Editing Suret language (section)

==Grammar==
NENA is a [[pro-drop]], [[null-subject language]] with both [[ergative language|ergative morphology]] and a [[nominative-accusative]] system.<ref>The Debate on Ergativity in Neo-Aramaic EDIT DORON & GEOFFREY KHAN (2010). The [[Hebrew University of Jerusalem]] & [[University of Cambridge]]</ref>

Due to [[language contact]], Suret may share similar grammatical features with [[Persian language|Persian]] and [[Kurdish languages|Kurdish]] in the way they employ the negative [[Copula (linguistics)|copula]] in its full form before the verbal [[Constituent (linguistics)|constituent]] and also with the [[Affirmation and negation|negated]] forms of the [[present perfect]].<ref>8 Cf. M. Tomal, Studies in Neo-Aramaic Tenses, Kraków 2008, pp. 108 and 120.</ref>

;Verbal stems<ref>Goldenberg, G. 2002 'Early Neo-Aramaic and Present-day dialectal diversity'. Journal of Semitic Studies XLV: 69-89.</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Aspect !! Stem 
|-
| '''[[Imperative mood|Imperative]]''' || ''ptux'' ("open!")
|-
| '''[[Realis mood|Indicative]]''' || ''patx-'' ( + ''k- / ki-'' present, ''bit-'' future, ''qam-'' past, transitive, definite object) ("opens")
|-
|'''[[Perfect (grammar)|Perfect]]''' || ''ptix-'' ([[perfect participle]], f. ''ptixta'', m. ''ptixa'', pl. ''ptixe'') ("opened")
|-
|'''[[Gerund]]''' ||''(bi-)ptaxa'' ("opening")
|}

===Suffixes===
Suret uses verbal inflections marking person and number. The suffix "''-e''" indicates a (usually masculine) [[plural]] (i.e. ''ward'''a''''', "flower", [[inflection|becomes]] ''ward'''e''''', "flower'''s'''"). [[Enclitic]] forms of [[personal pronoun]]s are affixed to various parts of speech. As with the [[object pronoun]], [[Possessive|possessive pronouns]] are [[suffix]]es that are [[possessive affix|attached to the end of nouns]] to express possession similar to the English pronouns ''my, your, his, her,'' etc., which reflects the gender and plurality of the person or persons.<ref>Zwicky, Arnold M. "''Clitics and Particles''." Language 61.2 (1985): 283–305. Print.</ref> This is a [[synthetic language|synthetic]] feature found in other Semitic languages and also in unrelated languages such as [[Finnish language|Finnish]] ([[Uralic languages|Uralic]]), [[Persian language|Persian]] ([[Indo-European languages|Indo-European]]) and [[Turkish language|Turkish]] ([[Turkic languages|Turkic]]).

Moreover, unlike many other languages, Suret has virtually no means of [[morphological derivation|deriving]] words by adding prefixes or suffixes to words. Instead, they are formed according to a limited number of templates applied to roots.<ref name="Solomon, Zomaya S.1994">Solomon, Zomaya S. (1994). ''Basic sentence structure in Assyrian Aramaic'', Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies, VIII/1:83–107</ref> Modern Assyrian, like Akkadian but unlike Arabic, has only "sound" plurals formed by means of a plural ending (i.e. no [[broken plurals]] formed by changing the [[word stem]]). As in all Semitic languages, some masculine nouns take the prototypically feminine plural ending (''-tā'').{{citation needed|date=June 2021}}

==== Possessive suffixes ====
{| class="wikitable" align="center"
|+Iraqi Koine possessive suffixes
! colspan="2" |
! singular
! plural
|-
! colspan="2" | 1st person
| {{transliteration|syc|betī}} (my house)
| {{transliteration|syc|betan}} (our house)
|-
! rowspan="2" | 2nd person
! masc.
| {{transliteration|syc|betux}} (your house)
| rowspan="2" | {{transliteration|syc|betōxun}} (your house)
|-
! fem.
| {{transliteration|syc|betax}} (your house)
|-
! rowspan="2" | 3rd person
! masc.
| {{transliteration|syc|betū}} (his house)
| rowspan="2" | {{transliteration|syc|betéh}} (their house)
|-
! fem.
| {{transliteration|syc|betō}} (her house)
|}

