A Challenge to all Arab Linguists arround the Globe
-
The said, ?We have listened, and we have refused to accept? {Refer 293}
And they say, ?We have listened, and we have refused to accept? {Refer 446}
And they said, ?We have listened, and we have accepted? {Refer 2285}
And if they had said, ?We have listened, and we have accepted? {Refer 446}
When you said, ?We have listened, and we have accepted? {Refer 507}
That they respond/say, ?We have listened, and we have accepted? {Refer 2451}
And you people listen and you people accept ? {Refer 6416}
The basic perception is to accept what is told. This is to believe in what is told. It is accepting it as true when some thing is told. Those who accept respond by expressing their acceptance or by the nod of head in affirmative. And those who do not accept what is told, they either refuse bluntly, or express their non acceptance by just turning away and departure.
You, the Messenger pronounce, ?You people accept the word of Allah and the Messenger.
For reason {gesture of refusal] you people turn away, in such case indeed Allah does not like those who refuse to accept .{Refer 332}
Whosoever listened and accepted the word of the Messenger, for reason {He is communicating nothing but word of Allah} he certainly accepted word of Allah.
And whoever turned away since We have not sent you as a guard upon them.{Refer 480}
Root of is and basic perception is to accept something wholeheartedly, by will without any external pressure/force/fear/compulsion.
{Refer 238}
comes after it, to follow exactly in the manner told, without there being interference from third party. Nothing should be in between what is being followed. To physically move, on footprints, act exactly on the line accepted. One has a theoretical aspect while the other has practical aspect/connotation. It means translating into action what was accepted.For Urdu speaking friends, here is a 21 page complete article.
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/book_6/21/slides/1.html -
Dear Anwer, In classic Arabic and Dal are interchangable. Hence, 9619 I am understanding as
Surah 96 19
As a matter of fact, do not be, with those who are in a state of subjugation and lowly; by lowering heads (in subservience) and because of this getting scarce and limited, with respect of means and resources, from me.However, and have similar meanings, hence the question if is actualy IV form of with written in place of . Anyhow for now I have used root until more confimation of this principle.
I have almost finished translating Sura 96, will share soon, then 9619 will make more sense.
Peace.
Badar
-
Dear Brother Anwer, I would like to thank you again for your participation in the discussion. It is also my request to you; that if you were to join hands with us in the cause of enhancing understanding of AlKitab. It would be a great pleasure as well a tremandous help.
Peace, may Rubb bless you.
Badar
-
Dear Anwer, In classic Arabic and Dal are interchangable.
And where did you get this idea from?
It is also my request to you; that if you were to join hands with us in the cause of enhancing understanding of AlKitab. It would be a great pleasure as well a tremandous help.
Peace, may Rubb bless you.
I hope I have been doing that, am doing that now and continue to do it. May our lord also bless you as well.
Godbless,
Anwar -
And where did you get this idea from?
I hope I have been doing that, am doing that now and continue to do it. May our lord also bless you as well.
Godbless,
AnwarAnwer
It is a very strange thing that a person who knows arabic (Probably the only person on this forum who knows some arabic) is involved in such a ???? type of discussion ?
Regards -
And where did you get this idea from?
Dear Anwer, from here,
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000005.pdf
as well please see here
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume5/00000104.pdf
Please just review description of Dal and Tay as alphabets.
Peace and Rubb bless you and all.
Badar
-
Peace,
Badar. The second link is interesting, but I am sure this only applies for those few words and may have a connection to idgham. you will find words that contain letters that are close soundwise (and in the position of the mouth) every once in a while being as synonyms. The first link you gave me is a definite explanation of idgham, something you might want to do more research on (this is also called assimilation in English and explains who letters affect the sound of other letters that follow or precede them). Extrapolating that the taw and dal are interchangeable is definitely a far reach. I would do some more research on idgham before making any more conclusions like this.
Q_Student,
I understand your point competely. And honestly I'm just trying to help in anyway I can. The world is full of very opinionated and many times very wrong people. But if someone asks me for help I will do my best and just hope that that knowledge I've given doesn't get distorted or used for the wrong purposes in the future.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
Badar. The second link is interesting, but I am sure this only applies for those few words and may have a connection to idgham. you will find words that contain letters that are close soundwise (and in the position of the mouth) every once in a while being as synonyms. The first link you gave me is a definite explanation of idgham, something you might want to do more research on (this is also called assimilation in English and explains who letters affect the sound of other letters that follow or precede them). Extrapolating that the taw and dal are interchangeable is definitely a far reach. I would do some more research on idgham before making any more conclusions like this.
Godbless,
AnwarDear Anwer may Rubb bless you more. I read idgham a while ago. I did not understand it, to be like this, but you bring an intresting prospective. Hence, I will restudy idgham with this prospective to check if it makes sense.
However, this change of Alphabet is becoming an increasingly recurring and possible helpful principle in understanding certain words in Alkitab. I will give you another example, where it seem to apply in more ambigous situation and help understand other more mysterious words in AlKitab.
I asked the question on open forum. No body answered. Although, I got a personal respose affirming it. Since it is personal reponse I can not share with you who it was. This is to respect privacy of the person.
This is what my question was "Dear are you aware that in Classic Arabic, alphabet could be changed to in script?"
Response without name "Could be chaged or looks like? I know that reading the original text is difficult without having knowledge beforehand of what letters/words are being read."
Badar
-
Badar.
Also this is not a huge deal, but I wanted to correct you Badar. It is not Rubb it is Rabb. And it is Anwar, not Anwer. And may our Rabb also bless you.
