

87

89

88

90 91

Jordan 96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

068

Interdentals: reflexes of *fax(i)£ Interdentals extant faxi£, faxe£, fa fax fuxi£, fuxe£ fuxu£ fu , fu fu

068 1.3.4.2 Reflexes of *fax(i)ḏ ‘thigh’

£

hig fax£e, fax£i faxid, faxed, faxe fixid fuxd faxde, faxdi fuxda

d

No interdentals faxid, faxed,

d

not attested faxde

0

5

10 km

Phonology

068 1.3.4.2 Reflexes of *fax(i)ḏ ‘thigh’ In MSA, faxiḏ, faxḏ, fixḏ. Elihay 2004:118-l faxed, faxde, Seeger WB online 535 faxḏe, faxḏ = “Unterfamilie, Unterclan”. As for the shift *ḏ > d in this word in dialects having maintained the interdentals, cf. also Syrian Arabic

151 in SA map 335, Yemeni Arabic sporadically (Behnstedt 2006:929). *ḏ > ḏ̣ is quite common in Syrian Bedouin dialects ( fuxḏ̣ loc. cit.). Cf. also Tunisian Arabic fxaḏ̣ (Singer 1984:501).

152

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4 6 7

22

21

8

B

1 14

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

26

16

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

46 31

36

60 41

44 45

62

61

48

65

49

34 53

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

64

63

69

68

71

C

82 79

Israel

85

e

83 84

87

88

90

89

91

92

Jordan 95

93

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

069

Interdentals: reflexes of * irs Interdentals extant s irs dirs dars

ar toot

No interdentals irs dirs irs

, -e, -i

0

069 1.3.4.3 Reflexes of *ḍirs ‘molar tooth’

5

10 km

Phonology

069 1.3.4.3 Reflexes of *ḍirs ‘molar tooth’ In Fredīs (92), ḍiris was labelled fuṣḥa but pronounced with /ḍ/. Yanūḥ (14) and Sūlam (89) have dirs, but pl. ḍṛāṣ. The form žirs in Taršīḥa (8) is quite interesting. It

153 is contaminated with the √ǧrs ‘to grind’. The same shift took place in Tunisian Arabic zirs. The form semantically matches with the more frequently attested ṭaḥūni.

154

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

8

21

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

26

16

13 38 B 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

35

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

49

53

63

Sea of Galilee ariyya

68

76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85

e

87 89

90 91

Jordan 95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

070

Interdentals: reflexes of *qunfu£ Interdentals extant qunfu£ 'unfu£, etc. 'abu qunfu£ qunfud, 'unfud, etc. No interdentals qunfud, 'unfud, etc.

edgehog 'abu bu k

0

070 1.3.4.4 Reflexes of *qunfuḏ ‘hedgehog’

5

10 km

Phonology

070 1.3.4.4 Reflexes of *qunfuḏ ‘hedgehog’ The shift of *ḏ > d in this word is also attested in northwestern dialects of Morocco having maintained the interdentals. See map 38 in Behnstedt 2005. For Bedouin

155 dialects, Rosenhouse 1984:279 indicates ġrēri as “hedgehog”. According to Bauer 1957:71-l, Seeger WB online 585, the internet (YouTube, speaker from central Palestine) this is, however, ‘a badger’.

156

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39 B

29 30

21

20

B

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

42

41 44 47 48

65

49

34 35

53

Sea of Galilee

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

93

ariyya

B

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan 95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

071

Loss of emphasis: sider, sidir# er# der, r# sadir#

0

071

1.3.5.1 ‘Chest’

5

10 km

Phonology

1.3.5 Loss of Emphasis 071 1.3.5.1 ‘Chest’ Reflexes of MSA ṣadr with this vowel and /ṣ/ are rare. Mostly, we find /i/ instead and loss of the emphasis: sider#. Yanūḥ (14) middle-aged male informant provides ṣadr; female speaker born in 1947 in text supplies sidrak. Ṭabariyya ṣidro in fn. 30 “not emphatic” (AGK-2:40). In Elihay 2004:489-r ṣadr, “see sider”, Bauer 1957:67-r ṣidr [ṣadr], the latter referring to the standard form. Ramallah sidr (Seeger 2009:114), Seeger WB online, 219, 306, passim sidr (ṣidr). For Syria, see SA map 109 where ṣidr is mainly a form of the sedentary dialects, whereas in Bedouin dialects ṣadr is more frequent. The loss of emphasis is attested only once on the map. In Barthélemy 1935–1969:339, the form is also quoted s.v. sdr as sədər with the meaning “très grand plateau rond, en cuivre”, in Elihay 2004:477-r sider “large serving tray”. This form and meaning are attested for Kufir Smēʕ (9). Younger students from all over Galilee interviewed at the University of Haifa only used sider, sifer ‘zero’ and sandūq ~ sandūʔ ‘box’. The loss of emphasis in the sequence ṣ – d is quite common in a number of items in several dialects: – ‘chest’: sidr ~ sidər all over the Šarqiyya province in Egypt (Abul-Fadl 1961:263/264), sidr, sidri, sidriyya, sidēri in Cairo (Hinds-Badawi 1986:505) Tunisia/ Takrouna “zder … avec les suffixes personnels sedri … poitrine” (Marçais-Guiga 1959 II:2199).

157 – ‘temple’ in Egypt sadġ, suduġ (Behnstedt-Woidich 1994:203-l), sidġ, sadġ (Hinds-Badawi 1986:505); cf. map 159. – √ṣdq: ‘believe’, ‘sincerity’, etc.: saddaq, sidq Ramallah (Seeger 2009:115), Mšērfe (94) ma saddakuhāš; ʕArrābi (61) yimkin ma tsaddqūš ‘perhaps you don’t believe it’; Egypt sadaq, sadq, etc. (Hinds-Badawi 1986:505), Yemen saddag (Behnstedt 1996:547), Tunisia/Takrouna “sdoq, zdoq”, (Marçais-Guiga 1959 II:2203), Ḥassāniyya sedūq “douaire” (Taine-Cheikh 1990:973). – Yemen ṣadafī ~ sadafī ‘mother-of-pearl button’ (Behnstedt 1996:547). – sadīdu ~ ṣadīd Yemen ‘beastings’, (Behnstedt 1996:545, 703). – sadīrah ‘leading camel’, cf. taṣaddara ‘to go ahead (horse)’ (Behnstedt 1996:546). – cf. also the other way around ḍ – s > d – s in ḍirs > dirs ‘molar tooth’. – AGK-1:54 quotes other cases of desemphatisation such as sarasīr ‘cockroaches’, Sḥā(ʔ) ‘Isaac’, sandū(ʔ) ‘box’. The latter also to be found in Syria (SA map 6). Annotation in recording of Šfaʕamir (31): loss of emphatisation in sidiq, sādiq, sidir, sandūq, sāyiġ, simiġ, sifir. – in middāyiq, miḏḏāyig ‘angry, annoyed, troubled, distressed’, the loss is general all over the area. Cf. Elihay 2004:105-l dīq “distress, trouble” and Barthélemy 1935– 1969:261 s.v. dyq: dāyaq “gêner, oppresser, incommoder”.

158

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 21

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

16

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

61

47 48

62 65

69

53

71

63

Nazareth

Sea of Galilee ariyya

80

78

73

Israel e

Jordan Palestinian Territories Jenin

072

Loss of emphasis:

o

sifir, sifer er

0

072 1.3.5.2 ‘Zero’

5

10 km

Phonology

072 1.3.5.2 ‘Zero’ The question was asked mainly in Lower and Central Galilee, but had been deleted from several questionnaires of/by the student collaborators. Emphasis is lost wherever

159 the form was elicited. For Haifa, see AGK-1:55. For Yāft inNāṣri (78) and Bedouin Ǧawāmīs (53), the questionnaire has sifir in the singular but ṣfūṛa in the plural.

160

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 36 37

34

35

51 52 53

72

65

49 66 67

50

76 80

78

81 82

79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

93

64

63

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

54 71

27

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

073

Dissimilation of *'93

h-

/'/: 'a'all, 'u'©ud, 'i'ra© /h-/: ha'all, hu'©ud, hi'ra©

0

073 1.3.6 Dissimilation of *ʔ- > h- in ʔvʔ or ʔvʕ

5

10 km

Phonology

073 1.3.6 Dissimilation of *ʔ- > h- in ʔvʔ or ʔvʕ The phenomenon is an urban one and, according to AGK, originated in the Christian dialect of Haifa. It is considered to be prestigious and has spread to other towns and even recently to villages. Cf. AGK-1:44 with examples for all three Haifa dialects such as huʔʕud “sitz!”, huʔmur “befiehl!”, haʕwaṛ “blind”, haʔall “weniger”, haʔrab “näher”. For Ṭabariyya, see AGK 2004:149 with examples huʔʕud, haʔulla “I tell her, haʔra “I read”, p. 170, s. 9. haʔdar “I can”, haʔūm “I get up”, p. 180, s. 2, fn. 722 haʔayyed < ʔaʔayyed “I noted down”. “This tendency, however, is not as common as in Haifa and other urban localities on the northern coast of Israel, such as, Šafaʕamr, as well as in Jerusalem”

161 (AGK-1:2004:149). In the texts in AGK-2:34, sentence 7, we find haʔall “less”. Other isolated cases found in the recordings are: Taršīḥa (8) hiʔraʕ ‘bald’, huʔmur! ‘order!’, Kufir Smēʕ (9) huʔmur! ‘order!’, Makir (29) huʔʕud! ‘sit down!’, irRiḥaniyyi (22) and ʕAkbara (26) hiʔraʕ ‘bald’, haʔall ‘less’. In Ždayydi (30), T. has elicited hōʔaʔ!, hōʔaʕi! as imperative of √wʔʕ ‘to fall’. A female from Ṣafad even used /ḥ/ in ḥaʔall ‘less’, ḥaʔrab ‘nearer’. Ir-Rāmi (56) haʔall ‘less’. An elderly speaker from Yāft in-Nāṣri (78) used huḳʕud! ‘sit down!’, in Zuʕbi 2005a:19–20 haʔʕud “I sit”. It is also attested for the dialect of Jaffa with haʔall “weniger”, biddi haʔṛa “ich will lesen”, huʔʕod “setz dich!” (Arnold 2004:36).

162

N

Phonology

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

9 2

Akko

17

16

12

29

28

56 59

Haifa

44 45

46

36

33

OI

47

31

35

60

Sea of Galilee

49

50

ariyya

54 75

80

Nazareth 78

72

79

84

Israel 86

e

89

92

87

91

Jordan

95

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

074

Dissimilation of n dunum dunim dinum

l in dulum dilim dilum

0

074 1.3.7 Dissimilation of *n in dunum > dulum

5

10 km

Phonology

074 1.3.7 Dissimilation of *n in dunum > dulum There are not enough instances for dunum ~ dulum, but it seems that there is no regional pattern. Elihay 2004:107-l only indicates dunom. Seeger WB online 263 dulum, dilim

163 with reference to DNM. There p. 266, dunum, dulum, dilim and the plurals dnūme, dlūme, which are also attested in our area.

164

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

14

Akko

28

17 18

19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

43

37

34

35

53

52

44

61 65

49

50

72

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

B

B

55

75

63

69

68

54 71

60

41 47 48

31 32

56 59

42

46

36

25

58

40

Haifa

O Y

B

1 2

21

20

8

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

83

87

88

90 91

Jordan

B 95

93

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

075

Assimilation of *l

n i

goo

mil ml mn both n 0

075 1.3.8 Progressive Assimilation in *malīḥ > mnīḥ

5

10 km

Phonology

075 1.3.8 Progressive Assimilation in *malīḥ > mnīḥ The map shows a certain concentration of mnīḥ in the north whilst in the centre and the south mlīḥ is preferred

165 or both are used. Today mnīḥ is considered an urban form. For details, see appendix. In Bedouin dialects, of course, we have the well-known zēn.

166

N

Phonology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

23 13 38 39

29 30

24

12

43

57

41 44

65

49

34

60 62

61

47 48

31 35

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40

Haifa

21

20

8

63

Sea of Galilee

69

53

ariyya

54 55 76 80

71 72

Nazareth 78

73

79

Israel

88 86

e

90 91

92

Jordan

96

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

076

Reciprocal assimilation:

©h

in

h her

ma©a ma©ha ha a

0

075 1.3.9 Reciprocal Assimilation in -ʕh- → -ḥḥ-: maʕha → maḥḥa, maʕhum → maḥḥum

5

10 km

Phonology

1.3.9 Reciprocal Assimilation in -ʕh- → -ḥḥ-: maʕha → maḥḥa, maʕhum → maḥḥum This feature is dealt with in Bergstraesser’s (1915) atlas, map 5 and with commentary on p. 20 where -ʕʕ- is attested

076

167 for the north-west and -ḥḥ- for the rest of the country. In Galilee, however, the latter is to be found only sporadically. Besides maḥḥa, also tabaʕha → tabaḥḥa in recordings from Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93) and Fredīs (92).

169

Phonology

1.4

Conclusion Consonantism

There are four pronunciations which are recessive in the area, namely /č/ being replaced by /k/, the standard pronunciation, however, three pronunciations which correspond to standard pronunciations, namely /ǧ/, /q/ and interdentals, are recessive and replaced by the obviously more prestigious /ž/, /ʔ/ and plosives. This corresponds to Al-Wer 1997:256, 257, 261 with similar observations as to Baḥrayni and Jordanian Arabic. The recession of interdentals seems to start rather with numbers and

/ḏ̣/ being replaced by /ḍ/, and often in dialects having maintained the interdentals forms such as ẓābiṭ ‘officer’, biẓ-ẓabiṭ ~ maẓbūṭ ‘exactly’ are quite common.31 As for communal dialects, it seems that /ʔ/ replacing /q/ and loss of interdentals are more frequent among Christians, especially younger females. This was already noted by Palva 1966:24f.

31  Which might also be loans from Turkish zâbit, mazbut.

2 Morphology

∵

172

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

26 56

40 43

Haifa 34

41 44 45

51 52 53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

077

94 97 98 100 101

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36 37

57

58

104

Jenin

Personal pronouns: 1st sg. 37

'ana 'ani

0

077 2.1.1 1st p. sg.

5

10 km

2 Pronouns and Pronominal Suffixes 2.1

Independent Personal Pronouns

077 2.1.1 1st p. sg. The sedentary, G and M dialects almost throughout have ʔana (cf. for the latter Jastrow 2004:170). The C dialects have ʔana (Ǧisr iz-Zarga II), but Ǧisr iz-Zarga I has ʔani (Jastrow 2009:234). The Bedouin dialects have ʔani, rarely

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/9789004411395_003

ʔāni (Rosenhouse 1984:79). For ʕArab Šibli (83), both ʔani and ʔana were indicated. In the recordings of speakers of a Bedouin dialect, there is a lot of oscillation between the Bedouin form ʔani and the sedentary ʔana. Sporadically, ʔani is also attested for sedentary dialects in points 20 (Ḥurfēš), 23 (Bēt Žann), two Druze villages. It is also used by the Druze on the Golan Heights.

174

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

46

35

42

57

41 44

65

49 66

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

102

078

ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

99

Sea of Galilee

B

55

75

93

64

63

69

68

73

60 62

61

53

71 72

56 59

47 48

31

B

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Personal pronouns: 2nd sg. m.+f. 'inta / 'inti 'inte / 'inti 'int / 'inti 'inte# / 'inte# 'inti / 'inti

'intay# / 'intay# 'inti# / 'intey#

0

078 2.1.2 2nd p. sg. m.+f.

5

10 km

Morphology

078 2.1.2 2nd p. sg. m.+f. In the 2nd p. sg. m.+f., due to the ʔimāla of *-a > -i an original masculine form *ʔinta becomes ʔinti and thus merges with the feminine form. On the other hand, a female form ʔinti may become ʔinte in pause and thus merges with masculine ʔinte. This change, however, is rather rarely attested. For ʕĒn Māhil (80), a middle-aged informant several times indicated ʔinte as m. and f. form in pause and in context. For similar forms in Syria, cf. SA map 251. ʔintay attested in two localities, in one text is also given in context: ʔintay ya falān, ʔintay zġīr, šū ʔintay ʔins walla žins?1 Cf. Blanc 1953:107: “Just as a pausal alternant ʔintay was noted for ʔinti, so a pausal alternant of ʔintaw was heard for ʔintu”. He does not specify whether this is valid for all the Druze dialects. In ʕIsifya (71), female and male Druze 1  In the transcription, no comma or colon are used in the last example. But one could imagine a short pause: šū ʔ’intay: ʔ’ins walla žins?

175 only distinguish in pause between masculine ʔinti# and feminine ʔintey#: ʔinti lal-muḏakkar, ʔintey, lal-muʔannaṯ, but in context ʔinti qult, ʔinti qulti. See 1.1.4.4. One questionnaire for Nazareth indicated ʔinta / ʔinti, another one ʔinti / ʔinti, which seems more reliable. One text from Šfaʕámir (31) has ʔinte / ʔinti, another one ʔinti / ʔinti. Haifa ʔinti (AGK-1:75). Ṭabariyya inti (AGK-3:151). Partly merged Iksāl ʔinti / ʔinti ~ ʔinte / ʔinti ~ ʔint / ʔinti (Nevo 2006:43). For Yāft in-Nāṣri, six texts distinguish between m. ʔinte and f. ʔinti, six have a common form: ʔinti. For Ǧisr iz-Zarga inta / inti, cf. Jastrow 2009:234. Interview with female born in 1960 has ʔinte / ʔinti. As for the Bedouin dialects east of Haifa, only texts were recorded, some of which do not show any instances of “you sg.”. Rosenhouse 1984:79 only indicates ʔinta / ʔinti. In one text of the Bedouin dialect of Nǧēdāt (65), there is one instance of ʔinti which might be borrowed from the Bʕēne dialect adjacent to it.

176

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa

41 44 45

46

36 37

34

35

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

079

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

51 53

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32

57

59

42

27

58

40 43

25 26

104

Jenin

Personal pronouns: 3rd sg. m.+f. 93

h huwwa huwwe huwwi

hiyya hiyye hiyyi

0

079 2.1.3 3rd p. sg. m.+f.

5

10 km

Morphology

079 2.1.3 3rd p. sg. m.+f. According to Blanc 1953:107 “In the present dialect, huwwi and hiyyi seem distinctly less frequent than huw and hiy”.2 As for Bedouin dialects, Rosenhouse 1984:80 states: “For both m. and f. persons, there is a ‘long’ form, which seems 2   Blanc’s transcription for hī and hū.

177 to be preferred in these dialects, and a ‘short’ one”. The fact that in the Bedouin texts short forms prevail seems to contradict Rosenhouse’s statement, but most probably they are due to the interference of sedentary dialects where they are more frequent. For details see appendices. If two forms are attested the symbol on the left indicates the more frequent one.

178

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

28

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

26 56

Haifa 34

41 44 45

51 52 53

72

76 80

81

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

080

94 97 98 100 101

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36 37

57

58

40 43

27

104

Jenin

Personal pronouns: 1st pl.c. 93

na na

0

080 2.1.4 1st p. pl.

5

10 km

Morphology

080 2.1.4 1st p. pl. All over the area ʔiḥna is attested. According to AGK-1:76, in the rural surroundings of Haifa niḥna is used. The form is attested in interviews from Dālyit il-Karmil (73) and Akko (28), for Dālyit il-Karmil also in Blanc 1953:106. Two

179 speakers of Bedouin dialects from Basmat Ṭabʕōn (35) and Li-Ḥmēra (32) also used niḥna. Cf. also Bergstraesser (1915), map 14, according to which most of the northern Palestinian dialects used ʔiḥna, except Ṣafad (point 34 on his map) with niḥna.

180

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9 10

14 15 19

16

24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

56 59

42

41 44

46

65 67

53

75

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Jenin

102 104

Personal pronouns: 2nd pl. c., m.+f. 36

081

83 84

Palestinian Territories

103

081

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

B

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

36

72

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

'intu 'into# 'intaw# 'in 'in

'intan 'intan

'in

'intin

2.1.5 2nd p. pl. m.+f.

'intu

intin

0

5

10 km

Morphology

081 2.1.5 2nd p. pl. m.+f. In iš-Šēx Dannūn (1), ʔinto was also recorded as a context form. In Yirka (16), ʔintu as a context form, ʔintaw in pause. Nazareth: one questionnaire ʔinto, two others ʔintu, six texts with different informants ʔintu. One questionnaire from Yāft in-Nāṣri (78): ʔintu / ʔintin but common form 3rd p. pl. hinni. Texts only have a common form ʔintu, also

181 a recorded but not transcribed interview with ʔintu. Iksāl (79) ʔintu / ʔintin (Nevo 2006:43), ʕIlūṭ (75) ʔintu (questionnaire and Palva 1966, text 7). For Bedouin dialects, Rosenhouse 1984:79 notes ʔintam / ʔintan. The Muṯallaṯ has ʔintu / ʔintin (Jastrow 2009:234). Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93): ʔintum / ʔintin. Fredīs (92): like the Muṯallaṯ.

182

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1

D

2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 26

24

12

56

40 43

Haifa 34

41 44 45

49

51 52 53

72

67

B 64

69

68

ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e 89

83 84

87

88

90

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

082

Sea of Galilee

55

75

73

D

B 63 65

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36 37

57

58

104

Jenin

Personal pronouns: 3.pl.c., m.+f. hunni hinni hinne hinn hinnen

hum hum hum hum hum hum

hinna hinne hinni hinni hinne hinni

hum hinna hum hinn hum inna hum inni humm(i) hinn(i) hum in

hum

hunne

0

082 2.1.6 3rd p. pl. m.+f.

5

10 km

Morphology

082 2.1.6 3rd p. pl. m.+f. The coverage through questionnnaires and texts is quite good. hunni seems to be a northern form, mainly in Druze dialects. For ir-Rāmi (56), Dālyit il-Karmil (73), Žūlis (19), Ḥurfēš (20) and Bēt Žann (23), Blanc 1953:106 indicates hunni, for ʕIsifya (71), Kufir Yasīf (18), Žaṯṯ (15), Bqēʕa (10), Abu Snān (17) hinni. For ʕIsifya, the majority used hinni, one informant hunni. There is a discrepancy as for Abu Snān (17). Blanc indicates hinni for the Druze. Recent research has found this with non-Druze speakers and hunni for Druze. The questionnaire and the texts recorded in Dālyit il-Karmil (73) show hunne and several times -hun. One text has hinne. About the speaker, it is mentioned “now married in ʕIsifya” [where hinni is usual]. For Sažūr (24), two texts with two male informants have hinni, two texts with two female speakers hunni and the suffixes -hun, -un. Whether this reflects a gender distribution of the variants hinni / hunni or not should be explored with more informants. Also for Fassūṭa (6), an old male informant used hinni, a young female hunni. Blanc 1953:107 states

183 “The geographical distribution of hinni and hunni ‘they’ is interesting because of its irregularity, adjacent villages often differing in this respect. It is not impossible that the two forms are free or individual variants within the same villages, and that only chance was responsible for letting me hear hunni in one place and hinni in the other”. Ṣafad/Jewish and Ṭabariyya/Jewish are exceptional with hinnen which is reminiscent, as other forms are too, of Syrian Arabic. For ʕĒn Māhil (80) having /g/, /k/ – /č/ one would expect humma / hinne as in other G and M dialects, but only a common form hinne was indicated in interviews and used in texts. Short forms in some Bedouin dialects should be stressed, namely hum / hin. Rosenhouse 1984:155 only mentions the long forms humma / hinne. Cf. also a short form in Haifa hinn (AGK-1:75) and in the dialect of Jerusalem humm ~ humme (Levin 1994:37). As for the origin of the Levantine masculine forms with -nn-, see the discussion in Diem 1971 and Behnstedt 1991.

184

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

B

56

Haifa 34

41 44 45

51 52 53

72

55

75

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

083

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

78

93

64

63

B

Nazareth

73

B

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36 37

57

58

40 43

25 26

104

Jenin

Pronominal suffixes: 2nd sg.m.+f. 36

-ak, -ik -ak, -i

0

083 2.2.1 2nd p. sg. m.+f.

5

10 km

Morphology

2.2

Pronominal Suffixes

083 2.2.1 2nd p. sg. m.+f. There is a neat distribution of -ak / -ik in sedentary dialects and Bedouin, G, C and M dialects with -ak / -ič. In

185 some places where /č/ for *k was indicated or used, -ik was given which is probably a koiné pronunciation. For the M and C, dialects, see Jastrow 2004 and 2009. After -V, the f. form is -ki or -či: ʔabūki / ʔabūči, fīči, maʕāči, but f. fīč, ʕalēč, ḏ̣arabūč, šafūč in ʕĒn Māhil (80).

186

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 21

20

8 1 2 18

Akko

28

19

16

13 38 39

30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44 45

46

36 34

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

51 52 53

72

62 65

50

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

83 84

79

Israel

88 90

e

91

92

99

93 103

102

084

64

63

69

68

54 71

60

94 97 98 100 101

95

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

104

Jenin

Pronominal suffixes: 2nd m. and 2nd f. negated k(i) , ma © k(i) ©ind i ma © ma ©indak, ma ©indi ma ©indk , ma ©indk ma ©indak(i) , ma ©indk , ma ©ind ma ©indak only ma afuk ma afuk ma ©indk

084 2.2.2 2nd p. sg. m.+f. negated

attested

0

5

10 km

Morphology

084 2.2.2 2nd p. sg. m.+f. negated The negated forms of the 2nd p. m. and f. which in many places follow the pattern ma ʕindkīš – ma ʕindkāš are remarkable. Since the positive forms are ʕindik and ʕindak, one would rather expect *ma ʕindikš → ma ʕindikiš and *ma ʕindakš → ma ʕindakiš in pause. Similar forms are quoted in Jastrow 2004:174 for the Muṯallaṯ, namely ma šafákiš and ma šafičiš. For ir-Rāmi (56), only forms after a vowel were elicited: ma ḍarabukīš – ma ḍarabukš, ma šafukīš – ma šafukš. The form ma ʕindkīš obviously is an analogical formation to forms like ma šafukīš ‘they did not see you (f.)’, and then -kīš triggered -kāš. Other examples from recordings are ma baʕrifkāš ‘I do not know you’,

187 ma šafukāš ‘they haven’t seen you’, btiʕrifkāš ‘she doesn’t know you’, biddkāš ‘you don’t want’. Thus, in ir-Rēni (76), for example, we have a rather equilibrated paradigm: ma ʕandhāš, ma ʕandnāš, ma ʕandkūš, ma ʕandkāš, ma ʕandkīš, ma ʕandīš, but ma ʕandušš. For ʕĒn Māhil (80), a very reliable middle-aged informant indicated -ak / -ič as positive forms, but only one negated form for both m. and f.: ma ḏ̣arabukīš ‘they didn’t beat you’: ʔinte ḏ- ḏakar mā ḏ̣arabukīš, w il-ʔunṯa ʔinti ma ḏ̣arabukīš, ḏ̣arabūk, ḏ̣arabūč, bin-nafi ma fišš faṛg! mā ḏ̣arabučīš as f. form was rejected. It seems that mā ḏ̣arabukīš is a compromise between *mā ḏ̣arabukāš (m.) and *mā ḏ̣arabučīš (f.).

188

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

26 56

40 43

Haifa 34

41 44 45

51 52 53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

085

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36 37

57

58

104

Jenin

Pronominal suffixes: 3rd sg.m. 89

-u -o

0

085 2.2.3 3rd p. sg. m.

5

10 km

Morphology

085 2.2.3 3rd p. sg. m. Blanc 1953:108 indicates for Kufir Yasīf (18) and Abu Snān (17) -u, while the questionnaire conducted by B. has -o. One text ʕammō ‘his uncle’, but fiyyu, minnu, ʔinnu and more. Another text from Abu Snān: ismu, innu, baʕdu, ǧanbu and more. Ṣafad and Ṭabariyya: -o. In Ṭabariyya ʕando, negated ma ʕandōš. In Haifa, besides -u also -o with Christians and

189 Muslims, according to AGK-1:76. Iksāl -u (Nevo 2006:44). Dālyit il-Karmil (73): tqullo, ʔāxḏo, ʔažībo, qultillo, also in context: ʕindo bēt. Text from ʕĒn il-Asad (transcribed by AGK): ʕindo, liʔanno, smō ‘his name’. Text from Kisra (11, transcribed by AGK) has biddo, qālū-lō, qāl-lo. ʕIsifya (71) text transcribed by AGK liʔanno, ʕindo, dōro, biddo. In all interviews, -u was used. Li-Bqēʕa (10) ʕindo, maʕo.

190

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

17 18

28

14 15 19

16

10

26 13 38 39

30

23

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

41 44 45

46

36 34

51 52 53

65

49

50

72

55

75

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

83 84

87

88

90

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

102

086

27

104

Pronominal suffixes: 3rd m. negated ma ma ma ma ma

©indu © ©and ©indh ©

andu ©an

ma ©indu , ma ©andu ma ©indo ©

0

086 2.2.3.1 3rd p. sg. m. negated

5

10 km

191

Morphology

086 2.2.3.1 3rd p. sg. m. negated When negated, the suffix of the 3rd p. sg. m. has the variants -u in Bedouin dialects, -u which is lengthened in dialects having (mā) – š negation: ma ʕandūš, -uh equally in these dialects with assimilation of *h to -š: ma ʕindušš,3 ma ʔatalušš ‘he did not kill him’ (ir-Rāmi, 56), baddušš ‘he doesn’t want him’ (Mġār, 60). We have -o negated as -ošš with an open [ɔ] in several places. For the M dialects, Jastrow 2004:174 indicates ma šafūš ‘he has not seen him’. Tiberias has -o negated as -ōš: ma ʕindōš faḥim ‘who does not have coal’ (AGK-2:32–33, s. 12). For Nazareth, questionnaires had -u, Zuʕbi 2005a:27 -ošš as a pausal form. After a vowel, also four variants exist: Bedouin with lenghtening like mā šufnā(h), dialects with ma – š negation either with -hu or *-h with assimilation of it to the following -š: ma šufnahūš, ma šufnašš, ma ḏ̣arabušš. Iš-Šēx Dannūn (1) ma šufnašš, Yanūḥ (14) ma šufnahūš, ir-Rāmi (56) ma šribtuhūš, btilbasuhūš, Ṭabariyya hāda ma bansahūš ‘which I cannot forget’ in AGK-2:134–135 last sentence. In fn. 496, “Normally the urban pronunciation by the Jews of Tiberias is ma-bansāš”. This suggests that ‘I do not forget’ and ‘I do not forget him’ are identical. We omit a map since the forms were not systematically elicited.

A fourth variant is -hušš in Ždayydi (30): m. bašṛabušš ‘I don’t drink it’, f. tišṛabihūš ‘you don’t drink it’ or tišṛabihušš, also balibsušš ‘I don’t wear it’, tilibsihušš ‘you f. don’t wear it’. In the perfect ma šribtušš, f. ma šribtihušš. The same is true for Šfaʕamir (31): ʔašṛabošš ‘I don’t drink it’, tišṛabihošš ‘you (f.) don’t drink it’, tišṛabū ‘you (pl.) drink it’, tišṛabuhošš ‘you (pl.) don’t drink it’, šribtī – ma šribtihošš, šribtū – ma šribtuhošš, tuḏ̣ərbī – tuḏ̣ərbihošš ‘you (f.) beat him’ – you (f.) don’t beat him”, etc. Ṭurʕān (69) bašṛabušš – tišṛabuhušš, ma tuḍurbuhušš. For the feminine šribtī – ʔinti ya binit, ma šribtušš like the masculine form and not ma šribtihušš, but ma šribtuhušš ~ ma šribtušš ‘you (pl.) have not drunk it’. Ir-Rēni (76): ma ʕandušš ‘he has not’, baʕərfušš ‘I do not know him’, ma šufnahūš ‘we have not seen him’, but also ma šafuhušš ‘they have not seen him’. It seems that -šš for some speakers is no longer a transparent *-hš for the 3rd p. m.4 and therefore is transferred to other persons. In Šfaʕamir (31), a male Druze used ʕindi – ma ʕindišš ‘I don’t have’ parallel to ʕindu – ma ʕindušš. ma ʕindišš was also used by an elderly female Druze in ʕIsifya (71). Cf. below feminine ma fiyyašš ‘not in her’.

3  Cf. also ma lušš ‘not for him’ in Kōkab (44).

4  Cf. ma kaltišš ‘you (f.) have not eaten it’ (Fredīs, 92).

192

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa 34

41 44 45

51 52 53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

087

94 97 98 100 101

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36 37

57

58

40 43

25 26

104

Jenin

Pronominal suffixes: 3rd sg.f. 89

-ha -a

0

087 2.2.4 Suffix Pronoun 3rd p. sg. f. after -C

5

10 km

Morphology

087 2.2.4 Suffix Pronoun 3rd p. sg. f. after -C Predominant is -ha. -a is attested in Akko, Biʕne (38), Saxnīn (41), Kufir Yasīf (18), Yirka (16), ir-Riḥāniyyi (22). Also, besides -ha, in Haifa (AGK-1:1:76). Also varying in Iksāl (79) -ha ~ -a (Nevo 2006:44). For the Druze villages he had investigated, Blanc 1953:108 only indicates -ha, i.e., also for Kufir Yasīf (18) and Yirka (16). Kufir Smēʕ (9): the same speaker varies between ʔibna ~ ʔibinha ‘her son’, another speaker ma kaltāš ‘you have not eaten her’, ḏ̣ahra ‘her back’, wlāda ‘her children’. After a vowel: daššarūwa ‘they let her’. Recordings of Bqēʕa (10): kulla ‘all’. Recordings of Kisra (11): kullha ~ kulla, ʔilha ~ ʔila ‘to her’, tabaʕha

193 ‘her (poss. pron.)’ (13): minha ~ minna, tabaʕha, sitta ‘her grandmother’. Recordings of Ṣafad/Jewish dialect have -a: ʕirfa ‘he got to know her’, tžawwaza ‘he married her’, ʕanda ‘near her’, also partly after -V: ʔatalūha ‘they killed her’, yaʕṭūwa ‘they give her’. Ṭabariyya/Jewish dialect, too, has -a, but -ha after -V: šāfa, ʔaxada, xaṭafa, iġlūha. In Kufir Smēʕ (9), a negated form -ašš is attested in halqirbe ma fiyyášš mayy ‘in this waterskin there is no water’. This is obviously a formation analogical to ma fiyyušš ‘not in him’. Also, one male informant from Nazareth used ma ʕindašš ‘she has not’.

194

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

72

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

102

088

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

65

49 66 67

54

60 62

61

50

53

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Pronominal suffixes: 2nd pl. m.+f. 36

-ku -ko -kaw# -kun -kon

088 2.2.5 2nd p. pl. m.+f.

-kam -kam -kum -kum -kum -kum

/ / / / / /

- in - an - an -kin - in not attested

-ku / -kin -ku / - in -ku / -ku, -k

/ -kinni

0

5

10 km

Morphology

088 2.2.5 2nd p. pl. m.+f. As for the suffix pronouns of the third person, they correspond to the independent pronouns having the same final consonant (hunni / -hun). Contrary to Syro-Lebanese Arabic there is, however, hardly any parallelism between the 3rd p. pl. and the 2nd p. pl. (-hon / -kon). Comparable forms are attested for Haifa -ku(n): ʔabūku(n), ḍarabūku(n) (AGK-1:77, also -kon may be heard), iž-Žišš (21) ʕindkun, Fassūṭa (6) baʕrifkun ‘I know you’, minkun ‘from you’, baddkun ‘you want’, baʕṭīkun ‘I give you’, but fīku “in you”, ʕindku ‘near you’ (text). Ṭabariyya has -kon (AGK-2:50 s.6 biddkon, 56, s. 13 kullkon, etc.). For Dālyit il-Karmil (73), a younger female indicated forms with -kon in final position in pause, when accentuated -kún-: šafítkon ‘she has seen you’, negated ma šafitkúniš. In Kufr Smēʕ (9), in texts from Christian and Druze informants numerous instances for -ku: niḥkīlku ‘we will tell you’, baddku ‘you want’, etc. The coverage is not so good as for the 2nd p. pl. for pragmatic reasons: most texts are descriptions, tales or accounts and not conversations where ‘you pl., your pl.’ are more likely to be used.

195 As for -ko (vs. -ku), it is most likely is a pausal form. For instance, the questionnaire for ʕArrābi (61) furnishes -ko, a text context forms -ku. -kaw recorded in Žūlis (19), ʕIsifya (71) is a pausal form, cf. 1.1.4.4. Asymmetric forms are to be found in Nēn (85) ʕindku / ʕindkin, Kufir Maṣr (88) -ku / -čin, Iksāl (79) -ku / -čin (Nevo 2006:44, but -hum / -hin), Also, asymmetric forms in Sulām (89) with masc. ʕindku, neg. ma ʕindkūš, fem. ʕindku, neg. ma ʕindkinniš. The independent pronoun only with common forms: ʔintu, hinne. For Bedouin dialects, Rosenhouse 1984:81 indicates -kam, etc. This is interpreted as -kam / -čin on the map and indicated for the ʕArāmša Bedouins. In Ǧurdēḥ (5), also inhabited by ʕArāmša Bedouins, however, -kam / -čan and -kam / -čin were elicited. -kam / -čan are also attested in other points of investigation. There seems to be more variation in the area than Rosenhouse 1984:81 indicates. For Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93), Jastrow 2009:233 indicates -kum / -kin. Questionnaire has -kum / -čin. Belinkov 2014:34: -kum / -kin, -čin.

196

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

28

21

20

8 9 10

12

23

C,D

24

58

56 57 C

40 43

Haifa 36 37

B

31 J

34 35

59

42

41 44 45

46

C

51 52 53

72

69

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

102

089

Sea of Galilee

76 80

Nazareth

93

ariyya

55

75

73

64

63 B

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

D

25 26

104

Pronominal suffixes: 3rd pl.c. / m.+f. -hun -un -hon -on

-hin -in -en

-hum / -hin -um / -in

0

089 2.2.6 3rd p. pl. m.+f.(c.)

5

10 km

Morphology

089 2.2.6 3rd p. pl. m.+f.(c.) In the north, there is alternation between -hun and -un after a consonant in most points of investigation. For example, in Fassūṭa (6) maʕun ~ maʕhun or yʔullun ~ yʔullhun. The more frequent form is indicated on the left-hand side. For iž-Žišš (21), one text and the interview furnished more frequent -un besides -hun. Two texts have -hum which is probably MSA. Will be disregarded on map. Dālyit il-Karmil (73): three texts with different informants and different editors show -hon, five texts, also with different informants, and different editors have -hun. An interview with a young female informant conducted by B. has -hon in final position, when accentuated -hún-: šafíthon ‘she has seen you’, negated ma šafithúniš. See above, šafítkon ‘she has seen you’, negated ma šafitkúniš. Both forms, -hun and -hon will be indicated on map. One text has -hum. This is most probably MSA. Will be disregarded. Mġār (60) questionnaire has hiyyāhum – hiyyāhin which are suspect. Furthermore, ʕindhin m.+f., ma šufthinniš. Recordings of one Druze born in 1943 and one Christian born in 1921 both have -hin. Recording of female Christian born in 1939: -hin. Two young Muslims born in 19876: -hin. Second Druze speaker born in 1980 in recording has -hun, -hin. Twelve-year-old school boy: -hun. Druze boy born in 1981: ʕindhun ~ ʕindun, fīhun, ʔaxallīyun, etc. Female Druze born in 1976: -hun, -un. Fifty-year-old male: -hon, -on. Li-ʕzēr (66) only one instance of -hin (minhin) f. in Palva 1966:128. As for Haifa, AGK-1:76 indicates after consonant -(h)-in for Christians, Jews and Muslims and -(h)un only for Jews. Ṣafad has -on after -C and -V: ḥayāton ‘their life’, yāklūwon ‘they eat them’. Also, Ṭabariyya/Jewish dialect -on: ʔallon, biddon, negated ma ḍarabonš il-kolira ‘the cholera has not struck them’. In a text from ʕĒn il-Asad (57, transcribed by AGK) -on: baddon, wlādon, tabaʕon. Idem li-Bqēʕa (10) ʕindon. Ir-Rāmi (56, Christian informant) minhin, ʔulnālhin; another Christian informant kullayātun; Druze informant niqlaʕin ‘we extract them’, another Druze informant lāfifhun, baddhun ~ baddun,

197 maʕhun, qālatilhun, another Druze informant: ʕindun, bālun, qallun; elderly Druze female informant: bitǧībilhun, biṭʕamhin, ʔalatilhin, ʕinnhin, wlādhin, also ḥawālēhin and hinni. Blanc 1953:341–350 ʕandun, qallun, ʔaxáḏ̣un [sic!], tabáʕun, idem 316–318 baʕḏ̣un, saʔálun, qallun. Šfaʕámir (31) two texts with Druze only furnish -hun after vowel. Tentatively -hun on map. One text told by female informant (no religion indicated): -hin after consonant, in Palva 1966, text 9; Christian informant ʕindhin, probably ʕindin. For ʕĒn Māhil (80), interviews and recordings have only a common form -hin. One speaker during interview spontaneously used -hum for the masculine: ʔaǧu ṯ-ṯalāṯe kullhum ‘the three all of them came’ and gives another example: aǧu l-xamse kullayāthin. Forms without /h/ are rather rare. For Biʕne (38), two interviews with different persons have ʕindin. Iksāl (79) -hum ~ -um / -hin ~ -in (Nevo 2006:44). One female informant from Iksāl (born 1925) -hin m.: baʕaḏ̣hin, baddhin, maʕhin, gālatilhin, ẓabbaṭathin, ʕanhin and more (also hinni); unnamed female informant: yiṭʕamhin, ṭiṭʕamhin, ǧarithin, kallhin ~ gallhin, anṭēthin. Palva 1966, text 8: biddhin, qallhin, kulliyāthin. In general, most of the texts recorded with Bedouin dialect speakers more or less show strong interferences from sedentary speech. These may be ad hoc interferences since the interviewers normally speak a sedentary dialect. Text from Basmat Ṭabʕōn (35) furnishes -hin. Not elicited with questionnaire but spontaneous forms with -hum during conversation. The same is true for ʕArab Ḥamdūn near Dēr Ḥanna (62). Text shows inhin ‘that they’, ʕanhin (twice), šaʕarhin and humma ~ hinni. Text from li-Ḥmēra (32, ʕArab Sawāʕid) has quttilhin, hinni biddhin, būhun ‘within them’, Basmat Ṭabʕōn (35, Nʕēm): hinne and -hin as common gender forms. The speakers also use niḥna5 ‘we’ und hōn ‘here’. 5  Which normally is used only in id-Dāli (Blanc 1953:106) and Akko.

