<div dir="ltr">------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Arabic-L: Thu 04 Apr 2013<br>Moderator: Dilworth Parkinson <<a href="mailto:dilworth_parkinson@byu.edu" target="_blank">dilworth_parkinson@byu.edu</a>><br>


[To post messages to the list, send them to <a href="mailto:arabic-l@byu.edu" target="_blank">arabic-l@byu.edu</a>]<br>[To unsubscribe, send message from same address you subscribed from to<br><a href="mailto:listserv@byu.edu" target="_blank">listserv@byu.edu</a> with first line reading:<br>


           unsubscribe arabic-l                                      ]<br><br>-------------------------Directory------------------------------------<br><br>1) Subject:LINGUIST review of Subjunctive Mood Book<br><br>-------------------------Messages-----------------------------------<br>


1)<br>Date: 04 Apr 2013<br>From:reposted from LINGUIST<br>Subject:LINGUIST review of Subjunctive Mood Book<br><br><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">AUTHOR: Arik Sadan</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">TITLE: The Subjunctive Mood in Arabic Grammatical Thought</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">SERIES TITLE: Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">PUBLISHER: Brill</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">YEAR: 2012</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">REVIEWER: Dinha Tobiya Gorgis, Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC)</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">SUMMARY</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">This book, a revised and abbreviated English version of the author’s M.A. and</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Ph.D. dissertations, treats one of the most controversial issues in Arabic</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">grammar, viz. the subjunctive mood in the verbal system of Classical Arabic</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">(CA). The other two moods associated with the imperfective verb, the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">indicative and the jussive, are treated as options or alternatives to the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">subjunctive according to various opinions attributed to mainly medieval Arab</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">grammarians. So the whole book is an elaborate overview and critical review of</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">what particles require the following imperfective verb to be assigned the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">subjunctive mood or otherwise.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">The author divides his work into a preface and eleven chapters, followed by a</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">discussion and conclusion, a bibliography, two appendices and three indexes.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Each of the first nine chapters, all structured alike, presents one particle,</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">whether bound or free morpheme. The particles, termed as either primary or</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">secondary, are generally believed to determine the form of the following</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">imperfective verb, sometimes called operators. The majority of medieval Arab</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">grammarians’ examples, notably those of the Basra and Kufic schools, are taken</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">from spoken varieties of the Bedouins, the Qur’an, ancient Arabic poetry and</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">very much less on Prophet Mohammad’s speeches, i.e. ḥadīth.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter One, ‘AN (pp. 1-35), is devoted to the primary particle ‘an, which</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">syntactically Sībawayhi and a host of grammarians consider al-aamil (operator)</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">that induces the following imperfective verb to take the subjunctive mood,</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">e.g. qarrara ‘an yaktuba risaalatan li’ummihi ‘He decided to write a letter to</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">his mother’, where the final a (a diacritic called fatHa) in the verb yaktuba</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">is this mood marker. Such use expresses futurity. However, most grammarians</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">argue that ‘an following verbs denoting fear and desire is followed by a verb</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">in the subjunctive mood (this ‘an being referred to as ‘an al-xafeefa),</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">whereas ‘an after verbs denoting certain knowledge is followed by a verb in</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">the indicative mood (this ‘an being referred to as ‘an al-muxaffafa). As for</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">‘an after verbs denoting doubt, it can be followed by a verb in the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">subjunctive or indicative mood (see pp. 29, 34-35). Still, “numerous examples,</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">many of which are introduced by the grammarians themselves, in which the mood</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">of the verb following ‘an is not as expected according to the grammarians’ own</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">rules” (p. 35) are attested as deviations.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Two, LAN (pp. 37-58), introduces the second primary particle, namely</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">lan. This is also called an operator with some functions similar to ‘an. But</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">unlike ‘an, which I regard as a complementizer in generative terms, lan is a</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">negator of the following imperfective verb with a future meaning, e.g. lan</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">‘adxula l-maktabata ‘I won’t enter the library’, where the final fatHa in the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">verb is the subjunctive mood marker. The jussive mood is possible, but it is</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">believed to be “due to poetic license” (p. 57).  Except for its disputable</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">etymology, this particle “has not been widely discussed by either grammarians</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">or modern scholars. One of the reasons seems to be that the common way of</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">speech requires the following verb in [the subjunctive]” (p. 57).</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Three, KAY (pp. 59-77), discusses another important particle</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">(operator), viz. kay and its free variant likay (generally meaning ‘in order</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">to’) and their two corresponding negative forms, kaylaa and likaylaa, e.g.