Lazar published Siddur Tefillot: A Woman's Ladino Prayer Book in 1995, based on a manuscript found in the French National Library [Hebr. 668]. He claimed that the text originated in 15th century Spain. Minervini reviewed the publication in 1998 and argued that the manuscript must have been written later, most likely in the latter years of the sixteenth or beginning of the seventeenth century. Both researchers agree that the Siddur is a literal, non-normative translation of a Hebrew Siddur written by an amateur author. The bibliographical description of the manuscript gives its origin as “Maroc?.” The manuscript is extremely interesting because it features linguistic characteristics of the languages spoken in Andalusia, Aragon, Portugal, Italy, and Judeo-Spanish from the Ottoman Empire. This paper examines various linguistic and textual aspects of the Siddur to determine the origin of the author. Even if the manuscript did reach Paris via Morocco, the linguistic data prove that the author's background is from Italy, probably of Portuguese ex-converso origin.
Resumen
Lazar publicó Siddur Tefillot: A Woman's Ladino Prayer Book en 1995, basado en un manuscrito encontrado en la Biblioteca Nacional de Francia [Hebr. 668]. Afirmó que el texto tenía su origen en España en el siglo xv. Minervini revisó la publicación en 1998 y argumentó que el manuscrito debió haber sido escrito posteriormente, muy probablemente a finales del siglo xvi o principios del siglo xvii. Ambos investigadores coinciden en que el Siddur es una traducción literal y no normativa de un Siddur hebreo escrita por un autor aficionado. La descripción bibliográfica del manuscrito indica su origen como «Maroc?». El manuscrito es sumamente interesante porque presenta características lingüísticas de los idiomas hablados en Andalucía, Aragón, Portugal, Italia y judeoespañol del Imperio Otomano. Este artículo examina diversos aspectos lingüísticos y textuales del Siddur para determinar el origen del autor. Aunque el manuscrito llegó a París a través de Marruecos, los datos lingüísticos demuestran que el trasfondo del autor proviene de Italia, probablemente de origen portugués ex-converso.
Prayer bookLadino/Judeo-SpanishwomandialectsHebrewItalianPortugueseGreekLibro de oracionesladino/judeoespañolmujerdialectoshebreoitalianoportuguésgriegoIntroduction
The manuscript Prières juives (judéoespagnol) is found in the French National Library with the catalogue number Hebr. 6681. Next to the French description of the manuscript the word «Maroc?» is added with a question mark. Is it a Moroccan Judeo-Spanish manuscript? This is a question that will be addressed in this paper. The first folio includes the words סִדוּר תְפִלוֹת and it starts with the morning prayers. Only by reading the formulation of the blessings, can it be deduced that it is a Siddur for women.
Moshe Lazar published this manuscript as Siddur Tefillot: A Woman's Ladino Prayer Book (Lazar 1995a). He copied the Judeo-Spanish manuscript in Hebrew letters without the vowel signs, transliterated it into Latin letters using Spanish conventions, and added abundant textual and lexical comments. His work is of great value to anyone working on this text.
Lazar (1995a, xx) claimed that the text originated in the first half of fifteenth-century Spain, before the expulsion of the Jews from Spain. Laura Minervini (1998, 404-419) reviewed the publication and argued that the manuscript must have been written later than originally thought, most likely in the later years of the sixteenth or the beginning of the seventeenth century2. Her analysis is based on a detailed linguistic analysis of the unique phonological, morphological and lexical phenomena found in this Siddur. Her arguments are very convincing in that it is clear the text was not medieval Hispanic but rather a late Judeo-Spanish (henceforth JS) diaspora text. Both Lazar (1995a, ix) and Minervini (1998, 415-416) agree that the Siddur is a literal, non-normative translation of a Hebrew Siddur, written by an amateur author. In my previous investigations of the text, I raised the possibility that the manuscript originated in Italy, probably in Venice (Schwarzwald 2011, 53-86). While re-examining the text, I would like to prove that the manuscript must have been written by a person whose origins are in Italy, perhaps a Portuguese-converted Jew.
In the first part of the paper, I will describe the history of the manuscript, and then present its special features which lead to the conclusion as to who wrote this manuscript.
Historical preliminary notes
The manuscript was first listed in a catalogue from 1739, as a text in use by Lusitania Jews (Catalogue 1739). It was later mentioned briefly as a woman's prayer book by Hermann Zotenberg (1866). Laurent Héricher, the curator of the Hebraica-Judaica manuscripts at the French National Library in Paris, informed me that the manuscript was delivered in 1667 from Gilbert Gaulmin's collection, together with an additional hundred manuscripts and books.
On the flyleaf of the manuscript, the name Hubert d'Orleans is written by hand. Étienne Hubert d'Orléans (Stephanus Hubertus 1567-1614) was a French physician, orientalist, and diplomat. Born in Orléans, he studied medicine there and in Paris, as well as Semitic and other European languages. From 1598 to 1600, he served as the court physician of the Moroccan ruler, Ahmad al-Mansur in Marrakech, Morocco. He was an expert in Arabic and taught that language in Paris after his return from Morocco. His student, Gilbert Gaulmin (1585-1665), an Orientalist scholar, studied Arabic from him. Gaulmin was also interested in Semitic and European languages. It was he who probably received the manuscript from Hubert d'Orléans, which was eventually donated to the French National Library by his followers. This explains the name Hubert d'Orléans on the flyleaf of the manuscript and shows that the manuscript probably dates from the end of the sixteenth century and might have been brought to Paris from Morocco; however, it does not necessarily prove that it was written either by a Moroccan author or in Morocco.
The manuscript
According to Laurent Héricher, the curator of the French National Library, codicological analysis reveals a paper probably of Italian origin, with several different watermarks which could be found in Ottoman papers. In addition, the paper has been polished with a stone, the traces of which are visible with grazing light, and there are several polishing directions. This usage was widespread in the Ottoman Empire, but not exclusively, as it appeared in North Africa too (Velkov 2005; Briquet 1968). Hence it seems to point to three possible sources: Italy, the Ottoman Empire, and North Africa.
The pocket-size manuscript (8.7 × 11 cm) includes 302 folios, numbered consecutively by a later hand. It is obvious that some folios are missing, while others have been misplaced. Here are a few examples: folios 19r-22v should have been inserted after fol. 80v. There is a gap between fols. 80v and 81r. Fol. 231v finishes with the words תם תם תם [tam] 'finished' followed by לה עמידה די כפור [la ˁamida de quipur]3 'The Amidah prayer of Yom Kippur' in cursive letters, but fol. 232r starts with the translation of Psalms 17 which is said on Yom Kippur, but not the prayer itself. Fol. 32v finishes with the words אי בינדיג'ו (i bendicho) 'and he blessed' in solitreo (the handwritten Sephardic letters), but fol. 33r does not start with these words, and apparently a folio is missing or misplaced here. A detailed description of the order of the folios, the contents and the missing parts are listed in Lazar (1995a, xxii-xxiv, 228, 231, 249).
The body of the manuscript is written in Ladino in the square, Hebrew, vocalized letters, without the Hebrew text. Some instructions and occasional notes are written either in the square, non-vocalized letters or in solitreo, perhaps by another hand, as can be seen in the example from fol. 231v. At the bottom of a few folios the beginning words of the next folio are written in square, non-vocalized letters (e.g., fol. 8v: איל [el] 'the'), but in other folios it is written in solitreo (e.g., fol. 39v: אי טומו מרים לה פרופיטה אירמאנה די אהרן אל אדופ'לי [i tomo Miryam la profeta ermana de Aharon al adufle] 'and Miriam the prophetess, Aharon's sister, took a timbrel' (Exodus 15:20). Several instructions are written in square, a smaller size vocalized letter, as in Example 1:
Example 1:
אי דירה שמע לה פרשה פרימירה נומאש אי דירה וינועם קומו לו דיזין לאש מוגיריש אי דירה איסטי פסוק ... אי דישפואיש שי אירה אה דורמיר
[y dirá ʃemaˁ la paraʃa primera no.más y dirá vinoˁam cumo lo dizen las moĵeres y dirá este pasuk … y después se irá a dormir] (fol. 92r)
'And she should say Shema [Israel], the first Parasha [portion], no more. And she should say Vinoˁam4 as women use to say and she should say this verse … and afterwards she should go to sleep.'
The writing is not unified, and it seems that perhaps several scribes wrote the text consecutively. For instance, fols. 1-6r, 15r-16r, and 17v-28v are written by one hand, whereas fols. like 7r-14v and 16v-17r seem to be written by another. There are differences in the size of the letters, due to the different plumes used and the pressure of the ink. There are also some differences in the shape of some letters like gimel, shin, and pe. Because of the width of the letters, the folios with more delicate writing include more text – more lines and more words in each line than the ones with bolder letters (see for example fols. 83v–84r). Nevertheless, it seems clear that the language tradition is the same, and the text continues from the same point that the previous folio ends (cf. fols. 114v–116r). It is possible that the same author changed his writing at different times, or it is possible that the work was divided between two writers who decided which sections of the prayer book each was going to write.
In one case, however, it is certain that another person wrote the text, from fol. 296r forward. Not only are the letters handwritten in a different way from all the previous folios, but there are several unique linguistic features that typify these folios which are different from previous ones5. The discussion below concentrates on the first 295 folios of the Siddur as being by one author, because the final folios were appended later from another source.
In many cases, there are corrections to the text. Sometimes the author writes a word and corrects it, as seen in several instances. For example, on fol. 114v, the author starts writing esperantes, realizes that the word cannot be finished at the end of the line, erases the beginning espe and writes the whole word on the next line. Two lines below the author writes esperar but realizing that it should be escapar, erases the letters perar (of esperar) and writes the letters capar above it, leading to the word escaper. On fol. 125v, the author writes boladía, erases it, and writes mortandad over it. On fols. 124v-125r, there are several corrections, some within the text, and others at the margins: el angostino is erased, and yerba is added above the line; the letters mos are erased from the word foemos, and above them the correction ron (i.e., foeron) is added. The word anigadios is erased, and in the margins the words atemad[os] noes[os] años are added. On fol. 45v, the author writes the Hebrew word על [ˁal] 'on', erases it, and writes sobre next to it.
Features of Ladino translations in the Siddur
Like other Hebrew liturgical texts translated into Ladino, the entire Siddur, except for the short instructions, is a word-for-word translation, as described in various references to Ladino translations (Sephiha 1973, 50-92; Schwarzwald 1989, 7-15; Bunis 1996, 337-357). Here is a short example:
Example 2:
Bindicho Él y Bindicho Su nombre y Bindicho Su remembraçión para çiempre y çiempre Bindicho Tú YY noestro Dio Rey para çiempre el Rey el grande y el santo Padre piadozo alavado en boca de Su poeblo loado y afirmoziwado en lengoa de todos Sus boenos y Sus siervos 'Blessed be He and blessed be His memory for ever and ever Blessed are You, our God, King forever, the great and holy King merciful father lauded in the mouth of His people praised and glorified by the tongue of all His righteous ones and His servants' (15v-16r).
The Hebrew equivalent in standard Sepharic Siddurs is:
The translation is an exact copy of the Hebrew text, although this part of the prayer is not an exact formula found in Hebrew Sephardic prayer books. The Hebrew text says ˀĕlohēnū mɛlɛk hāˁōlām 'Our God King of the universe', which occurs only once in the whole Siddur as noestro Dio rey del mundo (2r). The formulation of the blessing here and in the entire Siddur is noestro~noeso Dio rey para siempre 'Our God king forever', as if the Hebrew says מֶלֶךְ לְעוֹלָם [mɛlɛk ləˁōlām] 'King forever'6.
Nominal sentences do not include the copula ser, e.g., Bindicho Él y bindicho Su nombre, bindicho Tú (not: bindicho sea Él y bindicho sea Su nombre, bindicho seas Tú). In Hebrew, the definite article appears both in front of the noun and in front of the adjective that defines it, as in הַמֶּלֶךְ הַגָּדוֹל וְהַקָּדוֹשׁ [hammɛlɛk haggādōl wəhaqqādōʃ] 'the great and holy king'. In Spanish, as in English, the definite article is placed only once. In the Ladino translations, the definite article is duplicated as in el rey el grande y el santo (rather than el rey grande y santo or el grande y santo rey). The same applies to the possessive pronouns which are part of the inflected noun. Hence חֲסִידָיו וַעֲבָדָיו [ħăsīdāw waˁăbādāw] is translated as sus boenos y sus siervos (rather than sus boenos y siervos).
God's name YHWH is represented by double yod and an additional yod above them (representing the ħolam?), and a decoration at the end. The vowels underneath are schwa and camats, as vocalized in the Bible. The Hebrew word ˀĕlohīm (in ˀĕlohenū) is translated by Dio.
Another example of the lack of a copulative verb can be seen in this example: heĝ el foego y los leños y ado el carnero para la alsasion, 'Behold the fire and the woods and where is the lamb for a burnt offering?' (Genesis 22:7; 20r).
Comparison to other sources
Minervini (1998, 406)7 compared Psalms 48 in the Siddur to Libro de Oracyones from Ferrara 1552 (Lazar 1993, 208-211), and Moses Song in Exodus 15:1-18 in the Siddur (Minervini 1998, 407-408)8 to the Constantinople Ladino Pentateuch from 1547 (Lazar 1988, 170-173; Lazar 1995a, xiv-xvi)9. Lazar also brought the versions of Moses Song in the Siddur, together with the Spanish Bible Escorial Ij3, the Constantinople Pentateuch, and the Ferrara Bible (Lazar 1992, 489). He also paired parallel paragraphs from the Siddur with Ferrara prayer book from 1552, Ferrara Bible from 1553, prayer books from Judeo-Provançal and Judeo-Catalan, Escorial Ij3 and Constantinople 1540(?), without any comments (Lazar 1995b, xiv-xx).
Hereinafter, I cite a few examples as translated in the Siddur, compared to other translations. The first example relates to the word boladía10.
Example 3:
The verse in Psalms 104:12 states: עֲ֭לֵיהֶם עוֹף־הַשָּׁמַ֣יִם יִשְׁכּ֑וֹן מִבֵּ֥ין עֳ֝פָאיִ֗ם יִתְּנוּ־קֽוֹל [ˁăleyhɛm ˁōf-haʃʃāmayim yiʃkōn mibbeyn ˁŏfāˀim yittənū qōl] 'By them shall the fowls of the heaven have their habitation, among the branches will sing [lit: give voice]'. Here are the translations:
S: Sobre elyos boladia de sielo mora, de entre boladias dan vos (228v-229r)11.
C: Sobre elyos abe de los çielos mora de entre hoǰas dan boz (Lazar 2000, 1714-1715).
F: Sobre ellos aue de los cielos morara, de entre hojas darán boz (Lazar 1992, 511).
The word boladía(s) refers in the Siddur both to Hebrew ˁōf 'fowl' and to ˁŏfāˀim, although the traditional interpretation of the latter is 'branches and leaves of a tree'12. The translations from Constantinople and Ferrara refer to the traditional meaning, abe-ave for ˁōf and hoǰas-hojas for ˁŏfāˀim. The medieval translations have ave for ˁōf and either ramas, fojas or piedras for ˁŏfāˀim, according to the traditional interpretation (Enrique-Arias and Pueyo Mena 2008-). None has the meaning of fowls in the translation of ˁŏfāˀyim. I guess that the spelling similarity between ˁōf and ˁŏfāˀyim with áyin and pe led the writer to this choice of words in the Siddur.
The word boladía is listed three more times in fol. 125v, once erased and replaced by mortandad as a translation of dɛbɛr, and two times as the translation of dɛbɛr 'pestilence' and qɛṭɛb 'destruction', as in Example 4:
Example 4:
Psalms 91:6: מִ֭דֶּבֶר בָּאֹ֣פֶל יַהֲלֹ֑ךְ מִ֝קֶּ֗טֶב יָשׁ֥וּד צָהֳרָֽיִם [middɛbɛr bāˀofɛl yahălok miqqɛṭɛb yāʃūd şāhŏrāyim] 'Nor for pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for destruction that wasteth at moonday'.
S: De boladia que en la noche anda, de boladia que prea en.las siestas (125v).
C: De mortaldad que en la tinevla se anda, de taǰamiento que prea en las siestas (Lazar 2000, 1698).
F: De pestilencia {que} en tiniebla anda, de tajamiento {que} destruye en las siestas (Lazar 1992, 507).
Ferrara translates dɛbɛr and qɛṭɛb by pestilencia and tajamiento, and Constantinople by mortandad and taǰamiento, respectively. The medieval Bibles translate the first word dɛbɛr by priessa, mortandad, vestigio, pestilençia or negocio [de la prissa], and the second word qɛṭɛb by contracorrimiento, tajamiento, vagelisco, basilisco, corrimiẽto, cortamento, and contrario del mal13. None of them used a word resembling boladía. The use of the word boladía in the context of this verse seems unusual.