Although possessive suffixes are more convenient and common, they can be optional for some people and seldom used, especially among those with the Tyari and Barwari dialects, which take a more [[analytic language|analytic]] approach regarding possession, just like English [[possessive determiner]]s. The following are [[Periphrasis|periphrastic]] ways to express possession, using the word ''betā'' ("house") as a base (in Urmian/Iraqi Koine):

*my house: ''betā-it dīyī'' ("house-of mine")
*your ([[Grammatical gender|masc.]], sing.) house: ''betā-it dīyux'' ("house-of yours")
*your (fem., sing.) house: ''betā-it dīyax'' ("house-of yours")
*your (plural) house: ''betā-it dīyōxun'' ("house-of yours")
*3rd person (masc., sing.): ''betā-it dīyū'' ("house-of his")
*3rd person (fem., sing.): ''betā-it dīyō'' ("house-of hers")
*3rd person (plural): ''betā-it dīyéh'' ("house-of theirs")

==== Stress ====
Hakkari dialects are generally [[Isochrony|stress-timed]], whereas the Urmian and Iraqi Koine dialects may be more [[Syllable timing|syllable-timed]]:

*An example of stress timing is noticeable in the word "''qat''", an [[Conjunction (grammar)|adverb clause conjunction]] which translates to "so that" – The 'a' sound in "''qat''" is unstressed and thus would turn into a [[schwa]] if one would place the stress in the next word of the sentence, so; "''mīri qat āzekh''" becomes "''mīri qət āzekh''" ("I said that we go"). 
*Another example is observed in teen [[natural number|numerical]] range (13-19); In some dialects (particularly those of Hakkari), the words "''īštāser''" (sixteen) or "''arbāser''" (fourteen), among other teen numbers, the typically stressed vowel in the middle ([[Ā|long A]]) is reduced to a schwa, hence "īštəser" and "''arbəser''", respectively. 
{{Listen
| filename     = Assyriantone.ogg
| title        = ''dīyeh'' ("his"), ''dīyéh'' ("theirs")
| description  = An unstressed ''-eh'' denotes a singular possessive form (masc.), whereas a stressed ''-éh'' is a third person [[Apostrophe#Plural possessive|plural possessive]].
| format       = [[Ogg]]
}}
Although Suret, like all Semitic languages, is not a [[tonal language]], a tonal stress is made on a plural possessive suffix -''éh'' (i.e. ''dīy'''éh'''''; "their") in the final vowel to [[pitch accent|tonally differentiate]] it from an unstressed -''eh'' (i.e. ''dīyeh''; "his"), which is a masculine [[Possessive determiner|singular possessive]], with a standard stress pattern falling on the penult. The -''eh'' used to denote a singular [[Third person (grammar)|third person]] masculine possessive (e.g. ''bābeh'', "his father"; ''aqleh'', "his leg") is present in most of the traditional dialects in [[Hakkari (historical region)|Hakkari]] and [[Nineveh Plains]], but not for Urmian and some Iraqi Koine speakers, who instead use -''ū'' for possessive "his" (e.g. ''bābū'', "his father"; ''aqlū'', "his leg"), whilst retaining the stress in -''éh'' for "their".<ref name="Solomon, Zomaya S.1994" />

This phenomenon however may not always be present, as some Hakkari speakers, especially those from Tyari and Barwar, would use analytic speech to denote possession. So, for instance, ''bābeh'' (literally, "father-his") would be uttered as ''bābā-id dīyeh'' (literally, "father-of his"). In Iraqi Koine and Urmian, the plural form and the third person plural possessive suffix of many words, such as ''wardeh'' and ''biyyeh'' ("flowers"/"eggs" and "their flower(s)"/"their eggs", respectively), would be [[homophone]]s were it not for the varying, distinctive stress on the penult or ultima.<ref>Fox, S. E., 1997, The Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Jilu, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz</ref>

