If you'd read context, you'd see, that Assyrian ambassador was mimicing Pentateuch-Hebrew addressing to the Jews on the wall as if his words are the prophesy from Jewish God "if Jews will not give up, they will be destroyed by God Himself with Assyrian arms". That's why Jews replied to Assyrian ambassador not to speak Pentateuch-Hebrew to them but Aramaic-colloquial, because they didn't believe that Assyrian.The Bible, 2 Kings 18:26, says explicitly that Hebrew ("Judean") and Aramaic are NOT mutually intelligible
Just gotta correct this.Also, another thing I forgot to mention is that the modern surviving Aramaic dialects are not mutually intelligible even among themselves (between even the closest dialects), and thus have virtually no mutual intelligibility with Modern Hebrew.
Yup, all of this is true. I haven't had the chance to listen to most of the Jewish dialects outside of songs or random YouTube videos, but the ones I did play to my Assyrian friends said that many of the Jewish dialects are closer to the "Chaldean" Nineveh dialect than other Assyrian dialects, which makes sense as many of those have origins in Turkey.Thanks. I said that well before I had tried to learn Northeastern Neo-Aramaic. I would definitely say that many of the NENA dialects are mutually intelligible, but certainly not all. The farther away you get from the nucleus of the region (Northwestern Iraq), the more different the dialects become, and it seems that the farther away Jewish dialects become more different than their co-territorial Christian dialects. For example, the Jewish and Christian dialects of Urmi are probably not very mutually intelligible.
There was a consistent shift of "t" (or "th"?) to "l" in some Neo-Judeo-Aramaic dialects of Persia and Azerbaijan, so ביתא became בילא.As an example, if I recall correctly, in Christian Urmi the word for "house" is pronounced "béta" (with a "t" and with stress on the first syllable), while in Jewish Urmi it is prnounced "belá" (with an "l" and with stress on the last syllable).
Just to clarify for anyone reading this, this only applies to the Christian dialects.In general all the Urmi dialects have replaced "th" and "dh" with "t" and "d".
In Iraq most retain "th" (I think Iraqi Koine replaces "th" with "t", but almost all Iraqis in my experience have "th") but "dh" seems to be confined to some of the Nineveh "Chaldean" dialects and maybe Turoyo (not sure).
This is interesting. What is it about the two dialects/languages that makes them unintelligible with each other? And when did they begin diverging?The only remnants of Western Aramaic spoken today are in Maaloula and 2 other Syrian villages, spoken by both Muslims and Christians though heavily endangered (and now even more so since ISIS). They are totally unintelligible with Eastern dialects.
Western and Eastern Aramaic were already diverging in Biblical times. Biblical Aramaic (in the Books of Daniel and Ezra, for example, is a Western Aramaic dialect. Classical Syriac is an Eastern Aramaic dialect. In those times they were probably still mutually intelligible, but had already diverged in many ways.This is interesting. What is it about the two dialects/languages that makes them unintelligible with each other? And when did they begin diverging?
I don't have the sources to back this up, but I think this might have something to do with it.This is interesting. What is it about the two dialects/languages that makes them unintelligible with each other? And when did they begin diverging?
I really don't know that much about western dialects.But I was also interested to know what exactly makes it hard for them to communicate. Is it the phonology? The morphology? Words changing beyond recognition? Or just a different lexicon?