Perhaps one can find a clue for this strange use in the Haketía. Benoliel (1977, 258) lists two expressions: voladía de cabeza means 'dizziness', 'confusion' or 'frustration', and volatero de corasson means 'agitation'. Being unfamiliar with the Hebrew words dɛbɛr and qɛṭɛb, the translator of the Siddur used the word boladía (=voladía) to indicate those terms carriying negative meanings, although in the first case on the same folio the word boladía was corrected to mortandad, as described above.
The following comparison is taken from the Musaf of the Sabbath14. Hebrew words are marked by capital letters. The instruction in solitreo letters that precedes the prayer in the Siddur says למשה ציבה <lmʃh şybh> [lemoʃe şiva] instead of למשה צוית [lemoʃe şivita] 'to Moses you ordered', with bet instead of vav and the use of 3rd person instead of 2nd15.
Example 5:
a
S: A Moʃeh encomendaste sobre monte de Sinay encomendansa del Ʃabat
F: A Moseh encomendaste sobre monte de Sinay mandamiento del sabath
SN: A.Moʃe encomendaste sobre monte de Sinay encomendança de Ʃabat
b
S: membrar y goʷardar y en.el nos encomendaste YY noeso Dio
F: membrando y guardando en.el nos encomendaste AND (=Adonay Nuestro Dio)
SN: membrar y guardar y en.el nos encomendaste YY nueso Dio
c
S: para alegar en.elya alegasion del Musaf del Ʃabat cumo conviene
F: para fazer allegar en.el allegacion de Musaph de sabath como pertenece
SN: por alyegar en.elya alyegasion de eñadimiento de Ʃabat cumo pertenece
d
S: Sea veluntad de delantreti YY noeso Dio e Dio de noestros padres que mos subas
F: Sea voluntad delante ti AND y Dio de nuestros padres que nos fagas subir
SN: Sea veluntad delante ti YY nueso Dio y Dio de nuesos padres que nos hagas subir
e
S: con aligria a noestras tierras y plantarnosas en noestros terminos y alye faremos
F: con alegria a nuestra tierra y nos plantes en nuestro termino, y alli faremos
SN: con alegria a nuesa tierra y nos plantes en nuestro termino y aí haremos
f
S: delantreti a alegasiones de noestras obligansas Temidin cumo su regla
F: delante ti allegaciones de nuestras obligaciones continuas como su orden
SN: delante ti a alyegaçiones de nuestras obligaçiones continos cumo su orden
g
S: y Musafin cumo su uzo a Musaf de dia de.la folgança este
F: y añadimientos como su derecho y al acrecentamiento de dia de la folgança este
SN: y eñadimientos cumo su regla a eñadimiento de dia de la folgança este
h
S: fare y alegare delantre ti con amor cumo encomendansa de tu ḅeluntad
F: faremos; y faremos allegar delante ti con amor como mandamiento de su voluntad
SN: faremos y alyegaremos delante ti con amor cumo encomendança de tu veluntad
i
S: cumo escreviste sobre.nos en.tu ley por mano se Moʃe tu siervo en su ley
F: como que escreuiste sobre nos en tu ley por mano de Moseh tu sieruo en su ley
SN: cumo escrebiste sobre nos en.tu ley por manos de Moʃe tu siervo cumo es dicho en su ley
The principle governing all the translations is the same: they are literal, word-for-word translations from Hebrew, like any other Ladino translation. However, if one ignores orthographic phenomena like connections of words (e.g., enel~en el, enelya~enella~en ella) and the systematic differences in vowels between cumo (S, SN) and como (F), and noeso-nueso (S, SN), noestro-nuestro, goʷardar-guardar (S, F, SN), and b-v-u alternations escreviste-escreuiste (S, F) escrebiste (SN), siervo-sieruo (S, F) sierbo (SN), one can find the following equivalents between this Siddur and the other prayer books in Table 1:
Variations in the Ladino translations of the prayer books.
Example
The Siddur
Ferrara Siddur
Seder Nashim
a
encomendansa
mandamiento
encomendança
b
membrar y goʷardar
membrando y guardando
membrar y guardar
b
y
—
y
c
alegar
fazer allegar
alyegar
c
Musaf Musaph
eñadimiento
c
conviene
pertenece
d, h
veluntad, ḅeluntad
voluntad
veluntad
d
e
y
y
d
mos subas
nos fagas subir
nos hagas subir
d, f, h
delantre
delante
e
aligria
alegria
e
plantarnosas
nos plantes
e
alye
alli
aí
e
faremos
haremos
f
alegasiones
allegaciones
alyegaciones
f
obligansas
obligaciones
f
Temidin
continuas
continos
f
regla
orden
g
Musafin
añadimientos
eñadimientos
g
uzo
derecho
regla
g
Musaf
acrecentamiento
eñadimiento
h
fare y alegare
faremos y faremos allegar
faremos y alyegaremos
The Siddur resembles Seder Nashim in the words encomendansa (a), membrar y guarder (b), veluntad (d, h), and in the addition of y in b. They also resemble each other in the frequent alternations between the noeso-nueso and noestro-nuestro, as demonstrated in the examples above. The Siddur resembles Ferrara in the translation of the Hebrew word Musaf in c but not in g, and in the use of faremos in e. It uses the Hebrew word Musaf two more times in g, once in the singular and once in the plural, unlike the other translations. It also features the Hebrew word Temidin in f, which is translated in F and SN by continuas and continos, respectively.
Ferrara and Seder Nashim translate the same way in a few cases: pertenece (c), fagas~hagas subir (d), nos plantes (e), obligaciones and orden (f). In these cases, they differ from the Siddur.
The Siddur is unique in the consistent use of alegar and its derivatives in the translation of the Hebrew root q-r-b related to sacrifice and scarifying. Only in fols. 59v, אַלְיֵיגָאנוֹש [alyeganos] is written, where it translates 'to arrive' (Sp. llegar or allegar). In the other traditions in Ferrara and in Seder Nashim, allegar/alyegar is homonymic for both meanings.
The above example also demonstrates the use of JS mos in example d rather than nos, although in many other cases nos is used. This initial m is typical of JS and appears from time to time in the possessive moesa (190r) and moestros (188r, 259r; see section 6.2.2 (1) below). The vowel i in aligria (e; for alegria) in the Siddur is not frequent in the verb alegrar and its derivatives, but it occurs several times. The alternations between e and i can be seen in alye~alyi demonstrated above, and in other cases (see section 6.1.1.1 below). The word delantre is typical to JS, found sometimes in medieval Spanish texts (according to CORDE). The occurrence of delante is rarer in this Siddur (see section 6.4.12 below).
The selected examples above, the one regarding boladía in Examples 3-4 and the other regarding the translation of a few sentences from the Musaf prayer in Example 5 demonstrate the uniqueness of this prayer book. In the following paragraphs further analyses of the linguistic features of the Siddur will be presented.
Some linguistic characteristics of the manuscript<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn-16-1198">
<sup>16</sup>
</xref>
Phonological featuresVowels
The vowel system is represented by the Hebrew vocalization system (niqud). The vowels are not represented systematically. Pataħ and camats represent the vowel a, segol, tsere and sometimes schwa – the vowel e, ħolam represents o and shuruk u. Cubuts does not occur at all, and the schwa may represent a lack of vowel as well. Alternations between i-e are very frequent; less frequent are o-u alternations. A few features have already been seen in the previous examples. Here I list them briefly17.
Alternations between the vowels u and o are les common, e.g., buscantes21 (118v, 288v)—boscad (118v)—buscar (230r, 252v); cumo (8r, 12r and many more)—como (3v, 24r +6)—comu (24r, 125r, 258v, 273r)—cumu (162r 232v)22; alyudan (56r 137r 186r)—alyodan (57v); complira (215v)—cumplir (245r, 248r).
The sequence oe is very frequent and occurs hundreds of times. Here are a few examples: acoerda (20v), acoesta (232v, 283v), afoeras (44r, 54v +9), amoestra (208v), amoestrame (284v), bergoensa (249r, 270v), boeno (4r, 15r and many more), coenta (28r, 28v +4), coentanos (274v), coerḅo (28v), coernos (11r), coerpos (2r), coestas (7v, 30r +4), compoesto (236r, 295r), despoes (90r, 92r +2), desveĝoensan (5r), doenyo (5r, 48r +13), doerme (90v, 128v), empoes (8r, 20r, 194r) encoentro (5r, 91v), esfoersalos (68v), foente (217r), foersa (3r, 28v +13), foerte (21r, 36r +28), ǰoizios (62v), ǰoiĝsio (232r)—goegsio (260r)—ǰoezios (286r)—goeĝios (290r), loengo (17v, 70r, 281r, 285r). poeblo (5v, 16v and many more), poertas (25r, 29r +8), roedas (145v)24.
Rarely does the sequence oe alternate with ue, e.g., atuendo (241v)—atoendo (270v), foego (10r, 228r, 246r)—fuego (176v), ǰoezes (110v)—ǰueĝes (242r, 290v).
In four more cases, only the sequence ue occurs: 1. envuelto (162r); 2. encuenta (234v); 3. In the second person plural pronoun realized as guesos (=vuesos, vuestros) (181v), uestros (243v), uestra (243v); 4. Alternating with ui in ǰuesio (113r), ǰuezio (286v)— ǰuisio (221v), ǰuizio (193v, 235v, 286v)25.
<italic>oa-ua</italic> Alternations
As a rule, oa is frequently used throughout the Siddur. Here are a few examples: coaǰaron (37r), coal (78v, 279r, 288v), coando (39r, 74v +8; also alternations with cowando 278v), coanto (23r, 44v +8), coanta (133r), coatrevas (36r) coatreva (215v, 297v), coatro (49v, 71v, 151r, 269v), coatrupea (51v, 132v, 279v; alternating with coatro pea 28v, 30v, 229r), goarda (20v, 61v)—wardan (1v, 27v)—ĝoarda (67v), menĝoa (116r)—menĝwaran (116v), pascoa (199v, 203v).
In three cases, oa alternates with ua: 1. in the word for 'water', e.g., agoas (295v)—aĝuas 2v, 35r +4)—aguas (29v)—awas (39v)—agwas (29v, 30r +10)—aĝwas (68v, 80v +3)—agwa (239v, 240r); 2. in escuantra (45v)—escoantra (76v, 98r, 148v); 3. in lengua (253v)—lingoa (67v)—lengoa (116v, 138r +4). The single word cuarenta (269r) is spelled with ua, but coatro (49v 71v +2) is spelled with oa.
Only in one example does the sequence ua occur systematically: asetuaste (183r) alternating with asetuwaste (189v).
Diphthongization
The following feature is typical of certain verbs, where diphthongs alternate with simple vowels, e.g., amostran (78r), amoestra (208v), amoestre (10r), amuestrame (251v), amoestrame (284v); despierto (137v, 233v), despertan (27r, 137v); esfoersalos (68v), esforsan (109r, 215r +4). The diphthongization and lack of diphthongs in some of the forms could show the confusion between Spanish and Portuguese forms, but one should recall that all these variations have already existed in medieval Spanish26.
Consonants
The Hebrew alphabet is used to represent the JS consonants.
The letters ħet, caf, ˁayin, şadi and tav are typical of Hebrew words in the Siddur27, e.g., חסיד ħasid (244v), כהן cohen (187v), זכות zejut (22r), בלעם הרשע bilˁam haraʃaˁ (81r), עולם ˁolam (13r), צבאות şebaˀot (19v, 20r +14), תפלה tefila (136v)28. However, ħet and şadi also appear sometimes in JS words, as described below in 6.1.2.4 and 6.1.2.8. The following graphemes show one-to-one correspondence with the consonants they represent: dalet /d/, tet /t/, lamed /l/, mem /m/, nun /n/, samej /s/, resh /r/, and pe /p/, although sometimes the letter pe without a diacritic might represent /f/ as well.
The following consonant letters will be discussed below: bet-bet rafa-vav <b-ḅ-v>, pe rafa-he-alef <p-f-h-Ø>, gimel-cof <g-q>, ħet <ħ>, lamed-yod and yod-yod <ly-y>, shin/sin-samej <ʃ-s>, gimel and gimel rafa <g-ĝ>, and şadi <ş>.
The letter bet is used more frequently than vav. Because in Hebrew bet can represent both b and v, the writer preferred bet in many cases instead of vav. It could be expected that in word initial position, vav would be more frequent in cases of clear /v/, but this is not the case. The letters bet and vav alternate in many cases in words’ initial and medial positions. In final positions, only bet prevails. This distribution proves that the pronunciation of b-v was not so distinct at that time, as in Spain. In some cases, bet is marked by a diacritic pointing to the pronunciation of v.
In some words, only bet occurs in the initial position, e.g., bien (22r, 27v and many more), the verb bendizir in all its occurrences, e.g., bendizeras (136v, 200r), bendizira (176v), bendision (22r, 43v and many more), etc. Some words include only bet in medial position, e.g., abaʃar in all its conjugations (see examples below in the discussion on s-ʃ, in section 6.1.2.6); abastado (45v, 125r, 297r); abezare (236v), abezame (251v), next to the verb ambezar (e.g., 5v, 49r, 59r, 292v), and a few more words29.
In a few words, only vav occurs in the initial position, e.g., viernes (295r), vaso (175r), ventanas (1r), vos (9r, 27r, 40v, 160v) 'you', vestido (228r) vestiste (228r), and the pronouns voeso (119v, 290r), voesa (119v), voesas (289r), voesos (174v, 188v), voestro/a/s (51r, 52v +5), vos (9r, 27r and many more), and even wesas (281v, 288v).
Initial fe (pe with or without diacritic) alternates with he in the following words30:
(1) In the Sp. verb hallar 'find', as in falyaste (34r), falyo (216v)—halyaras (232r).
(2) In the preposition hasta, as in fasta (9r, 16r, 23v and many more)—hasta (243v) which also alternates with ħasta (72r, 139r, +7; see discussion in section 6.1.2.4 below).
(3) The Sp. verb hacer is mostly realized with initial f (pe), e.g., fazien (15r, 29v and many more), fazer (1v, 21v +11), faz (49v, 60v and many more)31. The number of forms with the initial he is scarce, with only three occurrences, e.g., heziste (12r) next to feziste (33v 35r +15), hizieron (252v), next to fizieron (208v). A few times, the verb occurs in the forms azio (38r, 98r), aziolos (38r, 98r, 289v), los azio (289v), and aziere (255r) without pe or he. Forms like azio, fazio and faziere are attested in medieval texts according to CORDE, and the forms in the Siddur seem to retain these old forms, but they also reflect JS varieties. The infinitive form is realized twice as fer: para fer saber (18r), para ferlos saber (79r), an influence of dialectal Aragon, Asturia-Leon, or Catalan, perhaps Old Northern Portuguese32.
(4) Sp. hermoso is realized as fermozo (53v)—hermoza (145r), and its JS derivative fermozura (17r, 18r +20)—hermozura (263r).
(5) Sp. hijo is realized as fiǰos (5v, 6r, 18r and many more)—hiǰos (118v), fiǰo (8r, 9v, 10r and many more)—hiǰo (11r, 11v, 241v)33.
In all these cases, the occurrences with initial fe are more frequent than those with he. In JS, they are pronounced with the initial f only in some dialects, as in Thessaloniki (Quintana 2006). For most JS speakers, the words start with a vowel, namely ayar, asta, azer, ermozo-ermozura, and iǰo.
The initial he is rare as the examples above show, but in addition to them, it occurs in the following words: haĝi (270v; translation of Heb. הֲרֵי 'indeed, here is'); heĝ (10r, 11r, 76r, 160v)—heg (23v, 90v +6), hegme (8r)—heĝme (9v, 10v; translation of הִנֵּה 'here! here is')34; the Sp. verb henchir, as in hinchiose (20r, 44v), henchara (32v), hinchirsea (37r), hinche (61v), hincha (87r), henchirlae (106r, 294v), hinchio (113r, 144v +3), hinchieran (138r), hengyose35 (143v, 230r), henchira (215v), henchiras (233v).
Some of the words that are derived from historical f (fablar, fambre, fartar, fecha, ferir, filo)36 are written consistently in the Siddur with pe with a diacritic. Here are a few examples: fablo (6r), fabla (6r, 22v +13), fablare (17r, 129v), and 12 more forms of the same verb; fambrientos (27v, 276v), fambre (86r, 114v, 138v), fambrienta (277r); fartan (18r), fartanos (100v, 124v +8), fartarteas (51v) fartura (61r, 62r, 229r); feridas (60v), firien (84r, 134v, 135v), ferida (86r, 128v), ferira (90v, 126v, 298r), firio (29v, 132v); and filo (52v). Many of these words have equivalents with initial f both in Italian and in Portuguese.
<italic>Gimel-cof</italic> <ג-ק> Alternations
Spanish words are written with cof to represent /k/ (Sp. c before a, o, u, qu before e and i). In several places, the letter cof replaces gimel, but only sometimes is the author aware of the change, e.g., in colieron (249r) the cof is erased and the letter gimel is written in the margin (>golieron). In cobernan (186r) the letters gimel and vav are written over the cof and vav (>gobernan). The word cozo (120v, 200v, 210r) is written instead of gozo: in the first case without any correction; in the two other times gimel and vav are written over the cof and vav. The letters shin and gimel in גושקארה ǰuscara (133r) are marked as mistakes and zayin and gimel are written in the margin (>ǰuzgara). The same verb is written twice more as ǰuzca and ǰuzcades (290v) without any correction. Also, the word for 'worm' is spelled cuzano (252v) with cof rather than guzano with gimel. The confusion between the letters might stem from the fact that the consonants k and g vary only in voicing (k voiceless, g voiced).