=== Determinative ===
When it comes to a [[determinative]] (like in English ''this'', ''a'', ''the'', ''few'', ''any'', ''which'', etc.), Suret generally has an absence of an [[Article (grammar)#Zero article|article]] (English "the''"''), unlike other Semitic languages such as [[Arabic language|Arabic]], which does use a [[definite article]] ({{langx|ar|ال}}, ''al-''). [[Demonstratives]] (''āhā'', ''āy''/''āw'' and ''ayyāhā/awwāhā'' translating to "[[Demonstrative|this]]", "[[that]]" and "that one over there", respectively, demonstrating [[Demonstrative#Distal and proximal demonstratives|proximal, medial and distal deixis]]) are commonly utilised instead (e.g. ''āhā betā'', "this house"), which can have the sense of "the". An indefinite article ("a(n)") can mark definiteness if the word is a [[direct object]] (but not a subject) by using the prepositional prefix "''l-''" paired with the proper suffix (e.g. ''šāqil qālāmā'', "he takes '''a''' pen" vs. ''šāqil-'''lāh''' qālāmā'', "he takes '''the''' pen"). [[Article (grammar)#Partitive article|Partitive]] articles may be used in some speech (e.g. ''bayyīton '''xačča''' miyyā?'', which translates to "do you [pl.] want '''some''' water?").<ref>Solomon, Zomaya S. (1997). ''Functional and other exotic sentences in Assyrian Aramaic'', Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies, XI/2:44–69.</ref>

In place of a definite article, Ancient Aramaic used the emphatic state, formed by the addition of the suffix: "''-ā''" for generally masculine words and "''-t(h)ā''" (if the word already ends in ''-ā'') for feminine. The definite forms were ''pallāxā'' for "the (male) worker" and ''pallāxtā'' for "the (female) worker". Beginning even in the Classical Syriac era, when the prefixed preposition "''d-''" came into more popular use and replaced state Morphology for marking possession, the emphatic (definite) form of the word became dominant and the definite sense of the word [[Phonological change|merged]] with the indefinite sense so that ''pālāxā'' became "a/the (male) worker" and ''pālaxtā'' became "a/the (female) worker."

=== Consonantal root ===
Most NENA [[noun]]s and verbs are built from [[Semitic root#Triconsonantal roots|triconsonantal roots]], which are a form of word formation in which the [[root (linguistics)|root]] is modified and which does not involve stringing [[morpheme]]s together sequentially. Unlike Arabic, [[broken plural]]s are not present. Semitic languages typically utilise triconsonantal roots, forming a "grid" into which vowels may be inserted without affecting the basic root.<ref>{{cite book |last=Haspelmath |first=Martin |title=Understanding Morphology |year=2002 |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |location=New York |isbn=0-340-76026-5}}</ref>{{page needed|date=June 2021}}

The root ''{{transliteration|syc|š-q-l}}'' ({{lang|syc|ܫ-ܩ-ܠ}}) has the basic meaning of "taking", and the following are some words that can be formed from this root:

*''{{transliteration|syc|šqil-leh}}'' ({{lang|syc|ܫܩܝܼܠ ܠܹܗ}}): "he has taken" (literally "taken-by him")
*''{{transliteration|syc|šāqil}}'' ({{lang|syc|ܫܵܩܸܠ}}): "he takes"
*''{{transliteration|syc|šāqlā}}'' ({{lang|syc|ܫܵܩܠܵܐ}}): "she takes"
*''{{transliteration|syc|šqul}}'' ({{lang|syc|ܫܩܘܿܠ}}): "take!"
*''{{transliteration|syc|šqālā}}'' ({{lang|syc|ܫܩܵܠܵܐ}}): "taking"
*''{{transliteration|syc|šqīlā}}'' ({{lang|syc|ܫܩܝܼܠܵܐ}}): "taken"

=== Tenses ===
Suret has lost the [[Perfect (grammar)|perfect]] and [[imperfect]] [[morphology (linguistics)|morphological]] tenses common in other Semitic languages. The [[present tense]] is usually marked with the [[subject (grammar)|subject]] [[pronoun]] followed by the [[participle]]; however, such pronouns are usually omitted in the case of the third person. This use of the participle to mark the present tense is the most common of a number of ''compound'' tenses that can be used to express varying senses of tense and aspect.<ref>Comrie, Bernard, ''Tense'', Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985.</ref>{{page needed|date=June 2021}} Suret's new system of inflection is claimed to resemble that of the Indo-European languages, namely the [[Iranian languages]]. This assertion is founded on
the utilisation of an [[active participle]] concerted with a [[copula (linguistics)|copula]] and a [[passive participle]] with a genitive/[[dative]] element which is present in [[Old Persian]] and in Neo-Aramaic.<ref>E. Kutscher, Two "Passive" Constructions in Aramaic in the Light of Persian, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Semitic Studies held in Jerusalem, 19–23 July 1965, [[The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities]] 1969, pp. 132–151</ref>

