Etymologically, the
Name of Syria is originally an Iron Age derivation of
Assyria and until the
Seleucid Empire it referred solely to the historical Assyria which encompassed modern Northern Iraq, Northeast Syria and the area of Southeast Turkey north of these areas. In the
English language, the term "Syriac" is used as a
linguonym (language name) designating a specific variant of the
Aramaic language in relation to its regional origin in northeastern parts of
Ancient Syria, around
Edessa, which lay outside of the provincial borders of
Roman Syria. Since Aramaic was used by various Middle Eastern peoples such as
Assyrians,
Mandaeans,
Arameans and
Judeans, having several variants (
dialects), this specific dialect that originated in northeastern Syria became known under its regional (Syrian/Syriac) designation (
Suryaya). In English
scholarly literature, the term "Syriac" is preferred over the alternative form "Syrian", since the latter is much more
polysemic and commonly relates to
Syria in general. That distinction is used in English as a
convention and does not exist on the ancient
endonymic level. Several compound terms like "Syriac Aramaic", "Syrian Aramaic" or "Syro-Aramaic" are also used, thus emphasizing both the Aramaic nature of the language and its Syrian/Syriac regional origin.
Endonyms and exonyms Early native speakers and writers used several
endonymic terms as designations for their language. In addition to common endonym (native name) for the
Aramaic language (
Aramaya), another endonymic term was also used, designating more specifically the local Edessan dialect, known as
Urhaya, a term derived directly from the native Assyrian name for the city of
Edessa (
Urhay). Among similar endonymic names with regional connotations, term
Nahraya was also used. It was derived from
choronym (regional name)
Bet-Nahrain, an Aramaic name for
Mesopotamia. ,
Kerala,
India, 1799 Original endonymic (native) designations, for Aramaic more broadly (
Aramaya), and Edessan Aramaic in particular (
Urhaya), were later (starting from the 5th century) accompanied by another term,
exonymic (foreign) in origin:
Suryaya (Syrian/Syriac), adopted under the influence of a long-standing Greek custom of referring to speakers of Aramaic, be they Assyrian or Aramean as
Syrians. Among ancient Greeks, term "Syrian language" was used as a common designation for Aramaic language, and such usage was also reflected in Aramaic, by subsequent (acquired) use of the term "Suryaya" as the most preferred
synonym for "Aramaya" (Aramaic). Practice of interchangeable naming (Aramaya, Urhaya, Nahraya, and Suryaya) persisted for centuries, in common use and also in works of various prominent writers. One of those who used various terms was theologian
Jacob of Edessa (d. 708), who was referring to the language as "
Syrian or Aramaic" (Suryāyā awkēt Ārāmāyā), and also as
Urhāyā, when referring to Edessan Aramaic, or
Naḥrāyā when pointing to the region of
Bet-Nahrain (Aramaic term for
Mesopotamia). Plurality of terms among native speakers (ārāmāyā, urhāyā, naḥrāyā, and suryāyā) was not reflected in Greek and Latin terminology, which preferred the Syrian/Syriac designation, and the same preference was adopted by later scholars, with one important distinction: in western scholarly use, Syrian/Syriac label was subsequently reduced from the original Greek designation for the Aramaic language to a more specific (narrower) designation for Edessan Aramaic language, that in its literary and liturgical form came to be known as
Classical Syriac. That reduction resulted in the creation of a specific field of
Syriac studies, within
Aramaic studies. in Syriac language Preference of early scholars towards the use of the Syrian/Syriac label was also relied upon its notable use as an alternative designation for Aramaic language in the "
Cave of Treasures", long held to be the 4th century work of an authoritative writer and revered Christian saint
Ephrem of Edessa (d. 373), who was thus believed to be proponent of various linguistic notions and tendencies expressed in the mentioned work. Since modern scholarly analyses have shown that the work in question was written much later ( 600) by an unknown author, several questions had to be reexamined. In regard to the scope and usage of Syrian/Syriac labels in linguistic terminology, some modern scholars have noted that diversity of Aramaic dialects in the wider historical
region of Syria should not be overlooked by improper and unspecific use of Syrian/Syriac labels. Diversity of Aramaic dialects was recorded by
Theodoret of Cyrus (d. ), who accepted Syrian/Syriac labels as common Greek designations for the Aramaic language, stating that "the Osroënians, the Syrians, the people of the Euphrates, the Palestinians, and the Phoenicians all speak Syriac, but with many differences in pronunciation". Theodoret's regional (provincial) differentiation of Aramaic dialects included an explicit distinction between the "Syrians" (as Aramaic speakers of
Syria proper, western of
Euphrates), and the "Osroenians" as Aramaic speakers of
Osroene (eastern region, centered in
Edessa), thus showing that dialect of the "Syrians" (Aramaic speakers of proper Syria) was known to be different from that of the "Osroenians" (speakers of Edessan Aramaic). Native (
endonymic) use of the term
Aramaic language (Aramaya/Oromoyo) among its speakers has continued throughout the medieval period, as attested by the works of prominent writers, including the Oriental Orthodox Patriarch
Michael of Antioch (d. 1199).