The Hebrew word Moriya 'place name' is translated twice by monte del.almisque (7v) or tierra de la almisĝe (8r), Old Sp. almizque, Modern Sp. almizcle37, relating the name of the place to the word mor 'myrrh', based on Jewish interpretation of the place name.
In all these cases, the translator replaced the voiced g with a voiceless k. This is a possible result of the special status of g in this Siddur, as described below in section 6.1.2.7.
<italic>Ħet</italic> (ח)
As stated above in 6.1.2, the letter ħet occurs many times in words of Hebrew origin, mostly proper names, e.g., חוּנִי38 (247r), חזקיה (246r), חזקיהו (81r), חנוכה (193r), חנניה (246v), חשמוּנאי (193v), יצחק (6r, 7v +15), יריחו (81r), ישתבח (42r), מנחה (81v, 166r, 216r).
In three other cases, the letter ħet is used in Ladino words:
(1) In the JS word for Sunday, alħad (288r), which is derived from Arabic al-ħad 'the one', the equivalent of yom riʃon 'the first', in Hebrew39.
(2) In the translation of Hebrew ħerut 'freedom', twice in the singular alħoriya (62r, 84r) and twice in the plural alħoriyas (199r, 206r), although the Hebrew text in both cases is in the singular. Another time the word is spelled with he: y los saco a al horía de trebeǰos 'and he took them out to freedom from sufferings' (245r; Sp. alhorría)40.
(3) In the word for 'until'. In section 6.1.2.2 above, we demonstrated the alternations of fasta-hasta where fasta occurs many times, whereas hasta occurs only once. The word ħasta occurs nine times in the Siddur41.
The example in (1) cannot prove a direct Arabic influence, because this is the JS word attested since the beginning of the 16th century42. The two other examples hint towards Arabic influence, but because the words also occurred in texts produced in the Ottoman Empire, they look like a general JS pronunciation in use at the time, not necessarily reflecting an author from an Arab country43.
<italic>Lamed-yod</italic> and <italic>yod-yod</italic> <לי-יי> Alternations<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn-44-1198">
<sup>44</sup>
</xref>
The author writes lamed and yod to represent Spanish <ll>, but often only yod is written instead of Spanish <ll>, e.g., cabalyeros (39r)—cabayeros (215v; Sp. caballero); cabalyo (28v, 35v, 40r, 234v)—cabayo (39r, 114v; Sp. caballo); elyas (82v)—eyas (117v; Sp. ellas); en.eyos (31v, 109v)—en.elyos (34r, 110v; Sp. en ellos); falyaste (34r)—falyo (216v)—halyaras (232r)—fayemos (71v)—fayar (234v; Sp. hallar); maravilyas (32v, 34v, 37v and many more)—maraviyas (132v)—maravelyas (17r, 164r; Sp. maravillas); oria (12r)—orilya (35r, 56v; Sp. orilla); silya (1v, 55v +6)—siya (26r)— silyas (129v)—siyas (129v; Sp. silla).
Moreover, in several cases, words are written with lamed and yod, although there is no etymological <ll> in Spanish. Here are a few examples of such alternations: alyina (49v, 51v +11)—ayina (67r, 80v +13; Sp. aína); ayudan (96v, 101v +12)—alyudan (56r, 137r, 186r; Sp. ayudan); en.vazio (64v)—en bazilyo (71r; Sp. en vacío); fuyes (174r)—fulyeron (249r; Old Sp. fuir, Sp. huir); mayor (33v)—malyor (55v; Sp. mayor); olyeste (34v)—oyiste (12v; Sp. oír); pilyadades (2v)—piadades (7r, 13v and many more; Old Sp. piadad); podestadilya (18r, 42v)—podestadia (220v, 221r; podestania in Ferrara's Bible and Libro de Oracyones); rebeyos (76v, 261r)—rebelyos (78r, 234v +5; Sp. rebelios); varaganilya (3v)—baraganiya (28v, 145r +3; Sp. barraganía).
In other cases, there are no alternations and either lamed and yod are written, or yod with no alternations, e.g., vilyentes (2v; Sp. veyentes); roselyo (59v)—rosilyos (60v)—rosilyo (61r, 97r, 102r +9; Sp. rocío); rodiya (139v; Sp. rodilla). In the following cases the lamed and yod correspond to Spanish spelling: calyad (243v; Sp. callad), cochilyo (9v, 10v; Sp. cuchillo).
Two conclusions can be drawn from the examples cited here: a. there is no distinction between /y/ and /λ/ (Sp. <ll>), and they are both pronounced probably as [y], a result of the well-known process of yeísmo in many dialects of Spanish (Lapesa 1984, §§121-125; Penny 2000, 120-121, 147-148; Penny 2002, 106); b. the writer is no longer familiar with Spanish spelling.
<italic>Shin-Samej</italic> <ש-ס> Alternations
The letter shin is predominantly used to represent the consonant /s/ (Sp. <s>, <c> before i and e, and sometimes <z>), although occasionally it alternates with samej, e.g., שיימפרי אי סיימפרי45 (150v; Sp. siempre), פאש~פאס (165v; Sp. paz), אַלָאבָאסְיוֹן (42v) ~אַלָאבַ'אשְייוֹן (66r; JS alavación, from Sp. alabar)46. Sporadically it represents the consonant /ʃ/ as well, although the cases where ʃ is marked by a diacritic are rare, e.g., אַבָאשׂוֹ abaʃo (159v) 'down' with a diacritic, but אַבָאשוֹ (45v), אַבַאשוֹ (146v) without a diacritic; בַֹאשׂוֹש ḅaʃos (56r) 'low.pl' with a diacritic, but אַבָאשָאן abaʃan (56r) 'lower.sg.pres' on the same folio, and בָאשוֹ ,בַאשוֹש baʃos, baʃo (247v) without a diacritic.
Shin is marked with a dot over the letter in one unusual case: in veʃeno (5r; וֶישֶׂינוֹ, Sp. vecino, JS vezino) 'neighbor'47.
We cannot be certain about the pronunciation of the Sp. verb buscar. Lazar transcribed it with s, based on the commonly known pronunciation at the time, rather than the JS pronunciation [buʃkar] (Lazar 1995a). Contrarily, Lazar transcribes the following cases with x, which represent ʃ in JS: the Sp. verb dejar, e.g., deʃara (i.e., <dexara>) (27r, 49v +3), deʃaron (139r), deʃen (49v, 150v), deʃaste (24v) deʃaran (233v), and the noun ʃarifes (27r, 173v, 176v; Sp. jarife). I guess Lazar's decision was based on Spanish medieval Spanish ʃ (Old Sp. x, Modern Sp. j) in these cases.
The case of the Sp. word mezquino and its derivatives in the Siddur need special consideration because of its spelling48. The word mesquino(s)~misquino(s), of Semitic origin (misken in Hebrew, miskīn in Arabic), written in Hebrew with caf and samej, is spelled in the following ways in the Siddur: מֶשְכִינוֹש (28v), מֶישְקִינוֹש (56r), מֵיסְכִינוֹס (140r), מֵישְקִינוֹ (79r, 247v, 291a), מִישְקִינוֹ ,מֶישְקִינוֹ (140r)49, מִסְכִינוֹ (291r), מֶיסְכִינוֹ (115v, 173v, 283)50. It seems that the Hebrew vowel under the mem and the spelling with samej and caf intervene with the Spanish pronunciation of the word and cause these variations in spelling and vocalization.
The verbal derivative of this word, enmeskenesimos (80v), enmeskeneserlosa (37r), and emeskenesieron (116v), all translations of biblical 'impoverished'51, are spelled as Ladino standard words with shin and cof.
<italic>Gimel</italic> and <italic>Gimel rafa</italic> <ג-ג'>
The letter gimel with a diacritic represents the consonants /Ʒ/, /dƷ/ and /tʃ/ in JS texts as in meĵor (176r; Sp. mejor), Aĝifto (14v, 34v +10; Sp. Egipto), anĝel (10v; Sp. angel), and anĝura (138r 176r; Sp. anchura). In this Siddur, gimel with a diacritic is not marked consistently, leading to some speculations regarding the consistent pronunciation of the words.
(1) The letter gimel with a diacritic (ğ) alternates with gimel without a diacritic, pointing to a fricative pronunciation of /g/ (perhaps like [γ]), rather than to the usual pronunciation of /Ʒ/, /dƷ/ and /tʃ/. E.g., foeğo (9v, 30r, 34r)—foego (10r, 228r, 246r); heğ (10r, 11r, 76r, 160v)—heg (23v, 90v +6), hegme (8r), heğme (9v, 10v) (and see 6.1.2.2 above); ğiaste (37v, 38r)—ğian (137r), ğiarmeas (250v)—gia (278v); ğovernan (58r)—ğoḅernan (197v, 204v)—governan (97r, 102r +3)—gobernan (186r52, 257r); mengoe (74r)—menğoa (116r); reğmidor (54v, 144r)—regmidor (19r, 54v + 19), riğmien 55v 56r)—rigmien (85v, 118r, 137r; JS regmir, Sp. redimir); yağa (35r)—yaga (126r, 234r; Sp. llaga); vergonsosos (56r)—ḅerğonsozos (78r), berğonsozos (78r), averğonsemos (49r). In all these cases, gimel with a diacritic alternate with gimel without a diacritic.
To these examples one can add the forms reğirmeas (251r; Sp. regir), and soğiuo (13r), soğiwen (13r; Sp. soguear), with the diacritic mark on the gimel.
(2) Gimel with a diacritic represents a fricative pronunciation of /g/, especially next to the diphthongs /ua/~/oa/ and /ue/~/oe/ realizing them as [wa] and [we]53. In these cases, the gimel might disappear altogether. Here are a few examples: ağuas (2v, 35r +4)—aguas (29v)—awas (39v)—ağwas (68v, 80v +3); desverwensamentos (2v)—desveğoensan (5r)—desverğonsados (74v); ğoalardoname (4v)—walardonamento (175r)—gwalardon (195v, 248v); goarda (20v, 61v)—wardan (1v, 27v)—wardete (6r) —wardares (41r)—gowardan (28r54, 86v, 117v), ğowarden (153v); goerfano (28r)—werfano (291r) (Minervini 1998, 410; Lazar 1995a, xxvi; Schwarzwald 2010, 185-187).
The JS verbs abiviguar 'revive', aboniguar55 'improve, make better', afermoziguar/aformoziguar 'glorify, beatify', apaciguar 'pacify', fraguar 'build', mochiguar 'increase', and the invented verb justiguar 'judge'56, always occur in the Siddur without any traces of gimel:
The same applies to the Sp. noun quatregua which translates רֶכֶב [rɛkɛb]: catrewa (39r), coatrewas (36r), coatrewa (215v)57.
This pronunciation of /gua/ > [wa] occurs in several JS dialects, including the Ħaketía, and in Andalusia. It is especially marked in JS texts written in Arab speaking countries (Benoliel 1977, 32; Romeu Ferré 2020, 34; Quintana 2008, 187-235; Quintana 2014a, 105-143). It also exists in some south Italian dialects where g in front of back vowels changes into γ or ø. Moreover, in the Venician Italian dialect the verb vardar corresponds to the Italian verb guardare, thus the use of this verb in the Siddur can be seen as a Venician influence (Rohlfs 1966, 206, 208; Loporcano 1997, 338-348; Boerio 1856, 778-779).
(3) Orthography demonstrates that gimel with a diachritic is used as an equivalent of <ll> in Spanish in the verb llamar, spelled as ğamar. The variations in the Siddur show that in some cases the pronunciation is either y or tʃ58, e.g., chamo (11v, 11v +6)—yamo (10v, 11v +5), chamantes (21r, 22v +6)—chama (28v), chamar (105v)—yamar (21v, 27r +3), chamaste (187r, 190r)—yamaḅa (58v), chame (232v)—yame (214v), chiame (250r)—yamaron (70v). The verb chamar was known in Galicia, it exists in Portuguese (chamar) and is close to the Italian verb chiamare, pronounced today as [kiamare], but as [tʃamare] in the Venetian dialect59.
(4) The occurrence of gimel with a diacritic, features not only in the case of Sp. <ll> which is pronounced as y in JS, but also in other cases of phonetic [y]. The verb 'to play (a musical instrument)' (Sp. tañer, from Latin tangĕre) is translated once by tanĝeran (31r) next to tanyeran (140r) and other forms like tanyer (23r, 92v +7) tanyedura (32r) and more. The occurrence of tanĝeran seems to be of Portuguese influence (cf. Port tanger).
In the conjugation of the verb 'to be', ser, one finds seğa (5r, 60v, 61v), seğan (68r), segan (81r), seğas (66v), next to sea (4r, 4v, 22r and many more), sean (271r, 282v), seas (45v, 46r +3). One explanation could be that a secondary pronunciation of y is created in forms like sea, seas, sean, as if they were [seya], [seyas], [seyan], and based on the other cases where y is realized as Ʒ, so are these examples. However, although the number of verbs with gimel with a diacritic is small, compared to the verbs without it, it seems that this might also be an influence of the Portuguese present subjunctive (cf. seja, sejan, sejas).
The Sp. word ya is also written as ğa (269v), reflecting the Portuguese pronunciation (ja).
(5) Gimel with a diacritic might rarely represent /ʃ/ as well, as in the Sp. verb alejar (JS aleʃar): aleğame (4r)—aleğados (206r, 271r)—aleʃaron (249r)—aleʃar (251v); the Sp. verb bendecir (JS bendizir), e.g., bendiʃo (29r, 99r)—bendeğistelo (98v) (Sp. bendijo, bendijiste)60; and the Sp. verb decir (JS dezir), e.g., diʃo (8r-v, 10r +9)—diğo (9v×2, 10r-c +13)—diʃiste (200r)—diʃe (107, 291)—next to değimos (269v; and see section 6.1.2.6 above).
(6) Finally, it seems that the words juicio, juez, justedad, and juzgar (and see justiguar above in paragraph no. 2) confused the writer of the Siddur61. The occurrence of nearby sibilants dƷ, s, and z, caused the author to write in the following ways:
In addition to its use in Hebrew words, the letter şadi occurs in the following four cases:
(1) In the words related to 'shade, shadow' (Old Sp. solombra): :אַצוֹלוֹמְבְכַארָה YY te aşolombrara63sobre mano de tu derecha 'the lord is thy shade upon thy right hand' (90v; based on Psalms 121:5); צוֹלוֹמְבְרָה and אַצוֹלוֹמְבְרַאדוֹ: En şolombra del Abastado sera aşolombrado (125r)64 'under the shadow of the Almighty will be sheltered' (125v; from the Siddur, Seder Hashcavot); צוֹלוֹמְבְרָה: Con şolombra de tus alas me encubriras 'hide me under the shadow of thy wings' (232v; based on Psalms 17:8).
According to CORDE, of the 75 occurrences of solombra in the 16th century, 74 are related to religious texts: two are in this Siddur, and the other 72 occur in the Ferrara Bible and Prayer Book, both written in Italy. Solombra is the JS word for shadow, but the spelling with tsadi is unique in this Siddur.
(2) The word faces 'face' is written in the following ways: faşes פ'אציש (4v 5r + 19), פָ'אצֶיץ faşeş (103v, 233v), פ'אציצ (203r, 230v, 249r), פאציצ (212v, 229r; without an apostrophe), פ'אשיש (61r 70v 71v ×5), פ'אשיס (61r), and פאשיש (246r; without an apostrophe). The occurrences of the şadi in the word faces is much greater than the use of shin [fases]. It seems that there is a clear influence of Italian faccia rather than restoration of the medieval pronunciation of /c/.
(3) The word eşpreraran אֵיצְפֵירַארָאנ (139v): y todo oǰo ati eşperaran 'and every eye will look forward to You' (from the morning prayers of the High Holidays) is written with a şadi. It translates Hebrew: וְכָל עַיִן לְךָ תְּצַפֶּה. The verb esperar and the noun esperanza occur many times in the Siddur (29 times), always written with shin. Perhaps the Hebrew word təşappɛ written with şadi influenced the use of this single occurrence.
(4) The word fonşado(s) (Sp. fonsado) is written with şadi six times: פ'ונצאדוש (29v, 113v, 159v, 247r), פ'ונצאדו (99r), פונצאדוש (159v); it is written with samej or shin 11 times: fonsados (34r), fonsado (34r, 36r, 129v +6), and ponsados (45v) without an apostrophe. The reason in this case seems to be phonetic: the pronunciation of s next to n causes an insertion of the parasitic sound t which ultimately sounds like ts66.
The fact that the letter şadi is used in the Siddur in these specific cases, probably pronounced as ts, could be a clear indication of an Italian influence, where şadi is used in Judeo-Italian texts, not only because of the frequent use of the word for 'faces' and the existence of ts next to n (Minervini 1992, I, 31-34)67.