198

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

23 13 38 39

29 30

24

12

Haifa 36 34

35

51 52 53

42

41 44 45

65

49

50

72

76

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

102

090

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

93

64

63

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

54 71

56 59

47 48

31 33 32

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Pronominal suffixes: 3rd pl. negated -un , -hun -on -huni -unni , -hunni -in , -hin -inni , -hinni

090 2.2.7 3rd p. pl. c. (m.+f.) negated

34

m. -hummi , f. -hinni m. -hum , f. -hin ma ... -hum, ma ... -hin

0

5

10 km

Morphology

090 2.2.7 3rd p. pl. c. (m.+f.) negated There are two quite neat isoglosses, namely one in the north separating the types -unš ~ -inš after a consonant, -hunš ~ -hinš after vowel as in ma ʕindunš ‘they do not have’, ma šufnahunš ‘we haven’t seen them’ from the type -hinniš which is used after consonant and vowel: ma ʕindhinniš ‘they do not have’, ma šufnahinniš ‘we haven’t seen them’.6 6   Cf. also in Fredīs (92) bibayynin ‘they (f.) appear’, negated bibayyninniš.

199 Dālyit il-Karmil (73) has an intermediate position with -huniš. The second isogloss is to be found in the south and on the Carmel Coast with -hummiš (m.) – -hinniš (f.). For the Muṯallaṯ, cf. Jastrow 2004:174 ma šāfhúmmiš – mašāfhínniš. One informant in id-Dabbūryi (82) furnished -hunniš – -hinniš vs. the positive forms -hum – -hin. This might be an ad hoc contamination.

200

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39 B

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

B

36 37

34

51 52

35

72

65

49 66

50

B 63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

60 62

61

54 71

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

C

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

83

87

88

90

92

Jordan 94

93

95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

091

Relative pronouns 'illi 'alli halli yalli li 0

091

2.3 Relative Pronouns

5

10 km

Morphology

091

2.3 Relative Pronouns

The most frequent form is ʔilli; cf. Haefeli 1939:354–255. Where attested besides other forms, it is the more frequent one. Bedouin dialects normally use ʔalli with /a/ parallel to the definite article al-. Where ʔilli was used in Bedouin dialects in the recordings, it is a loan from the sedentary dialects as already noted in Rosenhouse 1984:83: “Phonetic variations do occur, sometimes, namely, the first vowel a may be higher and more central, thus əlli, elli. This, however, seems to be another example of sedentary influence”. ʔalli in ʕĒn il-Ḥōḏ̣ (72) is a contamination of halli and ʔilli,

201 the definite article being il-. According to AGK-1:84, halli in Haifa was used only by Christians. The form yalli loc. cit. was typical for the inhabitants with a rural background; cf. also Schmidt-Kahle 1918:68. As a matter of fact, yalli is only attested once in a recording from Ṣandala (96), and in an exclamative phrase ʔinte, hē yalli fiš-šāriʕ ‘hey, you who are in the street!’ (ʕĒn Māhil, 80). In Ṣandala (96), ʔilli is by far the most frequent form attested, followed by three instances of halli in one recording. Rosenhouse’s statement loc. cit. “the forms halli, yalli so typical of the region”, referring to Fischer has to be relativised.

202

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa 36 37

J

34

35

59

42

41 44 45

46

51 52 53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32

57

58

40 43

25 26

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

092

Demonstrative pronouns: proximal sg.m. £a da d da

a

ya hayya

0

092 2.4.1 Proximal sg. m.

5

10 km

Morphology

2.4

Demonstrative Pronouns

092 2.4.1 Proximal sg. m. The map shows quite a neat isogloss. The north and the northern and central coast have forms with /ḏ/ or /d/, hāḏa ~ hāda, while the centre and the south including Bedouin dialects use hāḏ̣a. ʕArab Šibli (83) questionnaire hāḏ̣a confirmed by Rosenhouse 1980:21. The form hāya for Kufir Smēʕ (9) was indicated in neighbouring Bqēʕa (10), but

203 recordings also have hāḏa. Where only short forms were found or indicated, one has to suppose parallel use of the longer form. As for the form da in the dialect of the Jews of Haifa, see AGK-1:79, fn. 291, who supposes Egyptian influence, especially because it tends to be postponed: ilwalad da kān yatīm ‘dieses Kind war Waise’. For Ġrīfāt Bedouin from Bēt Zarzīr (54), Rosenhouse 1884:1890 mainly has hāḏa, one instance of hāḏ̣a. Recording has hāḏ̣a.

204

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa 34

41 44 45

51 53

49

50

65 67

72

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36 37

57

58

40 43

25 26

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

83 84

87

88

90 91

92

94 93

95

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

093

Demonstrative pronouns: proximal sg.f. £i di £iyya

93

y

y hayya ya ye yi hayye

di

haydi

y

0

093 2.4.2 Proximal sg. f.

5

10 km

Morphology

093 2.4.2 Proximal sg. f. The main form elicited and used in the recordings is hāy, hāḏi is much rarer. Where hāḏi was elicited with questionnaire, recordings also have hāy. hāy is gender neutral according to AGK-1:79f., but is quoted only for the feminine and a plural noun. In the dialect of the ʕArāmša, emphatic hāḏ̣i parallel to hāḏ̣a was noted. Rosenhouse 1984:82 only mentions hāḏi and hāy “for f. sg. only”. As for the recordings, independent hāy is mostly used with feminine nouns or with plurals: hāy ʔiṣṣitna ‘this is our story’, hāy ʔawḍāʕna ‘this is our situation’, hāy li-ʕrās ‘these are the weddings’, thus corresponding to the use of hāy in Syrian Arabic. Cf. also attributive hāy in Bedouin Ġrīfāt ʕarab əl-ṃuwāli hāi “these Mawāli Bedouins” (Rosenhouse 1984:180–181, 1). ṭarīq ‘way’ is feminine, therefore hāy iṭ-ṭarīq. There are,

205 however, some instances of its use as a masculine form. Recording from Naḥef (12) has bis-sahil hāy ‘in this plain, ground’, il-furun hāy ‘this oven’. According to the dictionaries, the forms are masculine. But in Egyptian Arabic furn is feminine. Another example for its use as a masculine is from Žūlis (19): hāy is-sayyid Aharón ‘this Mr. Aharon’. Bʕēni (65): hayya biddu ymūt ‘this one wants to die’. Iksāl (79): hāy ʔimmi w hāy ʔabūya ‘this is my mother and this is my father’. Enlarged forms may be more insistent: mīn ʔaḥla: hāy willa hāye? ‘who is nicer, this one or that one?’ (Yāft in-Nāṣri, 78). It may be also used as an indefinite pronoun referring to a situation mentioned before: hāy w ʔana dāyir bāli ‘such was it and I paid attention’, hāy ʔayyām gabil ‘that’s how it (the days were) was before’ Bedouins from Bēt Zarzīr (54).

206

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

28

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

B

36

B 34

33

31

52

47 48

65

49

50

64 B

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

95

83 84

87

89

92

93

63

55

Nazareth

73

B

69

68

75

71

60 62

61

54

72

57

41 44 45

D

53

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

094

Demonstrative pronouns: proximal pl., c., m.+f. ha ha ha ha ha ha

094 2.4.3 Proximal pl. m.+f.

ha ha ha ha ha ha

ha a l(i) l(i)

ha ha

a)

lin (f.) li (f.)

0

5

10 km

Morphology

094 2.4.3 Proximal pl. m.+f. There is a neat isogloss as for the forms with /ḏ̣/ which are typical for the centre and the south. As for Bedouin dialects, Rosenhouse 1984:82 indicates without localisation m. hāḏ̣am – f. hāḏ̣an and as a common form haḏōl(a). Where elicited or found in texts, only haḏōl, haḏ̣ōl, haḏ̣ōla are attested. In Rosenhouse’s texts, the m. forms hāḏōla (p. 180), haḏ̣ōla (pp. 184, 192), haḏōl (p. 190) are attested for Bēt Zarzīr (54), for Bīr il-Maksūr (50) m. haḏōla (p. 202), haḏ̣ōl (p. 204). ʕArab Šibli (83) questionnaire haḏ̣ōl Rosenhouse 1980:21 haḏ̣ōla. In Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93), a common form haḏōl(a) was indicated, but for ‘those over there’ haḏannak hināk and haḏannīč hināk.

207 In retrospect, it is not clear what is meant by the first form haḏannak. There is no respective data in Jastrow 2009 nor in Belinkov 2014. As for Iksāl (79), cf. Nevo 2006:45 who mentions haḏ̣ōl(a) – haḏ̣ōlin and as an analogical formation to mʕallim – mʕallmi ‘teacher’: m. haḏ̣ōl – f. hāḏ̣ōli. Quite remarkable is a new formation hayōl, according to the equation hāy(a): X = hād(a): hadōl. hayōl used in Šfaʕamir (31) by Druze speaker. A short form, ḏōli, is attested for Bedouin Mazārīb in Rosenhouse 1984:190, 37 with fn. 18, but not commented on p. 248, another ḏōl for Bedouin with no place named, probably Ibṭin (34). For Šfaʕamir (31), also hallōl was elicited by AGK.

208

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

23

11 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

65

49

50

72

80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

51 53

57

41 44 45

31

36

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

095

Demonstrative pronouns: distal sg.m. ha ha ha ha ha

a i i

ha ha ha ha ha

a i

ha

0

095 2.4.4 Distal sg. m.

5

10 km

Morphology

095 2.4.4 Distal sg. m. Again there is a neat isogloss for forms with and without emphatic /ḏ̣/. The form hayāk formed after haḏāk has to

209 be stressed as well as an isolated haḏ̣āč in a Bedouin dialect adapted to a feminine form actually not attested, but probably of the type haḏīč.

210

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

46

42

41 44

65

49

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

83 84

87

95

88

90

92

93

64

63

69

68

71

60 62

61

53

72

56 59

47 48

31

36

25

58

40 43

21

20

8

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

096

Demonstrative pronouns: distal sg.f. ha£ k ha£ ka ha£ ki had k

had ki

ha k ha ka ha ki

ha£ ha£ a ha

hayy k

had ka had ke 096 2.4.5 Distal sg.f.

0

5

10 km

Morphology

096 2.4.5 Distal sg.f. There are only a few cases where the consonant of the feminine form was assimilated to that of the masculine form: haḏ̣āk – haḏ̣īk(-a, -i). In the G and western M

211 dialects, one would expect more forms of the type haḏīč. Perhaps the shift *k > č did not take place due to paradigmatic constraint. For ʕArab Šibli (83), a questionnaire indicates haḏīč, text in Rosenhouse 1980:25: haḏīk.

212

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

41 44

61

47 48

31

27

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

60 62

B 65

64

63

69

53

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

54 75

71

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85

e

83

87

88

89

92

Jordan

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

097

Demonstrative pronouns: distal pl.m.+f. ha ha ha ha

097 2.4.6 Distal pl. m.+f.

ha ha ha ha ha ha

a k k

ha ha ha ha ha ha

a i i (i)

ha ha ha ha ha

a

ha£ink ha£an

ha£in an ha£ann

k 0

5

10 km

Morphology

097 2.4.6 Distal pl. m.+f. The student collaborators often had forgotten to ask the question and the recordings were not very helpful since ‘those’ is more rarely attested than ‘that’, ‘these’ and ‘this’. Nevertheless, the map shows a neat isogloss: the north and the Druze having forms of the type haḏōk. The long form *hāḏōlāk is mostly shortened to haḏlāk. hadlōk attested for ʕIbillīn (46) looks like a contamination of haḏōk of neighbouring Šfaʕamir (31) and *hadlāk. Besides the new formation haylāk was indicated. haḏlāk(i) > hallāk(i) with regressive assimilation was indicated by young female Druze informant in ʕIsifya (71). Older female Druze used haḏōk and hallōk. Another contamination is the type hadlōl = *hadlāk x *hadōl. For Bedouin dialects, Rosenhouse 1984:82 indicates m. haḏ̣ākam – f. haḏīčan and a common form haḏōlāk without localisation. Similar forms are in point 53 Ǧawāmīs Bedouin haḏinkam – haḏinčan. In Rosenhouse

213 1982:41, only a common form haḏ(o)lāk is mentioned for the tribes of the Ġrīfāt, al-Lhēb, Šibli and al-ʕArāmša. The form haḏ̣ōk, elicited by questionnaire in Ǧurdēḥ and surroundings for the ʕArāmša, is probably a loan from the sedentary dialects of the area. In Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93), forms were elicited which also look like a contamination, the /nn/ of the feminine form being transferred onto the masculine. Cf. Bedouin forms in Syria for the feminine such as haḏanna proximal, distal haḏannāk, haḏinnāk, haḏannīč (SA maps 277, 279). These forms are not mentioned in Belinkov 2014. As for hadōlka in Tiberias (AGK-2:334, s. 15, hadōlka hēk kānu “that’s how they were”), the form might have been adapted to enlarged forms like hēka ‘this way’, hunāka ‘there’. The forms elicited in Bēt Zarzīr (53) and Umm il-Ġanam (84), namely hāḏ̣hum – hāḏ̣hin, haḏ̣umma – haḏinna in retrospect, raise some doubts since other forms of this type elicited have the meaning ‘there they are’. They will be disregarded on the map.

214

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

8

26 56

40 43

Haifa 36 37

34

33

41 44

51 53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67 B

50

60 62

61

47 48

31

35

59

42

46

B

57

58

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

098

ere n na ne ni n na

098 2.5.1 ‘Here’

hn h na n na

0

5

10 km

Morphology

2.5

Demonstrative Adverbs and Presentatives

098 2.5.1 ‘Here’ The forms elicited can all be traced back to *hāhuna, *hāhina. For a discussion, see WAD IV s.v., cf. also Bergstraesser 1915, map 25. The forms other than hōn are typical of Bedouin dialects, cf. Rosenhouse 1984:112 with hīn, hēn, hīna, hēna, hān, partly also in some C, G,

215 M dialects. “The latter [hān] is less frequently used, and often appears by speakers from the southern part of the Galilee (express links with the central dialect-region in the country. Also hōn of the local sed. dialects may be heard sometimes, representing the sed. influence in NI Bed. dialects”. In Sūlam (89), hēna was used by speaker of Bedouin origin.

216

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

30

24

12

Haifa

46 31

36

56

42

41 44 47

65

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

60 62

61

53

71

27

57

59

49 35

72

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

83

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

099

ere he is hiy ha hayyu 'iy

hiy tu ha tu 'iy tu

£-h £-huwwa

0

099 2.5.2 ‘Here I am, here he is’

5

10 km

Morphology

099 2.5.2 ‘Here I am, here he is’ The vocalisations have already been dealt with on map 21. The 3rd p. sg. m. is either of the type hiyyā ~ hayyā or hiyyātu ~ hayyātu. In ir-Rāmi (56), the whole paradigm contains /t/: hiyyāti, hiyyātak, etc. In Seeger WB online 874, there are mixed paradigms: hayyni, hayyīni, hayyāni,

217 hayyātni, hayyūni, hayyūtni “da bin ich, schau her!”. Cf. also the second object suffix: illi baddna yyātu binṭīna yyātu ‘what we want, he gives it to us’ (Mġār).7

7  In ʕIsifya (71), hiyyātu and an analogical formation wiyyātu ‘with him’.

218

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 17 18

Akko

28

9 10

14 15

2 19

16

23

11 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

51 53

57

41 44 45

49

50

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40

43

21

20

8

65 67

Sea of Galilee

69

68

54

64

63

ariyya

55 75

71

76 80

Nazareth 78

72

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

83 84

87

88

90 89

92

91

Jordan 95

93

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

100

her hu k hu ka hu ke hu ki

k k, h n . k ka ki

ka, ka k, ihn k . hn

ha k hun k hun ki

0

100 2.5.3 ‘There’

5

10 km

219

Morphology

100 2.5.3 ‘There’ For many localities, several forms were indicated. This is partly explained by the fact that hunāk ~ hunāka are free variables. Often during the interview only one of these was indicated, but in recordings both were used. Another explanation may be different origins of the persons interviewed. An interview conducted by B. in il-Mazraʕa (2) with a family originally from il-Ġabsiyyi furnished ihnāk, another interview and recording of other persons hunāk. For the villages of the ʕArab Šibli (83), Rosenhouse 1980:21, 1983:27 indicates hanāk “there”, another interview conducted there: hnāk and recordings hunāk ~ hunāka. For Haifa, cf. AGK-1:82 “hināki, hunāki, hināk, hnāk und hunāk ‘dort’. Alle Formen wurden in allen drei Stadtdialekten von Haifa benutzt, wobei die zwei Formen, die mit -i enden, typischer für die Stadtdialekte Haifas sind”. Iksāl (79) Nevo 2006:55 hunāk(a) ~ hnāk(a), Palva 1966:158 hunǡk. Questionnaire Dālyit il-Karmil (73) hunāk, Blanc 1953:203,-1 huniyk and p. 204, fn. 140: “Elsewhere hunāk, hnāk: D [Dālyit il-Karmil] and [ʕIsifya] use both these

‫ع‬

forms as well as huniyk”. hunīk was rejected by young female Druze informant of T. Cantineau 1946:392 sees in the Ḥōrān forms honāk ~ honāka direct successors of CA hunāka. Fischer’s explanation (1959:121), namely a new formation *hōnāk with shortening of pretonic *ō is more probable. If hunāk derives from *hōnāk, then hināk presupposes *hēnāk. In Ǧisr iz-Zarga, the forms for ‘here’ and ‘there’ are indeed hēna and hināk, but in other places where hināk was elicited ‘here’ is hōn. As for Kufir Manda (47), Palva 1966:114,14, 116–117, 118,10 has hināk and hōna, the questionnaire has hnāk. There is a certain concentration of the hnāk forms in the centre of the area which is indicated by a green background. ġād ‘there’, which Rosenhouse 1984:29 indicates for the ʕArab al-Lhēb was elicited in several localities, but for a longer distance: ‘over there’. Cf. Blanc 1953:139: “For pointing to far distance, one uses ġād ‘over yonder’”. Will be disregarded on map.

220

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

17 18

Akko

28

21

20

8

15 19

26

16

13 38 39

30

12

56 58 59

43

Haifa

42

41 44 47 48

31

65

49

Sea of Galilee

69

53

75

71 72

78

73

ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

82 79

Israel

83 84

88

85

e

90

89

91

92

93

101

64

63

Palestinian Territories

here he is, there she is, etc k-h hi

0

etc.

hiy ki

n iyyi k

101

2.5.4 ‘There he is’

etc.

k

5

10 km

n nni

inne

- ha£ k hi hiy

Jordan

nne inni etc.

nni

k ha ki k

Morphology

101 2.5.4 ‘There he is’ There exist several constructions, the most frequent of which is formed by the demonstrative pronoun distal + personal pronoun as, for example, in: – Yirka (16), Ǧūlis (19), Ḥurfēš (20): haḏāk-hū – haḏīk-hī – haḏōk-hunni. – ʕAkbara (26) only haḏāk-hū attested. – iž-Žaṯṯ (15), idem except haḏōk-hinni. – Abu Snān (17), Kufir Yasīf (18) same forms with /d/ and pl. hadōk-hinni; iž-Ždayydi (30) haḏ̣āk-hū – haḏīk-hī – haḏ̣ōk-hinni. – ir-Riḥaniyyi (22): haḏāk-huwwi – haḏīk-hiyyi – haḏlākhunni. – Mažd li-Krūm (39), Bʕēne (65): haḏāk-hū – haḏīk-hī – haḏ̣lāk-hinni. – iž-Žišš (21): haḏakkuwwi – haḏakkiyyi – haḏukkinni. – ir-Rāmi (56): hadāk-hu – hadīk-hi – hadk-unni. – ʕIlabūn (63): hadakū – hadikī – hadlakhinni. – Ṣandala (96): haḏakúh – haḏkíyyah – haḏakkumme which can be reinforced by hunāk. – ʕArāmša (4, 5): hāḏ̣āk-hū – hāḏīč-hī. – iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda (48): hāḏ̣āk-hū – hāḏīč-hī – haḏ̣lāk-huṃṃa – ič-Čammāna (58, 59): haḏ̣āk-huwwa – haḏīč-hiyya – haḏ̣ōka-huṃṃa. – Umm il-Ġanam (84) reinforced by hunāk: haḏ̣āk-huwwa hnāk – haḏīk-hiyya hnāk – haḏ̣āk-humma hnāk. – Similarly, ʕIsifya (71, older female Druze): haḏāk-hū hināk – haḏāk-hī hināk – haḏōk-hinne hināk. – Similarly, Šibli (83) hāḏ-hu hnāk – haḏ-hiyya hnāk – haḏōl-hum hnāk. – Similarly, iṭ.-Ṭayybe (91): haḏ̣a-hū hnāk – haḏ̣a-hī hnāk – hāḏ̣a-hummi hnāk. Reduced forms are found in Akko, namely hadkuwwi – hadkiyyi – hadlāk hinni ~ idkinni; iž-Ždayydi (30) in one questionnaire only hadkiyyah attested. This type of construction is also mentioned in Seeger WB online 858 haḏ̣ākū, haḏ̣ākī, haḏ̣ākumm(e), haḏ̣ākinn(e). In Seeger 2013:92, “dort ist er”, also hanākū ~ haḏ̣ākū and f. hanākī ~ haḏ̣ākī. No plural forms are mentioned there. They are not attested in Bauer 1970:74. Similarly, in ʕĒn Māhil (80) haḏ̣akkū, haḏ̣akkī, haḏ̣akinne. The latter was indicated for both genders. A second construction is formed with hiyya ‘here is’ + hunāk, e.g.: – Taršīḥa (8) hiyyā hunāk – hiyyāha hunāk.

221 – Biʕne (38), Kōkab (44): hiyyā hnāk – hiyyāha hnāk – hiyyāhin hnāk. – Saxnīn (41): hiyyā hināk – hiyyāha hināk – hiyyāhin hināk. – ʕAkbara (26) ʔiyyā hunāk. – Naḥef (12) only hunāk hinni ‘there they are’ is attested. Another construction is found in Akko amongst others, namely: haḏ̣āhu hināk – haḏ̣āhi hināk. A simple invariant presentative hāḏ̣a in Iksāl means “here is”: hāḏ̣a hī baladi “here is my village” (Nevo 2006:46). Formed with ġād: Dēr il-Asad (13): hiyyāhin ġād. Formed with a deictic hakk-, e.g., Ṭamra (43) hakku hnāk – hakki hnāk – hakkinni hnāk, or Fredīs (92): hakkū – hakkī – hakkummi, which also can be reinforced by hunāk. Ṭurʕān (69) hakkū hnāk – hakkī hnāk – hakkinne hnāk. One is tempted to compare forms such as hakku ~ hakkū to Iraqi and Gulf Arabic ʔaku ‘there is’, but the origin rather is *haḏ̣āk hū > haḏ̣kū > hakkū. Cf. *hāḏōlāk > haḏlāk. Original hakku – hakki obviously in a second step were enlarged by -k to form hakkūk – hakkīk. Similar hakū and hakī are defined differently in Nevo 2006:46, namely as “here it is”, “here she is”, also hakinni lbitēn/libyūt “here are the two houses/the houses”. Formed with kiyy-: – Kōkab (44), Kabūl (42): kiyyāto – kiyyāha – kiyyāhin. These forms are reminiscent somewhat of Syrian forms of the type kwākē ‘there he is’, kyākē ‘there she is’ with a deictic element /k/. Cf. also Barthélemy 1935–1969:730 kō “voici!”. Talay 2003:380-r kāy! “siehe, da ist er!”; kāyu hāḏa hūwa “da, das ist er”. Noteworthy are the forms indicated in ʕĒn Māhil (80) as parallel forms, namely ʔawwēnahū – ʔawwēnahī – ʔawwēnahinne (c.). Almost identical forms are to be found in Upper Egypt: ʔawwēnhu – ʔawwēnhi – ʔawwēnhuṃṃa (“der/die dort drüben”, Behnstedt-Woidich 1985, maps 171–173). A comparable form is attested for the Negev Bedouins, namely “hawēn (*hā-ʔayn) ‘here is … (there) [re. a distant object]’, e.g., hawēn huṃ ḥāṭṭīn šarg ‘here, they’re encamping there to the east’” (Shawarbah 2012:116–117). See also Fischer 1959:173–174 hā-wēn “da ist … dort ist” mainly attested in Maghrebi dialects, but with the meaning “voici”, “voilà” and not as a demonstrative pronoun. In ibid., p. 174, it is also mentioned for, and a form with ʔā- for Libyan Arabic.

222

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

26 56

Haifa

B

36 37

34

35

59

42

41 44 45

46

51 52 53

72

55

75

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32

57

58

40 43

27

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

102 ha hassa© hassa hissa

31

'assa© 'assa 'issa 'issa PF 'iss ssa

al- n al- zah halla' ha t

0

102

2.5.5 Now

5

10 km

Morphology

102 2.5.5 Now Practically all the dialects of the area have reflexes of *hā s-sāʕa ‘this hour’ or *as-sāʕa. The Bedouin, C, M and partly G dialects have hassa, hassaʕ, hassāʕ, hassāʕa (rare), while the sedentary dialects use issa. hissa in Iksāl (79) besides ʔissa and hassa is a contamination of the two. Nevo 2006:55 only indicates hissa and hassa. Questionnaires and recordings also furnished ʔissa. In the recordings made with speakers of Bedouin dialects, ʔissa often was used, also ʔissaʕ in second interview with ʕArāmša. For the ʕArāmša (4, 5), “also alḥazza is sometimes heard” (Rosenhouse 1984:112). In interview with B., tawwa was indicated. The form is not attested in Rosenhouse 1984, or in Elihay 2004, but attested for the Negev Bedouins

223 in Shawarbah 2012:436 as (a)taww(iy) as “just now, just a moment ago”. Ibid. on p. 181, it is classified after “present” under “past”. It was possibly misinterpreted by B. Will be disregarded on map. In one point, al-ḥīn as used mainly on the Arabian Peninsula. For ʕArab Šibli (83), also ʔessa and ʔassa are attested in texts in Rosenhouse 1980. hallaʔ, which is reminiscent of the Syro-Lebanese form(s), is sporadically attested. For Haifa, see AGK1:329. One instance for Nazareth in recording of a Greek Orthodox housewife born in 1933. In ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣ (72), an interview with an older male has halkēt which is a central Palestinian form. It is attested for Kafr Qūd in the Jenin area. For a discussion of the different forms, see WAD IV, map 461.

224

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

8

26 56

Haifa 34 35

51 53

59

42

41 44 45 B

46

36 37

47 48

72

65

49 66 67

50

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e B

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

92

64

63

69

68

75

73

60 62 B

61

54 71

57

58

40 43

27

89

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

103

his 36

k ka ki

a

h h a h i

0

103

2.5.6 This way

5

10 km

Morphology

103 2.5.6 This Way For a more recent discussion of the forms of the type hēk and hīč, etc., see WAD IV, map 466. The Bedouin dialects with *k > č normally have forms of the type hīč. Rosenhouse 1984:112 quotes more forms such as hēč, hīč, hīča, min haššikel “of this form”, čiḏa, hiččiḏa without localising them. In several recordings of Bedouin dialect, forms

225 of the sedentary dialects, namely hēk and hēka, were used. hēč in two cases could be interpreted as a contamination of sedentary hēk and Bedouin hīč. The normal form, however, in the C, G and M dialects, is hēč. hēka, hēke, hēki indicated as unique forms for sedentary dialects have to be considered as enlarged variants for hēk.

226

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 14 15

2 17 18

Akko

28

19

16

25 26 13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58 59

40

43

Haifa

42

41 44

46 31

36

60 62

61

64

63

48

Sea of Galilee

49 53

69

68

54

ariyya

55 75

71

76 80

Nazareth 78

72

73

82 79

Israel

88

85

e

90 89

92

95

93

83 84

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

104

ast ye alsint a m mnawwal m i ils-sine ye, sint il-m i, etc. as-sina l-

104

2.6.1 Last year

ta

ilis-sini lli t, etc. l-© ma is-sini lli ma , etc. as-sana l t, etc. as-sint al ma , etc. is-sini lli nafdat

s-sana lli at is-sini lli at had k is-sine

0

5

10 km

227

Morphology

2.6

Other Adverbs

104 2.6.1 Last Year For a detailed discussion, see WAD IV, map 565a. Several constructions are possible: a. al-ʕām, probably elliptical for al-ʕām al-māḏ̣i, is the opposite of CA al-ʕāma ‘this year’. It is the most frequent form in the area. Obviously, for some speakers al-ʕām was not transparent enough, therefore, for clarity’s sake sina was added to form sint al-ʕām which formally now corresponds to its opposite: sint al-ǧāy. Cf. similar compounds in German as “Walfisch” = “whale”, English and German “Rentier”, “reindeer”. b. Forms with attributes meaning ‘first, former, past’: – ʕamnawwal so frequent elsewhere, for example, in Syria and Egypt, is attested only once.8 Other forms with attributes are sporadically to be found, namely: 8  A GK thinks that this form was used all over the area, but is now obsolete.

– il-ʕām il-māḍi, which most probably is influenced by MSA. – More frequent are forms of the type s-sine l-māḍye. In Naʕūra (90), is-sine l-māḏ̣i, with apparently masculine form of adjective, is a parallel to is-sine ǧ-ǧāy. – Only once attested as-sina l-fāyta in a Bedouin dialect. c. Most of the other constructions are relative sentences formed with verbs meaning ‘to pass’, ‘pass away’, ‘go away’, namely: fāt, marag, nafad, ṛāḥ, qalaṭ. The latter in Seeger WB online 763 “vorbeigegangen sein, passiert haben”. Also, in the dialect of the fallāḥīn of the Yaffa plain ḳalaṭ “vorbeigehen” (Bauer 1957:346b). d.

hādīk is-sine ‘that year’, however, in Ḥurfēš (20) from the context means ‘that year that we had mentioned’ and not ‘last year’: ḥakīna halḥādiṯ min haḏiyk issini “we told you this incident of the other year” (Blanc 1953:212, lines 8, -6).

228

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 14 15

2 17 18

Akko Akko

28

19

26

16

13 12 38 B 39

30

56 58 59

40

43

Haifa

46 31

36

42

41 44

60 62

61

47 48

65

49 53

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

55 75

71

76 80

Nazareth 78

72

73

82 79

Israel

83 84

88

85 86

e

90 89

92

91

Jordan 95

93

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

105

ext year

0

is-sana - ya is-sine - ye

is-sini l-mi'ible sine l-mu' as-sina l-mi ible sint a sint i sint i -

as-sina - ya y (i)s-sini (i)s-sani (i)s-sine - y 105

2.6.2 Next year

sant i is-sin y as-sint a as-sint alis-sant i -

5

10 km

is-sani lli s-sini lli y (i)s-sini y as-sina l- ya il- e il-

229

Morphology

105 2.6.2 Next Year For a detailed discussion, see WAD IV, map 464. There are five constructions and only two forms for ‘next’ = ‘coming’. a. ‘Year’ and participle of ‘coming’, mostly from √ǧ’y, rarely from √qbl. b. Annexion; sint iǧ-ǧāy(a) as in other Levantine dialects.

c.

The construction as-sint al-ǧāya may be explained in different ways: either as a relative clause, the al- being the short form of the relative pronoun (cf. Rosenhouse 1984:83), or as a contamination of two constructions, namely a) and b). Regarding it as a construction of type a, having maintained /t/ (*as-sanatu l-ǧāʔiʔa) seems rather improbable. d. Relative clause: is-sini lli žāy. e. Elliptic: il-ǧāye.

230

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21 8

1 2 17 18

Akko Akko

28

15 19

25 26

11

16

13 38 39

30

12 B

56 58 59

40

43

Haifa

46 31

36

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

49

75

73

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

72

64

63

69

53

71

60

82 79

83 84

Israel

88

e

90 89

92

Jordan 96

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

106

raight ahea ©a ©a du ri z

l

li

0

106

2.6.3 Straight ahead

5

10 km

Morphology

106 2.6.3 Straight Ahead The subject is discussed in WAD IV, map 455. There are only four designations in our area, namely ʕala ṭūl, shortened sporadically to ʕaṭ-ṭūl, from the same root referred to

231 as ‘length’ ṭawwāli and two loans from Turkish doġru, düz, i.e., duġri and dūz. Often both forms, duġri and ṭawwāli, were indicated by the informants.

232

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

72

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

64

63

55

75

73

B

B 69

68

54 71

65

49 66

50

53

60 62

61

47 48

27

57

41 44 45

31 35

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

107

Interrogatives:

both

at? n inu in n (m.)

n (f.)

0

107

2.7.1 What?

5

10 km

Morphology

2.7 Interrogatives 107 2.7.1 What? The most frequent form is šū. According to AGK-1:84, šū is an urban form used in Haifa besides rural ʔēš. šū is by far the most common form in the rural dialects and ʔēš was rarely elicited in the questionnaires or in the recordings. Often its use was restricted to phrases such as miš ʕārif ʔēš ‘I don’t know what’, also šū biʕarrifni ʔēš? ‘how the hell should I know?’ Sažūr (24), or minšān ʔēš ‘because of what?’. In ir-Rāmi (56), a female Druze informant considered ʔēš and šū as synonyms in ʔēš hāda ~ šū hāda?

233 ‘what is this?’ but said that only šū ṛāyak? ‘what do you mean?’ would be possible. Younger female in Dālyit ilKarmil (73) indicated šū. Two sentences later ʔēš qulet? ‘what did I say?’. ʔē is attested for Liʕzēr (66) besides šū in Palva 1966:126,-7,8. Two instances of ʔē in recording išŠēx Dannūn (1): hōn ʔē? filiṣṭīn miš isrāʔīl ‘what is here? Palestine not Israel’, ʔē biḥuṭṭu? ‘what do they put?’. ʕĒn il-Asad (57), in recording only one instance of ʔēš. For the Bedouins of the Galilee, Bergstraesser 1915, map 16 and p. 32, indicates šnū. Rosenhouse 1984:113, šnū “typical of nomadic and Syrian dialects” and “wēš? (Bed.)”.

234

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

28

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa

41 44 45

46

51 53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

57

59

42

27

58

40 43

25 26

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

108

Interrogatives: 36

la' law lal ©a , ©

(h) law

mak tib iy 0

108

2.7.2 Why?

5

10 km

Morphology

108 2.7.2 Why? ‘Why’ is formed with the preposition l-, la- plus ‘what’ as in most Arabic dialects. The most frequent form is lēš. In a few places, we have la-ʔēš?, la-wēš? The latter presupposes wēš, which is only attested in some Bedouin dialects. The short forms lē and lawē do not correspond to the basic forms *ē and *wē. For Kufir Smēʕ (9), in a recording postponed lē is attested: btisʔal ʕas-sukkar lē? ‘why are you asking for sugar?’, but Abu Snān (17) lē baddkāš? ‘why don’t you want?’, ʕIsifya (71) lē tiziʕžūni? ‘why are you

235 annoying me?’, ʕalēš in the ʕArāmša Bedouin dialect is reminiscent of the Maghrebi forms. For Haifa lē, see AGK1:84, fn. 319 “gilt als ägyptische Form”. For Bedouin dialects, cf. Rosenhouse 1984:113 “ʕalāma, also with suffixed bound pronouns. Besides the Bed. form lawēš, the less typical Bed. lēš and ʕalāš are also used”, p. 132 ʕalāmak tibčiy ‘why are you crying?’. ʕArab Šibli ʕalēš: ma ʕərift ʕalēš tilbas iṯyābha. For a further discussion of the forms, see WAD IV, map 443a.

236

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39 B

30

12

56

40 43

Haifa

41 44

62

61

47 48

31

36

60

42

46

27

65

49

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

53

ariyya

54 75

71 72

Nazareth 78

73

76 80 82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

109

Interrogatives: min w

e?

n

n mann 0

109

2.7.4 From Where?

5

10 km

Morphology

2.7.3 Where? Where to? All over the area, the form is wēn, which, when used with a verb of motion, means ‘where to’. 109 2.7.4 From Where? The construction is normally an analytical one formed with the preposition min and ‘where’. The question is

237 whether we deal with a univerbated compound such as mnēn or minnēn as in Tiberias (AGK-2:80, S. 65), Nazareth (Zuʕbi 2005a:20) and thus opposed to a form for ‘where’ = wēn or whether there is a more transparent min wēn.

238

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

25 26 13 38 39

29 30

12

56

Haifa 33

41 44

65

49

53

72

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

64

63

55

75

73

B

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31

35

59

42

46

36

57

58

40 43

21

20

8

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

110

Interrogatives: kf f f f

n

0

110

2.7.5 Reflexes of *kayfa ‘how’?

5

10 km

Morphology

110 2.7.5 Reflexes of *kayfa ‘how’? The shift *ay > /ī/ in this word is an isolated case, also to be found in Lebanese and Syrian dialects and even in Maghrebi dialects such as the dialect of Tripoli with /ē/ as the reflex of *ay (Pereira 2010:34, 281). Forms with /ī/ are

239 typical of Northern sedentary dialects. One can draw an approximate isogloss showing that B, C, G and M dialects prefer kēf, čēf. For ʕArab Šibli (83), the questionnaire has čēf and šlōn, Rosenhouse 1980:21 čīf.

240

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 36 34

33

56

41 44

65

66

53

63

69

68

54

60 62

61

47 48

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

80

Nazareth

83

78

73

27

57

59

42

31

71

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

Israel 86

e

89

87

88

90

92

93

Jordan 95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

111

Interrogatives: kam am m 'a 'a 'a 0

111

2.7.6 How much? How many?

5

10 km

Morphology

111 2.7.6 How Much? How Many? For ‘how much?’, asking for the price or the time, or a quantity without a noun, all over the area qaddēš, ʔaddēš, gaddēš, giddēš in ʕIbillīn/Bedouin (46), id-Daḥi (86) kaddēš are used: gaddēš is-sāʕa? = ‘what’s the time?’. Cf. Egyptian Arabic is-sāʕa kām? ʔaddē in Haifa in one recording of Muslima born in 1939, ʔaddē? recording iš-Šēx Dannūn, gaddē ʕArab Lhēb (54), qaddē Mġār (60), Bʕēne (65). Cf. also šūf ʔaddēš kānu žirān mnāḥ “see how [much] they were good neighbors” (AGK-2:28–39, s. 21).

241 For ‘how much?’, ‘how many?’ used with a noun, there are two variants: kam yōm ~ ʔakám(m) min yōm ‘how many days?’, or w ʔinti maʔāsak kām? ‘and you, what are your measurements?’ Dēr Ḥanna (62). They are also used in the sense of ‘a pair of, some’. In Kufir Smēʕ (9), in recordings of several Christians only kam was used, in recording of Druze ʔakamm. One should not adopt a premature conclusion of this distribution. The texts from Ṭabariyya have kam and ʔakam as ‘some’: kam nās “some people” (AGK2:58, 59, s. 10), fī kamān ʔakam ʕēle min Ṣafaḍ “there are some more families from Safed” (AGK-1:136–137, s. 8).

242

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1

9 14 15

2 17 18

Akko Akko

28

21

20

8

19

23 26

16

24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56

58

40

43

Haifa

46 31

36

60

42

41 44 47 48

65

49 53

75

71

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

95

83 84

87

88

90 89

92

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68 55

72

62

61

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

112

Interrogativ

93

he

mta nta mta nta mit 0

112

2.7.7 When?

5

10 km

Morphology

112 2.7.7 When? For a detailed discussion, see WAD IV: map 444. For Bedouin dialects, Rosenhouse 1984:44 quotes wēmet and waymata without further localisation and refers to Rosenhouse 1982. There, none of the forms was locatable.

243 As for wēnta, the form is not mentioned in Bergstraesser 1915, map 26, cf. also p. 69. But since he writes the forms in Arabic, his wāymtā, indicated for a part of Galilee might be read as wēmta ~ wēnta.

244

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

7

1 14 15

2 18

Akko

28

19

16

30

26 13 12 38 B 39

56 58 59

43

Haifa

42

41 44

31

36

65

49

53

75 78

Israel

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

62

61

48

60

82 79

83 84

88

85

e

89

92

90 91

Jordan

96

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

113

Prepositions:

side, outside

uwwa, awwa, a t, ba u t, ba iw t,

awwiyyit, barriyyit uww t, barr t aww t, barr t u t, barr t

0

113

2.8.1 ‘Inside the house, outside of the house’

5

10 km

Morphology

2.8

Prepositions, Conjunctions

113 2.8.1 ‘Inside the house, outside of the house’ Prochàzka 1993:215, 221 quotes only the forms barra – barrāt, ǧuwwa9 – ǧuwwāt, and considers the ending -āt as a secondary construct form as in nouns such as maʕnā – maʕnāt-. As for the ending -īt, it is mentioned besides -āt in Bauer 1957:37-l, Bauer 1970:88, Elihay 2004:78r. The origin is probably the noun barrīye ‘outskirts’ as in ṭilʕu la-barrīt il-balad “they went out to the outskirts of the 9  For simplicity’s sake, only /ǧ/ is written for both /ǧ/ and /ž/.

245 city” (AGK-2:54–55, s. 34). This was interpreted as a preposition, barrīt il-balad “outside the city” (loc. cit.). Cf. also Fassūṭa (6) xaraǧu la-barrīt il-baldi. This is corroborated by barriyyit and analogical žawwiyyit and an asymmetrical pair barrīt – ǧuwwāt in several places. Then an analogical ǧuwwīt was formed. The pair ǧawwīt – barrīt looks like a mutual adaptation, but since it is attested only in Bedouin dialects, one rather thinks of an original ǧawwa. Cf. also Syrian Bedouin dialects and Iraqi dialects having this form. In the Bedouin dialect of Bēt Zarzīr (54), b-galb albēt – barra l-bēt are used.

246

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

51 52 53

65

49

50

72

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

93

64

63

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

54 71

27

57

41 44 45 47

31 33 32

36

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

95

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

114

Prepositions: itl

zayy both both, more frequent both, zayy more frequent 0

114

2.8.2 As, like: miṯl ~ zayy

5

10 km

Morphology

114 2.8.2 As, like: miṯl ~ zayy Bauer 1957:362-r indicates miṯl, miṯil, zeij, šibh without localisation. The same is true for Elihay 2004:352-l. On p. 636, he states: “In Egypt the word for like, as is zayy, while in Lebanon and Syria it is mitel*, Palestininan dialect uses both, without distinction”. miṯl is by far the most frequent form in the corpus investigated. zayy seems to be preferred in the urban dialects

247 of Akko and neighbouring Maker, Haifa, Šfaʕamir, ʕIsifya and Nazareth. See appendix. Where only one form is attested this should not be misinterpreted. In most of the respective cases, only one or few recordings were available. Therefore, it cannot be excluded that the alternative form is also used to a certain extent.