Godbless,
AnwarDear Anwar, I stand corrected on both, transliteration of , as well spelling of your name. On other query, I am busy this weekend with visiting family so later.
May Rabb bless you.
Badar
-
Peace,
Yes pls show me where you think this interchange between jim and yaa has happened. I also think you may have made a visual mistake.
Godbless,
AnwarDear Anwar, here are the relavant referance link for above. I do not think that Jiim and Yaa are generated close enough in Vocal tract to justify or explain this exchange. Intresting, isn't?
Peace
Badar
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume2/00000005.pdf
-
Peace,
Wow, I am really glad you sited that. I always had a theory about that, having listened to the pronunciation of the Jeem in different Arabic countries. I will tell you this, the ONLY Arab group to maintain this original pronunciation of the jeem which is close to the yaa, are the Sudanese. And if you you move the jeem more to front of your mouth you get the most common (and closest to English) pronunciation of it. If you move it back in the throat you get the Egyptian and Yemeni Geem. But if you leave it in the middle it is a hybrid between a yaa and the more common J sound. This middle Jeem, that the Sudanese still employ I have always believed to be the most original form of the jeem, and you just confirmed my suspicions. Thakn you again for that and enjoy visiting your family.
Yaay, Sudanese! I love their jeem and their great Classical Arabic education. I think they have the best Classical Arabic education in the whole Arab world. As I have never been more impressed by well educated (in Arabic) Sudanese speakers compared to educated speakers from other Arabic countries. Oh and I also love the Maghrebi qaaf. Both the Maghrebi Qaaf and the Sudanese Jim are classic examples of conservative tendencies in these dialects.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
Wow, I am really glad you sited that. I always had a theory about that, having listened to the pronunciation of the Jeem in different Arabic countries. I will tell you this, the ONLY Arab group to maintain this original pronunciation of the jeem which is close to the yaa, are the Sudanese. And if you you move the jeem more to front of your mouth you get the most common (and closest to English) pronunciation of it. If you move it back in the throat you get the Egyptian and Yemeni Geem. But if you leave it in the middle it is a hybrid between a yaa and the more common J sound. This middle Jeem, that the Sudanese still employ I have always believed to be the most original form of the jeem, and you just confirmed my suspicions. Thakn you again for that and enjoy visiting your family.
Yaay, Sudanese! I love their jeem and their great Classical Arabic education. I think they have the best Classical Arabic education in the whole Arab world. As I have never been more impressed by well educated (in Arabic) Sudanese speakers compared to educated speakers from other Arabic countries. Oh and I also love the Maghrebi qaaf. Both the Maghrebi Qaaf and the Sudanese Jim are classic examples of conservative tendencies in these dialects.
Godbless,
AnwarDear Anwar, I am glad that you find this ignorant/illiterate of Arabic to be of some use. I reviewed, Idgham again today. I understood it, to be more relating to Tajweed before. That is only assimilation of alphabets in vocalization of words, not in script writing. Please see link below. Do you understand Idgham differently, if so please share some reference.
Badar
http//www.readwithtajweed.com/tajweed_Idghaam.htm
-
Idgham is not about writing it is about pronuncation. It is the original pronuncation of the Arabs. What do you mean by illiterate/ignorant of Arabic? Nowadays it is only related to the Quran. But it is about pronouncing Arabic well. However it shows up in writing as there are often ques to how something is to be pronounced in the Quran per the rules of old Arabic. You might want to review it more in depth as it concerns the measures of Arabic verbs. You will probably not find that on just any old site online. I woud pick up Wright's, 'A grammar of the Arabic language'.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Idgham is not about writing it is about pronuncation. It is the original pronuncation of the Arabs. What do you mean by illiterate/ignorant of Arabic? Nowadays it is only related to the Quran. But it is about pronouncing Arabic well. However it shows up in writing as there are often ques to how something is to be pronounced in the Quran per the rules of old Arabic. You might want to review it more in depth as it concerns the measures of Arabic verbs. You will probably not find that on just any old site online. I woud pick up Wright's, 'A grammar of the Arabic language'.
Godbless,
AnwarDear Anwar, thanks. Topic of Idgham is beyond Wright. I remember now, the last 6 chapter of Sibawayh's AlKitab are titiled as Bab Al Idgham. I am reviewing them.
Badar
-
Peace,
I think I have an idea of what you mean, but your question is way to broad and not specific at all. So let's take awsala for instance. In the imperfect it is yoosilu.
The two letters of these forms correspond to this grammatical change you are talking about. I don't think idgham is beyond, wright at all I'll have to review it to give you the right pages to review.Godbless,
Anwar -
Idgham is not about writing it is about pronuncation .
For non Arab, it may be otherway round. For him it is how to pronounce a written word. Like a non English student has to be told that "P" is silent in Psychology but it has to be there in the writing.
Language and its words describe things and matters around human beings. Language/Word must exist simultaneously with the creation. So both are something physical and concrete. Writing has to precede its pronunciation by others. Pronunciation is not converted into writing, it is the writing which is pronounced.
-
For non Arab, it may be otherway round. For him it is how to pronounce a written word. Like a non English student has to be told that "P" is silent in Psychology but it has to be there in the writing.
Language and its words describe things and matters around human beings. Language/Word must exist simultaneously with the creation. So both are something physical and concrete. Writing has to precede its pronunciation by others. Pronunciation is not converted into writing, it is the writing which is pronounced.
Dear Brother Mazhar, very humbly and politely that account above is absolutely incorrect and misleading. May I suggest, if you want few basic books in linguistics? If you do not care , it is okay. No intent to get into a fight. Just want to get records correct.
Badar