On Air

Investment

Buy this Domain?
Do you interesting about this domain and the running project?
Feel free to send your offer to webmaster.
pay with Paypal

Advertising

Phoenician language

Phoenician was a language originally spoken in the coastal (Mediterranean) region then called " Canaan" in Phoenician, Hebrew, Old Arabic, and Aramaic, " Phoenicia" in Greek and Latin, and "Pūt" in the Egyptian language. It is a part of the Canaanite subgroup of the Northwest Semitic languages. Other members of the family are Hebrew, Ammonite, Moabite and Edomite. Glenn Markoe.Phoenicians. p108. University of California Press 2000Zellig Sabbettai Harris. A grammar of the Phoenician language. p6. 1990 The area where Phoenician was spoken includes modern-day Lebanon, coastal Syria, coastal northern Palestine, parts of Cyprus and, at least as a prestige language, some adjacent areas of Anatolia.Lipiński, Edward. 2004. Itineraria Phoenicia. P.139-141 inter alia It was also spoken in the area of Phoenician colonization along the coasts of the southwestern Mediterranean Sea, including those of modern Tunisia, Morocco, Libya and Algeria as well as Malta, the west of Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, the Balearic Islands and southernmost Spain. Phoenician, together with Punic, is primarily known from approximately 10,000 surviving inscriptions, supplemented by occasional glosses in books written in other languages. In addition to their many inscriptions, the Phoenicians are believed to have left numerous other types of written sources, but most have not survived. Roman authors, such as Sallust, allude to some books written in the Punic language, but none have survived except occasionally in translation (e.g., Mago's treatise) or in snippets (e.g., in Plautus' plays). The Cippi of Melqart, a bilingual inscription in Ancient Greek and Carthaginian discovered in Malta in 1694, was the key which allowed French scholar Jean-Jacques Barthélemy to decipher and reconstruct the alphabet in 1758. Even as late as 1837 only 70 Phoenician inscriptions were known to scholars. These were compiled in Wilhelm Gesenius's Scripturae linguaeque Phoeniciae monumenta, which comprised all that was known of Phoenician by scholars at that time.}} Since bilingual tablets with inscriptions in both Etruscan and Phoenician dating from around 500 BCE were found in 1964, more Etruscan has been deciphered through comparison to the more fully understood Phoenician.

History

The Phoenicians were the first state-level society to make extensive use of the Semitic alphabet. The Phoenician alphabet is the oldest verified consonantal alphabet, or abjad. It has become conventional to refer to the script as "Proto-Canaanite" until the mid-11th century BCE, when it is first attested on inscribed bronze arrowheads, and as "Phoenician" only after 1050 BCE.Markoe, Glenn E., Phoenicians. University of California Press. (2000) (hardback) p. 111. The Phoenician phonetic alphabet is generally believed to be at least the partial ancestor of almost all modern alphabets. ]] From a traditional linguistic perspective, Phoenician was a variety of the Canaanite languages. However, due to the very slight differences in language, and the insufficient records of the time, whether Phoenician formed a separate and united dialect, or was merely a superficially defined part of a broader language continuum, is unclear. Through their maritime trade, the Phoenicians spread the use of the alphabet to North Africa and Europe, where it was adopted by the Greeks. Later, the Etruscans adopted a modified version for their own use, which, in turn, was modified and adopted by the Romans and became the Latin alphabet.Edward Clodd, Story of the Alphabet (Kessinger) 2003:192ff Carthaginian colonisation spread Phoenician to the western Mediterranean, where the distinct Punic language developed. Punic also died out, although it seems to have survived slightly longer than the original Phoenician, perhaps into the fifth century CE.

