The Ending of the Semitic Genitive

Abstract

ARTHUR UNGNAD (who is perhaps the most brilliant of the younger Assyriologists, although some of his recent utterances are rather peculiar) has just published a little monograph (18 pages) on parent Semitic,' which is dedicated to Dr. Kraeling, of Union Theological Seminary, and Dr. Lutz, of the University of California. He endorses (pp. 5. 7; cf. ZS 3, 21')2 the theory which I advanced (SFG vii; contrast WdG viii$; JAOS 45, 124m) 47 years ago, that Assyrian 3 is the Sanskrit of Semitic; he is also inclined (p. 24) to adopt my view that the original home of the Semites was northern Africa; he thinks, however, that the preformatives of the Semitic imperfect (BA 1, 17; JAOS 41, 184i) are not personal pronouns, but adverbs: the prefix of the first person, a-, I, is said to mean here; ta-: there, and ia-: anywhere (p. 10). But a-, I, is shortened from anaanakcu, just as the Assyrian preposition ina, which is identical with the Egyptian in-, Coptic n-, often appears as ', e. g. in Heb. dtmol, dm', az, ah6r, ake'n (JIIUC 341, 47, Oct. 11; JAOS 43, 425; MF 126m) as well as in Talmud. ibra, verily (cf. Aram. bgrairai, purity, verity; Arab. birr or burr, piety, veracity) and abardi, outside > Bdraitd (JHUC 348, 48, Oct. 10; cf. JBL 36, 255m). Ta, thou, is of course, the pronoun anta, thou, without the deictic prefix an(cf. Ungnad, op. cit. p. 9, n. 1) and I pointed out 26 years ago (JAOS 22, 48'; 28, 115'; 41, 184'; OLZ 12, 2128) that the preformative of the third person was originally not ia-, but i and u as in Assyrian; ia and iu are secondary. The initial h in ileb. hz2, he, is a prefixed deictic element, probably connected with the Hebrew article which is secondary: in the old Phenician inscription, discovered at Byblus in the fall of 1923,