Wider and narrower meanings , from the 2nd century AD, with inscriptions in early Edessan Aramaic (
Old Syriac) Since the proper dating of the
Cave of Treasures, modern scholars were left with no indications of native Aramaic adoption of Syrian/Syriac labels before the 5th century. In the same time, a growing body of later sources showed that both in Greek, and in native literature, those labels were most commonly used as designations for the Aramaic language, including its various dialects (both eastern and western), thus challenging the conventional scholarly reduction of the term "Syriac language" to a specific designation for Edessan Aramaic. Such use, which excludes non-Edessan dialects, and particularly those of
Western Aramaic provenience, persist as an accepted convention, but at the same time stands in contradiction both with original Greek, and later native (acquired) uses of Syrian/Syriac labels as common designations for the
Aramaic language. Those problems were addressed by prominent scholars, including
Theodor Nöldeke (d. 1930) who noted on several occasions that the term "
Syriac language" has come to have two distinctive meanings, wider and narrower, with the first (historical and wider) serving as a common
synonym for the Aramaic language as a whole, while other (conventional and narrower) designations only refer to Edessan Aramaic, also referred to more specifically as "
Classical Syriac". Noting the problem, scholars have tried to resolve the issue by being more consistent in their use of the term "
Classical Syriac" as a strict and clear scientific designation for the old literary and liturgical language, but the consistency of such use was never achieved within the field. , in Syriac script, from the 12th–13th century Inconsistent use of "Syrian/Syriac" labels in scholarly literature has led some researchers to raise additional questions, related not only to terminological issues but also to some more fundamental (methodological) problems, that were undermining the integrity of the field. Attempts to resolve those issues were unsuccessful, and in many scholarly works, related to the old literary and liturgical language, reduction of the term "
Classical Syriac" to "
Syriac" (only) remained a manner of convenience, even in titles of works, including encyclopedic entries, thus creating a large body of unspecific references, that became a base for the emergence of several new classes of terminological problems at the advent of the
informational era. Those problems culminated during the process of
international standardization of the terms "
Syriac" and "
Classical Syriac" within the
ISO 639 and
MARC systems. The term "
Classical Syriac" was accepted in 2007 and codified (ISO code: syc) as a designation for the old literary and liturgical language, thus confirming the proper use of the term. In the same time, within the MARC standard, code syc was accepted as designation for
Classical Syriac, but under the name "
Syriac", while the existing general code syr, that was until then named "
Syriac", was renamed to "
Syriac, Modern". Within ISO 639 system, large body of unspecific references related to various linguistic uses of the term "
Syriac" remained related to the original
ISO 639-2 code syr (
Syriac), but its scope is defined within the
ISO 639-3 standard as a
macrolanguage that currently includes only some of the
Neo-Aramaic languages. Such differences in classification, both terminological and substantial, within systems and between systems (ISO and MARC), led to the creation of several additional problems, that remain unresolved. Within linguistics, mosaic of terminological ambiguities related to Syrian/Syriac labels was additionally enriched by introduction of the term "
Palaeo-Syrian language" as a variant designation for the ancient
Eblaite language from the third millennium BC, that is unrelated to the much later Edessan Aramaic, and its early phases, that were commonly labeled as Old/Proto- or even Paleo/Palaeo-Syrian/Syriac in scholarly literature. Newest addition to the terminological mosaic occurred , when it was proposed, also by a scholar, that one of regional dialects of the
Old Aramaic language from the first centuries of the
1st millennium BC should be called "
Central Syrian Aramaic", thus introducing another ambiguous term, that can be used, in its generic meaning, to any local variant of Aramaic that occurred in central regions of Syria during any period in history. After more than five centuries of
Syriac studies, which were founded by western scholars at the end of the 15th century, main terminological issues related to the name and classification of the language known as Edessan Aramaic, and also referred to by several other names combined of Syrian/Syriac labels, remain opened and unsolved. Some of those issues have special
sociolinguistic and
ethnolinguistic significance for the remaining
Neo-Aramaic speaking communities. Since the occurrence of major political changes in the
Near East (2003), those issues have acquired additional complexity, related to legal recognition of the language and its name. In the
Constitution of Iraq (Article 4), adopted in 2005, and also in subsequent legislation, term "
Syriac" () is used as official designation for the language of
Neo-Aramaic-speaking communities, thus opening additional questions related to linguistic and cultural identity of those communities. Legal and other practical (educational and informational) aspects of the linguistic
self-identification also arose throughout Syriac-speaking
diaspora, particularly in European countries (Germany, Sweden, Netherlands). ==Geographic distribution==