Writing system

Phoenician was written with the Phoenician script, an abjad (consonantary) originating from the Proto-Canaanite alphabet that also became the basis for the Greek alphabet and, via an Etruscan adaptation, the Latin alphabet. The Punic form of the script gradually developed somewhat different and more cursive letter shapes; in the 3rd century BC, it also began to exhibit a tendency to mark the presence of vowels, especially final vowels, with an aleph or sometimes an ayin. Furthermore, around the time of the Second Punic War, an even more cursive form began to developJongeling, K. and Robert Kerr. Late Punic epigraphy. P.10. and it gave rise to a variety referred to as Neo-Punic, which existed alongside the more conservative form and became predominant some time after the Battle of Carthage (c. 149 BC).Benz, Franz L. 1982. Personal Names in the Phoenician and Punic Inscriptions. P.12-14 Neo-Punic in turn tended to designate vowels with matres lectionis ("consonantal letters") more frequently than the previous systems had and also began to systematically use different letters for different vowels, in the way explained in more detail below. Finally, a number of late inscriptions from what is now Constantine, Algeria dated to the first century BCE make use of the Greek alphabet to write Punic, and many inscriptions from Tripolitania, in the third and fourth centuries of the Common Era use the Latin alphabet for that purpose.Jongeling, K. and Robert Kerr. Late Punic epigraphy. P.2. In Phoenician writing, unlike that of abjads such as those of Aramaic, Biblical Hebrew and Arabic, even long vowels remained generally unexpressed, and that regardless of their origin (i.e. even if they originated from diphthongs, as in bt 'house' for earlier *bayt where Hebrew spelling has byt). Eventually Punic writers did begin to implement systems of marking of vowels by means of matres lectionis: first, beginning in the third century BCE, there appeared the practice of using final 'ālep to mark the presence of any final vowel and, occasionally, of yōd to mark a final long . Later, mostly after the destruction of Carthage in the so-called "Neo-Punic" inscriptions, this was supplemented by a system in which wāw denoted , yōd denoted , 'ālep denoted and , ʿayin denoted Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.85 and and .Jongeling, K., Robert M. Kerr. 2005. Late Punic epigraphy: an introduction to the study of Neo-Punic and Latino-Punic Inscriptions This latter system was used first with foreign words and was then extended to many native words as well. A third practice reported in the literature is the use of the consonantal letters for vowels in the same way as that had occurred in the original adaptation of the Phoenician alphabet to Greek and Latin, which was apparently still transparent to Punic writers: i.e. hē for and 'ālep for .Segert, Stanislav. Phoenician and the Eastern Canaanite languages. In Robert Hetzron, ed., The Semitic Languages. P. 175 Later, Punic inscriptions began to be written in the Latin alphabet, which also indicated the vowels. These later inscriptions, in addition with some inscriptions in Greek letters and transcriptions of Phoenician names into other languages, represent the main source of knowledge about Phoenician vowels.

Phonology

Consonants

The Phoenician orthography (see
Phoenician alphabet) distinguishes the following consonants (the phonemes in the table are in blue, and the standard transliteration of the corresponding Phoenician graphemes is marked in bold): The system reflected in the abjad above is the product of several mergers. From Proto-Northwest Semitic to Canaanite, and have merged into , and have merged into , and , and have merged into * ṣ. Next, from Canaanite to Phoenician, the sibilants and were merged as , and were merged as , and * and * were merged as *.Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.87 These latter developments also occurred in Biblical Hebrew at one point or another.

Sibilants

The original value of the Proto-Semitic sibilants, and accordingly of their Phoenician counterparts, is disputed. Recent scholarship argues that was , was , was , and was ,Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.86 against the traditional sound values of , , , and as reflected in the transcription.Segert, Stanislav. 1997. Phoenician and Punic phonology. In Phonologies of Asia and Africa: (including the Caucasus), ed. Alan S. Kaye, Peter T. Daniels. P.59. On the other hand, it is debated whether šīn and sāmek , which are mostly well distinguished by the Phoenician orthography, also eventually merged at some point, either in Classical Phoenician or in Late Punic.Kerr, Robert M. 2010. Latino-Punic Epigraphy: A Descriptive Study of the Inscriptions. P.126 Krahmalkov suggests that *z may have been dz or even zd based on Latin transcriptions such as esde for the demonstrative z.

Postvelars

In later Punic, the laryngeals and pharyngeals seem to have been entirely lost. Neither these nor the emphatics could be adequately represented by the Latin alphabet, but there is also evidence to that effect from Punic script transcriptions.

