There are speakers and lecturers who say, “if we say ARAMAIC, it is the native language of Jesus!”.
Based on what I have read, many people claim Aramaic Peshitta is the native language of Jesus.
Aramaic is a family of closely related languages, and many of the modern incarnations are mutually unintelligible.
There are parts of the Old Testament written in Aramaic
Those are the Aramaic parts in the Tanach: Genesis 31:47 – two words of a name.___Jeremiah 10:11 a single verse, Daniel 2:4b–7:28, Ezra 4:8–6:18 and 7:12–26 . Most biblical references appear after the “second temple period” that is after the exile to babylon. Aramaic became a lingua franca. Daniel was exiled amongst others in the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim -606 BC- to Babylon. Same as Ezra. The other references show that israel lived with and near Aramean people, but as you can see, the language of Aramaic became more and more dominant only after the exile when it was declared as a lingua franca.
The Aramaic text can be written in the Books of Daniel and Ezra which they call Imperial Aramaic that would have been in use in the sixth century B.C.
Aramaic was the language of late post-exilic Israel, and Hebrew is used for worship (still today).
Jesus could have talked about it in all probability by reading parts of Daniel and Ezra and probably in contemporary intonation.
Elaheh di-Daniyye’l (Daniel 6:26)
Why is Aramaic and Hebrew almost the same?
The vast majority of Jewish Aramaic is written in the exact same alphabet as Hebrew. Think of it as how Spanish and Portuguese share the same alphabet, but are distinct languages.
What are their differences?
There are various structures which are different between Aramaic and Hebrew – one sure giveaway is that Aramaic prefers the use of nun rather than mem for its masculine plural ending. The definite article is identified by aleph at the end of the word rather than he at the beginning. There is also no waw consecutive and no infinitve absolute in Biblical Aramaic.
I will give a verse from the Aramaic text of Daniel.
בִּשְׁנַת חֲדָה לְבֵלְאשַׁצר מֶלֶךְ בָּבֶל דָּנִיֵּאל חֵלֶם חֲזָה וְחֶזְוֵי רֵאשֵׁהּ עַל־מִשְׁכְּבֵהּ בֵּאדַיִן חֶלְמָא כְתַב רֵאשׁ מִלִּין אֲמַר
You will see various differences from Hebrew.
You will see that there is no wayiqtol which is so beloved of Hebrew. You have the construct chain which is the same in both languages. The vowel structure in the verb is different with shorter vowels in Aramaic, the definite article is at the end of the substantive, the word order is different – in the second part of the verse the clause starts with the subject, continues with the object and is followed by the verb – this would be very unusual in Hebrew which normally reads Verb Subject Object – there are plenty of variations in Hebrew although these are usually for emphasis. In the second clause the object precedes the verb. The structure of Aramaic tends to be more direct and simpler than Hebrew – at least I think so.
Both languages probably had a common ancestor from which they branched off. Hence the differences and the similarities. Most roots have similar meanings although not always.
What is the Real Native Language of Jesus?
The native language of Jesus is Galilean Aramaic. Galilean Aramaic (or Jewish Palestinian Aramaic) is a Western dialect of Aramaic with similarity to Samaritan Aramaic and Christian Palestinian Aramaic which share similar features.
Abu-nan or “Our Father”.
What is the difference of Galilean Aramaic and Imperial Aramaic?
I remember, the differences are simply historical developments (from imperial [5th cent.] to galilean [1st cent.]) and slightly different dialects (as the language developed in Galilee and in the Samaritan community).
Some say Aramaic Peshitta is the Native language of Jesus.
We can see this in people using the bible version translated by George Lamsa. If we see the cover of the bible version translated by Lamsa, this was translated from Eastern Peshitta.
Scholars who are experts in Aramaic will say Galilean Aramaic is the native language of Jesus and not Aramaic Peshitta.
Syriac Peshitta became prevalent a few hundred years AFTER Jesus’ death. Syriac is rather different from the Aramaic Jesus spoke. It comes from a different domain (Syriac is Eastern where Jesus spoke Western). A few thousand years change things eventually. What Jesus said (early Galilean Aramaic) came from a different era, geographical location, and dialect family.
Syriac as found in the Peshitta (Classical Syriac) isn’t the Syriac that was spoken during Jesus’ lifetime.
What is the difference of Galilean and Aramaic Peshitta?
In Galilean the word “ḥəsda” means “grace”. In Syriac, the same word means “curse” (instead using “ṭaibuṯa” for “Grace” in the same sense). Word order was different, with Syriac preferring more “classical” verb-subject-object speech, where Galilean would often go subject-object-verb. And finally, pronunciation was different, as Syriac had a different vowel inventory and rules than Galilean.
Another one, In Matthew 16, there is a built-up play on words which isn’t fully expressed in the Peshitta, although it gets half of it.
“at kefah wə-‘al hadən ’əvnah ’əvne kəništi”
“You are Kefa (כיפה) and upon this rock (אבנה ’əvnah) I shall build (אבני ’əvne) my Church.”
The clever remark goes from “rock” to a vague term meaning “rock” but is similar to the verb “to build” and ends with the verb “to build.” In “very” early orthography, the last two words could even be spelled the same with a terminal ה signifying the “a” and “e” sounds.
Aramaic Peshitta Vs. Galilean Aramaic – John 2:4
In Galilean Aramaic, the term “woman” in John 2:4 is “etəṯah”.
In Aramaic Peshitta, “Amar lah Yeshua ma li w’lak atta adkil atat shat”.
We can read the Aramaic Peshitta word, ܐܢܬܬܐ (atṯa).