The Conflict of Theory in Arabic Grammar
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 4, No. 1, January 2014 The Conflict of Theory in Arabic Grammar Solehah Hj Yaacob which was already developed thousand years before the rise Abstract—There have been debates and discussions on of Greece. In order to faithfully reflect the transmission linguistics` argumentations used by both schools Basra and process of Arabic we have to concentrate on early Kufa in order to impose their principles in modification of manuscripts. However the conflict among the traditional Arabic Grammar. This kind of scenario contributes some Arab schools of grammar indicated that the differences in negatives and positives views among the scholars claimed that intellectual approaches occurred in modifying the Arabic BaÎra and Kufa were the two cities which permanently rivaled each other. In principle, BaÎra and Kufah do evidence two Grammar system. For example, the BaÎra School used differing linguistic and grammatical approaches. The school of philosophical and logical approaches in their analysis, Basra was generally more philosophically inclined when critique, and in modifying and replacing the Arabic Grammar formulating the system of Arabic grammar while the school of system. Contrary, the KËfah School concentrated on reading Kufah based its rules on evidence found in classical texts. the Holy QurÉn, adÊth and Arabic poetry. ÑÓsim bin AbÊ Although Basra applied more analogy does not mean that NujËd, Hamzah ZayyÉt and KisÉ‘Ê, who were from the Basran scholars did not also refer to the already existent linguistic corpus in the classical texts. In order to re-evaluate QurrÉ’ SabÑah, were also among the thinkers of the school. the above discussion, the researcher addresses some evidences They worked on hypothetical and contemporary cases [which from the linguistic corpus and analogical approach in Arabic required analogy]. Grammar. The aforementioned views have been discussed and clarified by some researchers, historians, linguists and Index Terms—Rival, analogical, anomaly, corpus. grammarians. They established that the BaÎra School based their approach on analogy and the KËfa School based their approach on anomaly. However, this research aims to verify I. INTRODUCTION the approach of the BaÎra and KËfa Schools in order to Classical Arabic had eight cases: accusative (nasab), investigate their principles in implementing the linguistic genetive (jar), nominative (rafÑ), apocopate (jazm), a-vowel argumentation. (fath), i-vowel (kasr), u-vowel (Ìam) and zero-vowel (waqf). Sibawayh divided the endings of the eight cases into four pairs: the accusative and a-vowel, the genitive and i-vowel, II. THE RIVALRY BETWEEN THE TWO SCHOOLS the nominative and u-vowel, and lastly the apocopate and The KËfah School split from the BaÎra school due to the zero-vowel. A word which receives different pairs because it dispute between Sibawayh and KisÉ`i, concerning the case of is produced by a governor, its ending is not permanent and ZanbËriah [1]. The different views regarding