Another questionnaire for the dialectology of Malta?

Dominique Caubet (INALCO – LaCNAD, Paris)

Daniel Attard (L-Università ta’ Malta)

Abstract

The Maltese language, which knows its origin to the first-wave form of Arabic in the mid-11th century, has several varieties around the Maltese archipelago. This paper seeks to see if Caubet’s (2002) questionnaire, which was designed for the dialectology of North African dialects of Arabic, could be useful for the description of these dialects. We chose to look into three varieties: Żurrieqi, Żejtuni, and Sannati. The answers given include information which is taken from recorded interviews with speakers of the three dialects. They are compared with both Standard Maltese and North African dialects of Arabic. The linguistic comparison between these varieties of Maltese and North African Arabic offers a different perspective about the basic linguistic branches which constitute the dialects, and broadens the tools which can be used to further study Maltese and its varieties.

10.5281/zenodo.16933175

1 Introduction

1.1 Motivation

In 2002, one of the authors of the present article published a questionnaire for linguists working on the dialectology of North African dialects of Arabic (Caubet 2002). It was inspired - as the title indicates - by very important previous studies and by David Cohen’s questionnaire (2000). Since then, it has been used to describe new varieties of dialects of Arabic.

The Maltese language has been considered historically as a “peripheral” dialect of Arabic. In this regard, this questionnaire, which was written from the point of view of a dialectologist of Arabic, might prove useful, especially for the collection of the old dialects, provided it is adapted to the Maltese context, and translated into English, as it is presented here. This is the first publication of the English version of the questionnaire.

The idea is to make a contribution in the building of the dialectology of Malta, adding to the new impetus given to the matter and following the pioneers, going back to Vassalli who distinguished five dialects at the end of the 18th cenrtury (Puech 1994: 10-15 and Aquilina 1995: 109),¹ Aquilina, Isserlin and Fenech (fieldwork 1964-1971), Alexander Borg (1977), Puech (1994), Camilleri and Vanhove (1999 and 2016), Ray Fabri (2010), Azzopardi-Alexander (2011), and very recently, several publications by Klimiuk and Lipnicka for Gozo (Klimiuk 2021, Klimiuk & Lipnicka 2019, 2022a, and 2022b, Lipnicka 2022, 2025). Only recently, presentations were made at the 8th Conference on Maltese Linguistics, in Bremen in 2023, or at the 15th conference of AIDA (Association Internationale de Dialectologie Arabe) that took place in Malta in 2024, by Ray Fabri, Michael Spagnol and Alexandra Vella, Maciej Klimiuk or by Bruno Herin & Martin Zammit.

The authors also want to thank the editors and the reviewers for their help in the redaction of this article.

1.2 Dialectology of Western Arabic

To sum up shortly the various types of dialects of Western Arabic, they are usually divided into two main groups, those associated to the first wave of the Arab conquest that took place from the 7th to mid-11th centuries, creating prestigious cities where Arabic developed, Kairouan, Constantine and Fez, Tlemcen. During those first years, a triangle formed in the countryside between those cities, situated inland, and sea ports: Sousse and Mahdia for Kairouan, Jijel and Collo for Constantine, Badis and Tangier for Fez, and Rashgun and Hunain, for Tlemcen. There developed two types of dialects, the prestigious city dialect and in the countryside, dialects that were often stigmatised, spoken by sedentary peasants and which William Marçais (1925: introduction) named “les parlers villageois”. We will call these “the first-wave dialects”, but they are often referred to as “Prehilali”, in reference to what came next, i.e. the arrival of a number of Bedouin tribes coming from Arabia and Egypt from 1050, known under the name of Banu Hilal and Banu Solaym.

They brought their Bedouin dialects to the Maghrib, and within two hundred years they were widely spread across to the Atlantic. The second-wave dialects that arrived three hundred years later, were more conservative, and had had less contact with Amazigh.

Arabic, in its first-wave form, was spoken outside North Africa proper, in regions where it is now extinct, The Andalus, Sicily and Pantelleria, but also in the Maltese Archipelago where it has survived and evolved until the present times.

The viewpoint of a dialectologist of North African (henceforth: NA) dialects, bearing in mind the points of variation to be expected, as well as the characteristics of what was called the “peripheral dialects” and the circumstances of peripherality might prove interesting.

1.3 Maltese dialectology

In the Maltese islands, Joseph Aquilina, after working for years with Benedikt Isserlin on an atlas of the Maltese dialects collected from 1964 to 1971, wrote an article explaining that the publication had come to a hold after a first volume (Aquilina et al. 1981), where he quotes “Personal communication from Isserlin to Aquilina, 16 January 1995” about the Maltese situation (Aquilina 1995: 107):

The language thus developed occurs moreover in two essential guises: the standard Maltese spoken by the educated - the literary language - is juxtaposed with non-literary dialectal Maltese at home, essentially in the villages (though also found in the towns). This latter form of speech, representing old traditions, is again subdivided: Gozitans speech differs from the spoken Maltese of the main island (it seems indeed to go back to somewhat different traditions) and within each of the two main islands there are distinct local and regional dialectal variants which may sometimes cover hardly more territory than that of a single village.

In his conclusion, Aquilina (1995: 113) regrets that “some people still mistakenly consider dialectal peculiarities as forms of debased Maltese”. This state of mind leads to a situation where, as Fabri (2010: 804) puts it:

The Standard variety, often referred to by speakers as il-pulit ‘the polite language’, is the variety spoken in certain urban areas like Valletta, il-Ħamrun and Tas-Sliema. In contrast, a number of varieties, often referred to as l-imgħawweġ ‘the distorted language’, are spoken in different areas.

One must say that the standard variety is nowadays spoken across all villages, whereas the dialects are restricted to certain parts of the Maltese islands. There is also the use of the adjective raħli, which resonates with Marçais’s (1925) “villageois” label, as mentioned by Gilbert Puech (1994: 17).

Given the influence of the educational system and media, Standard Maltese (henceforth: SM) is no longer restricted to particular areas, and for various sectors of the population, especially children and young adults, SM has become their native variety of Maltese. Therefore, there are areas such as Tas-Sliema and il-Ħamrun which are associated only with SM, whereas rural areas like Ħal Għargħur, il-Mosta, l-Imġarr and Ħaż-Żebbuġ are associated both with SM and with the local dialects.

If Gozo has been chosen because the dialects seemed more vibrant there (Aquilina et al. 1981, Aquilina 1995, Klimiuk 2021, Klimiuk & Lipnicka 2021, 2022a, and 2022b, Lipnicka 2019 and 2025), other parts of the country offer similarly interesting fields of investigation (we chose two dialects from Malta and one from Gozo).

Our aim is only to test the validity of Caubet’s questionnaire on a few samples collected by Attard in 2025, for studies to come. Given the limited number of participants and the lack of depth required to satisfy qualitative research, this study is in no way representative of the populations who speak the dialects we chose, but it still points out general differences between these dialects and SM.

1.4 Data collection in 2025

1.4.1 General

For the collection of data, it was decided that the best method was by recording participants having a conversation about five topics related to the Maltese lifestyle. A short presentation with five photos was exhibited during the conversation to serve as a visual prompt. In order to decrease the effect of the observer’s paradox on the informants, a proficient speaker of each dialect was chosen to be the interviewer and moderator of the conversation. One of the authors recorded the conversations, but didn’t interfere in the discussion, except in the ones of Żejtuni to remind the informants of some names and nicknames which they didn’t remember during the conversation. The interviews were conducted in the informants’ house or a place in their own village, so as to avoid removing the participants from a familiar environment. Our heartfelt thanks go to Mr Emmanuel Aquilina, Mr Frank Fenech, Mr Jurgen Portelli, Mr Emanuel Vella, Ms Antonella Vella Muskat and Ms Nicole Zammit, who offered their precious help in finding participants and/or acting as interviewers and moderators of the discussions in dialect. We extend our gratitude to the informants who did a sterling job in keeping up a natural and flowing discussion in their respective dialects

One of the authors, before recording the conversation, dedicated some time to speak with the informers about various topics, such as Maltese, the weather and traditions. This was done to help diminish the uneasiness the informers might have felt before the interview.

1.4.2 Choice of topics

The five topics chosen to prompt and aid the discussion were: Carnival in Malta, Lent and Good Friday, Malta in the past, family and traditional activities, and the construction industry. These topics were chosen because they are some of the most popular topics which easily spark conversations.

1.4.3 Choice of dialects

Two dialects, Żejtuni and Żurrieqi, were chosen from Malta, and one dialect, Sannati, was chosen from Gozo. The three dialects were mainly chosen on account of their geographical position in the Maltese archipelago. Żejtun is an old village situated in the South East of Malta, whereas Żurrieq, another old village, is found in the South West of Malta. Ta’ Sannat, on the other hand, is a small village situated in the central West part of Gozo. One of the authors recorded one conversation in Sannati, two in Żurrieqi and two in Żejtuni (see Figure 1 below).

1.4.4 Choice of participants

The only criteria which were used for the selection of participants was their fluency in the dialect. A total of 13 participants were chosen: 3 of them pertaining to the pilot study which was conducted on the dialect of Rabat, Gozo, and the remaining 8 for the three main dialects. 11 participants were male, and 2 were female. Ages ranged from 22 to 82, however, out of 11 participants, 2 were under 30. The rest were over 40.

Whenever possible, members of the same family were chosen to participate in the study. In any other case, closely related friends were chosen for the conversation.

1.4.5 Ethics

Since the method used to collect data involved recording a conversation, an “Audio Recording Consent Form” was presented to and signed by each and every informer prior to the interview. The informers wrote their name and date of birth, and they consented for their voice to be used in the study. They agreed that the recordings, any reproduction of the recordings and their use were to remain the property of the authors, and that the recordings could be used in conferences, articles and other publications by the authors. The informers were given the possibility to allow the authors to reveal their names in the study or keep them anonymous.

1.4.6 Pilot study

A pilot study was conducted on the dialect of Rabat, Gozo. For this study, the author who conducted research prepared a series of questions about families, traditions, habits and other prominent topics. Although the interviewer managed to moderate a conversation with two family members, it was noticed that the conversation wasn’t engaging enough, and the informers sounded that they were finding it difficult to carry on with the conversation.

After conducting the interview, the author who recorded the interview decided to conduct the other dialect interviews with two major changes: 1. using photos related to the particular village as prompts, 2. moderating a pre-interview discussion with the participants to lessen their anxiety during the interview.

1.4.7 The questionnaire

In the next section, we present the answers to the questionnaire as it was originally published (Caubet 2002), translated into English, but using the same numbering. Whenever a question did not seem relevant for the Maltese situation, we skipped it but did not change the original numbers.

2 Phonetics [Caubet 2002 1]

The phonetic system of Maltese in its standard form has been completely rearranged vis-à- vis the first-wave dialects, which we will take as a basis of comparison, since they are already the most innovative. Since we are dealing with dialects, we will examine some features that are common with SM, and others that will be apart. A general tendency, common with first-wave dialects, is the unvoiced pronunciation of /q/ and the dropping of interdentals. In the dialects one should try to analyse the variation in the realisation of /r/ (Puech 1994: 18). Otherwise, the trend will be - along with the peripheral dialects - towards the merging of certain consonants (we will examine to what extent in dialects), like the three voiceless fricatives /h/ /ḥ/ /ḫ/ (laryngeal, pharyngeal and post-velar) in a new phoneme whose realisation is one of the variables; the loss of the emphatic phonemes and the confusion with non-emphatic correspondent, /ṣ/ and /s/ > /s/, /ḍ/ and /d/ > /d/, /ṭ/ and /t/ > /t/. The fate of phonemes ghayn /ġ/ and /ʕ/ will be subject to variation in the dialects, since they have been elided in SM (Vanhove 2016).

2.1 Consonants [Caubet 2002 1.1]

2.1.1 Realisation of qāf [Caubet 2002 1.1.1]

The historical qāf is mostly pronounced [ʔ], like in the dialects of old cities like Fez or Tlemcen, and in several Middle-Eastern dialects.

In some cases, the etymological qāf is realised as a [g]: giref ‘to scratch’, germed ‘to germinate’, geddum ‘chin’.

Qāf is not articulated by the Żejtuni, Żurrieqi and Sannati speakers. As in SM, it is generally realised as a [ʔ].

There are some speakers in Kottonera and Xewkija and Rabat, Gozo who pronounce [q], e.g. [ˈqɐllɪ] ‘he told me’, [ˈzɐqqɪ] ‘my stomach’ (Birgu), [tqɪːk] ‘flour’ (Xewkija, Gozo), [ˈdɐqqɐ] (Rabat, Gozo). For historical examples, see Aquilina & Isserlin (1965).

2.1.2 Realisation of ġayn and ʕayn [Caubet 2002 1.1.2]

In SM orthography, the digraph <għ> is used to represent both the etymological /ġ/ and /ʕ/, two historical phonemes which, apart from a few dialects, have been either elided or else changed into other phonemes. In the case of /ʕ/, it is realised as a [h] (ħasel, ‘he washed’), [g] (gelgel, ‘he streamed down’), or as a zero phoneme (∅), għani ‘rich’. In other cases, the elision of /ġ/ and /ʕ/ leads to a diphthongisation of the following vowel. When historical /ʕ/ merged with historical /h/, it is realised as [hh]; word-final <għ> represents the realisation [h].

We found no evidence of the realisation of /ġ/ and /ʕ/ in Żejtuni and Sannati, however, there was a particular participant from the Żejtuni dialect who pronounced the word bagħal [baʔal] ‘mule’ with a glottal stop in the position of the etymological /ʕ/ which is omitted in SM. In Żurrieqi, on the other hand, one of the speakers pronounced the pharyngeal fricative [ʕ] in (1):

1. ken għamel waħdæ
   kɛn ˈʕɐmɛl ˈwɐhdæ
   ‘He did one’

Apart from the high frequency attributed to the fricative and the changes in formants from [ʕ] to the following vowel [ɐ], the presence of [ʕ] is also proven by the short [ɐ], which is allongated in SM and other dialects [ˈɐːmɛl].

2.1.3 Realisation of kāf [Caubet 2002 1.1.3]

The etymological kāf is realised [k], although in final position, there are cases of shift from [k] to [ʔ] like in serduk > serduq ‘rooster’, that are so well established that even SM orthography reflects it. Some words of Arabic origin, such as kagħak ‘a type of pastry’ and daħak ‘to laugh’, also have [ʔ] variants in SM and other dialects. In some loan words, like qanpiena ‘bell’ (< Italian campana) which originally had a [k], this shift is attested word-initially as well.

Żejtuni speakers kept consistent with the articulation of [k], whereas Żurrieqi and Sannati speakers used the [ʔ] variants on one occasion.

2.1.4 Realisation of bā: [b] or [ḇ] (as in Anjra, Northern Morocco) [Caubet 2002 1.1.4]

This does not apply to Malta, where only the occlusive pronunciation is found. Devoicing occurs in final position and when preceding or following other unvoiced consonants: deheb [dɛːp] ‘gold’, ħabta [ˈhɐptɐ] ‘collision’.

2.1.5 Realisation of tā: [t] or [ţ] [ts] [ṯ], with various degrees of affrication (Prehilali) [Caubet 2002 1.1.5]

No affrication of the [t] in Maltese.

2.1.6 Realisation of dāl: [d] or [d^y] [ḏ]) [Caubet 2002 1.1.6]

There is no affrication of the /d/, but devoicing to [t] in SM, like in mbagħad ‘later’ - realised [mˈbɔːt] - and in pausal forms.

2.1.7 Realisation of ǧīm: [ž] [ǧ] [g]. In which phonetic context is there a [g] realization (as in MA gəzzār ‘butcher’, gləs ‘sit’, gəbṣ ‘plaster’)? [Caubet 2002 1.1.7]

Realised as [ǧ/ʤ]: ġobon ‘cheese’, ġurdien ‘mouse’.

