Thank you, Trevor. In this case it is possible that, for some unknown reason, both words were originally plural in form, but many Semitic languages have (independently?) lost the plural form. This common feature might tend to support an original etymological link, but also confirms that it goes back to proto-Semitic i.e. at least to the original split between East and West Semitic.===== Original Message From Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org> =====
Akkadian: shamu, mu
Ugaritic: shamuma, my
Phoenician: shmm, mym
Achaemenid Aramaic: shmin, myn
Syriac: shmayya, mayya
Classical Arabic: sama', ma'
Ge`ez (Ethiopic): samay, may
Sabaean: shmy, mw
Jibbali: sieh (with a nasalised e), mih
Aramaic and Phoenician also show the plural suffix, but the other forms
do not. This suggests that the innovation is a bit more widespread than
just Hebrew, but still localised to a small part of NW Semitic.
The Akkadian and Ugaritic forms are also plural.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.