a grammar will be changed based on its position and use in the sentence. system continued until the arrival of FarÉ`, who based most This system can be called the process of governing or the of his analysis on analogy. Many historians of linguistics concept of al-Ñamil. ShawqÊ Öaif believed this kind of rule assert that he was influenced by BaÎran scholars, but this 1 was unique to Arabic grammar and a sufficient proof of its claim has been refuted by ShawqÊ Öaif [2], who argued that originality. The introduction of short-vowel signs in written Fara’ was an independent scholar and original in his thought. language has to be considered a separate development and However, when reviewing the sources, which Sibawayh does not interfere with the original syntax. Arabic as a referred to in his KitÉb, we have to agree that some of them complete and fully developed language already existed were from the KËfah School [3]. There is no doubt that there before the arrival of Prophet Ishmael used by the tribe was a substantial exchange of ideas between the scholars of QahÏÉn and HimyÉr. Arabic was the language spoken by a KËfah and BaÎrah, as for FarÉ`, who was considered the tribal leader called Jurhum who married the daughter of IrÉm, leader of the KËfan School, was found with Sibaway’s sÉm`s son after Noah’s flood, and through his offspring Al-KitÉb under his pillow, [4] at the time of his death. Thus, 2 Arabic became the language of a great nation . The offspring to suggest that BaÎra was completely free from KËfan ideas is of Ishmael arrived and spread the use of Arabic. Arabic was erroneous. The analogists’ system of grammar needs to be an original language with its unique system of grammar verified using the anomaly approach such as Sibawayh and JumhËr al-Nuhah allowed the use of the samÉÑ system in the in ﺑ ﻐ ﺘ ﺔً Manuscript received June 10, 2013; revised August 11, 2013. topic of ÍÉl (condition) [5]. Both agreed that the word Zayd appeared suddenly) is a gerund-describing) ﺘﺔًزَ ﻳْ ﺪٌ ﻃَ ﻠَ ﻊَ ﺑ ﻐ Solehah Hj Yaacob is with the Arabic Dept. Language & Literature International Islamic University Malaysia (e-mail: [email protected]). 1 ShawqÊ Öaif, al-MadÉris an-Nahwiyyah, Cairo: DÉr al-MÑÉrif, 1995, form. In another case, they accepted the qirÉ’ah shÉdhah in ﻓَ ﺒِ ﺬَ ﻝِ ﻚَ (”…p.20 certain verses, such as(“in that let them rejoice because the BaÎran School allowed the system in this , ﻓَ ﻠْ ﺘَ ﻔْ ﺮَ ﺣُ ﻮ ا See the critique of the traditions relating to Jurhum and his offspring in 2 the book of the Dutch scholar Dozy 1864:146 and ff. (in the chapter: `De and we will carry your“) وَ ﻝْ ﻨَ ﺤْ ﻤِ ﻞْ ﺧَ ﻄَ ﺎ ﻳَ ﺎ آُ ﻢْ ,tweede Gorhoem”). see Golziher, History of Grammar Among the Arabs, verses based on qiyÉs p.45 sins”). This means that the BaÎran scholars used analogy. A DOI: 10.7763/IJSSH.2014.V4.308 1 International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 4, No. 1, January 2014 number of propagators of anomaly accepted the use of prerogative of individuality in grammar, and allows the analogy in some cases, for example, with