248

N

Morphology

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9 10

14 15 19

16

13 38 39

29 30

21

20

23 24

12

26 56

40 43

Haifa

31 32 53

41 44

62

61

47

65

49

50

69

68

Sea of Galilee

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

ariyya

55

75

71 72

42

46

36

60

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

83

87 90

92

Jordan 94

93

95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

115

ecause of, in order to min n mi mi m ©a ©ala n 0

115

2.8.3 ‘Because of, in order to’: minšān ~ ʕašān

5

10 km

Morphology

115 2.8.3 ‘Because of, in order to’: minšān ~ ʕašān Elihay 2004:348-r indicates minšān with the comment: “the shortened form mišān is also heard”, p. 21-r also has ʕašān ~ ʕalašān. The two forms are synonyms: ʔana sāwēto ʕašānek “I did for you” (p. 21), p. 348 hāda minšāno “that’s for him, that’s for his sake”. ʕArrābi (61) adawwir ʕalē ʕašān ʔasiʕfu ‘I look for him in order to rescue him’. Rosenhouse 1984:204, 18 mšān. Bedouin Ǧawāmīs (53) ʕašān, with suffix ʕašinnu ‘because of him’ probably by analogy with

249 liʔinnu, yōminnu ‘when he’. Dālyit il-Karmil (73) ʕala-šān, ʕašanno, ir-Rāmi (56), ʕIsifya (71), ʕĒn Māhil (80) ʕašān – ʕašinnu. miššān Ṭabariyya (AGK-2:44, s. 4), ʕašān p. 50, s. 6, minšān p. 52, s. 3. Haifa ʕašān (AGK-1:298). In the fairy tale “Little Red Riding Hood”, often related in the recordings = Layla wa ḏ-ḏīb: ʕašān ʔāklik ‘in order to eat you’ (Kufur Kanna, 68). Dālyit il-Karmil (73) ʕala-šān ʔāklik ‘in order to eat you’, minšān yākulha ‘in order to eat her’.

250

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 14

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

41 44

65

49

51 53

60 62

61

47 48

31

27

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

ariyya

54 75

71

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

116

Numerals: 36

wa wa wa wi

e, wa di , , ,

di e di 0

116

2.9.1 ‘One’

5

10 km

251

Morphology

2.9 Numerals 116 2.9.1 ‘One’ For ‘one, somebody’ all over the area, wāḥad with /a/ in the last syllable is used. This seems to be a typical Lebanese and Palestinian pronunciation vs., for example, Aleppo wēḥed, Damascus wāḥed. For the feminine form, most dialects have waḥade, waḥadi. For Bedouin dialects, Rosenhouse 1984:105 quotes the forms wāḥad, wāḥəd and fem. waḥda, wiḥda, waḥde.

According to the ghawa-syndrome, one should expect a form such as *wḥada as *naḥla > nḥaḷa ‘ant’, naxla > nxaḷa ‘palm-tree’. Dictionaries and grammars of Bedouin dialects consulted have, however, wiḥda or waḥda, cf. Negev wiḥdih (Shawarbah 158). ʕArab Šibli (83) in text Rosenhouse 1980:29 waḥada.10

10  Cf. Blau 1960:55.

252

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

28

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12 B

26 56

57

58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44 45

46 B

36

34

B

47 48

31 33 32 35

60

51 52 53

B 49 66 67

50

72

55

75

82 79

85 86

e

89

92

94 97 98 100 101

102 104

Numerals:

Sea of Galilee

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

117

ariyya

B

Israel

99

64

63

76 80

78

93

B

69

Nazareth

73

65

68

54 71

62

61

Jenin

hree, th e, talat n, etc. n te, tlat n, etc.

0

117

2.9.2 ‘Three, thirty, eight, eighty’

5

10 km

Morphology

117 2.9.2 ‘Three, thirty, eight, eighty’ Fronting and elision of *a in *ṯalāṯa, *ṯalāṯīn, *ṯamānya, *ṯamānīn. In most Bedouin dialects east of Haifa, *a is fronted to /i/: ṯilāṯa, ṯilāṯīn, ṯimānya and ṯimānīn. This follows the general rule that pretonic *a in such structures is raised to /i/ or /u/. Rosenhouse 1984:106–107 partly indicates such forms as: ṯalāṯa, ṯamānya (ṯumānya ~ ṯimānya), ṯalāṯīn,

253 ṯamānīn. In the recordings of Bedouin dialects, there is a lot of oscillation between forms with /i/ and /a/, obviously due to contact with sedentary dialects. As for elision of pretonic *a, there is a certain concentration of tlāte around Haifa. In Kufir Yasīf, Abu Snān and iž-Ždayydi-Maker, only older informants used tlāṯe, tlaṯīn. Contradictory ir-Rāmi (56): talāte – tlātīn, tamānīn.

254

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10 26

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

8

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

46

36 37

33

59

49

52

72

65 67

75 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

64

63

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

73

B

69

68

54 71

62

61

47 48

31

60

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

118

Numerals:

ht e i i e

a e ya ye yi ye

ya

tamanya yi ye tamanye tmanye 0

118 ‘eight’

5

10 km

255

Morphology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko 28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 36 37

33

41 44 45

76 80

81

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54

72

65

49 66 67

52

60 62

61

47 48

31

71

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

119

Numerals:

ht

forms with /y/ forms without /y/

0

119

‘eight’: forms with and without /y/

5

10 km

256

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

26

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

46

36 37

33

59

49

52

65 67

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

102 104

Numerals:

ht

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

120

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

62

61

47 48

31

60

Jenin

forms with plosive

with /t/, interdentals extant

0

120

‘‘eight’: forms with plosives

5

10 km

258

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

72

75 78

82 79

Israel

Sea of Galilee ariyya

83 84

88

85

e

89

92

95

93

64

76 80

Nazareth

73

63

69

53

71

60

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

121

Numerals: (i)

©(a) , (

'i 'id 'id 0

121

2.9.3 Numbers from 11–19

5

10 km

Morphology

121 2.9.3 Numbers from 11–19 In most forms elicited, the *ʕ is lost and a compensatory lengthening of the vowel preceding *ʕ took place: *ṯnaʕš > ṯnāš. The notations t(a)laṭṭāš, arba(ʕ)ṭās, etc., for Haifa (AGK-1:104) suggest a certain degree of variability between different pronunciations. This is illustrated by a map for ‘eleven’. A female young Druze in ʕIsifya (71) first pronounced ʔidāʕš; asked again, she repeated it as iḥdāʕš and attributed her first form to neighbouring Dālyit il-Karmil (73). Older female Druze from ʕIsifya used ʔidāʕš. The second series used with so./sth. counted normally has -aṛ ~ -ər. In the Jewish dialect of Haifa, it has the ending -il. This is also the case in Ṣafad where, in the recordings,

259 three variables are attested: ṭnāʕš balad ‘twelve villages’, aṛbaʕṭāš sine ‘fourteen years’ as in northern Syrian dialects, xamsṭāšil baʔaṛa ‘fifteen cows’, ṭnāšin sine ‘twelve years’, sabaʕṭāšin wāḥid ‘seventeen persons’ as in Maghrebi dialects (cf. Marçais 1977:178). -in is mainly used in Tunisia and Algeria. It is tempting to consider -in, -il as a Maghrebi feature in the Jewish dialects of the Galilee, the speakers of which partly originate from al-Andalus, but Corriente 1977:96 does not mention the like, only the ending -ar. According to AGK-1:105, the ending -il was interpreted as a definite article which is shown by a form like saba(ʕ)ṭāš issini ‘seventeen years’. For forms with loss of *ḥ in ‘eleven’, cf. SA map 296.

260

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

7

1 10

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

26

16

13 38 39

30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

60

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

72

55

75 78

80 82 79

Israel

85 86 89

92

95

93

ariyya

B

Nazareth

73

Sea of Galilee

69

53

71

64

63

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

122

Numerals:

sit

ixteen su su su

a)

sit 0

122

2.9.4 ‘Sixteen’

5

10 km

Morphology

122 2.9.4 ‘Sixteen’ The shift *i > u in suṭṭāʕš and the like until now was not attested in Palestinian Arabic, nor is it attested in other Arabic dialects to the best of our knowledge. Cf. Elihay 2004:481-r sittaʕeš ~ siṭṭaʕeš, Bauer 1957:271-l sittaʕš, rural

261 seṭṭaʕš, Seeger WB online 310 siṭṭaʕš, sittaʕš, siṭṭāš, also Rosenhouse 1969, Ramallah siṭṭaʕš (Seeger 2013:175), Hebron siṭṭaʕš (Seeger 1996:78), Haifa siṭṭāš (AGK-1 104), no mention in Nevo 2006:49. One of the student collaborators decided to stop the elicitation of numbers at twelve!

262

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

B

56

Haifa

41 44 45

46

36 37

34

35

51 52 53

72

B

55

75

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

Nazareth

73

64

69

68

54 71

B 63 65

49 66 67

50

60 62 B

61

47 48

31 33 32

57

59

42

27

58

40 43

25 26

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

123

Existential particle: 36

f b b

, bu

here is f , neg. ma bi f , neg. ma b

0

123

2.10.1 Existential particle: ‘there is’

5

10 km

Morphology

2.10

Existential Particle

123 2.10.1 Existential Particle: ‘there is’ Forms with b- are mainly those of Bedouin dialects. In Bēt Zarzīr (54), bū is the form of the Ġrīfāt. For bī ~ bū, cf. in detail, Rosenhouse 1984:109, 134. She thinks that bī is influenced by sedentary fī. bī is also attested for the dialect of the Rwaḷa Bedouin in Saudi-Arabia and this is certainly

263 not due to the influence of sedentary dialects. For a distribution of bī ~ bū and short forms such as buh, see WAD IV, map 473a. Cf. also Yemen with bī, bih in sedentary dialects. Where fī is attested in recordings of Bedouin dialects this is obviously a loan from sedentary dialects. As for Iksāl, cf. Nevo 2006:54 with “exceptionally bī” besides fī. In some points of investigation, the positive form attested is fī, but the negative form is ma bišš or ma bīš.

264

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

28

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

26 56

40 B B

Haifa 36 37

34

43

41 44 45

51 52 53

49

50

B

65 67

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31

35

59

42

46 33

57

58

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

124

Existential particle: ma ma ma ma ma

f f fi b bi

here is n a bi fi fi i bi

u uh

0

124

2.10.2 Existential particle: ‘there is not’

5

10 km

Morphology

124 2.10.2 Existential Particle: ‘there is not’ Negation in the sedentary dialects in the imperfect is mostly formed only with the negative suffix -š: baʕrifiš ‘I do not know’. This does not exclude the other possibilities with ma – š or only ma.11 For a general discussion see Lucas 2010, for Ramallah cf. Seeger 2013:146. The most frequent negated form of the existential particle in sedentary dialects is fišš (< *fihš). Where two forms are indicated, this refers to different informants as well as to variation 11  The imperfect forms with verb modifier ʕamb- are negated with miš normally used with nominal forms: miš ʕambiktib ‘he is not writing actually’ since ʕam- harks back to a nominal form ʕammāl. Cf. for Egyptian Arabic Woidich 2006:280 Anmerkung 1 and 2 for negation particle miš with the future marker ḥa- < *rāyiḥ.

265 in the informants’ speech. Whoever uses fišš may also use ma fišš. In Dālyit il-Karmil (73), a young female informant used ma fęšš#, in context ma fišš maʕo. Cf. ibid. ma ʕindǫšš#. Due to dialect mixing, there is quite a considerable number of asymmetrical forms such as Bedouin bī – ma bišš (44), fī – ma bišš (72), bī – mā fī. This may partly be idiosyncratic and due to the interview situation with a researcher normally speaking a sedentary dialect. Remarkable is bī – ʔa bišš in Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93) which is reminiscent of the Syro-Lebanese ʔa fī. Besides these forms, also attested are: fī – fišš and fī – ma fī. Also remarkable is bī – māš in a Bedouin dialect of ir-Rūmi (Lhēb). The same form is found in the dialect of the Negev Bedouin (Shawarbah 2012:275), also in the Sinai and parts of SaudiArabia (see WAD IV, map 474).

Morphology

2.11

Nominal Forms

2.11.1 Maṣdar of Verb Measure II Throughout the area there exist two types, taCCīC and tiCCīC – without any evident regional distribution – the forms with ti- being by far more frequent. During B.’s fieldwork, the following examples were collected in more than twenty localities. Number refers to the number of places where the forms were elicited: tixžīl = 12 / taxžīl = 10, tihrīb = 9 / tahrīb = 10, tiksīr = 24 / taksīr = 3, tiṣlīḥ = 20 / taṣlīḥ = 8, tilbīs = 19, talbīs = 1, tiʕlīm = 15 / taʕlīm = 6, tižlīs = 15 / tažlīs = 3 (‘straightening the wings of a car’), tislīm = 13 / taslīm = 6. Other examples with /i/, collected from different places, are tihwīd ‘judaisation’, tinžīd ‘bolstering’, tiʕṭīl ‘delay’,12 tižnīd ‘registration for military service’, tisbīḥ ‘saying subḥāna ḷḷāh’, tiṣrīḥ ‘permit’, tiždīd ‘renewal’, tilʔīṭ ‘picking’, tixṭīṭ ‘planification, furrowing’, tisyīž ‘fencing’. Cf. also tuṭʕīmi ‘bait’, tidrīʕa ‘burp’ (Kōkab Abu l-Hēža, 44). Interview in ʕIsifya (71) conducted with young female Druze by T. only furnishes the type tiCCīC. This seems to be a Galilean feature since Elihay 2004:530-l only mentions: “in words like this, you may sometimes hear 12  In some dialects, back consonants prevent *a > i: taxžīl “embarrassment”, taʕdīb “punishment” (Ṭurʕān 69).

267 te- instead of ta-”. Young female from Dālyit il-Karmil (73) in interview categorically rejected forms with /i/. 2.11.2 CVCCāy All through the area, the scheme CVCCāy, representing old forms with -an (-ā), -āʔ, -āya, is usual without a final vowel in the sedentary dialects. Examples are: miṣfāy ‘sieve’, ʕaṣāy ‘stick’, miḏrāy ‘winnowing fork’, ḥirbāy ‘chameleon’. Cf. also ṣurmāy “ein Schuh” (AGK-1:97) vs. ṣurmāye in Aleppo. Also ġallāy ‘pan’, fuṛšāy ‘brush’, ḥkāy ‘story’. Haifa “Die Endung *āyi ist zu -āy gekürzt z.B. dāy ‘Amme; Hebamme’, ntāy ‘Weibchen’, miʕzāy ‘Ziege’” (AGK1:89). This explains why there is only a common form for the participle active of ‘to come’: žāy. Cf. also SA maps 55ff. An exception is Ṭurʕān with miṣfāyi, miḏrāyi, mrāyi, ʕaṣāyi, ḥkāyi, furšāyi, ġillāyi ~ ġullāyi. In Bedouin dialects, too, e.g., point 53: miṣfāya, miḏrāya, mrāya, ʕabāya, ḥkāya, furšāya, nṯāya, ġullāya. Such forms are also attested in other Bedouin dialects of the area. 2.11.3 Plural Quite often the plural form flūme ‘films’ was heard. Cf. also frūni ‘ovens’ in Dālyit il-Karmil (73) and dlūmi ‘dunams’ in some places, e.g., Haifa dnūmi ~ dlūmi (AGK-1:95).

268

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 14

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa 34

49

65 67

72

ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

83 84

88 90 91

92

94 93

Sea of Galilee

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

50

51 53

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 32

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

95

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

125

Genitive exponent, possessive pronoun taba© © © (ta©ti, t ni, ta iyy ( ti, iyy ) t f., iy t pl.

125

2.12 Genitive exponent

giyy (giyyi z l

g ti, giyy

k)

0

5

10 km

Morphology

125

2.12 Genitive Exponent

– The dominant form is tabaʕ, f. tabaʕt ~ tabʕat ~ tabʕit ~ tabaʕīt, pl. tabaʕūn ~ tabʕīn, tabaʕōn in ʕĒn Māhil (80). In Bauer 1957, it is defined as “urban”. This does not apply to Galilee. The use of tabaʕ corresponds to that of bitāʕ, as in Egyptian Arabic (cf. Woidich 2006:328– 329): Bēt Žann (23) il-lahži tabʕat baladna ‘the dialect of our village’, Taršīḥa (8) tabaʕīn Ṣafad ‘those from Ṣafad’, haḏlāk tabʕūn is-sigāṛa ‘those of the cigarette’ = ‘those who smoke cigarettes’, Yāft in-Nāṣri (78), Yanūḥ (14) il-xādma tabʕitha ‘her female servant’. Congruence is not always the case: id-dafātir tabʕīn ṣaff ʔawwal ‘the notebooks of the first class’ ʕĒn Māhil (80), il-fabrika tabaʕit id-duxxān ‘the cigarette factory’ Nazareth (77), but il-faras il-ʔaṣīle tabaʕ il-ʔamīr ‘the purebred mare of the prince’ Dālyit il-Karmil (73). Also in Haifa iṭ-ṭanžaṛa tabaʕ l-ḥammīn “der Topf für den ḥammīn” (AGK-1:85). tabaʕ is also used in Bedouin dialects, cf. Rosenhouse 1984:287. – btāʕ used in Jerusalem (Barthélemy 1935–1969:28), Ramallah btāʕ, btāʕat, btāʕīn ~ btāʕūn, btāʕāt (Seeger 2009:18), Hebron btāʕ (Seeger 1996:101), in Bauer 1970:192 without localisation, is rare in our area. In Bauer 1957, it is designated as “rural”. In Kōkab Abu

269 l-Hēža (44), the possessive pronouns are m. btāʕi, f. btāʕti, pl. m. btaʕūni, pl. f. btaʕūti. – A short form of it or a contamination with tabaʕ is tāʕ, as possessive pronouns: f. tāʕti, taʕūni, taʕāti in Biʕne (65), biss min taʕūn il-Quds ‘one of the cats of Jerusalem’, but also in same text il-biss tabaʕ il-ʔuds Dēr Ḥanna (62), Fredīs (92) f. tāʕīt in recording. Iksāl (79) il-ġuruftēn taʕāt/taḏ̣ʕūn [sic!] ʔaxūy “the two rooms of my brother”, il-ġuruftēn taʕūni/ taʕāti “the two rooms of mine” (Nevo 2006:47). – ntāʕ once attested in Akko is reminiscent of Maghrebi mtāʕ ~ ntāʕ. – šiyy (possessive pronouns šīti, šiyyātak in ʕArrābi, 61) was considered to be “old-fashioned” in Kōkab Abu l-Hēža (44). For its use in the Levant, see WAD IV, map 472. In Haifa, šāt (AGK-1:301). – giyy is to be found only in Bedouin dialects and in one G dialect (Dabbūryi, 82). The form is not mentioned in Rosenhouse 1984. For a discussion of its etymology, see WAD IV, map 472. – z Jewish Haifa: b-dimmaġāt z-mayy suxni “Verbände mit heißem Wasser” (AGK-1:293). No etymology is indicated, ibid. 85. For a discussion, see WAD IV, map 472. Might be Syriac. – šēl Haifa Jewish from Hebrew.

270

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa 36 37

41 44 45

46 J

34

35

51 52 53

72

73

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93 103

94 97 98 100 101

102

126

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

D

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32

57

59

42

27

58

40 43

25 26

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

104

Verbs: perfect 3rd sg.f. I a- and i-type 103

rba libs rbat (kitbat) rab libsat rba libsit -it all verb classes

sat

0

126

2.13.1 Regular verb perfect 3rd. p. sg. f. a- and i-type

5

10 km

Morphology

2.13

The Verb

Verbal endings 2.13.1 Regular Verb Perfect 3rd. p. sg. f. a- and i-type The distribution of ending -at with a-type of verb, ending -it with i-type is a northern feature. Unfortunately, we know little about southern Lebanese dialects. For the Druze of Syria, in SA maps 135 and 136 ḏ̣arabat – libsit is 126

271 indicated. For the southern Druze dialect of ʕIsifya, the questionnaires and recordings have katbat, ṭalbat – fihmit, wiṣlit, ʕirfit, but -at in hollow verbs (kānat), geminate verbs (ḏ̣allat), final y verbs a-type (baqat). In Dālyit il-Karmil (73), according to interview and recordings, all verb classes have -it. In an interview with a younger female, it is pronounced [-et] in the final position: ġalet il-ṃayy ‘the water boiled’, ġilet il-ʔasʕār ‘the prices went up’, qālet ‘she said’, qalítli ‘she told me’, ma qalitlīš ‘she didn’t tell me’.

272

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12 B

Haifa 36 37

34

35

51 52 53

72

65

49 66 67

50

55

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

127

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

78

93

64

63

B

Nazareth

73

B

69

68

75

60 62

61

54 71

27

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

B

26

58

40 43

21

20

B

104

Jenin

Verbs: perfect endings 2nd pl.m.+f. 71

-tu -tu / -tum -tum -tam -tVm

-tin / -tin / -tan / -tan / -tan 0

127

2.13.2 2nd p. pl. m.+f. perfect

5

10 km

Morphology

127 2.13.2 2nd p. pl. m.+f. Perfect All sedentary dialects have -tu, e.g., Haifa, (AGK-1:114). The G and M dialects have -tu / -tin, as well as the C dialect Fredīs (Jastrow 2004:170, Jastrow 2009:237). An exception is the second C dialect, namely Ǧisr iz-Zarga I with -tum / -tin (Jastrow 2009:236). He does not indicate the forms for Ǧisr iz-Zarga II, but according to p. 234, where both dialect types have intum / intin for the pronouns, one can suppose the same verb forms. As for Bedouin dialects,

273 Rosenhouse 1984:91 is vague indicating only -tVm / -tan with commentary “the pl. m. suffixes may vary among the tribes as to the vowel quality”. On p. 86 (ibid.), kitabtam / kitabtan are indicated as historical forms: “the verb system must have been something like …”. Her texts and the recordings do not provide any examples for the 2nd p. pl. For the Bedouin dialects of the ʕArāmša, Sawāʕid, Ḥǧērāt, Lhēb, Šibli -tam / -tan were elicited, for Umm il-Ġanam (84) -tum / -tan.

274

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

B

26 56

Haifa 34

33

41 44 45

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

104

Verbs: endings 3rd pl. m. (c.) perf -u / -um -am -am -am -um

-u / -um / -am / -am n n

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Jenin

102

92

83 84

Palestinian Territories

103

128

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

69

68

B

54 71

B 63 65

49 66 67

50

51 53

60 62

61

47 48

31

35

59

42

46

36 37

57

58

40 43

27

-um / -am

3rd pl. m. (c.) imperfect only only only only

perf.-am attested imperf.-um attested imperf. -am attested imperf. - attested

0

128

2.13.3 3rd p. pl. m. (c.) perfect – 3rd p. pl. m. (c.) imperfect

5

10 km

Morphology

2.13.3 3rd p. pl. m. (c.) Perfect – 3rd p. pl. m. (c.) Imperfect Almost all sedentary dialects have the type ṣāru yʕammru ‘they started to build’ whilst Bedouin dialects, according to Rosenhouse 1984:91 have several types, namely gālam – ygūlam, gālum – ygūlum, gālam – ygūlūn, gālum – ygūlūn. In op. cit. 133–134, she supplies a list with the endings for twenty-five tribes. The following enumeration starts with group I having the -am / -ūn endings. First are quoted the data in Rosenhouse 1984:133–134 and in her texts, p. refers to page in texts in Rosenhouse 1984. “Interview(s)” and “recording(s)” refer to the interview(s) and recordings made within the framework of the Galilee project. – ʕArāmša (3, 4, 5): -am / -ūn, p. 228 ixtilfam, ǧābam, rāḥam. Interview: libsam, yilbasūn, etc. – ʕArab Zunnār near Taršīḥa (8): no data, only a lexical questionnaire extant. – Lhēb Ṭūba-Zanġariyyya (27): -um / -am, p. 192ff.: gāḷam, ngaṭʕam, yirkabūn, yrūḥūn, ygaflūn, yilgūn; recording: ṣārum, wiṣlum. – Mrēsāt near Ṭamra (Rāma) near Taršīḥa (8), Šfaʕamir (31): -um / -ūn. – Lhēb in Mišhad (55): recording only provides kitbam, nisam. – Lhēb in Bēt Zarzīr (54): -am / -am, Lhēb Abu Ṣayyāḥ -am /-ūn, interview ʕāšam, ṣārum. Interview with Lhēb (no place indicated): kitbam, giram, no imperfect forms indicated. Text in Rosenhouse 1984 216 f. ḅāgam, yidfaʕūn. – Sawāʕid (38, 58, 59): -am / -ūn; interviews -am / -ūn, Recording of the mayor from the is-Sawāʕid in Liḥmēra (32) is a mixture of MSA, sedentary and Bedouin dialect. He uses sedentary verb forms. Sawāʕid in ač-Čammāna (58) and il-Mall (59) interviews am / -ūn. Recording ilMall: čānum ~ kānum, (i)ʕtarfum, yiʕtašūn, yiʕtabrūn. – Ḥǧērāt iḏ̣-Ḏ̣hara (45) -am / -ūn, recording ṣāru ygūmu, yōklu, yiṭlaʕu, yḥaššru, gisamu, gālu, sḥabu!, iyḥuṭṭu!, aǧu, gālu, etc. Obviously loans from sedentary dialects. – Ḥǧērāt Bīr il-Maksūr (50) -am / -ūn, p. 202ff: ṣāram, fataḥam, ʔažu, ṣāru, saḥabu, ṣāru yīǧu, dawwəram, ligam, gaʕadam, rāḥam, yərukḏ̣ūn, ygūlu. Recording not available, only transcribed text: gālam ~ gālum, ygūlūn, yxarrfūn. In second recording Ḥǧērāt, only transcribed text available: gālam ~ gālum (several instances of both), xaḏam, ygūlūn, yxarrfūn. – Ǧanādi near Bīr il-Maksūr (50) -am / -ūn. – Ḥǧērāt in Mikmān (suburb of 50): Recording yharžūn ‘they speak’, yxarrfūn ‘they tell stories’. – Ġrifāt (Bēt Zarzīr, 54) -am / -am, -um / –, p. 242ff. tḥayyarum, nāmum, yisāwum, yerūḥum, yíʕuzmum, pp. 190–191, 34 ʕallagam ʕa-ḏyūlhum uyitmarǧeḥam 128

275 ṣāram ‘he hanged all of them on their tails, swinging, they started (gobbling)’. Below ʕallagum, inhazməm, yilʕabam. In Rosenhouse 1982:33, in the table for the Ġrifāt tribe different endings are indicated: geʕdum, fitḥum, libsum, waṣlam, čānam, gāmam, binam, xaḏam, fakkom, ǧam(m), for the imperfect yugʕodom, yiftaḥom, yikətbom, wuṣlum, yšīlum, yizgum, yilgum, yāxḏum, yfukkum, yīžum. Recording hažžum ‘they fled’, yrūḥu ysayyrūn. Second recording ʔafṭarum, čānum, ṣabbaḥum, yiguʕdūn, yʕarfūn. – Zbēdāt Basmat Ṭabʕōn (35) and Saxnīn (41): -um / -am, p. 222 yikbarum, yeṣīrum, yitʕabum, p. 238 ywaddūn. The latter could be a loan from other dialects of the area. – Iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda (48, Ḥaǧāǧra): field notes B.: giḏ̣bam – yugəḏ̣būn, xubzam – yxabzūn, etc. Recording of two speakers. Their dialect is heavily influenced by sedentary speech and provides no original forms. – ʕArab il-Ḥamdūn near Dēr Ḥanna (62) recording: speaker only uses perfect and imperfect forms with -u as loans from sedentary dialects. – Wādi l-Ḥammām (64 Gēṭiyya): no data in Rosenhouse 1984, in interview only šāfu, kitbu, nisu which are doubtful. No imperfect forms elicited. – Ṣbēḥ/in-Nǧēdāt (65): no data in Rosenhouse 1984, recording sawwum, gālum, ygūlūn, yxarrfūn. – ʕArab iš-Šibli (83): -am / -ūn, interview: šāfam, kitbam, nisam, yhaddidūn. Texts in Rosenhouse 1980:21 ff: dāʕam, ǧam, isrigam, yāxḏūn, yigdərūn, but contradictory ṣāram yināmam, ygūlam (p. 21), ygūlam (p. 22), yiḥaṭṭūn, yibʕaṯūn (p. 22). – In Mqēble (95), two different dialects are spoken, the main dialect being a M dialect with the endings -u / -u. In the recording of an elderly male using /g/ for Qāf, the informant mainly uses -u / -u, but there are instances of -ūn: yiʕtabrūn ‘they consider’, yiʕmalūn ‘they make’. Another recording of female born in 1929 using /k/ for Qāf: ṣāru yiflaḥūn ‘they started to plough’. Also in the interviews on YouTube with two women, occasionally -ūn was used (yitġaddūn ‘they have lunch’). Group II – ʕArab al- Ḥūla (north-east of 21) -am / -am. – ʕArab is-Samniyyi Šfaʕamir (31) recording: gālum, ṣārum, yrūḥum. – ʕArab il-Xawālid (33) - / -am, recording: naffaḏum, aʕtarafum, gāsum, ʕimlum, dāsum, yibnum. – ʕAmariyya Ibṭin (34): -am / -am, p. 218 f. ǧābum, kitalum, p. 226 rāḥam. The student collaborator in this Bedouin village managed to interview a person who declared that the inhabitants of the village were all Bedouins, but that he was a fallāḥ and that his family came from

276 Jordan in 1948. His data will not be used. Recording of another speaker from the ʕAmariyya tribe: ṣārum, čānum, btuʔumrum ‘you order’. – Kaʕabiyya Ibṭin (34), Bīr Maksūr (50), Basmat Ṭabʕōn (35): -um / -am, p. 240 ṣārum al-badu yisḥaǧum, yisḥalum, uġannum ‘the Arabs started clapping hands, and singing’. Recording: čānum. – Nʕēm Basmat Ṭabʕōn (35): -am / -, recording: informant uses only sedentary forms. – Ḥilf (51): -um / -am; recording ʕArab iṭ-Ṭabbāš: ǧam ‘they came’, wiṣlum, ʕimlum, itḥālafum, ykūnum, iyḥuṭṭum, yištaġlum, ygūlum, yrūḥum. – Ḥaǧāǧra near Bēt Zarzīr (54): -um / - am, -am / - ūn, p. 228 rāḥam, eštáram, ištaram, lifam ~ lefam, gāḷam, tfaḏ̣ḏ̣alam!, kulam!. Recording: tlāqam, yištaġlam. – Ǧawāmīs Bēt Zarzīr (54): recording ṣalḥum, ṣṭalḥum, širʕam, atʕālagum, ṭaššum, faḏ̣ḏ̣am, tgaṭṭaʕam, yiǧmaʕam, yʕiddam, ywaggfum, yṣūram, yisḥaxum, ysāwum, yisiknum, trūḥum, rāḥam. – Mazārīb Bēt Zarzīr (54) -am / -am, p. 188 uyitmarǧeḥam ‘and they swing’, ṣāram, ʕallagum, inhazmǝm. – Saʕāyda Umm il-Ġanam (84) -um / -um, interview contradictory: šāfam, kitbum, nisam. Recording aǧum, ṭāḥum, zārum, yištaġlum, biǧum. – As for Naʕūṛa (90), one elderly female in a recording used yṛūḥam ‘they go’, ybaddlam ‘they exchange’ which supposes a -m ending for the perfect. – As for the Ǧisr iz-Zarga forms with -um in perfect, imperfect and imperative, Jastrow 2004:236 refers to similar forms in Egyptian and Yemeni dialects “but have not been reported for the Palestinian dialects”. They have, indeed, been reported only for Palestinian Bedouin dialects! Rosenhouse 1984:91 refers to more dialect areas in Northern and Eastern Arabia as well as Syria with this feature. In those dialects, however, the -m is restricted to the perfect (gāḷam ‘they said’), whereas in Egypt also imperfect forms with -m are used, for example, yitġaddum ‘they have lunch’ and niʕallagum ‘we hitch up the plough’ (southern Biḥēra, Behnstedt-Woidich 1987:112). As for Yemen the -m forms are only attested in the perfect (cf. Behnstedt 2016:216–217). Variation in certain points of enquiry is explained partly by the fact that in one spot different tribes are attested. Cf. the map in Rosenhouse 1984 “Settlement of Bedouins

Morphology

in the Allonim-Shfarʕam Hill”. Mixture in the same dialect is explained “by influences of one group on another, probably due to imitation of stronger and more prestigious tribes which have the ‘other’ feature, intermarriages, which bring in women with speech habits that are different from those of their husbands, etc.” (Rosenhouse 1984:58) and in a p. c.: As to the verb suffix morphemes in these Galilee Bedouin dialects: there are various suffix forms related to the different vowels, as described in my book. Now, based on more stories which I’ve been recently working on, it seems one ought not define strictly which form characterizes which dialect. The same narrator can repeat ‘in one breath’, as it were, the same sentence with the verb form once with /a/ and then with /u/, or exchange /i/ with /u/, or vice versa, in the same word used sequentially. These variations seem to reflect not only tribal preferences or dialects, but also phonetic factors such as strength of articulation, or effects of non-Bedouin dialects or other Bedouin dialects, leading to stronger or weaker, more open / closer pronunciation of the vowel, in particular if it is unstressed, such as the suffixed u/ um or a/am in the perfect and imperfect verb forms we are dealing with. I should also mention that the vowels have various allophones (more closed /a/, vowels you cannot distinguish whether they are /i/ or /e/, /u/ or /o/, etc. These depend on their articulation manners, and these vary between vocal tracts and articulation manners. In this context, we should recall Blanc’s (1970:116–117) description of the vowels in the Negev dialects, which seems relevant for the Galilee Bedouins, too: He generally writes that vowels are not always stable, and shows there various cases – especially /i/ and /u/ are unstable and exchangeable, and even /a/ may be exchanged with /i, u/. I have found multiple cases that demonstrate this – between and within speakers’ narratives, as noted. In some papers, I consider the vowel issue in nonBedouin and Bedouin dialects (even compared with Hebrew), because it seems that at least some basic distribution features of Arabic vowels in this region (at least) are relatively similar, if not the same.

278

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 34

33

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85

e

99

94 97 98 100 101

89

102 104

Verbs: endings 3rd pl.f. perfect 92

88

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

129

95

83 84

87

92

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

51

27

57

41 44 45

31

35

56 59

42

46

36 37

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

Jenin

3rd pl.f. imperfect

-u / -u -an / -an -in / -in

0

129

2.13.4 Verb I Endings 3rd p. pl. f.

5

10 km

Morphology

129 2.13.4 Verb I Endings 3rd p. pl. f. There is a neat separation between Bedouin dialects having -an in both perfect and imperfect and the M, C and G dialects with -in. For Bedouin dialects, see Rosenhouse

279 1982:32 and Rosenhouse 1984:91. For the C and M dialects, cf. Jastrow 2004:171 and 2009:236, for Iksāl, Nevo 2006:49. In iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda, the /n/ of the ending is geminated in case of suffixation: yugəḏ̣bannu ‘they seize him’.

280

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 16

19

29 30

9 10

D

12

24

11

D

21

20

8

13 38 39

23 26 56

40 43

Haifa 34

41 44 45

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

ariyya

55

75

71

Sea of Galilee

69

68

54

64

63

65

49 66 67

50

51 52 53

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

I 36 37

57

58

82

83 84

79

D

Israel

85 86

e

88

87 90

89

91

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

102

130

104

Verbs: imperfect 1st sg. 36

Jordan

96 97

'aktib, 'aqtul, ' b 'iktib, 'uqt bb

63 64 77

95

Sarmada 78

n 98

65

99 z

100

Druze village in northern Syria

101

Idlib

84

79

'iktib

66

22 8 b

38

'aktib

0

130

2.13.5 Imperfect prefix 1st p. sg.

5

10 km

286

Sa

279

10

24

39

34 19 6

4

26 25 27 40 41 280

278 277

7

Aleppo

276 285

20

23

47 17 31 16

Morphology

130 2.13.5 Imperfect Prefix 1st p. sg. The prefix vowel /a/ is used almost all over the area. Exceptions are the Muslims in Haifa with /i/ and /u/ (AGK1:11, 112) and Dālyit il-Karmil (73), where, in the dialect of the Druze /i/, /u/ or no vowel are used as in a part of Syrian and in Lebanese dialects. One young female Druze in ʕIsifya (71) used ʔiktib corrected in baktib. All following forms used during interview with /a/. Another young female Druze in Dālyit il-Karmil used forms such as baʕrifeš ~ biʕrifš ‘I don’t know’, bistaʕmilš ‘I don’t use’, bitxayyal ‘I imagine’, bqullo ‘I call it’. She declared that her mother was from Syria and that her mother’s dialect might have influenced her dialect. In a recording of a female Druze born in 1944, at the beginning she declared: ʔana min žabal id-drūz, min sūrya. She used biʕrif ‘I know’, ʕam-bḥammil ‘I am loading up’, bxallīš ḥada ‘I won’t let anybody’, ʔuqʕud ‘I sit’, buqutlik ‘I will kill you’, etc. A third male Druze born in 1920 used burbuṭha ‘I will bind her’, būso ‘I kiss him’. A fourth informant used ʔiḥkīlkon ‘I tell you’, bīži ‘I come’, žīblik ‘I bring you’, bṭill ʕalēki ‘I will look after you’. A fifth male Druze born in 1944: ʔiṭlaʕ ‘I leave’, sammī ‘I call him’, laqīli ‘I find for me = I look for’. A sixth informant: biqdar ʔiḥki? ‘may I speak with’, etc. In some of the initial w verbs, the vowel is /u/ or /ū/: buṣal ‘I arrive’, būraṯ ‘I inherit’ (3rd p. byūraṯ),13 būqaʕ ‘I fall’ (3rd p. byūqaʕ). In the recording 13  As in Syro-Lebanese dialects with bi- or bu- for the first person, the 3rd p. m. and pl. have the prefix by-: byišṛab/u.

281 of the other informants, there are no instances of 1st p. sg. imperfect. Blanc 1953: 35 “bquwm, bnām, bsaddiq, as some Lebanese dialects”. Three of the informants in Dālyit il-Karmil also used forms such as fataḥit ‘she opened it’ without elision of /a/. The explanation of this deviating feature may be the fact that the Druze of Dālyit il-Karmil are said to be of north Syrian origin from the region of Aleppo. See long footnote no. 29 in Blanc 1953:10. The Druze villages in northern Syria are indeed concentrated in the west of Aleppo. They are all to be found in the area where the 1st. p. sg. imperfect has the prefix with /i/, /u/ or without vowel. For iž-Žišš (21), Christie, in text told by a Muslim, has ana bištrīha ‘I will buy her’. Interview with twenty-yearold Maronite (72% of the population) has ʔaktib, bašṛab, bánǝbsiṭ, baštġil and other forms with /a/. Recording of Catholic taxi driver born in 1934 has only forms with /a/. Christian born in 1923 declares that the dialect of the Muslims and Christians is almost identical. He uses only forms with /a/. In a recording from Bqēʕa, (10) ʔíštġil ‘I work’, ʔíštri ‘I buy’ vs. ʔáštri, baḏkur, baxafiš ‘I am not afraid’, etc. In a recording from Yirka (16) biʕrifiš, ʔíštġil, other forms with /a/. kunt ʔištri in Kufir Yasīf (18) has nothing to do with our subject (cf. Shehadeh 1983).

282

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa 37

34

35

51 52 53

72

65

49 66 67

50

76 80

78

82 79

85

e

89

92

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

Israel

63

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

54 71

57

41 44 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

91

Jordan

Palestinian Territories Jenin

131

Verbs: verb modifier present 36

©am (bi-)©id©id©id©id0

131

2.13.6 Verb modifiers imperfect

5

10 km

Morphology

131 2.13.6 Verb Modifiers Imperfect The sedentary dialects use a verb modifier ʕam- usually combined with the b- imperfect in order to characterise a present continuous act: ʕam-bōkil ‘he is eating’ Ṭurʕān (69), šū ʕam-tiʕmil? ‘what are you doing?’ ir-Rāmi (56). Cf. Elihay 2004 10-r: “However, in the combination ʕambti- (etc.) the b is silent, and what we actually hear is ʕam-ti”. The original form ʕammāl ‘doing, being busy’ is rarely heard (ʕArrābi 61: ʕammāl baktib ‘I am writing’). As for Bedouin dialects, gāʕed ‘sitting, staying’ is used: winno gāʕed yākil “and he was sitting and eating” (Rosenhouse 1984:326). Feminine forms are not attested. In Syrian Bedouin dialects ǧāʕid (< gāʕid) is no longer inflected: ǧāʕid-txábiz ‘she is baking’. The Bedouin form is also used in the M, C and G dialects: gāʕid-ʔōkil ‘I am eating’ (Ǧisr izZarga, 93), kāʕid-biġṛak ‘he is drowning’ (Fredīs, 92), gāʕidbiṣalli ‘he is praying’ (iṭ-Ṭayybe, 91), gāʕid-bisʔal ‘he is asking’ (neg. miš gāʕid b-), gāʕid-bitšatti ‘it is raining’ (ʕĒn Māhil, 89), kāʕid-biʕawwḏ̣u ‘they are compensating’ (Nēn, 85), gāʕid-biḥirǧu ‘he is embarrassing him’ (Dabbūrye, 82),

283 gāʕid-bōkil ‘he is eating’ (Iksāl, 79), ʔiḏa qāʕid-btiḥki ‘if you are talking’ also in sedentary dialect of ʕIlūṭ (75). As the examples show, gāʕid is fully grammaticalised and used for sg. m., sg. f. and the plural. The first example with gāʕed quoted above should rather read simply ‘and he was eating’. In Šfaʕamir (31), not grammaticalised: ʔāʕid baktib – ʔāʕde baktib ‘I am writing (m.+f.)’, also in Ṭurʕān (69): qāʕid yiqṛa ‘he is reading’, qāʕde tixbiz ‘she is baking’, pl. qāʕdīn ~ qāʕdāt yíxibzu, negated miš qāʕde tixbiz, etc. Christian male student who indicated these forms declared as for ʕam-: nistaʕmilhāš and that ʕam- was urban. Also other informants from Ṭurʕān used qāʕid, one female informant used ʔāʕid. Nazareth qāʕed biqūl (Zuʕbi 2005a:65). As for the future, both badd-, bidd- and ṛāḥ- ~ ṛaḥ- are used for the near and far future, for example, in ʕĒn Māhil 80: ṛāḥ-ysāfir sint iǧ-ǧāy ‘he will travel next year’, Ṭurʕān (69): biddi ʔasāfir il-ʔusbūʕ iǧ-ǧāy. ṛāḥ in Ṭurʕān is not yet fully grammaticalised: biṛūḥ yínəḍrib ‘he will be beaten’. In some recordings, ḥa-, ta- (55) are attested. The respective forms have not been elicited by the student collaborators.

