The Relationship Between Hebrew and Aramaic

What started as a few haaros about Onkelos has now turned into a full on exposition of the topic about the relationship between Hebrew and Aramaic. From the below sources, we will see that they are very closely related, perhaps a spin off of one another, and how different meforshim see parallels between them, some make closer parallels than others.

See the introduction to the Jastrow Dictionary who speaks about the history of the evolution of Aramaic from Hebrew, at length.

Maharsha to Megilla 3a (brought in the Introduction to Artscroll Onkelos, p. xviii) says that Yaakov Avinu’s wives spoke Aramaic as their first language, and therefore the Torah was also given with the Aramaic translation, the Jews’ "mother tongue".

In another place we find that Lashon HaKodesh was the conversant language used by the Imahaos. The passuk says:

בראשית כ״ד:כ״ג

(כג) וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ בַּת־מִ֣י אַ֔תְּ הַגִּ֥ידִי נָ֖א לִ֑י הֲיֵ֧שׁ בֵּית־אָבִ֛יךְ מָק֥וֹם לָ֖נוּ לָלִֽין׃

Genesis 24:23

(23) “Pray tell me,” he said, “whose daughter are you? Is there room in your father’s house for us to spend the night?”

רש"י על בראשית כ״ד:כ״ג

(א) ויאמר בת מי את. לְאַחַר שֶׁנָּתַן לָהּ שְׁאָלָהּ, לְפִי שֶׁהָיָה בָּטוּחַ בִּזְכוּתוֹ שֶׁל אַבְרָהָם שֶׁהִצְלִיחַ הַקָּבָּ"ה דַּרְכּוֹ: (ב) ללין. לִינָה אַחַת, לִין שֵׁם דָּבָר; וְהִיא אָמְרָה לָלוּן – כַּמָּה לִינוֹת:

Rashi on Genesis 24:23

(2) ללין TO LODGE IN — the word means one night’s lodging. The word לין is a noun (of the same form as גיל ,שיר). She however said (Genesis 24:25) ללון (a verb, “to lodge” generally) meaning many nights’ lodging (Genesis Rabbah 60:6).

On that Medrash, Yefei Toar says that from this whole variation in terminologies being used, it is clear that Rivka and Eliezer were speaking in Lashon HaKodesh.
What is puzzling to me is that Onkelos explains both terminologies in the same way without adapting the translation to the change in terminologies. Why not?
(See also Onkelos to the passuk in Noach by vayechal and vayiiyachel, where Rashi notes the variation in terminologies and Onkelos ignores it, Meat Tzori there nets this but gives no explanation as to why)

This debate about the usages of Lashon Hakodesh versus Aramaic throughout the Torah is discussed at length in the Hakdama to Tirgem Avraham, a sefer on Targum Onkelos.
His agenda in the sefer to show how all of the words of Aramaic really stem form Lashon Hakodesh, because Aramaic is really just a contorted form of Lashon HaKodesh.

Thus it is not be so difficult that sometimes Aramaic is used and sometimes Lashon HaKodesh is used, as it could be that it became distorted over a period of time.
See there where he posits the exact timeline of when Lashon HaKodesh began to become distorted:

This conversation also came up in Parshas Shoftim. The passuk says:

דברים ט״ז:כ״א

(כא) לֹֽא־תִטַּ֥ע לְךָ֛ אֲשֵׁרָ֖ה כׇּל־עֵ֑ץ אֵ֗צֶל מִזְבַּ֛ח יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ אֲשֶׁ֥ר תַּעֲשֶׂה־לָּֽךְ׃

Deuteronomy 16:21

(21) You shall not set up an Asheira, any tree beside the altar of your God יהוה that you may make for yourself

רש"י על דברים ט״ז:כ״א:א׳

(א) לא תטע לך אשרה. לְחַיְּבוֹ עָלֶיהָ מִשְּׁעַת נְטִיעָתָהּ, וַאֲפִלּוּ לֹא עֲבָדָהּ עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה עַל נְטִיעָתָהּ (שם):

Rashi on Deuteronomy 16:21:1

(1) לא תטע לך אשרה THOU SHALT NOT PLANT THEE AN ASHERA — This is intended to make one liable to punishment regarding it from the very moment that he plants it (the Ashera); even though he does not worship it he transgresses a negative command by the mere planting of it (Sifrei Devarim 145:1).