Both Modern Persian and Suret build the [[present perfect tense]] around the past/[[resultative]] participle in conjunct with the copula (though the placing and form of the copula unveil crucial differences). The more conservative Suret dialects lay the copula in its full shape before the verbal [[Constituent (linguistics)|constituent]]. In the Iraqi and Iranian dialects, the previous construction is addressable with different types of the copula (e.g. [[deictic]]) but with the elemental copula only the cliticised form is permitted. Among conservative Urmian speakers, only the construction with the enclitic ordered after the verbal constituent is allowed. Due to [[language contact]], the similarities between Kurdish and Modern Persian and the Urmian dialects become even more evident with their [[Negation (linguistics)|negated]] forms of present perfect, where they display close similarities.<ref>Cf. M. Tomal, Studies in Neo-Aramaic Tenses, Kraków 2008, pp. 108 and 120.</ref>

A recent feature of Suret is the usage of the [[infinitive]] instead of the present base for the expression of the [[present progressive]], which is also united with the copula. Although the language has some other varieties of the copula precedent to the verbal constituent, the common construction is with the infinitive and the basic copula cliticsed to it. In the [[Jewish Neo-Aramaic dialect of Urmia]], the symmetrical order of the constituents is with the present perfect tense. This structure of the NENA dialects is to be compared with the present progressive in Kurdish and [[Turkish language|Turkish]] as well, where the enclitic follows the infinitive. Such construction is present in Kurdish, where it is frequently combined with the [[locative]] element "in, with", which is akin to the preposition bi- preceding the infinitive in Suret (as in "bi-ktawen" meaning 'I'm writing'). The similarities of the constituents and their [[Morphosyntactic alignment|alignment]] in the present progressive construction in Suret is clearly attributed to influence from the neighbouring languages, such as the use of the infinitive for this construction and the employment of the enclitic copula after the verbal base in all verbal constructions, which is due to the impinging of the Kurdish and Turkish speech.<ref>E. McCarus, op. cit., p. 619, Kapeliuk gives further examples, see O. Kapeliuk, The gerund and gerundial participle in Eastern Neo-Aramaic, in: "Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung" 1996, Vol. 51, p. 286.</ref>

The [[morphology (linguistics)|morphology]] and the valency of the verb, and the arrangement of the [[Grammatical relation|grammatical role]]s should be noticed when it comes to the similarities with [[Kurdish languages|Kurdish]]. Unlike [[Old Persian]], [[Modern Persian]] made no distinction between [[Transitive verb|transitive]] and [[intransitive verb]]s, where it unspecialised the [[absolutive]] type of inflection. Different handling of inflection with transitive and intransitive verbs is also nonexistent in the NENA dialects. In contrast with Persian though, it was the ergative type that was generalised in NENA.<ref>O. Kapeliuk, Is Modern Hebrew the Only "Indo-Europeanized" Semitic Language? And What About Neo-Aramaic?, "Israel Oriental Studies" 1996, Vol. 16, pp. 59–70</ref><ref>M. Chyet, Neo Aramaic and Kurdish. An Interdisciplinary Consideration of their Influence on Each Other, "Israel Oriental Studies" 1997, Vol. 15, pp. 219–252.</ref>

{| class="wikitable" align="center"
|+ Persian and Suret verb tense comparison
|-
! Language !! Transitive verb !! Intransitive verb
|-
| Modern Persian
| {{interlinear|košte-am|kill.PP-COP.1SG|'I killed'}}
| {{interlinear|āmade-am|arrive.PP-COP.1SG|'I arrived'}}
|-
| Suret{{clarify|which dialect|date=June 2021}}
| {{interlinear|qṭǝl-li|kill.PP-1SG.OBL|'I killed'}}
| {{interlinear|dmǝx-li|sleep.PP-1SG.OBL|'I went to sleep'}}
|}

