No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Abstract
Considering the almost 1500 years of epigraphic documentation of the Sabaic language, not only can historical periods be defined, but also several regional dialects. While the existence of Sabaic dialects has long been known, the particular features of these dialects have not yet been analysed systematically; within the treatment of Sabaic grammar they have so far only played a rather marginal role. On the other hand, the importance of a detailed knowledge of dialectal characteristics is obvious: the apparent confusion of differing forms in numerous aspects of Sabaic grammar can be solved just as well in manycases by means of historical and dialectal patterns - a fact which has not been sufficiently considered in the past. The present paper attempts a first comprehensive approach to the topic on the basis of an exhaustive study of Sabaic phonology and morphology, based on the analysis of all the epigraphic evidence published so far. Regarding the middle Sabaic period, this material allows a distinction between three main dialectal areas of Sabaic: a northern region (comprising the Amirite or 'Haramic' dialect), a southern region (subdivided into Radmanite, Himyarite, and other dialects) and the central region, the last providing the bulk of the epigraphic evidence in the form of the large text corpora from Mārib and the central highlands.
Until recently, hadramitic was the least known and least studied among the Ancient South Arabian languages. A further difficulty concerning the study of hadramitic inscriptions is the fragmented nature of the corpus in terms of both its chronology and its geography. The paper offers some reflections on the history and unique traits of the language and culture of pre-Islamic hadramawt, taking into account some of the most topical issues in Ancient South Arabian studies. The paper shows how the kingdom of haDramawt, while bearing certain traits that were shared by all of the south Arabian kingdoms, was able to re-elaborate and assimilate them at a precocious stage. During its mature period, owing to the presence of a variety of cultural poles in the country, hadramawt was able to maintain and expand its unique set of linguistic traits, often passing its stylistic models on to the other south Arabian kingdoms.
The paper focuses on the unpublished inscription A-20-216, housed in the University Museum of Şan'a¯', which is a Sabaic votive text dedicated to the goddess Shams and to other South Arabian and foreign divinities and shares a number of traits in common with another Sabaic inscription housed in the British Museum, Ry 547. This text was discussed in the 2007 Seminar for Arabian Studies by Norbert Nebes, who suggested associating it with an unpublished fragment found in Ma'rib by the German Archaeological Institute. In the scholar's opinion the inscription, commissioned by inhabitants of Gerrha settled in South Arabia, might date back to the reign of King Seleucus I (end of the fourth century BC). The inscription at the University Museum of Şan'a¯' now provides further proof of most of these hypotheses. In fact, it is written by one of the tribes mentioned in Ry 547 and contains the same dating formula, even if it gives a different year. Some of the foreign linguistic traits of Ry 547 are also shown in the text. From the point of view of South Arabian chronology, A-20-216 is even more important, as it offers a synchronism between Seleucus and a Sabaean king named Yd'l Byn.
The present contribution proposes the existence of two ‘micro linguistic areas’ in Arabia in which features from Arabic and other Semitic languages diffused multilaterally. Some of the output varieties pose a significant challenge to phylogeny as they exhibit conflicting isoglosses connecting them equally with different lineages of Semitic. We introduce to the term ‘areal hybridity’ to explain the genetic position of languages emerging from contact situations such as these. We argue that several older varieties, such as the dialect of Ṭayyiʾ and the medieval Ḥimyaritic language described by the Arab grammarians, as well some modern varieties of southwest Arabia, such as Rāziḥī and Riǧāl Almaʿ, fall into this category.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.