reference to tawkÊd, regulation and arrangement of grammar. This is not only according to the forms that remain on the highroad of ,أَآْﺘَﻌَﺎِن ,أَﺟْﻤَﻌَﺎنِ which became dual أَ ﺑْ ﺘَ ﻊَ and أَ ﺑْ ﺼَ ﻊَ , أَ آْ ﺘَ ﻊَ , أَ ﺟْ ﻤَ ﻊَ regularity, but also those forms which are used according to وَ ﻗَ ﺪْ :as al-RaÌi stated in his SharÍ al-KÉfiah أَﺑْﺘَﻌَﺎِن and أَﺑْﺼَﻌَﺎنِ the individual will of poets” [15]. He continues: “What, quite أَ ﺟَ ﺎ زَ اﻝﻜُﻮْﻓِﻴَُﻮن وَ ا ﻷَ ﺧْ ﻔَ ﺶُ ﻝِﻤُﺜَﻨﱠﻰ ا ﻝ ﻤُ ﺬَ آﱠ ﺮِ أَﺟْﻤَﻌَﺎنِ أَآْﺘَﻌَﺎِن أَﺑْﺼَﻌَﺎنِ أَ ﺑْ ﺘَ ﻌَ ﺎ نِ ، وَﻝِﻤُﺜَﻨﱠﻰ wrongly, used to be called grammarians’ `exceptions` are [6] ا ﻝ ﻤُ ﺆَ ﻥﱠ ﺚِ ﺟَﻤْﻌَﺎوَانِ، آَﺘْﻌَﺎوَانِ، ﺑَﺼْﻌَﺎوَانِ، ﺑَ ﺘْ ﻌَ ﺎ وَ ا نِ وَ هُ ﻮَ ﻏَ ﻴْ ﺮُ ﻡَ ﺴْ ﻤُ ﻮ عٌ Another case is their acceptance of the accusative case in called by Arab grammarians’, al-ShÉÐ (plur. as-ShawÉÐ), is or properly speaking, isa form not conforming to , ﻝ ﻴ ﻜ ﻮ نَ fiÑil muÌÉriÑ (present and future tense verb) such as grammatical analogy (al-qiyÉs), but which appears in . وَ ا ﻝ ﻜُ ﻮْ ﻓِ ﻴُ ﻮْ نَ ﻳُﺠَﻮﱢزُونَ ا ﻝ ﻨﱠ ﺼْ ﺐَ ﻓِﻲ ﻡِ ﺜْ ﻠِ ﻪِ :[also mentioned by al-RaÌi [7 And the KËfans permit this particular verb or the like of ancient poetry”, In response to the above mentioned) ﻗِ ﻴَ ﺎ ﺱ ﺎً it, to take the accusative case based on qiyÉs (analogy). allegations made by Goldziher, we ought to investigate how In this regard, Ignaz Goldziher made the following far the acceptance of analogy (qiyÉs) went in the BaÎran observation: “I would like to highlight one which provides in School. This has been illustrated by al-Akhfash al-AwsÉt itself a very ample source for the study of the theoretical who noted that Sibawayh accepted most of the qira‘Ét ا ﻝ ﻘِ ﺮَ ا ءَ ةُ ﻻ ُﺕﺨَﺎﻝَﻒُ، ﻷﻥﻬﺎ ﺱُ ﻨّ ﺔٌ tendencies of the two schools, this is the book of Ibn shÉdhah in his qiyas as he said al-AnbÉri entitled Al-InsÉf FÊ MasÉil al-KhilÉf Bayna (Al-QirÉ’ah does not violate (the grammar) because it is NaÍwiyyÊna al-BaÎriyÊna wa al-KËfiyyÊna” [8]. Later on he customary.) [16]. Let us examine some of the cases of explains that the “two above-mentioned schools are analogy (qiyÉs), anomaly (samÉÑ) and qira‘Ét shÉdhah. distinguished by almost the same criteria that divide the Grammatical anomalies were found in the classical Arab In case the Ñamil . آَ ﺎ ﺋِ ﻦٌ ﻡَ ﻘْ ﻌَ ﺪَ اﻝﻘَﺎ ﺑِ ﻠَ ﺔِ means هُ ﻮَ ﻡِ ﻨﱢ ﻲْ ﻡَ ﻘْ ﻌَ ﺪٌ ا ﻝ ﻘَ ﺎ ﺑِ ﻠَ ﺔِ analogists from the anomalists in the field of classical poem by analogy the , ﻡَ ﻔْ ﻌُ ﻮ لٌ ﻓِ ﻴْ ﻪِ grammar” [9]. Ibn al-AnbÉri’s work consists of 121 is not from the same root as آَ ﺎ ﺋِ ﻦٌ ﻓِﻲ ﻡَ ﻘْ ﻌَ ﺪِ [should be added, meaning [17 (ﻓﻲ) problems, which needs to be revised, and its content preoposition which makes this a case of anomaly. Ibn Malik hinted at, ا ﻝ ﻘَ ﺎ ﺑِ ﻠَ ﺔِ thoroughly analyzed. According to Gotthold Weil [10], the rival theory between BaÎra and KËfa has to be dismissed due another case of anomaly [18]. You ) ﻝﻚ ا ﻝ ﻌ ﺰﱡ إ نْ ﻡَ ﻮْ ﻻَ كَ ﻋﺰﱠ، و إ نْ ﻳ ﻬُ ﻦْ * ﻓﺄﻥﺖ ﻝﺪى ﺑُ ﺤ ﺒ ﻮ ﺣ ﺔِ اﻝﻬﻮن آ ﺎ ﺋ ﻦُ to a lack of evidence that a full-fledged KËfan school actually existed.