=== Ergativity ===
Although Aramaic has been a nominative-accusative language historically, [[split ergativity]] in Christian and Jewish Neo-Aramaic languages developed through interaction with ergative [[Iranian languages]], such as [[Kurdish languages|Kurdish]], which is spoken by the Muslim population of the region.<ref>Cf. G. Khan, Ergativity in North Eastern Neo-Aramaic Dialects in: Alter Orient und Altes Testament. Studies in Semitics and General Linguistics Honor of Gideon Goldenberg, (334) 2007, pp. 147–157.</ref> Ergativity formed in the [[perfective]] aspect only (the [[imperfective]] aspect is nominative-accusative), whereas the [[subject (grammar)|subject]], the original [[agent (grammar)|agent]] [[Grammatical construction|construction]] of the passive participle, was expressed as an [[oblique case|oblique]] with [[dative case]], and is presented by [[Agreement (linguistics)|verb-agreement]] rather than case. The absolutive argument in [[Transitive verb|transitive]] clauses is the syntactic [[object (grammar)|object]].<ref>Ura, Hiroyuki. 2006. A Parametric Syntax of Aspectually Conditioned Split-ergativity. In Alana Johns, Diane Massam, and Juvenal Ndayiragije (eds.) Ergativity: Emerging issues. Dordrecht: Springer. 111-141.</ref><ref>A. Mengozzi, Neo-Aramaic and the So-called Decay of Ergativity in Kurdish, in: Proceedings of the 10th Meeting of Hamito-Semitic (Afroasiatic) Linguistics (Florence, 18–20 April 2005), Dipartamento di Linguistica Università di Firenze 2005, pp. 239–256.</ref> The dialects of Kurdish make a concordant distinction between transitive and intransitive verbs by using a tense-split ergative pattern, which is present in the tense system of some NENA dialects; The nominative accusative type is made use of in the present for all the verbs and also for intransitive verbs in past tense and the ergative type is used instead for transitive verbs.<ref>W. Thackston, op. cit. and E. McCarus, Kurdish Morphology, in: A. Kaye (ed.) Morphologies of Asia and Africa (Including the Caucasus)</ref>

Unique among the Semitic languages, the development of ergativity in Northeastern Neo-Aramaic dialects involved the departure of original Aramaic tensed [[finite verb]]al forms.<ref>Nash, Lea. 1996. The Internal Ergative Subject Hypothesis. Proceedings of NELS 26: 195–210.</ref> Thereafter, the active participle became the root of the Suret imperfective, while the [[passive voice|passive]] participle evolved into the Suret perfective.<ref>Alexiadou, Artemis. 2001. Functional Structure in Nominals: Nominalization and Ergativity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.</ref>{{Page needed|date=May 2020}} The Extended-Ergative dialects, which include Iraqi Koine, Hakkari and Christian Urmian dialects, show the lowest state of ergativity and would mark [[unaccusative]] subjects and [[intransitive verb]]s in an ergative pattern.<ref>Hoberman, Robert. 1989. The Syntax and Semantics of Verb Morphology in Modern Aramaic: A Jewish Dialect of Iraqi Kurdistan. New Haven: American Oriental Society.</ref>

{| class="wikitable" align="center"
|+ Ergativity patterns
|-
! Perfective stem
! Split-S <br /> (Jewish [[Sulemaniyya]])
! Dynamic-Stative <br />(Jewish Urmi)
! Extended-Erg <br />(Christian Hakkari dialects)
|-
| he opened it
| {{interlinear|pləx-∅-le|open-ABS-ERG|}}
| {{interlinear|pləx-∅-le|open-ABS-ERG|}}
| {{interlinear|ptíx-∅-le|open-MASC-ERG|}}
|-
| it opened
| {{interlinear|plix-∅|open-ABS|}}
| {{interlinear|pləx-le|open-ERG|}}
| {{interlinear|ptíx-le|open-ERG|}}
|-
| it got cut
| {{interlinear|qəṭe-∅|cut-ABS|}}
| {{interlinear|qṭe-le|cut-ERG|}}
| {{interlinear|qṭí-le|cut-ERG|}}
|-
| it was ruined
| {{interlinear|xrəw-∅-le|ruin-ABS-ERG|}}
| {{interlinear|məxrəw-le-le|ruin-ERG-ACC|}}
| {{interlinear|xríw-∅-le|ruin-ABS-ERG|}}
|}