284

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

21

20

B

26 56

Haifa

B

36 37

34

35

59

42

41 44 45

46

51 52 53

72

55

75

82 79

85 86

e

89

92

99

93 103

102

132

104

94 97 98 100 101

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

78

Israel

64

63

B

Nazareth

73

B

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32

57

58

40 43

27

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

Verbs initial ': perfect 36

'akal, 'axa£ 'akal, 'axa kala, xa£a

0

132

2.13.7.1 Verbs initial ʔ: perfect

5

10 km

Morphology

132 2.13.7.1 Verbs Initial ʔ: Perfect The Bedouin dialects (cf. Rosenhouse 1982:35) and Ǧisr iz-Zarga have in common the shift from verbs initial ʔ to verbs final y as is the case in many Bedouin dialects of the peninsula and in most Maghrebi dialects, cf. Prochazka 1988:62, SA map 167. Jastrow 2004:231 has axaḏu ‘they took’, p. 232 akal ‘he ate’ for the Muṯallaṯ and p. 233 for Fredīs akal, for Ǧisr iz-Zarga I and II equally akal. The student collaborators had deleted the question from their questionnaires, but the recordings from Ǧisr iz-Zarga have kalēt ‘I have eaten’ and xaḏa ‘he took’. The speaker who used these forms was from the Ǧurbān family which, according to Jastrow 2009:231, is one of the two older clans of

285 the town and which speaks a Ǧisr iz-Zarga I dialect. This is confirmed by Belinkov 2014:47 who quotes it for a female informant from the same family and adds: “Occasionally a speaker may use both forms”. The recordings conducted in Fredīs besides forms with initial ʔa- such as ʔaxaḏ ‘he took’, ʔaxḏatha ‘she took her’, ʔaxaḏu ‘they took’, ʔaxaḏin ‘they took’ also have xaḏūhum ‘they took them’ which might be explained by elision of the pretonic syllable and not by a change of the verb class. The M dialect north of Fredīs, ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣ equally has ʔaxaḏ. As for the G dialects including Iksāl the recordings all have forms with ʔaxaḏ(for Iksāl, cf. Nevo 2006:52). One Christian male student from Ṭurʕān (69) with emphatic /ḍ/: ʔạxạḍ.

286

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39 B

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

31 32

36 C J, M

35

51 53

72

47 48

65

49 66

50

60 62

61

78

76 80 82 79

Israel

90

89

91

92

103

94 97 98 100 101

95

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

102

133

83 84

88

85 86

e

99

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

93

64

63

69

68

75

73

27

57

41 44 45

54 71

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Verbs initial ': imperfect kul kil kul kil

ul l ul l

kul kil only only

ul l kul (1st p.) attested kil (1st p.) attested

only b/y ul (3rd p.) attested only b/y il (3rd p.) attested

0

133

2.13.7.2 Verbs Initial ʔ Imperfect: yōkul

5

10 km

Morphology

133 2.13.7.2 Verbs Initial ʔ Imperfect: yōkul, yōxuḏ Some of the questionnaires contained only the first form. Thanks to the recordings many instances of ‘to take’ are to be found, but unfortunately they are often in the plural, so nothing is known about the vowel of the last syllable: yōxiḏ or yōxuḏ. Forms with /ā/ in all persons are typical of the B dialects, the Jewish dialects of Ṣafad and Ṭabariyya. Jews and Muslims in Haifa rarely have forms with /ā/ (AGK-1:144). Forms with /ō/ attested in Bedouin recordings are obviously loans from the sedentary dialects. It turned out only at a second glance that in the northern and central dialects the first person does not have the same vowel as the other persons, i.e., bākul ‘I eat’, bōkul ‘he eats’, bāxuḏ ‘I take’, bōxuḏ ‘he takes’ versus, for example, in Haifa: ʔōkul, ʔōxid – yōkul, yōxid (AGK-1:144). Contradictory ir-Rāmi (56): interview with three informants (one female, two males, one born in 1920) and

287 recordings have yōxiḏ ~ yōxid; B. interview with Christian yōkil (which supposes yōxid), but Blanc 1953, in text told by two young Druze, twice has tāxuḏ. Older Druze in recording uses yāxuḏ, yāxḏu. Apparently, yōxid – yāxuḏ is a Christian/Druze isogloss in this place. For the Muṯallaṯ, the first person is not attested (cf. Jastrow 2004:168 bōkil ‘he eats’, bōklu ‘they eat’). For Iksāl, Nevo 2006:52 quotes yōkil ~ yōkul, but omits the first person. ʔākul ~ ʔākil – yōkul ~ yōkil is a northern and central feature which is absent from the G and western M dialects. Farther south, for example, in Ramallah (Seeger 2013:144), the first person has the same vowel as the rest of the forms. Cf. also Bergstraesser 1915:35. Bauer 1970:28 characterises byākul as “urban” and forms with /ō/ as “rural”. But on p. 27 he indicates bāxud – bōxud for urban dialects, bōxiḏ – bōxiḏ for rural dialects.

288

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4 6 7

1

Akko

9 10

14

2

17 18

28

16

23 24

13

30

43 46

36 34

26

C,I 56

D

39 40

Haifa

21

20

8

31 32

59

42

41

62

44 47

65

49 66 67

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

55

75

71

60

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

134

Verbs initial ': imperfect xu£, xi£, xu£, y i£

xud id xud

0

134

2.13.7.2 Verbs initial ʔ imperfect: yōxuḏ

5

10 km

290

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

23

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8

24

12

26 56

40 43

Haifa 34

41 44 45

51 52 53

72

76 80

81

Nazareth 78

Israel

82 79

85 86

e

89

92

94

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36

57

58

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

135

Verbs initial ': imperative 2nd sg.m. 93

xud!, xod!, kol! xu£!, d!, £!,

kul! kul! kil! k k 0

135

2.13.7.3 Imperative

5

10 km

Morphology

135 2.13.7.3 Imperative In the north, we have what one could call the beginning of a Syro-Lebanese feature, namely forms with a long vowel /ō/ in the sg.m.: kōl!, xōd! Cf. also Blanc 1953:114 in his transcription kūl!, kuli!, kulu! As for southern Druze dialects, in Šfaʕamir (31) kul! is attested. For multi-denominational Mġār (majority Druze, then Christians, then Muslims), kul! is attested in the interview, but the denomination of the interviewee(s) is unknown. The recordings of Druze, Christians and Muslims do not furnish any instances of

291 imperative forms of √ʔkl. In the interview with an elderly Druze female, the question was forgotten by the interviewer. For Dālyit il-Karmil (73) in interview and recordings, forms with /ō/ are attested, also when a pronominal suffix is added: kōl!, kōlo! ‘eat it!’ vs. Syrian Arabic kōl!, kulo!, kəlo! For Haifa, cf. AGK-1:144. There is, however, no parallelism with the other imperative forms such as kōl! – ktōb! ‘write!’ in Syro-Lebanese Arabic. The forms in our area are of the type ʔiktub.

292

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

23 26

C

13 12 I 38 B 39

30

56

Haifa

41 44

46

35

65

49

53

72

Sea of Galilee

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31 32

36

57

59

42

27

58

40 43

21

20

8

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

136

Verbs initial w:

ar yi yu

y yi yu

l 0

136

2.13.8.2 Verbs initial w imperfect: ‘to arrive’

5

10 km

Morphology

2.13.8.1 Verbs Initial w, Imperfect As for the perfect, an a- and an i-type seem to exist in all sedentary dialects, but have not been elicited regularly. For Haifa, AGK-1:117 mentions waṣaf ‘to describe’ and wiṣil ‘to arrive’. For Ṭurʕān (69), mainly an i-type was elicited: wiqif, wiqiʕ, wildat ‘she has born’, wilid ‘to be born’, wirim, wiriṯ, wiṣil, wižiʕ, waḥaš ‘to miss’. The distribution of short and long forms in the imperfect is not that of CA (waʕada – yaʕidu, waǧiʕa – yawǧiʕu, Wright 1974:78–79). Either short forms have been generalised or long ones, but some dialects have a mixed system different from that of CA, as, for example, in Mažd li-Krūm (39), tūlid ‘she gives birth’ – yiraṯ ‘he inherits’. Bedouin dialects seem to prefer short forms, but Rosenhouse 1984:89, besides yigaf ‘he stops’, also gives yāraṯ ‘he inherits’, yōram ‘it swells’. She also quotes “a handful of verbs … with a short vowel and a final cluster, thus: yild, tild (gives birth), yird (goes to the water to fetch water)”. – Forms for √wld ‘to give birth’ were hardly elicited, mostly xallafat, txallif were indicated, sometimes žābat, tžīb. One instance of tild ‘she gives birth’ for Bedouin Sawāʕid in Čammāna (58). In Ṭurʕān (69), informants

293 declared that tilad is used for animals and xallafat or žābat for women. – As for the reflex of CA wazana, yazinu, it has become a hollow verb wherever elicited, according to the equation ṣār – ṣir! = x – zin! > ṣār – ṣir! – zān: zin! The shift is complete: zān, yzīn, p. a. zāyin, p. p. mazyūn, vbs. zēn (e.g., in Šfaʕamir, 31), VII ʔinzān. In Ṭurʕān (69), the shift is almost complete, but mawzūn, wazn. mazyūn is ‘adorned’. Cf. also Elihay 2004:633 zān, yzīn and 620-l wazzan “in rural speech”. This shift is also attested for Antiochian Arabic in Döver (elicited by B.), in Syria/ Soukhne, Yemen (Behnstedt 2016:249). As for Ṭurʕān (69), a male Christian indicated both long and short forms, but designated the latter as more frequent. 136 2.13.8.2 Verbs Initial w Imperfect: ‘to arrive’ The map shows a quite neat isogloss, namely forms with a long vowel in the northern and western sedentary dialects. Where forms with /ō/ are used in the central and northern part, the 1st p. sg. imperfect has /ā/ as with verbs initial ʔ: bāṣal – bōṣal, bāʔaʕ – bōʔaʕ ‘to fall’ as bāxud – bōxud.

294

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9 10

14 15 19

16

13 38 39

C I

30

B

23 24

12

Haifa

46 31

36

56

57

59

42

41 44 47 48

72

65

49

Sea of Galilee

69

ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

64

63

55

75

73

60 62

61

68

71

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

137

Verbs initial w: qaf, qif 'af, af yiqaf, yi'af buqaf, bu'af

stop (intr.) gaf,

af

ywaqqif, ywa''if, ywaggif, yw

0

137

2.13.8.3 Verbs initial w imperfect: ‘to stop’

5

10 km

Morphology

137 2.13.8.3 Verbs Initial w Imperfect: ‘to stop’ As for intransitive ‘to stop’, measure II is used all over the area with more instances in the north, around Haifa and Nazareth, for example, in Yāft in-Nāṣri (78): fāt w waḳḳaf ‘he entered and then stopped’. As for the use of II for I

295 with this verb in other Arabic dialects, see WAD III:153–154 where it is explained as a backformation of measure V. For other roots, measure II is rare: iywalldu ‘they (the cows) give birth’ in a Bedouin dialect (iḏ̣-Ḏ̣hara) is not a genuine form.

296

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 21

1 2

Akko

17 18

16

30

26 13 12 C 38 I,B 39

56 58

40 43

Haifa

31

59

42

41 44 47 48

62

61

65

49

63

69

Sea of Galilee ariyya

80

Nazareth 79

73

Israel e

89

Jordan 95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

138

Verbs initial w:

fal

qa©, a© 'a© 'a© yuw'a© yiqa©, yi'a©, yiga©, yika© 0

138

2.13.8.4 Verbs initial w: imperfect: ‘to fall’

5

10 km

297

Morphology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4 6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

I

13 38 39 B

C

28

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

65

49

53

72

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 76 80

Nazareth

82 79

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

47 48

60

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

95

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

139

Verbs initial w:

swell yi

yi yu y

ywarrim yi

m 0

139

2.13.8.5 Verbs initial w: imperfect: ‘to swell’

5

10 km

298

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 21

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

16 I

C

30

13 38 39

56

B 58

40 43

Haifa

31

59

42

41 44

61

47 48

63 69

71

Sea of Galilee ariyya

Nazareth 79

73

Israel e

Jordan 93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

140

Verbs initial w:

inheri

t yi yu yi

s

0

140

2.13.8.6 Verbs initial w: imperfect: ‘to inherit’

5

10 km

299

Morphology

N

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea 7

8 9

15 18

Akko

19

26 13 38 39

28

12

60 41

Haifa

64

36 53

72

50

69

80 82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

Sea of Galilee

49

75

71

62

44

46

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

141

Verbs initial w:

hold, to con

sa© sa© si© yiwsa© yuwsa© y sa©

yisa© ywassi©

0

141

2.13.8.7 Verbs initial w: imperfect: ‘to contain’

5

10 km

300 138–141

2.13.8.4–2.13.8.7 Verbs Initial w: Imperfect: ‘to fall’, ‘to swell’, ‘to inherit’, ‘to contain’ The forms for ‘to inherit’ were only elicited by B. The student collaborators instead elicited the form for √wsʕ ‘to hold, to contain’.

Morphology

302

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

23 26 13 12 38 B 39

30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

49

71 72

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 76 80

Nazareth

82 79

73

64

63

69

68

75

60

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

142

Verbs initial y:

become

y bas yiybas bas bas

yibas

0

142

2.13.9 Verbs initial y: ‘to become dry’

5

10 km

304

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

23 26 13 38 39

30

12

56

Haifa

46 31

36

35

72

59

42

41 44 47 48

65

49

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

93

64

63

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

53

71

57

58

40 43

21

20

8

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

143

Verbs initial w and y: synopsis only long forms attested only short forms attested both

0

143

2.13.10 Verbs initial w and y: synopsis

5

10 km

306

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

29 30

28

23 12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44 47 48

60 62

61

65

49

53

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

55 76 80

71 72

Nazareth

82 79

73

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

144

Verbs final y:

re

qa , qiri, 'iri, giri, kiri gira

a

0

144

2.13.11.1 Verbs final y: ‘to read’

5

10 km

307

Morphology

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

7

1 17 18

Akko

28

9

14 15 19

16

23

11 13 38 39 B

29 30

21

20

24

12

26 56

57

58

40 43

Haifa

B

60

42 45

46

36

61

31

34

72

65

49 66

51

75

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 76 80

Nazareth

82 79

73

64

B

69

68

54 71

27

Israel

85

e

87 89

92

95

83 84

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

145

Verbs final y:

stay, remai

baqa, ba'a, baga, baka bigi biki bi'i biqi

biga buga bika

0

145

2.13.11.1 Verbs final y: ‘to stay’ perfect

5

10 km

308 144–145

2.13.11.1–2.13.11.2 Verbs Final y: ‘to read’, ‘to stay’ Perfect In all the sedentary dialects, an a- and i-type are attested such as baqa ‘he remained’ – nisi ‘he forgot’. A young female Druze from ʕIsifya (71) for the a-type indicated forms such as ḥaka ‘he spoke’, maḥa ‘he erased’ and for the i-type: šifa ‘he recovered’ corrected in ṣār ṭayyib, nisa ‘he forgot’, riḏ̣a ‘he agreed’, wiʕa ‘he became aware, adult’, bika ‘he cried’, ḥiba ‘he crawled’. Second old female informant named ḥaka, baka and more examples for the a-type, for the i-type: fiḏ̣i ‘it became empty’, riḏ̣a, wiʕa. Third interview with older female Druze elicited ḥaka, waʕa, qaṛa vs. riḏ̣a, bika, bida, miša. Blanc 1953:119 does not mention this type. This partial adaptation to the a-type is the one found in Bedouin dialects of the area, but is certainly not due to any Bedouin influence. The same type is also to be found in dialects of the northern Delta in Egypt. Cf. Behnstedt-Woidich 1985, maps 281, 284 and 285. ‘To remain’ sporadically may be of the i-type as, for example, in Sudanese and Upper Egyptian dialects. As for the active particples in Upper Galilee, where attested, the forms are nāsi – nāsyi – nāsyīn – nāsyāt, whereas in Lower Galilee the /y/ is dropped before /i/, /ī/: nāsi – nāsi – nāsīn – nāsyāt, thus, for example, in ʕIsifya (71), Ṭurʕān (69). But in Dālyit il-Karmil (73), māši – māšye – māšyīn – māšyāt. In some places, mixed forms were indicated such as: nāsi – nāsi – nāsyīn – nāsyāt (Šfaʕamir, 31), Bedouin nāsi – nāsya – nāsīn – nāsyāt. Haifa nāsi – nāsyi – nāsyīn (AGK-1:142).14 Cf. also Šfaʕamir (31) mʕabbi ‘having filled’ (m.+f.). But in ʕIsifya (71) mʕabbi, f. mʕabbiyyi, mitġaddi, f. mitġaddiyyi ‘having eaten lunch’. 14  The example suggests a merging of masculine and feminine in the plural of participles. In all the other localities investigated, the distinction between m. and f. is maintained with adjectives and participles. An exception is a young female informant from Dālyit il-Karmil who only indicated a common form and insisted on it: ʔakṯaṛ ʔiši l-yā w n-nūn.

Morphology

In the Bedouin dialects, according to Rosenhouse 1984:90 two types are equally extant, the a-type biga or buga and an i-type for which no base form is quoted, but only the first persons such as binēt, ligēt, drīt, n(i)sīt. For the latter, the base forms mentioned are dira and nisa. It seems that in several dialects in the 1st p. sg./pl., 2nd p. sg./pl. and 3rd p. sg. m. the two types are fused. As for the Bedouin dialect of iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda (48), the following paradigms were elicited: ṛuma ‘to shoot’, nisa ‘to forget’: a-type sg. pl. i-type sg. 1st ṛumēt ṛumēna nisēt 2nd. m. ṛumēt ṛumētam nisēt 2nd. f. ṛumēti ṛumētan nisēti 3rd. m. ṛuma ṛumam nisa 3rd. f. ṛumat ṛuman nisyat

pl. nisēna nisētam nisētan nisyam nisyan

ṛuma is only a variant of CiCa due to /m/. The other forms elicited are ḥiča ‘to tell’, bika ‘to cry’, riḏ̣a ‘to consent’, šifa ‘to recover’, fiḏ̣a ‘to be emptied’, miša ‘to leave’, gaṛa ‘to read’, ġila ‘to become expensive’ and 3rd p. f. ġilyat, ġala ‘to boil’. The two types are almost merged together. Only one “true” i-type is attested for this dialect, namely guwi ‘to become strong’, unfortunately without paradigm (*guwīt?). For points 51 and 55, an i-type is attested with bigi ‘to stay, remain’. In the dialect of the Sawāʕid, ‘to become expensive’ and ‘to boil’ are identical: 3rd p. sg. f. ġilat. The paradigm for ‘to forget’ is in Biʕne/Sawāʕid (38) of the a-type (3rd p. pl. m.+f nisam, nisan). For similar developments in Syrian Bedouin dialects, cf. SA map 194. What is surprising is that in the sedentary dialects quite often the vocalisation qiri is attested.

310

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23

12

Haifa

B

36

41 44

65

49

53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

88

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

146

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31

27

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Jenin

Verbs final y: i-type 3rd sg.f. perfect nisyat nisyit nisat nisit

0

146

2.13.11.3 Verbs final y: ending i-type perfect, 3rd p. sg. f.

5

10 km

Morphology

146

2.13.11.3 Verbs Final y: Ending i-type Perfect, 3rd p. sg. f. The map shows a neat isogloss namely nisyit in the north and the southern Druze dialects. A variant of nisyit is nisit. The latter supposes a plural form nisu. For ʕIsifya

311 (71), a young female Druze indicated nisit, nisu, an older female Druze nisit but ġilyit il-ʔasʕār ‘the prices went up’. Contradictory Taršīḥa (8) with ʔirit ‘she read’ – nisyat ‘she forgot’ (questionnaire); in Blanc 1953:119 bikit but bikyu.

312

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11

9 10

23

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

B

36

41 44

65

49

53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

88

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

147

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31

27

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Jenin

Verbs final y: i-type 3rd pl. m.+f. perfect 36

nisyu nisyu nisyu nis nis

u isyin nisan nisyan 0

147

2.13.11.4 Verbs final y: i-type 3rd p. pl. m.+f. perfect

5

10 km

314

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12 B

58

40 43

Haifa J

47 48

51 52

61

72

57

50

62

55

B 82

79

Israel

85 86

e

94

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

92

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

CD

60

65

49

54 71

56 C

41 44 45

31 C, I

26

59

42

46

36

21

20

8

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

148

3rd sg.m. perfect 'i a, 'i 'a a, ' ih

0

148

2.13.12.1 Verb ‘to come’ perfect 3rd p. sg. m.

5

10 km

Morphology

148 2.13.12.1 Verb ‘to come’ Perfect 3rd p. sg. m. In Elihay 2004–2:48-l, iǧa vis-à-vis aǧa is designated as Galilean.15 It is rather a northern Galilean form and the iǧa – aǧa isogloss in the area is quite neat. iǧa is also attested for Ramallah (Seeger WB online 6) aǧa ~ iǧa ~ iǧi. 15  The imperfect forms have /ī/: yīǧi “he comes”, the imperative is normally taʕāl – taʕāli – taʕālu. In the Bedouin dialect of ʕArāmša (4, 5), with m. and f. distinction in the plural: taʕāl – taʕāli – taʕālam – taʕālan. A short form taʕa is rarely used.

315 Bauer 1957:178-l indicates iǧa as an urban form. As for Haifa, there is a clear distinction as for the communal dialects: Jews have (had) the northern form iǧa, Muslims and Christians aǧa (AGK-1:147). For Ṭabariyya, see AGK-2:124, s. 5 ʔižāni.

316

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

1

Akko

9 10

14

2

17 18

19

16

13 38 39

29 30

28

23 24

12

Haifa B

34

52

65

49

50

72

Sea of

Galilee

ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

63

55

75

73

B

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31

'a

57

41 44 45

46

36

56 59

42

26

'i

58

40 43

21

20

8

83

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

149

3rd sg.f. perfect 'a at, ' t 'i at, ' 'i it

at it t

0

149

2.13.12.2 Verb ‘to come’ 3rd p. sg. f. perfect

5

10 km

Morphology

149 2.13.12.2 Verb ‘to come’ 3rd p. sg. f. Perfect The vowel of the ending *-at is assimilated with the prothetic i- in the northern area: ʔižat > ʔižit as in *libsat > libsit. The area of ʔižit reaches beyond the area of libsit. This is what is called in Behnstedt-Woidich 2005:97, 160

317 et passim, “Staffellandschaft” and might be translated as “terrace landscape”. Unfortunately, the students had removed the question from their questionnaires, but the texts furnished enough data. As for Ṣafad, the phonetic realisation in the recordings was [ʔɪʒet].

318

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

35

51 52 53

65

49

50

72

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

88

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

150

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

93

64

63

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

54 71

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

36

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Jenin

Ending -it 3rd sg.f. perfect: synopsis all verbs 'i it nisyit, nisit libsit

0

150

2.13.12.3 Synopsis feminine ending -it

5

10 km

Morphology

150 2.13.12.3 Synopsis Feminine Ending -it The map shows a gradation. There is, in the north, a core area with -it in three or four forms. At the fringes, we only find one or two of them with -it.

319

Morphology

2.13.12.4 Verb ‘to come’ 3rd p. pl. m.+f. Perfect Only the forms of the Bedouin dialects, of the C, M and G dialects are of interest. For Bedouins, Rosenhouse 1984:35 mentions “a tendency to geminate the last consonant in forms such as ǧatt, ǧamma, ǧanna (besides ǧat, ǧam, ǧan)” without localisation. In a text from ʕArab Šibli, aǧat is attested (Rosenhouse 1980:25). For the Bedouin dialects

321 investigated in points 4, 5, 38, 48, 58 and 59, only ǧaṃ – ǧan were elicited. For the C and M dialects no forms are attested in Jastrow 2004 and Jastrow 2009. According to the other forms mentioned, one has to suppose *ǧum – ǧin. As for the C, M and G dialects investigated by student collaborators, they had simply deleted the respective questions in their questionnaires. We omit a map.

322

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

1

Akko

28

9 10

14

2

17 18

19

21

20

8

26

16

13 38 39

30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44 45

46

53

65

50

72

55

75

Nazareth 78

73

Sea of Galilee ariyya

B

76 80 82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

151

participle sg. m.+f. y, ye, etc. y m.+f.

0

151

2.13.12.5 Verb ‘to come’ participle sg. m.+ f.

5

10 km

Morphology

151 2.13.12.5 Verb ‘to come’ Participle sg. m.+ f. In Ṭurʕān (69), the feminine form žāyi was indicated, but not used in sint iž-žāy ‘next year’. For Haifa, see AGK-1:147. Other examples from texts: Ḥurfēš (20) ir-riḥli ž-žāy ‘the next excursion’, Bqēʕa (10) maṛṛt iž-žāy ‘next time’, Kufir Smēʕ (9) flāne žāy ‘a such and such a female is coming’. One has to suppose the same contraction of *žāyi > žāy as in ṣurmāyi > ṣurmāy; cf. 2.11.2. In Ṭurʕān, ʔana žayī ‘I

323 am coming to him’, ʔana žayīk ‘I am coming to you’, hū žayīni ‘he is coming to me’ and not *žāyu, *žāyak, *žāyni show that the original masculine form is žāyi16 which was indicated as an isolated form. Feminine and plural forms elicited are hī žayītni ‘she is coming to me’, žayītni ~ žaytīni ‘you (f.) are coming to me’, pl. žayyīnni, žayyātni ‘they are coming to me’. For Nazareth questionnaires indicate only a common form, Zuʕbi 2005a:116 has m. žāy, f. žāyye.

16  Cf. Syrian common m.+f. forms like ǧēye, e.g., in Aleppo. See SA map 223.

324

N

Morphology

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

13 38 39

29 30

26

O

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

72

Nazareth 78

73

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80 82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

93

64

63

69

68

75

71

65

49

53

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

95

83 84

88

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

152

Derived measures: IV perfect 'af©al 'af©al, yif©il + y'aslim 'if©al

0

152

2.13.13.1 Measure IV sound verb perfect

5

10 km

Morphology

2.13.13 Derived Measures Measures II, III, V, VI, IX, X are all over the area of the types sallam, ysallim ‘to greet’, sāfaṛ, ysāfir ‘to travel’, (ʔi)tkallam, yitkallam ‘to speak’, (ʔi)tqātal, yitqātal, ‘to quarrel’, (ʔi) ḥlaww, yiḥlaww ‘to become sweet’, (ʔi)staʕmal, yistaʕmil ‘to use’. Exceptions are Bedouin dialects with ti-prefix in the perfect of V and VI and yitCaCCaC ~ yiCaCCaC for the imperfect of V “with haplological deletion of the t” (Rosenhouse 1984:94 f.). The same is attested in some Yemeni dialects as yiʕallim ‘he teaches’, yiʕallam ‘he learns’ (Behnstedt 2016:239). As for IX in Šfaʕamir (31), ʔiswadd ‘to become black’, ʔiṣfarr ‘to become yellow’, ʔibyaḍḍ ‘to become white’, ʔismaṛṛ ‘to become tanned’ were confirmed, but for ‘to become red (face)’ a quadriliteral ḥamṛaʔ was indicated, which is obviously a fusion of √ḥmr and √ḥrq. 152 2.13.13.1 Measure IV Sound Verb Perfect Measure IV is attested for Haifa in AGK-1:128 with ʔaḍrab, yiḍrib “streiken”, Jewish yuḍrub. For Iksāl, Nevo 2006:50– 51 gives more examples of the base pattern ʔaqtal. The forms to be elicited by questionnaire were ʔakṛam, yikrim “to treat hospitably” (Elihay 2004:51-l), ʔazʕaž, yizʕiž “to annoy” (ibid., 65-l), ʔaḥṛaž, yiḥriž “to embarrass” (ibid., 44-r), ʔamhal, yimhil “to give (someone) time” (ibid., 53-r), ʔamḥal, yimḥil ‘to render barren’ (Seeger WB online 772), ʔasqa, yisqi ‘to water’. During fieldwork, other forms were found such as ʔibsaṭni = ʔikramni (Saxnīn, 41), ʔiqraḏ̣ ‘to lend money’, ʔiṭlaʕathin ‘she brought them outside’, ʔibʕadat ‘she went away’, ʔiʕṣarat id-dinya ‘it became late afternoon’, ʔirkanat ‘she placed upright’ (Bʕēni

325 65, the latter not in Elihay 2004 with this meaning); ʔidxal, yidxil ‘to let in, give refuge’, ʔiṣlaḥ, yiṣliḥ ‘to reconcile’ (ʕIlabūn 63), ʔahmal ‘to neglect’ (ʕIlūṭ 75). For Nazareth, Zuʕbi 2005a:76 quotes ʔanṭa, ʔanha, ʔarzaq, ʔaʕṭa, ʔanžaz, ʔakmal. In several dialects, the same shift *ʔa- to ʔi- took place as with the defect and colour pattern. When losing the stress, the ʔa- or ʔi- is elided in some dialects: sʔāni ‘he gave me to drink’, ḥrážtni ‘you have embarrassed me’. For ir-Rāmi (56), ʔištat id-dinya ‘it rained’, is attested in a recording. However, this is not so in Iksāl (79): ʔafṭirt “I ate breakfast”, ʔalḥigt “you (m.) overtook” (Nevo 2006:51), ʔaḍrabtu Haifa (AGK-1:128). As for Haifa, AGK-1:114 states that the number of IV forms elicited is very limited and borrowed from MSA (“war gering und aus dem Hocharabischen entlehnt”). This does not apply to rural dialects where quite a considerable number of forms for this closed verb class was elicited with questionnaires and found in recordings. For Ramallah Seeger 2013:182 quotes seven forms of this class. As for the imperfect, new formations as in Syrian Arabic ʔaslam, yʔaslim ‘he converts to Islam’ (Grotzfeld 1964:85 yʔaṣbeḥ ‘he becomes’, biʔazher ‘it blooms’) are hardly used. Only in ʕIsifya (71), one male Druze indicated yʔaslim, yʔasílmu, while all the other forms asked for were of the type yiCCiC or measure II, for example, sakkarni ‘it made me drunk’. He considered most of the forms proposed to him more or less as MSA. Also, a Christian male student from Ṭurʕān (69) indicated ʔaslam, yʔaslim ~ yislim but ʔaCCaC, yiCCiC in the rest of the forms asked for.

Morphology

2.13.13.2 Measures V and VI Sound Verb Perfect Palva 1966:72: “In most instances these forms are begun by a two-consonantal cluster tC1, preceded by a prothetic vowel, e.g.: ʔitḥassanat ‘it has been improved’ … Sometimes these forms are begun with the two-­consonant cluster tC1 without a prothesis, e.g. tfaḏ̣ḏ̣al ‘please’”. For more examples of both types, see Palva 1966:72. The forms for V to be elicited in the first Galilee questionnaire were t-ṣallaḥ, t-rabbaʕ, t-kaḥḥal, t-ʕallam, t-ḏakkar, t-fāṣal, t-ḍārab, t-qātal, t-xānaq, t-sāmaḥ, t-šāwar. For measure V, B. has elicited tC- in twenty localities, ʔit- in six and ti- in four

327 Bedouin dialects; for VI t- in 23 places, ʔit- in 3 and ti- in four Bedouin dialects. Zuʕbi 2005a:83ff only quotes forms without prothetic vowel. This looks like the opposite of what Palva states, however, due to different examples, our data are hardly comparable and since the occurrence of a prothetic vowel seems to depend on the consonant following t- we omit a map. Furthermore, in many cases an isolated form may be noted without prothetic vowel but in context with one, for example, #tḍārabu – w itḍārabu ‘and they fought’.

328

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

8

2

Akko

17 18

B

28

11 19

16

13 38 39 B

30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 34

41 44 45

51 52 53

49

50

65 67

Sea of Galilee

80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

83 84

87

e

89

92

94 93

ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36

56

58

40 43

21

20

1

72

22

6

95

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

153

Derived measures VII and VIII: prefixes 'infa© 'ifta©al nfa©al fta©al both 'anfa©al afta©al

0

153

2.13.13.3 Measures VII and VIII sound verb perfect

5

10 km

Morphology

153

2.13.13.3 Measures VII and VIII Sound Verb Perfect For measure VII, Palva 1966:73 states: “The prothetic vowel i is usually pronounced” and for VIII “In most cases the prothesis is pronounced … Only two instances are to be found without the prothetic vowel, one of them an optional variant štarētu ‘I bought it’ 1, the other beginning with a geminate (t)taṣal ‘he contacted’”. Our data confirm Palva’s description. Cf. also Zuʕbi 2005a:91ff. with infaʕal and both iftaʕal ~ ftaʕal. A very reliable informant from Ṭurʕān (69), however, pronounced all forms without ʔi-. In the tables in AGK-1:131–134, the prothetic vowel is always found in brackets. Iksāl (79) with -in, -it: inqátal, iqtátal in the Darāwši clan, in the Šalabi clan anqátal, aqtátal (Nevo 2006:52). For the reflexive-passive of verbs containing a liquid, measure VIII instead of measure VII is preferred, for example, xtanaq ‘he was strangled’, ntataf ‘it was plucked’.

329 Informant in Ṭurʕān (69) asserted that ltamm is reflexive and referred to persons as in il-žamāʕa ltammat ʕala baʕeḍ ‘the people gathered together’ vs. il-maṣāri lli buqaʕu nlammat ‘the money which fell down was picked up’. For other verbs, he indicated both possibilities: nrabaṭ ~ rtabaṭ liḥmāṛ ‘the donkey was tethered’, nṛaššat ~ rtaššat il-ʔarḍ ‘the soil was sprinkled’. Others explained that ʔinrabaṭ is concrete, for example, ʔinrabaṭ bil-ḥabil ‘he was bound with the rope’, and ʔirtabaṭ figurative: ʔirtabaṭ bil-ʕēn ‘he was bewitched by the evil eye’.17 The same applies to ʔinrašš ‘to be sprinkled’ and ʔirtašš ‘to become crazy’.18 17  Not in Elihay, or in Seeger WB online. rabṭ, ʔirtabaṭ in magic normally refers to impotence caused by the spell of a jealous person or a rejected lover. See the texts in Behnstedt 1994:178ff., Behnstedt 2000:588ff. Also Behnstedt-Woidich 1988:164ff for Egypt. 18  Not attested in Palestinian dictionaries and glossaries consulted.

330

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 36 37

34

35

51 52 53

72

65

49 66 67

50

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

60 62

61

54 71

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

B

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

83 84

87

88

90

92

94 93

95

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

154

Derived measures: VII and VIII sound verb imperfect yi

t il rib, yi il rib, y ta il

yi eb, yi el niktil, yin m t il instances of yinCaCaC

0

154

2.13.13.4 Imperfect measures VII and VIII

5

10 km

Morphology

154 2.13.13.4 Imperfect Measures VII and VIII There are four types of vocalisation and accentuation: a) yínḏ̣rib, pl. yinḏ̣írbu ‘he/they is/are being beaten’, yíštġil, yištíġlu ‘he/they work(s)’, the accent being on the first syllable in the base form. This type is the one of Galilean sedentary dialects, of the C dialects and partly of the M and G dialects. The second type b) is yinḏ̣árib, pl. yinḏ̣árbam, yinḏ̣arbūn typical of the Bedouin dialects and some of the G and M dialects. In type a) in VII, an anaptyctic vowel is inserted: yínəḏ̣rib, yínəmsik vs. yíštġil, yíxtlif ‘he is different’, yíttṣil ‘he contacts’. Dālyit il-Karmil (73) has the types a) and c): yinḏ̣íreb, yištíġel indicated by a young female; recording of older male has yíštġil, yiḥtírim, Recording of old woman tížtmiʕ; recording of older male tinbísiṭ. For Iksāl (79), Nevo 2006:52 quotes as a fourth type d), different vocalisations and accentuations for VII, namely yíniktil ‘he

331 is beaten’, yinḥásab “it (m.) is considered”, yinhizím “he flees” and for VIII yíštġil, rarely yíštġul. The forms were not elicited in three interviews conducted by student collaborators, only VII and VIII of verbs final y. The type yinCaCaC is sporadically also attested in a few examples: yinšaṛab ‘is being drunk’ (text Ṣandala, 96), btinḥasab ‘she is being calculated’ (Makir, 29), Ṭurʕān (69) binwáṛat ~ bínwirit ‘is inherited’, bínəḍrib ~ binḍárab ‘is beaten’. The informant’s explanation for the difference in the two vocalisations seems rather fanciful: binḍárab would be used for a repeated action, bínəḍrib for a singular one: hāda lwalad dāʔiman binḍárab ‘this boy is always being beaten’, biṛūḥ yínəḍrib ‘he will be beaten’. The same would apply for bínəftiḥ – binfátaḥ, bínəktib – binkátab. There are no instances of yinCaCaC in the few texts from Ṭurʕān. For the prothetic vowel, see Palva 1966:100.

332

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44 45

46

36 34

51 52 53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

155

Derived measures: VII and VIII verbs final y imperfect 93

only yi in addition yinb

ni, yi i, , ma

tri

0

155

2.13.13.5 Measure VII and VIII imperfect verbs final y

5

10 km

333

Morphology

155

2.13.13.5 Measure VII and VIII Imperfect Verbs Final y As for measure VII and VIII of verbs final y, the distribution of a – i and i – i only is identical in Bedouin dialects and some G and M dialects, whilst in the sedentary dialects parallel to yinCCi, yiCtCi a type yinCaCa, yiCtaCa is often to be found. As for Haifa, the type yínirmi is attested for the Jews, for the others yinrími. An interview conducted by B. with a Christian furnishes seven forms for the type yinCáCa. yinCaCa, yiCtaCa are also widely attested in Syrian Arabic, see SA maps 203–207. For Ramallah Seeger 2013:196 only quotes the types nġaza, yiniġzi ‘überfallen werden’ and yištri ‘kaufen’. In Bauer 1970, or in Seeger 1996 concerning Hebron nothing comparable is mentioned either. As for Dālyit il-Karmil (73), one young female provides yinkíwi, yinṭíwi, yintíli ‘is being filled’, yinḥíni. Forms for which an a-type is attested in addition to the i-type are: – binkáwa ‘to be ironed’: Taršīḥa (8), Dēr il-Asad (13), Abu Snān (17), Haifa (36), Ṭurʕān (69), ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣ (72), yínčawa ʕĒn Māhil (80) – tinsáʔa ‘to be irrigated’ Haifa (36), Šfaʕamir (31 ~ tínǝsʔi) – binmáḥa ‘to be erased’: iž-Ždayyde (30), Saxnīn (41), Ṭurʕān (69), ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣ (72) – binḥáka ‘to be told’: Naḥef (12), Dēr il-Asad (13), Yirka (16), Makir (29), Haifa (36), Biʕne (38), Šaʕeb (40), Dēr Ḥanna (62), ʕIlabūn (63), Ṭurʕān (69), ʕIsifya (71), Dālyit il-Karmil (73), yínḥača ʕĒn Māhil (80) – binṛáma ‘to be thrown’: Dēr il-Asad (13), Šaʕeb (40), Dēr Ḥanna (62), ʕIlabūn (63) – binḥana ‘to be bent’: Yirka (16) – binʔaṛa ‘to be read’: il-Mazraʕa (2), Naḥef (12), Dēr ilAsad (13), Yirka (16), Abu Snān (17), Šfaʕamir (31), Haifa (36), Saxnīn (41), Šaʕeb (40), Ṭamra (43), ir-Rāmi (56), Dēr Ḥanna (62), ʕIlabūn (63), yinqaṛa Ṭurʕān (69), ʕIsifya (71), Dālyit il-Karmil (73), yíngaṛa ʕĒn Māhil (80) – binṭáwa ‘to be folded’: il-Mazraʕa (2), Abu Snān (17), Haifa (36), Saxnīn (41), Ṭamra (43), ʕIsifya (71, ~ yinṭwi), ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣ (72) – bintana ‘to be folded’: Taršīḥa (8), Haifa (36) – binṭáfa ‘to be extinguished’: ʕIsifya (71, besides bínṭfi)

– binbána ‘to be built’: il-Mazraʕa (2), Naḥef (12), Dēr il-Asad (13), Yirka (16), Akko (28, other informants bínəbni), Šfaʕamir (31), Ṭamra (43), Mišhad (55, besides bínəbni), Mġāṛ (60), Iksāl (79, quoted by two informants, all other forms of the type yínṭfi ‘to be extinguished’, yínčwi ‘to be ironed’, yínəmḥi ‘to be erased’, etc., also mentioned in Nevo 2006:53 yinbána ‘it (m.) is built’, with a negation suffix yinbanāš (7), Fradīs (92, besides yínəbni), Šaʕeb (40), ʕIsifya (71)19 – binláʔa ‘to be found’: Kufir Yasīf (18) – yinmáḥa ‘to be erased’: Ṭurʕān (69) – tinġala ‘to be boiled (water)’: Ṭurʕān (69) – yinḥama ‘to be heated’: Ṭurʕān (69) – binláwa ‘to be twisted’: il-Mazraʕa (2), Abu Snān (17), ʕIsifya (71) – birtáma ‘to be thrown’: Taršīḥa (8), iž-Žišš (21) – binrama ~ bínərmi ‘to be thrown’: Šfaʕamir (30) – yiltáqa ‘to be found’: Taršīḥa (8), Dēr il-Asad (13), Yirka (16), iž-Žišš (21), Haifa (36), Kufir Manda (47), Dēr Ḥanna (62). ʕIsifya (71, besides bíltqi), byiltaqa Dālyit il-Karmil (73), yíltaga ʕĒn Māhil (80) – yirtáša ‘to be bribed’: Kōkab Abu l-Hēža (44) – yinmála ‘to be filled’ ʕIsifya (71) – yintása ‘to be forgotten’: il-Mazraʕa (2), Dēr il-Asad (13), Yirka (16), Abu Snān (17), Kufir Yasīf (18), iž-Ždayyde (30), Šfaʕamir (30), Haifa (36), Šaʕeb (40), Saxnīn (41), Kufir Manda (47), ir-Rāmi (56) ʕArrābe (61), Dēr Ḥanna (62), ʕIlabūn (63), Dālyit il-Karmil (73), ʕĒn Māhil (80) The latter is rather an exception since VIII with a liquid as C1 or a front consonant is rather of the i-type: yíntli ‘to be filled’, yístwi ‘to be cooked’, yírtši ‘to be bribed’, yirtmi ‘to be thrown’, yíltqi ‘to be found’. As for VII, the a-type is more frequent with back consonants. According to Grotzfeld 1965:39, the two vocalisations are reflexes of the old active form yanšari > yənšəri and the old passive form yunšara > yənšara. The most frequent forms for the a-type are binbana, binʔaṛa, yiltaqa and yintasa. 19  Older female Druze informant only used forms with i – i.

334

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

8

1

9

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

16

13 12 38 B 39

30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

46

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

65

49

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

ariyya

54 71 72

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

Israel

82 79

88

85

e

89

92

93

83 84

90 91

Jordan

Palestinian Territories Jenin

156

Derived measures: X of geminate verbs yista yi t il) yist l (y t il) yista t il) yist l (yi il)

0

156

2.13.13.7 Measure X geminate verbs

5

10 km

Morphology

2.13.13.6 Measures IX and X Measure IX is not dealt with in Palva 1966. It was elicited by B. with first questionnaire in twenty-five out of thirty localities without the protethic vowel. In subsequent research, the forms were no longer elicited. We omit a map. As for X, Palva 1966:73 states: “Free variation seems to prevail between the presence and absence of the prothesis, e.g.: stanna ‘wait (imperat.)’ 6, … istannētak ‘I waited’ ”. First questionnaire conducted by B. in all localities visited: staftaḥ, staʕmal, staġṛab, stanna. In Bedouin dialects, there are both ʔistaġṛabt and stagbaḷt. 156 2.13.13.7 Measure X Geminate Verbs The questionnaire contained only one form to be elicited, namely (i)staġall – yistáġill ~ yistġill ‘to exploit’. The

335 two imperfect vocalisations correspond only partly to the distribution of yištáġil – yíštġil. In yistaġill > yistġíll, a pretonic vowel (*a or *i: *yistiġill) is elided, in *yíštiġil > yíštġil a posttonic *i is elided. For Haifa, see AGK-1:136 yistaḥill “erobern” vs. yíštġil (questionnaire). Kufr Smēʕ (9) yistʕiddu ‘they get ready’. ʕAkbara (26) mistamirr ‘permanent’ suggests yistamirr; ʕIbillīn yistamirru ‘they remain’. Questionnaire in Haifa conducted with Muslima born in 1942 furnishes byistġill. Questionnaires in Saxnīn (41), Kōkab Abu l-Hēža (44), Mġār (60), Dēr Ḥanna (62) also furnish bistridd ‘to demand back’, vs. bistaridd in Bedouin dialects. For Nēn (85) and Sūlam (89), the opposite is attested, namely yistġill – yištaġil.

