Question for Sister Samia
-
Salaam Badr
Your question is ambiguous. Here are the diacritic signs specific to Arabic (ref. Wiki)
( and stand alone ء hamza indicates a glottal stop.
( ) tanwn (ن symbols. Serve a grammatical role in Arabic. The sign is most commonly written in combination with (Alif), e.g
) shadda Gemination (doubling) of consonants.
( ) wala Indicates where an alif is not pronounced.
( ) madda. A replacement for two alifs in a row. Read as a glottal stop followed by a long /a/.
(ٰ superscript alif (also "short" or "dagger alif". A rare replacement for "long" Alif in some words.
arakt (In Arabic also called tashkl).
- ( ) fata (a)
- ( ) kasra (i)
- ( ) amma (u)
- ( ) sukn (no vowel)
The arakt or vowel points serve two purposes
- They serve as a phonetical guide. They indicate the presence of short vowels (fata, kasra, or amma) or their absence (sukn).
- At the last letter of a word, the vowel point reflects the inflection case or conjugation mood.
o For nouns, The amma is for the nominative, fata for the accusative, and kasra for the genitive.
o For verbs, the amma is for the imperfective, fata for the perfective, and the sukn is for verbs in the imperative or jussive moods.
All of them are essential not just for meaning purposes, but also for ease of pronunciation, as in many languages, English included (as the case of short vowels). In addition to this, the part of diacritics signs under "harakaat" above, such as fatha, damma, kasra and sukuun, plus their related tanween signs, have been assigned an additional role by grammarians to mark the function of a word in a sentence, such as subject, object,...etc. It's this role or function of harakaat that is not indispensible to understand a sentence, and native speakers are not very good in this subject; nor does the written material care about them or show them.
-
Dear Sister my thanks for such an elegant and elaborate write up. It will not only help us both in future as a referance point, but as well any other person intrested in this discussion. I could not have done it even if I tried.
Sister lets now discuss, Harkat as defined in your post. You are implying that these four signs, (four because you have written four, also I know people use sukun and jezm interchangabley). Hence for discussion sake we assume, sukun and Jezm are one and same. Since Sukun is integeral for understanding meanings of a given word, even for natives. Would you please share your undersdtanding of it. What is its role in imparting meaning to a given word? Thanks.
Badar
-
Dear Sister my thanks for such an elegant and elaborate write up. It will not only help us both in future as a referance point, but as well any other person intrested in this discussion. I could not have done it even if I tried.
Sister lets now discuss, Harkat as defined in your post. You are implying that these four signs, (four because you have written four, also I know people use sukun and jezm interchangabley). Hence for discussion sake we assume, sukun and Jezm are one and same. Since Sukun is integeral for understanding meanings of a given word, even for natives. Would you please share your undersdtanding of it. What is its role in imparting meaning to a given word? Thanks.
Badar
jazm and sukuun are not the same and are not used interchangeably not every sukuun is jazm and not all jazm is by sukuun. The only connection is that some jazm is demonstrated by a sukuun. We discussed this before where I explained this point. I cannot, even for discussion purposes, assume that jazm and sukuun are the same.
-
That is even better, because I have same understanding as well. Then first please settle this issue where would you put Jezm in your above classification? Would you place it with Harkats?
Badar
If you had the same understanding you wouldn't ask such a question jazm is not a sign, diacritical or not.
-
-
Thanks again, but to remove any ambiguities in this discussion. Would you please name "the round" sign in the text in question. First one happens to be on second Lam and second one on Yaa.
Badar
I am not a kid in a kindergarten, and I hate to be tested.
What we are discussing has no effect on the words of God, which were revealed without these diacritical signs. By now you should have known what I think just as I know where your questions lead to, going around and around to say sukuun (or jazm, according to you) is the end of a word and the beginning of another. If you do not want to accept my understanding, fair enough. I am not taking yours, and it's fair enough, too.
Let's agree to disagree. -
No reason to be upset sister. I asked you a simple question please label, rounded marks in the text, put the definition on them; from the elegant write up of yours above. These marks that you know what they are, based on your knowledge. But you are free not to, I respect your freedom. I have never asked you to agree with me. It is purely an academic discussion; so far no personal opinions involved or are there?
Pecae,
Badar
-
Dear and respected Sister Samia, I would never treat you with disrespect, so even do not imagine that. Final question in our discussion of, weather Jezm indicate end of a word or not? Do you consider Sibawayhi and his Al-Kitab as a respectable authority in Arabic grammar or not? My understanding is, when one says word Alkitab; more Arabs think of Sibawayhi's AlKitab, than real AlKitab.
Badar
-
Fair enough dear sis, how would you identify the "round mark" on second Lam in red, of this construct and second one on Ya. Thanks
Badar
There is no such "round mark" anywhere on this word throughout in the Grand Qur'aan. Only on the second lam there is a jezm on it. The word which is placed in colour seems to be the Urdu version of Qur'aan.
-
I have swiftly gone through first 100 Aa'ya'at of Chapter 2 and have noted that round mark only appears on the alif if it is at the end of a word, and it appears on waw in between in the word Aoulaika "these/they are". On no other word/consonant this sign appears. Pl throw some light on it.
-
Sister Samia it appears, that you have choosen not to answer my question about Sibawayhi and his Al-Kitab. However, irrespective of your answer. His position as Arab Linguist and Grammarian is established and well know. One way of resolving a disagreement between educated people is to call upon witness of an authority. Hence, I call upon his AlKitab, to support my argument that "Jezm" indeed does indicate end of a word. Please see below, chapter 2 of AlKitab. This whole chapter is dedicated to markers of end of words.
http//www.jalt.net/jaltusr/CurrJournals/SaraJalt1.pdf
Peace.
Badar
-
Hence, I call upon his AlKitab, to support my argument that "Jezm" indeed does indicate end of a word. Please see below, chapter 2 of AlKitab. This chapter is dedicated to markers of end of words.
http//www.jalt.net/jaltusr/CurrJournals/SaraJalt1.pdf
Peace.
Badar
I was hardly connected during the week-end.
Saying that "jazm" is a marker of end of words is not the same as saying it indicates the end of a word. Mmoreover, according to Sibawayh, (and it's well known), nouns are not subjecte to jazm. Also, jazm can be demonstrated in different ways, and not just a simple "sukuun" at the end of the word.
Three main points from the book of Sibaway which you quote a link of
-
Pages 3738 jazm, raf3, nasb and jarr are all signs of "i3raab grammar", which is "removable", i.e not pemanent and is changed according to the function/position of the word (such as the end signs for a noun when it's direct object, indirect object or subject)and affects the end of words. Mirroring these four "channels" are waqf; damm; fat7 and kasr, which are signs of "binaa' built-ins", and are permanent example the preposition "min ", where the sukuun is permanent whatever the position of the preposition is.
-
Pages 38-39 There's no "jarr/inclination" in a verb and there's no "jazm" for a noun.
-
Pages 44-45 The sign of jazm for verbs conjugated to the plural masculin, the dual and the second person feminine is the removal of the "nuun". This is also the sign of "nasb". In other words, the "nuun" is the sign of "raf3" and its disappearance is an indication that the verb is either in a state of nasb or jazm.
-