The differences between the east and west branches are very wide, there are fundamental differences in both grammar and phonology of basic words- there are numerous swadesh words and stems that are different! The pronouns don't even have an h-shift like the entire rest of the family. What you mean to say is that it would be overrun by an Arabic dialect and become the substrate, because otherwise these claims make no sense.qwed117 wrote:Well, maybe not Russian becoming a dialect of English, but rather given how Arabic spread, the language would quickly be assimilated, becoming little more than a husk loaning down a few words. It needs a religious foundation if it were to survive like Hebrew or Aramaic.Isfendil wrote:How on earth does an East Semitic language become a dialect of Arabic, that's like Russian becoming a dialect of english. Who on earth even bothers to say this stuff when they clearly don't know what they're talking about? Not even the surviving Aramaic dialects became "dialects of Arabic", and they're much, much closer to it on in the family. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure your consonant correspondences aren't as bad as people say they are as it's generally assumed proto-semitic (and thereby Akkadian) consonants were more strong (i.e. affricates where now there are fricatives, ejectives where now are emphatic, etc.) then our working reconstructions actually provide. Like honestly what on earth is this about.
I think it's nice that I can now no longer count the amount of extant semitic conlangs online with just one of my hands. My only complaint is with the orthography but that's aesthetic more than anything else.
What substantiates this nitpicking?