336

N

Morphology

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 21

20

8 1 2

10

15 16

Akko

28

13 38 39

30

B

24

12

40 43

Haifa

31

36

56

58 59

44

60 62

61

63

48

72

55

75 78

Israel

80 83 84

79

88

85

e

89

92

93

ariyya

B

Nazareth

73

Sea of Galilee

69

53

71

64

49

91

Jordan

Palestinian Territories Jenin

157

Derived measures: X hollow verbs yistaf d (yi il) yistf d (y t il) yistaf d (y t il) il) yistf d (yi

0

157

2.13.13.8 Measure X hollow verbs

5

10 km

Morphology

157 2.13.13.8 Measure X Hollow Verbs The questionnaire contained only (ʔi)stafād – yistafīd ~ yistfīd to be elicited. In Haifa, ʔistaṛāḥ was rejected in favour of ʔitrayyaḥ. In AGK-1:141, yistašīr “sich beraten”.

337 Young female Druze in ʕIsifya (71) indicated both bastafīd and bastfīd, and when conjugating used forms with and without preservation of /a/.

3 Lexicon

∵

340

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

21

20

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

29 30

12

56

B 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

65

49

34 53

72

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan 95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

47 48

60

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

158

he

abha bha b l©a 158

3.1.2 Forehead

n 0

5

10 km

3 Nouns 3.1

Body Parts

3.1.1

For Body Parts, See also Chapter “Phonology”, namely ‘face’, ‘neck’, ‘mouth’, ‘chest’, ‘shoulder’, ‘thigh’, ‘instep’, ‘heel’

158 3.1.2 Forehead All the forms attested are dealt with in WAD I:95–97. The most frequent form in the area, ṣabāḥ, is designated in Bauer 1957:290-r as “rural”, in Elihay 2004:487-r as “Galilean”. Seeger WB 450 online “Stirn”, ṣabḥa “weiße

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/9789004411395_004

Stirn”, aṣbaḥ “weißgestirnt” = “with a white forehead”, probably said of the blaze of a horse. Cf., Dozy 1968 I:814-l ṣabḥa “marque blanche sur le front d’un cheval ou d’un taureau”, thus being originally a pars proto. In some Syrian and Jordanian dialects, ṣabāḥ has the meaning ‘face’. It is to be compared to forms in CA such as ṣabīḥ which refer to “bright … in the face”, ṣabāḥa “brightness in the face” (Lane 1863 s.v.). A similar metonymical shift is mentioned in WAD I:96 for Algerian Arabic with ġarra ‘forehead’ = CA ġurra “a whiteness in the forehead of a horse” (Lane 1863:2238-m).

342

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

8

2

Akko

28

17

B

16 38 39

29

B

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46

59

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

36

60

64

63

Sea of Galilee

49 69

53

ariyya

76 80

71

Nazareth

82

78

73

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

159

emple bir dir bi di da

159

3.1.3 Temple

r

du de

sa sid sa

da© sada© sad©a

xadd nak amb iha lif

,

a

0

5

10 km

Lexicon

159 3.1.3 Temple Bauer 1957:258-r indicates the forms ṣuduġ, ṣidġ, pl. ṣdāġ, Elihay 2004:501-l ṣudeġ, pl. ṣdāġ, Seeger WB online 359 ṣudġ, ṣidġ. In CA, ṣudġ “temple” (Lane 1863:1665-l). – ṣābir is not attested in the dictionaries for Palestinian Arabic at our disposal, but in Yemen as “Wange, Backe, Schläfe, die gesamte Kopfhälfte” = “cheek, temple, the whole half of the head” (Behnstedt 1996:698) where it is compared to CA ṣibr ‘side’. In Lane 1863:1645-l ṣubr, ṣibra “the side of a thing”. There are contaminations such as: – ṣadir in two points (‘chest’ there is sider!). – ṣābiġ in two points. – In some points, the emphasis is lost as in sider ‘chest’. – In several localities, it is associated with ṣudāʕ “headache, migraine” (Lane 1863:1004-m as neologism). Remarkable loss of emphasis in some points. The roots

343 ṣdʕ and ṣdġ are probably related with a common meaning of ‘to split, half’. Cf. migraine form Greek ἡμικρανία ‘pain on one side of the head’. – ǧamb ar-rās and ǧiha may be makeshift designations. – Other sporadical forms refer to ‘cheek’ or ‘jaw’ such as xadd or ḥanak. – Sporadical sālif in Seeger WB online 377 is “Schläfenlocken der Juden”, Bauer 1957:258-r idem, not in Elihay 2004. Might be a misunderstanding or metonymous. – Sporadical mattāka reminds maḏ̣ḏ̣āġa = “Kauer, weil die Kiefer hier beginnen” = “chewer, since the jaws begin at the temples” (Seeger WB online 788, Bauer 1957:258-r idem). – dmāġ normally refers to the brain. But cf. WAD I:36 also with the meaning ‘head’.

344

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

+ +

7

8

21

B

1 2

Akko

+

28

17 18

16

29 30 40 43

Haifa

+ +

+

12 58 59

42

41 44

46

+

78

82 79

+

Israel

+

+ +

83 84 B

+

85

e

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

73

92

69

68

+

64

63

53

71

62

61

47 48

31

36

26

13 38 39

89

B

88

+

91

Jordan

95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

160

ump on t da da ra darane, -i da ra dummal dummali

ba© ba 'aren ba am da a nubza

e© la©a za

+ u (vb.)

wa bb na nafxa

0

160

3.1.4 Bump on the head

5

10 km

Lexicon

160 3.1.4 Bump on the Head Many of the designations are also to be found in Syrian Arabic, cf. SA map 310. – Quite often simply waṛam ‘swelling’ was indicated. It is to be found equally in Seeger WB online 885 as “Beule”, also in Bauer 1957:58-l, in Elihay 2004:615-l only as “swelling”. – The most frequent form is daʕdūṛa, sporadically daʕdēra, also to be found in Elihay 2004:92-l “bump, bruise”. The form is characterised as “Galilean”, but is also to be found in Seeger WB online 254. In Syria similar forms such as dangūṛa are attested. – Sporadical darane, darani are also to be found in Syria in the Ḥōrān area. This is certainly no coincidence. In Barthelémy 1935–1969:237, “excroissance blanche et dure sous la peau, loupe, tumeur, tubercule, ganglion”. The form is not attested in CA. – Sporadical dardēra looks like a contamination of √drn and √dʕdr. – Sporadical baʕǧūṛ, baʕžūṛa are quite frequently attested in Syria. – dummal (dummali) is attested in Seeger WB online 264 as “Eiterbeule” = ‘abscess, boil, furuncle’. In Syria: dimle, dimble, dimbel = ‘head bump’. As for Syrian Arabic, there is no doubt as to the meaning since the question was always “somebody hit his head and got a swelling, how do you call this?”. Cf., however, Egyptian Arabic dimmila ‘pustule, pimple’, but Syrian Arabic dmēl “durillon, cor

345 au pied, cal” (Barthelémy 1935–1969: 250) = ‘corn’ from Old French corne = ‘horn’. Cf. sporadical metaphorical ʔaren ‘horn’. dummal in CA is “a kind of purulent pustule” (Lane 1863: 915-l). – baḷġam Bedouin is in Syria “pituite, glaire” (Barthelémy 1935–1969:61), but mbalġem, is “qui présente à sa surface des croûtes grisâtres” (bouton d’Alep) referring to the “Aleppo boil” = cutaneous leishmaniasis. – daḥlūṣa is attested in Syria in the Ǧabal id-Drūz. It is related to dōḥas “sich Beulen bilden am Finger infolge Fremdkörper” (Seeger WB online 268, same definition in Bauer 1957:58-l). Cf. CA wa d-daḥḥāsu mina l-warami, wa lam yuḥaddidūhu (Lisān 1235-r). – nubza is attested punctually in Syria as nabbūzi. √nbz is not attested in this meaning in CA. Cf. Yemeni Arabic nabz “Pickel im Gesicht” (Behnstedt 2006:1190 with related forms). – ṭuleʕ, ṭullaʕa are ṭulʕ “Eiterbeule, Furunkel” in Seeger WB online 505. Cf. √ṭlʕ ‘to come forth’. – kōza is attested as a verbal form in Haifa kōzar ṛāsu ‘he bumped his head’. - ḥabb normally refers to a pimple. – nafṭa Bedouin (53) is not attested in Palestinian dictionaries at our disposal. Cf. Wehr 1960 nafṭa “blister”. It is part of a series √n – f – for “to swell, blow”. Cf. nafax ‘to blow up’, nafaš ‘to swell’. – nafxa ʕIsifya (71), see above.

346

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

20

8 1 14 15

2 17 18

Akko

28

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40

43

Haifa

46

42

41

63

Sea of Galilee

67

53

69

68

75

71 73

ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

72

62

44 47 48

31

36

60

82 79

83 84

85 86

87

e

90

88

89

91

92

95

93

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

161

be of the ear e

0

il-'i£in

t i

5

ami

e, ' i e e

t al-'i£in liyyi

kark t i

bint ya

161

3.1.6 Lobe of the ear

a©ab 'i£nak t

10 km

Lexicon

3.1.5

Ear, see Phonology

161 3.1.6 Lobe of the Ear – Forms such as qaṛqūše, ʔarʔūši originally refer to the cartilaginous parts of the ear (helix, antihelix, tragus and antitragus), but are often used in the sense of ‘lobe of the ear’ due to metonymy, i.e., proximity of the designatum. Cf. WAD I:107. – šaḥmi and the like refer to the fat = fleshy part of the ear, the lobe and are related to CA šaḥm ‘fat’. – One isolated form laḥmit iḏ-ḏān, i.e., the fleshy part of the ear, is also sporadically attested in Syria and Morocco. – Metaphorical and also referring to ‘fat’ is liyyi which normally is “the sheep’s tail” (Elihay 2004:299–3), “Fettschwanz des Schafs” (Seeger WB online 770). – raṭṭūli is not to be found in Elihay 2004 nor in Seeger. It is related to Barthélemy 1936–1969:284 rəṭəl “gnangnan,

347 lambin” who refers to CA raṭlu “mou”. In Lane 1863:1102r, raṭlun “soft, lax, or uncompact”, referring to the soft part of the ear. Cf. also loc. cit. ʔarṭala “his ears became flabby”. Cf. also Seeger WB online 303 raṭṭa “schwabbelig, schwächlich” = “soft and wobbly, flabby”. – Also referring to the soft part of the ear is ḥlayya. Cf. ḥlayya “zart” = “tender, soft” in Seeger WB online 138. – A quite frequent form is ḥalama which is in CA “the head [or nipple, when small] of a woman’s breast” (Lane 1863:633-l). In Seeger WB online 182, ḥalamit ḏān “Ohrläppchen”, ḥalmit il-bizz “Brustwarze”. – čaʕab ʔiḏnak litterally is the ‘heel of your ear’. – bint id-dān ‘daughter of the ear’ is sporadically found in Syria and in Urfa (WAD I:107). There it is compared to Moroccan rbīb ‘son, appendage’. – guḥmāšit iḏ-ḏēn is reminiscent of forms for ‘helic’ mentioned in WAD I-107 such as gurmēšt l-uḏén, ʔarmūši.

348

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

8

21

20

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

23 24

12 13 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

41 44 45

46

51 52 53

49

50

65 67

72

55

75 78

B 82

79

Israel

85 86

e B

92

89

83 84

87 90

88

B

91

Jordan

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32

36

56 59

42

27

58

40 43

25 26

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

162 munx manax r xa im xa um

xu em xu im xu um

0

162

3.1.7 Nose

5

10 km

Lexicon

162 3.1.7 Nose The meaning of CA xašm ‘nose’ is maintained in our area (see Lane 1863:744-m with reference to “Modern Arabic” = “mouth”). The CA vocalism is to be found in Bedouin and Bedouin type ruralite dialects (G dialects) while sedentary dialects have xušm. Elihay 2004:201-r xušom. Bauer 1957:261-r quotes it for Nazareth as a parallel form. Two questionnaires from Nazareth have munxār, one xušum.

349 In point 34 (Bedouin dialect of Ibṭin), munxāṛ probably is a (ad hoc?) loan from sedentary dialects. Will be disregarded on map. For the other Bedouin dialects of the area, one has to suppose a form like *xašim. No instance in Rosenhouse 1984. Seeger WB online 192 xušm ~ xašm. The subject is dealt with in WAD I map 41, for Syria in SA map 324. The area with munxāṛ is the southern part of a western Levantine isogloss.

350

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

8

21

20

B

1 2

Akko

17 18

15

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

28

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

62

61

47

65

34 53

ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

Sea of Galilee

69

68

75

71

63

82 79

Israel 86

e

89

92

95

87

B

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

163

a nak na n

n© fakk ye

0

163

3.1.9 Jaw

5

10 km

Lexicon

3.1.8

Mouth, see Phonology

163 3.1.9 Jaw There are four lexemes attested, three of them without any determined regional distribution. – As for fakk, it is attested for Nazareth and surroundings. The form is to be found in Elihay 2004:119-l, Bauer 1957:173-l fäkk, pl. afkāk, Seeger WB online 632 idem. – ḥanak refers to the lower jaw, while fakk with ʔaʕla oder ʔasfal refers to both of them. ḥanak is polysemic in CA, namely “lower chin”, “the palate, or soft palate”, “the lower part of the mouth” (Lane 1863:659-m-r). Cf. WAD I:125, Behnstedt-Woidich 2005:195–196. Seeger WB online 189 sakkir ḥanakak! “schweig!”. Cf. below ‘jaw’ and ‘palate’.

351 – nīʕ, pl. nyāʕ in Elihay 2004:404-r is “mouth (of an animal)”, sedd nīʕak! “shut your gob!”. In Haifa, sakkir nīʕak! ‘shut up!’. In il-Mazraʕa (1), nīʕ was characterised as miš ḥilwe! The form is not attested in Wehr 1960 or Lane 1863. In Dozy 1968 II:750, “palais” after Muḥīṭ al-Muḥīṭ by Botros al-Bistânî, Beirut 1870 who included many non-classical forms. In Yasīn 2003:1624, for Syrian Arabic as = al-famu ʔawi l-ḥanak. Ani – Stowasser 1964:128-r have only fakk and ḥanak. Barthélemy 1935–1969:859 indicates it for central Syria as “mâchoire, gueule”. Yasīn s.v. gives the following etymology: ʔaxaḏūhu min nāʕa l-ġuṣnu ʔay māla, wa ḏālika liʔannahu yamīlu ʕinda n-nuṭqi wa l-ʔakl. One rather thinks of Syriac nīʕā “molar tooth” (Costaz n.d.:203-r) as a pars pro toto. For several instances of metonymical liḥye, cf. Seeger WB online 748 liḥye “Unterkiefer”.

352

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 21

14

2

Akko

28

17

16 38

29 30

B 58

40

59

42

41 44

Haifa

47 48

31

36

62

61

65

53

Sea of Galilee

69

68

71

64

63

ariyya

76

Nazareth

83 84

79

73

Israel

88

85 86

e

89

Jordan Palestinian Territories Jenin

164

vula

ali'

, -e

zubb £amb ir

0

164

3.1.10 Uvula

alg

5

lq

10 km

Lexicon

164 3.1.10 Uvula In some twenty points of investigation, the question was misunderstood when interviewers pointed at it (signal failure, “Deutefehler”) and forms for ‘throat’ or ‘gullet’ (balʕūm, ballūʕa, zalʕūm, ḥaliʔ, ḥalik) were indicated. In five interviews, forms such as sakf il-ḥalik ‘roof of the throat’ were indicated which probably mean ‘palate’. – ṭuneṭle is designated in Elihay 2004:604:r as “Galilean”. Bauer 1957:372-l and Seeger WB online 509 have both ṭunṭune without elision of unstressed /u/. It is attested for Central Syria in Barthélemy 1935–1969 as ṭənṭle “luette”. Barthélemy compares it to CA ṭulāṭilatu- which in Lane 1863:1863-r is, indeed, “uvula”. Cf. also ṭanṭle = taḥrīf aṭ-ṭulāṭila in Yasīn 2003:994. The CA form and similar Galilean forms like ṭunəṭle are related to forms for ‘to dangle’ like Yemeni Arabic ṭanṭal (Behnstedt 1996:788 “herunterhängen lassen”), Palestinian dandal “to dangle” (Elihay 2004:98-r),1 Egyptian Arabic daldil 1  For the many d – ṭ doublets, cf., for example, madd – maṭṭ.

353 “to dangle, hang down” (Hinds-Badawi 1986:299– 3). The latter is a reduplicated form of √dly as in tadallā “it hung down, or dangled” (Lane 1863:909-l). Cf. Arabic internet website qiṭʕatu l-laḥmi ʔallatī tatadallā fī muʔaxxirati l-ḥalq. ṭunṭli indicated by the ʕArāmša Bedouins is obviously a loan from the sedentary dialects. – As for ṭinṭāf and the like, no corresponding verbal form *ṭanṭaf could be found. When consulting the Arabic internet writing ṭanṭūfa many sites with lihāʔ ‘uvula’ and photos of it appear, one in Wikipedia without mentioning ṭanṭūfa, another one from Ḥomṣ/Syria with ṭanṭūfat al-ḥalq. – širš in Iksāl is according to Elihay 2004:525-r, “root, vein, nerve” in some areas. Similar, in Seeger WB online 412. – There are two sexual metaphors, namely zubb al-ḥalg ‘penis of the throat’ and ḏambūr il-ḥalq ‘clitoris of the throat’ (in Seeger WB online 339 zanbūr).

354

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

8 1 2

Akko

28

17 18

25 19

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

F M

47 48

61

65

53

78

Israel

Sea of Galilee ariyya

80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

82 79

85 86

e

83 84

87

88

91

92

Jordan

96

93

Palestinian Territories Jenin

165 lq l' lg lk

la

ba za m

n a n a

ze

a 0

165

3.1.11 Throat

5

10 km

Lexicon

165 3.1.11 Throat All the attested forms are dealt with in WAD I:134. There, Heath 2002:95 is quoted, according to whom there is spillage between “external throat”, “internal throat”, “larynx” and “Adam’s apple”. This is also true for CA. ḥalq = “The fauces: and hence, by a synecdoche, the throat, or gullet, i.e. the oesophagus, the place of the {ġalsama} [or epiglottis]; and the place of slaughter in an animal … or the forepart of the neck … or the passage of, or place by which pass, the food and drink into the mariʔ [or oesophagus]” (Lane 1863 s.v.). ḥalqūm in CA is ‘the windpipe’. zalʕūm is attested for Lebanon and western Syria. In Wehr 1960 s.v.,

355 “throat, gullet”. The form is not attested in CA. CA ḥanǧara is “the head of the windpipe; consisting of a part, or the whole, of the larynx … or the extremity of the ḥalqūm, at the entrance of the passage of the food and drink”. (Lane 1863 s.v.). zōṛ in CA is “the breast … or chest or its upper or uppermost part” (Lane 1863 s.v.). The semantic shift to “throat” is explained by contiguity. In one place, laġlūġ was indicated, in Ṭurʕān (69): ʔilli min tiḥt id-daʔen = laġlūġ. Cf. luġd “flesh at the throat and under the chin” (Wehr 1960 s.v.). As for ǧōza and the like, cf. Elihay 2004:265-l “Adam’s apple – by extension also throat”. ‘Adam’s apple’ in Ṭurʕān (69) is zalʕūma.

356

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 14

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

O Y

44

41

47 48

61 M F

53

72

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55 80

Nazareth 78

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62 65

49

34

60

82 79

Israel

83 84

85

e

91

92

95

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

166

ape of the ne raqabi ra'abi kabe ragabe rguba

©u a ©a a ©un©a ©unug ©unuq ©unu'

©u ©ing ©ungu

©u ©a

qafa 'afa kafa gafa

0

166

3.1.14 Nape of the neck

5

a

10 km

Lexicon

3.1.12 Lip, see Phonology 3.1.13 Neck, see Phonology 166 3.1.14 Nape of the Neck All forms attested are dealt with in WAD I:122. ʕunq in MSA is polysemic meaning ‘neck’ and ‘nape of the neck’. This also applies to raqaba. ʕungur is nothing but an enlargement of *ʕung. ʕuntaṛa and ʕantara are compared to √ʕnt and √ʕnd with the meaning ‘stubborn’. Cf. German ‘hartnäckig’, ‘halsstarrig’ = ‘having a hard neck, having a stiff neck’ = ‘stubborn’. Sporadical ʕuʔṣa is compared to an Egyptian meaning ‘base of the tail, back part’.

357 saḥsūḥ loc. cit. was elicited by B. in Akko and was a double misunderstanding (signal failure, “Deutefehler”). When asking for the word, he gave a slap on his neck. This was misunderstood by the informants and then misinterpreted by B. saḥsūḥ is found on the Arabic internet for Lebanon and Syria as ‘slap on the neck’. The form qafā of the questionnaire = ‘nape’ (Wehr 1960) was misunderstood by some of the interviewers and interviewees who answered with ṭīẓ ‘arse’. Some answered with gafa and metathetical faga. Cf. Elihay 2004:417-l qafa “nape”, “bottom”, “ass”, “tush”. In retrospect, it is not clear what was meant by gafa or faga. Unambiguous, of course, is gafa r-ragabe (ʕĒn Māhil, 80).

358

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

21

20

B

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

26 13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

46

65

49

34 53

75 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e B

92

95

93

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

76 80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

71 72

62

61

47 48

31

36

59

89

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

167

ger an 'u 'u

167

fingernai

ba© ba© bi© ba© bi©

3.1.15 Finger and fingernail

ar far far far r ir r

'u 'u

ir

ba© ar ur ir

'u

ba© bi© ba© ba©

ifir

r fur r ifer

'u 'u

fir ifir

0

5

10 km

Lexicon

167 3.1.15 Finger and Fingernail CA ḏ̣ufur, ḏ̣ufr, ḏ̣ifr, especially in a central strip, have completely been adapted to reflexes of ʔiṣbaʕ: > ʔiḏ̣far. In other places, often one of the two forms is slightly different as to its vocalism. For Nazareth, the three questionnaires indicated identical forms, one also as alternative ʔuṣbaʕ –

359 ḍifir. For Tiberias, only ʔuṣbaʕ is attested (AGK-2:108, s. 9). An isolated ṣbāʕ is possibly an adaptation to (i)bhām ‘thumb’. No distinction is made between forms with /ḍ/ or /ḏ̣/ on the map. The anaptyctic vowel is sometimes [i], but mostly [e].

360

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

46

47 48

31

36

62

61

65

49

53

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

55 71

80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

83 84

88

91

Jordan

95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

168 'ib him

ilal-

a© li-k a© al-

r

0

168

3.1.16 Thumb

5

10 km

Lexicon

168 3.1.16 Thumb The CA form is ʔibhām. Especially in the north and partly in the centre, an analogical form bāhim is used, formed

361 after šāhid ‘forefinger’. il-ʔiṣbaʕ li-kbīr refers to the fact that the thumb is thicker than the other fingers.

362

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

21

20

B

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

29 30

28

26 13 38 39

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

60

42

41 44 47 48

53

72

65

49

34

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

169

avel su sirra sirr

zu zukre zu zik

0

169

3.1.18 Navel

5

10 km

Lexicon

3.1.17 Thigh, see Phonology 169 3.1.18 Navel There is a quite clear regional distribution of suṛṛa – zukṛa, the first being a southern form, the form used in the C, G and M dialects and also typical of Bedouin dialects, the latter continuing a Lebanese form as is badd- vs. bidd ‘to want’ in the northern region. zəkra ~ ẓəkra in Barthélemy 1935–1969:316 for Syrian Arabic is “petite outre”, “au fig. panse” = “paunch”. Since body parts were often elicited by pointing at them, this might suggest a misunderstanding. Pointing at the navel, the informants may have interpreted this as pointing at the belly (signal failure, “Deutefehler”). Cf. Behnstedt 1997:87 as for ‘lobe of the ear’ and ‘earring’. But the word was elicited by a direct question: “what do you call the navel?” by using suṛṛa. zukṛa is not attested in Elihay 2004, Bauer 1957, Seeger WB online. P.c. M. Woidich (translated): “zikra is attested besides brīm and ṣurra for Lebanon as ‘nombril, gourde’ in Sultani – Milelli 2010:490a. Cf. also Abū Saʕd 90a zukra = surra, the latter designated as qāmūsīya and Yasīn 2003: 691 zikra = surrat al-baṭn and aṣ-ṣawāb zukra. Cf. also Denizeau 1960:223 zəkre ‘nombril’”. Denizeau has the form from Belot’s dictionary (1952). In Dozy 1968:597 the form zukra ‘nombril’ is from Muḥīṭ al-Muḥīṭ. zukra in CA is “a certain small receptacle … a

363 receptacle of skin … or a skin … or a small skin … for wine … or for vinegar” (Lane 1863:1239-r). Comparing the belly to a receptacle such as a bag is quite common. Cf. girba ‘a water skin’ = ‘belly’ in Sinai (WAD I:map 58). Cf. also English “‘belly’ a general Germanic word for a leather bag, pouch, pod” (Harper 2003), for example, German ‘Balg’ as in ‘Blasebalg’ = ‘bellows’). Cf. also Spanish barriga ‘paunch’ related to French barrique, the Spanish loan barrica from Gascon barrique, “que cambió de significado por comparación del vientre, adonde se echa el vino y la vianda, con un barril” (Coronimas 1973:87-r).2 The metaphor ‘receptacle for wine’ = ‘belly’ is already attested in CA in the verb tazakkara “it (a child’s belly) became large … or full … so that it was like a {zukra} … and in good condition” (Lane 1863:1239–3). The semantic shift from ‘belly’ to ‘navel’ as the central point of the belly is a synecdoche, i.e., a totum pro parte.3

2  Also, the English ‘“barricade”’ is derived from it since formerly barricades were mainly made by using barrels. Cf. Wartburg 1968:60-l. 3  On the other hand, the form elicited for a ‘paunch’, namely ṭuḥla (not in Elihay 2004; Bauer 1957, Seeger WB online) is a pars pro toto related to CA ṭaḥila “having his {ṭiḥāl} [or spleen] large, or enlarged” (Lane 1863:1830–3).

364

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 20

8 1 2

Akko

28

17 18

15

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

65

49

53

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e 92

Sea of Galilee ariyya

80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

71

93

62

61

47 48

60

89

B

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

170

ole of the foo kaff il er kaff(i)t il- er aff ar-ri il afft ar-ri il afft 'i ri

170

3.1.20 Sole

ba l-'i ba l-'i ir ba t il-'i er ba l-gadam kar et il- r

© il er ©at il-' © il-'i er ©at ar-ri il © ar-ri il ©t al-'i ir

© il-'i er © il er da©si

0

5

10 km

Lexicon

3.1.19 Instep, see Phonology 170 3.1.20 Sole Most of the designations are analytical. The most frequent form is kaff(i)t il-ʔižer, which is compared to the palm of the hand, in MSA kaff or kaffa. Cf. Elihay 2004:270-l kaffe “palm of the hand, sole of the foot”. A second comparison is with the belly: baṭn il-ʔižer, rarely karšet il-ʔižer. The tertium comparationis is not the shape but the position:

365 the belly is opposite to the back as is ‘instep’ = mušṭ ilʔižer = ‘dorsum of the foot’ to ‘the sole’; baṭn al-qadam is also the form found in MSA. The third form, more often found in Bedouin dialects, also refers to the position: qāʕ ‘bottom, lowest part’. An isolated daʕsi refers to the function of the sole. Cf. daʕas ‘to tread on, trample’. See also WAD I:160ff where kaʕb, which normally means ‘heel’, is also mentioned. In retrospect, it is doubtful and will be disregarded. As for sedentary dialects, forms with /ǧ/ are subsumed under ʔižer.

366

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22 21

8 1 2

Akko

28

17 18

19

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

31

36

59

65

73

ariyya

80

Nazareth 78

64

Sea of Galilee

69

53

71

63

82 79

83 84

Israel 86

e

89

Jordan 95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

171 zirr a©b al-m k© al-m © al-m a©ab

ka©ab k© ka

0

171

3.1.21 Ankle

5

10 km

Lexicon

171 3.1.21 Ankle The most common form is zirr which is not attested in Elihay 2004 with this meaning, but only as “button, knob” to which an ankle might be compared. Cf., however, Seeger WB online 327 zirr “Knöchel”. There are a few instances of

367 kāḥil, which is quite common in Syria (SA map 338). kaʕb in MSA is polysemic meaning ‘ankle’, ‘heel’, etc. Typical for Bedouin dialects are forms such as čaʕb al-mōt ‘death ankle’, also very common in Syria where the form was explained by the fact that it is painful when it is hit.

368

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4 6 7

20

8

1 2

15

17 19

Akko

28

16 38 39

30

56

B 58

40 43

Haifa

59

42

41 47 48

31

36

62 65

49

34 53

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

76 80

71 72

27

26

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86 ©A

83 84

87

89

88

90

92

95

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

172

warf qazam qazame qa am quzum qizim 'azam

gazam gizam gizim kazum kazami qa

gurzum ga m gaza© kiz©ar 'iz qa r

'a r ga r r ka r ayyir

wa'li 'aqba µaµ

0

172

3.1.23 Dwarf

abza

©

5

10 km

Lexicon

3.1.22 Heel, see Phonology 172 3.1.23 Dwarf Reflexes of CA qazam are the most frequent forms and often pronounced with /q/ even in dialects with /ʔ/ for Qāf. qazame und kazami are obviously formed analogically to zalame, zalami ‘man’;4 gurzum is nothing but an enlargment of √qzm. gazaʕ corresponds to quzʕa ‘dwarf’ designated in Wehr 1960 as Egyptian Arabic. kizʕar ~ ʔizʕar is an enlarged form or a contamination, since the latter could also be interpreted as a √zʕr form. Cf. Seeger WB online 330 izʕar “schwanzlos, zwergenwüchsig”. qaṣīr and the like are nothing but ‘short’. ʔaqbaz, f. 4  Or are to be explained by the fact that often a feminine form is used with defects such as kasīḥa ‘cripple’. Cf. WAD I:217 with feminine forms for ‘stupid person’.

369 qabza has the same semantics. Cf. Lisān 3510-l al-qibzu l-qaṣīru. Not in Lane 1863. For waʔli cf. Lisān al-ʕArab 4900-m wa l-waqlu … šaǧaru l-muqli … ad-dawmu” = “Zwergpalme” (Wahrmund 1985:1211), i.e., a metaphor. marbūʕ is perhaps MSA = “of medium height” (Wehr 1960). For ṃaṃṣūx Bedouin dialect of Biʕne (38), cf. Wehr 1960, English version “disfigured”, German edition “hässlicher Zwerg” = ‘ugly dwarf’. Bedouin garʕūma in Biʕne (38) is metaphorical, either an enlargement of √qrm or a contamination of √qrm and √qmʕ as in qurmiyyi “tree stump” (Elihay 2004:436-l). Cf. also loc. cit. qurmiyyt is-sigāra “the cigarette stump” with reference to qumʕa “butt, stub”, qumʕet is-sigāra “cigarette stub”, the latter in Biʕne garʕūm.

Lexicon

3.2 Animals 3.2.1 General Remarks There is great uniformity as to the names of animals and most of the questions elicited no significant results as to regional diversity. For example, ‘tomcat’ and ‘cat’ are everywhere biss and bissa/bisse/bissi, ‘mouse’ is fāṛ, ‘scorpion’ almost everywhere is feminine: ʕaqṛabe, ‘mole’ is xlund, ‘porcupine’ nīṣ, etc. For ‘lamb’ mostly ʕabūṛ(a) was indicated. But originally this refers to a one- or-two-yearold lamb, but is used as a general name. In ʕĒn Māhil (80), it was defined as smaller than xaṛūf, the age being up to five months. The bellwether is miryāʕ as in Syrian Arabic. A young goat was called žafṛa. Cf. Seeger WB online 147 ǧafra “junge Ziege (8 bis 12 Monate alt)” and Lane 1863:433-l “a female kid”. A word for a one- or-two-year-old

371 goat was ṣaʕūṛa.5 A female informant from Ṭurʕān (69) indicated the age stages as ṣaʕūṛa – žafṛa – ʕanze. miʕza is not a singular for ‘goat’ as one might suppose, but a collective form, the singular/nomen unitatis being ʕanze or miʕzāy. In Bauer 1957, miʕza ~ miʕzāi as a singular form/ nomen unitatis, in Elihay 2004:343-r meʕza “goats” (coll.). As for the lexicon related to cows among the Bedouins of the región of the Sea of Galilee, see Sonnen 1952:40–42.

5  In Dalman 1987 VI:188, saʕūra means ‘seven to twelve months old’. Form elicited by him in Syria. In SA map 419, ṣāʕūra ‘one year old’. In Arnold-Behnstedt 1993:84, ṣaʕūra is associated with Aramaic √ṣʕr ‘small’. In another source, which we cannot locate anymore, it is derived from Aramaic √sʕr ‘hair’. In this case, an emphatic ṛ would have caused emphasis of *s, too. Denizeau 1960:246 quotes saʕūra after Dalman loc. cit. and sāʕūr ‘chevreau’ for Lebanon after Feghali.

372

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

B

8

+ 11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

43

+

+

31 B 33 B B 34 B 52 B 35 53

73

47 B 48

65

49

+ 76 80 + +82 Nazareth 78 + 79

+

64

63

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

85 86

e 92

89 B

95

93

+

69

68

Israel +

60 62

61

75

71 72

+

41 44 45

B 50

56

59

42

46

26

+

58

40

Haifa

21

20

83 84

87

B B

88

90 91

+

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

173

ck of sheep, goats al©a il©a

alyi alye alya aliyye ilya

+

ga ©, k

©

0

173

3.2.2 Herd, flock

5

10 km

Lexicon

173 3.2.2 Herd, Flock According to Elihay 2004:598-r, ṭarš is “a mixed flock / herd of both big and small animals”. The questionnaire asked for a “flock of sheep or goats”. In recording Sažūr (24): ṭrūš miʕza ‘flocks of goats’, in recording ʕIlūṭ (75) ṭarš refers to sheep. In Kisra (11), w iṭ-ṭariš hāḏa ʔinʔaṭaʕ, mā ḏ̣all rīḥit iṭ-ṭariš wala ʕinna šalʕit miʕza šēli wala ṭariš wala ʔiši ‘and this herding was given up; there is no smell of herds, nor do we have flocks of goats at all or big herds or anything’. The forms elicited are: – šalʕa, šilʕa, not in Elihay 2004 or in Lane 1863. In Dozy 1968 I:782 “troupeau d’ânes” after Thesaurus Syriacus.6 It is mentioned in Wehr 1985:672 as “Kleinviehherde”. In WAD I:242, “ausschließlich für den Raum Palästina – Jordanien – Syrien belegt”. According to Bauer 1957:154l, “ein weggenommener Teil der Herde”. Barthélemy 1935–1969:404 explains it as “ce qu’on arrache du sol, ou à une autre tribu”. Cf. ġanima ‘to gain booty’ – ġanam 6  Payne Smith: 1868.

373 ‘small cattle’. In point 49 (ir-Rummāni), it is composed of ten to fifteen animals – šalya, šalyi in Dozy 1968 I:783-r šaliyya “petit troupeau” after Muḥīṭ. The regional distribution is the same. See also WAD I:242 and Lane 1863:1593-l as a neologism šaliyya “a remnant … ḏahabat māšiyatu fulānin wa baqiyat lahu šaliyyatun [The cattle of such a one went away, but a remnant remained to him]”. šalya can be explained as a fusion of šalʕa and šaliyya. In point 48 (iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda), šalʕa was defined as ‘a small flock’, šalya as ‘a big flock’, in point 41 (Saxnīn) šalyi = ‘small flock’, šalʕa ‘big flock’. – ʕaǧǧāl bagaṛ (68), ʕažžāl (69) obviously refer only to cows. – qaṭīʕ = 50–100 animals point 49 (ir-Rummāni), in Yanūḥ (14) qaṭīʕ ‘bigger than šalʕa’. – One questionnaire for Nazareth indicates manūḥa, another one has it as a synonym for ġanam. The form is not to be found in dictionaries consulted.

374

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

53

72

65

49

34 B

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

80

Nazareth

73

64

63

69

68

75

71

62

61

47 48

60

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

174

ull ,

©a ©i il

0

174

3.2.3 Bull

5

10 km

Lexicon

174 3.2.3 Bull The form ṯōr was not so frequently indicated. Often ʿammāl was furnished, but this is the ox for ploughing (cf. Elihay 12-l). Another form mentioned was ʿalūl. Depending on the informants it was indicated as “older than ṯōṛ”, “two

375 years old”, “three and more years old”, some thought it was younger than ṯōṛ. The form is not to be found in Elihay, nor in Seeger WB online, nor in Bauer. It is to be found in neighbouring Ḥōrān as ʿallūl, ʿālūl, ʿalūl which is certainly no coincidence. Cf. SA map 415.

376

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44 47 48

65

Israel

Sea of Galilee ariyya

80

Nazareth 78

64

63

69

68

75

73

62

61

53

71

60

82 79

85

e

83 84

87 89

92

88

90 91

Jordan

Palestinian Territories Jenin

175 na©≤e, etc. n©a a aname anami nima 0

175

3.2.4 Ewe

5

10 km

Lexicon

175 3.2.4 Ewe Two forms were elicited, reflexes of CA naʕǧa and a new motivated formation ġaname from ġanam, according to the model baqar – baqara. For the collective, ġalam is

377 attested for ʕArab Šibli (83) in Rosenhouse 1980:29, but not the nomen unitatis. In Ṭurʕān (69), a female informant pretended that ġaname would be older than naʕži. Cf. WAD I:249 where ġaname is attested mainly for the Levant.

378

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 2

Akko

17 18

28

14 15 19

16

26 13 38 39

30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

65

49 66 67

34 53

Sea of Galilee

69

68

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

64

63

ariyya

76 80

71 72

62

61

47 48

60

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

176

ill s

el al

0

176 3.2.5 Billy-goat

5

10 km

Lexicon

176 3.2.5 Billy-goat Not much can be deduced from the map. There is no regional distribution of the synonyms to be recognised and often both forms were indicated in the same point. In Bʕēne (65), tēs was said to have a negative connotation. Cf. Elihay 2004:566-r “idiot, fool, stupid person” as a second meaning. This applies to other places, too, for example, ʕIsifya (71) = ʔihbal ma bifhamš.

379 The anaptyctic vowel in faḥl is [e] in sedentary dialects, [a] in Bedouin dialects. faḥl in CA is “a male … of any kind” (Lane 1863 s.v.). The special meaning ‘billy-goat’ is a West Syrian, Lebanese isogloss which extends into Galilee. See WAD I:169–270.

380

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

8

21

B

1 2

Akko

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

B

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

49

34 53

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

B

87

85

e

89 B

95

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

177

o fda©a ufda©a da©a if a©a fda©a afda©a

wirr a (coll. wirri ) wirr e (coll. wirri )

0

177

3.2.6 Frog

5

10 km

Lexicon

177 3.2.6 Frog In some points where interdentals are extant, the form was indicated without interdental. These points are underlined on the map. Emphasis was noted mostly only for the first syllable, for Haifa and Nazareth ḍufḍaʕa in questionnaires.

381 For wirriǧ, cf. WAD I:381 where this form is attested for Galilee and Syrian Bedouin dialects (also in SA map 442). The form is also mentioned in Bauer 1957:118-r, Seeger WB online 979 as wirrig for Bedouins and in Dalman 1987 I,2:398 as wirriḳ. It is most probably an onomatopoetic formation.

382

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

8 1 2

Akko

17 18

19

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

B

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

49

34 53

63

Sea of Galilee ariyya

68

76 80

71

Nazareth

82

78

73

Israel

85 86

e

87

88

90

89

91

Jordan

95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

178

lipede 'umm as-sif f 'umm as yif 'abu s-sa if 'irbi©niyye, -i 'irba©niyye, -i 'arba©niyye

'arb©iniyye 'urba©niyyi mirba©niyyi 'imm (il-)'arba© w (il-)'arba© n

lad

'imm il-'arba© n 0

178

3.2.7 Millepede

5

10 km

Lexicon

178 3.2.7 Millepede Most of the designations for this animal are based on the number ‘forty’ or ‘forty and four’, this being a more realistic estimate of the number of its legs/feet than European names such as millipede, mille-pattes, milpiés, Tausendfüßler, duizendpoot, tusenfoting, etc. Cf. also Egyptian Arabic ʔummı ʔarbaʕa w-ʔarbiʕīn (HindsBadawi 1986:324-l). – For the Bedouin forms ʔumm as-sifīf, ʔimm is-sifāyif and in a southern G dialect ʔabu s-safāyif, no satisfying etymology could be found at first. When introducing this name into the Arabic internet, articles and pictures of millipedes appeared but with no hint at this form. On one site which, however, was not locatable ʔabu s-safāyif was used with its synonym ʔumm il-ʔarbaʕīn. Since animals’ names formed with ʔumm or ʔabu = ‘the one of’ plus noun refer to a characteristic feature of the animal such as ʔabu gurūn ‘horned viper’, sifīf or safāyif should refer to the most characteristic feature of this animal and mean something like ‘feet’ or ‘legs’. Nothing similar could be detected in CA and many dialect dictionaries. When asked for the meaning of safāyif, an informant in ʕĒn Māhil (80) supposed that it had to do with its legs or stings. safīf in CA is “woven … of palm leaves” and hence “the girth of the {raḥl}”; safīfa is a

383 “piece of woven [or plaited] work of palm-leaves … a wide belly-girth with which a [raḥl] … is bound”. The plural safāʔif means “wide ribs” (Lane 1863:1368-r). Perhaps this is the explanation. It is not the numerous legs which inspired this name but the numerous body segments of a millipede which are interpreted as ribs or belly-girths, each of them provided with a pair of legs. For Dabbūrye (82), a speaker of a Bedouin dialect (as some pronunciations suggest, see index of localities) hesitates, first uses ʔirbāʕniyyi and then calls it laddān. Another informant from Nēn (85) mentioned the same form. It is not attested in Elihay 2004, Seeger WB online, Bauer 1957. When searching for ḥašarat al-laddān in the Arabic internet, photographs of millipedes appear, one of them on a site from Irbid/Jordan with exactly this name. Since millipedes are venomous (cf. Elihay 2004:294-l lasaʕ “to bite” with reference to arbʕīniyye), the form is to be compared with √l – d – for ‘to bite’ as in ladaġ ‘to bite, sting’ said of scorpions, snakes and other venomous animals (Seeger WB online 333), ladaʕ idem (Denizeau 1960:472 for Lebanon). On an accoustically very poor recording from id-Daḥi (86), the informant calls it ʔabu šḥādi or ʔabu šḥayyi. These forms or something similar were not detectable.