Realised as [g] (in a context of lateral consonants): gżira ‘island’, girna ‘small hut built out of rubble out in the fields’.

2.1.8 Are there any interdentals, e.g. /ḏ/, /ṯ/, /đ̣/? Is there a shift from [ḏ] to [f]? (as in Tunisia or Algeria)? [Caubet 2002 1.1.8]

No interdentals in Maltese.

2.1.9 How is ḍād realised: [ḍ] [đ̣]? [Caubet 2002 1.1.9]

There are no interdentals and no emphatics in Maltese. The historical ḍād becomes [d].

2.1.10 Realisation of rā: [r] [ṛ] [ɹ̥]? Are there two phonemes [ṛ] and [r]? (emphatic non emphatic)? Is there a fricative pronunciation, like in the dialects of old cities (Fez, Jews of Algiers) (Cohen 1912) [Caubet 2002 1.1.10]?

In NA Arabic, the main phoneme is emphatic /ṛ/, and gets disemphatised in some contexts. Since there is no emphasis left in Maltese, we can only rely on the quality of the vowels. For example, tara ‘you see’ has no imāla, which implies the existence of a /ṛ/ at some stage.

On the other hand, there are words where [r] can be emphatic in other NA dialects, but they still have an imāla in SM: driegħ [drɪːh] ‘arm’ = NA draʕ; mistrieħ [mɪsˈtrɪːh] ‘rest’ = NA mertāḥ ‘rested, at ease’, ġrieħi [ˈdʒrɪːhɪ] ‘wounds’ = NA žeṛḥa ‘a wound’. But there is no opposition nowadays between a [r] and a [ṛ], e.g. kbira [ˈgbiːrɐ] ‘big f.’, krieh [krɪːh] ‘he became ugly’.

In the following tables, words with various types of [r] in the three dialects are compared with SM and MA. In some cases, the emphasis in MA is lost completely in the dialects, but leaves traces in the quality of the vowels surrounding it in SM: emphatic bḥeṛ (MA) > baħar (SM) > beħer (Żejtuni).

Are they back vowels resulting from emphasis contamination (see [Caubet 2002 1.1.14]), like [a], [o], or front or middle ones like [e] or [u]?

Case 1: Emphatic [ṛ] in NA dialects where [a] is preserved in SM

Case 2: No emphatic /r/ in NA

Recently, a new trend has emerged where younger Maltese pronounce the trill less strongly. This came out from a study Mitterer (2025) conducted among younger and older participants to determine which of the four rhotics are used in Maltese. The following rhotic sounds have been found in Maltese: the alveolar trill [r], the alveolar tap [ɾ], the alveolar approximant [ɹ] and the lateral fricative [ɺ].

The most common rhotics in the three dialects were the [ɹ] and [ɺ], and they occurred mostly in geminate contexts, such as jitharrae [jɪˈtɐ:ɺɺæ] ‘to be worn out’. Since there were only a handful of participants for each dialect, it would be premature to suggest that certain rhotics are more abundant in one dialect or another. At this stage, one can only say that there does not seem to be a particular distribution of rhotics in the dialects, because even a word like the SM tara [ˈtɐːrɐ] ‘to see (2/3sg.ipfv)’ is realised with a [ɾ] in Żejtuni and an [ɹ] in Sannati.

2.1.11 Is there a dropping of the hā (as in Tunisian Judeo-Arabic or Muslim Arabic of Tlemcen)? Is it generalised? If not, in which position? Only for affixes? [Caubet 2002 1.1.11]

In NA first-wave dialects, the hā is often dropped. This is also the case in SM where in the SM orthography, the letter <h> represents etymological /h/, but the actual sound is generally no longer present. Word-initially and in the middle of the word, this results either in diphthongization, as in ħalliha [hɐlˈlija] ‘leave (2sg.imp) her’, or in the lengthening of the preceding/ vowel, as in huwa [ˈʊːwɐ] ‘he’ or deheb [dɛːp] ‘gold’, etc. The one major exception to this is the end of the word, where the etymological hā represented by <h> is realised as a [h] or [ħ]: ħallih [hɐlˈlɪːh/hɐlˈlɪːħ] ‘(2sg.imp) him’, bih [bɪːh/bɪːħ] ‘with him’, etc. Etymological clusters of [ġ] or [ʕ] + [h] result in [ħħ]: tagħha ‘hers’ (< ta’ + -ha) [ˈtɐħħa].

In Żejtuni, Żurrieqi and Sannati, the hā is dropped in the same contexts as in SM and it is realised as a [h] at the end of the word. It seems that the realisation of hā as a [hh] which is becoming common in SM does not occur in Żurrieqi, probably because of the different vowelisation.

2.1.12 Is there a devoicing of the [ḍ] to [ṭ] (as in certain “parlers villageois” (Marçais 1950) under the influence of Berber) or the reverse [ṭ] > [ḍ]? [Caubet 2002 1.1.12]

There are no emphatics in Maltese.

2.1.13 Sibilants and palato-alveolar fricatives: is there a confusion of sibilants and palato-alveolar fricatives? [š] and [s] in [s] or [s’] (intermediate affricated realisation) or [ž] and [z] in [z] or in [ź]? Are there any impossible combinations inside the word: [s]/[z] + [š]/[ž], [s]/[z]+ [s]/[z], [s]/[z] + [s]/[z], [š]/[ž] + [š]/[ž]? How is this solved? How do you say ‘two’: žūž, zūǧ, zūz? [Caubet 2002 1.1.13]

In SM, [s] and [ʃ] can be merged in certain contexts, especially in the case of negatives of verbs which end in [s]: ma messx ‘he didn’t touch’ can be pronounced either as [mɐˈmɛss] or [mɐˈmɛʃʃ].

No confusion between [ž] and [z].

The word ‘two’ in NA is derived from ‘pair, marriage’ (compared to ṯnīn in the Middle East), realised as [žūž], [zūǧ] or [zūz] according to the dialect: SM żewġ (variant ġiex, on which see [Caubet 2002 3.4.6.3]), Sannati żiġt ’two.

2. Ħa nixtrej żiġt ifniek
   ha ˈniʃtrɛj zɪtʃt ɪfˈnɪːk
   ‘I am going to buy two rabbits’

2.1.14 Is there a confusion of [h], [ḥ], and [ḫ]? How is it realised? Merging of the three voiceless fricatives /*h, ḥ, ḫ/ (laryngeal, pharyngeal and post-velar) in a new phoneme [Caubet 2002 1.1.14]

It was noticed in all three dialects that the laryngeal fricative [h] is always realised word-finally. Words which etymologicall had a /ḫ/ seem to be generally pronounced with a [ḥ] (aḫada > ḥūdu), with the exception of the Sannati dol-aħħar ‘nowadays’, which was pronounced [dɔˈlɐχχɐɹ]. This merging is characteristic of some peripheral dialects of Arabic, including Maltese and the extinct Pantelleria Arabic (Brincat 1977 and 2021, Caubet 2025 and forthcoming).

2.1.15 Have certain consonants (/h/ /ʕ/ /ġ/, /q/, /ḥ/, /ṭ/, /ḍ/, /ṣ/, /đ̣/) been ellided? Particularly relevant for Maltese where the emphatics have disappeared along with /ʕ, ġ, ḥ/, generally developing new vowels in their place [Caubet 2002 1.1.15]

Historically, Maltese lost the emphatic consonants it inherited from Arabic. Nonetheless, Puech (2018) notices some influences of the emphatic consonants on phonemes which surround them, even in contemporary Maltese. For instance, “forms whose Arabic etymon had an emphatic consonant are characterized by stem vocalism a” (Puech 2018: 15).

To the well-known case of the emphatics - /ṭ/, /ḍ/, /ṣ/, /đ̣/ - we will add the less-described ellision of /ṛ/ and that of back consonants, i.e. /h/, /ʕ/, /ġ/, /ḫ/, /q/, /ḥ/.

Since emphatic and guttural consonants are imāla inhibitors (Owens 2006: 218), a close look at the distribution of imāla in the three dialects would help us determine both the historical emphatic consonants in Maltese and also the etymological /ʕ/ and /ġ/ represented in SM orthography as the digraph <għ>.

2.1.16 Are there any new phonemes e.g. /ṛ/, /ẓ/, /ḷ/, /ṃ/, /ḅ/, /v/ or /p/ or new vowels (see below)? [Caubet 2002 1.1.16]

Diachronically, Maltese borrowed sounds from Romance languages [p], [v], [ts], [dz] (both last ones represented as <z> in SM orthography) and [tʃ] (<ċ> in SM orthography), which are also a part of the phonetic inventory of the dialects.

2.1.17 Assimilation. Is there assimilation of the [l] of the article with letters other than the solar consonants (e.g. [ž], [b], [m], [q]…)? Is there assimilation of the [l] inside the word? (as with qelb ‘heart’> qebb in Jijel)? [Caubet 2002 1.1.17]

Apart from the assimilation of the [l] of the article with <d, n, r, s, t, x, ż> (referred to as “solar consonants” in the Arabic grammatical tradition), the article merges with <ċ> (iċ-ċwievet ‘the keys’) and <z> (iz-zalzett ‘the sausage’). The same type of assimilation is found in all three dialects - Sannati (3), Żejtuni (4) and Żurrieqi (5).

3. Tajniehom bis-sēq
   give.pst-1pl:do.3pl with:def-foot
   ‘We took them for granted’

4. dut-tratt
   this.m:def-picture
   ‘This picture’

5. Fir-rezzett
   in:def-farmhouse
   ‘In the farmhouse’

In SM, for instance, jiftħilna ‘he opens to us’ is occasionally pronounced as [jɪfˈthɪnnɐ] where [ln] > [nn]. This type of regressive assimilation was also noted in Żejtuni jgħidinnae [jɐjˈdɪnnæ] ‘he tells us’ (SM: jgħidilna) and in Żurrieqi kenna [ˈkɛnnɐ] ‘we had’ (SM: kellna).

2.2 Vowels [Caubet 2002 1.2]

2.2.1 Long vowels and vowel length differences [Caubet 2002 1.2.1]

Żejtuni and Sannati share the same number of long vowels (9), with Żurrieqi having 8, since it lacks the [uː]. In certain contexts, all varieties have the same vowel distribution (e.g. the [a] in għandi [ˈɐːndɪ] ‘I have’. In other contexts, there are different dialectal distributions correspoding to the [ɐː] of SM, e.g. Jannur [jɐnˈnʊːr] ‘January’ (SM: Jannār); Ta’ Sannot [tɐ sɐnˈnɔːt] ‘Village in Gozo’ (SM: Ta’ Sannat); kapoċi [kɐˈpɔːtʃɪ] ‘capable’ (SM: kapāċi).

The three dialects are phonetically richer than SM, which has 7 long vowels. One of the long vowels, [ʊː], is an allophone of [uː], and occurs before a /h/ or /ʔ/, e.g. fuq ‘above, up’ and ruħ ‘soul, self’.

2.2.1.1 How many vocalic phonemes are there? Long or medium vowels /ā/, /ī/, /ū/? Are there others like /ē/ /ō/)? Do the latter correspond to former diphthongs? Or are they linked to the disappearance/elision of consonants? [Caubet 2002 1.2.1.1]

The three dialects surpass SM in the vocalic phonemes, with Sannati having 16,⁶ Żejtuni 15 and Żurrieqi 14.

Various long vowels occur when there is the elision of a historical consonant such as /ʕ/, /ġ/ and /h/, e.g. deheb [dɛːp] ‘gold’ and bogħod [bɔːt] ‘away’. Words with etymological diphthongs are realised with a long vowel in SM, e.g. jūm ‘day’ (< Ar. jawm, MA jūm) and għalīkom ‘for you ((pl))’ (< Ar. ʕalajkum, MA ʕalīkum). In some cases, the transition from diphthong to long vowel happens in SM, but not in the dialects, e.g. Żurrieqi fowq [fɔwʔ] ‘up’ (MA: fūq/fawq; SM: fūʔ). The table below shows the vowel distribution in all three dialects compared to SM. Note the occurrence of diphthongs in the dialects – especially [ɛj] and [ɔw], and more rarely, the Sannati [ɪə] – as opposed to the long vowels in SM. Additionaly, Żejtuni has a short [ʊ] where SM has long [ɔː].

2.2.1.2 Do the long vowels correspond to the loss or change of consonant phonemes? [Caubet 2002 1.2.1.2]

As said in 1.2.2, the long vowels do correspond also with the loss of consonant phonemes. For example, the word hena [ˈɛːnɐ] ‘happiness’ was pronounced [ˈhɛnɐ] in old Maltese. The correspondence between long vowels and the loss of consonant phonemes is also observed in all the dialects, Sannati (6), Żejtuni (7) and Żurrieqi (8).

6. X’tagħmil fil-Karnivol?
   ˈʃtɐːmɪl fɪlkɐrnɪˈvɔːl
   ‘What do you do during Carnival?’

7. miftehmin
   mɪftɛːmiːn
   agreed.pprt-pl

8. għandhe
   ˈɐːndæ
   have.pres-3sgf

When historical phonemes are either pronounced or else realised as another phoneme, their neighbouring vowels are shortened in Żurrieqi (9) and Źejtuni (10).

9. għamel
   ˈʕɐmɛl
   do.pfv-3sgm

10. bagħal
    ˈbɐʔɐl
    ˈmule

2.2.1.3 Give minimal pairs to establish the existence of the various vocalic phonemes [Caubet 2002 1.2.1.3]

2.2.2 Imāla (the tendency to the pronunciation of /a/ towards [e] and [i]) [Caubet 2002 1.2.2]

2.2.2.1 Is there imāla at word ending? Inside the word? [Caubet 2002 1.2.2.1]

The imāla occurs mostly in Żejtuni, both at the end of the word and inside the word. It occurs less frequently in Żurrieqi, and seldomly in Sannati.

2.2.2.2 Is imāla blocked in certain consonant contexts? In which positions? [Caubet 2002 1.2.2.2]

Imāla is inhibited when the last vowel is preceded by a <għ> (even though it’s a historic phoneme), e.g. Żejtuni erba’ [ˈɛːɾbɐ] ‘four’, ġimgħa [ˈdʒɪmɐ] ‘week’, siġra [ˈsɪdʒɹɐ] ‘tree’.

It doesn’t occur either after a [j] although there is a <għ> at the beginning of the word: Żejtuni għulja [ˈʊːljɐ] ‘hill’, Sannati famulja [fɐˈmʊljɐ] ‘family’, and generally even after a [r], as we have seen in [Caubet 2002 1.1.14] because of etymological [ṛ]: Żejtuni siġra [ˈsɪdʒɹɐ] ‘tree’, Żurrieqi oħra [ˈɔhɾɐ] ‘another one (f.)’, Sannati tura [ˈtʊːɾɐ] ‘to see’ (2/3sgf.ipfv).

2.2.2.3 Is it 1st degree imāla (/ä/ IPA [e] or [ē]), 2nd degree [ī], or 3rd degree [iə]? [Caubet 2002 1.2.2.3]

In SM, the etymological [ā] is represented by the digraph <ie> with the phonetic value [ɪː]; this is 2nd degree imāla. There may be cases in dialects where the etymological [ā] is realized as a diphthong, producing what could be called a 3rd degree imāla, however, none have been found yet.

In SM, imāla and particularly 2nd degree imāla is very common: [ā] to [ɪː] (represented as <ie>). It is mainly prevented when preceded by [hh], e.g. baħħar [bɑhˈhɐr] ‘to sail’, baħħar [bɑhˈhɐːr] ‘sailor’, duħħan [dʊhˈhɐːn] ‘smoke’, saħħar [sɐhˈhɐːɾ] ‘sorcerer’, and by elided emphatic and back consonants (see table in 1.1.14).

2.2.3 Diphthongs [Caubet 2002 1.2.3]

2.2.3.1 Are there any diphthongs: mšayt, fqay, ḥawma, fayn, layn, xayṭ, mawt, lawn, ḥayṭ…? Give examples of words from all grammatical categories [Caubet 2002 1.2.3.1]

The following table lists examples of diphthongs in all three dialects along with the grammatical category (PoS) of the example word.

