2. The Karaim language of the translation
2.1 Nominals
2.1.4 Case marking
2.1.4.2 Hebrew influence on case marking
Halich Karaim
dạ arttir:di tubdur:mạ
and continue:DI.PST3SG15 give birth:INF
osol ḵarindas:i:n anin osol hẹbel:ni that brother:POSS3SG:ACC he:GEN that Abel:ACC
‘and she gave birth again to his brother Abel’
Gen. 4:2 (7/20)
In this respect, the Crimean Karaim translation resembles the Halich Karaim trans-lation. Thus, the Crimean Karaim translation uses šol ‘that’ followed by the noun in the accusative where ´et occurs in the Hebrew Bible.16 The Crimean Karaim exam-ple given below in (38) is not the same as in the case of Halich and Trakai Karaim, because the Crimean Karaim translation of Genesis ends at Gen 1:18. In order to represent this feature in the Crimean Karaim Bible translations, an example from Gen. 6 was chosen.17
(38)
Biblical Hebrew18
wayyôºled nöªH
and begat.V:HIPH.W.CONS.IPRF.MASC3SG Noah
šülöšâ bänîm ´et-šëm
three sons.N:MASC.ABS.PL DIR.OBJ- Shem
‘and Noah had three sons, Shem’19
Gen 6:10 Crimean Karaim
da doγur:du Noaḥ üč oγlan:lar: šol Šem:ni
and beget:DI.PAST3SG Noah three son:PL that Shem:ACC
‘and begat Noah three sons: Shem’
2a (4)
15 See more about arttir- in Section 2.7.2.4 (Selectional copies of semantic properties of Hebrew verbal expressions) in Chapter 2.7 (Verbs).
16 Jankowski says that the demonstrative šol is “mostly copied from Hb definite article ה” (1997:
73). This statement, however, is not precise, as the discussion of the translation of the Hebrew direct object marker ´et shows. Furthermore, šol is also used as the translational equivalent of the Hebrew ´et even when ´et appears in other functions than as the direct object marker.
17 The Halich Karaim translation, which is not part of the investigated corpus, contains osol + noun in the accusative as expected (Gen 12/3 dạ tubdur:du nōax ic ubul:lar osol šẹm:ni [and beget:DI.PST3SG Noah three son:PL that Shem:ACC] ‘and begat Noah three sons: Shem’).
18 ERV translation: ‘and Noah begat three sons, Shem,’.
19 The ERV translation is ‘and Noah begat three sons, Shem’.
The Trakai Karaim Bible translation differs from the translations in the other varie-ties, and always renders ´et only with the accusative on the noun, that is, without any preceding demonstrative pronoun; see (39). The Hebrew original, found in (37), has direct object ´et prefixed to the noun ‘his brother’ and ‘Abel’. Both of the Hebrew particles are rendered only by the accusative marker on the noun in the Trakai Karaim Bible (e.g. karandaš:y:n [brother:POSS3SG:ACC] ‘his brother’, Γevel:ni [Abel:ACC] ‘Abel’).
(39)
Trakai Karaim
da arttyr:dy tʹoŕa:ḿa karandaš:y:n Γevel:ni
and continue:DI.PST3SG give birth:INF brother:POSS3SG:ACC Abel:ACC
‘and she continued to give birth to his brother Abel’
Gen. 4:2 2.1.4.2.2 Selective copying of combinational properties of Hebrew prepositions The Hebrew particle ´et, as described above, is mostly used to mark the direct ob-ject. In Biblical Hebrew, an object may be definite or indefinite. The particle ´et usually marks the definite direct object; however, sometimes it also refers to an indefinite direct object (Gibson 1997: 115–116).
Accusative marking of the direct object is rather inconsistent in Karaim, but there is a tendency to use the accusative marker on definite objects, whereas indefi-nite objects are often left unmarked (Csató 2001a: 18).
Apparently, there is certain overlap between the Biblical Hebrew and Karaim languages with respect to object marking, i.e. a tendency to mark the definite direct object (with the particle ´et in Biblical Hebrew and with the accusative marker -ni/-n in Karaim). As for the indefinite direct object, when the particle ´et occurs in the Hebrew Bible, HKB reflects it in the usual way: with osol + noun in the accusative.
This feature is illustrated in (40). This verse is part of HKB, but not part of our cor-pus.