Lenition

There is no consensus on whether Phoenician-Punic ever underwent the lenition of stop consonants that happened in most other Northwest Semitic languages such as Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic (cf. HackettCf. Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.87 vs SegertSegert, Stanislav. Phoenician and the Eastern Canaanite languages. In Robert Hetzron, ed., The Semitic Languages. and Lyavdansky). The consonant may have been generally transformed into in Punic and in late Phoenician, as it was in Proto-Arabic.Лявданский, А.К. 2009. Финикийский язык. Языки мира: семитские языки. Аккадский язык. Северозапазносемитские языки. ред. Белова, А.Г. и др. P.283 Certainly Latin-script renditions of late Punic include many "spirantized" transcriptions with ph, th, and kh in various positions – although the interpretation of these spellings is not entirely clear – as well as the letter f for original *p.Kerr, Robert M. 2010 Latino-Punic Epigraphy: A Descriptive Study of the Inscriptions. P.105 ff. However, in Neo-Punic, *b lenited to v contiguous to a following consonant, as in the Latin transcription lifnim for *lbnm "for his son".

Vowels

Knowledge of the vowel system is very imperfect because of the characteristics of the writing system; during most of its existence Phoenician writing didn't express any vowels at all, and even as vowel notation systems did eventually arise late in its history, they never came to be applied consistently to the native vocabulary. It is thought that Phoenician had the short vowels , , and the long vowels , , , , .Segert, Stanislav. 1997. Phoenician and Punic phonology. In Phonologies of Asia and Africa: (including the Caucasus), ed. Alan S. Kaye, Peter T. Daniels. P.60. The Proto-Semitic diphthongs and are realized as and ; this must have happened earlier than in Biblical Hebrew, because the resultant long vowels are not marked with the semi-vowel letters (bēt "house" was written bt in contrast to Biblical Hebrew byt). The most conspicuous vocalic development in Phoenician is the so-called Canaanite shift, partly shared by Biblical Hebrew, but in Phoenician going further. The Proto-Northwest Semitic and became not merely as in Tiberian Hebrew, but . Stressed Proto-Semitic became Tiberian Hebrew ( in other traditions), but Phoenician . The shift is proved by Latin and Greek transcriptions like rūs for "head, cape" (Tiberian Hebrew rōš, ), samō for "he heard" (Tiberian Hebrew šāmāʻ, ); similarly the word for "eternity" is known from Greek transcriptions to have been ʻūlōm, corresponding to Biblical Hebrew ʻōlām and Proto-Semitic ʻālam. The letter Y used for words such as ys "which" and yth (definite accusative marker) in Greek and Latin alphabet inscriptions can be interpreted as denoting a reduced schwa vowel that occurred in pre-stress syllables in verbs and two syllables before stress in nouns and adjectives, while other instances of Y as in chyl and even chil for /kull/ "all" in Poenulus can be interpreted as a further stage in the vowel shift resulting in fronting () and even subsequent delabialization of and .Cf. Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.88Segert, Stanislav. 1997. Phoenician and Punic phonology. In Phonologies of Asia and Africa: (including the Caucasus), ed. Alan S. Kaye, Peter T. Daniels. P.61. Short in originally open syllables was lowered to and was also lengthened if accented.

Suprasegmentals

Judging from stress-dependent vowel changes, stress was probably mostly final, as in Biblical Hebrew.Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.89 Long vowels probably only occurred in open syllables.Segert, Stanislav. 1997. Phoenician and Punic phonology. In Phonologies of Asia and Africa: (including the Caucasus), ed. Alan S. Kaye, Peter T. Daniels. P.63.

Grammar

As is typical for the Semitic languages, Phoenician words are usually built around triconsonantal roots and vowel changes are used extensively to express morphological distinctions.