384

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

8

21

20

B

1 2

Akko

17 18

14 15 19

16

29 30

28

26 13 38 39

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46 31

59

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

49

34 53

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

55 D

71

C

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

179

flowe za qa b 'a b 'annab ga b ka b

179

3.3.1 Cauliflower

0

5

10 km

Lexicon

3.3

Fruit and Vegetables

For tomatoes and parsley, see “Phonology”. 179 3.3.1 Cauliflower According to Elihay 2004:424-l s.v. qarnabīṭ: “however, the most commonly used word for cauliflower is zahra”. The

385 map shows a neat isogloss like qarnabīṭ being used in the north and the west of our region. As for Nazareth, two questionnaires indicated ʔarnabīṭ, a third one karnabīṭ and zahra. The subject is dealt with in WAD I:485. Bauer 1957:63-l distinguishes collective zahr as ‘blooming cauliflower’ (“als blühend”), in Barthélemy 1935–1969:505 ẓahret qarnabīṭ or ẓahra.

386

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

8

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

46

53

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

31 34

59

65

49

52

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

76 80

71

Nazareth

82

78

73

Israel

85

e B

95

87 89

88

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

180

ranges burdq burd' burda burdg burdg burda

burdu bir n burd burda bu n burtak

u burda

0

180

3.3.4 Oranges

5

10 km

387

Lexicon

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

8

21

B

1 2

Akko

17 18

19

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

28

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

59

42

41 44 47 48

31 53

71

65

49

34

D

62

61

63

Sea of Galilee ariyya

68

76 80

C

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85

e

87 89

B

95

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

181

emon m lem m

m m

m mi mu mu

0

181

3.3.4 Lemons

5

10 km

388 180–181 3.3.4.–3.3.5 Oranges and Lemons The subject is discussed in WAD I:493–498. There, the form laymūn is characterised as typical for the Syrian coast and Lebanon. It is still attested in Galilee. The basic meaning of laymūn is ‘citrus fruit’ which is specified by

Lexicon

additonal ḥilu ‘sweet’ for ‘oranges’, and ḥāmiḍ ‘sour’ for lemons. The diphthong *ay is reduced to /a/: lamūn as in zatūn ‘olives’. On the map for ‘lemons’ the elliptic form ḥāmiḍ is dominant.

390

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

20

8 1 2

Akko

28

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12 58

40 43

Haifa

59

42

41

62

61

44

31

56

48

65

34 53

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

87

e

89

91

Jordan

95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

182

e x x 'abu waba x 'abu waber

du du du du du du

q '

du

g

aftal

0

182

3.3.6 Peaches

5

10 km

Lexicon

182 3.3.6 Peaches The subject is dealt with in WAD I:504. Elihay 2004:107-r durrāq “peaches” with reference to xōx (p. 209) “plums, peaches (usage varies from one region to another). If you want to be precise you can say xōx ʔabu wabar” (referring to the hairiness of its skin). Where xōx is only found on recorded questionnaires with no written questionnaire available, in retrospect doubts are justified. The respective

391 points are underlined. For Nazareth, Yāft in-Nāṣri (78) and Dālyit il-Karmil (73) questionnaires have xōx for both peaches and plums. Where barʔūʔ or brūmya were indicated, meaning ‘plums’ and then xōx, the latter obviously referred to peaches. Some informants indicated brūmya and ʕēn il-baqaṛa which most probably is a confusion with ‘plums’. šaftal in ir-Riḥaniyyi is from Turkish şeftali ‘peach’.

392

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

8 1 23

2

Akko

28

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

59

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

31

65

63

Sea of Galilee

34 53

ariyya

68

76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel 86

e

95

89

87

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

183

lums x br ya n il-ba n il-ba ba q ba '

a a

0

183

3.3.7 Plums

5

10 km

Lexicon

183 3.3.7 Plums See above. Cf. also WAD I:502–503. There, ʕēn il-baqaṛa is mentioned as ‘peaches’ for Galilee. New materials have it for ‘plums’. The form brūmya loc. cit. is defined as ‘peach(es) with smooth skin’, but new data have it clearly defined as ‘plums’. This is also the definition given in

393 Elihay 2004:88-l with superscript ‘g’ = Galilee. It is obviously a loan from Italian prugna. In Dabbūrye (82), ʕēn il-bagaṛa and brūmya were designated as differents sorts. For Bēt Žann (23), baṛqūq was indicated for xōx ʔixḏ̣ar and ‘red anemones’.

394

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

1

Akko

28

9 10

14

2

17 18

19

16

24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

Haifa

59

42

41 44

61

47 48

31

36

56

58

40 43

21

20

8

62 65

34 35

60

53

63

69

68

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

76 80

71

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85

83

87

e 92

Jordan 95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

184 'a

i

mawa© n hd ty 0

184

3.4.1 Clothes

5

10 km

Lexicon

3.4 Various 184 3.4.1 Clothes The subject is dealt with in WAD II:198–202. awāʕi on p. 200 is characterised as typically Palestinian and the semantic shift from CA ʔawāʕin ‘vessels’ to ‘clothes’ is explained via ‘equipment, utensils’. Iksāl (79) mawaʕīn (Nevo 2006:39). For similar cases, see loc. cit. hdūm is typical for Bedouin

395 dialects. This is a case of semantic amelioration, since in CA we have, according to Lisān al-ʕArab 4632-l, wa l-hidmu, bil-kasri: ṯ-ṭawbu l-xalaqu l-muraqqaʕu … al-kisāʔa l-bālīya. Sporadical ṯyāb, tyāb are dominant in neighbouring Lebanon and Western Syria. In Elihay 2004:579-l, tyāb as “garments”. For ʕArab Šibli (83), Rosenhouse 1980:21 has awāʕi.

396

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 14

2

Akko 28

17 18

19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

46 31 B 33 34 51 52 35 53

36

72

42 47 B 48

49

65 67

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

55 80

78

82 79

85 86

e

93

60 62

61

Israel 92

57

41 44

Nazareth

73

56 59

75

71

25 26

58

40 43

21

20

8

B

95

89

83

87

88

90

Jordan 96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

185 36

µayy µayya µayye µayyi

0

185

3.4.2 Water

5

10 km

Lexicon

185 3.4.2 Water The subject is dealt with in WAD I:420 where only the forms ṃayy, ṃayye, ṃayyi are indicated for the area. Some Bedouin dialects have ṃayya as a part of the Šāwi dialects in Syria (cf. SA map 455).

397

398

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4 6

8

B

1

18

Akko

16

13 38 39

28

24

12 B

Haifa

59

42

41

48

65

49

34 53

71

D

63

Sea of Galilee ariyya

68

76

Nazareth 78

73

60 62

61

46

C

56

58

40 43

26

82 79

B

Israel 86

e

89

B

95

83

87 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

186

poo ma©laqa, ma©la'a, ma©laka mi©la'a, mi©laga, mi©laka mil©a'a zalafe, zalafi a 0

186

3.4.3 Spoon

5

10 km

Lexicon

186 3.4.3 Spoon The subject is discussed in WAD II:130–135. On p. 200, zalafe is indicated as a Palestinian form. In Elihay’s English (2004) version of his dictionary, the form is not attested, but in the French one (1985) as “cuiller … dans certaines régions”. Bauer 1957:195-r mentions it without localisation. In Denizeau 1960:225, zalafi after Blanc 1953, in Dozy 1968 s.v. as “écuelle, plat, coquillage”, zalafe “Löffel” in Seeger

399 WB online. In some points, the form was characterised as old-fashioned, maʕlaqa being more modern or it was described as being smaller. In iš-Šēx Dannūn (1), maʕlaʔa was defined as bigger than zalafe. In Yirka (16), zalafi was indicated as ‘rare’, in Nazareth as ‘obsolete’. xašūga in Dabbūrye (82) was characterised as “old-fashioned”, the modern word is maʕlaga.

400

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

8 1 2

Akko

28

17 18

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

65

63

Sea of Galilee ariyya

53

76 80

Nazareth

82

78

73

Israel e

89

Jordan Palestinian Territories Jenin

187

bre r kasrit kasra fra kasrit, kasr fra ka fra kasr fra

tirw qa tirw 'a tirw ga

0

187

3.4.4 First breakfast

5

10 km

Lexicon

187 3.4.4 First Breakfast The subject is discussed in WAD II:233–235. kasr iṣ-ṣafra and the like are explained in two ways: as ṣafra ‘bile, gall’ as attested in Lebanese Arabic and as ṣafrā “Galle” in Bauer 1957:121-l (not in Elihay 2004), i.e., get rid of (literally ‘to break’) the bitter taste in the mouth in the morning by drinking or eating something. The second possibility is

401 ṣafra ‘hunger’ as attested in Lane 1863 s.v., i.e., ‘break the hunger’. The first explanation is plausible because similar expressions refer to the spittle which is loosened or ‘broken’ in the morning: fakk ər-rīq, kasar ər-rīq (Syria), nominal tirwīqa. In two places, kasr iṣ-ṣufra (Bedouin 53) and kasrit iṣ-ṣufra Kufir Yasīf (18) were mentioned with /u/, probably by relating it to ṣufra (< sufra) ‘dining table’.

402

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

21

20

8

1 14

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

B

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

41

60 62

44 47 48

31

36

59

42

46

27

65

64

63

Sea of Galilee

69

53

ariyya

54 76 80

71 72

Nazareth

82 79

73

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

83 84

88 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

188

e ©is ©a ©a

i i i

am wi i

a i il a i a i 'a wal ya wi

mi

0

188 3.5.1 Left-Handed

5

10 km

403

Lexicon

3.5 Adjectives 188 3.5.1 Left-Handed The subject is dealt with in WAD I:220 with a side map for Galilee. The main forms are to be found on this map, namely: a) ʕisrāwi, ʕasrāwi ~ ʕaṣṛāwi b) šmāli with a new variant šamlāwi, šimlāwi c) šalfāwi with two new variants šilfāwi and šaltfāwi d) čatfāwi looks like a fusion of two forms, with a second element -fāwi as above and *kat- > *čat- for which see ʔaktaʕ, f. katʕa ‘with a crippled hand’. There are two completely new forms, namely ʔašwal, common in Egypt and elsewhere, yasrāwi as in other parts of Palestine.

The left hand from the standpoint of view of a righthanded person is the bad hand, therefore forms are used meaning ‘lame’, ‘difficult, hard, strait, intricate, unfortunate’ such as aʕsar7 (Lane 1863 s.v.), in our region ʕisrāwi ~ ʕasrāwi. šalfāwi is explained in AGK-1:300 as a metathetical form of *fašlāwi from √fšl ‘to fail’. The form šaltfāwi is probably a contamination with another form such as *zaldāwi. Cf. Bauer 1957: zadlāwi as a rural form. ʔašwal belongs to √šwl as in šawwala “to become deficient” or “to be flabby” said of a horse’s veretrum (Lane 1863 s.v.), more in WAD I:221. For būmi “owl” see the text in AGK-1:230–231 with fn. 2. 7  Emphatic in Taršīḥa: ʔaʕṣaṛ ‘with a crippled hand’ – ʕaṣṛāwi.

404

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

8

21

B

1 2

Akko

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

28

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44 45

62

61

47 48

31

36

59

65

34 53

ariyya

80

Nazareth

82

78

73

Sea of Galilee

69

68

71

63

Israel

87

e

95

89

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

189

tingy bax l bix l kit nikit ku ka t

189

3.5.2 Stingy

ka ka

t t

'abu kamm ni 'abu kamm ne 'abu kamm ni

'd

ke if

'ir

'a

ir © 0

5

10 km

Lexicon

189 3.5.2 Stingy The subject is dealt with in WAD I:229 with a map for Galilee based on the data which B. had at his disposal at the time. The new recovered data show only one new lexeme. – nākit is by far the most common form. It is not attested in Bauer 1957, Elihay 2004 or Seeger WB online. In WAD loc. cit., it is compared to nakata “to scratch up” (Wehr 1960) and another form for ‘to scratch off’, namely kaḥata (Wehr 1960) as in kaḥtūt and enlarged karḥūt. It refers to the miser who scrapes money together. – ʔireṭ see Wehr 1960 qarraṭa “to be stingy”. – We find the concept of not being free with one’s money in ʔīdu māske as in English “close-fisted”.

405 – ʔabu kammūne refers to the fact that a caraway seed is worth nothing and that a person won’t even part with caraway seed (cf. Spanish me importa un comino ‘I don’t give a damn about …’). – ʕāṭil in Elihay 2004:23-r is simply “bad, nasty”; also sporadically in Syria as ‘stingy’. – nāšif is nothing but ‘dry’. The same idea is also to be found in other dialects. – ṭammīʕ normally is ‘greedy’. – mḥaṣṣir cf. Wehr 1960 ḥaṣara “to hold back”. – ʔanṭaš “Geizhals” for Haifa (AGK-1:98) is not attested in WAD I.229, not in Elihay 2004, Bauer 1957, or Seeger WB online. It has to be compared to nataš “to snatch” (Elihay 2004:400-l), “schnappen, rasch ergreifen” in Seeger WB online 808. Cf. French grippe-sous.

406

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

9

14 15 19

16

26 13 12 38 B 39

29 30

56 58

40 43

Haifa

41 44

65

51 53

72

ariyya

Sea of Galilee

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

B

92

95

93

64

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31 34

59

42

46

36

21

20

8

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

190 mar , mar mir mr mar n

©a n ©iy n ta© ©f

sa

xin

n

0

190

3.5.3 Sick

5

10 km

Lexicon

190 3.5.3 Sick The subject is dealt with in WAD III:566ff. No new designations have to be added. There is no regional distribution of the synonyms. mrīḍ is considered to be rural in Bauer 1957:182-l, in Elihay 2004:329-r mrīḍ “in some areas”, the euphemism ʕayyān (‘tired’) is considered as urban in Bauer loc. cit. which is not the case in Galilee. The euphemisms

407 ḍʕīf (‘weak’) und taʕbān (‘tired’) are found in Ṭabariyya in AGK-1:100,3 and 146, s. 9 besides the more current ʕayyān and sāxin. The latter is a pars pro toto and originally refers to one of the symptoms of illness, namely being ‘feverish’. Also in Bedouin dialects (Rosenhouse 1984:280) sāxen ‘ill’. Cf. also saxan ʔibnu ‘her son became ill’ (Kufir Smēʕ, ʕIsifya).

408

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6

8 1 14

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa

B

41 44 45

35

53

52

49

50

65 67

72

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

94 93

Sea of Galilee

76 80

Nazareth

73

ariyya

55

75 D C

63

69

68

54 71

60 62

61

47 48

31

34

56 59

42

46

36 37

26

58

40 43

21

20

B

95

87 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

191

o g ©a a 'a 'i©

'a 'in

0

191

3.6.1 To give

5

10 km

409

Lexicon

3.6 Verbs 191 3.6.1 To Give The subject is discussed in WAD III:406–411. As for ʔanṭa, cf. Elihay 2004:56-l “this form is used in Galilee alongside the more common ʔaʕṭa”. Bauer 1957:123-l indicates it for the centre and the north. Both forms are often used in parallel by same speaker, for example, in ir-Rāmi (56). For ʕIsifya (71) the four interviews conducted with Druze all provided ʔaʕṭa; a recording of a Christian male elicited ʔanṭa. The form is old. Cf. Lisān al-ʕArab 4465m: wa ʔanṭaytu luġatun fī ʔaʕṭaytu, wa qad quriʔa ʔinnā ʔanṭaynāka l-kawṯara. For more details, see loc. cit.

In Ṭurʕān (69), ʔanṭa in the imperfect has /a/ and not /i/ as one would expect: banṭi ‘I give’, ‘he gives’, btanṭi ‘you (m., f.) give’, banṭu ‘they give’, imperative ʔanṭi! m.+f., pl. ʔanṭu!, active participle manṭi m., manṭiyyi f., pl. manṭiyyīn, manṭiyyāt, participle f. + -v: manṭītu ~ minṭītu ‘having given it’, participle f. 2nd p. minṭitī.8 The /a/ is probably due to equally used yaʕṭi. Elihay 2004:56-l indicates yenṭi, yonṭi. In one point, nāwal was indicated. This is rather ‘to hand over’ and will be disregarded on the map.

8  Informant declared that both vocalisations would be possible.

410

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

8 1

9

2

Akko

28

17 18

19

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

42

41 44

B 49

34

65

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

54

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

ariyya

76 80

71

Nazareth

82

78

73

Israel

85

e

87 89

92

95

93

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

192

o quarrel, fight

tk t(i

tal tal tal rab, etc.

t bak kas laffax ba© ba

habba ba© tx ' tk t lax t(i wa t wa

t(i wan t(i) a©

0

192

3.6.2 To quarrel, to fight

5

10 km

Lexicon

192 3.6.2 To Quarrel, to Fight The subject is discussed in WAD III:455ff. with more than sixty designations. What is meant is to quarrel violently, i.e., to fight each other. The most frequent form is yi/ tqātalu, which does not necessarily mean ‘they killed each other’. Cf. ir-Rāmi (56) ʔakalt qatle mnīḥa ‘I received a good hiding’ (recording), ʕIsifya (71) interview: ma ḏ̣arabunīš = ma qatalunīš. In G dialects and in Bedouin dialects, the form is to be found with /k/. Cf. also Iraqi Arabic kital ‘to kill, to beat up’. The same shift of meaning is to be found in tḏābaḥu ‘they slaughtered each other’ which does not necessarily imply killing. For tšābak, cf. MSA ʔištabaka ‘to come to blows’. Other forms also referring to beating are tiḏ̣ārabam, tḍārabu. tbākasu is derived form ‘box’, laffaxu baʕḍ (laffax not in Elihay 2004, cf. Barthélemy 1935–1969:759 lafaḥ kaff “donner un soufflet”). For ṭṭābaš (not in Elihay 2004), see Barthélemy 1935–1969:469 ṭabaš “taper avec le plat de la main”. Other source domains are designations for ‘to seize, grab each other (by the clothes, the hair, etc.)’, namely tlāqaṭ (not in Elihay 2004 but in Barthélemy 1935–1969:761 laqaṭ “saisir”). habbaš baʕḍ (not in Elihay 2004) but in MSA habaša ‘to seize, grab’. txānaʔ attested for Ṭabariyya originally meant ‘to seize by the throat’. For tkābaš, see map ‘to

411 seize’. tšālaxu is perhaps related to Elihay 2004:512-l šalaʕ “to pull hard”, šalaʕ-lo dāno “he tugged his ear”. Cf. also Seeger WB online 432 šalax “aufschlitzen” (“to slash, slit open”). A form referring to ‘turmoil’ is thāwaš. In WAD III, only attested for Bedouins in point 65, but very common on the peninsula and elsewhere. It is typical for Bedouin dialects and the G and M dialects (for these only attested in the east). The form is attested in CA (Lane 1863 s.v.). tġāwaš is derived from ġōše ‘noise’ (Bauer 1957:188-r ġawše “Lärm”), not in Elihay 2004. Bēt Zarzīr (54) ma kānat ġōšāt, mā kānat ṭōšāt ‘there were no quarrels, there was no turmoil’. It is attested in Wahrmund 1985 II:370 as an Egyptian form, not to be found in Hinds-Badawi 1986, but in Dozy 1968 II:231 according to Bocthor9 and attested also for Syria. In Barthélemy 1935–1969:587, ġawše as “dispute, vacarme” for Lebanon. tišāǧaʕ is a contamination of √šǧr as in MSA tašāǧara ‘to quarrel, fight’ and √šǧʕ as in šaǧuʕa ‘to be courageous’. For tkāwan, cf. WAD III:458.

9  Ellious Bocthor, French lexicographer of Coptic origin who published the Dictionnaire Français – Arabe in 1828.

412

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

8 1

9 10

2

Akko

17 18

19

16

23 24

13 12 38 B 39

29 30

28

43

41 44

65

49

53

75

Sea of Galilee ariyya

80

Nazareth 78

63

69

68

54

73

60 62

61

47 48

31

71

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40

Haifa

21

20

B

82 79

Israel 86

e

95

89

87 90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

193

o seize, grab, snatch, catch, arrest misik masak masa kama kaba ka©a

193

gib ga

ab ib

ka

3.6.3 To seize, grab, snatch, catch, arrest

0

5

10 km

Lexicon

193 3.6.3 To Seize, Grab, Snatch, Catch, Arrest The subject is discussed in WAD III:246–258. – The form kamaš so frequent in Syrian Arabic is hardly attested. See SA map 378. Elihay 2004:271-r mentions it without any regional distribution as “to grab, seize, snatch”. Bauer 1957:108-l gives “mit der Hand zusammenhalten” which is not exactly the same, but rather designates the result of an action: ‘to hold tight’ while ‘grab, seize, snatch’ is the action itself. Seeger WB online 690 has qamaš / yiqmiš “ergreifen, mit der Hand greifen (etw) eine Handvoll nehmen (von etw)” which refers to the action and which is probably a misinterpretation as it is written with {q}. Barthélemy 1935– 1969:728 has kamaš “empoigner” and designates it as CA. The form is not attested in CA with this meaning. Cf. Lane 1863:2631. One young female Druze informant

413 in interview with T. designated it as ‘rare’; middle-aged male Druze rejected it in an interview with B. In some localities, kamaš / yikmiš was mentioned as ‘to shrink after washing’, which is not attested in the dictionaries mentioned, but in MSA takammaša “to wrinkle, to shrink” (Wehr 1960). – kabaš, which is rather a northern form, simply seems to be a b-doublet for kamaš. For ir-Rāmi (56) is attested measure II with plurality of object: ʔiža l-bulīs kabbaš ʔarbaʕa w ʔarbʕīn zalami ‘the police came and arrested forty-four men’. kamaš might have been contaminated with qabaḍ ‘to seize’, which in the area is mainly attested in the sense of ‘to arrest’: ʔabaḍu ʕalē. The form is attested in Syria only in Bedouin dialects as metathetical giḏ̣ab. The same form is attested in our area. – kaʕaš is also attested in Syrian Arabic (SA map 376).

414

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

1

Akko

28

9 10

14

2

17 18

19

16

13 38 39

29 30

23 24

12

Haifa

41 44

75

72

Sea of Galilee ariyya

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

63

69

68

54 71

65

49

53

60 62

61

47 48

31

27

56 59

42

46

36

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

83

90 91

Jordan

95

Palestinian Territories Jenin

194

ook! lla© f da da da da 0

194

3.6.4 Look!

5

10 km

Lexicon

194 3.6.4 Look! The subject is dealt with in WAD III:345ff. As for šūf!, elicited in some places, it is probably possible in all the dialects of the area since šāf ‘to see’ is usual in all of them. As for the imperative form daḥḥič, this form was also elicited in Syrian Bedouin dialects and in WAD III:346 it was

415 supposed that this was a pausal form with devoicing of a final -ǧ. Rosenhouse 1984:297 has noted daḥḥag, ydaḥḥeǧ for the tribe of the Lhēb and compares it with a question mark to √ḥdq as in MSA ḥadaqa ‘to look, glance’. In points 76 and 90, daḥḥak and daḥḥag probably are loans from a Bedouin dialect.

416

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 34

41 44 45

65

49

50

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

63

69

68

71

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

42

46

56

58

40 43

26

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

87 90

92

93

Jordan 95

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

195

o go down, descend, dismount 36

nizil wwal hawwad

0

195

3.6.5 To go down, descend, dismount

5

10 km

Lexicon

195 3.6.5 To Go Down, Descend, Dismount The subject is discussed in WAD III:56 with evidence for hawwad in Palestinian Arabic, for example, Ramallah. The form is mainly used in Bedouin or rural Arabic (Bauer 1957:158-l).10 There is a plausible semantic shift from ‘to go slowly’ as in CA to ‘to go down’. When going down a (steep) slope or stairs one normally goes slowly. It could also be contaminated with hawā “to go down” as attested in Wahrmund II:1138 in hawā fil-biʔr “in den 10   A GK thinks that hawwad is known all over the area, but it is rural and partly obsolete.

417 Brunnen hinabsteigen”. As for ḥawwal, it is used in rural and Bedouin dialects. There is no etymology in WAD. The meaning is not classical but is easily explained through the attested ‘to change the direction’. In a recording from Žūlis (19), ḥawwalu ʕindu means ‘they stopped at his place’. The same applies in a text in Blanc 1953 for ir-Rāmi (56): lamman ḥawwal fi rRāmi “when he stopped in ir-Rāmi”. This meaning is not to be found in Elihay 2004, but in Seeger WB online 194 “absteigen (vom Pferd)” = “to dismount (from a horse)”. Cf. also in Syrian Arabic the invitation ḥawwlu! ‘come in!’ originally meaning ‘dismount!’.

418

N

Lexicon

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 21

20

8 1 2

Akko

28

17 18

26

16

13 38 39

29 30

12

56 58

40 43

Haifa

59

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

31

M

W

49

53

60

65

63

Sea of Galilee

69

68

ariyya

76 80

71

Nazareth

82

78

73

Israel

85

e

95

93

87 89

91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

196

e talks too much, he`s a chatterb biq bi' r big biq ir bik ir bigargir

biq i bi'arwi bibarbir birbari bir i

bul'u

ni anak li© o

ki kt r

bik aki r ( aki i a i a i kwa 0

196

3.6.6 He talks too much, he’s a chatterbox

5

10 km

Lexicon

196 3.6.6 He Talks Too Much, He’s a Chatterbox The concept ‘chatterbox’ is often expressed by a verbal or nominal phrase. The same forms as in Syria (SA map 365) are to be found. As with other human defects the concept attracts synonyms as do ‘stingy’, ‘stupid’ or ‘fat’ and, often, more than one form was indicated by the informants. – One group of designations is formed with √qrr or √grr also in sedentary dialects. It can be reduplicated or enlarged as in bigargir, biqarwiš. In Barthélemy 1935– 1969:738, garr is “bavarder, jacasser, parler beaucoup et futilement”, but also “ronronner (chat)”. It is obviously an onomatopoetic form. Cf. also xarr = ‘to gurgle’. bibarbir is reminiscent of the Greek βάρβαρος ‘babbler’. biṯarṯir is found in Syria in neighbouring Ḥōrān and Ǧabal id-Drūz and also in Ramallah (Seeger WB online 89).

419 – birġi normally means ‘he lathers, foams’. – laʔaš, bulʔuš is not attested in the meaning of ‘to chatter’ in Palestinian Arabic, but it is in Syria. It is not negative in the dialect of Aleppo “parler, causer” (Barthélemy 1935–1969:761). – ṭigīg ḥanak Bedouin Ǧawāmīs (53) is a ‘jaw-clicker’. Cf. Elihay 2004:596-r ʕam-minṭoqq ḥanak “We’re chatting / We’re having a good natter / we’re jawing away < we’re jaw-clicking >”. – bāliʕ rādyo ‘he has swallowed a radio’ is also attested in Seeger WB online 62 “ständig quasselnd, ununterbrochen schwätzend”. – For ‘he talks too much’, one smybol is used for different pronunciations as in the G dialect of Dabbūrye (82) yiḥči ktīr (sic!) or in sedentary dialects yiḥki ktīr.

420

N

Isoglosses and Dialect Groups

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

26 56

57

40 43

Haifa

46

42

41 44

62

61

47 48

31 32

36 37

60

65

49 66 67

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

197

ariyya

55

75

73

Sea of Galilee

69

68

71

64

63

104

Jenin

Salient phonological isoglosses sedentary dialects f = q f = k baddu hunni ba 0

197

4.1 Salient phonological isoglosses sedentary dialects

5

10 km

4 Isoglosses and Dialect Groups Defining the dialects of the area is, at first glance, not so easy. Cf. already Palva 1966:24: “Thus the situation concerning the dialect of the Moslem and Christian population of Galilee is obscure … Nowhere in LGal. less than two varieties were registered, sometimes even in one person’s speech”. What is easy is a classification of the Bedouin dialects of the area vs. the sedentary dialects. The dialects of the Carmel Coast, namely Fredīs and Ǧisr iz-Zarga are quite neatly defined by Jastrow 2009. This is also true for the Muṯallaṯ dialects. The problem is that the so-called “macro-discriminants” of the Arabic dialects defined by Taine-Cheikh 2000 and Palva 1966:23 are not so easily applicable due to their sociolinguistic distribution, as for example, in Nazareth where in the sample in Havelova 2000a:143 four Muslim men used /ḳ/ for Qāf, ten Muslim women /ḳ/ and three of them /ʔ/. Out of the nineteen Christians the majority of the men pronounced /ḳ/, the women /ʔ/. See also the dialect of Kufir Kanna where

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/9789004411395_005

Muslim and Christian men use /g/, younger Christian women /ʔ/, or ʕArrābi where men use /q/ and women /ʔ/. To a certain extent this also applies to interdentals. Defining dialect groups by combining all isoglosses on a map turned out to be quite impossible. Alone, the map with all phonological features turned out to be a complete mess, cf. Behnstedt-Woidich 2005:106, therefore only some important phonological features are dealt with on maps 191 and 192. 197–199 4.1–4.3 Isoglosses Map 192 deals only with four features and map 193 with four morphological isoglosses. Map 194, featuring more lexical isoglosses, shows how messy the isogloss method can be.

422

N

ISOGLOSSES AND DIALECT GROUPS

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

17 18

28

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

30

9 10

23 24

12

Haifa 34

35

51 52 53

72

65

49 66 67

50

76 80

78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

198

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

Nazareth

93

64

63

69

68

75

73

60 62

61

54 71

57

41 44 45 47 48

31 33 32

56 59

42

46

36 37

26

58

40 43

21

20

8

104

Jenin

Salient morphological features: maps 82, 90, 92, 110, 126, 133, 135

0

198

4.2 Salient morphological isoglosses sedentary dialects

5

10 km

423

ISOGLOSSES AND DIALECT GROUPS

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa 34

41 44 45

51 52 53

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

60 62

61

47 48

31 33 32 35

59

42

46

36 37

57

58

40 43

25 26

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

199

Salient lexical isoglosses sedentary dialects: maps 162, 169, 173, 179, 182, 188, 193

0

199

4.3 Salient lexical isoglosses sedentary dialects

5

10 km

424

N

DIALECT GROUPS

Lebanon

Mediterranean Sea

22

6 7

8

/'/ /q/ 9

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

13 38 39

29 30

WG Haifa

43

10 24

12

26 56

57

60

42

CG

41

44

62

61

65

49 66 67

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

73

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

99

93

94 97 98 100 101

95

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103 102

200

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

71

63

69

68

SD

bidd

23

47

31

badd

NG

40

46

36 37

11

21

20

104

Dialect groups: sedentary dialects NG northern group incl. Druze dialects CG central group western group WG southern Druze dialects SD G dialects M dialects

Jenin

Nazareth and surroundings dialects of the Carmel coast Jewish dialects Frad s (extinct) Kab b r r iz-zarqa 0

200 4.4

The sedentary dialect groups

5

10 km

DIALECT GROUPS

200

4.4 The Sedentary Dialect Groups

– The northern Galilean and Druze dialects: the /q/ – /ʔ/ isogloss separates the Druze dialects from the dialects of the Christians and Muslims (dotted line). Talmon 2002:70 calls this the “Lebanese dialectal belt” and quotes two isoglosses “the /ʔ/ reflex of q and for ‘nose’ munxār/minxār … used by Muslims and Christians of the border area, as well as in Ṣafad”. But the munxār/ minxār-isogloss reaches far into the west and the three denominations quoted above have more in common and salient features are hunni ‘they’ (hunni identical with the pink area) defining the northern group quite well. Then there is baddi in the north vs. biddi elsewhere (red line), the ending of verbs i-type 3rd p. sg. f. perfect as in nizlit vs. nizlat, iǧit vs. iǧat (blue line). Other important isoglosses separating the northern and the western group from the central group are the ʔiǧa – ʔaǧa isogloss and the kōl – kul isogloss separating the north from the rest. Cf. also the negated forms of the pronominal suffixes, -hinš, -hunš in the north vs. central, western and southern forms of the type -hinniš. – The central group can be subdivided in a northern part with /ʔ/ as a reflex of *q and a southern one with /q/ (dotted black line). Another salient phonological feature is /ḏ̣/ for *ḏ in hāḏ̣a vs. hāḏa ~ hāda in the north and in the west. ‘There’ is (i)hnāk vs. hunāk in the north and the west. An important lexical isogloss which separates the centre from the north and the west is xušm ‘nose’ vs. munxāṛ. Talmon 2002:70f. called this area “an alleged corridor among the Acre-Ṣafad road” and quotes the munxāṛ–xušum isogloss. “However, the distribution in the same surface cell of the /ʔ/ reflex of q hints at a different interpretation of its relations with its surroundings, namely that it creates a corridor along the Acre-Ṣafad main road. More details about other items are still needed to establish safer grounds”. – The western group is defined by /ʔ/ as a reflex of *q. One morphological feature of this western group is, according to AGK-1:76, niḥna ‘we’ (“Die ländliche Bevölkerung in der Umgebung von Haifa verwendet bis heute die Form niḥna”). This form, however, is attested only in Akko and in Dālyit il-Karmil (73, see below) and obviously as a loan in Bedouin dialects. Within this group Haifa has a special position with features such as dissimilation of *ʔ – ʔ > h – ʔ as in huʔmur! ‘order!’ (AGK1:49), the pattern ʔaCCaC vs. ʔiCCaC. Talmon 2002:70 called this “a homogeneous linguistic area of the northern coast” and besides /ʔ/ mentioned “the prevalent plosive reflexes of the interdental triad”.

425 – The southern Druze dialects of ʕIsifya (71) and Dālyit ilKarmil (73) are more or less identical with the northern ones and share with them such features as /q/, interdentals and pausal diphthongisation as in ʔismay ‘my name’ and yinhizmaw ‘they flee’. Dālyit il-Karmil has /i/, /u/ in the prefix of the 1st p. imperfect or no prefix vowel. Cf. map 130 and Blanc 35 “bquwm, bnām, bsaddiq, as in some Lebanese dialects”. Dālyit ilKarmil has -it as an ending for the 3rd. p. sg. f. perfect for all verb classes and the pronoun niḥna ‘we’ (also in Blanc 1953:106), whereas ʕIsifya has -it only attested for the i-type of verb I, nisit and ižit, iḥna. Dālyit il-Karmil (73) therefore must be considered as a subdialect of its own. Cf. also forms such as lābsíto.1 – The G dialects have as main features, of course, /g/ for Qāf, /č/ for *k, according to the environment, interdentals, mostly /ǧ/ for Ǧīm and distinguish between m. and f. in the plural of pronouns and verb forms. – For the M dialects, see Jastrow 2009:166–175. – For the dialects of the Carmel Coast, see Jastrow 2004. One feature has led him to consider the dialect of Fredīs different from the M dialects, namely a new formation of the feminine pl. form of the hollow verb, i.e., kālin ‘they (f.) said’ vs. kalin (kulin) in the M dialects. As for Ǧisr iz-Zarga, two salient features are /g/ for Qāf and the verb forms as in the southern Bedouin dialects of the type gālum – ygūlum. Cf. also Belinkov 2014. – As for ʕĒn il-Ḥōḏ̣, the dialect has /k/ for Qāf and in the recordings and questionnaire there are a few instances of /č/ such as čān ‘he was’ and ʔifčaḥ ‘limping’. It distinguishes between m. and f. in pronouns: ʔintu – ʔintin, hummi – hinni, but no relevant verb forms are attested for a further classification. There was only one person interviewed and recorded. He used halkēt for ‘now’. He declared that he originated from the village. As for Kabābīr, there is too little data for a nearer classification. Cf. commentary map Kāf where an origin of its speakers from central Palestine is mentioned. – For the dialect of Nazareth and surroundings, see Havelova 2000a, 2000b and Zuʕbi 2005a and 2005b. One of the salient features besides /ḳ/ for Qāf, according to gender are special pausal forms, no interdentals in Nazareth, oscillation between interdentals and plosives in the surroundings.

1  As for the rural dialects of the Carmel region in von Mülinen’s time (beginning of last century), they were quite different from the town dialects of Haifa. There was a northern group and a southern group. See AGK-4 “Sprachliche Vorbemerkungen”.

426 – The extinct Jewish dialect of Ṣafad has as salient features /ʔ/ for Qāf, no interdentals, the pronoun hinnen ‘they (c.)’ as in Syrian dialects. Cf. AGK-3:148 “The dialect of Ṣafad is the most distinct of the four Jewish dialects in Galilee, and has incorporated some Syrian rather than Palestinian features”. The imperfect of verbs initial /ʔ/ shows /ā/: yākul, yāxud. This is a feature it shares with the dialect of Tiberias. The imāla of the feminine ending is -e vs. -i elsewhere (e.g., Jews of Haifa): zalame

DIALECT GROUPS

‘man’, talāte ‘three’. For Tiberias, see AGK-3 where on p. 150 is mentioned “a phenomenon found in North Africa (and also among the Jews of Haifa) … the indefinite expression always used with the singular waḥ il … (‘one’ …), waḥ ilmarra (12, ‘once’)”. This dialect also uses hinnen besides hinne vs. the Jews of Haifa with hinni. Besides ʔissa ‘now’ also hallaʔ is used. As for the Jewish dialect of Bqēʕa (10), it “resembles the Christian dialect of that village” (AGK-3:147).

428

N

DIALECT GROUPS

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

3

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

43

Haifa 34

33

44 45

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

99

94 97 98 100 101

95

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories

103

Jenin

102

201

89

T

92

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

54 71

65

49 66 67

50

51 53

60 62

61

47 48

31

35

59 41

46

36 37

57

58

40 42

27

25 26

104

Bedouin dialects group I -am n -um n only imperf. -

group II

attested

T

not defined

-um / -um -am / -am -am -um / um only perf.-am attested only imperf. -am attested 0

201

4.5 The Bedouin dialect groups

5

10 km

DIALECT GROUPS

201

4.5 The Bedouin Dialect Groups

There is a classification of the dialects in Rosenhouse 1984:58 where she distinguishes between two groups. Group I uses for 2nd f. sg. and 2nd, 3rd m. pl. persons of the imperfect conjugation the end-morphemes -īn, -ūn. Group II has in these cases -i, -um, -am respectively. Some tribes, however, mix these two types of end-morphemes, which may be explained by influences of one group on another, probably due to imitation of stronger and more prestigious tribes which have the ‘other’ feature, intermarriages, which bring in women with speech habits that are different from those of their husbands, etc., … A morpholexical feature that seems to divide between tribes (in a different grouping than the above two features) is the use of bī vs. bō2 for the expression ‘there is’. See map 120 with a concentration of bū in group I.

2  With dot underneath /ō/. P.c. J. Rosenhouse: /o/ or /u/ seem to be allophones of one group.

429 As for the main criterion, namely the perfect and imperfect endings, see map 125 and commentary. Another criterion for a classification is the syllable structure in measure I verbs: kitbat vs. ktibat. For the Lhēb, Umm il- Ġanam, Wādi l-Ḥammām, ʕArāmša, as-Sawāʕid and iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda (Ḥǧērāt), the type kitbat is attested, for Šibli ktibat as in all Syrian Bedouin dialects. Rosenhouse 1984:86 mentions the latter with skanat “she lived”, xbazat “she made bread”, ktabum “they wrote”. But since she found only a few examples she thinks that the feature “is dying out due to contact with non-Bed. societies”. The type kitbat is also to be found in Iraqi gilit-dialects (Ingham 1982:3), therefore this type in our area is not necessarily a contamination of an original *ktibat with sedentary katbat > kitbat.3 On the map we distinguish between a southern and a northern group following the criteria which Rosenhouse has established supra. For comparison we also add data from Ǧisr iz-Zarga. 3  Examples collected amongst the ʕArāmša are kitab/kitbat, libas/ libsat, xubaz/xubzat, Sawāʕid libas/libsat, xibaz/xibzat ~ xubaz/ xubzat, kimaš /kimšat, gibaḏ̣/gibḏ̣at, čibaṛ / čibrat, šibaʕ / šibʕat, sikan/siknat, giʕad/giʕdat, ḏ̣iḥak/ḏ̣iḥkat.

430

N

DIALECTOMETRY

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa

41 44

65

49

34

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

71

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

42

46

57

58

40 43

25 26

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

202

Identity test with M coefficient, MINMWMAX algorithm, point of reference no. 1 0.8053 0.7465 0.6877 0.6265 0.5655 0.5045

.8642 .8053 0.7465 0.6877 0.6265 0.5655

202 4.6.1 Identity test: phonetics and phonology with M coefficient

0

5

10 km

431

DIALECTOMETRY

4.6

Dialectometrical Approach to the Dialects of the Area: Identity Tests

The identity of different dialects can be calculated by multiple dialectometrical tests; see Goebl 2010b (in English), Behnstedt-Woidich 2005:108ff. as for Arabic dialects. For our area we have chosen an identity test with point no. 1 as a point of reference. On a digital atlas, as a matter of fact, any point of investigation can be clicked on as a point of reference and then be compared to other points in the area. For our calculations a binary matrix was established with more than 500 entries and the calculations were first made with the simple matching coefficient using Goebl’s MINMWMAX algorithm for the representation on the maps, for which see Goebl 1984:94. Of our ninety-four points of investigation only seventyeight are represented, since for the Bedouin dialects east of Haifa not enough data are available. Together with two more Bedouin points in the north, this means that eleven points are disregarded. In a way, this is not so tragic since Bedouin dialects are very close to each other and very distant from sedentary dialects, therefore the lack of some villages where a Bedouin dialect is spoken does not really change the picture of our dialectal landscape. Also some other points could not be considered, for example, point 66, for which only in Palva 1966 are data in a short text to be found. The dialects of the Muṯallaṯ area are also not represented on the map because of lack of data. This area which is not a part of Galilee has been investigated only by Jastrow with a questionnaire of his own focussing on morphology. We have not represented the data on a ‘honeycomb map’ (cf. Goebl 2010b:447–448) but on a map with coloured circles as to be found in Viereck 2010:98. The similarity between point of investigation (dialect) j and point (dialect) k is calculated with the simple matching coefficient4 as follows: a11 = the number of elements where both dialect j and k have “+” (coidentity) a10 = the number of elements where dialect j has “+”, dialect k “-” a01 = the number of elements where dialect j has “-”, dialect k “+” a00 = the number of elements where both dialects j and k have “-” (codifference). 4  Called “relativer Identitätswert” (RIW, relative identity value = RIV) in Goebl 1984:75.