Sannati has the largest number of diphthongs (8), followed by Żurrieqi and Żejtuni. Apart from diphthongisation at the beginning of the word (ħejjin, Għawdix, etc.) which was observed in all three dialects, Żurrieqi and Sannati also exhibited pausal diphthongisation of etymologically long vowels /ī/ and /ū/, both in closed and open syllables (Lipnicka, 2022: 230): Sannati kulowr [kʊˈlɔwɹ] ‘colour’ (SM: kulūr), Żurrieqi ħaxejx [hɐˈʃɛjʃ] ‘vegetables’ (SM: ħaxīx).

2.2.3.2 Do these diphthongs appear in all categories of words (verbs, substantives, grammatical words)? Are they systematic? [Caubet 2002 1.2.3.2]

Diphthongs appear mostly in nouns, especially verbal nouns derived from hollow verbs: sejba ‘finding’, mawra ‘outing’, sejħa ‘calling’, etc., in the 1st and 2nd person singular and plural perfective of Arabic verbs of the C1C2j/għ type, like imxejt ‘I/you walked’, smajt ‘I/you heard’, urejt ‘I/you showed’, etc., and of verbs derived from Romance and English: ipparkjajt ‘I parked’, ittestjajtu ‘you (pl) tested’, elenkajt ‘I listed’, etc.

In SM, diphthongs can also result from the elision of etymological /ġ/ and /ʕ/ (represented in the orthography as <għ>), like [ɛj]/[ɐj] in tiegħi [ˈtɪjɛj/ˈtɪjɐj] ‘mine’, and [ɔw]/[ɐw] in miegħu [ˈmɪjɔw/ˈmɪjɐw] ‘with him’. This type of diphthongisation is also found in all three dialects. The dialects are, however, more systematic, as a single diphthong occurs here: [ɐw] is favoured by the Żejtuni speakers, tiegħaw, miegħaw, whereas in Sannati, [ɛw] is used in the same contexts, tiegħew, miegħew.

2.2.3.3 Is there a diphthong resulting from imāla ([ā]> [iə])? [Caubet 2002 1.2.3.3]

Maltese orthography employs the sequence <ie> in words where /ā/ occurs in NA Arabic. This may be misleading, since today in SM the graphic sequence represents an [ɪː] (see [Caubet 2002 1.2.2.3] above), e.g.  NA bāb ‘door’ is bieb in Maltese (realised [bɪːp]).⁸

2.2.4 Short vowels [Caubet 2002 1.2.3]

2.2.4.1 How many short vowels (phonemes) are there? Has the length opposition disappeared? Several cases exist in NA, which one is represented? [Caubet 2002 1.2.4.1]

• One short vowel: /ə/
• Two short vowels: /ə/ (merging of ĭ and ŭ): /ă/; or else /ə/ (merging of ĭ and ă): /ŭ/
• Three short vowels: /ă/ /ŭ/ /ĭ/

The table below contains the short vowels in SM and in the three dialects under investigation.

As with long vowels, the three dialects are phonetically richer than SM, since Sannati and Żurrieqi have seven short vowels in their vocalic inventory, Żejtuni has six and SM only has five.

2.2.4.2 Give the minimal pairs establishing the list of short phonemes [Caubet 2002 1.2.4.2]

3 Syllabic structure [Caubet 2002 2]

3.1 What is the pattern for regular verbs at 3rd pers. masc. of the suffixed conjugation? [Caubet 2002 2.1]

1st verbal form is patterned C1vC2vC3, e.g. kiteb ‘he wrote’.

Unlike NA Arabic, Maltese and its dialect maintain 2 short vowels, including one in an open syllable: kiteb (NA¹⁰ kteb), raqad ‘to sleep’ (NA rqed), seraq ‘to steal’ (NA sreq).

3.2 For certain nominals, is there a pattern C1vC2C3? If so, is C2 a lateral consonant? [Caubet 2002 2.2]

Yes, e.g. SM kelb ‘dog’, bard ‘cold’, qalb ‘heart’, serp ‘snake’, ġenb ‘side’, ferq ‘a gap created when one combs his/her hair’.

In such case, C2 is indeed a lateral consonant, i.e. one of /l/, /r/ or /n/. There is also ħobż ‘bread’, with a sibilant as C3. This is similar to NA Arabic: ḫobz ‘bread’, kelb ‘dog’, berd ‘cold’, qelb ‘heart’, ferq ‘difference’, or ženb ‘side’.

It is different from the general pattern for regular nouns which, like the verbs (2.1), are usually formed with a short vowel in the first syllable: baħar ‘sea’.

Table below contains examples of nouns in the three dialects, SM and MA.

3.3 When a vocalic suffix is added to a word in C1C2vC3, what happens? [Caubet 2002 2.3]

In SM, like in the regular pattern verbs, the pattern C1vC2vC3 is adopted with a short vowel in the first open syllable: għadam ‘bones’ (NA ʕḍem), għoġol ‘calf’ (NA ʕžel). When a vocalic suffix –a is added the first short vowel is dropped: għadma ‘a bone’, għoġla ‘heifer’.

A similar phenomenon occurs when a collective noun forms a noun of unity: nemel ‘ants’- nemla ‘an ant’, naħal ‘bees’ - naħla ‘a bee’, ġebel ‘stones’ - ġebla ‘a stone’, basal ‘onions’ - basla ‘an onion’ (see sections on morphology below).

The following examples illustrate the phenomenon in all three dialects:

• Żejtuni: siġar ‘trees’ - siġra ‘a tree’, like in SM and NA šžeṛ ‘trees’ - šežṛa ‘a tree’
• Żurrieqi: qemħ ‘wheat’ - qemħae ‘a grain/the wheat plant’ (SM: qamħ - qamħa)
• Sannati: logħob ‘games’ - logħba ‘a game’, like in SM siġar

3.4 In words containing more than 3 consonants, does the short vowel disappear in an open syllable? [Caubet 2002 2.4]

Yes forming the plural of the prefixed conjugation: tikteb-tiktbu ‘he/you (pl) wrote’, għaġġel-għaġġlu (stress on first syllable) ‘he/they hurried’, lose the short vowel in an open syllable, whereas tiflaħ-tifilħu (stress on second syllable) ‘you endure’, retain it, thus adding another syllable: titilfu ‘you lose’, timirħu ‘you roam’, tidinbu ‘you commit sin’, taqilgħu ‘you will be to be rewarded’, tikinsu ‘you sweep’, tisirqu ‘you steel’.

• Żejtuni: jerfgħaw ‘they lift’ (SM: jerfgħu)
• Żurrieqi: jagħmil - jagħmly ‘he/they do’ ((SM: jagħmel - jagħmlu)
• Sannati: nitkellem - nitkellmy (SM: nitkellem - nitkellmu), jerġgħew jidħlu ‘they go back in’ (SM: jerġgħu jidħlu), nibżgħew għālēh ‘we take care of it’ (SM: nibżgħu għalih)

In SM, the short vowel of an open syllable also disappears in plurals or various nominals including adjectives and participles, and duals: imqalleb – imqallbin ‘turned’, imkisser – imkissrin ‘broken’, rkoppa – rkopptejn ‘knee’ - ‘knees (dual)’ (where /b/ is devoiced into [p]).

The same thing happens in all three dialects:

• Żejtuni: ramel (coll.) ‘sand’ - ramla ‘beach’ (but also a noun of unity, ‘one grain of sand’)
• Żurrieqi: ġebel (coll.) ‘stones’ - ġeblae (noun of unity) ‘a stone’
• Sannati: darba ‘once’ - darbtejn [dɐr’ptɛjn] (dual) ‘twice’.

3.5 Finally, what happens when a vocalic suffix is added to the 3sgf of the suffixed conjugation: kitbet + u? [Caubet 2002 2.5]

This is a very important point of variation in NA dialectology, which has four cases:

1. ḍəṛbtək (with sometimes the presence of a short vowel between C2 and C3: ḍəṛəbtək and a strong stress on the 2st syllable) (Tunisia)
2. more rarely: ḍṛəbtək (Jewish dialects of Fez, Sefrou, Algiers))
3. lengthening of the vowel; ḍəṛbātək
4. gemination of C2: ḍəṛbəttək (Fez, for example)

The 3rd person feminine singular of regular verbs in SM is kitbet. When adding the suffix pronouns –k or -u, a full vowel is inserted which reminds us of case 3 (lengthening) above: kitbitek ‘she wrote you’, or kitbitu ‘she wrote it’. See also għażlet + -u > għażlitu ‘she chose him’.

In verbs like kitbet ‘she wrote’, għażlet ‘she chose’, ħabbet ‘she loved’, etc., short vowel /e/ becomes /i/ when pronoun –u is added: kitbitu, għażlitu, ħabbitu kitbitu l-isem ‘she wrote the name’, urietu (√WRJ) ‘she showed him/it’ (see NA ḍəṛbātək above).

We did not find any examples in the recordings for any of the dialects.

4 Morphology [Caubet 2002 3]

4.1 Verbs [Caubet 2002 3.1]¹¹

4.1.1 Prefixed Conjugation (Imperfect) [Caubet 2002 3.1.1]

4.1.1.1 Regular verbs: for the 1st person, the plural is formed by adding a suffix –u/-ew [Caubet 2002 3.1.1.1]

4.1.1.2 Is there gender neutralisation in the 2nd person singular? [Caubet 2002 3.1.1.2]

Yes, there is gender neutralisation in the 2nd person singular: tikteb is used both for masculine and feminine.

In Sannati tura [ˈtʊːɾɐ] ‘you see’ is used for both gender (SM: tara); Żurrieqi tiġrej [ˈtɪdʒrɛj] ‘you run’ (SM: tiġri), tgħix [tɛjʃ] ‘you live’ (SM: tgħix), tagħmil [ˈtɐːmɪl] ‘you do’ (SM: tagħmel); Żejtuni tisma’ [ˈtɪsmɐ] ‘you hear’ (SM: tisma’).

4.1.1.3 Is there gender neutralisation in the plural (2nd and 3rd person)? [Caubet 2002 3.1.1.3]

No gender distinction in the plural of verbal conjugations.

4.1.1.4 Is there a preverbed conjugation in addition to the simple form? [Caubet 2002 3.1.1.4]

No preverbs for the prefixed conjugation in Maltese.

4.1.1.5 Paradigms [Caubet 2002 3.1.1.5]

The following is a paradigm for the prefixed conjugation of the verb kiteb ‘to write’ in SM.

For the dialects, we found the following:

• Żejtuni: jerfgħaw ‘they lift’, jgħajdu ‘they say’
• Żurrieqi: jagħmly ‘they do’, tgħejx ‘you/she lives’
• Sannati: nitkellmy ‘we speak’, tagħmil ‘you do/she does’

The following are verbs in the imperfect (2sg/3fsg, 2pl), covering all verbal forms in SM:

• 2/3sgf.ipfv: tikteb, timla, tmur (1), tgħallem (2), tqarar (3), titgħallem (5), titbierek (6), tinħasel (7), tiltaqa’ (8), tibjad (9), tistkerrah (10)
• 2pl.ipfv: tiktbu, timlew, tmorru (1), tgħallmu (2), tqarru (3), titgħallmu (5), titbierku (6), tinħaslu (7), tiltaqgħu (8), tibjadu (9), tistkerrhu (10)

One notices an interesting stress pattern allowing a 3 consonant clusters like tiktbu or tberflu (Żejtuni) like in Tunisian Arabic, where Moroccan would have tˈketbu with the stress on –ket-.

It is the same with dialects: Sannati jaqgħad (√QGħD); Żetjuni: neħseb (√ĦSB); Żurrieqi taħdim (√ĦDM)

The following table provides an overview of prefixed conjugation forms in the three dialects:

4.1.2 Imperative [Caubet 2002 3.1.2]

4.1.2.1 Is there an initial vowel in the imperative in verbs starting with 2 consonants? [Caubet 2002 3.1.2.1]

Yes: imxi, ‘go’, ikteb ‘write’, inża’ ‘undress’

The hollow verbs do not need an epenthetic vowel, given their syllabic structure: mur ‘go’, żur ‘visit’, sib ‘find’,

In the past, imperatives for derived forms had an initial vowel: itgħallem ‘learn’, istenbaħ ‘wake up’. Nowadays, the imperative is taught without an initial vowel: tgħallem ‘learn’, stenna ‘wait’, but ipparkja ‘park’, ittestja ‘test’.

4.1.2.2 How are the feminine and plural forms of the imperative for all types of verbs? [Caubet 2002 3.1.2.2]

There is no gender distinction in the imperative.

4.1.3 Suffixed Conjugation (Perfect) [Caubet 2002 3.1.3]

4.1.3.1 What is the 2nd person singular of the perfect? [Caubet 2002 3.1.3.1]

The 2nd person singular has no gender distinction and its form is identical to the 1st person: ktibt ‘I/you wrote’, stenbaħt ‘I/you woke up’.

• Sannati: kint ‘you were’ (SM: kont)
• Żejtuni: kunt ‘you were’ (SM: kont)
• Żurrieqi: bqojt ‘you remained’ (SM: bqajt)

4.1.3.2 Is there gender neutralisation of the suffixed conjugation in the singular? [Caubet 2002 3.1.3.2]

Yes, in the 1st and 2nd person: kont ‘I was, you were’.

4.1.3.3 Is there gender neutralisation in the plural of the suffixed conjugation? [Caubet 2002 3.1.3.3]

Yes, in all persons.

• Żejtuni: Jiġifieri kienu radmu kullox ‘That is, they buried everything’
• Sannati: Killix ħūdu l-flettijiet ‘The flats (fig.) took everything’
• Żurrieqi: Ħuti ħōdu tumna kull wijħid ‘My siblings took one tumoli of land each’

The following table provides an overview of suffixed conjugation forms in the three dialects:

Note Żurrieqi bigħitha ‘she sold it (f)’,

4.1.4 Weak verbs [Caubet 2002 3.1.4]

The weak verbs are those that have a vowel in their triliteral root, whether at the beginning, in the middle or at the end. In what follows, we discuss those weak verbs ending in a vowel and check how the adding of the plural –u suffix affects the verbal form.

4.1.4.1 What is the 3rd person plural of the Imperfect and the perfect? [Caubet 2002 3.1.4.1]

In SM in the imperfect of verbs with etymological /j/ as C3, the –u takes the place of the final -i to form the plural form (jibki > jibku). This is an important point of variation where dialects have reconstructed plural forms by adding the –u suffix instead of substituting it in verbs in C1vC2C2v: in the dialects, inaqqew(ha) ‘they weed (it f)’ (Żurrieqi).

It seems to be evolving in SM, where the 3pl.pfv used to end with an -u, e.g. daqqu t-tmienja ‘they rang 8 = it’s 8 o’clock’, but now it is becoming daqqew l-istrument ‘they played the instrument’.

This is very common in NA dialects where the plural forms of the 3pl; imperfect and perfect have been reconstructed. See the table below for an example from MA.

The jibku, jiġru forms seem unexpected in Maltese, because in NA, it is usually the most conservative second-wave dialects, i.e. the ʕrubi or Bedouin type, that form their verbal plurals with the -u suffix, as in jebku or jensu. This is interesting, since Maltese has little in common with the second-wave dialects.

4.1.4.2 What is the 3rd person feminine of the perfect? [Caubet 2002 3.1.4.2]

The table below contains the SM forms.

In all three dialects, bkiet is pronounced [pkɪːt] or [pkɛːt], with a long vowel with slightly different degrees of imāla.

