That it pattern is indicative regarding borrowing, in lieu of language change
Hoberman (1989, 6-7) summarizes and you will runs new categories out of Maclean and you may Cohen
Thomason and Kaufman (1988, 78-91) suggest a correlation between your items and you will concentration of contact ranging from languages and also the types of determine and that result. The types of changes which happen to be utilized in Neo-Aramaic appear to slide extremely without difficulty within their category 3 otherwise cuatro, that are described as hefty lexical credit, together with restricted borrowing out-of architectural issues. That’s, they things to a population that has constantly spoken Aramaic, however, whose language has evolved lower than pervading dictate from other communities, rather than one that keeps used Aramaic if you are sustaining top features of the unique tongue.(3)