Metathesis
Several words show metathesis: ildo (294v; Sp. ídolo) and ildos (51v, 52r +3), never idolo(s)68. The Sp. word postero and its derivatives are realized as prosmeto (!) (44r), prosteros (54r), prostimero (55r)69, prostimerilya (61r, 61v) prostimeria (61v, 252v), prostimeros (137r), prostemereia (160v) and once porostimero (290v). In the conjugation of the verb alabar, the following forms are attested: alavalde (29v×3), alavaldo (29v, 30r, 32r, 42v), rather than alavadle, alavadlo, and in the verb rodear – rodealda (290r) rather than rodeadla, and sobreviamos (267r) rather than soberviamos.
Metathesis was known in medieval and in vulgar Spanish next to r, but also in the verbal system next to d and l, as found in the Siddur (Lapesa 1984, §§391-392; Quintana 2006, 107-109; Bunis 2018, 381, 391, 397, 399). The forms are typical JS.
Consonant deletion
At times, due to customary pronunciation, some letters are deleted. The word verdad (54r, 55r-v and many more) is written verda (18v, 53v +7), berda (21v, 89r, 224r) and ḅerda (108v) without the final consonant. Velunta (181v) is written only once without the final d, next to countless occurrences of veluntad, viluntad, ḅiluntad, beluntad, and ḅeluntad70. Both words were attested in Medieval texts as verdat~berdaθ and veluntaθ71, indicating that the final consonants were weak and therefore susceptible to deletion.
The deletion of n in front of m is attested in the Siddur in comigo (115v, 285r) for conmigo 'with me', in emalesimos (75v, 76r, 267v), emalesades (120r), emalesientes (293r), next to enmalesimos (75r, 267v), enmalesemos (267r), enmaleserme (68r), enmalesientes (24r)72, and in emoesos términos (181r). The occurrence of the two adjacent apical consonants led to the deletion of n.
The deletion of a whole syllable occurs in enelbanon (94r; en el Lebanon), and there are other cases of letter deletion due to unsuitable division of morphemes (see section 6.2.5 below).
Morphological featuresPresent tense
As in other Ladino translations, the Hebrew present tense forms are translated by apocopated present participle forms rather than by Spanish present tense forms, e.g., melezinan, maravillan, wardan (1v); bolvien, dan (2r, 65v +9); abrien, soltan, enfistan (2v) 'heals, astounds, preserves it; restores, gives; opens [sights], releases, stands upright' (Hebrew rōfeˀ, maflīˀ, məʃammərāh; maħzīr, nōten; pōqeaħ, mattīr, zōkef). The same occurs throughout the whole Siddur, e.g., aboresien (180v), asufrien (58r, 64r +10), cubrien (28v), deperdien (27v), dizien (15r), dezientes (47r, 59r, 255r), embolvien (228r), fazien (15r, 29v and many more), partien (35r), ponien (29r, 228r), regmien (57r, 60r, 111r, 214v), sabien (268r, 292v), tendien (273r), vinien (177v).
Pronouns
(1) The first-person possessive plural pronoun is either noeso(s) or noestro(s) with numerous occurrences. On the first few folios only noestro(s) occurs, e.g., noestro Dio (1r×2, 2v×3, 3r×4 and more). From fol. 7 on, the pronoun noeso(s) is outnumbered, e.g., noeso Dio (7r×2), noeso padre (7v), but later noestro and noeso alternate freely, sometimes on the same folio, e.g., noestro Dio y Dio de nuesos padres envelunta agora en nuesa folgansa… pon noestra parte en tu ley (168r) (Bunis 1994, 328). And although the above forms are very common, in some later folios of the manuscript, the first-person possessive pronouns, moeso/moestro occur with initial m: emoesos terminos (181r; =en muesos términos; see 6.1.4 above), moestros (188r, 259r) and moesa (190r)73. The occurrence of m in such cases is typical of JS in the modern period, but it was also known in vulgar Iberian Spanish (Lapesa 1984, §116, §125; Menéndez Pidal 1962, 252, 258; Penny 2000, 179; Bunis 2018, 392; Crews 1935, 27, 183).
(2) The second-person possessive pronoun is not very frequently used, and it also alternates between voeso(s) and voestro(s) as follows: voesa (119v), voeso (119v, 290r), voesos (174v, 188v), voesas (289r), and two times wesas (281v, 288v; see discussion in 6.1.2.7 (2) above); voestro (51r, 53r×2, 83r), voestros (52r, 52v, 53r, 261v), voestras (52r×2).
The pronouns are vocalized twice with initial u, וּאֵישְטְרוֹ uestro corason (243v), and וּאֵישְטְרָה uestra ğağisa74 (243v) pointing to the pronunciation of westro, westra, as in the case of voeso.
Only once does the pronoun gueso occur: y en cabeseras de guesos mezes (181v) 'in the beginnings of your months'. The use of ue>gwe is well attested in rural Spain and America, and this pronoun exists in spoken and written documents of JS, especially in the Balkans (Penny 2000, 134-135; Quintana 2006, 33-40; Schwarzwald 1989, 87; Schwarzwald 2008, 237; Bunis 2018, 392).
The use of the pronoun -ueso occurs in north Spain, Aragon, and Leon; noeso resembles the Portuguese nosso (Menéndez Pidal 1962, 145, 258; García de Diego 1981, 143). The pronouns -uestro reflect the standard Castilian Spanish. However, there are instances where spoken JS pronouns occasionally appear.
(3)The expression 'with us' is translated consistently in the following manner: conosco (225v), con nosco (102v, 105r +3), conusco (72v, 105r +6), and con nusco (138v, 156v, 196r)75. The expression conusco/con nusco was quite rare in standard Spanish. It was attested in CORDE over 200 times until 1580 in various documents, mostly religious or juridical, including this manuscript. However, it should be kept in mind that conosco is the standard Portuguese form that might influence it.
The suffix -<italic>mento</italic>
The suffix -mento is common: apanyamento (140v, 159v), alavamento (42v, 138r +5) complimento (98v), enfortesimento (122v), mantenimento (182v, 189r, 227r, 266v), vensimento (33r, 42v, 141v) – a total of 49 different words with many occurrences76. This suffix points towards a Portuguese influence, although this ending is also common in Italian and in Galician. The suffix -miento occurs only in one word in the Siddur: nasimientos (137r, 180r)77.
Second person preterit form
The second person past tense (preterit) ending -ste occurs more than 100 times in words like alegraste (23r, 93r, 106v) 'you were glad', ambezaste (82v) 'you learned', asoplaste (37r, 139r) 'you blew', foeste (123r, 177v) 'you were'. The ending -stes appears only 12 times78, e.g., regmistes (138v) 'you redeemed', aleǰastes (151r) 'you went up', alegastes (187r) 'you sacrificed', ambezasteslos (149v) 'you taught them', ensalsastes (148v), quebrantastes (243r) 'you tortured', santiudastes (187r) 'you sanctified', santiudastesnos (222r, 260r) 'you sanctified us'. These forms represent the intermediate stage before changing -ste into -tes in Modern JS (e.g., regmites, aleʃates)79.
Definite article
The definite articles are not always perceived as independent units, therefore in several cases they are attached to the noun that follows as part of it. Here are a few examples: a lmundo (2r), elvinien (2r), a lgalyo (2r), fasta lsielo (56r), a lDyo (56r), a lombre (59r), a lmaʃiaħ (64r), de lanoche (81v), almundo (92r, 143r), laluna (134v), elombre (1r), latiera (2v), lcabo (196r, 276r). This phenomenon is common among illiterate individuals who base their spelling on what they hear. The author of the Siddur has knowledge of the Hebrew alphabet but does not possess literacy in JS.
The preterit perfect verbs
The preterit perfect simple verbs show variations in the conjugation of the first-person plural between the final vowels -emos, -imos and -amos. Some occur in the Viduy 'confession' section (75r-v; 267r-v), both in the morning prayer and in Yom Kippur, but in other places as well. Thus, we find verbs of type -er (a), and verbs of type -ar (b) with -emos endings:
Only three times does the ending -emos occur with verbs of the type -ir: oemos (289v; Sp. oír); reviemos (60r; Sp. rever) and sobreviemos (267r; Sp. soberevir?). In the other cases, the verbs end in -amos or -imos consistently, depending on the verb types.
All these verbs in the Viduy in the Ferrara Siddur from 1553 are represented by -amos in all the -ar verbs. In Seder Nashim, the prayer book for women from ca. 1565, those verbs in the Viduy are also represented by -emos, e.g., pequemos, culpemos, falçemos, robemos, hablemos fealdad, aǰuntemos falçedad, etc.83Quintana (2012a, 37) observes that these forms occur specifically in the Viduy of Seder Nashim and she contends that it is an old tradition from Aragon that was kept in this special prayer, because the other occurrences of the verbs in Seder Nashim demonstrate standard usage of -ar verbs, e.g., pecamos, rebelyamos, esperamos, etc.84
The data under discussion shows a fluctuating situation. Although there are a considerable number of verbs with -emos endings of the verb type -ar in the Viduy, they alternate with -amos in the same contexts – and there are plenty of other verbs in various prayers of the Siddur with -emos. It might be an influence from the Aragon dialect keeping an old tradition, as Quintana suggests, but it may also be the unsteady intermediate development of JS from -amos to -emos in which all these verbs eventually turned to the unified -imos ending, as in JS echimos (Sp. echamos), avlimos (Sp. hablamos), artimos (Sp. hartamos), etc.
The suffix -<italic>des</italic>
The ending -des is common in the conjugation of second person plural, e.g., acordedes (53r) alimpiaredes (274r), ambezaredes (52r), bindiziredes (6r), encorvarvosedes (51v), enfeuziedes (27r), emalesades (120r), esculquedes (53r), faredes (53r), olyer oyerdes (40v), pondredes (51v), serviredes (51v), tirarvosedes (51v), veredes (53r). Only once does the form saltaies (174r) occur85.
Syntactic and textual features<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn-86-1198">
<sup>86</sup>
</xref>
Since the syntax follows the Hebrew structure quite rigidly, only a few comments will be discussed here.
Verbal compositions
(1) One medieval Spanish feature is retained in the Siddur, namely the construction of Verb + Pronoun + Copulative verbs as one unit, e.g., enmeskeneserlosa (80v; lo enmesquenerser ha), afermoziwartee (16r; te he afermoziguar), alavartee (16r), amostrartee (234v), enaltesertee (16v, 106v, 178r), enfortesertee (58v, 97v), loartean (17v), loartee (177v, 178r, 284v), moḅermee (252r; mover me he), alavartean (178r), etc.
This construction is probably reinforced by Hebrew, where the accusative pronoun is attached to the verb as part of it, as in the verse: rodearmeas siempre, parartee mientes y amostrartee en.carera esta que andaras 'you surround me always, I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go' (Psalms 32:7-8): תְּסוֹבְבֵנִי <təsōbəbenī> = tesobeb ˀoti (rodearmeas), אַשְׂכִּילְךָ <ˀaśkīləkā> = ˀaskil ˀotka (parartee), אוֹרְךָ <ˀōrəkā> ˀore (lə)ka (amostrartee) and many more such as יוֹדוּךָ <yōdūkā> = yudu (lə)ka 'they will thank you' (loarantea).
(2) Accusative pronouns are often attached to the verb at the end, as in Hebrew, e.g., ambezasteslos (149v), criolos (145r), estroerlos (23v), atemarme (253r), ayudasteme (285v), enfeuziate (13v), goardarte (126r), etc.
The translation of <italic>ʃeneˀemar</italic>
For the translation of Hebrew ʃeneˀemar when reciting a biblical verse, two structures are used: cumo es dicho (149r, 281v) and cumo dize el pasuk (48r). Both constructions are typical to liturgical translations from Italy: como es dicho occurs in Ladino translations in Latin script from Italy (as well as in London and Amsterdam). Como dize el pasuk/verso occurs in Venetian Ladino translations of Pirke Avot as well as in the Ladino translations of Haggadot from various locations in Italy. The Ottoman Empire Pirke Avot and Haggadot have instead the formula of que ansi dize el pasuk (sometimes como que ansi dize el pasuk in the Haggadah) (Schwarzwald 1989, 302; Schwarzwald 2008, 138-139)87. The usage in this Siddur points towards an Italian influence.
Deviations from other Siddurim
In many cases, the translation slightly deviates from the Sephardic prayer book. Here are three short examples from the morning prayers:
(a) Instead of ʃɛlo ˁāśani gōyā 'who did not make me a gentile.f' the translation says: qui mi criyo en so ĝodizmo (3v) 'who made me in His judaism'. The word goy 'gentile' is avoided, perhaps for fear of the Inquisition88. Instead of ʃɛlo ˁāśani ˀiʃā 'who did not make me a woman' that man says, the translation is: qui mi criyo cumo so viluntad (3v) 'who made mi as His wish'.
(b) El pasan soeño de noestros oǰos y adermedura de mis palpados (4r). The Hebrew text has meˁeynay 'from my eyes', but the translation has 'from our eyes'. The word palpados is used instead of párpados with r-l substitution (Bunis 1977, 319-333).
(c) The translation of the blessing malbiʃ ˁarumim 'who clothes the naked' is absent in the list of the initial morning blessings.
(d) In the blessing immediately after the list of the morning blessings, in the paragraph that starts in Hebrew with the words yəhī rāşon miləfānɛka 'May it be Your will', translates as sea viluntad de lantriti. The following Hebrew expressions are not translated in the Siddur: vəkōf ˀɛt yişrī ləhiʃtaˁbed lāk 'and force my inclination to be subservient to You', hayōm ubkōl yōm 'today and every day', and ləˁamō Yiśrāˀel 'to His nation Israel'. In the same paragraph, the Hebrew word ˀělohay 'my God' is translated by noestro Dio 'our God' instead of mi Dio.
Lexical features
Most of the vocabulary is Spanish, as in other Ladino translations, but sometimes the choice of words in the Siddur is unique. The following list refers to some of the special lexical usages in this Siddur, some of which were mentioned above. The list is given in alphaberical order.
<italic>Abiviguar</italic>
The Hebrew word heħeya 'revived' is translated in the Siddur by the verb abiviguar which relates to the Spanish verb vivir (Latin vivĕre; pronounced in JS as bivir), e.g., abivivan (16r, 34r +6), abeviwan (43r, 96v +25), abivian (57v, 167r, 257r), abeviwar (58r, 153r +6), abevivasteme (107r, 198r), abevevarlos (114v), abiviwan (58r), and aabevivaminto (144r) (Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. vivo). The use of this verb is typical of the Italian Ladino translations, from the Ferrara Bible to the latest translations of other texts (Sephiha 1973, 240; Schwarzwald 1989, 385-386; Schwarzwald 2008, 203). The equivalent typical verb in the eastern Ladino translations from the Ottoman Empire is abediguar89.
<italic>Afeitar</italic>
The Spanish verb afeitar90 appears just once in the Siddur, afeitad sus torres (290r) in the translation of Psalms 48:13, סִ֝פְר֗וּ מִגְדָּלֶֽיהָ <siprū migdālɛyhā>. The English translations have: 'go through her citadels' or 'consider her palaces'91. Hebrew exegesis interprets it as 'count the number of towers', or 'see how big they are'92. It seems that the meaning in the Siddur is related to the old meaning of afeitar 'decorate, beautify', a word used in JS as well (Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 351; Nehama 1977, 9; Perez and Pimienta 2008, 6; Koén-Sarano 2009/10, 8).
<italic>Afreir</italic>
Another well attested verb in the Ladino translations of the Ottoman Empire and in JS is afreir and its derivatives. The Siddur includes the following occurrences: afreision (34v, 60r, 79r, 277r), afreiste (125r), afreido (291r), afreidos (277v), afresios (277v), and afrien (292r; Sp. afligir). Such forms were attested in a medieval Jewish text as well (Blondheim 1925, 19-20; Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 352-353).
<italic>Aĝifto</italic>
The word for Egypt is translated 17 times as Aĝifto/Aĝipto (14v, 34v +15; Sp. Egipto), and one time it is copied as Mişrayim (245r) in the translation. Aĝipto~Eĝipto~Aĝifto is common in the Ladino translations from Italy and quite rare in the Ottoman Empire translations where the word Aifto is used in Ladino translations, especially in Thessaloniki (Schwarzwald 1989, 339; Schwarzwald 2008, 134-135)93.
<italic>Alarze</italic>
The word alarze (24r, 30v, 94r, 229v; Sp. alerce) translates Hebrew ˀɛrɛz 'cedar'. The word is used in JS, and attested in the Ferrara Bible and in the Constantinople Pentateuch as well. The word looks like the Arabic word ˀalárze, and Corriente (2008, 54) relates it to JS, but gives the meaning of copper or bronze, and claims that the etymon is unclear94. It might be a JS form echoing the Arabic structure based on the common Semitic root.
<italic>Alongramento</italic>
The expression alongramento de noestros días (82v), alongramento de días (126v), alungramento de días (295v; Sp. alongamiento) is based on the Old Sp. verb alongar (Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. luengo). The form exists in Portuguese as alongamento, but the addition of r is unique in this Siddur, although alongrar is also attested in 15th century Spain, according to CORDE.