4.1.4.3 What is the 2nd person plural of the perfect? [Caubet 2002 3.1.4.3]

Maltese has no gender distinction for the 2nd person singular, i.e. –t; the plural ending is –tu:

4.1.4.4 Verb kiel ‘to eat’ (verba primae hamzatae). Give the whole paradigm for this verb [Caubet 2002 3.1.5]

The two verbs with a hamza as the first consonant in Classical Arabic - kiel ‘to eat and ħa ’to take’ - have a special paradigm in NA dialects and in Maltese:

In Żurrieqi, the verb ħa ‘take’ has a truncation of the final [d], which affects its paradigm, namely the entirety of singular imperfect and the 3rd person masculine of the perfect (bold in the table below). The truncation of the final [d] is also found in SM and the other dialects. There is also a dialectal variation of the vowel for the dialects, where Żurrieqi has ħodt, instead of ħadt found in SM and the other two dialects.

4.1.5 Verb ra ‘to see’. Give the whole paradigm for this verb [Caubet 2002 3.1.6]

There is no imāla, most certainly due to the fact that the /r/ used to be emphatic /ṛ/ like in NA.

In NA Arabic, some dialects, like that of Tunis have maintained the verb ṛa for everyday use, most dialects use the verb šāf, ṛa being reserved to literary language.

There is dialectal variation in the conjugation of this verb: Żejtuni and Sannati have tūra for 2nd and 3rd person feminine, Żurrieqi has narō-h ‘I see it (m)’.

4.1.6 Paradigms Give the paradigms for imperfect and perfect for all verb types: sound (kteb), geminate (kebb ‘to pour’, šedd ‘to seize, to hold’), and according to the place of the vowel in the root, defective (mša ‘to go’), hollow (ṭāṛ ‘to fly’) and vowel-initial (ybes ‘to dry’, wsel ‘to arrive’) verbs [Caubet 2002 3.1.7]

The following paradigms are given for Żurrieqi by Mr Emanuel Aquilina (personal communication, 2025) for the verbs kiteb ‘write’ (sound verb), waqaf ‘stop’ (assimilated verb), dar ‘to turn round’ (hollow verb), mela ‘fill’ (defective verb), and daqq ‘to play (an instrument)’ (doubled verb).

4.1.7 Passive: how is the passive formed? With a prefix? Which one: t-/ttə-, n-, tn-, nt-? [Caubet 2002 3.1.8]

The passive is formed like in Arabic, by means of:

• the 5th form - twaqqa’ ‘it was demolished’
• the 7th form – nkiteb ‘it was written down’, inqabad ‘it was caught’

with either a prefix or the insertion of t- and -n- (for Morocco, see Aguadé 1994).

The passive is also formed analytically with the verb ġie ‘he came’ plus a past participle: e.g. ġie mibni ‘it was built (lit. it came built)’.

It is the same for the dialects: mtila ‘to be filled’ (Sannati, 8th form), jitharrae (Żejtun, 5th form) ‘to be worn out’.

One of the Żurrieqi speakers pronounced the verb xrajna ‘we bought’. This is either the result of the dropping of the [t] in the 8th form xtrajna (which, despite its morphology, is not passive), or else, it is the 1st form xara, which is not a common usage in SM.

4.1.8 Participles [Caubet 2002 3.1.9]

There are active and passive participles in Maltese like in Arabic.

There are only a hundred active participles left in Maltese. The main form for regular verbs is C1āC2vC3, with variation in the realisation of [a:] (mostly [i:] in SM). They are mainly used with verbs of movement or position (middle verbs), like rieqed ‘asleep’, nieżel ‘going down’, wieqaf ‘stationary, upright, vertical’. Other rare forms include: sejjer ‘going’, ġej ‘coming’, etc. The same can be presumably said of the dialects, but our recordings do not contain any of these forms

The past participles are formed with a prefix m-, _mi-_C1C2_u_C3 for regular verbs: kiteb – miktub ‘written’, sab ‘he found’ – misjub ‘he was found’.

For derived forms, the m- is prefixed to the verb, with a short vowel in the case of verbs starting with two consonants.: għallem > mgħallem ‘learned’, tkellem (5) > mitkellem ‘spoken’, sellef (5) – missellef ‘lent’, twieled (6) > mitwieled ‘born’, dbiel (9) > midbiel ‘withered’, stkerrah (10) > mistkerrah ‘loathed’.

The vowel can also be inserted before the prefix: bierek (3) – imbierek ‘blessed’.

Examples from dialects include: māgħrufin ‘known (pl)’, miftēhmin ‘agreed upon (pl)’ (Żejtuni), minsej ‘forgotten’ (Sannati, SM: minsi).

4.2 Pronouns [Caubet 2002 3.2]

4.2.1 Independent pronouns [Caubet 2002 3.2.1]

The 1st person pronoun jien, is similar to some forms found in the old first-wave dialects, like jāna for the Jbala dialects of Northern Morocco (Caubet 2017), similar to Żurrieqi form [je:n].

4.2.1.1 Is there gender distinction in the 1st person sing.? [Caubet 2002 3.2.1.1]

Not in SM, nor in the three dialects.

4.2.1.2 Is there gender distinction in the 2nd person sing.? [Caubet 2002 3.2.1.2]

Not in SM, nor in the three dialects.

4.2.1.3 If there is only on form, which is it? [Caubet 2002 3.2.1.3]

Either int or inti (both are gender neutral). Same with the three dialects.

4.2.1.4 Are there variants with a suffix –ya: ānā-ya, entā-ya, huwā-ya… [Caubet 2002 3.2.1.4]

There are no suffixes on independent personal pronouns in SM; the same applies to the three dialects. In NA, augmented forms are used for expressivity, e.g. ana-ya, enti-ya, huwa-ya.

4.2.1.5 Is there a prefixed form in the 1st person: yāna (Jbala, Taza, Trâra, Fez sometimes)? [Caubet 2002 3.2.1.5]

Yes, this is the default form: jien/jiena – both mean the same, no gender distinction. The dialects have [je:n], see [Caubet 2002 3.2.1].

4.2.1.6 How does one say: ‘you and me’, ‘me and him’, etc.? [Caubet 2002 3.2.1.6]

Jien u int ‘me and you’, _int u jien ‘you_ and me’, hu u jien ‘he and me’, jien u hu ‘me and him’. It would seem more “natural” to say jien u hu rather than hu u jien. In MA, one says ana wiyya-k/wiyya-h (lit. ‘me with you/him’).

4.2.2 Suffixed Pronouns [Caubet 2002 3.2.2]

4.2.2.1 Give the whole paradigm, according to the ending of the verbal form (vocalic and consonant: kteb, nsa). Do the same for pronouns affix to nouns? [Caubet 2002 3.2.2.1]

There are direct object clitics and indirect object clitics. Below is a paradigm for verbs ending in a consonant and a vowel.

The paradigm with pronouns suffixed to nouns, whether ending with a consonant or a vowel, is laid out in the table below. It is to be noted that this possessive relation is marked with an analytic construction: il-kelb tiegħu ‘his dog (lit. the dog of him)’, rather than with a suffixed pronoun. Suffixed pronouns are reserved for inalienable possession, such as kinship terms or body parts.

In Sannati, the 1st person singular suffixed pronoun is a diphtong: qalbej ‘my heart’.

4.2.2.2 Which is the 3rd person masc. sing. a consonant: -u, -ah, -a(h)? [Caubet 2002 3.2.2.2]

It is –u after a consonant and -h after a vowel.

4.2.2.3 Is there a dropping of the [h] for the 3rd person (masc., fem., plur.)? After a consonant, a vowel? 3rd fem.: -ha > -a (Tlemcen, Jewish dialects of Tunis, Fez…) [Caubet 2002 3.2.2.3]

There is a phonetic elision of the [h] in the 3rd person masculine and feminine, in the 3rd person plural, and always after a consonant. The [h] is generally also dropped when preceded by a vowel. There are, however, exceptions: nowadays, a substantial number of SM speakers pronounce words like raha ‘he saw her’ and tahulu ‘he gave it (m) to him’ as [ˈrɐhhɐ] and [tɐhˈhuːlʊ].

Historically – that is, more than 100 years ago – the words raha and tahulu were pronounced with a double [h], as is the case nowadays.

4.2.2.4 When the word ends with /ʕ/ or /ḥ/ and a 3rd person pronoun beginning in /h/ is added to it, what happens: are they pronounced [ḥḥ] (maʕ + hum > [maḥḥum])? [Caubet 2002 3.2.2.4]

When a pronoun starting with a /h/ is suffixed to a word ending in /*ʕ/, the resulting consonant cluster is pronounced [hh]: jerfagħha [jɛrˈfɐhhɐ] ‘he lifts her up’. If a suffixed pronoun starting with a [h]is suffixed to a word ending in a [h], the resulting consonant cluster is pronounced as [h]: kerrahhom [kɛrˈrɐhɔm] ‘he made them look ugly’.

Żurrieqi: biegħhae [ˈbɪɛhhæ] ‘he sold it (f)’

4.2.3 Interrogative pronouns [Caubet 2002 3.2.3]

The following is a list of some interrogative pronouns.

4.2.3.1 Who [Caubet 2002 3.2.3.1]

min ‘who’
- min tahulek ‘who gave it to you’?
- Il-ktieb min tahulek? ‘Who gave you the book?’

4.2.3.2 What [Caubet 2002 3.2.3.2]

xiex/xi/x’ ‘what’
- X’tixtieq ‘What do you want?
- X’qed tfittex? ’What are you looking for?’
- Xi trid tixtri? ‘What do you want to buy?’

4.2.3.3 Which? [Caubet 2002 3.2.3.3]

liema ‘which’ (no gender or number distinction)
- Liema xtrajt? ‘Which did you buy?’
- Liema karozza xtrajt? ‘Which car did you buy’
- Liema hu s-siġġu tan-nanna? ‘Which one is grandma’s chair?’

4.2.3.4 How much, how many, how [Caubet 2002 3.2.3.4]

kemm ‘how much/many’
- Kemm għandu karozzi? ’How many cars does he have?
- Kemm għandek bżonn dqiq? ’How much flour do you need?

kif ‘how’
- Kif għamiltha? ‘How did you do it (f)?’

4.2.3.5 Yes-or-no question: is there an interrogative pronoun, like in Moroccan wāš: wāš ža, ža ši? ‘Has he arrived/Did he come?’ [Caubet 2002 3.2.3.5]

In Maltese, there is no interrogative pronoun for yes-or-no questions. Tag questions can be formed with postponed hu/hux at the end of an interrogative sentence:

SM: It-tfal marru l-iskola, hux? ‘The children went to school, right/didn’t they?’

This is very interesting to compare MA polar questions wāš ža, ža ši ‘has he arrived/did he come?’. For more detail, see [Caubet 2002 4.8] and Wilmsen (2016) or Caubet (1983b and 2021).

4.2.3.6 Where [Caubet 2002 3.2.3.6]

fejn ‘where’
- Fejn? ‘Where to’
- Għal fejn/'il fejn? ‘Where to’
- Minn fejn/ mnejn? ‘Where from’
- Fejn sejjer? ‘Where are you going?’
- Mnejn ġej? ‘Where are you coming from?’
- Minn fejn int? ‘Where are you from?’

4.2.3.7 When [Caubet 2002 3.2.3.7]

meta ‘when’
- Meta ħa tiġi ċċelebrata l-festa? ‘When is the feast going to be celebrated?’

4.2.3.8 How does one say what for, what is this, why, with what, from what, with whom, from whom, whose? [Caubet 2002 3.2.3.8]

għal xiex ‘what for’
- Għal xiex tridu dal-ktieb? ‘What do you want this book for?’

x’inhu dan (m), x’inhi din (f), x’inhuma dawn (pl) ‘what is this’
- X’inhuma dawn il-karti? ‘What are these papers?’

għala/għaliex/il-għala ‘why’
- Għala trid tmur id-dar? ‘Why do you want to go home?’

b’xiex/biex ‘with what’
- Biex ħa tmur id-dar? ‘With what [means of transport] are you going home?’

minn xiex ‘from what’
- Minn xiex inhi magħmula dil-mejda? ‘What is this table made of?’

ma’ min ‘with whom’
- Ma’ min tkun? ‘In whose company are you usually?’

mingħand min/m’għand min ‘from whom
- Mingħand min irċevejtu r-rigal? ’From whom did you receive this present?’

ta’ min ‘whose’
- Mela ta’ min kienet? ‘But whose was she?’

4.3 Adverbs and adverbials [Caubet 2002 3.3]

4.3.1 How does one say ‘now’, ‘at present’, ‘presently’, ‘right now’, ‘straight away’? How does one say ‘I’m coming right away!’? [Caubet 2002 3.3.1]

SM has developed a series of adverbs: ‘now’ – issa; ‘at present’ – bħalissa/iss’issa (lit. ‘now now’); ‘presently’ – bħalissa/daż-żmien (lit. ‘this moment’); ‘right now’ – iss’issa ‘straight away’.

‘I’m coming straight away’ – tlaqt/ġej issa [stess].

4.3.2 How does one say yes (agreement and answer to someone calling)? [Caubet 2002 3.3.2]

‘yes’ (agreement) – iva/ija/iwa/mela; ‘yes’ (to someone calling) – ejj/ija?/haw’ (lit ‘here’).

4.3.3 How does one say no? [Caubet 2002 3.3.3]

‘no’ - le

4.3.4 Locative adverbs and adverbials [Caubet 2002 3.3.4]

Like for ‘now’, SM has developed a series to express ‘here’: ‘here’ – hawn/hawnhekk; ‘there’ – hemm/hemmhekk; ‘over there’ - 'l hemm/'l hemmhekk.

Other adverbial expressions: ‘above’ – ’il fuq; ‘on top’ - fuq; ‘down there’ – hemm isfel; ‘inside’ – ġewwa/ġo; ‘behind’ - wara, ‘in front’ – quddiem.

Żejtuni: hemm fowq ‘upstairs, up there’; hemm isfel ‘down there’; ġal-iskula ‘inside the school’. Żurrieqi: hemm fowq.

4.3.5 Temporal adverbs and adverbial phrases [Caubet 2002 3.3.5]

These are some adverbs and adverbial phrases expressing time: ‘now’ - issa; ‘then, after’ - wara (which also means ‘behind’), imbagħad; already - diġà (Żejtuni: ġu); ‘again’ - mill-ġdid, darb’oħra; ‘the other day’ - l-aħħar darba, ftit ilu (lit. ‘the other time, little time ago’); ‘today’ - illum; ‘tomorrow’ - għada; ‘yesterday’ - ilbieraħ; ‘the day before yesterday’ - ilbiraħtlula, pitilbieraħ; ‘the day after tomorrow’ - pitgħada.

4.3.6 Adverbs of manner [Caubet 2002 3.3.6]

These are some adverbs and adverbial phrases expressing manner: ‘thus’ - għalhekk; ‘directly, straight ahead’ - direttament, dritt; ‘a lot’ - ħafna, wisq, ferm; ‘few, little’ - ftit, ftit wisq; ‘similarly’ - bl-istess mod (lit. ‘in the same way’); ‘fast’ - malajr, bilġri; ‘slow’ - bil-mod.

4.4 Nouns [Caubet 2002 3.4]

For the morphology of nouns, we will examine the formation of diminutives, elatives and plurals.

4.4.1 Diminutives [Caubet 2002 3.4.1]

4.4.1.1 What is the diminutive for triliteral nouns: kelb, bieb, mara? [Caubet 2002 3.4.1.1]

Since the diminutive for triliteral nouns is not productive any more, we only have a small number of words with the Arabic diminutive pattern C1C2ejC3(-a)/ C1C2ajC3(-a), listed in the table below.

4.4.1.2 What is the diminutive for quadriliteral nouns like senduq, muftieħ, filfel, and karmus and for loan-words (Romance)? [Caubet 2002 3.4.1.2]

It is formed on the pattern C1C2ejC3vC4 or C1C2ejC3C4-a: mirkeb ‘a type of ship’ – mrejkba ‘a small float with a sail used for fishing’, senduq – snejdaq ‘chest’, martell – mrejtel ‘hammer’ (which is, interestingly, of non-Arabic origin, cf. Italian martello), serduk – srejdak ‘rooster, cock’.