(40)
Biblical Hebrew20 wükî|- yiGGaH
and when gores.V:QAL.IPRF.MASC3SG
šôr ´et- ´îš
ox.N:MASC.SG.ABS DIR.OBJ man.N:MASC.SG.ABS
20 ERV translation: ‘and if an ox gore a man or a woman’.
´ô ´et- ´iššâ
or DIR.OBJ woman.N:FEM.SG.ABS
‘when an ox gores a man or a woman’
Exod. 21:28 Halich Karaim
dạ ki šiz:se egiz and that gore:HYP ox
osol kiši:ni yẹmese osol ḵatin:ni that person:ACC or that woman:ACC
‘and if an ox gores (a) man or (a) woman’
Exod. 21:28 (174/23)
Due to the rather automatic and consistent rendering of the Hebrew particle ´et by the demonstrative osol ‘that’ and the noun in the accusative, the translator applies the usual translational equivalent even in exceptional, uncommon cases in the He-brew Bible. However the expected translation of (40) would be in the nominative, i.e. *ki šizse egiz bir kiši yẹmese bir ḵatin.
2.1.4.2.3 Translational equivalents of the Biblical Hebrew combined ´et + ha- forms As we have seen it in the previous sections –2.1.3.1.1 (Selective copying of the He-brew definite article) and 2.1.4.2.1 (Selective copying of the combinational proper-ties of the Hebrew direct object marker ´et–)– the Hebrew definite article and the direct object marker ´et both have consistently and systematically used correspon-dences in HKB. Therefore, when these two are combined in the Hebrew original, osol + ol + noun in the accusative appear in the Halich Karaim translation. See, for instance, (41) in which we find the double use of the Karaim pronouns and the accu-sative marked noun, Gen. 1/12 osol ol raḵiaʻ:ni [that the scope of heaven:ACC] ‘the scope of heaven’.
As pointed out before, Trakai Karaim and Crimean Karaim have different strate-gies for rendering the Hebrew definite article and direct object marker. Accordingly, it is natural, that ´et + ha- forms of the Hebrew Bible have different translations in HKB and in the other Karaim varieties. In the Trakai Karaim translation, the pro-noun oł and the pro-noun in the accusative serve as the correspondence of such Hebrew constructions, e.g. 1.(7) oł avłaχłyχ:ny [the space:ACC] ‘the space’. This confirms our previous assumption that there is no exclusive translational equivalent of the Hebrew ´et in Trakai Karaim.
The Crimean Karaim Bible is a translation that is somewhat in between HKB and the Trakai Karaim translations; it is not as precise as HKB, but reflects more of the Hebrew original than the Trakai Karaim translations. Based on the equivalences of ´et and ha- separately, we would expect šol ol + noun in the accusative. But on
the contrary, šol + noun in the accusative are used; i.e. ol is omitted from the Crimean Karaim translation.
(41)
Biblical Hebrew
wayyaº`aS ´élöhîm
and he made.CONJ.V:QAL.W.CONS.IPRF.MASC3SG God
´et-häräqîª`
the extended surface.DIR.OBJ-DEF.N:MASC.SG.ABS
‘and God made the firmament’
Gen 1:7 Halich Karaim
da yạrat:ti tenri osol ol raḵia`:ni
and create:DI.PAST3SG God that the scope of heaven:ACC
‘and God created the scope of heaven’
Gen 1:7 (1/12) Trakai Karaim
da i̯arat:ty t́eńri oł avłaχłyχ:ny and create:DI.PAST3SG God the firmament:ACC
‘and God created the firmament’
1. (7) Crimean Karaim
da yarat:tï taŋrï šol tabaqa:nï
and create:DI.PAST3SG God the layer:ACC
‘and God created the layer’
1a (14)
2.1.4.2.4 Hebrew influence on the selection of case markers
There are certain expressions in which the relators used in the Hebrew Bible differ from those in Halich Karaim. The translator sometimes follows the Karaim grammar in the selection of case markers, and sometimes copies an expression from the He-brew Bible as a whole, i.e. also copies the semantics of the HeHe-brew preposition.
Therefore, there are samples in HKB in which the case government is determined by the original forms in the Hebrew Bible. This phenomenon is discussed and illus-trated with examples in Section 2.7.2.2.2 (Hebrew influence on case government) in Chapter 2.7 (Verbs).