Talk:Jewish Babylonian Aramaic

Untitled Section
This article isn't very good.

However, the majority of those who are familiar with it, namely Orthodox Jewish students of Talmud, are given no systematic instruction in the language, and are expected to "sink or swim" in the course of Talmudic studies, with the help of some informal pointers showing similarities and differences with Hebrew. For this reason, insights based on grammar or philology tend to be received with bewilderment in Orthodox Talmudic circles (see Chaim Potok's novels The Chosen and The Promise).

No footnotes or references (other than two of Chaim Potok's works of fiction...without page numbers I might add). How about some substantive footnotes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tal0687 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

a reverted, possibly good edit
this revert have erased good content. i am pretty buusy so i don't have the time to go over the edit and put back accurate content. i'd be grateful if someone would take on himself the mission. thanks ahead. melo kol haaretz kevodi (talk) 19:36, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * user:מלא כל הארץ כבודי Look at the book of Yitzhak Frank: Grammar for Gemara and targum onkelos: An Introduction to Aramaic, Ariel Institute, Jerusalem 2011 ISBN 978-1-59826-466-1. The content is based on this book. It is all right. I don't understand the action of this german user --EthanLc (talk) 20:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Schulhofpassage admitted he dosen't know if the informaion that he erased is correct. And i believe if someone makes sure it's accurate he'll aprove putting it back. I myself don't have time to check but i asked in the Hebrew wiki for someone to go over it. melo kol haaretz kevodi (talk) 20:27, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * @melo kol haaretz kevodi: Note that user EthanLc is also a sockpuppet of Messina, the same user that added the information to the article. But you are correct, if a trustworthy user verifies the additions I've got nothing against putting them back. --Schulhofpassage (talk) 20:33, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Schulhofpassage i assumed that was the case. That's why i said "someone" and not "you". melo kol haaretz kevodi (talk) 20:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

== en:Jewish Babylonian Aramaic Why  this revert again by german user ? Please help ==
 * I am Talmud student. I benefited from the english article "Jewish Babylonian Aramaic". Why this revert again by de:user:schulhofpassage ? without knowledge in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic I can not read the Talmud Babli. Please help --PoelP (talk) 05:00, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Noun singular/plural


 * Idiom


 * please help
 * user:מלא כל הארץ כבודי
 * user:Meni yuzevich.
 * Thank you --05:00, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Law French and other dubious content
I do not know every single book and article about Jewish Babylonian Aramaic, but enough to doubt the passage on vernacular, Law French, and so on. I have no idea where the comparison to Law French comes from, but I have to assume original research. On the contrary, the apocopated and syncopated forms, the loss of pharyngeals, and so on are signs of a vernacular (whereas Syriac, for instance, kept the letters that are not pronounced and are therefore not written in Mandaic and Jewish Babylonian Aramaic). The sentence about the influence on modern Hebrew is questionable, too. Various dialects of Aramaic have left their mark, from ancient Hebrew (archaic poetry [depending on which scholar you ask and how you interpret things], post-exile books of the Bible [no doubt about those]) to Amoraic Hebrew (Galilean or Babylonian Aramaic influences depending on origin, obviously), but the way the sentence is written implies these terms have influenced modern Hebrew as a language, which is a dubious claim. Some terms like those mentioned here are listed in Hebrew and Yiddish dictionaries though, but still the sentence has to be changed. --46.114.4.117 (talk) 20:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)