A Maltese innovation is the use of diminutives for names of non-Arabic origin with 4 consonants: Stiefnu ‘Stephen’ – Stejfen, Grabiel ‘Gabriel’ – Grejbel.

Maltese also makes use of Romance-derived suffixes -ina/inu to form the diminutive, a process the productivity of which is evidenced by neologisms, such as borrinu ‘snowman’ (< borra ‘snow) and wiċċinu (< wiċċ ’face’) ‘emoji’.

4.4.1.3 What is the diminutive of adjectives of defect and colour (MA ṣfeṛ ‘yellow’) or of adjective kbīr ‘big’? Is it ṣfiyyer or ṣfīfer, kbiyyer or kbīber? [Caubet 2002 3.4.1.3]

In SM, it is formed on the pattern kbiyyer, which is more conservative than the kbīber type:

• isfar – sfajjar ‘yellow’
• qasir – qsajjar (m), qasira – qsajra (f/pl) ‘short’
• sabiħ – sbejjaħ ‘beautiful’

This probably implies that these NA patterns (C1C2īC2eC3) developed later in the Andalus and the North of Africa and independently from Malta for the old city dialects.

4.4.1.4 What is the diminutive of the adjective meaning ‘sweet, nice’ (MA ḥlu > ḥlīlu)? [Caubet 2002 3.4.1.4]

SM: ħelu – ħlejju ‘sweet, nice’, with the doubling of C2, where MA first-wave dialects have developed the form ḥlīlu for ḥlu.

4.4.1.5 How are the plurals of diminutives of nouns and adjectives formed? [Caubet 2002 3.4.1.5]

The plurals of diminutives of adjectives generally take the suffix –a: qsajra ‘short’ can be both feminine and plural; same goes for twajjeb (m) - twajba (f/p) ‘good’. Sometimes the plural is formed in –in: twajbin.

Diminutives of nouns like rħajjel retain the same form for the plural.

In MA, the plural of the diminutives of adjectives are formed with the plural suffix –in, whereas the diminutives of nouns are formed with the suffix -āt.

4.4.1.6 Are diminutives very much used? By whom mostly? [Caubet 2002 3.4.1.6]

It depends which types of diminutives. There are diminutives like wejda (< id ‘hand’), which are very rarely used. Other diminutives like ġbejna ‘typical Maltese cheeselet’, is used regularly. On the whole, however, the diminutive derived from Arabic is not used a lot. Nowadays, Romance diminutive suffixes are used for Christian names - Valentina, Katrina, Martina - and for neologisms like wiċċinu ‘emoji’ and borrinu ‘snowman’.

4.4.2 Augmentatives: Are there augmentatives formed on patterns CeCCūC, CeCC-ūn or any other? [Caubet 2002 3.4.2]

The augmentatives in SM are formed using the suffix -ūn (< Italian/Sicilian –one). This suffix is the same as in NA Arabic, where it is also a borrowing from Romance languages (cf. Ibn Ḫaldūn < Ḫālid or Jāsrūn < Jāsir). In MA, this suffix is used very often with adjectives of defect and colour, and can have both functions - augmentative, as possessing a high degree of the quality, and diminutive, in an affectionate sense (see the list in Caubet 1993: I, 133-4): zeʕrūn (< zʕer ‘blond, fair’) ‘little blond kid’ or belqūn (< bleq ‘very white-skinned’) ‘albino’. It is also used with nouns, like sebʕūn (< sbeʕ ‘lion’) ‘very big lion’, šemsūn (> šems ‘sun’) ‘very strong sun’, or in the name for ‘measles’ bu-ḥemṛūn (< ḥmeṛ ‘red’, lit. someone who is very red). The derivation involves not only the addition of the suffix, but also the restructuring of the derived word to the CvCCūn model.

As we saw above, it is used to form diminutives of personal names: Saʕdūn < Saʕd, Ḥemdūn > Ḥmed, Hindūn < Hind.

According to Cutajar (2018: 10), the suffix -ūn which forms augmentatives is used either to intensify some trait or else to show an object which is larger than normal. For example, the augmentatives are used in adjectives like pastażun ‘a very vulgar person’ (< pastaż ‘vulgar, ill-mannered’ ) to indicate increased intensity or extent, or in nouns like kuċċarun ‘ladle’ (< kuċċara ‘a type of spoon), and bankun (< bank ’bench’) ‘a large platform used in Maltese village feasts’ to indicate the increased size of an object.

This suffix is also used in reduplication with verbal nouns of unity of (generally) Arabic origin to magnify the action denoted: ħasla ħaslun ‘a large wash’, xirja xirjun ‘a large purchase’, etc. More examples to be found in Cutajar (2018: 142).

4.4.3 Elatives. How is the comparative of adjectives formed: ‘bigger’, ‘smaller’, ‘younger’ etc.? Does the comparative construction use the preposition min, ʕla, or another? [Caubet 2002 3.4.3]

Adjective - comparative - superlative: kbir – ikbar – l-ikbar ‘big, old’, sabiħa – isbaħ – l-isbaħ ‘beautiful’.

For adjectives which do not form the comparative and superlative morphologically (very often not of Arabic origin), it can be formed with iżjed or iktar/aktar: aktar antik ‘older’, iżjed superfiċjali ‘more superificial’.

For the comparison, the preposition minn is used:

• Pawlu ikbar minn Robert ‘Paul is bigger than Robert’
• Dil-ġerħa aktar superfiċjali milli ħsibt/minn tiegħek ‘This wound is deeper than I thought/than yours’

The superlative is constructed with the article:

• Maria l-iktar persuna intelliġenti fil-klassi ‘Maria is the most intelligent person in the class’

4.4.4 Plurals [Caubet 2002 3.4.4]

4.4.4.1 Plurals of quadriliterals: what is the plural of senduq or muftieħ? [Caubet 2002 3.4.4.1]

The pattern is C1ie/aC2C3vC4: senduq – sniedaq ‘chest’, muftieħ – mfietaħ ‘key’, kantun - knatan ‘brick’.

4.4.4.2 What is the plural of adjectives in CCīC? [Caubet 2002 3.4.4.2]

In SM, this pattern can be realized as CCiC:

• kbir ‘big’ or żgħir ‘small’
• with an epenthetic vowel i: irqiq ‘thin’
• with a short vowel inserted between C1 and C2: qasir ‘short’, ħażin ‘bad’, ħafif ‘light’

The plural patterns are varied:

• CCiC > plural CCāC: kbir - kbar ‘big’, twil - twal ‘long, tall’, sħiħ - sħaħ ‘complete’
• iCCiC > plural iCCāC: irqiq - irqaq ‘thin’, irħis - irħas ‘cheap’
• C(a)CiC > plural CoCCa: qasir - qosra ‘short’, ġdid - ġodda ‘new’, qadim - qodma ‘old’
• CaCiC > plural CCieC(a): ħażin - ħżiena ‘bad’, ħafif - ħfief ‘light’

4.4.5 Adjectives of colour [Caubet 2002 3.4.5]

4.4.5.1 How does one say ‘red’, ‘black’, ‘white’, ‘blue’, ‘yellow’, ‘green’? Does the word begin with a vowel? Is there a word for ‘purple’, ‘orange’, ‘grey’, ‘beige’, ‘brown’? Are they loan-words? [Caubet 2002 3.4.5.1]

The basic colours are of Arabic origin: aħmar ‘red’, iswed ‘black’, abjad ‘white’, ikħal ‘blue’, isfar ‘yellow’, aħdar ‘green’. The alternative word for ‘blue’ blu is of Italian origin and has a variant blun (fem. bluna, pl. bluni).

The other colours are loanwords: ‘purple’ – vjola; ‘orange’ – oranġjo; ‘grey’ – griż (archaic ixheb); ‘beige’ – beige (unless explained by the phrase kannella jagħti fl-isfar); ‘brown’ – kannella. These are loanwords from Sicilian or Italian, except for beige which is from French; the English loanword magenta is also used.

4.4.5.2 What is the feminine for ‘red’, ‘black’, ‘white’, ‘blue’, ‘yellow’, ‘green’? [Caubet 2002 3.4.5.2]

Since the syllabic structure of the word changes with the adjunction of the feminine suffix –a, the epenthetic vowel is no longer needed: ħamra, sewda, bajda, kaħla (but also bluna), safra, ħadra.

4.4.5.3 What is the plural for ‘red’, ‘black’, ‘white’, ‘blue’, ‘yellow’, ‘green’? Are there several possibilities: kūḥel or keḥl-īn? Any others? [Caubet 2002 3.4.5.3]

They are formed on the C1uC2vC3, like in first-wave MA dialects: homor, suwed, bojod, koħol (but also bluni), sofor, ħodor.

4.4.6 Duals [Caubet 2002 3.4.6]

4.4.6.1 Is there a dual? What is the suffix? Is it used for the plural of double body parts (legs, eyes, ears etc…)? [Caubet 2002 3.4.6.1]

Yes, there is a dual. The general suffix is –ejn, which takes the form -ajn after a [h] or [ʔ] (traced to etymological back consonants /q/ or /ʕ/ which inhibit the imāla): sieq – saqajn ‘leg’, driegħ – dirgħajn ‘arm’.

When a suffix is added, the final -n is elided: dirgħaj-ja ‘my arms’ (as in MA Arabic režlīn > režlīya ‘my legs, feet’).

When it comes to body parts like għajn ‘eye’, id ‘hand’, widna ‘ear’, etc., the dual form is used in an unexpected way, in that it can denote both the singular and the plural: ‘I hurt my hand’ can be expressed as weġġajt idejja (dual) or weġġajt idi (singular). Another example can be found in the idiom b’seba’ għajnejn ‘very carefully (lit. with seven eyes)’.

The dual is also for the nouns of various types of measurements (nouns of Arabic origin): sentejn ‘two years’, wiżintejn ‘two 4kg weights’, Żurrieqi (note the elision of final -n) tumnej’ ‘two tumoli’, bixxtej’ ‘two pieces [of land]’.

4.4.6.2 Is the dual reserved for a certain category of nouns? Numerals, nouns of measure? [Caubet 2002 3.4.6.2]

Like in NA Arabic, the dual is used for nouns related to body parts, weight and length measures (wiżna - wiżintejn ‘weight measure equivalent to 4 kg’, ratal – ratlejn ‘weight measure equivalent to 800g’), periods of time (xahar – xahrejn ‘month’, ġimgħa – ġimagħtejn ‘week’), and units of food items (ħobża – ħbiżtejn ‘bread’, bajda – badtejn ‘egg’).

4.4.6.3 How does one say two? How does one say two books, two children? [Caubet 2002 3.4.6.3]

The numeral is expressed with the lexemes żewġ(t), ġiex(t) (alternative ġixt), and tnejn: żewġ kotba ‘two books’, żewġt itfal ‘two children’, ġixt ifniek ‘two rabbits’. For the final -t, see [Caubet 2002 3.4.7.4] below. The form ġiex is a variant of żewġ (Aquilina 1987: 406).

SM has both forms, żewġ (< ‘pair’, compare NA Arabic) and tnejn (more common in Eastern Arabic).

4.4.7 Numerals [Caubet 2002 3.4.7]

4.4.7.1 What are the numerals from 1 to 10? Individual full forms and construct state (short form) with numerals and nouns of measure? How does one say three men, three days? [Caubet 2002 3.4.7.1]

Maltese has the full NA paradigm from 1 to 10 given in the table below.

When used with nouns:

• for 1, the singular of the object is used: wieħed ħabib ‘one friend’
• for 2, żewġ + plural is used: żewġ ħbieb ‘two friends’
• 3-10, plural is used as well: tliet, erba’, ħames, sitt, seba’, tmien, disa’, għaxar ħbieb.

MA uses an analytical construction, e.g. tlāta d-l-ktūb ‘three books’, whereas for a series of nouns of measure or body parts, it uses a reduced form: telt ijjām ‘three days’, tmen ijjām ‘eight days’.

SM also has reduced forms, e.g. tlett or tlitt for tlieta, used typically with nouns of measure: tlitt ijiem ‘three days’, tlett iljieli ‘three nights’. These reduced forms can also be used with a larger range of nouns, which have a plural that can take the epenthetic vowel i-: tlitt irġiel, ‘three men’, tlett itfal ‘three children’.

4.4.7.2 What are the numerals between 11 and 19? Give the full individual form, and the construct form: ḫemsṭāšel ktāb, ḫemsṭāšen ktāb, ḫemsṭāšeṛ ktāb, other? How does one say fifteen men, fifteen years? [Caubet 2002 3.4.7.2]

Numerals from 11 to 19 are as follows: ħdax, tnax, tlettax, erbatax, ħmistax, sittax, sbatax, tmintax, dsatax. The counted noun is in the singular and with the linking element -il, e.g. ħmistax-il sena ‘fifteen years’.

In NA, there is variation in the phonetic realization of the linking element (/l/, /n/, /ṛ/): ḫemsṭāšel ktāb, ḫemsṭāšen ktāb, ḫemsṭāšeṛ ktāb. In Maltese, the linking element is always -il, like in MA ḥdāšel-ktāb, ḫemsṭāšel-ktāb, ‘eleven, fifteen books’.

4.4.7.3 What is the construction with a noun between 3 and 10? How does one say ‘five books’? Is there a preposition: ḫemsa d-el-ktūb, ḫemsa mtāʕ-el-ktūb, ḫemsa ktūb or ḫems ktūb? Other? Is the counted noun in the plural or in the singular? [Caubet 2002 3.4.7.3]

Maltese has not developed an analytical construct with the possessive particle, but has a simple juxtaposition with the counted nouns in the plural for numerals from 4 to 10: ħames kotba, sitt kotba ‘five, six books’, ħames imwejjed ‘five tables’, tliet siġġijiet ‘three chairs’, għaxar kotba ‘ten books’.

If the counted noun has a mono-syllabic plural (tfal ‘children’, fniek ‘rabbits’, klieb’ dogs), a –t (reminding of the tāʔ marbūta of Arabic) is added: sebat itfal ‘seven children’, ħamest itfal ‘five children’, disat ifniek ‘nine rabbits’.

The same occurs in Żejtuni for ‘four;: erbat idjūr ’four houses’, tlitt iklieb ‘three dogs’.

4.4.7.4 Is there a specific paradigm for the construction with nouns of measure? Do they have a dual? ḫems iyyām, sett snīn, sbeʕ šhūṛ…²[Caubet 2002 3.4.7.4]

Historical nouns of measure have a dual (ratlejn ‘2 x 800g’, wiżintejn – ‘2 x 4kg’, xkertejn ‘two sacks’, qasbtejn ‘2 x 2.292 yards’, xibrejn ‘2 x 10.31 inches’). Modern units of measurement, however, are constructed with words żewġ or ġiex: żewġ metri ‘two meters’, ġiex grammi ‘two grams’.

With numerals 3 to 10, for nouns of measure, MA uses the reduced form of the numeral + the plural: ḫems iyyām ‘five days’, sett snīn ‘six years’, sbeʕ šhūṛ ‘seven months’ (instead of ḫemsa-d-el + plural, see [Caubet 2002 3.4.7.3]).

SM uses the full form + the plural for all types of nouns, including measures: ħames snin ‘five years’, like ħames kotba ‘five books’, tliet qasbiet, erba’ qasbiet, etc.

5 Syntax [Caubet 2002 4]

5.1 Possession and relative pronoun [Caubet 2002 4.1]

5.1.1 Is the construct state still used? In which case(s)? [Caubet 2002 4.1.1]

The construct state is mostly found in toponyms, like Fomm ir-Riħ ‘lit. the mouth of the wind’, Wied il-Qlejgħa ‘lit. the valley of the small fortress’, Belt is-Sebħ ‘lit. the city of dawn’, Ħondoq ir-Rummien ‘lit. the ditch of the pomegranate’.