<italic>Aquedar</italic>
The Old Spanish verb aquedar 'become calm, quiet stopped' with its derivatives are attested several times in the Siddur: aquedamento (47r, 148r, 168r), aquedados (130v), aquedo (44r), daquedo (43v; de+aquedo), aquedar (292v). This verb is well-known in JS (Nehama 1977, 19; Perez and Pimienta 2008, 10).
<italic>Arnasio</italic>
The Hebrew word dor 'generation' is translated as arnasio many times in the Siddur, e.g., arnasio a arnasio alavaran tus fechas 'One generation shall praise thy works to another' (17r; Psalms 145:4)95; en cada arnasio y arnasio 'throughout all generations; lit. in every generation and generation' (54v-55r; Psalms 145:13); para fazer al Ʃabat asus arnaçios firmamento de mundo 'to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations for a perpetual convent' (153v-154r; Exodus 31:16)96. This word was attested in medieval Spanish used by Jews (Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 358), and it is a typical word in Ladino translations from Thessaloniki, because other JS communities use [ĝeneransio] or [ĝerenansio] (Nehama 1977, 48; DHJE, s.v. arnancio; Schwarzwald 1989, 322; Schwarzwald 2008, 83).
<italic>Aylo/ayelo</italic>
The word for 'angel' is translated only once as anĝel (10v) in the story of the sacrifice of Isaac. In all the other occurrences of the word in the Siddur it is translated as אָיְילוֹ aylo, or ayelo.Lazar (1995a) transcribes it: aylo (11v, 116r, 244v) and aylos (29v, 56v +6, including one on p. 297v). Aslanov (2011, 395) attributes this word to a Judeo-Greek influence where a fricative g was lost97, but the g deletion does not explain the form aylo/ayelo (see the discussion on ĝ above, section 6.1.2.7, and the case of aifto 'Egypt' mentioned above in 6.4.4). I could not find such a translation in any other place.
<italic>Buraco</italic>
The word boracos or buracos98 'holes' occurs twice on the first folio. It is known to exist in Portugal, Galicia, and Leon, but buraco is also the common JS word (Bunis 1994, 329; Nehama 1977, 101; Koén-Sarano 2009/10, 67; Perez and Pimienta 2008, 77)99.
<italic>Conecer~conocer</italic>
The Sp. verb conocer occurs three times in the Siddur: conosieron (29v), conoser (280r) and coneseran (168r). The third representation reflects the Catalan coneixer and Portuguese verb conhecer, though it was attested in Old Spanish as well. It is also attested in Sefer Ħeṣeq Ʃelomo published in Venice 1588, and in the Haketía (Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 266-267; Bunis 1994, 325; Quintana 2014b, 79)100.
<italic>Delantre</italic>
The preposition delantre (1v, 181r +9), is very common and occurs with pronouns, as in delantreti (2r, 7r and many more), dedelantreti (64v, 73r +3), dedelantriti (4r, 4v, 232r). The form delante (29v, 39r, 35r) occurs as well, next to delanteti (76r, 76v +5), but its occurrence is quite rare. The form delantre is attested in vulgar Spanish and it is the common JS word attested in Ottoman Empire Ladino translations, in the spoken language, and in Haketía (Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. delante; Benoliel 1977, 189).
<italic>Deledir</italic>
Portuguese influence can be seen in the following forms: deledidos (38r), delidelos (29v), delediras (239r), deledia (278v), and in the last folios, deledirse (301r). Lazar (1995a, 229) comments on delidelos that is an assimilation of r and l, and it was probably from derretir. The Portuguese verb deletar seems more appropriate for these forms, which all indicate disappearance or deletion101.
<italic>Ensalsar</italic>
The verb Old Spanish verb ensalzar 'elevate' and its derivatives are written in the Siddur with shin: ensalsamento (33v), ensalsado (43v, 45r +17), ensalsalos (108v), ensalsaste (106v), ensalsastes (148v), ensalsantes (47v), ensalsanos (200r, 209v), ensalsa (207r), ensalsados (288v, 292r), ensalsaron (295v), and ensalsad (301v) in one of the last folios. It is unclear whether it is pronounced [enʃalʃar], [ensalsar], [enʃalsar] or [ensalʃar]. In the translations of Pirke Avot in Hebrew script it alternates between ensalsar, ensasar, ensansar, and enʃalʃar but in the Latin script enxalçar, exalçar, where the x reflects the pronunciation of ʃ (Schwarzwald 1989, 407). In the Ladino Haggadot in Hebrew script, we find ensalsar, ensalʃar, ensansar, enʃaʃar and enʃalʃar (Schwarzwald 2008, 165). Modern JS dictionaries have enʃaʃar, enshalsar, enshalzar and enshalshar, enshalshar (Nehama 1977, 177; Perez and Pimienta 2008, 154; Koén-Sarano 2009/10, 129). Quintana (2004, 173) argues that it is Portuguese exalter influence on JS, but it should be recalled that it existed in Old Spanish as well (derived from Latin exaltiāre) (Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. ensalzar).
<italic>Entropezar</italic>
The Old Spanish verb entropezar 'stumble' is realized in the Siddur as entropesamos (49r), entrompesare (150v), entropisaron (277r). Nehama (1977, 182) lists the verb as entrompesar, as in one of the occurrences in the Siddur. Quintana (2004, 185) claims that it is a Portuguese influence on JS.
<italic>Escarnidor</italic>
The Hebrew expression meˁam loˁez (Psalms 114:1) is translated de pueblo escarnidor (173v) 'from mocked people' unlike the traditional transaltions that choose the base ladinar: pueblo aladinan/ ladinador/ ladinan in the Ladino Haggadot and in the Constantinople Bible (ladinan). Ferrara translate it as pueblo barbaro, like several medieval Bibles, although some translate as estraño, descreydo or destruydo (Bunis 1994, 329). The word escarnidor existed in Old Spanish, later replaced by escarnecedor.
The Sp. words hermoso and hermosura are always realized with the vowel e, e.g., hermoza הֵירְמוֹזָה (145r), fermozo פֶ'ירְמוֹזוֹ (53v), hermozura (263r), fermozuras (47v) and firmozura (3v, 18r, 141v)102. The Latin etymology for hermoso is formmōsus. Hermosear and hermosura are derived from hermoso in Spanish. Portuguese formoso, and Italian formoso 'shapely' kept the vowel o. The change of the Latin vowel o to Spanish e is already attested in medieval Spanish. The derivative JS verb and adjective in the Siddur are realized with two distinct vowels, e~i or o, e.g., afermoziwaran אָפֶ'ירְמוֹזִיוָוארָאן (46r, 146r, 146v, 178v), aformoziwaran אָפ'וֹרְמוֹזִיוָוארָאן (139v), afermozewada (146v), and aformoziwado (43v, 44r, 144v), where the forms with the vowel e outnumber those with the vowel o103. In other Ladino translations of Pirke Avot and the Haggadah, most of the forms with the vowel o after f occur in Italy (the vowel e is rare); most of the forms with the vowel e occur in the Ottoman Empire (the vowel o is rare) (Schwarzwald 1989, 417; Schwarzwald 2008, 224-225, 314, 318). This distribution means that both forms were familiar to JS speakers. The forms in the Siddur reflect that inconsistency, although the tendency is towards the Ottoman Empire tradition.
<italic>Fortenza</italic>
The word for 'strength' is consistently translated by fortenza (17v, 32r +40)104. It is also attested in Sefer Ħeṣeq Ʃelomo (Bunis 1994, 329). Fortenza seems to be analogous to forms like altenza (36v, 223v +5), altenzas (233r; next to altura [19v, 46r +3]), berğoensa (243v), bergoensa (249r, 270v; JS verguensa), mani festan sa (25r), and manifestansa (see 6.4.21 below). The word fortenza is attested in CORDE only in this Siddur. Fortenza is also used just once in the Constantinople Pentateuch (Dt. 8:17), although forteza occurs elsewhere. The words fortaleza, the standard Spanish word, like the Portuguese (fortaleza), or forteza like the Italian (fortezza) occur in other Ladino translations.
<italic>Chuvia</italic>
The word for 'rain' is always spelled with gimel, with or without diacritic, realized as follows: <ğubia> chubia (28v, 51r +11), guḅia (57v) guḅias (61v) <ğuḅia> chuḅia (166v;=chuvia), never Spanish lluvia or JS luvia. Apparently, the pronunciation was [tʃuvia], as in Portuguese (chuva) or Galician (chuvia).
<italic>Lampos</italic>
The word lampos (132r) 'lightenings' is attested in Old Spanish. It also occurs in Haketía, the JS of Morroco, as well as in Portuguese and Italian (Benoliel 1977, 225; Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 388).
<italic>Manifestansa</italic>
The word manifestansa (25r, 28v, 175v, 278r; Sp. manifestación) is an innovation of the translator. Ladino translations of the Haggadot have manifestación in all the versions (Schwarzwald 2008, 274).
<italic>Mar ruvlo</italic>
The Hebrew expression yam sūf is translated by mar ruvlo (34v, 55v) and mar ruḅlo (36v, 84r, 135r; Sp. rubro), whereas the translations from Ferrara and Constantinople had mar (de) Suph and Constantinople sometimes has mar ruḅio. The medieval translation uses mar rubio/ruvio or bermejo. Only E8/E6 through the whole Bible and the Alba Bible (not in the Pentateuch) have mar rubro (Enrique-Arias and Pueyo Mena 2008-). The author of the Siddur seems to be experiencing a case of r-l confusion, like the instances of palpados mentioned above in section 6.3.3 (b) and prenizmo mentioned below in section 6.4.28.
<italic>Muncho</italic>
The translator consistently uses the word muncho 'a lot' e.g., muncho (17r, 72r +7), munchos (26v, 45r +4), munchas (59v, 58r +17), monchas (159r), moncho (227v; Sp. mucho). This is the common JS form which was attested in old Spanish as well (Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. mucho)105.
<italic>Niev</italic>
The word niev (29r, 30r, 236r) stands for Sp. nieve 'snow’. There is no occurrence of nieve in this Siddur106.
<italic>Nilguna</italic>
The word ninguna is attested in the Siddur as nilguna (11r) or nelguna (268r). This seems to be a dissimilation of n to l and a unique form of the translator of this Siddur.
<italic>Oĝe</italic>
The word 'today' is translated eight times as oĝe (4v, 11v +6; Sp. hoy, from Latin hodie), and never as hoy. The Portuguese hoje is an exact equivalent, and the Italian oggi shows similarity with the word observed in the Siddur. It is plausible that these two languages, especially Portuguese, have had an influence on the occurrence of this word in the Siddur.
<italic>Pelegrino</italic>
The Old Spanish word pelegrino 'foreigner' (Hebrew [ger]) is attested in the Siddur in the singular (252r, 292r; Sp. peregrino) and in the plural (28r, 63v), and it is the standard word in JS, Haketía, and Ladino translations from the Ottoman Empire; many of the medieval translations use it as well.
<italic>Prenizmo</italic>
The word for 'unsophisticated' (Hebrew [tām]) and its derivatives are realized in the Siddur as prenizmo (73v), prenizma (110r), prenizmedad (79v, 217v; Sp. plenismo), with r instead of l. Prenizmo is the word used in the Haggadot from Thessaloniki for the translation of tam, whereas other Ladino translations and those from other locations use plenismo, however, both versions with l and r are very common in JS107.
<italic>Preva</italic>
The Sp. verb probar and the noun prueba (from Latin prŏbāre; Portuguese and Catalan prova, provar) are realized with the vowel e in the Siddur, e.g., preva (4r), preḅo (8r), prevo (40v), and previte (294r). The forms with e instead of o were considered vulgar Spanish, but they are widespread in Asturias, Mexico and Puerto Rico, as in this Siddur (Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. probar)108. These forms were retained in JS and Haketía. The usage of the forms in the Siddur conforms with the Ottoman Empire Ladino translations of these words which have the forms prevaron, fue prevado, and prevas, while in Italy and Amsterdam, the translations include forms like provaron, pruebas109.
<italic>Regmir</italic>
The JS verb regmir and its derivatives are used consistently in the Siddur, never the Sp. redimir, e.g., rigmio (85r, 276v), reğmiste (98r), regmidor (19r 54v +19), regmision (60r, 193r, 194r, 195r), and many more forms (Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. redimir; Blondheim 1925, 100).
<italic>Rey para siempre</italic>
The special expression Rey para siempre 'King forever' deviates from any known Ladino translation of the blessings that start with bārūk ˀattā YY ˀĕlohēnū mɛlɛk hāˁōlām 'blessed You are, our God king of the universe'. Rey del mundo (2v) is written only once in the whole Siddur in such blessing, while Rey para siempre occurs many times (see section 4, example 2 above). I could not find such a version in Hebrew Bārūk ˀattā YY… mɛlɛk ləˁōlām…, neither in Hebrew prayer books nor in any Sephardic tradition. I consulted experts in Jewish prayers, but none could find an equivalent expression. Furthermore, I examined prayers of the Portuguese conversis (Anusim), and none of them contain such a formulaic version (Schwarz 2005, 132-264; Yovel 2014, 235-239).
<italic>Romagiga</italic>
The word רומאגיגה / רומאגיג'ה (romagiga/romaĝiĝa/romaǰiǰa/romachicha?) occurs three times in the Siddur110: a. la bestia y toda coatro pea romagiga y pasara de ala רוֹמָאגִיגָה (30v), as a translation of Hebrew rɛmɛś 'insect' in Psalms 148:10111; b. Y sobre romagiga de tu pueblo caza de Yisrael y sobre escapadura de caza de soferim רוֹמָאגִיגָא (63v), as a translation of Hebrew ʃəˀerit 'remains'112; and c. Y deʃaran su romagiĝa a sus chiquitos רוֹמַאגִיגָֹה (233v), based on Psalms 17:14, as a translation of Hebrew yɛtɛr 'remainder'113. I could not find the source of this word. Even if we assume o~e alternations114, the word remagiga / remaĝiĝa / remaǰiǰa is unknown. It could be associated with Sp. remanente or Catalan romanent meaning 'remainder'115. As for the translation of Hebrew rɛmɛś, perhaps the phonetic similarity led to the use of this translation in the first case. It is worth mentioning that the expression fue romanesido (55v) 'remained' occurs once in the Siddur, with the vowel o (Sp. remanecer) which strengthens the assumption regarding o~e alternations in some words.
<italic>Santiudar/santiudad</italic>
The Spanish verb santificar is never used in the whole Siddur; instead, the verb santiudar occurs very frequently (Catalan influence?), e.g., santiudo (1r, 5r, 99v), santiudaste (98v, 99r +4), santiudartea (186v), santiudara (258r), santiudan (101r, 154v +8) among other verbal forms. The noun santidad is quite rare, e.g., santidad (45v, 105r +10), santedad (47v), compared to santiudad which occurs very frequently, e.g., santiudad (22v, 32r, 37v +over 40 occurrences)—santibdad (19v, 236r, 238r 241v)—santiḅdad (19v)—santeḅdad (108v). The adjectival form occurs as well from the same stem, e.g., santiudado (47v, 140v +4), santiudada (159v). The form is unique in this Siddur.
<italic>Sequiyozo</italic>
The word sequiyozos (276v) 'thirsty', derived from seco rather than from sed, is used in Ottoman JS, is probably derived from a Portuguese usage of sequioso (Quintana 2004, 187; Quintana 2014b, 75).
<italic>Tanĝer</italic>
Tanĝeran, see discussion in 6.1.2.7 (4).
<italic>Veluntad</italic>
Unlike the above alternations, the Siddur shows consistency in the verb velunta (181v) and the noun veluntad (46v, 48v and many more), beluntad (68r 82r and many more), ḅeluntad (4v, 22v +4), and viluntad (3v, 4r, 22v)116. The Latin source is volŭntas, -atis (Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s v. voluntad). Modern Spanish only uses the nominal form voluntad, although the verb voluntar 'want' occurred in old juridical medieval Spanish texts, according to CORDE. The forms veluntad and enveluntar were very rare in medieval Spanish, according to CORDE. The noun beluntad and the verb enbeluntar are attested in a medieval Jewish explanation of the Bible (Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 362, 374). In medieval JS texts from Castile and Aragon, both forms appear: voluntad, boluntaθ, veluntaθ, beluntad (Minervini 1998, 486). Ottoman Empire Ladino texts from the 16th century onwards only use the forms veluntad, enveluntar, and rarely <enbeluntar> in early texts. The Ferrara Bible from 1553 and Libro de oracyones from 1552, written in Latin letters and late JS Hebrew script texts from Italy, only use voluntad and envoluntar (Schwarzwald 1989, 437; Schwarzwald 2008, 170, 255, 256). This usage in the Siddur shows an old JS tradition which was retained in the Ottoman Empire and in Haketía117.
<italic>Ĝa</italic>
The Sp. word ya is written as ĝa (269v), reflecting the Portuguese pronunciation (ja). See 6.1.2.7 (4).
