D
Dave_Noonan
Guest
I submitted this question in “Ask an Apologist” but never received an answer, so I’ll throw it out to the general populace.
I was listening to Catholic Answers Live the other day and Fr. Vincent Serpa came on with a “Catholic Answers Minute.” I thought I heard Fr. Serpa make the statement that “Aramaic had no word for cousin.” (I admittedly may have misheard.) Anyway, I found this to be pretty shocking for several reasons. The first reason is that we moderns (of course) have no complete first century native-speaker lexicon of Palestinian Aramaic to be able to determine whether this is or is not the case. It seems to me that one perhaps might try to assert something like: “there is no attestation of a word for ‘cousin’ in Palestinian Aramaic”—but I don’t understand why someone who should be knowledgeable would make a such a positivistic statement for which no one could never compile supporting evidence. Quite simply, you can’t prove a negative in this case. Even if you combed through all the written sources, there would still be the possibility that in the spoken language, there was a word for cousin that never came up in a written context. Also, the blanket term “Aramaic” is pretty broad geographically and chronologically.
Based on a CA Forum search I see this assertion repeated quite often in threads (and even in a CA tract for that matter) but never explained.
The second part of my reaction has to do with the fact that Aramaic words for “cousin” can be quite easily located in places like the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon (online) or Sokoloff’s A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic. So I am curious as to why this never seems to be acknowledged or addressed by those who wish to argue the negative assertion.
I’m wondering whether perhaps this is just one of those canards (like the Council of Jamnia) that has been cited so many times that the idea just won’t die–regardless of whether it is correct or not?
Note that this is not a question or observation about the perpetual virginity of Mary, only on the assertion that “Aramaic had no word for cousin.”
Alternatively, if you can direct me to a thread that already discusses this, I would be appreciative.
I was listening to Catholic Answers Live the other day and Fr. Vincent Serpa came on with a “Catholic Answers Minute.” I thought I heard Fr. Serpa make the statement that “Aramaic had no word for cousin.” (I admittedly may have misheard.) Anyway, I found this to be pretty shocking for several reasons. The first reason is that we moderns (of course) have no complete first century native-speaker lexicon of Palestinian Aramaic to be able to determine whether this is or is not the case. It seems to me that one perhaps might try to assert something like: “there is no attestation of a word for ‘cousin’ in Palestinian Aramaic”—but I don’t understand why someone who should be knowledgeable would make a such a positivistic statement for which no one could never compile supporting evidence. Quite simply, you can’t prove a negative in this case. Even if you combed through all the written sources, there would still be the possibility that in the spoken language, there was a word for cousin that never came up in a written context. Also, the blanket term “Aramaic” is pretty broad geographically and chronologically.
Based on a CA Forum search I see this assertion repeated quite often in threads (and even in a CA tract for that matter) but never explained.
The second part of my reaction has to do with the fact that Aramaic words for “cousin” can be quite easily located in places like the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon (online) or Sokoloff’s A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic. So I am curious as to why this never seems to be acknowledged or addressed by those who wish to argue the negative assertion.
I’m wondering whether perhaps this is just one of those canards (like the Council of Jamnia) that has been cited so many times that the idea just won’t die–regardless of whether it is correct or not?
Note that this is not a question or observation about the perpetual virginity of Mary, only on the assertion that “Aramaic had no word for cousin.”
Alternatively, if you can direct me to a thread that already discusses this, I would be appreciative.
