Language Families
Semitic
Branches
Citation Formats
General Reference
APA Style
BibTeX
A branch of Afro-Asiatic, and by a long way the most consequential single branch of any family for the history of religion. It carries more surviving scriptural corpora than any comparable group, and the closeness of its members is why a reader of one Semitic scripture keeps meeting the vocabulary of another.
Facts
Disputed
Homeland HypothesisEither the Levant and the Arabian peninsula, where the branch is attested from the beginning, or Africa, if Afro-Asiatic began there and Semitic is the branch that left it. 1 The dispute is inherited from the level above and cannot be settled at this one. If Afro-Asiatic originated in Africa, which is the majority position among those who work on the phylum, then Semitic is its only branch to have moved substantially out of the continent, and the Semitic homeland question becomes a question of when and by which route. If Afro-Asiatic began in the Levant instead, Semitic never left. The Semitic evidence on its own is compatible with both, which is why the argument is conducted at the Afro-Asiatic level and not here. Attestation
Earliest AttestationAkkadian, written in cuneiform borrowed from Sumerian, from the third millennium BCE. It is the earliest attested Semitic language and among the earliest attested languages of any family. 1 Akkadian was written with a script devised for an unrelated language, which is a recurring condition in this branch and shapes what can be recovered: a system built for Sumerian records some Semitic distinctions poorly and others not at all. Status
Classification StatusEstablished as a branch of Afro-Asiatic, and among the earliest families ever demonstrated. The division between East and West Semitic is agreed; the arrangement of the branches within West Semitic is argued. 1 Learn More
A Branch That Behaves Like a Family
Semitic is one branch of Afro-Asiatic and is studied as though it were a family in its own right, with its own comparative grammar, its own journals and its own reconstructed proto-language. There are good reasons for that. It has the longest and densest written record of any branch anywhere: Akkadian is attested from the third millennium BCE, Ugaritic and the Canaanite languages from the second, Aramaic, Hebrew, Phoenician and Old South Arabian from the first, and Arabic, Ge'ez and Syriac carry the record forward without a break to the present. A comparative linguist working on most families is reconstructing an unattested ancestor from modern descendants.
A Semitist can watch the changes happen in documents. The branch is also structurally distinctive, built around consonantal roots of usually three consonants whose vowels carry grammatical information, a pattern that shapes the writing systems: the alphabets of the region record consonants and leave vowels to be supplied, which is why the vocalisation of a scriptural text becomes a scholarly discipline in more than one tradition here.
The Masoretes who fixed the vowels of the Hebrew Bible between the seventh and tenth centuries, and the scholars who fixed the canonical readings of the Qur'an, were doing structurally similar work on structurally similar scripts, several centuries apart and in unconnected traditions, because the writing system posed both of them the same problem.
Where the Scriptures Come From
The concentration of scripture in this branch has no parallel. Biblical Hebrew carries the Tanakh and, through it, the Christian Old Testament. Aramaic carries parts of Daniel and Ezra, the Targums, most of the Talmud, and, in its Syriac form, a large Christian literature including the Peshitta. Classical Arabic carries the Qur'an. Ge'ez carries the Ethiopian canon, including Enoch and Jubilees in complete form where other traditions have only fragments. Classical Mandaic carries the Ginza Rabba and the scriptures of the Mandaeans, the last surviving Gnostic community.
Samaritan Hebrew carries the Samaritan Pentateuch, which differs from the Masoretic text in thousands of places. Ugaritic and the other Canaanite languages carry the mythological texts that supply the closest available context for early Israelite religion. This is one branch of one branch of one family. The proximity matters practically: a term in one of these scriptures often has a recognisable cognate in another, sometimes with the same sense and sometimes with a sharply different one, and the study of any of them is improved by knowing the others. It also means that translations between them are unusually transparent, and that arguments about what a word means in one tradition frequently turn on how a neighbour used it.
Cross-Tradition Connections
Associated With
The tradition's liturgical, scriptural or ancestral language belongs to this family.
The tradition's liturgical, scriptural or ancestral language belongs to this family.
The tradition's liturgical, scriptural or ancestral language belongs to this family.
The tradition's liturgical, scriptural or ancestral language belongs to this family.
The tradition's liturgical, scriptural or ancestral language belongs to this family.
Branch Of
Sources
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.