introduction 9

each of which are distinct in the modern languages;24 the use of the
common OSA preposition bn ‘from’, versus Mehri mən, Soqori mən,
etc.;25 and the presence of the suffixed definite article in a%ramitic,
versus the prefixed article (or complete lack of article) in Modern
South Arabian. Therefore, it seems safest to say only that the similari-
ties between a%ramitic and MSA may be due to language contact.26

1.5. The Grammar

The grammar described in this book is based on the Omani Mehri
texts collected by Johnstone, as published by Stroomer (1999). Topics
in phonology, morphology, and syntax are covered, though the cover-
age is disproportionate compared to what is found in most grammars.
Because the system of transcription is imperfect, because the audio
versions of these texts are also imperfect (see below, §1.7), and because
an excellent overview of Mehri phonology has already been written by
scholars with first-hand field experience,27 phonology is treated here
only briefly. Those features of phonology that most affect the mor-
phology are discussed. With regard to morphology, all of the basic
topics are covered, but in the realm of verbal morphology I have
chosen to restrict the scope of my treatment. This is in part because
fifty pages of verbal paradigms can be found already in Johnstone’s
ML. Mehri verbal morphology is immensely complex, due to the large
number of “weak” root letters that have resulted in various phonetic
changes, and there simply are not enough verbal forms attested in
Johnstone’s texts to provide complete paradigms for most verb types;
Johnstone himself had to elicit verbal forms in order to complete his
paradigms. Therefore, a thorough treatment of verbal morphology
would simply be a re-hashing of what Johnstone has already printed.
In my treatment of the verbal system, I have spent more time discuss-
ing the derived stems and the use of the tenses, both areas in which
Johnstone left much to be said. A large part of this grammar is devoted
to the syntax of Mehri. There are certainly areas in which more could
have been said, but I have chosen to focus on those features which are
most remarkable or most practical for reading Mehri texts. Each fea-
Copyright © 2010. BRILL. All rights reserved.

24
Beeston (1984: 68). Note that the interdentals and dental/alveolar stops have
fallen together in some dialects of Mehri and in Soqori (i.e., θ > t and ð > d), but this
is an internal development.
25
Arguably, the modern preposition could be explained as an Arabic borrowing.
26
For further on this issue, see Rubin (2008a).
27
Lonnet and Simeone-Senelle (1997).

Rubin, Aaron. Mehri Language of Oman, BRILL, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uic/detail.action?docID=1079746.
Created from uic on 2021-05-04 13:49:19.
 10 chapter one

ture described is well illustrated with examples from the texts. An

index of these textual examples is included at the end of this volume.
I have restricted myself in this book to the Omani Mehri of
Johnstone’s texts, to the exclusion of other published Mehri material.
This was done for a number of reasons. First, Johnstone’s texts reflect
a different dialect than the large corpus of material collected by the
Austrian expedition, and it seemed wiser and clearer to try and
describe well one type of Mehri, rather than try to describe multiple
dialects simultaneously. Moreover, the material collected by the
Austrians, and the work based on their material (e.g., that of Bittner
1909-15) is not always accurate. Second, Yemeni Mehri has been
treated in a number of publications, and several first-rate scholars are
currently working on additional descriptions of Yemeni Mehri. Third,
other published material on Omani Mehri (namely, that of Thomas
1937) is, though very interesting and important, not very sound in
terms of its linguistic method.
My philosophy in compiling this grammar was essentially to deduce
as much as possible directly from the texts, without the interference of
previous descriptions of Mehri. Of course, previous works were
invaluable in their help, but, as much as possible, I consulted these
only after forming my own initial theories. To this end, Johnstone
made the following remark, in an unpublished manuscript:
I have not been preoccupied in the course of my own field work to run
down errors in the work of my predecessors, since I have found it on
the whole easier not to study their publications too closely. Certain of
the wrong ideas I did acquire from them did mislead me seriously, and
these of course stick in my mind.28
Johnstone was referring to the works of the Austrian expedition. Of
course, I have many more predecessors than Johnstone did, authors of
the far more reliable material of the last three decades (including that
of Johnstone himself). Still, in compiling this grammar, I was wary of
having too many presuppositions based on earlier publications, pre-
ferring to reach my own conclusions. Despite this philosophy, and
despite the restricted scope of this grammar, reference will occasion-
Copyright © 2010. BRILL. All rights reserved.

ally be made to other corpora, where useful and appropriate.

28
This manuscript, entitled “The reliability of the SAE [= Südarabische Expedi-
tion] publications on the MSA languages”, is in the possession of A. Lonnet, who very
kindly allowed me to borrow it for study.

Rubin, Aaron. Mehri Language of Oman, BRILL, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uic/detail.action?docID=1079746.
Created from uic on 2021-05-04 13:49:19.