Nominal morphology

Nouns are marked for gender (masculine and feminine), number (singular, plural and vestiges of the dual) and state (absolute and construct, the latter characterizing nouns followed by their possessors) and also have the category definiteness. There is some evidence for remains of the Proto Semitic genitive grammatical case as well. While many of the endings coalesce in the standard orthography, inscriptions in the Latin and Greek alphabet permit the reconstruction of the noun endings (which are also the adjective endings) as follows:Segert, Stanislav. 2007. Phoenician and Punic Morphology. In Morphologies of Asia and Philippines Morphologies of Asia and Africa. ed. by Alan S. Kaye. P.79 In late Punic, the final of the feminine was apparently dropped: "son of the queen" or "brother of the queen" rendered in Latin as HIMILCO.Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.90 was also assimilated to following consonants: e.g. "year" for earlier . The case endings in general must have been lost between the 9th century BC and the 7th century BC: e.g. the personal name rendered in Akkadian as ma-ti-nu-ba-a-li "Gift of Baal", with the case endings -u and -i, was written ma-ta-an-baa-al two centuries later. However, evidence has been found for a retention of the genitive case in the form of the first singular possessive suffix: /abiya/ "of my father" vs /abī/ "my father". If true, this may suggest that cases were still distinguished to some degree in other forms as well. The written forms and the reconstructed pronunciations of the personal pronounsThe description of the pronouns follows Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). are as follows: Singular: 1st: // (Punic sometimes ), also attested as // 2nd masc. // 2nd fem. // 3rd masc. // , also (?) and // 3rd fem. // Plural: 1st: // 2nd masc. unattested 2nd fem. unattested 3rd masc. // , 3rd fem. // Enclitic personal pronouns are added to nouns (to encode possession) and to prepositions, as shown below for "standard Phoenician" (the predominant dialect, as distinct from the Byblian and late Punic varieties). They appear in a slightly different form depending on whether they follow the plural form masculine nouns (and therefore are added after a vowel) or not. The former case is given in brackets with the abbreviation a.V.. Singular: 1st: // , also (a.V. // ) 2nd masc. // 2nd fem. // 3rd masc. // , Punic , (a.V. // ) 3rd fem. // , Punic (a.V. // ) Plural: 1st: /n}}/ 2nd masc. unattested 2nd fem. unattested 3rd masc. // (a.V. // ) 3rd fem. // (a.V. // ) In addition, according to some research, the same written forms of the enclitics that are attested after vowels are also found after a singular noun in what must have been the genitive case (which ended in , whereas the plural version ended in ). In this case, their pronunciation can be reconstructed somewhat differently: 1st singular // , 3rd singular masculine and feminine // and // . The 3rd plural singular and feminine must have pronounced the same in both cases, i.e. // and // . These enclitic forms vary between the dialects. In the archaic Byblian dialect, the third person forms are h and w // for the maculine singular (a.V. w //), h // for the feminine singular and hm // for the masculine plural. In late Punic, the 3rd masculine singular is usually // . The same enclitic pronouns are also attached to verbs to denote direct objects. In that function some of them have slightly divergent forms: first singular // and probably first plural //. The near demonstrative pronouns ("this") are written, in standard Phoenician, z for the singular and for the plural. Cypriot Phoenician displays instead of z. Byblian still distinguishes, in the singular, a masculine / from a feminine / . There are also many variations in Punic, including st and zt for both genders in the singular. The far demonstrative pronouns ("that") are identical to the independent third person pronouns. The interrogative pronouns are or perhaps "who" and "what". An indefinite pronoun "anything" is written mnm. The relative pronoun is a , either followed or preceded by a vowel. The definite article was and the first consonant of the following word was doubled. It was written h, but in late Punic also and , due to the weakening and coalescence of the gutturals. Much as in Biblical Hebrew, the initial consonant of the article is dropped after the prepositions b-, l- and k; it could also be lost after various other particles and function words such the direct object marker and the conjunction w- "and". Of the cardinal numerals from 1 to 10, 1 is an adjective, 2 is formally a noun in the dual and the rest are nouns in the singular. They distinguish gender: , (construct state ), , , , , , , , vs , unattested, , , , , , unattested, unattested, . The tens are morphologically masculine plurals of the ones: , , , , , , , . "One hundred" is , two hundred is its dual form , whereas the rest are formed as in (three hundred). One thousand is . Ordinal numerals are formed by the addition of *iy .Segert, Stanislav. 2007. Phoenician and Punic Morphology. In Morphologies of Asia and Africa. Morphologies of Asia and Africa. ed. by Alan S. Kaye. P.80 Composite numerals are formed with w- "and", e.g. for "twelve".

