It is known, by contrast, that a variety of accounts from the Physiologus were embedded into several Amharic commentaries. Several pieces of evidence prove that for most zoonyms treated in the native vocabularies a derivation from the Scriptures is to be privileged. The influence of the small naturalistic treatise on the sawāsǝw compilations appears far less significant than previously believed. This paper intends to offer an unprecedented evaluation of the role of the Physiologus as a literary source for both traditions. The Ethiopian native lexicographic corpus (the so-called sawāsǝw) and the traditional commentaries (the ʾandəmtā corpus) are intended to explain, with different strategies and expectations, the meaning of poorly understandable Gǝʿǝz words and canonical or non-canonical passages.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |