Arabic-L:LING:compromise, privacy

[Dilworth Parkinson]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arabic-L: Sat 01 Sep 2007
Moderator: Dilworth Parkinson <dilworth_parkinson at byu.edu>
[To post messages to the list, send them to arabic-l at byu.edu]
[To unsubscribe, send message from same address you subscribed from to
listserv at byu.edu with first line reading:
            unsubscribe arabic-l                                      ]

-------------------------Directory------------------------------------

1) Subject:compromise
2) Subject:Haqq
3) Subject: privacy

-------------------------Messages-----------------------------------
1)
Date: 01 Sep 2007
From:"Mahmoud Elsayess" <melsayess at socal.rr.com>
Subject:compromise

Actually, the other party of the treaty refused to have Muhammad's  
name preceded by "The Messenger of Allah".  Their argument was that  
if they recognized him as a prophet then there will be no need for  
the treaty. The Prophet compromised and ordered Ali to remove "The  
Messenger of Allah". Once that clause was removed the treaty was  
signed and peace flourished.

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
2)
Date: 01 Sep 2007
From:Alex Bellem <alex at bellem-hussein.demon.co.uk>
Subject:Haqq

Greetings,

Following this thread with interest and can no longer resist inserting
my twopenn'orth... This discussion keeps bringing to mind the
interpretation issues of Arabic 'Haqq'. It has always struck me that
English (at least) is very impoverished in not having a word that covers
all the nuances of Haqq, expecially with the issue of human rights being
such an international hot topic. I often speculate that English speakers
have an odd notion of 'rights' as something due only to us, and not
having a corollary notion of something being equally due from us,
whereas in Arabic the notion 'Huquuq' works both ways. If the English
word 'right' were more like Arabic in having both the 'giving' and
'taking' senses, would the English-speaking world have a less selfish
interpretation of what 'rights' are? (And I mean here the common
interpretation which leads to such refrains as 'I know my rights' or
'it's my right'.) I think this is an example of where a concept *has*
been driven by language... or is it that the word 'right' has a given
nuance because as a society the English-speaking world is more selfish?
Without over-generalising or resorting to pop linguistics, I think that
this too is an interesting example in the context of the previous
discussion!... which also leads me to wonder about the word 'anaani' -
how long has this been in use in Arabic? I've always thought it a word
derived from the translation of European 'selfish', etc, and not
particularly 'native' to Arabic - how was the notion 'selfish' (/ self-
serving / unconcerned with others) expressed in Old Arabic?

Best,
Alex.

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
2)
Date: 01 Sep 2007
From:Waheed Samy <wasamy at umich.edu>
Subject:privacy

Another Arabic term used to express the idea of privacy is hurriyyah  
حريّة.  For example, the expression على حرّيتنا is used  
to indicate: in private.

عايزين نقعد على حرّيتنا

Waheed

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
End of Arabic-L:  01 Sep 2007
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/arabic-l/attachments/20070901/36f8e440/attachment.htm>