# Syriac: marker of direct object



## S1234

Hi everyone

Sometimes ܠ is used to mark the direct object and sometimes it is not. Is there a rule for when it is to be used?

In Hebrew את is always used when the direct object is definite but never when it is indefinite.

Thanks


----------



## radagasty

The rule is basically as it is in Hebrew, but it is less consistently observed, so it is not rare to come across ܠ with an indefinite direct object. Note that, unlike Biblical Aramaic, which still maintained the definiteness distinction between the emphatic and the absolute state, in Syriac, the former has encroached on the latter, which has greatly retreated, such that even indefinite nouns are frequently in the emphatic state.


----------



## fdb

The direct object with or without l- is discussed (if I remember rightly) in Geoffrey Khan's dissertation.


----------



## Ali Smith

ܝܵܬ is an alternative to ܠ. Witness:

ܒܪܫܝܬ ܒܪܐ ܐܠܗܐ ܝܬ ܫܡܝܐ ܘܝܬ ܐܪܥܐ
(בראשית א א)


----------



## fdb

Ali Smith said:


> ܝܵܬ is an alternative to ܠ. Witness:
> 
> ܒܪܫܝܬ ܒܪܐ ܐܠܗܐ ܝܬ ܫܡܝܐ ܘܝܬ ܐܪܥܐ
> (בראשית א א)


Here in Gen 1,1 yath is simply a gloss on the Hebrew. It occurs a few other times in the Syriac OT, otherwise rarely (if ever). Ephrem thought it meant "existence", indicating that he did not realise that it is accusative particle.


----------

