Etymology of "Arab", Etc.
Etznab
Was looking for origin of the word "arab" &
I found this so far. Which was more than I
knew before.
***********************************************
In the Qur'an, the word ʿarab does
not appear, only the nisba adjective,
ʿarabiyyun: [....]
Based on this, in early Islamic terminology,
ʿarab referred to sedentary Arabs, living in
cities such as Mecca and Medina, and
ʾaʿrāb referred to the Arab Bedouins, [....]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_the_word_Arab
That was significant to me since the
Bedouin are commonly associated by
"movement" from one place to another.
Part of my research on this topic led
me to pages about pre-Islamic Arabia
and lanuages spoken aroung the 5th &
6th centuries B.C. Primarily Ancient
North Arabian. Some examples:
The definite article is h-/hn- (or zero) in
Ancient North Arabian and al- in CA.
However, the oldest evidence of both
articles occurs in the 5th century BC,
in the epithet of a goddess which Hero-
dotus quotes in its preclassical Arabic
form as ʼal-ʼilat, and which occurs in its
Ancient North Arabian form as hn-ʼlt in
a number of Aramaic inscriptions. Both
mean "the goddess".[3]
[....]
Safaitic shows considerable alternations
in roots between w and y, e.g. wrḫ which
becomes yrḫ "month". (This change is
also characteristic of Northwest Semitic
languages).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_North_Arabian
The latter has me wanting to take a 2nd
look at the word "Yama" & "Ymir", etc.,
and compare with Hindu Uma - "name of
the goddess Parvati in Hindu mythology."
Along with other words beginning with the
sounds "um-", or "om-".
Some more trivia about ancient Arabic:
Safaitic is a branch of the early South
Central Semitic languages (Arabic).
Within the Arabic group there are a
number of dialects which use h- rather
than ’al for the definite article - these
include Safaitic, Dedanite, Lihyanite,
Thamudic and Hasaitic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safaitic
***********************************************
This track of research stems from having
contemplated the word "Rama" and "Ab-
ram", then looking at root words with "rm"
and asking myself:
1) What happens when the "rm" root is
preceded by an "h".
2) What happens when the "m" in "rm"
changes to a "b"?
Still looking at all of this.
From the Arab history sites it looked, to
me, as ancient "arabs" came up from the
south before settling in the Middle East. I
also found evidence for the same kind of
thing happening with Semites.
And, of course, one can find numerous
examples (depending on source) which
propose who was there first.
Umm ... regardless, if there were settle-
ments and there were nomads then does
it really matter, and can one really argue
who was there when? Nomadic tribes -
(Aryans anyone?) have more than once
been accused of conquering settlements
all throughout history. However, I want to
ask myself if even the word "conquer" is
in every case the most appropriate.
A snippet:
Many scholars derive the entire population
of the Mesopotamia from population move-
ments out of Jazirat al-Arab ("island of the
Arabs") – an area between the Red Sea and
the Persian Gulf, with Hadramawt its southern
perimeter, extending northward up to the area
just east of the Dead Sea (Jordan).[30] Early
Semitic peoples from the Ancient Near East,
such as the Arameans, Akkadians and Cana-
anites, built civilizations in Mesopotamia and
the Levant; genetically, they often interlapped
and mixed.[31] Slowly, however, they lost their
political domination of the Near East due to in-
ternal turmoil and attacks by non-Semitic
peoples. Although the Semites eventually lost
political control of Western Asia to the Persian
Empire, the Aramaic language remained the
lingua franca of Mesopotamia and the Levant.
Aramaic itself was replaced by Greek as West-
ern Asia's prestige language following the con-
quest of Alexander III of Macedon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab
What causes the most turmoil on the grandest
scale (in my opinion) is when "peoples" get to
writing (and rewriting) history to set their own
agendas. Including the formation of religions &
religious texts. It sets people one against the
other where this might not have been the case
originally. This is one strong reason for looking
at recorded history according to organized re-
ligion ans comparing that with what the actual
evidence shows with regard to same. Keeping
in mind that academia is not immune from the
bias of national, or religious preferences. This
includes archaeology and the study of ancient
things generally. In the past there was a time
when findings had to agree with the dominant
religion (for a given area), otherwise it was put
in a place like "The Forbidden Zone" from The
Planet of the Apes!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbidden_Zone_(Planet_of_the_Apes)
Etznab