Verbal morphology

The verb inflects for person, number, gender, tense and mood. Like other Semitic languages, Phoenician verbs have different "verbal patterns" or "stems", expressing manner of action, level of transitivity and voice. The perfect or suffix-conjugation, which expresses the past tense, is exemplified below with the root q-t-l "to kill" (a "neutral", G-stem).The vocalized reconstructions in the schemes below follow chiefly Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). The spellings are based mostly on Segert, Stanislav. 2007. Phoenician and Punic Morphology. In Morphologies of Asia and Africa. Morphologies of Asia and Africa. ed. by Alan S. Kaye. P.82 Singular: 1st: // 2nd masc. // 2nd fem. // 3rd masc. // 3rd fem. // ,Segert, Stanislav. 2007. Phoenician and Punic Morphology. In Morphologies of Asia and Africa. Morphologies of Asia and Africa. ed. by Alan S. Kaye. P.82 also , Punic Plural: 1st: // 2nd masc. unattested 2nd fem. unattested 3rd masc. / , Punic 3rd fem. unattested The imperfect or prefix-conjugation, which expresses the present and future tense (and which is not distinguishable from the descendant of the Proto-Semitic jussive expressing wishes), is exemplified below, again with the root q-t-l. 1st: // 2nd masc. // 2nd fem. // 3rd masc. // 3rd fem. // Plural: 1st: *//? 2nd masc. // , Punic 2nd fem. // 3rd masc. / 3rd fem. unattested The imperative endings were presumably , and for the second singular masculine, second singular feminine and second plural masculine respectively, but all three forms surface in the orthography as , i.e. . The old Semitic jussive, which originally differed slightly from the prefix conjugation, is no longer possible to separate from it in Phoenician with the present data. The non-finite forms are the infinitive construct, the infinitive absolute and the active and passive participles. In the G-stem, the infinitive construct would usually be combined with the preposition l- "to" as in "to kill"; in contrast, the infinitive absolute (qatōlHackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.96.) is mostly used to strengthen the meaning of a subsequent finite verb with the same root: "you will indeed open!", accordingly // "you will indeed kill!". The participles had, in the G-stem, the following forms: Active: Masculine singular // or // , plural // or // Feminine singular , plural * Passive: Masculine singular // or // , plural // Feminine singular , plural // The missing forms above can be inferred from the correspondences between the Proto-Northwest Semitic ancestral forms and the attested Phoenician counterparts: the PNWS participle forms are *. The derived stems are:
  • the N-stem (functioning as a passive), e.g. nqtl, the N-formant being lost in the prefix conjugation while assimilating and doubling the first root consonant (yqtl).
  • the D-stem (functioning as a factitive): the forms must have been /qittil/ in the suffix conjugation, /yaqattil/ in the prefix conjugation, /qattil/ in the imperative and the infinitive construct, /qattōl/ in the infinitive absolute and /maqattil/ in the participle. The characteristic doubling of the middle consonant is only identifiable in foreign alphabet transcriptions.
  • the C-stem (functioning as a causative): the original *ha- prefix has produced *yi- rather than the Hebrew *hi-. The forms were apparently /yiqtil/ in the suffix conjugation (/ in late Punic), /yaqtil/ in the prefix conjugation, and the infinitive is also /yaqtil/, while the participle was probably /maqtil/ or, in late Punic at least, /miqtil/.Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.97.
Most of the stems apparently also had passive and reflexive counterparts, the former differing through vowels, the latter also through the infix -t-. The G stem passive is attested as qytl, < *.; t-stems can be reconstructed as /yitqatil/ ytqtl (tG) and /yiqtattil/ (Dt) yqttl.Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.99.