It is also used in the names of flora and fawna, like widnet il-baħar ‘lit. the ear of the sea’ (cheirolophus crassifolius or Maltese rock-centaury), qerd in-naħal ‘lit. bee-eater’ (merops apiaster or European bee-eater).

The construct state is also used in some expressions related to the family, like żewġ oħti ‘the husband of my sister’, or omm ommi ‘the mother of my mother’.

It is also used in some fixed expressions, like għaqal ix-xjuħ ‘the wisdom of the elderly’ and lewn il-ħajt ‘the colour of the wall’. These are, however, obscolescent and younger speakers prefer their equivalents with the analytic genitive, e.g. l-għaqal tax-xjuħ.

5.1.2 The analytic construction. Which marker is used: mtāʕ, ntāʕ, tāʕ (Tunisia, Algeria), ta’ (Malta), dyāl, d (Morocco), di (Morocco Jewish), eddi (Jijel), elli (Collo)? [Caubet 2002 4.1.2]

In Maltese, the possessive particle is ta’ (< mtāʕ) with typical final truncation of etymological /ʕ/ (see 1.1.2):

• Dak il-basket ta’ ħija ‘That bag belongs to my brother’.
• Il-karozza xtrajtha mingħand is-sid tal-pompa tal-petrol ‘I bought the car from the owner of the petrol station’.

It is also used in place names like site Ta’ Majmuna (lit. Majmuna’s place), the site where the 12th century tombstone was found in Gozo, tal-Ħandaq or tar-Rabat in Malta, or restaurant names like Ta’ Marija ‘Marija’s’, or Tal-Aħwa ‘The Brothers’’.

The possessive particle is also used to form independent possessive pronouns which follow the noun. In these pronouns, the etymological /ʕ/ resurfaces (represented orthographically as <għ>) and causes changes in the phonological make-up of the word (see [Caubet 2002 1.1.2] and [Caubet 2002 1.1.15]): tiegħi ‘mine’, tiegħek ‘yours sg’, tiegħu ‘his’, tagħha ‘hers’, tagħna ‘ours’, tagħkom ‘yours pl’, tagħhom ‘theirs’. Żurrieqi has tiegħak (SM: tiegħek) and tagħkim (SM: tagħkom). Żurrieqi also favours the dipththong [ej] in the 1st person singular while Żejtuni almost consistently leans towards the diphthong [ɐj]:

• Żejtuni: tiegħaj [’tɪjɐj] ‘mine’
• Sannati: tiegħi [’tɪjɛj] ‘mine’
• Żurrieqi: tiegħak [’tɪjɐk] ‘yours (sg)’, tagħkim [’tɐːkɪm] ‘theirs’

5.1.3 What is the relative pronoun: (e)lli, eddi (Jijel), di (Jewish dialects of Morocco), li (Malta)…)? Is there a correspondence between the relative and the possessive preposition, like with Jijel (e)ddi or di in some Jewish dialects? [Caubet 2002 4.1.3]

In SM, the relative pronoun is illi/li, while the possessive particle is ta’ derived from mtāʕ. Consequently, there is no connection between the relative and the possessive.

5.1.3.1 How does one say ‘Marie’s mother’, ‘Joseph’s father/brother’? Is a construct state used in this case as in mmwet-Maria in Morocco, or is there a preposition of Berber origin, n as in bbay-n Maria (Fez)? Other? [Caubet 2002 4.1.4]

There are two contructions. The first one is the synthetic one, the construct state (see [Caubet 2002 4.1.1] above): omm Marie ‘Marie’s mother’, missier Joseph ‘Joseph’s father’, oħt Marie ‘Marie’s sister’ and ħu Marie ‘Marie’s brother’.

There is also the analytic construction with the possessive particle ta’. This is used primarily with kinship terms borrowed from Sicilian/Italian: il-mamà ta’ Marie ‘Marie’s mom’ or il-papà ta’ Joseph ‘Joseph’s dad’, iz-zija ta’ Marie ‘Maries aunt’, iz-ziju ta’ Marie ‘Marie’s uncle’. Same goes for nanna ‘grandma’ and nannu ‘grandpa’: in-nanna ta’ Marie, in-nannu ta’ Marie.

Interestingly, the Romance word zija ‘aunt’ is treated like an Arabic one, in that its Romance feminine suffix -a can be treated as if it were its Arabic equivalent and the tāʔ marbūta resurfaces in the construct state: zit Marie.

5.1.4 Give a relative clause with a definite antecedent and with an indefinite one. Is the relative pronoun used in both cases? [Caubet 2002 4.1.5]

Yes. Unlike cases in NA where there with an indefinite antecedent the relative pronoun can be omitted, SM uses the relative with both definite and indefinite antecedents:

• xtrajt ktieb li kont ġa qrajt ‘I bought a book which I had already read’
• rajt ktieb li qatt ma kont smajt bih ‘I saw a book I hadn’t heard about’
• xtrajt il-ktieb li għedtli dwaru ‘I bought the book you told me about’

MA has both:

• šeft waḥed-el-fīlem lli ma ʕžebniš ‘I saw a film I didn’t like’
• šeft waḥed-el-fīlem Ø ma ʕžebniš ‘I saw a film I dind’t like’

5.2 The expression of future [Caubet 2002 4.2]

5.2.1 Is there an analytic future, constructed with an auxiliary or a particle? Give the various possible constructions and particles expressing a kind of future. [Caubet 2002 4.2.1]

The future in Maltese is constructed with the particle se/ser/sa + the verb in the imperfect: se ngħumu ‘we are going to (alt. we will) swim’, se nixtru ‘we are going to buy’, etc. The forms se, ser and sa are used interchangeably.

The particle se is a grammaticalised form of sejjer, the active participle of a verb meaing ‘to go’, like in many Arabic dialects. The full form sejjer (m) is still used as a future marker and in such cases, it agrees in gender and number: sejra (f), sejrin (pl).

• Missieri sejjer jaħdem l-Alġerija. ‘My father is going to work in Algeria.’
• Ommi sejra taħdem l-Alġerija. ‘My mother is going to work in Algeria.’

In SM, the forms ħa and ħalli, essentially exhortative markers (where the former is derived from the latter), can also express the future when combined with verbs in the imperfect. They are equivalent to Libyan Arabic preverb ḥa- (Pereira 2008 and Benmoftah & Pereira 2019). According to Scicluna, Agius & Giordano (2018), ħa and ħalli express the near or immediate future, and are used more in speech, while the forms se, ser, sa are more used in writing.

In Sannati, both particles were found with the 1st person plural:

• se nitkellmy [sɛ nɪt’kɛllmy] ‘we will speak’
• ħa nitkellmy wkill [ħɐ nɪt’kɛllmy wkɪll] ‘we will speak as well’
• jekk mhux ħa nibżgħew għalēh [jɛkk mʊʃ ħɐ ’nɪbzɛw ɐː’lɛːh] ‘if we are not going to take care of it (m)’

In Żejtuni, the few examples of the future which were given all contained the ħa particle:

• ħa mmurru sax-xatt [ħɐ mˈmʊɹɹʊ sɐʃˈʃɐtt] ‘we are going to go to the beach’
• ħa nitilgħaw sar-reħel [ħɐ nɪˈtɪlɐw sɐɹˈɹɛhɛl] ‘we are going to go to the village’.

5.2.2 Do the particles agree in gender or number with the subject as in Morocco - ġāda tži, ġādya tži, ġādīn yžīw, ġādyīn yžīw? [Caubet 2002 4.2.2]

We have seen ([Caubet 2002 4.2.1] above) that sejjer (fem. sejra, pl. sejrin) agrees in gender and number with the main form. This would be partly similar to the Moroccan situation, where for particle ġādi – which can either agree or not - there coexists a reduced invariable form ġā. Morocco had even more reduced forms leading to future forms with a prefixed a- (Caubet 2022).

5.3 Reflexive. How is the reflexive - ‘he killed himself’, ‘he bought a book for himself’ - expressed? What is the word used: ṛās, ṛūḥ, nefs, other? [Caubet 2002 4.3]

In SM and the dialects, the reflexive is expressed by two words, ruħ ‘lit. soul’ and nifs ‘lit. breath’, attached with pronouns. Ruħ and nifs differ primarily in syntax (Scicluna et al. 2018: 261): ruħ is generally preceded by a verb, as in 1., whereas nifs is preceded by a preposition or an object marker with a suffixed pronoun, as in 2.

These lexemes are also used in Arabic dialects, together with ṛas ’lit. head’.

1. Qatel ruħu b’idejh ‘He committed suicide (lit. he killed his soul with his hands)’
2. Emmen fik innifsek ‘believe in yourself’

5.4 Indefinite articles [Caubet 2002 4.4]

5.4.1 Has an indefinite article been created, formed on the nouns meaning ‘one’ or ‘thing’ originally? [Caubet 2002 4.4.1]

Indefinites can be expressed with a bare noun (Ø article): kelb ‘dog, a dog’.

There are, however, three indefinite determiners, wieħed (orig. ‘one’), xi (‘some’ < ‘thing’) and ċertu (< It. certo ‘certain’): wieħed raġel ‘a (possibly unspecified) man’, xi ktieb ‘some book’, ċertu bniedem ‘a specific person, unknown to the other participant in the discourse’. These three determiners are used to express something not specific and indefinite. For a detailed study of determiners wāḥed-el and ši in MA see Caubet (1983a and 1983b).

The indefinite determiner wieħed was recorded in Żejtuni. In the following example, wieħed is used by one of the speakers to refer to a person - known to the speaker, but unknown to the adressee - who spoke to him about his village, Żejtun:

• Għax hemm wieħed jgħajdli, ‘iż-Żejtun’ jgħadli, ‘iż-Żejtun nanna’
  [ɐʃ ɛmm ˈwɪːħɛt ˈjɐjdlɪ ɪzzɛjˈtuːn ˈjɐjdlɪ ɪzˈzɛjtuːn ˈnɐnnɐ]
  ‘Because there is a certain [person] who tells me “Żejtun”, he tells me “Żejtun is a grandmother”’

5.4.2 What is the article: MA wāḥed-el, weḥd-el, ḥa-l, ši, kāš? [Caubet 2002 4.4.2]

As noted in [Caubet 2002 4.4.1] above, wieħed, xi and ċertu are used as indefinite determiners and do not have a reduced form. The determiner wieħed is derived from the numeral ‘one’ and used mostly for people, rather than other living things or objects. The determiner xi is a cognate of e.g. MA nominal determiner ši and it used in a similar manner (Caubet 1983a, 1983b). ċertu is a borrowing from Sicilian/Italian.

5.4.3 How is the indefinite article constructed? Mor. wāḥed-el-bənt, weḥd-el-bent, ḥa-əl-bent, ši bent, Alg. kāš bent, Malt. xi ktieb, xi mkien? [Caubet 2002 4.4.3]

The indefinite determiners given in [Caubet 2002 4.4.1] above are used with bare nouns: wieħed raġel, xi ktieb, ċertu bniedem.

5.4.4 Is it used widely? By whom (more by men or women)? With an undefinite value, or rather with an appreciative value: ‘some X’, ‘a particular X’, ‘one of these X’, ‘a special X’? In that case is the marker stressed? Is there a lengthening of the vowel a: or i: wāḥed-el-bənt, ši bent? [Caubet 2002 4.4.4]

The indefinite markers given in [Caubet 2002 4.4.1] above are used indiscriminately by all speakers without any lengthening of their vowels according to their function. The determiner xi has the meaning ‘some’, the determiner ċertu denotes ‘a specific person, unknown to the other participant(s) in the discourse’.

5.4.5 Can it be used to give an estimate like in Morocco: men dāba ši xems iyyām ‘about 5 days from now’? [Caubet 2002 4.4.5]

Yes, xi can be used as a quantifier meaning ‘an unspecified amount’ as in the following examples from SM:

• Dam xi ħames snin jgħix l-Amerka ‘He lived in America for about five years’
• F’xi l-għaxra ‘At about 10 o’clock’
• Xi għaxart itfal ‘10 or so children’

It is also found in our data for the dialects:

• Żurrieqi: Kenna xi tumnej’ oħra. ‘We had a couple of more tumoli’
• Żejtuni: Xi l-erbgħa ‘At about 4 o’clock’

5.5 Demonstrative Deictics [Caubet 2002 4.5]

5.5.1 How does one say ‘this, these, that, those’ (pronouns)? [Caubet 2002 4.2.1]

They are similar in SM and in the dialects:

5.5.2 How does one say ‘this man’, ‘this girl’, ‘these people’? These are demonstratives referring to the space within the enunciator’s domain.¹⁴ [Caubet 2002 4.5.2]

For the space within the enunciator’s domain, see the table in the previous subsection. Note that the last consonant of the demonstrative (-n or –k) can be assimilated to the article.

• SM: dan ir-raġel/dar-raġel ‘this man’, din it-tifla/dit-tifla ‘this girl’, dawn in-nies/dan-nies ‘these people’.
• Żejtuni: dut-tratt ‘this photograph’¹⁵
• Sannati: dol-binej ‘this construction’¹⁶

5.5.3 How does one say ‘here’? Are there any other forms, e.g. with affixes, such as MA hnā-ya, hnā-k? What are the fine nuances behind these forms? Are there any compound forms, like MA ha fayn? Give all local dialectal forms. [Caubet 2002 4.5.3]

In addition to the basic form hawn (variant haw’) ‘here’, there is an expanded form hawnhekk (variant haw’hekk) where the added element is derived from hekk ‘thus’. Both the simple and the expanded form are used to express ‘here’.

’l, the shortened form of the preposition lil ‘to’ (on which see [Caubet 2002 4.6]) is added to both hawn/hawnhekk and even hemm/hemmhekk ‘there’ (on which see [Caubet 2002 4.5.6] below) to express not location, but direction: ejja ’l hawn ‘come here’, mar ’l hemmhekk ‘he went there’.

5.5.4 Can the word meaning ‘here’ take a temporal meaning? [Caubet 2002 4.5.4]

It cannot, hawn ‘here’ is strictly spatial.

5.5.5 How does one say ‘that man’, ‘that girl’, ‘those people’? These are demonstratives referring to the space within the domain of the “other”, i.e. the co-enunciator. [Caubet 2002 4.5.5]

For what can be analysed as the co-enunciator’s domain, the demonstratives determiners are as follows (see also [Caubet 2002 4.2.1] above): dak ir-raġel ‘that man’, dik it-tfajla ‘that girl’, dawk in-nies ‘those people’. Note the suffix -k which indicates a link with the 2nd person pronoun. The determiners agree in gender and number with the noun or referent.

For the dialects:

• Żejtuni: Duk mhyx ir-reħel immae ‘That’s not the village, however’¹⁷
• Sannati: Dawk ma nitilfuhimx ‘Those we do not lose them’¹⁸
• Żurrieqi: Imma dik tal-wēd kēn biegħhae ħija ‘But that.f (antecedent is feminine) of the valley, my brother had sold it.’

5.5.6 How does one say ‘there’? Are there any other forms, with affixes, such as MA temmā-k, temmā-ya, temmā-tīk(a)? What are the fine nuances behind these forms? Are there any compound forms, like MA ṛa fayn? [Caubet 2002 4.5.6]

There are several words for ‘there’ in SM: hemm, hemmhekk. In older Maltese, a suffix -a was often added to demonstrative pronouns, dana ‘this.m’, dina ‘this.f’ and to adverbs such as hemmhekka ‘there’, hawnhekka ‘here’. The latter two forms are regularly heard by one of the authors from older people, whereas dana and dina are heard from people of all ages.

In some dialects, such as the dialect of Mġarr, the forms hinn and hinnhekk are used.

5.5.7 Can it be used as a predicate of existence, i.e. ‘there is’, ‘there isn’t’, as in Tunisian femma, ma femmaš? Give all local dialectal forms. [Caubet 2002 4.5.7]

These forms are used in SM and all three dialects. The form hemm can be used as an existential and presentational predicate, i.e. ‘there is’:

• Hemm kelb ‘There’s a dog’.

