Dating an armenian woman Neue leute kennenlernen im urlaub
Even this brief sketch of the historical background shows that the relations between Armenia and Iran were often very strained, especially during the golden ages of Iran under the Achaemenid and Sasanian dynasties. A selection of these early Iranian words in Armenian is organized in groups to indicate the Iranian penetration. Later than these older loanwords many of the more recent post-Sasanian and modern Persian words are found in the Armenian authors.
Moreover, it shows that conditions favorable to a fruitful cultural interchange between Armenians and Iranians existed almost exclusively during the rule of the Arsacids over Armenia before the Christianization of Armenia. Henning, who in 1963 had assigned those words containing the group ) to Median. Since there were never direct connections between Armenians and Sogdians it is impossible to envisage Sogdian loanwords in Armenian. Such words are however well known in later stages of Persian and are of less interest for the old Iranian vocabulary.
Furthermore, it should be emphasized that these borrowings were not limited to the vocabulary but also involve derivational suffixes, phraseology, and all kinds of names, and that they are from the beginning of the Armenian literary tradition inextricably mixed with the inherited vocabulary of IE. (For the political, social, cultural, and religious contacts between Iran, Armenia, and Georgia see most recently Lang, 1983.) 2. Armenian word forms are close to or even identical with Iranian and especially NPers. languages themselves, e.g.: -; see Benveniste, 1957/58, pp. In every investigation of these questions one must bear in mind, however, that individual cases either may not be so clearcut on the Iranian side because the Ir. 25-29) thought she had found the key to its characterization in older Aramaic inscriptions from the region, particularly in that of King Artašês/Artaxias (189-160 B. characteristics of which a limited number can be established for the Old Iranian period (see Périkhanian herself, 1966, p. Most striking is the fact that a number of words known only from Sogdian were borrowed into Armenian (see Bolognesi, 1966, pp. No definitive proof has been found but it is plausible to assume that the words in question may have been East Iranian words that entered Armenian via Parthian. But matters are clearest in the case of some borrowings from Greek, in particular with the older ones, which were taken over in the period before the complete Christianization of Armenia. Formerly it was thought that the borrowings in the first group go back to a period when the original final syllables had not yet disappeared. Such an assumption would entail that the so-called (older) Arm. A chronological dilemma is brought about by treating as morphologically late such group 2 forms which phonological criteria prove to be archaic borrowings. Such words or compositional elements are partly also in independent use in Arm., as is the case with - “lord, chief.” The extremely large number of these formations (collected, classified, and interpreted in detail by Leroy, 1960 and Benveniste, 1961 ) is clear evidence of the profound influence of the Arsacid and Sasanian feudal aristocracy and military on Armenia. suffixes that were true suffixes from the beginning and have gained great vitality and productivity in Arm. Conclusive evidence of the strong influence of the foreign Iranian culture and languages on Armenia and Armenian is also afforded by the loan translations, of which a steadily increasing number has been identified. On the one hand we find a great many names of Arsacid or Sasanian kings and queens, princes and princesses, generals and notables of various kinds which refer exclusively to Iran proper and to Iranian matters but just happen to occur in Armenian texts and are therefore virtually on the same level as the Ir. Schmitt, “Iranische Namenschichten und Namentypen bei altarmenischen Historikern,” , N.
forms in so many cases that the particular connection between the two languages could not escape the notice of scholars even at the beginning of modern Armenological studies. transmission is in parts very fragmentary, or on the whole be more complicated because of borrowings between different Iranian dialects. This complication of the Iranian situation calls for a more comprehensive view in order to assess the Armenian borrowings, which means that one must take into account all available data rather than discuss specific criteria in isolation. The confusion described above is compounded by additional factors. That Parthian played the part of such an intermediary must be assumed also in other instances. Even the general historical situation would lead us to expect that Greek words would have come to Armenia through the Parthian empire since Greek was the cultural language of the Parthians, who were Hellenized to some extent at least in their upper classes. This view seems to have been first expounded by Meillet, 1911/12, p. 149, and it was repeated subsequently in several manuals although it was never based on a close investigation of the problem, relying mainly on certain cases of agreement between Arm. “Law of final syllables,” according to which the vowel of the originally final syllable of a word and this syllable itself disappear, would have operated only in the Arsacid period at roughly the same time as the analogous phenomenon in Western Mid. It is true that a number of such correspondences are found but they can not be considered apart from the many seemingly archaic borrowings whose antiquity is guaranteed by phonological features (e.g. The only way out of the dilemma seems to be the one proposed by Bolognesi, 1954, p. Prefixes that are of frequent occurrence and thus often allow a borrowing to be identified by way of cumulative evidence are: -: no longer productive in Arm. are, among many others, the following: --formations so characteristic of some of the younger Ir. Many phrases composed only of Armenian words were in fact modeled on Iranian expressions. It is of course much more difficult to detect instances of loan translation than loanwords so that there remains much scope for future research in this field. In Armenian literature we find from the very beginning in the fifth century A. a very large number of Iranian proper names, especially personal names. collateral tradition in Greek, Aramaic, Elamite sources, etc. Leroy, “Emprunts iraniens dans la composition nominale en arménien classique,” ibid., pp.