Prepositions and particles

Some prepositions are always prefixed to nouns, deleting the initial of the definite article if present: such are b- "in", l- "to, for", k- "as" and m- // "from". They are sometimes found in forms extended through the addition of -n or -t. Other prepositions are not like this, e.g. "upon", . "until", "after", "under", "between". New prepositions are formed with nouns: lpn "in front of", from l- "to" and pn "face". There is special preposited marker of a definite object (//?), which, unlike Hebrew, is clearly distinct from the preposition (//). The most common negative marker is (//), negating verbs, but sometimes also nouns; another one is (//), expressing both non-existence and negation of verbs. Negative commands / prohibitions are expressed with (//). "Lest" is . Some common conjunctions are (originally perhaps //, but certainly // in Late Punic), "and" (), "when", and (), "that; because; when". There was also a conjunction ("also". (//) could (rarely) be used to introduce desiderative constructions ("may he do X!"). could also introduce vocatives. Both prepositions and conjunctions could form compounds.Hackett, Joe Ann. 2008. Phoenician and Punic. In: The Ancient Languages of Syria-Palestine and Arabia (ed. Roger D. Woodard). P.98

Syntax

The basic word order is VSO. There is no verb "to be" in the present tense; in clauses that would have used a copula, the subject may come before the predicate. Nouns precede their modifiers (such as adjectives and possessors).

Vocabulary and word formation

Nouns are mostly formed by a combination of consonantal roots and vocalic patterns, but they can also be formed with prefixes (, expressing actions or their results; rarely ) and suffixes . Abstracts can be formed with the suffix -t (probably , ).Лявданский, А.К. 2009. Финикийский язык. Языки мира: семитские языки. Аккадский язык. Северозапазносемитские языки. ред. Белова, А.Г. и др. P.293 Adjectives can be formed following the familiar Semitic nisba suffix y (e.g. ṣdny "Sidonian"). Like the grammar, the vocabulary is very close to Biblical Hebrew, though some peculiarities attract attention. For example, the copula verb "to be" is kn (as in Arabic, as opposed to Hebrew and Aramaic hyh) and the verb "to do" is pʿl (as in Aramaic pʿl and Arabic fʿl, as opposed to Hebrew ʿśh).

Survival and influences of Punic

The significantly divergent later-form of the language that was spoken in the Tyrian Phoenician colony of Carthage is known as Punic; it remained in use there for considerably longer than Phoenician did in Phoenicia itself, arguably surviving into Augustine of Hippo's time. It may have even survived the Muslim conquest of the Maghreb: the geographer al-Bakri describes a people speaking a language that was not Berber, Latin or Coptic in the city of Sirte in rural Ifriqiya, a region where spoken Punic survived well past written use. linkhttp://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/vtw/jongeling/latpun/LPINTRO.htm However it is likely that Arabization of the Punics was facilitated by their language belonging to the same group (the Semitic languages group) as that of the conquerors, and thus having many grammatical and lexical similarities. The ancient Lybico-Berber alphabet still in irregular use by modern Berber groups such as the Tuareg is known by the native name Tifinagh, possibly a derived form of a cognate of the name "Punic". Still, a direct derivation from the Phoenician-Punic script is debated and far from established, since the two writing systems are very different. As far as language (not the script) is concerned, some borrowings from Punic appear in modern Berber dialects: one interesting example is agadir "wall" from Punic gader. Perhaps the most interesting case of Punic influence is that of the name of Hispania (the Iberian Peninsula, comprising Portugal and Spain), which, according to one theory among many, derived from the Punic I-Shaphan meaning "coast of hyraxes", in turn a misidentification on the part of Phoenician explorers of its numerous rabbits as hyraxes. Another case is the name of a tribe of hostile "hairy people" that Hanno the Navigator found in the Gulf of Guinea. The name given to these people by Hanno the Navigator's interpreters was transmitted from Punic into Greek as gorillai and was applied in 1847 by Thomas S. Savage to the western gorilla.

Surviving examples

See also

Notes

References

Further reading

  • .
  • J. Friedrich – W. Röllig (1999). Phönizisch-punische Grammatik (III ed., neu bearbeitet von M.G. Amadasi Guzzo unter Mitarbeit von W.R. Meyer)
"green air" © 2007 - Ingo Malchow, Webdesign Neustrelitz
This article based upon the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenician_language, the free encyclopaedia Wikipedia and is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
Further informations available on the list of authors and history: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phoenician_language&action=history
presented by: Ingo Malchow, Mirower Bogen 22, 17235 Neustrelitz, Germany