a media into a media, and so forth. ܙܬ was pronounced like ܣܬ (e. g. ݂ܪܱܓܽܘܙܬ݂ܳܢܳܐ "vehemently angry" like ܪܱܓܽܘܣܬ݂ܳܣܳܐ), for ܙ is a media and ܣ a tenuis like ܬ݂ (in spite of the assibilation); ܙܟ like ܣܟ (e. g. ܢܷܙܟܷ݁ܐ "conquers" like ܢܷܣܟܷ݁ܐ; ܕܰܙܟ݂ܰܪܝܳܐ "of Zacharias" like ܕܰܣܟ݂ܰܪܝܳܐ); vice versa ܣܕ like ܙܕ (e. g. ܚܶܣܕܳ݁ܐ "disgrace" like ܚܶܙܕܳ݁ܐ). Farther ܓܬ݂ was given like ܟܬ݂ (e. g. ܪܱܝܽܘܓ݂ܬ݂ܳܢܳܐ "greedy" like ܪܱܝܽܘܟ݂ܬ݂ܳܢܳܐ), and even ܩܬ݂, with suppression of the emphasis before the last unemphatic ܬ, like ܟ݁ܬ݂ (e. g. ܥܱܝܽܘܩܬ݂ܳܢܳܐ "sorrowful" like ܥܱܝܽܘܟ݁ܬܳܢܳܐ. The East-Syrians went much farther in this process, for they prescribed e. g. ܠܡܷܕ݂ܒܱ݁ܪ even for ܠܡܷܬ݂ܒܱ݁ܪ "to break"; ܢܹܐܓ݁ܕ݁ܘܰܢ for ܢܹܐܩܕ݁ܘܰܢ; and they gave to ܫ immediately before ܒ, ܓ, ܕ, the sound of the French j, ge (Pers. ژ), e. g. in ܚܰܘܫܒܳܢܳܐ "an account". This subject might be treated at great length. Notice that such assimilations take place even when the consonants affected were originally separated by a sheva (e̊).—The written language exhibits only a few traces of these changes.[1]
Rem. A very ancient reversed assimilation consists in ܩܬ always becoming ܩܛ in Aramaic roots[2] at the beginning of the word, as the emphatic ܛ corresponds more accurately to ܩ than does ܬ. Similar equalisations in all roots might farther be pointed out.
Rukkākhā and Quššāyā. R. and Q. in individual words.RUKKĀKHĀ AND QUŠŠĀYĀ.
- ↑ The proper name כזבי (Num. 25, 15) is written in Ceriani's Pesh. ܟܘܣܒܝ, where sb has the sound of zb. In Aphr. 111, 6, and Ephr. Nis. 71 v. 65 (in one Codex) it still stands ܟܘܙܒܝ.
- ↑ ܩܱܬܴ݁ܪܴܐ "stone" would form an exception, but this word is probably of foreign origin.
- ↑ And in that case, apparently, they always make it quiesce into u. Even the best Nestorian MSS. are, from these circumstances, of almost no value for an