According to Rashi, the word Ashera means a tree, and the passuk is first prohibiting planting an Ashera tree anywhere in the world. Thus, Ashera means a tree according to Rashi. However, Onkelos reads the passuk in a different syntax:

תרגום אונקלוס על דברים ט״ז:כ״א

(כא) לָא תִצּוֹב לָךְ אֲשֵׁרַת כָּל אִילָן בִּסְטַר מַדְבְּחָא דַּיְיָ אֱלָהָךְ דִּי תַעְבֶּד לָךְ:

Onkelos Deuteronomy 16:21

(21) Do not plant an Asherah of any tree for yourself [or]near the altar of Adonoy, your God, that you will make for yourself.

Whereas according to Rashi's understanding of the syntax of the passuk, an Ashera can mean a type of tree, according to Onkelos' understanding of the passuk, the word Ashera clearly doesn't mean a type of tree, rather it is being used as a descriptive word for the word "etz." What then is the definition of the word "Ashera" mean in the passuk according to Onkelos?

ArtScroll Onkelos brings from some meforshim that the word Onkelos' uses, "Asheras", means "pathways of" , the same way the Ramban to our passuk does, as it is reminiscent of a Hebrew word of mentioned in Tehillim.

רמב"ן על דברים ט״ז:כ״א

(א) לא תטע לך אשרה כל אילן הנטוע על פתחי בית אלהים יקרא "אשרה" אולי בעבור שהוא שם דרך מראה אותו לעם יקרא כן מלשון תמוך אשורי במעגלותיך (תהלים יז ה) יזהיר הכתוב שלא יטע אילן אצל מזבח ה' לנוי ויחשוב שהוא כבוד והדר למזבח השם ואסר אותו בעבור שהוא מנהג עובדי עבודה זרה לטעת אילנות בפתחי בתי עבודה זרה שלהם...

Ramban on Deuteronomy 16:21

(1) THOU SHALT NOT PLANT THEE AN ASHEIRAH. Any tree planted at the entrance of a house of G-d is called asheirah. Possibly because it is because it shows the way to the [idolotrous] nation. The root of the word comes from ordereth the way aright (Psalms 59:23). Scripture thus admonishes not to plant a tree beside the altar of G-d for beauty and to think that it is an honor and glory to G-d’s altar. He prohibited it because it was a custom of the idolaters to plant trees at the entrances of their idol’s temples...

Again, we see that a root of an Aramaic word can stem from Hebrew.

See also Haksav VaHabbala who understands Onkelos slightly differently, but also with a root word that is Hebrew.

הכתב והקבלה, דברים ט״ז:כ״א

(א) לא תטע לך אשרה. הזהירתנו התורה בזה מלנטוע אילן אצל המזבח או בכל עזרה, בין אילן מאכל אפי' לנוי למקדש וליופי לו, כ"כ הרמב"ם (בסה"מ סי' י"ג ופ"ו מעכו"ם ה"ט); א"כ אין לפרש כאן אשרה כבשאר מקומות שהוא אילן הנעבד כבמתני' (דע"א ד' מ"ח) והוא אילן המיוחד לעובדי ירח, כמ"ש במכדרשב"י (בראשית מ"ט) כל אינן פלחי שמשא אקרון עובדי בעל, ואינון דפלחין לסיהרא אקרון עובדי אשרה. אבל צריך לפרש מלת אשרה לפי ההוראה העיקרית כמ"ש בעלי הלשון, ששם אשרה מסתעף משם "ישר", והוא תואר לכל מין אילן העולה ישר משרשו שאיננו נוטה לכאן ולכאן, אבל הוא עושה עם השטח שהוא עומד עליו זוית נצב, או שהוא ישר בעצמו שאין בו גבשושית ובלטיות כ"א ישר וחלק (גראדע אויפ- שיעסענד, אויפראגענד), ולהיות שהאילן הישר יותר מהודר לעבודה ישמש מלת אשרה בפרטית גם על אילן הנעבד (ע' רש"פ), ולפי שהאשרות היו ממין אילן מיוחד, לכן הוסיפה התורה לאמר כל עץ מאיזה מין שיהיה, ואין חילוק בין שהוא אילן מאכל או אילן סרק; ומה שדרשו בספרי מכל עץ לרבות את הבנין, אינו אלא אסמכתא (ערא"ם וצד"ל וזרע אברהם); ויש א"כ לתרגם אשרה כל עץ (אירגענד איינען גראדע אויפשיעסענדען בוימע), ויראה שלזה נתכוון אונקלס שתרגם אשירת כל אילן, הבין שלשת המלות אשרה כל עץ כאלו הם נסמכים יחד. וא"צ להוסיף אות וי"ו במלת כל כמ"ש הרא"ם:

HaKtav VeHaKabalah, Deuteronomy 16:21

...