<italic>Yaĝiĝa</italic>
The expression su yaĝiĝa (31r) translates Hebrew מִשְכְּבוֹתָם in which the traditional interpretation is 'their rest' or 'their bed'. The expression uestra ĝaĝisa (243v) translates מִשְׁכַּבְכֶם 'your bed'. The verb ĝaĝé (242v) translates שָׁכַבְתִּי 'I laid down' and is spelled with gimel with a diacritic, and the verb ĝazere (244r) translates אֶשְׁכְּבָה 'I will lie down'. The Spanish equivalents are yacija, yací, and yaceré, respectively118. Lazar (1995a, 230) comments on the first example that it alternates with yazida or yazisa, but not in this Siddur. Perez and Pimienta (2008, 466) have yazeza, yazizá and yazida next to yazedura meaning lying down, none of which agree with the spelling in the Siddur. The Portuguese noun is jazigo, related to the verb jazer. The pronunciation in this case hints towards the Portuguese pronunciation. As in the case of the words related to 'justice' discussed in 6.1.2.7, the occurrence of the sibilants in the words caused the occurrence of this spelling with multiple ĝ's.
The use of Hebrew words
The Hebrew form of personal names and toponyms is kept in the translation, e.g., [yarden, lebanon, babel, yeruʃalayim; parˁo, yaˁaqob, yişħaq, moʃe, ʃelomo] (rather than Sp. Jordan, Libanon~Labanon, Babilonia, Jerusalen; Faraon~Pharaon, Jacob, Ysaach~Ysac~Ysaque, Moysen, Salamon~Salomon). At times, the spelling is inconsistent: יעקב or יעקוב, דוד or דויד, ירושלַםִ or ירושלַיִם. The exceptions are scarce: the word Miṣráyim 'Egypt' is translated 17 times as Aĝifto, and only once written as מצרים (245r; see section 6.4.4); also, Mount Moriya is interpreted as Almisque (see section 6.1.32 above).
The number of Hebrew words in the translation is relatively small (Minervini 1998, 415). In addition to personal names and toponyms, all the Hebrew words related to Jewish concepts are written in their Hebrew spelling in the translation, e.g., ˀadar (195v) 'Adar, a month in the Jewish calendar', ˀaʃre(y) (16v), baruk ʃeˀamar (136r) 'Ashrey, Blessed be who says – names of prayers', bet din (270r) 'Jewish court of law', bet hamicdaʃ (288r) 'the Temple in Jerusalem', quipur (231v, 272r, 302r) 'Day of Atonement', soferim (63v) 'writers'. Other words which are in daily JS use are also written in the translation, e.g., ˀafilu (1v) 'even', ˁabera (4r) 'sin', maʃiaħ119 (64r, 144r +5) 'messiah', ˀamen (32v, 43r +10) 'Amen', ħaber (5t) 'friend, partner', among others. The word for 'world' is always translated by mundo (15r, 21v + 15, and five more times as mondo[s]), but once it occurs in its Hebrew form: Señor del ˁolam (13r). Lazar (1995a, 261) lists only 47 Hebrew words excluding personal names and toponyms, but I found many more types of Hebrew words. Sometimes the Hebrew original words are either miscopied or replaced by other words, e.g., malaquiyot (269r) instead of malcot 'lashes', and Yiśraˀel (270r) instead of Yeʃurun. More on the Hebrew use will be discussed in the Conclusion section.
The uniqueness of the final folios of the Siddur
As mentioned earlier, the final folios from 296r to 302r were appended to the Siddur by another writer. The handwriting is totally different. Fols. 295v ends with the words tam tam tam meaning 'end'. The repetition of the word tam indicates that it is final; fols. 296r-v is taken from the middle prayer of the 9th of Av. The next folios are not ordered appropriately. According to Lazar (1995a, 258), the right order is 301r-v, 299r-v, 297r-298v, and 300r-v. Fol. 302r starts with a translation from a verse of Psalms 66:36 and ends with the title Mizmor leyom haquipurim 'a psalm for the Day of Atonement'.
There are several features that mark distinguish these folios from the rest of the Siddur, in addition to the handwriting:
Words are divided at the end of the line and continue in the next.
Sentences are separated by a colon; in the previous folios the quotation mark (") separates sentences and paragraphs.
There is an n in front of p and b in words like tanbien (297v, 299r; cf. tambien 14r, 30v +9), sienpre (297v, 298r, 299r, 300v; cf. siempre 26r, 54v and many more), and onbre (297v; cf. ombre (5r, 18r +27).
The letter shin /ʃ/ is marked by a diacritic, e.g., דִישׂוֹ diʃo (298r) '(he) said', but דִישוֹ (8r×2, 9v×2120 +6) with no diacritic, in all other occurrences of the Siddur.
The word for house is spelled three times as קאשֹה [kaʃa?] (298r, 299r-v) with a diacritic dot over the shin in the middle, rather than קאזה [kaza] in the previous folios.
The marking of the vowels in the final folios is less consistent than in the rest of the Siddur, especially with regards to i and u, hence dilantre (301r) instead of delantre (1v, 181r +9); aburesientes (301r) rather than aboresientes (63r, 83v +5), Şiyun (296r-v) rather than Şiyon (cf. 19r, 26v and many more), to (298r, 299r-v) next to tu (296r) 'you, your'; ildus (296r) rather than ildos (51v, 52r +3) 'idols'121; altigus (296r) rather than altiwos (56r, 105r, 130v, 291v; <*altiguos); cun (296v) next to con (297v), so, sos (297r) rather than su, sus 'his', colpas (298r) rather than culpas (264r, 276r); surbientes (296r)122 rather than sirvientes (154r), cumu (296r-v, 301r) rather than cumo in the whole Siddur (see examples above in section 5 and discussion in 6.1.1.2), Yehoda (298v) rather than Yehuda (173v, 290r), fuegu (296v, 301r) rather than foeĝo (9v, 30r, 34r), foego (10r, 228r, 246r) or fuego (176v)123, and zeḅolon (298v) for Zeḅulun, etc.
Only in these final folios does the word Aifto (300v) translate the word Mişrayim 'Egypt' instead of Aĝifto/Aĝipto (14v, 34v +15) which was used throughout the whole Siddur. The word Aifto is typical of the Ottoman Empire Ladino translations, especially in Thessaloniki, (see section 6.4.4 above).
The word hek (300v) is written instead of heg (see 6.1.2.2). This typifies Thessaloniki tradition.
There are no vowel signs on God's name יי (Cf. section 5, Example 2 above).
The verb fuir (Sp. huir) is written as fueran (301r). In the previous folios, the conjugation resembles Old Spanish, cf. fuyes (174r), fulyeron (249r), foirtes (97v), folyo (174r), foir (242r), foire (249r)124.
Based on the handwriting, on the mixed order of the folios, and on the features pointed out here, these folios do not belong to this Siddur, but being connected to prayers, were appended to the existing manuscript. These pages also prove that the writer followed some Ottoman Empire traditions.
Conclusion
As noted by both Lazar (1995a, ix) and Minervini (1998, 415-416), the manuscript is a literal, non-normative translation of a Hebrew Siddur written in Ladino by an amateur author. The data presented so far support their claim that the Siddur was written by a nonprofessional individual. There are numerous inconsistencies in the translations in orthographic, lexical, textual, and morphological aspects. Laurent Héricher, the curator of the Hebraica-Judaica manuscripts at the National Library in France, has also suggested that the translator could be either male or female. The question remains as to the identity of the manuscript's author. Its target reader appears to be a woman, as indicated by expressions such as que non me fizo sierva (3v), or cumo lo dizen las moǰeres (92r). However, this does not necessarily imply that a woman wrote it, making the gender issue of the writer irrelevant in this context. In this section, I will be referring to the first 295 folios of the manuscript, as the last pages were written by a different person, as described in section 8.
The translation is based on the Hebrew text, and the prayers and the psalms are recited in a manner like other Hebrew prayer books. However, the citations are not exact translations from Hebrew into the vernacular, giving the impression that the translation was done from memory. Nevertheless, the presence of Hebrew phrases inserted into the text, along with some spelling mistakes and corrections, indicates that the translator was familiar with the Hebrew source. As mentioned in the end of section 3, the translator initially wrote על [ˁal] in Hebrew, then erased it and corrected it to sobre (45v). Similarly, the word אדם [ˀadam] is written in Hebrew and corrected to ombre (133v), בראשית [bereʃit] is corrected to premeriya (143r), and אחד is corrected to uno (160r). In section 6.1.2.6, I discussed the spelling of mezquino with samej and caf, as in Hebrew. Additionally, the spelling of אתאמאראל [atamaral] (24r, 94r) is written with tav. Both instances reflect the spelling of the Hebrew words מסכן [misken] and תמר [tamar], and they imply that the author had a good command of Hebrew125.
The data presented in the Siddur are indeed perplexing due to the numerous variations found within it. Lazar assertion that the Siddur originated in 15th-century Spain is challenged by the linguistic evidence, as the dialectal variations are too diverse to be attributes to a specific region in Spain. Minervini's claim that the Siddur was written in the Sephardic diaspora after the Expulsion from Spain find support in the various linguistic phenomena observed in the text. These phenomena align with the historical context of Sephardic Jews settling in different locations after the expulsion, which could explain the linguistic diversity present in the Siddur.
The paper on which the Siddur was written is Italian, but its processing could potentially be attributed to either the Ottoman Empire or from North Africa, as previously described by the curator (as mentioned in section 3). While it is evident that the Siddur arrived at the French National Library from Morocco, as demonstrated earlier, the specific nationality or origin of the translator remains uncertain.
The language style employed by the translator can be classified as JS from the late sixteenth century, which adheres to the principles of the Ladino calque translations of other liturgical texts. JS retains a close resemblance to Spanish, but it also exhibits distinct features. When the translator uses certain Y forms instead of X forms in parallel linguistic circumstances, it suggests that these Y forms emerged due to the writer's other language habits. However, if the translator consistently employs forms that deviate from X forms in Spanish, Ladino, or JS, it indicates the presence of a different language tradition. In such instances, etymological analysis, comparison with other languages, examination of Ladino translations, and exploration of other JS traditions can provide clues about the author's identity.
The language of the translator exhibits clear evidence of language intervention, which can be attributed to language contact. While the manuscript's origin in Morocco and subsequent arrival in Paris may suggest Arabic influence, other languages and dialects have exerted a more significant impact. These include Portuguese, Italian, Ottoman Empire JS, particularly the Salonica dialect, and at times Haketía. In contrast, the influence from dialects such as Galicia, Leon, Aragon or Catalan, Old Spanish, and even Greek appears to be relatively minor.
Table 2 captures some of the variations presented above. Certain sporadic phenomena discussed above will not be included in this table, e.g., k~g alternations or nm>m (see sections 6.1.2.2 and 6.1.4). I ignore orthographic variations that existed in contemporaneous Spanish and JS (like i~e, u~o, b~v, oa~ua, oe~ue, or initial f~h alternations). I also ignore systematic ly~y alternations as part of yeísmo, and diphthongization processes which were typical of the general trends in Spanish of that time (see sections 6.1.1.5 and 6.1.2.5 above). I concentrate on the relevant linguistic phenomena which can shed light on the origins of the writer.
The list of the linguistic phenomena.
Linguistic forms
Possible source
Section
ħ (the spelling of ħet)
Arabic (?)
6.1.2.4
alarze
JS126
6.4.5
boladía
Italian Ladino tanslations; Haketía (?)
5, Ex. 3, 4
ĝ=ʃ, fricative ğ
JS, JS dialects
6.1.2.6, 6.1.2.7
metathesis
JS
6.1.3
mos, moestros, moesa
JS
6.2.2
final d deletion
JS
6.1.4
-ste>-stes
JS
6.2.4
regmir
JS
6.4.30
muncho
JS
6.4.23
delantre
JS
6.4.12
veluntad
JS
6.4.36
preva
JS
6.4.29
pelegrino
JS.
6.4.27
afreir
JS
6.4.3
gua>wa, gue>we
JS dialects, Ḥaketía, Andalusia, Venice (?)
6.1.2.7
arnasio
Old JS, Thessaloniki, Ladino
6.4.8
prenizmo
Ottoman JS, Thessaloniki Ladino
6.4.28
fiǰo, fablar, fambre, fartar, fecha, ferir, filo
Port., Old Sp. JS Dialects, Italian
6.1.2.2
gueso (=vueso)
JS dialects, JS Balkans
6.2.2 (2)
Sp. juicio, juez…
unique
6.1.2.7
romaĝiĝa
unique
6.4.32
manifestansa
unique
6.4.21
nilguna
unique
6.4.25
santiudar/ santiudad
unique
6.4.33
alongramento
Old Sp., Port. (?), unique
6.4.6
palpados
Ottoman JS
6.3.3 (b)
ruvlo
unique
6.4.22
Rey para siempre
unique
4, 6.4.31
aylo~ayelo 'angel'
Unique, Greek (?)
6.4.9
afeitar
Ottoman JS
6.4.2
aquedar
Old Sp., JS
6.4.7
escarnidor
Old Sp.
6.4.16
niev
Old Sp.
6.4.24
ş (Heb. tsadi)
Italian, medieval JS, North Africa?
6.1.2.8
Aĝifto/ Aĝipto
Italian (Ladino translations)
6.4.4
abiviguar
Italian (Ladino translations)
6.4.1
fortenza
Italy, Ottoman Ladino
6.4.1.8
cumo es dicho, cumo dize el pasuk
Italian, Venice (Ladino translations)
6.3.2
chamar (Sp. llamar)
Port., Venice, Galician
6.1.2.7 (3)
lampo
Italian, Port., Old Sp., Haketía
6.4.20
oĝe (Sp. hoy)
Port., Italian (?)
6.4.26
tanĝer (Sp. tañer)
Port.
6.1.2.7 (4)
seǰa, seǰan, seǰa (Sp. ser)
Port.
6.1.2.7 (4)
ĝa (Sp. ya)
Port.
6.1.2.7 (4)
deledir
Port.
6.4.13
entro(m)pesar
Port., Ottoman JS,
6.4.15
conecer
Port. Catalan, Venice, Haketía
6.4.11
sequiyozo
Port., Ottoman JS
6.4.34
yaĝiĝa
Port.
6.4.38
-mento
Port., Old Sp.
6.2.3
conusco
Port., Rare Old Sp.,
6.2.2 (3)
enʃalsar
Port., Old Sp.
6.4.14
chuvia (Sp. lluvia)
Port., Galician
6.4.19
buraco
JS, Port., Galician, Leon,
6.4.10
fer (Sp. hacer)
Aragon, Asturia-Leon, Catalan, Old Port.
6.1.2.2 (3)
-emos in preterit of -ar verbs
Aragon, JS development
6.2.6
If the writer of the Siddur were a Jew from Morocco, one would expect a greater influence of Arabic on the language used in the Siddur. However, the most compelling evidence is found in the consistent spelling of ħet in alħad, and occasionally in alħoriya 'freedom' (Sp. alhorría) and ħasta 'until' (Sp. hasta). The presence of ħet in alħad aligns with the standard JS usage, thus not providing substantial proof. Additionally, the frequent use of he or fe in these words as alternatives to the others weakens the influence of Arabic127. Considering that ħet is common in many JS words derived from other languages128, its sporadical occurrence in these words hints that the author was aware of this variety, as found in other texts from other locations.
The word alarze 'cedar tree' cannot serve as definitive proof that it is an Arabic term used in JS; on the contrary, it is analyzed as a JS source in Arabic. Moreover, in Arabic it has a different meaning as shown above.
The word boladía means either 'fowl' or 'pestilence; destruction'. The first meaning appears in Italian JS sources. The second meaning hints towards a use in the Haketía, spoken in Morroco.
The significant influence of JS is noteworthy. The spelling of gimel with a diacritic representing ʃ is also observed in other JS texts (Bunis 2005, 111-171; Schwarzwald 2004, 173-185; Alonso 1976, vol. 2). The fricative pronunciation of g is well documented in various JS dialects. The metathesis of l-d and r-l is typical in JS, as is the use of initial m instead of n in the pronouns mos, moestro and moesa. Despite the prevalence of pronouns with the initial n, the appearance of the m suggests that it was commonly used by the translator.
The omission of the final d in certain commonly used words (verda, velunta) is indicative of natural features found in the spoken language. This phenomenon can also be observed in printed texts, emphasizing its presence in the language.
The extensive use of preterit forms like alegaste (260r) 'you sacrificed' throughout the text is prevalent and reflects the common usage of the time. However, the infrequent occurrence of forms like alegastes (187r) and other verbs with the -stes ending suggests that, despite the author's attempt to employ standard forms, the habitual verb form used in everyday life could not be entirely avoided. The transition of the preterit ending from -ste to -stes, which eventually became unified in JS as -tes, is evident in other JS texts prior to 1800.
Words such as regmir, muncho, delantre, veluntad, preva, pelegrino, and afreir, in addition to alarze, exemplify the typical usage of words in JS in the Ottoman Empire as well as in the Haketía129. The word arnasio 'generation' in the Siddur is attested in a medieval Jewish text and is part of the Thessaloniki tradition. Similarly, the word prenizmo 'naïve' in the Siddur is exclusively found in Ladino translations from Thessaloniki but it is also common in other dialects of JS.
