The Age of the Peshitta

[memradya]

Galileans didn't speak Greek, because Jewish Nation didn't encourage the learning of Greek. Like Josephus pointed out, Greek was an unaccustomed language to Jews in first century AD.

I don't think that jewish nation had to encourage the learning of Greek, in order that Galilean try to speak with their neighbor: when you have fish to sell, you go and trade. And the Galilee was till about 100 BC an "unjewish" nation, sometime still seen as such. They don't share the same point of view as the Judean, and are more tolerants with the foreigners.

Steve Caruso wrote

Middle Aramaic starts in the 3rd century AD, not 200 BC.

That's why I've given this exemple, because Konway mistook classical Syriac for old Syriac

If you're an Aramaic speaker of any modern dialect of Aramaic, and you cannot understand my transcription above from 6AD, then it is a shame.

I'm not. I don't think that there's anybody who couldn't understand it. But the Israeli who speak modern Hebrew could say the same thing about the tongue of the Bible.

That make me think : I can't hardly understand what someone coming from Quebec says, and he speaks French like me, but with an accent very different from mine. It's a matter of habbit... I have no doubt that a 4 Century Aramaic speaker could understands what the 1st Century one says ^^. It doesn't mean that there is not difference between first and four Century Syriac.

I can put any of those ancient inscriptions from the first century until the fifth century in front of any of dozens of students at Sunday school Aramaic class at Mar Gewargis church at Chicago, and explain a couple of little nuances (like the Y vs N) for the imperfect 3rd person masculine, and within five minutes these 12-year olds will explain to you in English what the inscription says.

There is more that one difference (and I agree nothing of very incredible).

Orthography : old syriac is rather litteral. By contrast classical Syriac is rather historical. We see it with the linea occultans, where the orthography doens't represent the pronunciation.
Phonology : The use of shin instead of samkath to indicate a voiceless palatal fricative which will be pronunced in classical syriac exactly as the samkath.

Some features which differenciate old Syriac from classical Syriac.
It would be like " Peshitto is a 1st Century book "!!! . No, it doesn't because it is written in western Syriac, and in the first Century the division in two diallects didn't occur. It's not a matter of content, but of form...