HY RU EN
Asset 3

Loading

End of content No more pages to load

Your search did not match any articles

The Case for One Armenian Dialect

Among the few rifts that exist between people from the Armenian diaspora and citizens of the Republic of Armenia are the nuances of language.

There is an ongoing debate, although perhaps not well publicized, about which Armenian is “proper” — that which is taught and spoken throughout the diaspora, known as Western Armenian, or the Eastern Armenian dialect spoken by those born in the Armenian republic and elsewhere, like Iran. The notable differences between the two dialects, particularly in vernacular, are such that it can be quite difficult for Armenians from opposite sides of the world to understand one another.

Conversational Armenian spoken in the republic is often riddled with Russian words and phrases and also borrows some lexicon from Turkish as well as Farsi. Spoken Western Armenian, on the other hand, is often sprinkled with Arabic or Turkish expressions by those from the Middle East, while Armenians in the US may use English or Turkish words to name something, like food or clothing. Yet bring two people together, each speaking a different dialect, and you may find gaps in comprehension between them.

Unless pure, literary Armenian is spoken, which may not be the case between a tourist visiting Armenia and someone working in the service industry, the dialog could break down in frustration, with either side concluding that the other cannot speak properly. This phenomenon does exist, and rather than bringing Armenians together, it can have the opposite effect, pushing resentment and misunderstanding to the fore.

Read full article in Footprints

Comments (4)

Grish Begian
We all are Armenians in heart, language barrier is not important...we still can understand each others pain and sorrow!! remember when Monte was fighting for liberation of Artsakh he knew little Armenian, especially Gharabaghi Armenian!!
Vartan
Anybody with a modern education in linguistics can attest that purist approaches utterly fail. The history reveals this. It is quite unfortunate that the majority of Armenian linguists (i.e., from Armenia) are purists, because it deteriorates from the quality of education students in Armenia receive in Armenian language classes. Dialectal differences are not to be bashed, but rather embraced. Languages change over time. Futile fights against nature, especially for nationalistic purposes such as in this case with the Armenian language, are simply pathetic.
hagop sadanyans
I never was in armenia, frankly i tell you its not difficult for me to understand and with somebuddy of Armenia. Little effort, I mean if you work on both dialeckts soon you find out its so easy to undersatand each others.
Armen
I totally agree that we should have one spoken, written and read Armenian even if it means taking some parts of grammar from Eastern or Western or Iranian Armenian. However we should make every effort to make sure that the post-modern Armenian that we are talking about should be close to Grabar - Classical Armenian and never depart further from it. This work should be sponsored by the Government of Armenia and worked by scholars and linguists from Armenia and Diaspora. It should unite us further if the issue of orthographics 'Oughagrutyun' would be fixed with it as well, so that we would not argue and quarrel every time about a 'ian' or a 'yan'. A unified language and orthography would make a stronger Armenia.

Write a comment

Hetq does not publish comments containing offensive language or personal attacks. Please criticize content, not people. And please use "real" names, not monikers. Thanks again for following Hetq.
If you found a typo you can notify us by selecting the text area and pressing CTRL+Enter