Several phenomena observed in the Siddur can be attributed to JS dialects, although they can also be found in other language traditions. For example, the frequent use of the initial f in words like fiǰo, fablar, fambre, fartar, fecha, ferir, filo, as well as the transformation of gue, gua to we, wa, respectively, are characteristics shared with other languages. Additionally, the realization of vueso as goeso 'your.pl' reflects variation found in JS Ottoman dialects, but it is not exclusive to the Siddur.
Several phonetic phenomena, words, and expressions found in this Siddur are unique and have been extensively discussed above. The spellings of the words juicio 'justice', juez 'judge' and yaĝiĝa 'bed, rest' reveal a lack of spelling uniformity; the occurrence of close sibilant consonants next to each other was perhaps difficult and confusing for the author hence the variations in spelling. Words like romaĝiĝa, manifestansa, nilguna~nelguna, santiudad, alongramento, palpados and ruvlo could hardly be found in other available sources. The special expression Rey para siempre 'King forever' deviates from any known Ladino translation of the Hebrew blessings mɛlɛk hāˁōlām 'king of the Universe'.
I have put forward some speculations concerning the uncertain origins of the word aylo/ayelo 'angel' which could potentially be of Judeo-Greek origin.
Four words in the Siddur, namely afeitar 'decorate', aquedar 'become calm', escarnidor 'mocked', and niev 'snow', can be traced back to Old Spanish. The word afeitar is attested also in a medieval Jewish text and in JS; aquedar exists in JS as well.
The influence of the Italian tradition can be detected in the use of the letter şadi in some words, although it occurred in some other JS sources. Additionally, the translation of Egypt as Aĝifto/Aĝipto as well as the utilization of the verb abiviguar 'revive' are both typical of Ladino translations from Italy, not from other locations. Fortenza is attested in a Jewish text from Venice and in an Ottoman Ladino text. Also, the formulaic expressions of Bible citations: cumo es dicho or cumo dize el pasuk, are typical of Ladino translations from Italy, especially from Venice, as shown above.
It is possible to identify influences from Italian or Portuguese in various linguisric aspects. The presence of chamar 'call' which is commonly used in Portuguese and Galician, also reflects the Venetian pronunciation of the verb. The intensive use of the initial f in words like fiǰo and fambre mentioned above, serve as further indicators of these influences. As recalled, the term lampo meaning 'lightening', also exists in Italian and Portuguese, although its origin could be traced to medieval Jewish Spanish and attested in Haketía usage.
The Portuguese influence surpasses the other languages that could have had an impact on the translator's language, as demonstrated by the list in Table 2, e.g., oĝe 'today', tanĝer 'play', seǰa 'be', ǰa 'already', deletar (deledir) 'disappear, delete', entro(m)pezar 'stumble', conecer 'know', sequiyozos 'thirsty', and yaĝiĝa 'rest, bed', the latter being used regularly in Ottoman JS. The extensive use of the suffix -mento can also be attributed to Portuguese, like the usage of conusco 'with us', and enʃalsar 'elevate'. Some of the phenomena are common to Portuguese, Galician, Catalan, and other dialects of Spain (e.g., chuvia 'rain', buraco 'hole', fer 'do', noeso 'ours', coneser 'know').
The conjugation of -ar verbs in the preterit with the first-person plural suffix -emos might indeed be considered an Aragonese influence. However, in my opinion, due to their widespread use in the Siddur, it can also be seen as evidence of the intermediate stage of development in JS of conjugating all verb types (-ar, -er, -ir) into -imos suffix.
Based on the information provided, it can be inferred that the translator has knowledge of Hebrew prayers. However, due to being unfamiliar with either Spanish spelling or Ladino orthography, the translator tends to write words inconsistently, reflecting the spoken language as the translator heard it130. The variations in some cases reflect the author's difficulty to transfer the heard words into spelling in the Hebrew alphabet. From the data, it is evident that the translator was a speaker of JS, but the linguistic inventory, the substratum, was strongly influenced by Italian and Portuguese as well.
The linguistic study of JS indicates that in the 16th century, the language had not yet fully developed as a Koiné (Minervini 2002, 497-512; Quintana 2009, *221-*255; Quintana 2012b, 697-714; Penny 1996, 54-58; Penny 2000; Wagner 1990). It is only from the 17th century onwards that one can observe the emergence of a more unified JS, with distinct dialectal varieties. In this context, the translation of the Siddur aligns with the amalgamation of languages within the speech of an individual situated between various languages and cultural influences.
It is plausible to suggest that the translator of the Siddur originated from Italy, influenced by various factors. Firstly, during the 16th century, Italy housed three distinct Jewish communities: Judeo-Italian, Judeo-Spanish, and the ex-Converso Portuguese community. The Judeo-Italian community predated the Expulsion from Spain in 1492 and persisted in Italy thereafter. Following the Expulsion, many expelled Jews sought refuge in Italy, maintaining strong connections with their counterparts who settled in the Ottoman Empire and possibly in North Africa. This close association likely led to the preservation of similar Judeo-Spanish features.
Moreover, throughout the 16th century, numerous Converso Jews, primarily from Portugal, fled the Iberian Peninsula and established a significant ex-Converso Portuguese community in various Italian cities, with Venice being a notable destination for these exiles.
The coexistence and close interaction of the Judeo-Italian, Judeo-Spanish, and ex-Converso Portuguese communities in Italy fostered a linguistic environment where elements from each language could merge and influence one another. Consequently, the author of the Siddur likely drew upon their knowledge and exposure to spoken Portuguese, Italian, and Judeo-Spanish, resulting in a unique language reflecting this multilingual influence.
Based on the linguistic evidence presented, it is highly probable that the Siddur's author was an ex-Converso Jew from Portugal who settled in Venice. Linguistic choices, such as Venetian formulaic citations from the Bible (e.g., como es dicho and como dize el pasuk") and the use of chamar (also found in Portuguese), strongly indicate a connection to the Venetian context. Furthermore, specific translations of words like Aĝipto (instead of Aifto) and abiviguar (instead of abediguar) align with linguistic features found in Italy. The linguistic features in the Siddur translation indicate a blending of spoken Judeo-Spanish with Portuguese and Italian influences, likely stemming from the linguistic environment in Italy during the 16th century when various Jewish communities coexisted and interacted closely.
While it remains unclear whether the translation was written in Italy or Morocco, it is highly likely that the Siddur's translator was an Italian Jew with a Judeo-Spanish-Portuguese background. It is plausible that the manuscript traveled with the author or someone else from Italy, eventually reaching the Portuguese community in Morocco before ending up in the French National Library, as previously described.
Declaration of competing interest
The author of this article declares that they have no financial, professional or personal conflicts of interest that could have inappropriately influenced this work.
Authorship contribution statement
Ora (Rodrigue) Schwarzwald: conceptualization, investigation, writing – original draft, writing – review & edition.
Notes
Now available online: https://www.europeana.eu/portal/en/record/9200519/ark__12148_btv1b105430384.html?q=ladino#dcId=1579624581224&p=1.
Many examples in the review article are listed briefly.
I use the following transcription conventions: Biblical citations are transliterated following the biblical tradition: ā = camats, a = pataħ, e=tsere, ɛ = segol, ə = shwa, ō = ħolam male, o = ħolan ħaser, ī = ħirik male, i = ħirik ħaser, ū =shuruk, u = cubuts, ˀ = alef, ˁ = ayin, ħ = ħet, q = cof, k = caf rafa, b = bet rafa [v], ʃ = shin, ś = sin. The Spanish transcription follows Spanish usage with modifications depending on the Ladino orthography: gimel with a diacritic is transcribed as ĵ, ĝ and ch as in iĵo 'son' (Sp. hijo), aĝipto 'Egypt' (Sp. Egipto), and dicho 'said' (Sp. dicho), lamed-yod is transcribed by Sp. ll, and nun-yod by Sp. ñ, samej transcribes ç, while shin transcribes both s and ʃ, as in çiempre~siempre 'always' (Sp. siempre), baʃo 'low' (Sp. bajo). The English translations of the Siddur are based on Toledano 2002. Bible translations are based on the American Standard Version.
Vinoˁam is misspelled for Hebrew וִיהִי נֹעַם [vīhī nóˁam], a verse from Psalms 90:17: “And let the beauty of the LORD our God be upon us: and establish thou the work of our hands upon us; yea, the work of our hands establish thou it.” The translation here is based on the King James Version.
See discussion in section 8 below.
See discussion of this expression in section 6.4.31 below.
Fols. 289r-290v in the Siddur.
Fols. 35v-39r in the Siddur.
Moses Song has been described and compared in nine different versions by Morreale 1963, 3-21, excluding this Siddur.
S stands for the Siddur under discussion, F to Ferrara 1553 (Lazar 1992), and C for Constantinople-Saloniki (Lazar 2000).
The word haʃʃāmayim is translated in the Siddur by sielo in the singular form, while the other translations use los cielos reflecting the Hebrew structure.
The word is derived from the Latin verb vŏlare, and the noun volatĭle, see Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. volar. It is attested there as a JS volatilla and boladilla in the Ferrara Bible; Blondheim 1925, 132-133, refers to boladilla in the footnote as cited in Lumbroso. The word boladidia (from Old Spanish uolatilia) meaning 'bird' is attested in a 13th-century medieval text written by Jews, see Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 363. Boladidia, but not boladía, is also attested in another religious text from the 15th century according to CORDE. Bolladilla is also attested in CORDE in the Ferrara Siddur.
In Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 303, 408, one finds tajadura que fiéred.
S = the Siddur (fols. 161r-162r), F = Ferrara Libro de oracyones from 1552 (fols. 84v-85r; Lazar 1993, 122), SN = Seder Nashim, a women's prayer book from Saloniki ca. 1565, see Schwarzwald 2012, 101-102, pp. 68-70 in the original book.
Minervini 1998, 409-413 lists some of them briefly as well.
As stated above, most examples are taken from the main body of the Siddur; the final folios written by another hand will be discussed separately in section 8 below.
Cf. Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 349. See discussion below in the morphological section 6.2.6 regarding the conjugation of preterit forms.
Cf. Minervini 1998, 409-410. The alternation of i-e and o-u existed in medieval Spanish, see Lapesa 1984, §§30, 40-41.
In several cases ħolam and shuruk are both marked on vav, e.g., cobrenos/cubrenos קוֹּבְרֵינוֹש (86r).
The author does not distinguish between /s/ and /ʃ/ and they both are written with ש. The Judeo-Spanish pronunciation is with ʃ in this case, but it is not certain. Lazar 1995a transcribes these cases with the letter s. Note that on the same folio (118v) both pronunciations with u and o are represented. Lazar 1995a transcribes these cases with the letter u.
The form cumo is more widespread than the other ones.
Cf. Minervini 1998, 410.
The word occurs two more times, one as roidas (47v), and one as la roedas (!) (148v).
See more discussion about these words in section 6.1.2.7, paragraph (6).
See Quintana's discussion of such forms in JS, Quintana 2004, 173. The verb amostrar is documented in medieval Spanish, and the diphthongization is well attested as described in Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 276-280, 355.
As for the Hebrew component, see section 7 below.
There are very few exceptions when Spanish words are spelled with these letters. The words toro and toros are spelled with tet on folios 182r and 237r, but with tav on folios 188v and 189r, perhaps influenced by the Aramaic word תורא'bull'. In one case the word que is spelled with caf, כֵי (50v) because of the phonetic and semantic similarity. See discussion below regarding the word mezquino and its derivatives in 6.1.2.6.
The diacritic mark is not always placed on the letter pe, but the words are probably pronounced as f.
Cf. Italian fare, Portuguese fazer.
See discussion in Dubert García 2021, 51-85, and the references there. In Old JS text one also finds fazer next to fer, cf. Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 383-384. Three such forms of fer saber are attested in Spain according to CORDE as early as in the 13th century.
Cf. Italian figlio, Portuguese filho.
In the translations of Pirke Avot, Venice versions from 1696 till 1780 have heg, except for Venice 1609 which is based on Thessaloniki 1570, that has hek, see Schwarzwald 1989, 325.
The gimel is not marked by a diachritic, referring to henchiose.
Vocalized by shuruk rather than with ħolam, i.e., Ħuni rather than Ħoni.
The term yom riʃon for Sunday already exists in Mishnaic Hebrew.
The JS word is alforía, as in Portuguese, derived from Arabic al-ħurriyya. See Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. horro; DRAE, s.v. alhorría. The word appears in Ladino in the Ferrara Prayer book from 1552, in the Ferrara Bible from 1553, in the medieval Spanish Bible E3, in a few other medieval Spanish texts (according to CORDE), and in other Ladino translations, see Schwarzwald 1989, 345; Schwarzwald 2008, 104.
Folios 72r, 139r, 146v, 193r, 195r, 196r, 255r, 276r, 279r. According to Corominas and Pascual, 1981-1991, s.v. hasta, the origin of hasta is Arabic ħátta and the s is a result of dissimilation. According to DRAE, the origin of the word is Arabic ħatta combined with Latin ad ista 'until that'.
See, for instance Schwarzwald 2012, 84, 104, 116, and several other places in Seder Nashim.
In Seder Nashim from Thessaloniki the word alforía occurs three times and alhoría one time, the word hasta occurs 44 times, fasta 28 times and hata (!) five times, never with ħet, see Schwarzwald 2012.
Cf. Minervini 1998, 411.
Statistically, the word siempre is spelled many more times with samej than with shin.
It is part of the seseo process that occurred in many dialects of Spanish, see Lapesa 1984, §§391-392; Quintana 2006, 92, 122-125; Penny 2002, 26-29, 103; Penny 2000, 118-120.
Two other times in the end of the book by the other handwriting appear in caʃa: קָאשַׂה (299r) קַאשָׂה (299v) in the translation of 'house' (Sp. casa, JS caza). See section 8 below.
Cf. meçquinos, emeçquinexer, and emeçquenexíronsi, which are all spelled with samej and caf as in Hebrew, in Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 291, 374.
The caf was corrected to cof in מֶישְקִינוֹ.
Samej is written over the shin in the first two occurrences.
The words translate dālonū (Psalms 79:8), tōriʃemō (Exodus 15:9) and rāʃū (Psalms 34:11).
Written with cof and corrected to gimel, see discussion above in 6.1.2.3.
Cf. Minervini 1998, 410-414.
At the end of 27v the word is written with vav, wardan וורדאן, in solitreo, but the first word in 28r is written with gimel גוֹוַארְדָאן in square vocalized letters.
Aboniguar is already attested in the Middle Ages, cf. Blondheim 1925, 30-31; Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 348-349.
See Blondheim 1925, 65-66, where the closest form is the Provance-Catalan verb justiugar.
Quatregua in the Ferrara Bible and Prayer Book according to CORDE. Unknown in DRAE.
Cf. Minervini 1998, 411. The examples in her review are very few.
I found such spelling in a Haggadah from Venice 1716 in the translation of miqrā, spelled <ğamadura> [chamadura], whereas other Haggadot had <lyamadura>, see Schwarzwald 2008, 136.
Lazar 1995a transcribes these cases with the letter x (representing /ʃ/ in medieval Spanish). The use of shin for ʃ occurred in other texts, see Bunis 2005, 125; Schwarzwald 2004, 179-180; Alonso 1976, vol. 2, 47-144.
A similar explanation can be given about yaĝiĝa and ĝaĝé to be discussed in section 6.4.38.
The word is not vocalized, and its end is blurred.
Typo error: the letter caf is written by mistake instead of the first resh. Lazar 1995a transcribes it as it should be: asolombrara.
From Latin sub umbre, Modern Sp. sombra. Only once does the word sombra 'shade' occurs in the Siddur with shin in the expression y con sombra de tus alas cobrenos (86r) 'and in the shadow of your wings cover us'.
The same tsadi is spelled in a Ladino translation of a Haggadah from Livorno 1794, Italy, next to n, in words like cenşeña סינצינייא 'Matzah', olganşa (Sp. holganza) 'rest', encomendanşa 'commandment', alcanşar 'reach', gananşia 'possessions', sentenşio 'judged' and more, see Schwarzwald 2010, 181; Schwarzwald 2008, 32.
This letter is also attested in medieval Jewish texts, and to some extent in texts written in the Arabic world where the discinction between /s/ and /ş/ was not too clear. The pronunciation of ts also exists in late north Balkan JS communities in words like natsional 'national' instead of nasional due to Ashkenazi influence. However, this consideration is irrelevant in the examples cited above.
Cf. idlu in Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 291.
Cf. postremeru in Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 399.
Cf. Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 362.
Next to v[e]rdad and voluntad, boluntaθ and beluntad in Minervini 1992, I, 484, 486.
Cf. emalexer in Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 374.
See also the use of mos in section 5, Example 5, and the discussion there.
Translation of מִשְׁכַּבְכֶם (Psalms 4:5) 'your bed'. See discussion in 6.4.38 below.
Cf. Minervini 1998, 413.
Cf. Minervini 1998, 412.
In the word cimiento (255r), the ending is part of the word, not a suffix.