Mesrop Maštocʿ) and which is characterized from the very beginning of the literary documentation by a large number of Iranian loanwords. Since these Armenian highlands had been subdued by Cyaxares about 600 B. and so had become part of the Median Empire, the conditions had been provided for the intensive influence of Iranian culture and customs on the Armenians and their language. The independence of Armenia from the Seleucids was not gained until 189 B. The Armenian kingdom, whose power and size had been enlarged considerably in particular by king Tigranes I called the Great (ca. C.), had become a bone of contention between the Parthians and the Roman Empire (see Chaumont, 1976) ever since L. Though the Christianization of Armenia in the third century and its rise to Armenian official religion shortly after 300 A. loosened the close ties between Iranians and Armenians, ties that had until then been close even in matters of creed, little changed in the political situation even under the Sasanians (who ruled over Iran from 224 A.
General ARMENIAN, the language of the Armenians, which is attested in written sources since the 5th century A. (after the invention of the Armenian alphabet by St. In some parts of the area the Armenians constituted the majority of the population, in others only its upper classes, but they were everywhere the unifying element that maintained the culture and language of the whole region. D., again except the short period of Roman occupation under Trajan. Indeed, the Parthian aristocracy was emulated by the Armenians, especially the upper classes, who necessarily had a command of both Parthian and Armenian, and who even tried to join through marriage with the new true masters of their country.
Apart from interruptions of varying duration Armenian was to bear the yoke of the respective Iranian leading power for more than a thousand years, for after the Medes followed the Persian Achaemenids (550-330 B. Licinius Lucullus had marched against Tigranes during the third Mithridatian War and this king had submitted himself to Pompeius in 66 B. The Roman protectorate was followed by the rule of a younger line of the Parthian Arsacids (Arm. D.), until the Armenian apple of discord was finally divided between Romans and Sasanians in 387 A. Bailey) Originally Published: December 15, 1986 Last Updated: August 12, 2011 This article is available in print.
C.; we find the first attestation of the name of the country in OPers. D.: Western Armenia came under the rule of the Romans and later the Byzantines, whereas the far greater eastern part of the country, the so-called “Great Armenia” or the “Persarmenia” of the Byzantine historiographers, came under Persian control and was fully annexed by Bahrām V Gōr some years later, in 428 A.
D., and from then governed only by Sasanian margraves. Iranian Loanwords in Armenian The Iranian loanwords in early Armenian are either fully integrated into the language or, at times, cited as foreign words. The words can be traced from Achaemenian times through Parthian and Sasanian to the intrusion of the Muslim technical terms into Iran.
The designation "Armenia" applies to different entities: a "historical" Armenia, the Armenian plateau, the 1918–1920 U. State Department map of an Armenia, and the current republic of Armenia.
The notion "Armenian culture" implies not just the culture of Armenia but that of the Armenian people, the majority of whom live outside the current boundaries of the republic of Armenia.
Search for dating an armenian woman:
period, although this does not mean that it is possible to date each borrowing precisely. vocabulary, even though they are attested by only a few words, seem to belong to the time before Macedonian and Seleucid rule over Iran, i. chiefly to Achaemenid times, when Armenia was under Iranian domination but not yet thoroughly Iranianized (see Meillet, 1911/12, pp. The order followed is that of the Armenian alphabet. These borrowings from the Iranian religious vocabulary did not occur as a result of the close Irano-Armenian symbiosis during the Arsacid period.