|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Canaanite languages article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2|
|WikiProject Languages||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Ancient Near East||(Rated Start-class)|
Ani vs. Anoki
As opposed to the comment, as I recall, both Ani and Anoki are common Afro-Asiatic pronouns, with different theories as to why there would be two different 1st person pronouns (gender, etc). Canaanite using 'Anoki', except for Mishnaic (and later) Hebrew borrowing Ani from Aramaic. That is, 'ana/i' would be less of a AfroAsiatic 'retention'.
- Ok, I'ved removed the this is a common retention from proto-Afro-Asiatic., both Ani and Anoki as present in proto-afro-asiatics, I don't remember specific non-semitic AfroAsiatics with either. There's several theories about the use, I think the popular one assumes them to be used for different gendered, but with no hard-evidence, ie, no recorded or spoken language that has both pronounes at the same period
I added a (?) after Philistine. Its genetic relationship to other languages is far from certain. Imperial78
- The one who added Philistine here had with no doubt a very bad reason for doing so. There are people with POV who try to make fictional historical connection between Philistinians and present days Arabic Palestinians. Almost all of the articles that connected to this isuue are stricken by this POV and it goes well as there is no one to harshly supervise these aritcles quality. The origins of Philistine and Philistinians were European, not Semitic. There is no difference in counting Philistine as Canaanite than in counting French or English as ones.
Quote a book which is quoting another book, The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (edited by G. A. Buttrick, 1962, Vol. 1, p. 495) that “the Amarna Letters contain evidence for the opinion that non-Semitic ethnic elements settled in Palestine and Syria at a rather early date, for a number of these letters show a remarkable influence of non-Semitic tongues.” (Italics ours.) The facts are that there is still uncertainty as to the original language spoken by the first inhabitants of Canaan. Canaanite were Hamitic, as were there language.
The Canaanites' Semitic lanugage was adopted it came about was because the nations around spoke Arabic, Aramiac, Urgatic, Akkadian, Non-Israelite Hebrew, and they spoken languages were increasing in number as were there people, also they gaining more and more power. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
There is no reference here to the Canaanite language found in glosses on the Tell elAmarna tablets. Bezold's book on the tablets is available online. Start with that. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 12:47, 22 April 2015 (UTC)