Three of these occurrences appear in the final folios of the Siddur: sobistes~subistes (297v) 'you went up', tomastes (297v) 'you took'.
Cf. Bunis 1994, 328.
Cf. Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 350.
The letter s is missing before t.
The word is written with a yod but vocalized with camats a.
Cf. Schwarzwald 2012, 200, 241-242.
In fact, there are two more occurrences of -emos in the preterit forms of -ar verbs, llamemos and fablemos in the section about Taˁaniyot in Seder Nashim, see Schwarzwald 2012, 212.
Cf. Minervini 1998, 413; Penny 2002, 217.
A few of the phenomena are listed in Minervini 1998, 414.
Only in the Salonica translation of Pirke Avot from ca. 1570, which is the origin of Venice 1601, do we also find cumo dize el pasuk. See Schwarzwald and Cohen 2020, 117-136.
The saying echoes ʃɛˁāśani Yiśraˀel from the Babylonian Talmud (Menaħot 43:2), see Elbogen 1972, 70.
Cf. Bunis 1994, 329. Only in very early Haggadot from Italy do we find abediguar as well, see Schwarzwald 1989, 199-200, 339. The translations of the Haggadot are more conservative of old JS features and sometimes resemble the eastern ones, see Schwarzwald 1994, 33-54.
Of Aragonese or Leonese sources, from Latin affectāre which meant 'to arrange'.
The English translations vary, as can be seen here. Ferrara and Constantinople-Salonica Bibles have contad, see Lazar 1992, 489; Lazar 2000, 1632. All medieval Bibles also use the verb contar. See Enrique-Arias and Pueyo Mena 2008-.
See Rashi, RaDaQ, and Alshekh interpretations, in the Responsa Project, 30, Bar-Ilan University, Psalms 48:13.
See section 8 below for the discussion regarding aifto in the last folios of the Siddur, see Aslanov 2011, 135.
Corominas and Pascual 1981-1991, s.v. alarce, from Arabic ˀarz. Nehama 1977, 23 states the meaning of copper and bronze and adds in parenthesis that it is Ladino, although in Ladino it always means cedar tree. Perez and Pimienta 2008, 13 give both meanings, whereas Koén-Sarano 2009/10, 16 gives the botanical meaning and adds in parenthesis that it is a tree.
The expression also appears in 18r, 25v and 21 more times on other folios.
Arnasio and arnasios also occur in 52v, 54r, 119r, 247r, 288v, 290v. Cf. Minervini 1998, 412 who discusses it very briefly.
Angel is άγγελος in Greek.
The first vowel is unclear. Quintana 2004, 173 considers the word as a Portuguese influence on JS.
The equivalent word in Seder Nashim and in the Siddur from Ferrara is forados.
The Ladino translations have conoser, but one translation of the Haggadah from Thessaloniki 1894 has conesieron, cf. Schwarzwald 2008, 329; Benoliel 1977, 185.
Cf. Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 370, where are attested some forms in the 13th century text.
See i-e alternations in 6.1.1.1 and h-f alternations in 6.1.2.2 above.
See aformoziguar in Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 352; Wiesner 1981, 4. In Ladino translations, see Schwarzwald 2015, 488-506.
And once in the last folios of this manuscript which represents a different author: fortenzas (302r), next to forteza (300r-v).
See the distribution in CORDE.
In CORDE it is attested in this Siddur and in five occurrences in a medical document from around 1500. Lapesa 1984, §125 mentions the use of nief for nieve.
Nehama 1977, 448, lists prenismo as a Ladino word and sends the reader to plenismo, but the late entry is missing; Perez and Pimienta 2008, 361, have prenismo~prenizmo and prenismedad with the same meaning, but plenismo gets the meaning of integrity and wholesome. Koén-Sarano 2009/10, 326, has one entry of plinizmo/prinizmo. Cf. Blondheim 1925, 91-92; Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 398.
Koén-Sarano 2009/10, has prova and provar next to aprevar; Nehama 1977 and Perez and Pimienta 2008, include both preva, prevar and prova, provar.
Except for Venice 1601, which has provaron but fue prevado, see Schwarzwald 1989, 394-395.
Lazar copied the text in Hebrew letters and in the transliteration inaccurately; CORDE followed his transcription accordingly.
'וְעַל זִקְנֵי שְׁאֵרִית עַמְּךָ בֵּית יִשְֹרָאֵל וְעַל פְּלֵיטַת בֵּית סוֹפְרֵיהֶם', a phrase from a Sephardic prayer.
'וְהִנִּ֥יחוּ יִ֝תְרָ֗ם לְעוֹלְלֵיהֶֽם'
See veluntad~voluntad in section 5, example 4 above, and veluntad in section 6.4.36 below, and afermoziguar/aformoziguar in section 4.4.17 above.
Alfonso and del Barco 2021, 403, base romasa on Old Spanish remasaja/romasaja from Latin remanere. Javier del Barco (personal communication) thinks it relates to Occitan/Catalan romandre 'to stay, to remain'. Cyril Aslanov (personal communication) suggests romaniĝa or romaniga but cannot pinpoint the Roman source of the word. Cf. also Blondheim 1925, 133-133.
See Example 5 above and Table 1 in section 5.
Nehama 1977, 583 has veluntád, veluntáryo and veluntádo, and on p. 595 he adds voluntáryo as well; Perez and Pimienta 2008, 457 has veluntad, veluntar and enveluntar, veluntario and veluntozo, and also voluntad, voluntariamente, voluntario/volontario; Koén-Sarano 2009/10, 431 addresses veluntar to voluntad on p. 436, where the word is listed next to voluntariamente and voluntario; see also Benoliel 1977, 257.
Alfonso and Del Barco 2021, 411, found yazer in Psalms 139:3.
The yod is vocalized by camats or pataħ.
See discussion in 6.1.2.7 above, paragraph no. 5.
Metathesized form, instead of idlos. See 6.1.3 above.
Lazar 1995a, 216-217, transcribes it both in Hebrew script ש[י]רביינטיש and in Latin script as s[i]rvientes with v, although it is spelled שוּרְבייֵנִטְיש with a bet and the vav is clearly vocalized by shuruk.
See discussion above on oe-ue alternations in 6.1.1.3 and the discussion on gimel in 6.1.2.7.
See discussion in section 6.1.2.5 above regarding ly-y alternations.
See also fn. 28 above.
Unless otherwise indicated, JS referes to the Haketía as well.
The word rincones (45v) or arrincones (62r, 207v) 'corners' are also of Hispano-Arabic source, but they are already part of the Spanish inventory.
The word afermoziguar can be added to this list, see 6.4.17.
I also suspect the translator had some hearing problems regarding the sibilant consonants, based on the spellings of words with dž, ž, tʃ, or ʃ (see the spelling of ĵuizio, ĵuez and the like in 6.1.1.3, 6.1.2.7 above).
The word ends in a small non-final nun which looks like a yod, probably a typographical error.
BibliographyAlfonsoEsperanzadel BarcoJavier2021Translating the Hebrew Bible in Medieval Iberia: Oxford, Bodleian Library, ms Hunt. 268, with a linguistic Study and Glossary of the Leˁazim by Javier del BarcoLeiden and BostonBrillAlonsoAmado1976De la pronunciación medieval a la moderna en españolMadridGredosAmerican Standard VersionASV20202023https://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-versions/#google_vignetteAslanovCyril2011Judeo-Greek or Greek Spoken by JewsBonfilRobertIrshaiOdedStroumsaGuy G.TalgamRinaJews in Byzantium385398Jerusalem Studies in Religion and CultureNew YorkBrillBenolielJose1977Dialecto Judeo-hispano-marroquí o haquitíaMadridVaronaBlondheimDavid Simon1925Les parlers judéo-romans et la Vetus LatinaParisLibrairie Ancienne Edouard ChampionBoerioGiuseppe1856Dizionario del dialetto venezianoVeneziaG. CecchiniFacsimile edition: Firenze: Giunti, 1993BriquetCharles-Moïse1968Les Filigranes : dictionnaire historique des marques du papier dès leur apparition vers 1282 jusqu'en 1600StevensonAllanAmsterdamThe Paper Publications SocietyBunisDavid M.1977Haʃimuʃ bisodot ˁivriyim veˀaramiyim biyşirat satira bequerev dovrey ĝudezmo (The Use of Hebrew and Aramaic Elements in the Creation of Satire among Judezmo Speakers)Massorot9-11319333BunisDavid M.1994Tres formas de ladinar la Biblia en Italia en los siglos xvi-xviiHassánIacob M.Berenguer AmadorÁngelIntroducción a la Biblia de Ferrara315345MadridComisión Nacional Quinto CentenarioBunisDavid M.1996Translating from the head and from the heart: The essentially oral nature of the Ladino Bible-translation traditionBusseWinfriedVarol-BornesMarie-ChristineHommage á Haïm Vidal Sephiha337357BernPeter LangBunisDavid M.2005Writing Systems as a National-Religious Symbol - on the Development of Judezmo WritingPe'amim101-102111171in HebrewBunisDavid M.2018Judezmo (Ladino/Judeo-Spanish): A Historical and sociological PortraitHaryBenjaminBunin BenorSarahLanguages in Jewish communities, Past and Present185238Boston and BerlinDe Gruyter1739Catalogue de la bibliothèque du RoiI: ManuscritsParisCORDEReal Academia EspañolaBanco de datos Corpus diacrónico del español20202023http://corpus.rae.es/cordenet.htmlCorominasJoanPascualJosé19811991Diccionario crítico etimológico castellano e hispánicoDCECHMadridGredosCorrienteFederico2008Dictionary of Arabic and allied loanwords: Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Galician and kindred dialectsBostonBrillCrewsCynthia M.1935Recherches sur le judéo-espagnol dans les pays balkaniquesParisDROZGarcía MorenoAitor2022DHJEDiccionario histórico del judeo-españolhttp://recursos.esefardic.es/dhje/consulta.phpDRAEDiccionario de la lengua española de la Real Academia Española20202023https://dle.rae.es/Dubert GarcíaFrancisco2021Las formas reducidas de facĕre en el noroeste de la península ibérica: Convergencia y divergencia geolingüísticasStudia linguistica romanica20216518510.25364/19.2021.6.7ElbogenIsmar M.1972Hatfilah beYisrael behitpatħutah hahistorit [Der Jüdische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklen]Tel AvivDvirEnrique-AriasAndrésPueyo MenaFrancisco Javier2008-Corpus Biblia Medieval20202023http://www.bibliamedieval.esGarcía de DiegoVicente1981Gramática histórica españolaMadridGredosKoén-SaranoMatilda20092010Diksionario Ladino (Djudeo-Espanyol)-Ebreo — Ebreo-Ladino (Djudeo-Espanyol)JerusalemZackLapesaRafael1984Historia de la lengua españolaMadridGredosLazarMoshe1988Ladino Pentateuch: Constantinople 1547Culver CityLabyrinthosLazarMoshe1992The Ladino Bible of Ferrara [1553]Culver CityLabyrinthosLazarMoshe1993Libro de Oracyones: Ferrara Ladino Siddur [1552]Culver CityLabyrinthosLazarMoshe1995aSiddur Tefillot: A Woman’s Ladino Prayer BookCulver CityLabyrinthosLazarMoshe1995bBiblia Ladinada: Escorial I.j.3MadisonThe Hispanic Seminary of Medieval StudiesLazarMoshe2000The Ladino Scriptures: Constantinople - Salonica [1540-1572]I-IICulver CityLabyrinthosLoporcanoMichele1997Puglia and SalentoMaidenMartinParryMairThe Dialects of Italy338348London / New YorkRoutlegeMenéndez PidalRamón1962Manual de gramática histórica españolaMadridEspasa-CalpeMinerviniLaura1992Testi Giudeospagnoli Medievali (Castiglia e Aragona)I-IINapoliLiguori EditoreMinerviniLaura1998Review of Moshe Lazar’s edition of Siddur Tefillot: A Woman’s Ladino Prayer BookRomance Philology31404419MinerviniLaura2002La formación de la Koiné Judeo-española en el siglo xviRevue de Linguistique Romane263-264497512MorrealeMargherita1963Las antiguas Biblias hebreas españolas en el pasaje del Cántico de MoisésSefarad23321NehamaJoseph1977Dicctionaire du Judeo-EspagnolMadridCSICPennyRalph1996Judeo-Spanish varieties before and after the expulsionDonaire65458PennyRalph2000Variation and Change in SpanishCambridgeCambridge University PressPennyRalph2002A History of the Spanish LanguageCambridgeCambridge University PressPerezAvnerPimientaGladys2008Diksionario Amplio Djudeo-espanyol - Ebreo: Lashon me-AspamiaMaale-AdumimLa Autoridad Nasionala del Ladino & El Instituto Maale-AdumimQuintanaAldina2004El sustrato y el adstrato portugueses en Judeo-españolNeue Romania: Judenspanisch VIII,31167192QuintanaAldina2006Geografía lingüística del judeoespañolBernPeter LangQuintanaAldina2008From the Master’s Voice to the Disciple’s Script: Genizah Fragments of a Bible Glossary in LadinoHispania Judaica Bulletin6187235QuintanaAldina2009Aportación lingüistica de los romances aragonés y portugués a la coiné judeoespañolaBunisDavid M.Languages and Literatures of Sephardic and Oriental Jews221255JerusalemBialik Institute and Misgav YerushalayimQuintanaAldina2012aLa lengua del Seder Naʃim: castellano del norte con influencia aragonesaSchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)Siddur para mujeres en ladino, Salónica, siglo xvi2856JerusalemInstitute Ben-ZviQuintanaAldina2012bJudeo-Spanish: From Linguistic Segregation outside the Common Framework of Hispanic Languages to a de facto standardSchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)MuchnikMalkaSadanTsviStudies in Modern Hebrew and Jewish Languages697714JerusalemCarmelQuintanaAldina2014aTierra Santa y Egipto, Lugares de encuentro entre los judíos ibéricos y los judíos arabófonos en los siglos xvi-xviiBusseWinfredLa lengua de los sefardíes: Tres contribuciones a su historia105143TubingenStauffenburgQuintanaAldina2014bJudeo-Spanish in contact with Portuguese: A Historical OverviewAmaralPatriciaCarvalhoAna MariaPortuguese-Spanish Interface: Diachrony, synchrony and contact6594Amsterdam and PhiladelphiaJohn BenjaminsRohlfsGerhard1966Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti1TorinoPiccola Biblioteca EinaudiRomeu FerréPilar2020Dos cedulones publicados en Orán en 1879 por la imprenta KarsentyEl Presente42547SchwarzSamuel2005The New Christians in Portugal in the 20th Centuryin HebrewJerusalemDinur Center and Zakman Shazar CenterSchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)1989Targume haladino lefirke avot [The Ladino Translations of Pirke Aboth]Eda VeLashon, 13JerusalemMagnesSchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)1994The Difference between Ladino Translations of Pirke Aboth and the Haggadotin HebrewAlexanderTamarHaimAvrahamHasan-RokemGalitHazanEphraimHistory and Creativity in the Sephardi and Oriental Jewish Communities3354JerusalemMisgav YerushalayimSchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)2004Spelling and Orthography in Ladino Translations from the 16th Century onin HebrewPe'amim101-102173185SchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)2008Milon haHagadot ʃel Pesaħ beLadino [A Dictionary of the Ladino Passover Haggadot]Eda VeLashon, 27JerusalemMagnesSchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)2010Masorot haktiv vehahagiya biʃne sidure naʃim [Spelling and pronunciation tradition of two Ladino prayer books]Massorot15173203SchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)2011Lexical Variations in Two Ladino Prayer Books for WomenBusseWinfriedStudemund-HalévyMichaelLexicología y lexicografía judeoespañolas5386BernPeter LangSchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)2012Siddur para mujeres en ladino, Salonica, siglo XVIJerusalemInstitute Ben-ZviSchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)2015On two derivational phenomena in Judeo-SpanishSKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics (A Festschrift for Pavol Ʃtekauer)1234885062022http://www.skase.sk/Volumes/JTL29/pdf_doc/21.pdfSchwarzwaldOra (Rodrigue)CohenDov2020El descubrimiento de la primera traducción impresa en ladino de Pirqué Abot (Salónica, hacia 1570)Sefarad80111713610.3989/sefarad.020-004SephihaHaim Vidal1973Le Ladino: DeutéronomeParisCentre de Recherches HispaniquesToledanoEliezer2002Siddur Kol Sason: The Orot Sephardic Weekday SiddurNew YorkOrot UKVelkovAsparuh2005Les filigranes dans les documents ottomansSofiaA. TrayanovWagnerMax Leopold1990Juden-Spanish I-IIStuttgartFranz SteinerWiesnerChrista1981Jüdisch-Spanisches Glossar zum ME'AM LO'EZ des Iacob KuliHamburgHelmut Buske VerlagYovelYirmiyahu2014The Other Within: The Marranos: Split Identity and Emerging ModernityPrinceton, N.J.Princeton University PressZotenbergHermann1866Catalogue des manuscrits hébreux et samaritains de la Bibliothèque ImpérialeParisImprimerie Impériale