Hawn ‘here’ discussed above in [Caubet 2002 4.5.3] shares this function:

• Hawn bżonn ta’ aktar riċerka ‘There is need for further research’.

Both hemm and hawn in their function as existential/presentational predicates can be negated: M’hemmx triq oħra ‘There is no other way’, M’hawnx kelb ‘There is no dog’.

5.5.8 Can the word meaning ‘there’ take a temporal meaning? [Caubet 2002 4.5.8]

It cannot, hemm ‘there’ is strictly spatial.

5.5.9 Is there a form, different from the preceding, meaning ‘over there, beyond what is visible’ as MA lhīh compared to temmā-k? It refers to what is beyond the range of vision: walls, horizon line, and what is considered as not belonging to the space within the domain of either the enunciator or the co-enunciator. [Caubet 2002 4.5.9]

Hemmhekk is used in this case:

• Se mmorru Franza, hemmhekk hemm ħafna nies sinjuri ‘We’re going to France, there are many wealthy people there.’

5.6 Prepositions [Caubet 2002 4.6]

5.6.1 How does one say ‘to, for’ and/or mark the indirect object as with MA l-, li-, līl (the latter is rare, found only in Prehilali dialects like Fez)? Is it the same preposition or are they different? Give the paradigms with the affix pronouns and with a noun for all the variants. [Caubet 2002 4.6.1]

Where most NA dialects have l-, SM uses the same preposition as old city first-wave dialects (e.g. Fez), lil (lill- with the fused definite article) ‘for, to, towards’: lil ommi ‘to my mother’, lill-pajjiż ‘to the country’, lix-xemx ‘to the sun’.

In Maltese, the preposition lil also doubles as a differential object marker for the direct object. Such use is, however, restricted to nouns with referents high on the scale of animacy, i.e. mostly humans, but also inanimate objects endowed with human properties:

• rajt lil ħija ‘I saw my brother’
• rajt lil Malta tinbidel ‘I saw Malta change’

In all its functions, lil can be shortened to ’il or ’l (see also [Caubet 2002 4.5.3]): rajt ’il ħija ‘I saw my brother’, rajt ’l ommi ‘I saw my mother’.

The following table gives the forms of lil with suffixed pronouns.

5.6.2 Give all the monoliteral prepositions: b-, f-, l-. Give the paradigms with suffixed pronouns. [Caubet 2002 4.6.2]

In Maltese there are only bi/b’ ‘in, with’ and fi/f’ ‘in’.

5.6.3 Give the list of other common prepositions. Give the the paradigms with the affix pronouns. [Caubet 2002 4.6.3]

minn ‘from’, għal ‘for’, bħal ‘like’, ħdejn ‘next to’, bejn ‘between’, biswit ‘next to’, dwar ‘about’, minflok/flok ‘instead of’, fuq ‘on, about’, għand ‘at’, maġenb ‘next to’, ma’ ‘with’, mingħand ‘from’.

5.7 Negation [Caubet 2002 4.7]

5.7.1 How is verbal negation formed? How does one say: ‘I haven’t slept’,’ I haven’t read this book’, ‘I haven’t bought any bread’ (I have bought bread), ‘I don’t have any book’, ‘You’re not lucky’, ‘I don’t feel like going out’, ‘I have nothing to say’ etc.[Caubet 2002 4.7.1]

One of the authors has been working on the use of particle ši in MA since the early 1980s (Caubet 1983a, 1983b, and 2021) and it is very interesting to compare it with what occurs in the Maltese islands. The idea was then to analyse all the contemporary uses of ši in MA and the grammaticalisation processes at stake in grammatical categories like quantification, negation and interrogation.

In MA, particle ši is a reduced form of šay ‘thing’¹⁹ and is used under the forms šay, ši or š to mark nominal determination (ši), negation (second marker used with ma…šay, ši or š) and a form of interrogation (postponed ši). For NA and the comparison with Amazigh Berber, see Caubet (2021) and Chaker and Caubet (1996).

The word ‘thing’ is first grammaticalised into an indefinite pronoun ‘something’ or ‘nothing’, then becomes a quantifier ‘some, a certain, a’, and finally a second marker intended to reinforce the negation, and an interrogative (yes-or-no questions), both postposed to the verb (Caubet 2021: 129).

It seems interesting to revisit the uses of particle xi/x/xejn in Maltese, in this light and with the works published in recent years, as being the process of grammaticalisation of the word ‘thing’, which is associated with the idea of ‘minimal degree’ or ‘small element’.

We found all three uses in SM and dialects, for quantifier xi [Caubet 2002 4.4] and even its modal value for an estimation of a quantity (‘about fifty’, ‘around ten’, ‘some 10 or so’) [Caubet 2002 4.4.5].

In negation, -x is used as the second element of a bipartite marker m(a)…-x, with -x affixed to the verbal and pseudo-verbal forms (see Lucas 2023 for an analysis of negation in Maltese). Before vowels (including those resulting from the loss of etymological /ġ/, /ʕ/, and /h/), the first marker ma can be reduced to m’.

• ‘I havent’t slept’ ma rqadtx
• ‘I haven’t read this book’ ma qrajtux dal-ktieb²⁰
• ‘I haven’t bought any bread’ ma xtrajt l-ebda ħobż (vs. ‘I have bought bread’ xtrajt ħobż)
• ‘I don’t have any book’ m’għandi l-ebda ktieb
• ‘I don’t feel like going out’ m’għandix aptit noħroġ
• ‘I have nothing to say’ m’għandi xejn x’ngħid

The sentence ‘You’re not lucky’ M’intix iffortunat is formed with nominal negation which is discussed in [Caubet 2002 4.7.2] below.

To these, one must add the pseudo-verbs, “this class of predicates, which includes items such as existential hemm, possessive għand- and għad- ‘still’” (Lucas 2023: 155-156; see also Čéplö in this volume):

• M’hemmx dubju li s-suq globali se jkompli jeżisti… ‘There is no doubt that the global market will continue to exist…’ (Lucas 2023: 156)

Examples from dialects:

• Żejtuni: ma baqūx ‘there isn’t any left (lit. they did not remain)’, m’għāmelx, ‘it didn’t rain’²¹
• Sannati: Dawk ma nitilfuhimx ‘those, we do not lose them’²²

There exist in SM and in the three dialects a set of negative polarity items, such as xejn ‘nothing’, l-ebda, ‘no/any’, ħadd ‘no one’, mkien ‘nowhere’, qatt ‘never’, lanqas ‘not even’, etc. When a negative sentence contains one of these items, the marker -x is dropped (Lucas 2023: 161-162).

Examples:

• SM: Ma mort imkien dis-sena ‘This year, I went nowhere’
• SM: Qatt ma xrobt kafè f’ħajti ‘In all my life, I have never drunk coffee’
• Żejtuni: Xej’ ma baqa’ ‘nothing is left’

5.7.2 How is nominal negation formed? How does one say: ‘Paul is not sick’, ‘I am not sick’, ‘Thomas is not a carpenter’, ‘You’re not a carpenter’, ‘Maria is not the director/headmistress’, ‘Maria is not my sister’, ‘I am not your brother’? Does the construction vary according to the person subject? Give the complete paradigm. [Caubet 2002 4.7.2]

Nominal negation is formed with the discontinuous markers ma…-x attached to the independent personal pronouns (see [Caubet 2002 4.2.1] above). The construction thus varies according to the person.

There is also, along with the grammaticalisation process, what Lucas (2023: 154) calls “A very common alternative to full person–number–gender agreement of the negative copula … the use of mhux as a frozen form in negative copular sentences with subjects of any person/number/gender:

• intom mhux biss union, imma assoċjazzjoni… ‘you are not just a union, but also an association…’ (Lucas 2023: 154)

What has been said of verbal negation applies here as well, i.e., ma is reduced to m’ before vowels and etymological /ġ/, /ʕ/, and /h/. With 3rd person pronouns, the construction is now fused orthographically, e.g., mhux ‘he is not’ (< *m’hux).

• Pawlu mhux marid ‘Paul is not sick’
• jien mhux marid, ‘I am not sick’
• Thomas mhux mastrudaxxa ‘Thomas is not a carpenter’
• int m’intix mastrudaxxa, you’re not a carpenter
• Maria mhix id-direttur/kap tal-iskola, ‘Maria is not the director/headmistress’
• Maria mhix oħti, ‘Maria is not my sister’
• jien m’iniex ħuk ‘I am not your brother’
• m’intix iffortunat ‘You’re not lucky’

As with verbs and pseudo-verbs, negative polarity items like xejn ‘nothing’ or qatt ‘never’ also trigger the dropping of the marker -x:

• SM: Jiġifieri magħhom , qatt m’inti rebbieħ ‘That means that with them, you are never a winner’
• Żejtuni: m’aeħnae kuntenti b’xej’ ‘we are not satisfied at all (lit. we are not satisfied with nothing)’

5.7.3 Is there any slang or dialectal variation in expressing ‘not a single, not the least’, ‘I dont know shit’, or not vulgar, ‘not a blade, not a shred, not a scrap’ where the latter is usually a small object like habb ‘a grain’, ‘a seed’? [Caubet 2002 4.7.3]

Yes, there is:

• Lanqas/’qas waħda mġiddma ‘Not a single one’ (mġiddma ‘leprous.f’)
• Ma kinux jafu farka dwar il-festa ‘They didn’t know zilch about the feast’ (farka ‘crumb’)
• Lanqas/’qas sibna ħabba mġiddma fil-karus ‘We didn’t even find a [type of] coin in the money box’ (ħabba ‘grain, very small coin, something of negligible value’)
• Ma ħalliex ħabba ‘He didn’t leave anything significant (lit. a grain)’
• Ma ħalliex sold ‘He didn’t leave a penny’ (sold ‘penny’)

Sometimes, a relative clause can be used to strengthen the negation: - Ma rawx tifla li hi tifla ‘They didn’t even find one single girl’ (lit. a girl who is a (proper) girl)

Sometimes, the vulgar word żobb ‘penis, dick’ in the sense of ‘nothing, nothing at all’ (see Italian cazzo which is equivalent in both meanings; compare English ‘dick’ in ‘I don’t know dick’).

• Question: Xtrajt kotba lbieraħ? ‘Did you buy books yesterday?’
  Answer: Xtrajt żobb! ‘I didn’t buy any (lit. I bought a dick)’
• Question: Papà, ixtrili karozza! ‘Dad, buy me a car!’
  Answer: Nixtrilek żobb! ‘I won’t buy you dick! (lit. I will buy you a dick)’

Note that such use of żobb also triggers the dropping of the -x.

In such cases, the vulgarity of the expression can be reduced by using non-vulgar nouns in place of żobb, such as suffara ‘whistle’ (compare English ‘shit’ > ‘zip, zilch’):

• Question: Papà, ixtrili karozza? ‘Dad, will you buy me a car?’
• Answer: Nixtrilek suffara! ‘I won’t buy you zip!’

As an illustration, we give some examples of phrases equivalent to ‘I don’t give a damn/shit/crap’, in descending order of vulgarity:

• Niġi għala bieb żobbi ‘lit. I arrive the door of my penis’
• Niġi għala bieb il-ħanżir ‘lit. I arrive on the door of the pig’
• Niġi naqa’ u nqum lit. I arrive, I fall and get up’

5.8 Yes-or-no questions or polar interrogation [Caubet 2002 4.8]

This question has been added because we felt it was missing in the questionnaire and because some new studies have been published on this matter (Wilmsen 2016, Lucas 2018) and a debate has arisen, calling for comparative research with Moroccan and all the other NA dialects.

To follow up on [Caubet 2002 4.7.1], we will examine the use of ši in NA polar questions and its existence, as –x, in Maltese. This was thoroughly studied by Wilmsen (2016) and discussed in Lucas (2023: 170-172) under the name “non negative –x” with the following example:

• Intomx taraw dak il-bieb fix-xellug tan-niċċa? ‘Do you see that door on the left of the niche?’ (Lucas 2023: 172)

For the use of interrogative ši in MA, Caubet (2021: 134) observes that “in the early 1980s, its use was not very widespread in Morocco. I no longer hear it around me today.” To take examples from the early 1980s, the particle was used with intransitive verbs, but also transitive ones (Caubet 1983b: 42-45):

• xdemti ši? ‘Have you worked?’
• nʕesti ši? ‘Have you slept?’
• lʕebti ši el-kora l-yum? ‘Have you played soccer today?’
• kliti ši? ‘Have you eaten?’
• kayn ši xobz? ‘Is there (any) bread?’
• ʕendek ši xobz? ‘Do you have bread?’

Note that the last two examples involve an existential predicate and a pseudo-verb.

Talking about the existence of this seldom described form for SM, Wilmsen (2014), in what he calls “polar interrogative –š/ši” explains that there is only one example presented in Borg & Azzopardi, a reference book on Maltese (1997:4):

• Ħriġtux mill-forn kmieni wisq? ‘Did you take it out of the oven too early?’

Although the etymology given by Wilmsen for -x is not convincing, it seems much more interesting to compare it with NA common origin form ‘thing’ (Lucas 2018, Souag 2018, Caubet 1983a and 1983b, Caubet 2021). Be that as it may, the examples gathered by Wilmsen are extremely useful for Maltese. Wilmsen goes back to the 19th century with Francis Vella’s manual (1831: 249), whose first example in the section titled “Of interrogative verbs” is:

In our interrogative phrases we affix x to the end of the verb; as,
Have you eaten ? Chiltûx?

This happens to be the exact parallel of MA’s kliti ši?. Vella goes on to give a complete paradigm with independent pronouns and with the verb kien (Table 1 in Wilmsen 2016: 177), adapted from Vella (1831: 249), given here in original spelling and new formatting:

Wilmsen (2016: 178) also mentions a 20th century source, namely Sutcliffe (1936), who documented interrogative –š occuring, e.g., with the verb ġie as ġewx ‘have they come?’ and with the pseudo-verb għand-:

• għandekx il-ħila tmur iġġib fitit taċ-ċomb? ‘have you the courage to go and fetch a little lead?’ (Wilmsen 2016: 178; Sutcliffe 1936: 211).

Although this form is not common nowadays, it is important to know of its historic existence. A contemporary example, as a confirmation request (SM):

• Mortx ittih mitt ewro wkoll? ‘You didn’t give him 100 euros, did you?’

Pereira (2003: 37) has similar examples from Tripoli (Libya) (our translation, original transcription):

The particle ši (or š or -ěš) is placed directly after the verb … klä-ši? ‘did he eat?’; bɛīdä-ši? ‘is she far away?’; yudxulū-š? ‘will they come back?’

Lameen Souag (2018: 62) has examples for 19th century Algiers:

• djaoueb chi (sic) ‘Did he answer?’ (1845)
• andek chi bezzaf menn-ou? (sic) ‘Do you have a lot of it?’ (1847)

The analysis for Moroccan ši also applies to Libyan and Algerian ši (or š) and to Maltese interrogative –x.

In SM, polar interrogation is indicated either by the tone of the sentence, or by the use of the pronoun huwa/hu with suffixed interrogative [ʃ], which is in fact a tag question. Change in intonation:

• SM: It-tfal marru l-iskola?
  [ɪtˈtfɐːl ’mɐrrʊ lɪsˈkɔːlɐ] with a rising intonation
  ‘Did the children go to school?’

SM huwa/hu and Sannati: hy as a tag question:

• SM: It-tfal marru l-iskola, hux?
  [ɪtˈtfɐːl ˈmɐrrʊ lɪsˈkɔːlɐ uːʃ] the intonation falls, and rises on the tag, hux
  ‘The children went to school, right?’
• Sannati: Toħroġ barra, hy?
  [ˈtɔhrɔtʃ ˈbɐrrɐ yː]
  ‘You’re going outside, right?’