The similarity is calculated as follows: s (j,k) = (a00 + a11) / (a01 + a10 + a00 + a11) = (a00 + a11) / n, “n” being the number of features compared. We have first calculated the phonological and phonetic similarity of the dialects with 152 features. “The algorithm MINMWMAX divides by three the range of the measurement scores between the minimal value (MIN) and the arithmectic mean (MW), or, alternatively, between the maximal value (MAX)” (Goebl 2010b:442). In our case, the arithmetic mean is 0.6877, the maximal value is 0.8642 and the minimal value is 0.5045. This gives us the following intervals: 0.5045–0.5655 0.5655–0.6265 0.6265–0.6877 0.6877–0.7465 0.7465–0.8053 0.8053–0.8642 Values above the arithmetic mean are represented by warm colours from yellow to red, those below it by cold colours from light blue to dark blue. As for the tonal range, cf. Goebl 1984:92. As to be expected, the lowest values are those of the Bedouin dialects. Also the G, M and C dialects can easily be recognised, but the rest of the dialects as to phonetics and phonology are not really discernible. This has partly to do with the fact that every feature was given the same weight. If one dialect uses ʕind ‘at’ and another dialect ʕand, this is treated as if one dialect has /q/ and the other one /ʔ/. For a discussion on giving equal weight to each feature, see Goebl 1982:19. In some few cases, the values may be too high due to the fact that the number of features compared was too low, for example, for point 10 one would expect a lower value, this being a NG (northern Galilean) dialect. For this point, only seventy-seven out of 152 features were available for the calculations. This kind of distortion is “bothersome, and the RIV values are in general or tendentially too high” (p.c. H. Goebl, translated into English). It has also to be kept in mind that for several localities different pronunciations had to be taken into consideration. The second test, with the Jaccard similarity coefficient for which compare for Arabic Behnstedt-Woidich 2005:131 in a way shows the same results. The arithmetic mean is 31.14, the highest value 40.95, the lowest 14.84, which gives us the following intervals:

432

DIALECTOMETRY

37.68–40.95 34.41–37.68 31.14–34.41 25.71–31.14 20.28–25.16 14.84–20.28 As to be expected, the Bedouin dialects have the lowest values and the C, G and M dialects are more or less well to be recognised. Again some points have too high values.5 A third test performed with the Ochiai similarity coefficient is based on the formula sOjk = a : √(a + b) (a + c) where “a” is the number of + +, b = + -, c = - +. The codifference - - is not taken into consideration. Here again we can only clearly recognise the B, C and M dialects due to the low values in comparison with our point of reference. 5  “The Jaccard similarity index (sometimes called the Jaccard similarity coefficient) compares members for two sets to see which members are shared and which are distinct. It’s a measure of similarity for the two sets of data, with a range from 0% to 100%. The higher the percentage, the more similar the two populations. Although it’s easy to interpret, it is extremely sensitive to small samples sizes and may give erroneous results, especially with very small samples or data sets with missing observations. http://www.statisticshowto .com/jaccard-index”.

Due to the erratic distribution of Bedouin dialects, such an impressive graduation of dialect identities or a dialect continuum as on the ALF map in Goebl 2010b – left are not discernible on this map. A fourth test on morphology only shows a clear picture for the Bedouin dialects with the lowest values. The C and M dialects are more or less recognisable, but as for the rest of the dialects the picture is somewhat diffuse. As stated above, with less data the RIV is tendentially too high. For instance, Ṣafad has a very high value of 0.9073 with only 205 out of 244 features attested which were to be compared. Some of the M dialects, too, have too high values: point 86 with 0.7761 with 210 features out of 244, point 87 with 0.7846 with only 195 features, etc. Finally, a combination of the two tests on phonology and morphology with the M coefficient and with ten intervals shows us a slightly modified picture, but again only the C, M and B dialects are clearly distinguishable. The Western sedentary Galilean group crystallises out with rather high values. Since for many points of investigation, lexicon was not elicited and for dialectometrical calculations too many zeroes are to be found in the matrix, we omit a corresponding map.

434

N

DIALECTOMETRY

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44 47 48

65

49

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

72

60 62

61

34

71

57

58

40 43

25 26

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

203

Identity test with Jaccard coefficient, MINMWMAX algorithm, point of reference no. 1 37.6 34.4 31.1 25.7 20.2 14.8

40.95 37.68 34.41 31.14 25.21 20.28

203 4.6.2 Identity test: phonetics and phonology with Jaccard similarity coefficient

0

5

10 km

435

DIALECTOMETRY

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa

41 44

65

49

34

72

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

71

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

42

46

57

58

40 43

25 26

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

204

Identity test with Ochiai similarity coefficient, MINMWMAX algorithm, point of reference no. 1 0.8335 0.7933 0.7531 0.7129 0.6727

.8737 .8335 0.7933 0.7531 .7291

0.6140 0.5553 0.4966 0.4379 0.3800

.6727 0.6140 0.5553 0.4966 0.4379

204 4.6.3 Identity test: phonetics and phonology with Ochiai similarity coefficient

0

5

10 km

436

N

DIALECTOMETRY

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa

46 31

36

59

42

41 44 47 48

65

49

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of Galilee ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

72

60 62

61

34

71

57

58

40 43

25 26

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

205

Identity test morphology with simple matching coefficient, MINMWMAX algorithm 0.8645 0.8185 0.7725 0.6938 0.6151 0.5364

.9107 .8645 0.8185 .7725 0.6938 0.6151

205 4.6.4 Identity test: morphology

0

5

10 km

437

DIALECTOMETRY

N

5

Mediterranean Sea

Lebanon

4

22

6 7

1 2

Akko

28

17 18

14 15 19

16

11 13 38 39

29 30

21

20

8 9 10

23 24

12

56

Haifa

41 44

65

49

34

72

Galilee

76 80

Nazareth 78

82 79

Israel

85 86

e

89

92

95

93

Sea of ariyya

55

75

73

64

63

69

68

71

60 62

61

47 48

31

36

59

42

46

57

58

40 43

25 26

83 84

87

88

90 91

Jordan

96

Palestinian Territories Jenin

206

Identity test phonology, morphology with simple matching coefficient, MINMWMAX algorithm 0.8354 0.8091 0.7828 0.7565 0.7301

.8617 .8354 0.8091 0.7828 .7565

0.6896 0.6486 0.6078 0.5670 0.5260

206 4.6.5 Identity tests: synthesis phonology and morphology

.7301 0.6896 0.6486 0.6078 0.5670

0

5

10 km

Appendices Map 063: 1.3.3 Ǧīm – Fassūṭa (6): two texts told by a male speaker born in 1928: /ǧ/. Interview with second male speaker (middle-aged or older): /ž/. A text told by a third informant shows another problematic point of the field work as it was conducted in the area. The informant was born in the pre-1948 Christian village of Iqriṯ: “located 25 kilometres (16 miles) northeast of Acre” (Wikipedia). – Bqēʕa (10): one Druze speaker born in 1933 in recording uses /ǧ/ but more frequently /ž/. Second speaker, seventy-seven years old uses /ž/. Female informant (no age indicated) uses /ž/. Male speaker born in 1951 uses /ž/. Three more male speakers (no age indicated) use /ž/. – Kisra (11): Druze born in 1943: /ž/, second Druze speaker born in 1939 also /ž/; third male speaker born in 1898, no religion indicated; text transcribed by student with /ǧ/, speaker in reality uses /ž/. – Naḥef (12): three middle-aged male speakers use /ž/; a fourth speaker uses /ǧ/ ~ /ž/; interview with fifth speaker (fifty years old): /ž/. – Dēr il-Asad (13): younger informants (questionnaire) use /ž/, older people use /ǧ/. – Yanūḥ (14): several male middle-aged Druze speakers: /ž/; one male speaker: /ǧ/, obviously of Bedouin origin since in one word uses /g/: gāʕid ‘staying’. Will be disregarded. – Žaṯṯ (15): unidentified Druze in transcribed text has /ǧ/, but speaker pronounced /ž/ on recording. Texts recorded by Blanc 1953:200–203 have /ǧ/. But since Blanc in his transcriptions uses /ǧ/ for both /ǧ/ and /ž/, the texts are not helpful. Interview with middle-aged informant has /ž/. – Yirka (16): Recording of older male: mostly uses /ǧ/, rarely /ž/; recording of female born in 1975: /ž/. Recording of male Druze born in 1931: /ž/. Fourth recording, text sung by elderly man: /ǧ/. Fifth recording, older male: /ǧ/. Sixth recording, older male: /ǧ/ ~ /ž/. Seventh recording, male Druze: recording /ž/, transcription /ǧ/! Eighth text told by three elderly Druze: /ǧ/. Recording not available. Ninth recording of unnamed female: /ž/. Tenth recording of female: /ž/. Eleventh recording of older male Druze: /ž/. – Abu Snān (17): interview with three female speakers conducted by B. (informants twenty to thirty years old): /ž/; text told by male speaker born in 1912: /ž/; text told by female speaker born in 1945: /ž/, text with male speaker born in 1946: /ž/, Blanc 1953:263ff. Male speaker born in 1897 has /ǧ/. But Blanc 1953:58 is rather vague: “(b) The phoneme ǧ. It has two main allophones varying freely for many speakers: a pre-palatal voiced spirant [j] and the homorganic affricate [ǧ]: some speakers (see Text No. 7) use the latter exclusively”.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2019 | doi:10.1163/9789004411395_006

– Žūlis (19): interview with middle-aged male informant /ǧ/ ~ /ž/, the latter is more frequent. Recording of Druze born in 1911: /ǧ/. Recording of male born in 1912, transcribed text has /ǧ/, speaker uses /ž/! Two male Druze born in 1926 and 1943: /ž/. Eighty-five-year-old male: /ž/. – Ḥurfēš (20): interview with middle-aged male informant: /ž/. Blanc’s texts cannot be used since he does not distinguish between /ǧ/ and /ž/ and only transcribes /ǧ/. Recordings of female speaker born in 1925: /ǧ/. Recording of second female speaker (no age indicated): /ž/.1 Third female speaker born in 1951: /ž/. Male born in 1928: /ž/.2 – iž-Žišš (21): texts in Christie 1901 have /ǧ/, but on p. 91 he declares that it sounds like the French /j/. In all the recordings, /ž/.3 – Bēt Žann (23): seven Druze speakers born in 1898, 1906, 1907 and 1909; two female Druze born in 1912 and 1932. In the texts of five of them, /ǧ/ is transcribed. Speaker born in 1898, however, uses /ǧ/ ~ /ž/, speaker born in 1906 /ž/, speaker born in 1907 /ž/, speaker born in 1909 /ž/, speaker born in 1912 /ž/ and speaker born in 1932 /ǧ/ ~ /ž/. – Sažūr (24): retired school teacher uses /ž/, one instance of /ǧ/ in the place name ‘Saǧūr’. All other five speakers, two born in 1934, one without indication of age, one older female: /ž/; transcription recording of male born in 1943 has /ǧ/, but speaker uses /ž/. – ʕAkbara (26): interview with middle-aged male: nine instances of /ǧ/, two of /ž/: twice ʔižer ‘foot, leg’. Second interview with middle-aged female: thirty instances of /ž/. Recording of Muslim born 1931: /ž/.4 Recording of male from Qadīṯa born in 1913: /ž/. For Qadīṯa, see index of points of investigation. Recording of female born in 1965: /ž/. Recording of male born in 1940: /ž/. – Haifa (36): cf. AGK-1:51, according to whom /ǧ/ was brought into the town by rural immigrants during the first half of last century. /ǧ/ is still used in the eastern quarter of Haifa Ḥallīṣa populated by a mixture of refugees from the southern Carmel and immigrants from other areas such as Nablus who arrived in 1930. – Mažd li-Krūm (39): interview conducted by B. with three males twenty, twenty-two, twenty-three, and sixty-five-yearold uncle: /ž/. Recording of Muslim born in 1930, barely any formal education, popular poet: mainly /ǧ/, some instances of /ž/. Herdsman born in 1932: /ǧ/, /ž/ only before consonants 1  Transcription has /ǧ/! 2  Transcription has /ǧ/! 3  One text transcribes /ǧ/, but speaker uses /ž/! 4  Transcription has /ǧ/!

440 such as in Mažd li-Krūm, iž-žmāl ‘the camels’. Recording of older farmer: /ž/. Recording of middle-aged female: /ž/. Recording of farmer born in 1924: mainly /ǧ/, several instances of /ž/. – Kōkab Abu l-Hēža (44) interview conducted by B.: /ž/. Two recordings of males both born in 1934: /ž/. Third recording of male born in 1936 transcribed with /ǧ/, but speaker uses /ž/! Three recordings of Muslim born in 1918: /ž/. Recording of male in his thirties: /ž/. Recording of older female: /ž/. – Kufir Manda (47): male speaker born in 1935: /ǧ/; male speaker born in 1918: /ž/; male speaker born in 1984: /ž/; Palva 1966:114ff. /ž/. – Iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda (48): speaker originally from Kufir Manda: in transcription of recording only /ž/, but in reality uses /ǧ/. Second speaker born in 1925 from iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda, transcription /ž/, in reality uses /ǧ/. – Rummāni (49): male speaker born in 1916: /ǧ/, other male speaker (age unknown): /ǧ/; two male speakers born in 1936 and 1938, according to Palva 1966: /ž/. Interview with older male speaker /ǧ/; another older informant: /ž/. – Bīr il-Maksūr (50, Bedouin village): transcription of text /ž/. Recording not available. Doubtful. – Bēt Zarazīr (54) Ǧawāmīs Bedouin: only transcribed text available with /ž/. Doubtful. – Li-ʕzēr (55): data only from Palva 1966:124ff.: /ž/. – ir-Rāmi (56): interview with couple born in 1920: /ž/; interview conducted by B. with young female Christian (twenty or so years old): /ž/. Recording of older Muslima, born and raised in now abandoned Kufr ʕNān, having spent time in several towns and countries, including seven months in Lebanon in 1948, then seven months in Mažd li-Krūm in 1948, then Jenin, went from Jenin to Jordan, then to Darʕa/Syria, followed by forty-five years in Lebanon, then in Rāmi; however, can hardly be considered a representative speaker of the Rāmi dialect. Christian born in 1924: /ž/. Druze (Christie): /ǧ/, Christian /ǧ/ (Christie). Two Druze informants, born in 1930, recorded 1952, Blanc 1953:341ff.: /ǧ/. But what Blanc means by /ǧ/ is far from being clear, cf. above. Druze speaker born in 1977: /ǧ/; Druze born in 1940: /ǧ/ ~ /ž/. Male Christian speaker born in 1931 recorded and tranbscribed by AGK: /ž/. Older Christian informant (recorded by grandson): /ǧ/. Christian born in 1956: /ž/. Very old Christian woman: /ǧ/ ~ /ž/. – ʕĒn il-Asad (57): illiterate speaker born in 1922, transcription of recording /ǧ/, in reality used /ž/. Second speaker, about thirty years old: /ž/. One recording of illiterate Muslim born in 1922, second recording of thirty-year-old male teacher, both: /ž/. On YouTube, in his speech in MSA an official from the village, on the occasion of the inauguration of the tomb of local saint, uses /ž/. – Mġār (60): of the twenty informants of different ages, sex and religion only one old Druze farmer used: /ǧ/.

Appendices – ʕArrābi (61): interview with male student /ž/. Recording of male born in 1972: /ž/. Recording of boy born in 1988: transcription by Amal Zuʕbi: /ǧ/, but speaker uses /ž/. Recording of Muslim born in 1924, who lives in Ždayydi: /ž/. Recording of Muslima born in 1931: /ž/. Seventy-five-year-old Muslima: transcription of recording: /ž/, while she uses /ǧ/! Muslima born in 1906: /ž/; Muslim born in 1941: /ž/. – Dēr Ḥanna (62): interview conducted by student /ǧ/, corrected by NN to /ž/. Recording not available. Second interview conducted by DZ with female Christian: /ž/. Recording of Muslim born in 1937: /ž/. Older Christian woman: transcription /ǧ/, in reality uses /ž/. Recording of unnamed male: /ž/. Recordings of Muslim born in 1946: /ž/. – Kufir Kanna (68) female speaker born in 1940: /ž/, using /g/ for Qāf. Christian farmer born in 1920: /ǧ/, /g/ for Qāf. Male speaker, equally using /g/ for Qāf: /ǧ/, female Christian born in 1950: /ž/, /ʔ/ for Qāf. Interview conducted with middleaged male speaker: /ž/, /g/ for Qāf. Interview with female speaker (younger to middle-aged): /ž/, Qāf /ʔ/. Third interview with middle-aged Christian speaker /ž/, Qāf /q/. – Ṭabariyya (70): Jewish speaker born in 1923 moved to Nazareth in 1945: /ž/. Second speaker born in 1913: /ž/. For more details, see AGK-2. – ʕIsifya (71): female informant born in 1964: /ǧ/ ~ /ž/. Male speaker born in 1934 recorded and transcribed by AGK: /ž/. Male speaker born in 1919: /ž/. Male speaker born in 1923: /ž/. Speaker born in 1907, recorded 1952 by Blanc 1953:257ff. /ǧ/. But see above as for the problematic transcription of Blanc. Female speaker born in 1933: /ž/. Female speaker born in 1931: /ž/. Male speaker (no age indicated): /ž/. Male speaker born in 1931, recorded and transcribed by AGK: /ž/. Forty-year-old female Druze /ž/. Male speaker born in 1930 /ž/. Interview with sixty-five-year-old male informant: /ž/. – Dālyit i-Karmil (73) interview with seventy-year-old male informant: /ž/. Male speaker born in 1882 interviewed by Blanc 1952: “every j, without exception, is an affricate [dj], never the voiced equivalent of [š]” (Blanc 1953:325). Male informant born in 1969: /ǧ/. Male informant (no age indicated), originally from the village, now married in ʕIsifya: /ǧ/. Male informant born in 1946: /ž/. Male informant born in 1960: /ǧ/. Unnamed woman born in 1944: /ž/. Male informant born in 1920: /ž/. Female informant (no age indicated): /ž/. – ir-Rēni (76): four texts with four different speakers – one male, three females – transcribed by students have /ǧ/, but speakers in reality use /ž/ as with the other five informants from this place. – Nazareth (77): interview with female informant born in 1925: /ž/. Interview with male informant born in 1984: /ž/. Female informant born in 1921 in Dabbūrye, in Nazareth since 1940: /ž/. Male informant born in 1911, refugee: /ž/. Female informant born in 1906: /ž/. Christian (no age indicated): /ǧ/.

appendices Muslim born in 1924: /ž/. Muslim teacher of Nazareth born in 1930, “the unspecified rural, non-Nazarene origin of this speaker is expressed in his occasional use of /č/, hunne and -hum, and aʕṭa” (commentary on text). Uses /ǧ/. Muslim housewife born in 1920: /ž/. Christian informant, moved from Kufir Kanna to Nazareth when young, lived in Nazareth orphanage”: /ž/. Muslim teacher (no age indicated): /ž/; Muslim worker born in 1930: /ž/; female Roman Catholic speaker (no age indicated): /ǧ/; Greek Catholic female (no age indicated): /ž/; Greek Orthodox female born in 1939: /ž/; female Roman Catholic worker: /ž/; Female Greek Orthodox born in 1933: /ž/. Three interviews with younger females all /ž/. A. Havelova 2000a:142 only says: “In the Palestinian area /ž/ occurs in most rural dialects in Galilee, and in the rest of Palestine only in urban dialects”. In their dissertation and thesis, Zuʕbi 2005a, 2005b and Havelova 2000b both have /ž/. /ǧ/ in Nazareth is found only among speakers originating from Ṣaffūri.5 – Iksāl (79): text told by female speaker (born in Dabbūrye in 1942, in Iksāl since 1957) has /ž/. Other informants all have /ǧ/. Nevo 2006:28 has /ǧ/, “sporadically … the value of voiced velar stop g in the following isolated instances: ygīb ‘he brings’, gīna ‘we came’, gāyi ‘having come (f.sg.)’, ʕa-grēna ‘on our feet’ … maglis ‘council’ … tigi ‘she comes’, yigmaʕ ‘he gathers’”. In all those examples, /i/, *i, /ī/, /y/ are present. – Nēn (85): male informant born in 1944: /ǧ/.6 Interview with forty-one-year-old male informant: /ǧ/. Interview with middle-aged male: /ǧ/. – Naʕūra (90): male speaker born in 1930: /ž/. Speaker born in 1918, in Naʕūra since 1953 in Nazareth uses /ǧ/. Interview with younger speaker: /ž/. Second interview with middleaged male: /ž/ ~ /ǧ/, the latter more frequent. – Mqēble (95): interview with older male from Zyadāt family: /ǧ/ more frequent than /ž/. Interview with male born in 1930: /ǧ/ more frequent than /ž/. Interview with old woman: /ǧ/. Interview with male: /ž/ more frequent than /ǧ/. Recording of male born in 1924 from Zyadāt family: mainly /ǧ/, some instances of /ž/. Recording of male born in 1940: /ǧ/. Recording of older female: /ǧ/. Recording of female born in 1929: /ǧ/. Recordings on YouTube: older female Christian, older Muslima, both /ž/. Older man from Zyadāt family: /ǧ/. Muslim family (six persons) making music on YouTube, all: /ž/. Several Christians (different ages, sexes) all: /ž/. It is noteworthy that for neighbouring Jenin, Bergstraesser’s atlas (1915) map 2 indicates /ž/. The map 064 gives a clearer impression of the distribution area of /ž/ simply by omitting the places where variation with /ǧ/ was attested; /ž/ seems to win ground. As for the texts of Bedouin 5  Ṣaffūri, formerly the biggest village in Galilee. 6  Text transcribed by student has /ž/!

441 dialects with recordings no longer available, there is reason to doubt as for /ž/, since the transcriptions of students often show {ǧ} where in reality the recording has /ž/ or vice versa. Normally, in oriental Bedouin Arabic the pronunciation /g/ of Qāf goes with /ǧ/ (or /y/) for Ǧīm. But see also above Kufir Kanna (a ruralite dialect with Bedouin features) with /g/ – /ž/ and Rosenhouse 1984:8: “However, ž is also used in some rural sedentary dialects in the Eastern dialects, e.g., in Lebanon and Israel, where it is also partly acquired by the semi-nomadic Bedouins”. Map 075: 13.8 Progressive assimilation in *malīḥ > mnīḥ – Fassūṭa (6): both mlīḥ and mnīḥ used by same female speaker born in 1928. – Kufir Smēʕ (9): both Christians and Druze informants used mnīḥ. – Dēr il-Asad (13): four older informants: mlīḥ ~ mnīḥ. In a recording of another speaker born in 1925, two instances of mlīḥ and two of mnīḥ. In a recording of unnamed male, there are several instances of mnīḥ. – Yanūḥ (14): recording of first speaker born in 1945: several instances of mnīḥ. Druze male born in 1921: only instances of mnīḥ. Female speaker born in 1947 uses only mnīḥ. – Yirka (16): several male and female Druze speakers of different ages: all mnīḥ. – Abu Snān (17): interview with three female speakers between thirty and forty and one young man, all Christians: mnīḥ. Recording of Christian born in 1912: mnīḥ. Text in Blanc 1953:166ff. one instance of mliyḥa, two of mniyḥ. Recording of male Christian born in 1946: several instances of mnīḥ. – Kufir Yasīf (18): interview with several Muslim informants of different age, all: mnīḥ. Recording of Christian born in 1944: mlīḥ. No instances in recordings of other Muslims and Druze. – Žūlis (19): speaker born in 1912: several instances of mlīḥ in recording. Recording of Druze born in 1911: mnīḥ. – Ḥurfēš (20): recording of female born in 1925: mnīḥ. Recording of female teacher born in 1951: mnīḥ. Recording of male speaker born in 1928: several instances of mnīḥ. Recording of two female speakers born in 1940 and 1950: several instances of mnīḥ. – Žišš (21): interview with several Maronites: older speakers mlīḥ, younger generation mnīḥ. Male speaker born in 1914, no religion indicated: mnīḥ in recording. Recording of Catholic male speaker born in 1923: two instances of mnīḥ, one of mlīḥ. – ir-Riḥaniyyi (22): interview with Circassian7 family (father, sons and daughters): mlīḥ. – Bēt Žann (23): recordings of speaker born in 1907: only mnīḥ. Recording of Druze woman born in 1912: only instances of

7  About 80% of the population, the rest are Arabs from nearby ʕAlma.

442 mnīḥ. Recording of Druze born in 1898: only instances of mnīḥ. Recording of speaker born in 1906: mnīḥ. – Sažūr (24): recordings of male born in 1934: several instances of mlīḥ. Recording of another speaker also born in 1934: several instances of mlīḥ. Recording of female born in 1943: instances of mnīḥ. The question of whether this hints at variation conditioned by sex must be left unanswered. – Ṣafad (25): recordings of old female informant: mnīḥ. – Akko (28): recording of twenty-two-year-old high school student: mnīḥ. Recording of fisherman born in 1946: mnīḥ. Goldsmith, about twenty with twelve years of school: one instance of mlīḥ, two of mnīḥ. – Maker (29): questionnaire with middle-aged male informant: mnīḥ. Recordings of female born in 1936 and of male born in 1896: idem. Recording of male Muslim born in 1937 but living in nearby iž-Ždayyde: twice mlīḥ. – iž-Ždayydi (30): Recording of Muslim born in 1925: several instances of mnīḥ. – Šfaʕamir (31): recordings of male Druze born in 1907, 1927: mlīḥ. Recording of female Druze born in 1950 (elementary school): several instances of mnīḥ. Recording in Palva 1966 with Greek Orthodox butcher, eight classes, born in 1931: two instances of mnīḥ. – Haifa (36): no instance in AGK-1, not asked for in three questionnaires. Recording of female born in 1934: mnīḥ. Recording of female born in 1962: several instances of mnīḥ. Recording of Christian female born in 1946: several instances of mnīḥ. Recording of female Muslim born in 1936: several instances of mnīḥ. – Kababīr (37): recording of fifty-one-year-old male school teacher: several instances of mnīḥ. – Il-Biʕne (38): interview with female school teacher born in 1973. Declares that she uses mnīḥ in the sense of ‘good’, mlīḥ for ‘pretty’. – Mažd li-Krūm (39): recording of herdsman born in 1932: several instances of mnīḥ. – Šaʕeb (40): interview with two young informants (high school education), twenty-two and twenty-nine years old, elderly female informant with grandson: mlīḥ. Recording of female (no age indicated): several instances of mlīḥ. – Saxnīn (41): interview with female Muslim born in 1930: mlīḥ. Two texts recorded by Rosenhouse 1969 with both male and his mother: imlīḥ. Another informant of Rosenhouse 1969: mlāḥ pl. Fourth text in Rosenhouse 1969: imlīḥ ~ əmlīḥ, pl. mlīḥīn. Recording of unnamed male: several instances of imlīḥ, pl. imlāḥ. Recording of school teacher born in 1926: mlīḥ. One speaker born in 1918 in recording has three instances of mnīḥ, but lived in Haifa when still working. Will be disregarded on map. Last speaker born in 1969, ten years of education: pl. mlāḥ. – Kabūl (42): interview with eighty-eight-year-old ḥaǧǧi, main informants were his middle-aged son and his approximately

Appendices forty-year-old neighbour: mlīḥ. Recording of male born in 1937: imlīḥ. – Ṭamra/Dammūn (43): interview mlīḥ. About 60% of the inhabitants are from Dammūn, Rwēs, Miʕār, ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣, ilḤadaṯi/Lake Tiberias. The Bedouin tribes of Mawāsi, Mrīsāt and Ḥilf live in the quarter of Xallt iš-Šrīf. The autochthonous population comprise about 40% of the town. The first interview was conducted with an informant from Dammūn born in 1948. The second interview was conducted with two informants aged twenty and twenty-three, one of them a student. Their family came from Dammūn. They, too, indicated mlīḥ. A recording of a male from Ṭamra supplies no instances. A second recording should not be used since the speaker is from Ḥadaṯi, but lived in Kōkab Abu l-Hēža (44). – Kōkab Abu l-Hēža (44): interview with student and his father: mlīḥ. Recording of male born in 1934: one instance of mlīḥ, three of mnīḥ. Recording of male born in 1936: four instances of mlīḥ. Recording of speaker born in 1918: five instances of mlīḥ. – ʕIbillīn (46): recording of Orthodox male born in 1942, three years of school: five instances of mnīḥ. Interview with male Muslim born in 1940: mlīḥ. – Kufir Manda (47): recording of Muslim born in 1984: twice mlīḥ. Recording of male born in 1918: mlīḥ. Text in Palva 1966: pl. mlāḥ. Recording of elderly male, probably in his sixties: mlīḥ. – iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda (48): male born in 1920, but originally from Kufir Manda: twice mlīḥ. Information should not be used. – Rummāni (49): speaker of Bedouin dialect uses mlīḥ in recording. Text in Palva 1966 told by two farmers born in 1936 and 1938, with five to six years of school: three instances of mlīḥ. – Mišhad (55): recording of Muslima born in 1925: twice mlīḥ. – ir-Rāmi (56): interview with female Christian born in 1920: mnīḥ. Male born in 1931: mlīḥ. Text in Blanc 1953:194: imliyḥ. – Mġār (60): recording of male Druze born in 1943: two instances of mnīḥ. Recording of male Christian born in 1921: pl. mnāḥ. Recording of male Druze born in 1980: fifteen instances of mlīḥ, four of pl. mlāḥ. Recording of male Druze born in 1983: two instances of mlīḥ. Recording of Druze born in 1981: two instances of mnīḥ. Recording of female Druze born in 1976: several instances of mlīḥ, pl. mlāḥ. Recording of male Catholic born in 1939: several instances of mlīḥ, pl. mlāḥ. Two male and female Muslims born in 1987: both several instances of mlīḥ. Recording of male born in 1972: pl. mlāḥ. – ʕArrābi (61): interview with male student: mlīḥ. Recording of male born in 1972: pl. mlāḥ. Recording of Muslima born in 1906: pl. mlāḥ. – ʕIlabūn (63): questionnaire regarding Bedouin dialect = zēn. Questionnaire completed with four females all about twenty and their father: mnīḥ. Seventy-five percent of the town is Christian.

appendices – Bʕēni-Nǧēdāt (65): recording of female born in 1952: mlīḥ. Recording of male born in 1908: twice mlīḥ. – Li-ʕzēr (66): only short text in Palva 1966: no instances. – Kufir Kanna (68): recording of Christian farmer: three instances of li-mlāḥ pl. Recording of male born in 1934: three instances of mlīḥ. Recording of Christian female born in 1950: two instances of mnīḥ. – Ṭurʕān (69): no instances in recordings. Not elicited in questionnaire. – Ṭabariyya (70): texts in AGK-2, for example, p. 32, sentence 7: mnīḥa. – ʕIsifya (71): recording of female born in 1974: mnīḥ. Recordings of male born in 1919: two instances of mlīḥ, five of mnīḥ. Recording of female Druze born in 1930: mlīḥ. Questionnaire with forty-year-old male mnīḥ. – ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣ (72): recording of male born in 1918: twice pl. mlāḥ. – Dālyit il-Karmil (73): questionnaire with seventy-year-old male from Umm iz-Zināt (north of Dālyit il-Karmil, destroyed in 1948): mnīḥ. Recording of Druze born in 1969: mnīḥ. Speaker “now living in ʕIsifya”:8 three instances of mnīḥ. Lorry driver with eight years of study, born in 1946, no religion indicated: one instance of mlīḥ, one of pl. mnāḥ. Female Druze born in 1944: two instances of mlīḥa. Recordings of male born in 1920: four instances of mnīḥ. Interview with Druze (no age indicated): mlīḥ. – ʕIlūṭ (75): recording of male informant born in 1938: mlīḥ. Second recording of male speaker born in 1933: mlīḥ. Third male speaker born in 1932, story collected in Damascus in 1949 (!): two instances of mlīḥ. Text in Palva 1966: eight occurrences of mlīḥ. – ir-Rēni (76): recordings with of females born in 1953 and 1961: three instances of mnīḥ. – Nazareth (77): questionnaire with female born in 1925 mnīḥ. Second questionnaire with male born in 1984: mnīḥ. Third questionnaire completed with female born in 1933: mnīḥ. Text in Zuʕbi 2005a:LXVII: pl. l-imnāḥ. – Yāft in-Nāṣri (78): interview with male born in 1947: mnīḥ. Recordings of male born in 1925 in Maʕlūl a neighbouring pre-1948 village of Yāfa: nine instances of mnīḥ, five of mlīḥ. Recording of illiterate female born in 1900: mlīḥ. Recording of male born in 1925: one instance of mlīḥ, one of mnīḥ. Illiterate male born in 1918: mlīḥ. – Iksāl (79): interview with male born in 1913: malīḥ. Recordings of female born in 1918 and unnamed female: both mlīḥ. – ʕĒn Māhil (80): recording of farmer born in 1926: nine instances of mlīḥ. – Dabbūryi (82): interview with fifty-year-old male: mlīḥ. Recording of male born in 1909: mlīḥ. – ʕArab iš-Šibli (83): recording of male born in 1918: mlīḥ. Texts in Rosenhouse 1980: mlīḥ ~ mnīḥ. 8  Note in transcribed text.

443 – Nēn (85): recording of male born in 1944: six instances of mlīḥ. – Ḥadaṯi-Ṭamra (87): recording of female born in 1925: seven instances of mlīḥ. – Kufir Maṣir (88): interview with male, no age indicated: mlīḥ. – Sūlam (89): recording of male born in 1931: five instances of mlīḥ. – Naʕūra (90): recording of male born in 1930: mlīḥ. – Fredīs (92): recording of seventy-three-old female with numerous occurrences of mnīḥ. Recording of Muslima with numerous instances of mlīḥ. Third recording of unnamed female: twice mlīḥ. Fourth recording of male born in 1933 with sixteen instances of mnīḥ, mniḥīn, mnāḥ. Fifth recording of unnamed female with thirteen ocurrrences of mlīḥ. – Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93): Recording of male: mlīḥ. Second speaker born in 1921: mnīḥ. – Mqēble (95): Recording of male born in 1940 with sixteen instances of mlīḥ. Interview with male mlīḥ, rejects mnīḥ. – Ṣandala (96): recordings of males born in 1908, 1928 have mlīḥ. Recording of female born in 1921: mlīḥ. Map 079: 2.1.3 3rd p. sg. m.+f. In what follows, localities where long forms or both long and short forms are attested (in transcribed texts and questionnaires) are dealt with. Druze villages: Dālyit il-Karmil (73) five instances of huwwe, one of hiyy, two of hiyye in two texts of four. In a third text: hū ~ hūwi ~ hūwe. Fourth text: one instance of hī. Female young Druze informant in ʕIsifya (71) declares that the short forms are more frequent. Ḥurfēš (20): in three texts only short forms. A fourth text with two instances of hiyyi, two of huwwi, two instances of hū, one of hī. Only short forms in texts from Žūlis (19). Li-Bqēʕa (10): two instances of hiyyi, eight of hū, two of hī in two texts. Kisra (11): in four texts, two instances of huwwi, one of hiyyi, three of hū, twelve of hī. Northern and central villages: iž-Žišš (21): nine instances of huwwi / hiyyi in three texts out of seven, otherwise hū / hī. Fassūṭa (6): huwwi / hiyyi seven instances in one text, three of hū. Once hū in second text. Questionnaire with an older male has huwwe / hiyye. Miʕilya (7) one instance of hiyyi, in a third text: hūwi. Was not elicited in the interview with questionnaire. Taršīḥa (8): nine instances of hū in one of two texts. Interview with questionnaire: huwwi. Student interviewer forgot to ask for “she”. Four texts from Bēt Ǧānn (23) only provide hū. Dēr Ḥanna (62): questionnaire hū / hī. One instance for huwwi in one of five texts, otherwise hū / hī. Mažd li-Krūm (38): one instance of hiyyi in five texts with different informants, otherwise hū / hī. Ir-Rāmi/Christian (56): huwwi (first text), Druze huwwi (second text, three instances), Druze hiyyi (third text), Christian huwwi (fourth text), Christian huwwi / hiyyi (fifth text, one/two instances), Druze hiyyi (Blanc

444 1953:317). About two thirds of the population of ir-Rāmi are Christians. Interview9 with a young female Christian informant furnished hū / hī. ʕIbillīn (46): interview with speaker of Bedouin dialect: hiyyi. Interview with older Muslima: hū / hī. Recording of Christian female born in 1939: hū / hī. Recording of female Christian born in 1942: huwwi / hiyyi. Recording of male Christian born in 1913: two instances of hū. Recording of male Christian born in 1939: one instance of hī, three of hū. IrRummāni (49): one instance of hiyy in Palva 1966:122, fourth line from bottom, otherwise in texts hū / hī. ʕArrābi (61) questionnaire: hū / hī. One instance of hiyye in one text out of seven, otherwise hū / hī. ʕIlabūn (63) questionnaire: huwwe / hiyye. Haifa huwwi / hiyyi (AGK-1:74). Saxnīn (41): one instance for huwwi, one for hiyyi in 23 [!] texts with different informants, otherwise hū / hī. Kufir Manda (47): questionnaire hū / hī, one instance of hiyye in one of five texts, otherwise hū / hī. Only long forms are attested for Ṣafad (recordings) and Ṭabariyya (recordings): huwwe / hiyye. Ṭurʕān (69) questionnaire: huwwe ~ hū – hiyye. Recording of male born in 1920: two instances of huwwi, two of hū and two of hī. Text in Palva 1966 only has hū / hī. ʕIsifya (71) first and second interviews: huwwe ~ hū / hiyye ~ hī. Third and fourth interviews: hū / hī. Fifth interview hū / hiyye. Seventeen recordings of twelve different informants: only three of them use long forms besides short ones, the rest short forms. Dālyit il-Karmil (73) interview: huwwe / hiyye. In twelve recordings of nine different informants, five of them used the long forms huwwi – hiyyi more frequently than the short forms, the others only used short forms. Nazareth: first interview with Christian female born in 1925: hū / hiyyi; second interview with speaker born in 1984 (no further data): huwwe / hiyye; third interview with Muslima born in 1923: hū (huwwe) / hī (hiyye); recording of Muslima (no further data): huwwi / hiyyi. Fifteen recordings of eleven Muslim(a)s of different ages, four recordings of Christian males and females of different ages: all hū / hī. Iksāl hū (hūwi) / hī (hīyi) (Nevo 2006:43) are to be explained as in Blanc 1953:107. First text: three instances of hū, two of hī. Second text: four instances of hū, one of hī, one of hiyyi. One instance of hū in Palva 1966 text:136–139. Yāft in-Nāṣri (78) interview with elderly female: huwwe / hī. Second interview with male born in 1947: hū / hī. In eleven recordings of six informants, three of them used huwwi / hiyyi besides hū / hī, the others only hū / hī. Ir-Rēni (76) first interview: huwwe / hiyye, hū / hī indicated as less frequent. Second interview: hū / hī. ʕIlūṭ (75) interview: hū ~ huwwe / hī ~ hiyye. In three recordings of different informants, there were twenty-four instances of hū and hī. South: Mqēble (95): one instance of huwwe in one of three texts, otherwise hū / hī. Ṣandala (96): one instance of huwwe, one of hū and hī. Fredīs (92, Carmel Coast) one questionnaire: 9  Interview was not transcribed.

Appendices huwwe / hiyye, the other one hū / hī. Jastrow 2009:234 hū ~ huwwi / hī ~ hiyyi. Recordings have several instances of hū and hī. IṭṬayybe (91): interview huwwi / hiyyi, recording hū one instance. For the Muṯallaṯ, Jastrow 2009:234 indicates hū ~ huwwi / hī ~ hiyyi. Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93) Jastrow 2009:234 hū – hī. Cf. Belinkov 2014:34: “the short form is given by (Jastrow 2009b). The longer form hiyya was used by Ǧamīla Ǧurbān and Ǧād Šihāb”. Belinkov does not mention the 3rd p. sg. m. Bedouin: huwwa ~ hū / hiyya ~ hī: “For both m. and f. persons, there is a ‘long’ form, which seems to be preferred in these dialects, and a ‘short’ one” (Rosenhouse 1984:80). ʕArab il-Xawālid/ Šfaʕámir (31): three instances for hū, one for hī. ʕArab il-Xawālid (33): one instance of hū / hī in text. Iḏ̣-Ḏ̣mēda questionnaire has huwwa / hiyya. Text: two instances of hiyya, one of hī, five of hū. Li-Ḥmēra/ʕArab as-Sawāʕid (32): hū / hī ~ hiyye. Short forms are more frequent in the text. Ibṭin (34): only lexical questionnaire available. Recording has one instance of hū. Il-Ḥaǧāǧra/ ʕArab Ǧawāmīs (53) questionnaire: huwwa / hiyya. Bēt Zarazīr/ ʕArab Ġrīfāt (54): one instance of hī. ʕArab Lhēb (67): hī (two instances) ~ hiyya (four instances). ʕArab il-Ḥamdūn near Dēr Ḥanna (62): four instances of hū, one of hī. ʕArab al-Ḥǧērāt/ il-Mikmān (pt. 50): one instance of huwwa, one of hū, two instances of hī, one of hiyya. Bīr al-Maksūr (50): two instances of hū in text. Basmat Ṭabʕōn/ʕArab an-Nʕēm (35): four instances of hiyya. Aḏ̣-Ḏ̣hara/al-Ḥǧērāt (45): five instances of hū. Al-Ḥilf/ ʕArab Ṭabbāš (51) only hū / hī attested (several times). ʕArab al-Ḥaǧāǧra near Bēt Zarazīr (54): two instances of hū, one of huwwa. Ač-Čammāna/Wādi Sallāme/Bedouin (58, 59): questionnaire huwwa / hiyya. Texts: seven instances of hū three of hī, one of hiyyi. Kufir Maṣir (88): one instance of hiyya in text. An-Nǧēdāt/ʕArab aṣ-Ṣbēḥ (65): two instances of hū, two of hī.10 Map 114: 2.8.2 As, like: miṯl ~ zayy The following list is based on transcribed texts and questionnaires. Besides miṯl and zayy as a preposition the conjunctions miṯil ma and zayy ma were also considered. For simplicity’s sake, only miṯl is written – Iš-Šēx Dannūn (1): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 8 miṯl, 13 zayy. – Il-Mazraʕa: questionnaire zayy, recordings 4 miṯl. – ʕArāmša/Bedouin (4, 5): questionnaire miṯl. No data in Rosenhouse 1984. – Fassūṭa (6); questionnaire zayy, recordings 11 miṯl, 40 zayy. – Miʕilya (7): recordings 6 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Taršīḥa (8): recordings 1 miṯl, 3 zayy. 10  This enumeration might seem like accounting – pedantic and boring – but it simply shows that things are not so easy and that the answers given during the interviews, which in a way are produced after deliberation, often deviate from those used in spontaneous speech.

appendices – Kufir Smēʕ (9); recordings 13 miṯl, 15 zayy. – Li-Bqēʕa (10): recordings 14 zayy, miṯl not attested. – Kisra (11): recordings 8 miṯl, 5 zayy. – Naḥef (12): recordings 21 miṯl, 9 zayy. – Dēr il-Asad (13): recordings 16 miṯl, 10 zayy. – Yanūḥ (14): recordings 1 miṯl, 8 zayy. – Žaṯṯ (15): recordings 2 miṯl. – Yirka (16): recordings 13 miṯl, 7 zayy. – Abu Snān (17): questionnaire zayy ~ miṯl, recordings 21 miṯl, 4 zayy. – Kufir Yasīf (18): questionnaire zayy ~ miṯl, recordings 2 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Ǧūlis (19): recordings 7 miṯl. – Ḥurfēš (20): recordings 12 miṯl, 2 zayy. – iž-Žišš (21): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 10 miṯl, 2 zayy. – ir-Riḥaniyyi (22): questionnaire zayy, no recordings. – Bēt Ǧānn (23): recordings 12 miṯl. – Sažūr (24): recordings 15 miṯl, 10 zayy. – Ṣafad (25): recordings 3 miṯl, 1 zayy. – ʕAkbara (26): recordings 6 miṯl, 1 zayyy. – Ṭūba-Zanġariyya (27) Bedouin Lhēb: recording 1 miṯl. – Akko (28): recordings 4 miṯl, 32 zayy. – Makir (29): recordings 1 miṯl, 16 zayy. – iž-Ždayyde (30): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 7 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Šfāʕamir (31): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 6 miṯl, 4 zayy. – Li-Ḥmēra (32), ʕArab as-Sawāʕid: recording 6 zayy, 1 miṯl. – ʕArab al-Xawālid (33): 2 miṯl. – Basmat Ṭabʕōn (35) ʕArab Nʕēm: 1 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Haifa (36): AGK-1:322 miṯl, p. 293 miṯl; recordings 5 miṯl, 21 zayy. – Biʕne (38): questionnaires miṯl ~ zayy. – Mažd li-Krūm (39): questionnaires miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 14 miṯl, 5 zayy. – Šaʕeb (40): questionnaires miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 2 miṯl, 14 zayy. – Saxnīn (41): questionnaires miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 16 miṯl, 4 zayy. – Kabūl (42): questionnaire: zayy, recordings 8 miṯl. – Ṭamra (43): recordings 30 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Kōkab Abu l-Hēža (44): questionnaire miṯl, recordings 6 miṯl. – Iḏ̣-Ḏ̣hara (45) Bedouin Ḥǧērāt: recording 1 miṯl, 9 zayy. – ʕIbillīn (46): recordings: 2 miṯl. – Kufir Manda (47): questionnaire miṯl, recordings 5 miṯl, 4 zayy. – Ir-Rummāni (49): recordings 9 miṯl. – Bīr il-Maksūr (50) Bedouin li-Ḥǧērāt: recordings 3 miṯl. – Ḥilf (51) Bedouin Ṭabbāš: recording 2 miṯl.

