Verb Movement in Biblical Aramaic (review)

Hebrew Studies 47 (2006) 436 Reviews “What’s Wrong with Grammaticalization?” p. 158). Rubin is to be complemented for illustrating the heuristic value of grammaticalization for Semitic studies: the collecting of various examples of grammaticalization found throughout the geographic and temporal range of the Semitic languages presents an important step forward both for linguists interested in the data and Semitists interested in typological arguments and explanations for Semitic language change. I am, however, less convinced that Rubin’s brief volume has offered “valuable insights into the history of the Semitic languages” (p. 154) beyond what has hitherto been known but admittedly widely scattered in the literature. John A. Cook Eisenbrauns Winona Lake, IN 46590 jacook@eisenbrauns.com VERB MOVEMENT IN BIBLICAL ARAMAIC. By Adriaan Lamprecht. Acta Academica Supplementum 1. Pp. iv + 165. Bloemfontein: UFSSASOL Library, 2001. Paper. Lest anyone overlook this modestly-sized and unassuming volume, let me say at the outset that this work is a significant contribution to the study of word order in Biblical Aramaic. Not only does Lamprecht address an understudied topic, he employs a theoretical framework, the minimalist program of Chomskyan generative linguistics, that is underused in biblical studies, even though it is one of the most prominent frameworks in general linguistics. Indeed, Lamprecht hypothesizes that “word order in Biblical Aramaic is not free,” as has been generally thought in biblical and Aramaic studies, and that verb “movement as proposed in the Minimalist Programme … is adequate to explain the various word orders in BA” (p. 9). Given his minority conclusion, that Biblical Aramaic is a recognizable verb-subject language, it is well-worth the time necessary to work through this technical study. Lamprecht organizes his investigation in seven chapters, the first of which is the introduction, in which he clearly sets out his research questions (p. 8), and the last of which is a summary of his conclusions. In the main body of the work, chapter 2 is a clear and concise introduction to the minimalist program as it was articulated by Chomsky in 1992 and 1994. Chapters 3 and 4 are the crucial sections in that the basic relationships of the subject and verb (chap. 3) and verb and object (chap. 4) are analyzed. Chapter 5 synthesizes the analyses advanced in chapters three and four in Hebrew Studies 47 (2006) 437 Reviews that all three major constituents, verb (V), subject (S), and object (O), and the various orders in which they occur (SVO, OVS, SOV, OSV, VOS) are described within the model that has been developed. Finally, chapter 6 tackles double-object syntax in Biblical Aramaic (i.e., clauses with ditransitive verbs). At the heart of Lamprecht’s conclusions is the rejection of the description in reference grammars of Biblical Aramaic word order as “free.” Instead , Lamprecht proposes that Biblical Aramaic has an unmarked surface word order of verb-subject-object (viz., the verb raises out of the verb phrase while the subject noun phrase remains in its site of origin in the verb phrase). Thus, clauses like Dan 6:8 are unmarked: aDt…wkVlAm yEk√rDs lO;k …wfAoÎyVtIa. However, Biblical Aramaic clearly exhibits a great deal of constituent movement, although it is not free but “licensed” (that is, linguistically motivated) for specific environments. Notably, Lamprecht was quick to pick up on a development in minimalist syntax for which the minimalist implications were just being worked out when this monograph was written: the proposal of specific positions (“projections ”) at the front of the clause for pragmatically-oriented constituent movement. Specifically, Lamprecht suggests that the “marked and unusual” subject-verb word order (as in Dan 7:10 bIt◊y aDnyî;d) reflects the movement of the subject, which normally remains in the verb phrase (i.e., below the raised verb), to a “Topic” phrase that is above the projection in which the verb may check its agreement features against the subjet noun phrase (labeled as the “AgrSp” node). In other words, Lamprecht argues that the normal order would have been (unattested) aDnyî;d bIt◊y, but that subject aDnyî;d raised to the Topic phrase to create the subject-verb order. This structure also fits clauses in which the object precedes the verb...