the 1st major dict. of Gǝʕǝz was published in Leipzig in 1865, by August Dillmann (1823-1894), who had already prepared Gǝʕǝz manuscript catalogs, text editions (incl. Enoch & Jub), a ref. grammar (& a chrestomathy afterward): Lexicon linguae Aethiopicae
/
Dillmann's lexicon is along the lines of other big lexical productions around the 2nd half of the 19th cent. like LSJ (1843), Payne Smith (1868-1901), Lewis & Short (1879), Bosworth (1882), Monier-Williams (1899), and BDB (1906)
/
some details on Dillmann's lexicon:
1392 columns
arranged by root
Gǝʕǝz text completely in Ethiopic script
etymological info
definitions in Latin
lots of citations
Latin index
/
the dictionary is over 150 years old, but it's often still worth a look when things are otherwise unclear, or just for fun
/
as cool as a hard copy is, there's a searchable electronic version of Dillmann's lexicon is available here betamasaheft.eu/Dillmann/
/
Wolf Leslau (1906-2006), a major contributor to the study of Ethiopian languages — among numerous books & articles, e.g. his Etymological Dictionary of Harari (1963), intro (1995) and reference (2000) grammars of Amharic — is responsible for 2 more recent dictionaries:
/
first, the Comparative Dictionary of Geʿez (1987)
647 pp
arr. by root, ≈ Latin script order
Gǝʕǝz text only in translit., except the main lemma also in Ethiopic script
lots of etymological info (Sem, spec. Ethiosemitic, & otherwise)
Eng definitions
no citations
Eng index
/
Leslau's other dictionary is his Concise Dictionary of Geʿez (1989)
247 pages
arranged by root, in the Ethiopic order
Gǝʕǝz text in Ethiopic script + translit. throughout
no etymological info
definitions in Eng
no citations
no index
/
the English definitions in both of Leslau's dictionaries are not especially detailed, and there isn't a single text reference, but they work well enough with some creativity and/or a thesaurus
/
all three dictionaries, spanning 135 years, serve different needs and users, and you may find one more helpful than others depending on set & setting: try 'em & see! 📚 happy reading!
/end ✌️
p.s. a visual aid
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I had a great discussion w/ someone today about practical tips for studying #manuscripts
even where programs offer language instruction (not a given), there's usually ZERO practice in paleography, codicology, using catalogs, interacting with manuscript libraries, etc.
🧵
1/
why is knowing a little something about working with manuscripts meaningful?
even for heavily studied languages and text corpora (like certain periods of Greek and Latin lit.), and for which there are lots of editions, manuscripts should still be attracting readers
2/
editions, even very good editions, don't replace manuscripts, especially given all of the absolutely unique qualities & features of a manuscript that may not make it into editions:
colophons, notes, special page arrangements, the way the handwriting looks, script-choice
3/