445 – ʕArab al-Kaʕbiyye (52): recording 1 miṯl. – Il-Ḥaǧāǧra (53) Bedouin Ǧawāmīs questionnaire: miṯl ~ zayy. – Bēt Zarzīr (54) Bedouin il-Ḥaǧāǧra, Ġrīfāt: recordings 1 miṯl. – Mišhad (55): recordings 2 miṯl. – Ir-Rāmi (56): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 14 miṯl, 8 zayy. – ʕĒn il-Asad (57): recordings 2 miṯl. – Ač-Čammāna (58) and Wādi Sallāma (59) Bedouin Sawāʕid: questionnaires miṯl, recordings 9 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Mġār (60): questionnaire: miṯl, recordings 27 miṯl. – ʕArrābi (61): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 21 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Dēr Ḥanna (62): questionnaires miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 25 miṯl, 7 zayy. – ʕIlabūn (63): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 11 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Wādi l-Ḥammām (64) Bedouin: questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy. – Li-Bʕēni (65): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 13 miṯl, 5 zayy. – Kufir Kanna (68): recordings 14 miṯl, 9 zayy. – Ṭurʕān (69): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 11 miṯl 2 zayy. – Ṭabariyya (70): texts AGK-2 59 miṯl, 44 zayy. – ʕIsifya (71): recordings: 15 miṯl, 19 zayy. – ʕĒn Ḥōḏ̣ (72): recordings 4 miṯl. – Dālyit il-Karmil (73): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 11 miṯl, 18 zayy. – ʕIlūṭ (75): recordings 15 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Ir-Rēni (76): recordings 1 miṯl, 6 zayy. – Nazareth (77): questionnaires miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 19 miṯl, 28 zayy. – Yāft in-Nāṣri (78): questionnaires miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 45 miṯl. – Iksāl (79): recordings 6 miṯl, 1 zayy. – ʕĒn Māhil (80): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy, recordings 24 miṯl, 3 zayy. – Id-Dabbūrye (82): recording: 1 zayy. – ʕArab iš-Šibli (83): questionnaire miṯl ~ zayy. – Umm il- Ġanam (84) Bedouin: questionnaire miṯl. – Nēn (85): recordings 4 miṯl. – Id-Daḥi (86): recordings 1 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Kufir Maṣir (88): recordings 1 miṯl, 1 zayy. – Sūlam (89): recordings 8 miṯl, 4 zayy. – In-Naʕūṛa (90): recordings 6 miṯl, 3 zayy. – Iṭ-Ṭayybe (91): recordings 2 miṯl. – Fredīs (92): recordings 11 miṯl, 39 zayy. – Ǧisr iz-Zarga (93): 37 miṯl, 5 zayy. – Li-Mšērfe (94): recording 1 zayy. – Mqēble (95): 12 miṯl, 11 zayy. – Ṣandala (96): recordings 12 miṯl.

Bibliography Abu l-Fadl, F. “Volkstümliche Texte in arabischen Bauern­ dialekten der ägyptischen Provinz Šarqiyya mit dialektgeographischen Untersuchungen zur Lautlehre”. PhD thesis, University of Münster, 1961. AGK-1: Geva-Kleinberger, A. Die arabischen Stadtdialekte von Haifa in der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2004. AGK-2: Geva-Kleinberger, A. Autochthonous Texts in the Arabic Dialect of the Jews in Tiberias. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009. AGK-3: Geva-Kleinberger, A. “Memories of the Sea of Galilee: The Jewish Arabic Dialect of Tiberias”. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 29 (2004), 145–165. AGK-4: Geva-Kleinberger, A. “Das Werk Graf von Muelinens als Quelle zu den arabischen Dialekten des Karmels”. In: Otto Jastrow, Shabo Talay and Herta Hafenrichter, eds. Studien zur Arabistik und Semitistik. Festschrift für Hartmut Bobzin zum 60. Geburtstag, 99–105. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2008. AGK-5: Geva-Kleinberger, A. and Yossi Ben Artzi. Von Muelinen’s Mount Carmel [ha-Karmel shel Von Muelinen]. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2013 [Scientific annotations, translation and editing of Eberhard von Mülinen, Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Karmels (Leipzig: In Kommission bei K. Baedeker, 1908)] (In Hebrew). AGK-6: Geva-Kleinberger, A. “Last Informant of the JewishArabic Dialect of the Ancient Community of Peqi’in”. In: Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 95 (2005), 45–61. AGK-7: Geva-Kleinberger, A. “Archaeological Dialectology: Reconstructing the Etymological Derivation of the Various Lexemes Denoting the Obsolete Farm-Implement ‘Threshing-Board’ in Palestinian Dialects”. In: Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 168–1 (2018), 125–134. AIDA 4: Youssi, A., F. Benjelloun. M. Dahbi and Z. IraquiSinaceur, eds. Aspects of the Dialects of Arabic Today. Proceedings of the 4th Conference of the International Arabic Dialectology Association (AIDA), Marrakesh, Apr. 1–4. 2000. Rabat: AMAPATRIL, 2002. Al-Hilou, A. “Topographische Namen des Syro-Palästinischen Raumes nach arabischen Geographen”. PhD thesis, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, 1985. Al-Wer, E. “Arabic between Reality and Ideology”. In: International Journal of Applied Linguistics 7, 2 (1997), 251–265. Al-Wer, E., U. Horesh, B. Herin and M. Famis. “How Arabic Regional Features Become Sectarian Features. Jordan as a Case Study”. In: Zeitschrift für arabische Linguistik 62 (2015), 68–87. Amir, N., O. Amir and J. Rosenhouse. “Colloquial Arabic Vowels in Israel: A Comparative Acoustic Study of Two Dialects”.

In: Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 136 (2014), 1895–1907. Ani, M. and K. Stowasser. A Dictionary of Syrian Arabic. English – Arabic. The Richard Slade Harrell Arabic Series. Richard S. Harrell, General Editor. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1964. Arnold, W. Die arabischen Dialekte Antiochiens Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1998. Arnold, W. “Die arabischen Dialekte von Jaffa und Umgebung”. In: Approaches to Arabic Dialects. A Collection of Articles Presented to Manfred Woidich on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday. Martine Haak, Rudolf de Jong and Kees Versteegh, eds. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2004. Arnold, W. and P. Behnstedt. Arabisch-Aramäische Sprach­ beziehungen im Qalamūn (Syrien). Eine sprachgeographische Untersuchung mit einer wirtschafts- und sozialgeographischen Einführung von Anton Escher. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1993. Baccouche, T. and S. Mejri. Les questionnaires de l’Atlas linguistique de Tunisie. Rencontres linguistiques méditerranéennes. Sud Editions. Paris/Tunis: Maisonneuve & Larose, 2004. Barghouthi, A. Dictionary of Colloquial Palestinian Arabic Dialect. Ramallah/Bireh, 2001 (In Arabic). Barthélemy, A. Dictionnaire Arabe – Français. Dialectes de Syrie: Alep, Damas, Liban, Jérusalem. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1935–1969. Bauer, L. Deutsch-Arabisches Wörterbuch der Umgangssprache in Palästina und im Libanon. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 19572. Bauer, L. Das Palästinische Arabisch. Die Dialekte des Städters und des Fellachen. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung; 1913: reprint Leipzig, 1970. Behnstedt, P. “Noch einmal zum Problem der Personal prono­ mina hənne (3.Pl.), -kon (2. Pl.) und -hon (3.Pl.) in den syrischlibanesischen Dialekten”. In: Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 141 (1991), 235–252. Behnstedt, P. Die nordjemenitischen Dialekte. Teil 2: Glossar Alif – Dāl. Wiesbaden: L. Reichert, 1992. Behnstedt, P. Der arabische Dialekt von Soukhne, I. II. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994. Behnstedt, P. Sprachatlas von Syrien. II. Volkskundliche Texte. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2000. Behnstedt, P. “Materialien für einen Dialektatlas von Nordost Marokko. I: Tiernamen, Teil 2: Kommentare, Bibliographie. II: Mensch: Körperteile; Teil 1: Karten, Teil 2: Kommentare”. In: Estudios de dialectología norteafricana y andalusí 9 (2005), 7–57. Behnstedt, P. Die nordjemenitischen Dialekte. Teil 2: Glossar Fā’ – Yā’. Wiesbaden: L. Reichert, 2006. Behnstedt, P. Dialect Atlas of North Yemen and Adjacent Areas Leiden: Brill, 2016.

bibliography Behnstedt, P. and M. Woidich. Die ägyptisch-arabischen Dialekte. II. Dialektatlas von Ägypten. Wiesbaden: L. Reichert, 1985. Behnstedt, P. and M. Woidich. Die ägyptisch-arabischen Dialekte. Band 3. Texte. II. Niltaldialekte. III. Oasendialekte. Wiesbaden: L. Reichert, 1987, 1988. Behnstedt, P. and M. Woidich. Arabische Dialektgeographie. Eine Einführung. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2005. Belinkov, Y. “The Arabic Dialect of Ǧisir iz-Zarga: Linguistic Description and a Preliminary Classification, with Sample Texts”. MA thesis, Tel Aviv University, 2014. Belot, J. B. Dictionnaire Français-Arabe. Nouvelle édition entièrement refondue sous la direction du R.P.R. Nakhla S.J. Beirut 1952. Reprint of Edition 1900. Benvenisti, M. Sacred Landscape. The Buried History of the Holy Land since 1948. Translated by Maxine Kaufman-Lacusta. Berkeley: California University Press, 2000. Bergstraesser, G. Sprachatlas von Syrien und Palästina. Sonderdruck aus der Zeitschrift des Deutschen PalästinaVereins XXXVIII 169–222. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1915. Blanc, H. “Studies in North Palestinian Arabic. Linguistic Inquiries among the Druze of Western Galilee and Mt. Carmel”. PhD thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1953. Blanc, H. Communal Dialects in Baghdad. Cambridge, Mass. 1964. Blanc, H. “The Arabic Dialect of the Negev Bedouins”. In: Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities IV, 7 (1970), 112–150. Blau, J. Syntax des palästinensischen Bauerndialekts von Bīr Zēt. Walldorf-Hessen: Verlag für Orientkunde Dr. H. Vorndran, 1960. Boris, G. Lexique du parler arabe des Marazig. Paris: Librairie Klincksieck, 1958. Canaan, T. “Haunted Springs and Water Demons in Palestine”. In: Studies in Palestinian Customs and Folklore (Revised and enlarged from the Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society I, 3–24, 153–170. Jerusalem: Palestine Oriental Society, 1922. Cantineau, J. “Etudes sur quelques parlers de nomades arabes d`Orient”. In: Annales de L’Institut d’Etudes Orientales 2 (1936), 1–118; 3 (1937), 119–237. Cantineau, J. Les parlers arabes du Ḥōrân. Atlas. Paris: Librairie Klincksieck, 1940. Cantineau, J. Les parlers arabes du Ḥōrân. Notions générales, grammaire. Paris: Librairie Klincksieck, 1946. Chaker Sultani, J. and J.-P. Milelli. Dictionnaire français – libanais, libanais – français. Crespières: Milleli, 2010. Christie, W. “Der Dialekt der Landbevölkerung des mittleren Galiläa”. In: Zeitschrift des deutschen Palästina-Vereins 24 (1901), 69–112. Corominas, J. Breve Diccionario etimológico de la lengua castellana. Madrid: Gredos, 1973.

447 Corriente, F. A Grammatical Sketch of the Spanish Arabic Dialect Bundle. Madrid: Instituto Hispano-Arabe De Cultura, Direccion General de Relaciones Culturales, 1977. Corriente, F. A Dictionary of Andalusi Arabic. Leiden/New York/ Cologne: Brill, 1997. Costaz, L. (S. J.). Dictionnaire syriaque – français. Beirut: Impri­ merie Catholique, n.y. Cotter, W. M., II. “Dialect Contact and Change in Gaza City”. MA. thesis, University of Essex, 2013. Cowell, M. W. A Reference Grammar of Syrian Arabic. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1964. Dalman, G. Arbeit und Sitte in Palästina. I–VIII. Olms: Neudruck Hildesheim, 1987. Denizeau, C. Dictionnaire des parlers arabes de Syrie, Liban et Palestine. Paris: Maisonneuve, 1960. Diem, W. “Zum Problem der Personalpronomina hənne (3. Pl.), -kon (2. Pl.) und -hon (3. Pl.) in den syrisch-libanesischen Dialekten”. In: Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 121 (1971), 223–230. Diem, W. “A Historical Interpretation of Iraqi Arabic aku ‘there is’”. In: Orbis 23 (1974), 448–453. Dozy, R. Supplément aux dictionnaires arabes. I., II. Reprint. Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1968. Elihay, J. The Olive Tree Dictionary. A Transliterated Dictionary of Conversational Eastern Arabic (Palestinian). Jerusalem: Minerva Instruction & Consultation, 2004. Elihay, Y. Dictionnaire de l`arabe parlé palestinien, français – arabe. Paris: Klincksieck, 1985. Fischer, W. Die demonstrativen Bildungen der neuarabischen Dialekte. Ein Beitrag zur historischen Grammatik des Arabischen. ’s-Gravenhage: Mouton & Co., 1959. Fischer, W. Grammatik des klassischen Arabisch. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1972. Fleisch, H. Etudes d`Arabe Dialectal. Beirut: Dar El-Machreq, 1974. Goebl, H. Dialektometrie. Prinzipien und Methoden des Einsatzes der Numerischen Taxonomie im Bereich der Dialektgeographie. Denkschriften der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Kl. vol. 157. Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1982. Goebl, H. Dialektometrische Studien. Anhand italoromanischer, rätoromanischer und galloromanischer Sprachmaterialien aus AIS und ALF. Band I. Tübingen: M. Niemeyer, 1984. Goebl, H. “Dialectometry: Theoretical Prerequisites, Practical Problems, and Concrete Application (mainly with Examples Drawn from the ‘Atlas Linguistique de la France’, 1902–1910)”. In: Dialectologia. Special Issue I (2010[a]), 63–77. Goebl, H. “Dialectometry and Quantitave Mapping”. In: A. Lameli, R. Kehrein and S. Rabanus, eds. Language and Space. An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation. Vol. 2: Language Mapping 433–457, 2201–2212. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010[b].

448 Gralla, S. Der arabische Dialekt von Nabk. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006. Grotzfeld, H. Laut- und Formenlehre des DamaszenischArabischen. Wiesbaden: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft, 1964. Grotzfeld, H. “Ein Zeugnis aus dem Jahr 688/1289 für die Aussprache des qāf als hamza im Kairenischen”. In: Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft 117 (1967), 87ff. GvG: Brockelmann, C. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen. I. Band: Laut- und Formenlehre. Olms: Nachdruck Hildesheim, 1982. Haddad, E. N. Manual of Palestinian Arabic. Jerusalem, 1909. Haefeli, L. Spruchweisheit und Volksleben in Palaestina Luzern: Räber & CIE, 1939. Halloun, M. Lehrbuch des Palästinensisch-Arabischen. Bethlehem Universität, 2016. Harper, D. Online Etymology Dictionary. Athens, Ohio University, 2003. Havelova, A. “Sociolinguistic Description of Nazareth”. In: M. Mifsud, ed. Proceedings of the Third International Conference of Aïda: Association Internationale de Dialectologie de l’Arabe held at Malta, 29 March–2 April, 1998, 141–144. Malta, 2000. Havelova, A. “The Arabic Dialect of Nazareth: A Dialectological and Sociolinguistic Description”. PhD diss. University of Haifa, 2000b. Heath, J. Jewish and Muslim Dialects of Moroccan Arabic. London: Routledge Curzon, 2002. Hinds, M. and El-Said Badawi. A Dictionary of Egyptian Arabic. Arabic – English. Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1986. Horesh, U. and W. Cotter. “Sociolinguistics of Palestinian Arabic”. In: Encylopedia of Arabic Linguistics. Eds. L. Edzard, R. de Jong. BrillOnline Reference Works 2015. . Ibn Manẓūr. Lisān al-ʕArab. 6 vols. Cairo: Dār al-Maʕārif, n.y. Ingham, B. Northeast Arabian Dialects London/Boston: Kegan Paul International, 1982. Jastrow, O. Die mesopotamisch-arabischen qəltu-Dialekte. Band I. Wiesbaden: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft, 1978. Jastrow, O. “The Corpus of Spoken Palestinian Arabic (COSPA)”. In: Shlomo Izre’el, ed. Teîuda 18. Speaking Hebrew: Studies in the Spoken Language and in Linguistic Variation in Israel. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 2002. Jastrow, O. “The Arabic Dialects of the Muṯallaṯ (Central Israel)”. In: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 29 (2004), 166–175. Jastrow, O. “The Arabic Dialects of the Carmel Coast”. In: G. Goldenberg and A. Shisha-Halevy, eds. Egyptian, Semitic

Bibliography and General Grammar. Studies in Memory of H. J. Polotsky, 233–238. Bilingual edition. Jerusalem 2009. Lane, E. W. An Arabic – English Lexicon. 8 Vols. London, 1863. Reprint Beirut. Marçais, W. and A. Guiga. Textes arabes de Takroûna. I. Textes, transcriptions, et traductions annotées. II. Glossaire. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1925, 1958–1961. Mion, G. “Textes arabes de Amman”. In: Una presenza, non un ricordo. Studi di lingua e letteratura araba in memoria si Sameh Faragalla. A cura di Olivier Duran, Giuliano Mion, 151–171. Rome: Aracne, 2013. Mülinen, E. von. Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Karmels. Leipzig: In Kommission bei K. Baedeker, 1908. Nevo, M. “Notes on the Arabic Dialect of Iksāl”. In: Zeitschrift für arabische Linguistik 46 (2006), 26–58. Oman, G. L’ittionomia nei paesi arabi del Mediterraneo. Quaderni dell`Archivio Linguistico Veneto 3. Florence: Leo S. Olschki, 1966. Palva, H. Lower Galilean Arabic. An Analysis of Its Anaptyctic and Prothetic Vowels with Sample Tests. Studia Orientalia Edidit Societas Orientalis Fennica XXXII. Helsinki 1966. Palva, H. “The Unconditioned Affrication of *k in Central Palestinian Arabic: A Bedouin Feature or a Spontaneous Development” In: J. Cremona, C. Holes and G. Khan, eds. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of L`Association Internationale pour la Dialectologie Arabe. Held at Trinity Hall in the University of Cambridge, 10–14 September 1995, 181–188. Cambridge: University Publications Centre, 1996. Payne Smith, R., ed. Thesaurus Syriacus. Oxford, 1868. Pereira, C. Le parler arabe de Tripoli (Libye). Estudios De Dialectología Árabe 4. Directores de la colección F. Corriente y Á. Vicente Zaragoza: Instituto De Estudios Islámicos Y Del Oriente Próximo, 2010. Procházka, S. “Die Präpositionen in den neuarabischen Dialekten”. Verband der wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaften Österreichs. PhD diss., University of Vienna, 1993. Procházka, S. Die arabischen Dialekte der Çukurova (Südtürkei). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2002. Prochazka, T. Saudi Arabian Dialects. London/New York: Kegan Paul International, 1988. Rosenhouse, J. “Ha-Lahag ha-Medubar shel Saxnīn: Fonetika uMorfologia [= The Colloquial Dialect of Saxnīn: Phonology and Morphology]”. MA thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1969 (In Hebrew). Rosenhouse, J. “Some Features of Some Bedouin Dialects in the North of Israel”. In: Zeitschrift für arabische Linguistik 7 (1982), 23–47. Rosenhouse, J. “Texts in the Dialect of the ʕArāmsha Bedouins”. In: Zeitschrift für arabische Linguistik 10 (1983), 39–70.

bibliography Rosenhouse, J. The Bedouin Arabic Dialects. General Problems and a Close Analysis of North Israel Bedouin Dialects. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1984. Rosenhouse, J. “An Acoustic-Phonetic Analysis of Vowels in Levant Arabic: Similarities and Differences, Modalities in Arabic”. In: Romano-Arabica 16 (2016), 257–268. Rosenhouse, J. “Colloquial Arabic and Hebrew Vowels in Bedouin and Druze Native Speakers’ Spontaneous Speech (in Israel)”. In: A. Amit and H. Bat-Zeev Shyldkrot, eds. Proceedings of the Haim B. Rosen Israeli Linguistics Society, 31st–32nd Annual Meetings XXX, 12017:129–143. Ra’anana: The Open University. (In Hebrew). Rosenhouse, J. “Differences between Arabic Dialects in Israel in the Phonetic-Acoustical Area”. In: A. Geva-Kleinberger ed., to appear in: V. XXX, Nazareth, Israel, The Arabic Language Academy (in Arabic). Rosenhouse, J. and Y. Katz. “Texts in the Dialects of Bedouins in Israel”. In: Occasional Papers on the Middle East (New Series) 3 (1980). Rosenhouse, J. “Bedouin Arabic”. In: Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics I. (Eds. K. Versteegh et al.). Leiden, Brill 2006, 259–169. SA: Behnstedt, P. Sprachatlas von Syrien. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1997. Schmidt, H. and P. Kahle. Volkserzählungen aus Palästina gesammelt bei den Bauern von Bīr Zēt. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck und Ruprecht, 1918. Seeger WB online: Seeger, U. Wörterbuch Palästinensisch – Deutsch. In Zusammenarbeit mit Laṭīfe Abu l-ʕAsal, Taḥsīn ʕAlawnih, Rāmi il-ʕArabi. Work in Progress. Stand: 23. März 2017. Academia.Edu. Seeger, U. “Der arabische Dialekt von il-Xalīl (Hebron)”. MA thesis. Heidelberg University, Karlsruhe, 1996. Seeger, U. Der arabische Dialekt der Dörfer um Ramallah. Teil 2: Glossar. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009. Seeger, U. Der arabische Dialekt der Dörfer um Ramallah. Teil 3: Grammatik. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2013. Shachmon, O. and N. Faust. “The Spread of Prepausal Lowering in Galilean Arabic”. In: Journal of Semitic Studies LXII/2 (Autumn 2017), 371–387. Shawarbah, M. A Grammar of Negev Arabic. Comparative Studies, Texts and Glossary in the Bedouin Dialect of the ʕAzāzmih Tribe. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012. Shehadeh, H. “kunt ‘ištri in Kufir Yasīf dialect”. In: Zeitschrift für arabische Linguistik 11 (1983), 79–83. Singer, H-R. Grammatik der arabischen Mundart von Tunis. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1984. Sonnen, J. “Landwirtschaftliches vom See Genezareth”. In: Biblica 8 (1927), 320–337. Sonnen, J. Die Beduinen am See Genesareth. Cologne: Druck und Verlag J. P. Bachem, 1952.

449 Taine-Cheikh, C. Dictionnaire Ḥassāniyya Français 5 zā’ – sīn. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1990. Taine-Cheikh, C. “Deux macro-discriminats de la dialectologie arabe (la réalisation du qâf et des interdentales)”. In: Matériaux arabes et sudarabiques (GELLAS), 2000. Nouvelle série no. 9 (1989–1999), 11–51. Talay, S. Der arabische Dialekt der Khawētna. II: Texte und Glossar. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2003. Talmon, R. “Preparation of the Northern Israeli Arabic Sprachatlas: A Report”. In: AIDA 4: (2002): 68–77. Trudgill, P. Dialects in Contact. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986. Viereck, W., K. Viereck and H. Ramisch. dtv-Atlas Englische Sprache. 2002. WAD I: Behnstedt, P. and M. Woidich. Wortatlas der arabischen Dialekte. Band I: Mensch, Natur, Fauna, Flora. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2011 WAD II: Behnstedt, P. and M. Woidich. Wortatlas der arabischen Dialekte. Band II: Materielle Kultur. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2012. WAD III: Behnstedt, P. and M. Woidich: Wortatlas der arabischen Dialekte. Band III: Verben, Adjektive, Zeit und Zahlen. Leiden/ Boston: Brill, 2016. WAD IV: Behnstedt, P. and M. Woidich. Wortatlas der arabischen Dialekte. Band IV: Funktionswörter. Eine Auswahl. To appear in Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2019. Wahrmund, A. Handwörterbuch der neuarabischen und deutschen Sprache. I, II. Librairie du Liban. New Impression. Beirut: Libraire du Liban, 1985. Wartenburg, W. von. Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue française. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1968. Wehr, H. A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic. J. Milton Cowan, ed. Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 19603. Wehr, H. Arabisches Wörterbuch für die Schriftsprache der Gegenwart. Arabisch – Deutsch. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 19855. Woidich, M. “Zum Dialekt von il-ʕAwāmṛa in der östlichen Šarqiyya.” In: Zeitschrift für arabische Linguistik 2 (1979), 78–99. Woidich, M. Das Kairenisch-Arabische. Eine Grammatik. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006. Wright, W. A Grammar of the Arabic Language. New Impression Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1974. Yāsīn ʕAbd ar-Raḥīm. Mawsūʕat al-ʕāmmīya as-sūrīya. 4 vols. Damascus: Manšūrāt wizārat aṯ-ṯaqāfa, 2003. Zuʕbi, A. “The Arabic Dialect of Nazareth. Topics in Phonology and Morphology”. MA thesis. University of Haifa, 2005a (In Hebrew). Zuʕbi, A. “The Arabic Dialects of Nazareth and the Surrounding Villages: Phonology, Morphology and Texts”. Haifa 2005b (In Hebrew). Zuʕbi, A. “Pausal Forms in the Arabic of Nazareth”. In: Mediterranean Language Review 24 (2017), 159–174.

General Index Place names indicated in the index of Arabic-speaking localities are not listed here accent 1.1.3.1, 1.1.3.2.3, 1.1.3.2.4, 1.1.4.1, 2.13.13.4, 2.2.6 accommodation 1.3.2.1 adaptation 1.1.1.1, 1.2.6, 1.3.2, 2.8.1, 2.13.11.1, 3.1.15 adstratum 1.2.9 affrication 1.3.2 Ahmadiyya Muslim Community p. 131 al-Andalus I,1., 2.9.3 Aleppo 1.1.1.20, 2.9.1, 2.11.2, 2.13.5, 3.1.4, 3.6.6 Algeria 2.9.3 Algerian Arabic 3.1.2 allophones p. 276, p. 429, p. 439 alternation 2.2.6 Amman p. 89, fn. 15 analogical formation 2.2.2, 2.2.4, 2.4.3, 2.4.4, 2.5.2 fn., 2.8.1, 2.13.8.1, 3.1.16, 3.1.21 analogy 1.2.5, 2.8.3 analytical form 2.7.4, 3.1.20 analytical symbols I.3 Anatolian Arabic 1.2.7 Andalusian Arabic 1.2.5 annexion 2.6.2 Antiochian Arabic 2.13.8.1 apheresis 1.1.2.1 Arabian Peninsula 2.5.5, 2.13.7.1, 3.6.2 Aramaic 1.1.1.17, 3.2.3, passim article fn. 4., 1.1.2.1, 2.3, 2.9.3 assymetrical form 2.8.1, 2.10.1 backformation 1.1.1.13, 1.1.2.1, 2.13.8.3 Baghdad 2.5.4 Bedouin dialects 2.5.5, 2.5.6, 2.7.2, 2.10.1, 2.12, 2.1.3.2, 2.13.3, 2.13.4, 2.13.6, 2.13.7.1, passim Bedouin influence 2.13.11.1 Bēt Ǧāla 1.2.6 borrowing 2.1.2, see also loan bound form 1.1.3.1 Cairo 1.3.5.1 Cairene Arabic 1.3.2 Carmel coast I.2., I.4., I.5., 1.2.9, passim Central Syria 3.1.9, 3.1.10 change of verb class 2.13.7.1 closed verb class 2.13.13.1 collective 3.2.1, 3.2.4, 3.3.1 communal dialects 1.4, 12.13.12.1 compensatory lengthening 2.9.3 compounds 2.6.1 congruence 2.12 connotation, negative 1.1.1.7, 3.2.5 contamination 2.2.7, 2.3, 2.4.6, 2.5.5, 2.5.6, 2.6.2, 2.12, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.1.21, 3.5.1, 3.6.2, 4.5 context forms 1.1.2.1, 1.1.2.2, 1.1.4.4 contiguity 3.1.11 core area 2.13.12.3 Damascus 1.1, 1.1.4.1, 1.1.4.2.4, 2.9.1 defect and colour pattern 2.13.7.1 definite article 2.3, 2.9.3

Deutefehler 3.1.10, 3.1.14, 3.1.18 devoicing 3.6.4 dialect archeology I.1 dialect continuum I.1., 1.2.9 dialect contact 1.3.2, 2.9.2 dialect mixing 2.10.1 diminutive 1.2.3, 1.2.4 doublet 3.6.3, 3.1.10 fn Druze of Syria 2.13.1 Egypt 1.1.1.3, 1.1.2.1, 1.1.3.2.2, 1.3.1.1, 1.3.5.1, 2.6.1, 3.5.1, passim Egyptian Arabic 1.1.1.15, 1.1.2.2, 1.1.4.1, 1.1.4.2.4, 1.2.1, 1.2.9, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.7.2, 2.7.6, 2.10.1 fn., 2.12, 2.13.3, 2.13.11.1, 3.1.4, 3.1.10, 3.1.14, 3.1.21, 3.2.6, passim elision see contents, 1.1.1.1, 2.9.2, 2.13.5, 2.13.7.1, 3.1.10 ellipsis, elliptic 2.6.1, 2.6.2, 3.3.4 emphasis, loss of 1.3.5, 3.1.3 enlarged forms 2.4.2, 2.4.6 euphemism 3.5.2 figurative 2.13.13.3 final cluster 2.13.8.1 free variables 2.5.3 fronting 1.1.2.1, 1.1.2.3, 1.1.2.4, 2.9.2 functional load 1.1 future marker 9. 265 fn. 11, 2.13.6 Gaza 1.3.3 gemination 2.13.4 gender neutral 2.4.2 ghawa-syndrome I.3., 1.1.2.1, 1.1.4.2.1, 2.9.1 gradation 2.13.12.3 grammaticalisation 2.13.6 Gulf Arabic 2.5.4 Ǧabal id-Drūz 3.1.4, 3.1.9, 3.6.6, passim haplological deletion 2.13.13 Ḥassāniyya dialect 1.3.5.1 Hebrew 2.12, 2.13.3 Hebron 1.1, 1.2.3, 2.9.4, 2.12, 2.13.13.5 homorganic consonants 1.1.3.1 Ḥōrān I.1., 2.5.3, 3.1.4, 3.2.2 Ḥōrān dialects 1.1.2.6.3 hyper-adaptation 1.3.2 hyper-correction 1.3.1 i- and u-colouring environments 1.1.1 i-umlaut 1.2.4, 1.2.5 idiosyncratic hyper-corrections 1.3.1, 1.3.2 ʔimāla 2.1.2 imitation 2.13.3 incomplete accomodation 1.3.2.1 indefinite article XII fn. 4 influence of sedentary dialects on bedouin dialects 1.1.4.3, 1.2.9, 2.9.2, 2.10, 2.13.3 interview techniques 1.3.2 Iraqi Arabic 2.5.4, 2.8.1, 3.6.2, 4.5 Irbid 3.2.7

general index isogloss(es) I.3., 1.1.20, 1.3.3, 2.2.7, 2.4.1, 2.4.3, 2.4.4, 2.4.6, 2.7.5, 2.13.5.2, 2.13.6.1, 2.13.7.2, 2.13.11.3, 2.13.12.1, 3.2.5, 3.3.1, passim isolated shift 1.2.3, 1.3.4.1 Jaffa 1.1.1.15, 1.3.1.1 Jenin 1.3.3, 2.5.5 Jerusalem 1.1.1.15, 1.1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.3.6, 2.1.6, 2.12, passim Jezreel Valley 1.3.2 Kafr Qūd 2.5.5 koiné pronunciation 1.3.3, 2.2.1 Lebanon I.1., I.6., 1.3.3, 2.2.5, 1.2.9, 2.8.2, 3.1.11, 3.1.14, 3.1.18, 3.2.7, 3.3.4, 3.6.2, passim Lebanese Arabic I.1., I.6., 1.1.1.20, 1.2.8, 2.2.5, 2.7.5, 2.9.1, 2.13.1, 2.13.5, 2.13.7.3, 3.1.18 Levant 2.12, 3.2.4 Levantine Arabic 1.1, 1.1.1.5 fn., 1.1.4.1, 1.2.9, 2.1.6, 2.6.2, 2.12, 3.1.8 Libyan Arabic 1.1.4.2, 1.1.4.2.1, 2.5.4, 2.7.5 liquid consonants 2.13.13.3, 2.13.13.5 loan(s) 1.1.1.20, 1.1.2.1, 1.1.2.2, 1.1.3.2.2, 1.1.4.2.4, 1.3.1.1, 2.3, 2.4.6, 2.6.4, 2.10, 2.13.3, 2.13.7.2, 3.1.7, 3.1.10, 3.1.18, 3.2.3, 3.6.4, passim loss of emphasis 1.1, 1.3.5, 3.1.3 Maghrebi Arabic 1.2.5, 1.2.7, 2.5.4, 2.7.2, 2.7.5, 2.9.3, 2.12 Maghrebi forms 2.7.2 Maghrebinian features I.1 Maronites 2.13.5 meaning, basic 3.3.4 metaphor, metaphorical 3.1.4, 3.1.6, 3.1.18, 3.1.21 metathesis, r-metathesis, metathetical 1.1.1.1, 1.1.3.2.4, 3.1.14, 3.5.1 metonymy 3.1.2, 3.1.6 minimal pairs 1.1 Morocco I.1., 1.3.4.4, 3.1.6 Moroccan Arabic 3.1.6 morphological distribution 1.1.2.4 motivated formation 3.2.4 mutual adaptation 2.8.1 Muṯallaṯ I.2., I.4., I.5., 2.13.7.2, 1.1.4.2, 1.3.2, 2.1.3, 2.1.5, 2.2.2, 2.2.7, 2.13.7.1, 2.13.7.2, 4., passim negation 1.1.4.1, 2.2.3.1, 2.10.1, 2.1.31.3.5 negative connotation 1.1.1.7, 3.2.5 Negev, N. Bedouins 1.2.5, 1.2.8, 2.5.4, 2.5.5, 2.9.1, 2.10.1, 2.13.3 neologism 3.1.3, 3.2.2, new formation 2.4.3 Niʕlīn 1.3.2 nomen unitatis 3.1, 3.2.4 nomina instrumeni 1.1.2.4 nomina loci et temporis 1.1.2.4 obsolete 2.6.1 fn., 3.4.3 onomatopoetic 3.2.6, 3.6.6 overlong syllables 1.2.9 paradigmatic constraint 2.4.5 paradigmatic levelling 1.3.2 pars pro toto 3.1.18 fn., 3.1.9, 3.5.2 participle 1.1.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.9, 2.6.2, 2.13.11.1, 2.1.3.12.5, 3.6.1 passive 1.2.6, 2.13.13.3 pausal forms, pause 1.1.1.12, 1.1.1.19, 1.1.4.4, 1.2.9, 2.1.2, 2.1.5, 2.2.2, 2.2.5, 4.2 fn., 3.6.4 peninsula 1.1.2.3, 2.13.7.1, 3.6.2

451 plurality of object 3.6.3 polysemic 3.1.9, 3.1.14, 3.1.21 possessive pronouns 2.12 posttonic vowel 2.13.13.7 pragmatics 1.3.2, 2.2.5 prestige pronunciations and forms 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.6 pretonic vowel(s) 1.2.5, 2.13.13.7 progressive assimilation 1.3.8 prothesis, prothetic vowel 1.1.1.1, 2.13.12.2, 2.13.13.2, 2.13.13.3, 2.13.13.4, 2.13.13.6 pseudo-dual 1.2.5 Ramallah 1.1.1.5, 1.1.2.1, 1.2.1, 1.1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.1.2.8, 1.3.2, 1.3.4.1, 1.3.5.1, 2.9.4, 2.12, 2.13.7.2, 2.13.12.1, 2.13.13, 2.13.13.3, 2.13.13.5, 3.6.5, passim reanalysis 1.2.5, 2.8.1 reciprocal assimilation 1.3.9 reduplicated form 3.1.10, 3.6.6 reflexive 2.13.13.3 regressive assimilation 2.4.6 relative clause 2.6.2 rule ordering 1.1.3.1, 1.2.9 rural forms 1.2.6, 1.3.3.1, 2.6.4, 2.1.4, 2.3, 2.7.1, 2.9.4, 2.12, 2.13.7.2, 2.13.13.1, 3.1.2, 3.5.1, 3.5.2, 3.6.5, 3.8.1 Rwaḷa Bedouin 2.10 salient features 4.4 Saudi-Arabia 2.10, 2.10.1 secondary meaning 1.1.1.7 sedentary influence 2.3 semantic amelioration 3.4.2 semantic extension 3.1.11 sexual metaphors 3.1.10 shibboleth forms 1.2.8 shift 1.1.1.13, 1.1.2.1, 1.1.2.6.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.3.4.1, passim shift, semantic 3.1.13, 3.1.19, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.6.2, 3.6.5, 3.1.11, 3.1.18, 3.6.5 shortening of pretonic vowels 2.5.3 sign ~ signal failure (“Deutefehler” in German)1 3.1.10, 3.1.14, 3.1.18 Sinai 2.10.1, 3.1.18 Soukhne 1.1, 1.1.4.2.4, 1.2.3, 1.3.4.1, 2.13.8.1 sound change 1.2.3, 1.3.2 source domain 3.6.2 standard form 1.3.5.1 standard pronunciation 1.1.2.5, 1.4 stigmatised pronunciations 1.3.2.1 Sudanese Arabic 1.1.4.2 suffixation 1.1.4.1, 2.13.4 synecdoche 3.1.11, 3.1.18 synonyms 1.2.7, 2.7.1, 2.8.3, 3.2.1, 3.2.5, 3.5.2, 3.6.6 Syria I.1., 1.1.1.16, 1.1.1.18, 1.1.2.1, 1.1.4.1, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.9, 1.3.3, 1.3.5.1, 2.1.2, 2.4.6, 2.6, 2.8.2, 2.13, 3.1.6, 3.1.7, 3.1.9, 3.1.14, 3.2.4, 3.3.4, 3.4.1, passim Syriac 1.2.9, 2.12, 3.1.9 Syrian Arabic 1.1.2.1, 1.1.2.6.2, 1.1.4.2.4, 1.2.4, 1.1.3.2.5, 1.3.1.1, 1.3.4.1, 1.3.4.2, 2.5.4, 2.7.5, 2.9.3, 2.1.3.5, 2.13.13.1, 2.13.13.3, 2.13.13.5, 3.1.4, 3.1.20, passim Syrian Bedouin dialects 1.1.1.17, 1.1.3.2, 2.8.1, 2.13.6, 2.13.11.1, 3.6.3, passim Syro-Lebanese 1.2.9, 2.2.5, 2.5.5, 2.10.1, 2.13.5, 2.13.7.3 1  Translation proposed by Enam Al-Wer. It means that a word was elicited by pointing at sth. and that the gesture was misunderstood, e.g., pointing at the ‘lobe of the ear’ which was misunderstood by the informants as a question asking for an ‘earring’.

452 Šarqiyya 1.1.2.2, 1.2.9, 1.3.5.1 Šāwi dialects 3.4.2 Takrouna 1.3.4.1, 1.3.5.1 Tel Aviv 1.2.8 terrace landscape 2.13.12.2 tertium comparationis 3.1.20 totum pro parte 3.1.18 trade routes 1.3.3 transparency 2.2.3.1, 2.6.1, 2.7.3 transregional pronunciation 1.3.2 Tripoli/Libya 2.7.5 Tunisia I.1., 1.3.4.1, 2.9.3 Tunisian Arabic 1.2.3, 1.3.4.1, 1.3.4.2 1.3.4.3 Turkish 1.1.1.1.5 fn, 1.1.1.1.7, 1.4 fn., 2.6.3, 3.3.6

General Index univerbated compound 2.7.4 Upper Egyptian 1.1.4.2.4, 2.13.11.1 urban 1.1.1.4, 1.1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.3.1, 1.3.1.1, 1.3.4.1, 1.3.6, 1.3.8, 2.2.3.1, 2.6.4, 2.7.1, 2.8.2, 2.12, 2.13.6, 2.13.7.2, 2.13.12.1, 3.5.2, passim Urfa 3.1.6 variation I.3., 1.1.1.14, 1.1.2.6.2, 1.3.1.1, 1.3.3, 1.3.8, 2.2.5, 2.3, 2.10.1, 2.12.2.13, 2.13.3 vowel harmony 1.1.1.13, 1.1.4.2.5 Yemen 1.2.7, 1.3.5.1, 2.10, 2.13.8.1, 2.13.13, 3.1.3, 3.1.4 Yemeni Arabic 1.3.4.1, 1.3.4.2, 2.13.3, 2.13.13, 3.1.4, 3.1.10