For hy, it really appears to have become an enclitic, and a creaky voice [x̰] can occur linking barra and (h)y, which sound like a single phonetic word [ˈbɐrrɐ͜y: / ˈbɐrrɐ̰y:] falling intonation with the stress on [ˈbɐ] and rising intonation of the [y:].

We add this section as a continuation of the on-going debate, and a call for future research on this topic.

6 Lexicon [Caubet 2002.5]

The following is a list of words where variation appears particularly clearly for the North-African dialects. For example, it is important to know what is the verb for ‘to do/to make’ (ʕmel or dār), ‘to see’ (ṛa or šāf), ‘to take away’ (ʕebba or dda). In the examples given, the first term is associated with first-wave dialects, the second with more Bedouin-like second-wave dialects.

SM has some typical first-wave vocabulary: għamel ‘do’, ra ‘see’, sab ‘find’, bagħat ‘send’, saqsa ‘ask’, ilbieraħ ‘yesterday’, lanġas ‘pear’, xita ‘rain’, etc.

6.1 Gender: What gender are the words for ‘door’, ‘house’, ‘knife’, ‘dagger’, ‘oil’, ‘wool’, ‘leg’/‘foot’, ‘water’, ‘room’? The words for ‘moon’, ‘sun’, ‘belly’, ‘stomach’, ‘heart’, ‘shop’, ‘earth’, ‘road’, ‘fire’? [Caubet 2002 5.1]

In first-wave NA dialects some words have varying gender (and do not usually have the feminine suffix –a(t)), some keeping the Old Arabic feminine for knives and swords or some body parts, and other probably influenced by the Amazigh substrate which is less important in Malta and Gozo.

For SM, ‘knife’ sikkina is feminine (in –a), while ‘dagger’ sejf is masculine. For body parts, ‘belly’ żaqq is feminine, and so is ‘heart’ qalb (f) (unlike Arabic, where it is masculine), whereas ‘leg/foot’ can be riġel (m) and sieq (f).

‘House’ is feminine dar (f) and so is ‘road’ triq (f), but ‘door’ bieb (m), ‘fire’ nar (m), ‘water’ (m) and ilma (m) are masculine.

Probably under Amazigh influence, ‘oil’, ‘wool’ and ‘shop’ are feminine in first-wave dialects in Morocco. In SM, they are all masculine: ‘oil’ żejt (m), ‘wool’ suf (m), ‘shop’ ħanut (m).

Like in Arabic, the ‘moon’ is masculine qamar (m), while the ‘sun’ is feminine xemx (f). In Romance languages, it is the other way round, and so e.g. in Italian, the sun is masculine (il sole) and the moon feminine (la luna).

‘Soil’ ħamrija (f) and ‘earth’ art (f) are both feminine, like in Arabic.

7 Conclusion

This questionnaire is addressed to the linguist who must formulate the proper questions in order to fill it in. As far as the lexicon goes, the questionnaire is very general, leaving apart all the technical vocabulary and the neologisms.

Although the research didn’t bring to light lexicon related to the three dialects, the phonetic and phonological branches compensated for the lexical lacuna. Their richness in the vocalic inventory, together with the imāla distribution and the [ʕ] found in Żurrieqi are a few aspects which vouch for the bond between Maltese (whether Standard or the dialects) and Arabic dialects, such as Moroccan Arabic.

Findings such as the constant inclusion of the personal pronouns in Żurrieqi (as opposed to the dropping of personal pronouns in SM) and the regular use of ħa to construct the future tense in Sannati are surely valid arguments for more in-depth studies of these three dialects. We hope that our work, albeit conducted on a small scale, contributes to on-going dialectal studies on Malta and Gozo (like Fabri, Spagnol, Vella, Klimiuk, Lipnicka, and others) giving another angle of approach, and helps safeguard the richness of this Maltese patrimony.

8 Acknowledgments

This article is the fruit of a collaboration between a promising young student from L-Università ta’ Malta reading for a Masters in Teaching and Learning in Maltese, Daniel Attard, and a Professor Emerita of North African Arabic from Inalco, Dominique Caubet. This might sound like an odd pair, who exchanged by email and WhatsApp, but we decided to launch an experiment, whose - very provisional - result we present here in honour of Professor Thomas Stolz.

9 Appendix: Samples of dialectal texts

To conclude, we are presenting short samples of the spontaneous texts recorded in 2025 in all three dialects. We hope to use these texts for further studies. The extracts are presented sentence by sentence, in Maltese orthography, IPA and English translation.

9.1 Żejtuni

The interviewees are Żjt 1 (male, age 70) and Żjt 2 (male, age 53)

9.2 Żurrieqi

The interviewees are Żrq 1 (male, age 74) and Żrq 2 (81, age male)

9.3 Sannati

The interviewees are Snt 1 (male, age 23) and Snt 2 (female, 43)

10 References

Aguadé, Jordi. 1994. “La formation du réfléchi-passif dans le dialecte arabe de Skura (Maroc).” In Caubet, Dominique and Martine Vanhove (eds.), Actes des premieres journées internationales de dialectologie arabe de Paris, 71-78. Paris: Presses de l’INALCO.

Attard, Daniel. 2024. L-ewwel snin tal-Għaqda tal-Kittieba tal-Malti. Il-Kalkara: Heritage Malta Publishing.

Azzopardi-Alexander, Marie. 2011. “The vowel systems of Xlukkajr and Naduri.” In Caruana Sandro, Ray Fabri & Thomas Stolz (eds.), Variation and Change*, 233–253. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

Aquilina, Joseph. 1987. Maltese-English Dictionary. Vol. I: A-L. Santa Venera: Midsea Books.

Aquilina, Joseph. 1995. “Language and Village Dialects.” In Lino Briguglio and Joseph Bezzina (eds.), Gozo And Its Culture, 106-114. Gozo: Formatek Ltd.

Aquilina, Joseph, and Benedict Isserlin. 1981. A Survey of Contemporary Dialectal Maltese: Report on the Results of Fieldwork undertaken during year 1964-1971. Leeds: Isserlin.

Benmoftah, Najah & Christophe Pereira. 2019. “Les futurs en arabe de Tripoli (Libye) : temporalité, aspectualité et modalités.” In Miller Catherine, Alexandrine Barontini, Marie-Aimée Germanos, Jairo Guerrero & Christophe Pereira Studies on Arabic Dialectology and Sociolinguistics. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of AIDA held in Marseille from May 30th to June 2nd 2017, 25-37. Aix-en-Provence: Institut de recherches et d’études sur les mondes arabes et musulmans. https:// doi.org/10.4000/books.iremam.4869

Borg, Alexander. 1977. “Reflexes of pausal forms in Maltese rural dialects.” Israel Oriental Studies (7). 211-225.

Brincat, Joseph. 1977. “Malta e Pantelleria: alla ricerca di un sostratto commune.” Journal of Maltese Studies 11. 42–54.

Brincat, Joseph M. 2021. Maltese and Other Languages. A Linguistic History of Malta. Santa Venera: Midsea Books.

Camilleri, Antoinette and Martine Vanhove. 1994. “A Phonetic and Phonological Description of the Maltese Dialect of Mġarr (Malta).” Zeitschrift für arabische Linguistik 1994 (28). 87-110.

Caubet, Dominique. 1983a. La détermination en arabe marocain (Collection ERA 642). Paris: Université Paris 7.

Caubet, Dominique. 1983b. “Quantification, négation, interrogation: les emplois de la particule «ši» en arabe marocain.” Arabica 30 (3). 227-245.

Caubet, Dominique. 2002. “Questionnaire de dialectologie du Maghreb (d’après les travaux de W. Marçais, M. Cohen, G.S. Colin, J. Cantineau, D. Cohen, Ph. Marçais, etc.).” Estudios de dialectologia norteafricana y andalusi 2000-2001 (5). 73-92.

Caubet, Dominique. 2017. “Les parlers du Nord-Ouest marocain à partir de corpus recueillis dans la région en 1992-1995 (sous la direction de Simon Lévy).” In Ángeles Vicente, Dominique Caubet & Amina Naciri Azzouz (eds.), La région du Nord-Ouest marocain: Parlers et pratiques sociales et culturelles 109-142. Zaragoza: Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza.

Caubet, Dominique. 2021. “Revisiter quelques constructions apparentées du ‘berbère’ et de l’‘arabe maghrébin’ – tamazight et darija : les particules ‘ši’ et ‘bu’ et la particule prédicative ‘d’”. In Merolla, Caubet, Naït Zerad & Cassuto (eds.). Les Études Berbères à l’ère de l’institutionnalisation de tamaziɣt. Mélanges en l’honneur de Salem Chaker et Abdellah Bounfour, Paris: L’Harmattan (Série Tira), 116-144.

Caubet, Dominique. 2022. “Revisiting the use of future in Darija: Confirming the emergence of a new a- preverb.” In Chikovani, Guram, and Zviad Tskhvediani (eds.), Studies on Arabic Dialectology and Sociolinguistics. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of AIDA held in Kutaisi in June 10-13, 2019, 109-120. Kutaisi: Akaki Tsereteli State University.

Caubet, Dominique. 2025. “Pantelleria Arabic, a peripheral dialect?” In Bituna, Sitaru, Ovidiu Pietrǎreanu, and Laura Sitaru (eds.), Bridging Cultures, Building Legacies through Arabic. A Festschrift for George Grigore, 141-162. Bucharest: Bucharest University Press.

Caubet, Dominique. 2025. “Pantelleria: its Arabic dialect reconsidered with a little help from Maltese”. In Vorholt, Maike, Raffaello Bezzina, and Michela Vella (eds.), The Next Century of Maltese Linguistics, in print. Berlin: De Gruyter.

Chaker, Salem, and Caubet, Dominique. 1996. La négation en berbère et en arabe maghrébin. Paris: L’Harmattan.

Cohen, D. & Caubet, D. 2000. “Un questionnaire différentiel pour la dialectologie arabe.” Oriente Moderno XIX (LXXX), n. s., 1 – 2000, Studi di Dialettologia Araba. 1-23.

Fabri, Ray, Spagnol, Michael & Vella, Alexandra. 2023. Ten Years of Research on the Dialects of Malta and Gozo. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Maltese Linguistics, 18–20 September 2023, Universität Bremen.

Cutajar, Fransianne. 2018. Id-Diminuttiv u l-Akkrexxittiv fil-Malti. Unpublished BA thesis, University of Malta.

Farrugia, Ruben. 2010. Aspetti soċjolingwistiċi tad-djalett ta’ Sannat u s-sistema vokalika tiegħu. Unpublished BA thesis, University of Malta.

Hammett, Sandra. 2012. Maltese within the Maghrebi dialectological framework: A study based on the questionnaire by D. Caubet. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Exeter.

Klimiuk, Maciej and Maria Lipnicka. 2019. “Dialectology in Practice: Notes from Fieldwork in Gozo.” In Arnold, Werner & Maciej Klimiuk (eds.), Arabic Dialectology: Methodology and Field Research, 23–32. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.

Klimiuk, Maciej. 2021. “Language Questionnaire for Gozo, Malta”. Folia Orientalia 2021 (58). 111-190. doi:10.24425/for.2021.142214

Klimiuk, Maciej and Maria Lipnicka. 2022a. “Fishing and Cyclone Cutting: A Text from the Area of Għasri within the Dialect Continuum of Gozo (Malta).” Mediterranean Language Review 29. 19–52.

Klimiuk, Maciej and Maria Lipnicka. 2022b. “The Gozitan Dialect of Xewkija: Three Recorded Dialogues and Some Preliminary Remarks.” In Cohen, Yoram, Amir Gilan, Nathan Wasserman, Letizia Cerqueglini & Beata Sheyhatovitch (eds.) The IOS Annual Volume 22: “Telling of Olden Kings”, 145–77. Leiden: Brill. doi:10.1163/9789004526792_008.

Lipnicka, Maria. 2022. “Pausal Diphthongisation in Gozitan Dialects Compared to Zaḥlé, Lebanon.” In Klimiuk, Maciej (ed.), Semitic Dialects and Dialectology: Fieldwork—Community—Change, 229–241. Heidelberg: Heidelberg University Publishing. doi:10.17885/heiup.859.c13963

Lipnicka, Maria. 2025. The Dialect of Għarb (Gozo/Malta). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. (Semitica Viva 67)

Lucas, Christopher. 2018. “On Wilmsen on the Development of Postverbal Negation in Dialectal Arabic.” Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik 67. 44-70. doi:10.13173/zeitarabling.67.0044.

Lucas, Christopher. 2023. “Negation in Maltese.” Journal of Maltese Studies 30. 149-175.

Owens, Jonathan. 2006. A Linguistic History of Arabic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pereira, Christophe. 2003. “Le parler arabe de Tripoli (Libye), état des lieux d’après les travaux de Hans Stumme, Antonio Cesàro, Eugenio Griffini…” Estudios de dialectología norteafricana y andalusí 2003 (7). 7-57.

Pereira, Christophe. 2008. “Aperçu du système aspecto-temporel du parler arabe de Tripoli (Libye).” In Procházka, Stephan & Ritt-Benmimoun, Veronika (eds.), Between the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. Studies on Contemporary Arabic Dialects. Proceedings of the 7th AIDA Conference, Held in Vienna from 5-9 September 2006, 329-348. Wien: Institut für Orientalistik der Universität Wien.

Pereira, Christophe. 2010. Le parler arabe de Tripoli (Libye). Zaragoza. Instituto de Estudios Islámicos y del Oriente Próximo. (Serie Estudios Árabes e Islámicos. Subserie Estudios de Dialectología Árabe. 4)

Puech, Gilbert. 1994. Ethnotextes Maltais. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz Verlag.

Puech, Gilbert. 2018. “Loss of emphatic and guttural consonants: From medieval to contemporary Maltese.” In Paggio, Patrizia, and Albert Gatt (eds.), The languages of Malta, 7-54. Berlin: Language Science Press. (Studies in Diversity Linguistics 18) doi:10.5281/zenodo.1181787.

Scicluna, Karl, Saviour S. Agius, and Chris Giordano. 2018. Inħaddem il-Malti Tajjeb: Manwal Prattiku tal-Grammatika. San Ġwann: BDL Publishing.

Sutcliffe, Edmund. 1936.* A Grammar of the Maltese Language. With Chrestomathy and Vocabulary.* Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Vanhove, Martine. 1999. “La dialectologue du Maltais et son histoire.” In Paris, Catherine (ed.), Revue d’ethnolinguistique (Cahiers du Lacito), 171-191. Leuven: Peeters.

Vanhove, Martine. 2009. “The nominal quantifier xi in Maltese.” In Ray Fabri (ed.), Maltese linguistics: A Snapshot. In memory of Joseph A. Cremona (1922–2003) (Il-Lingwa Tagħna - Our Language 1/2009), 17-33. Bochum: Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.

Vanhove, Martine. 2016. “From Maltese phonology to morphogenesis: A tribute to David Cohen.” In Puech, Gilbert, and Benjamin Saade (ed.), Shifts and Patterns in Maltese, 1-15. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi:10.1515/9783110496376-002.

Vella, Alexandra. 2011. “The phonetic implementation of falling pitch accents in dialectal Maltese: a preliminary study of the intonation of Gozitan Żebbuġi.” In Embarki, Mohammed, and Mona Ennaji (eds.), Modern trends in Arabic dialectology, 211-238. Trenton, NJ: Red Sea Press.

Vella, Alexandra. 2024. Towards a dialect mapping approach to research on the dialects of Malta and Gozo. In Caruana, Sandro (ed.), Malta and Italy. Language, linguistics, film and literature. Writings in honour of Joseph M. Brincat, 125-137, Santa Venera: Midsea Books.

Vella, Francis. 1831. Maltese Grammar for the use of the English. Livorno: Glaucus Masi.

Wilmsen, David. 2016. “Polar interrogative -š in Maltese: Developments and antecedents”. In Puech, Gilbert, and Benjamin Saade (ed.), Shifts and Patterns in Maltese, 175-198. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi:10.1515/9783110496376-008.