Another place I found this intersection between Aramaic and its impression on the Hebrew language is in Parshas Ki Teitzei. The passuk says regarding the Ben Sorer U'Moreh, that the parents of the child would bring him to Beis Din to await his fate.

דברים כ״א:י״ט

(יט) וְתָ֥פְשׂוּ ב֖וֹ אָבִ֣יו וְאִמּ֑וֹ וְהוֹצִ֧יאוּ אֹת֛וֹ אֶל־זִקְנֵ֥י עִיר֖וֹ וְאֶל־שַׁ֥עַר מְקֹמֽוֹ׃

Deuteronomy 21:19

(19) his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town at the public place of his community.

תרגום אונקלוס על דברים כ״א:י״ט

(יט) וְיֶחֱדוּן בֵּיהּ אֲבוּהִי וְאִמֵּיהּ וְיַפְּקוּן יָתֵיהּ לָקֳדָם סָבֵי קַרְתֵּיהּ וְלִתְרַע בֵּית דִּין אַתְרֵיהּ:

Onkelos Deuteronomy 21:19

(19) His father and mother are to grasp him and take him out before the judges of his town and to the court in his location.

We see that Onkelos replaces the word "to" the elders to "before" the elders in this passuk.
However, in Parshas Devarim where Moshe was recounting how before Yisro's multiple beis-din idea was implemented he received all of the questions, the passuk uses the same terminology as the above passuk, but Onkelos does not replace "to" with the word "before." The passuk says:

דברים א׳:י״ז

(יז) לֹֽא־תַכִּ֨ירוּ פָנִ֜ים בַּמִּשְׁפָּ֗ט כַּקָּטֹ֤ן כַּגָּדֹל֙ תִּשְׁמָע֔וּן לֹ֤א תָג֙וּרוּ֙ מִפְּנֵי־אִ֔ישׁ כִּ֥י הַמִּשְׁפָּ֖ט לֵאלֹהִ֣ים ה֑וּא וְהַדָּבָר֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִקְשֶׁ֣ה מִכֶּ֔ם תַּקְרִב֥וּן אֵלַ֖י וּשְׁמַעְתִּֽיו׃

Deuteronomy 1:17

(17) You shall not be partial in judgment: hear out low and high alike. Fear neither party, for judgment is God’s. And any matter that is too difficult for you, you shall bring to me and I will hear it.”

תרגום אונקלוס על דברים א׳:י״ז

(יז) לָא תִשְׁתְּמוֹדְעוּן אַפִּין בְּדִינָא מִלֵּי זְעֵרָא כְרַבָּא תִּשְׁמְעוּן לָא תִדְחֲלוּן מִן קֳדָם גַּבְרָא אֲרֵי דִינָא דַּיְיָ הוּא וּפִתְגָּמָא דִּי יִקְשֵׁי מִנְּכוֹן תְּקָרְבוּן לְוָתִי וְאֶשְׁמְעִנֵּיהּ:

Onkelos Deuteronomy 1:17

(17) Do not show favor in judgement; [words] small and great alike will you hear out; do not fear any man; for justice belongs to God. And the matter that will be too difficult for you, bring to me and I will hear it.’’

The Pas'Shegen says the reason why Onkelos doesn't replace the word "to" with "before" in the passuk in Devarim but does in Parshas Ki Teitzei, is because in Ki Teizei the passuk is talking about any Beis Din, and therefore Moshe says "before" which is a deferential term, in order to show reverence to the Beis Din.
But in Devarim, Moshe is talking about rulings brought before himself, and therefore out of humility, he doesn't use a deferential term of "before" to refer to himself.

We see from here, it would seem, that although Moshe used the same words, the Aramaic difference is telling us the inflection that Moshe used when saying these two statements, not that he necassarily used different words. Or perhaps he actually said different words? T'B.