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">saafara kay/likay yukmila diraasatahu ‘He traveled in order to continue his</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">studies’. The general rule dictates that we should assign a fatHa, the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">subjunctive mood marker, to the imperfective verb word-finally.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Four, ‘ḎAN (pp. 79-109), presents conflicting opinions about the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">identity of the particle ‘iḏan, also spelt with tanween (nunation).</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Disagreements concern not only its two spellings, but also “its definition,</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">the necessary conditions for its influence on the following verb, [and] its</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">etymology” (p. 107), among other things. Although the author proposes that</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">this particle “was originally used as an adverb meaning ‘therefore’ or ‘well’</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">with no syntactic effect” (p. 107), he admits that it can fulfill two</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">different roles: that of adverb and operator.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Five, ‘AW (pp. 112-125), is devoted to the particle ‘aw, basically a</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">conjunction meaning ‘or’. Sadan, however, states that “[all] grammarians</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">emphasize that in most sentence types in which ‘aw is followed by a verb in</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">[the subjunctive], it denotes a meaning other than ‘or’” (p.111). In certain</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">syntactic configurations, and with semantic similarities/dissimilarities, ‘aw</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">may have meanings such as ‘unless’ and ‘in order to’; lines of poetry and</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Qur’anic verses are offered to support the argument. In the author’s words:</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">“in most examples in this chapter the meaning of ‘aw followed by [an</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">imperfective verb in the subjunctive mood] is indeed [‘illaa ‘an] (p.117).</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Six, FA- (pp.127-171), which Sadan admits is “quite lengthy and</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">involved” (pp.127-171), is devoted to another conjunct, viz. fa- , because</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">“[the] mood of the imperfect verb following  fa- is one of the most complex</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">subjects in Arabic syntax” (p. 170). A number of semantic and syntactic</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">reasons, including modality (a term which the author does not mention</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">explicitly), are documented, especially those offered by Sībawayhi and</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">al-Farrā’, where the former’s presentation is described as “more systematic”</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">than the latter’s and hence more widely circulated and accepted by later</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">grammarians.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Seven,WA- (pp. 173-195), handles the question of wa- when “it denotes</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">a meaning other than ‘and’” (p. 174) and thus functioning as an operator which</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">induces the following imperfective verb to take the subjunctive mood in a</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">similar fashion to the preceding conjuncts. And as before, Sadan explores the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">ideas of Sībawayhi, al-Farrā’, other grammarians and those found in secondary</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">sources (kept in that order) for the sake of comparison. Although it is said</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">that “[the] mood of the imperfect verb following wa- has received considerably</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">less attention than the mood of the verb following fa-'' (p. 194), yet it</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">remains to say that both conjuncts can function as operators “in the same</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">syntactic environments” (p. 195).</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Eight, ῌATTᾹ (pp. 197-248), is concerned with the subjunctive mood of</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">the imperfective verb following the particle ḥattā, bearing in mind that it</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">can be followed by a verb in the indicative mood as well, in addition to being</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">used as a preposition followed by a noun or an adverb meaning ‘finally’ (see</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">p. 248) and as a conjunction meaning ‘and’ or an adverb meaning ‘even’. One</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">may also add to this list the fact that it can be a discourse marker</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">functioning as an empty category in sentence-initial position. Other meanings,</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">such as ‘so…that’ and ‘such…that’, are additionally reported in the literature</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">(see p. 217). Due to its multifunctional nature, arguments and</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">counter-arguments are expected among grammarians, whether medieval or later,</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">especially between Sībawayhi and al-Farrā’ and their supporters. And this is</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">what the author tries to demonstrate using ample examples from various</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">sources.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Nine, LI- (pp. 249-270), is the final chapter that deals with another</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">particle, namely lī- and its four variants, which most grammarians reduce to</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">two while only three are said to be dealt with by Sībawayhi (see p. 249).</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Apart from the two variations in pronunciation, all analyses are generally</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">semantically-oriented. Sībawayhi, however, “maintains that the verb following</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">lī- is [in the subjunctive mood] not due to its direct effect but to [a</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">suppressed] ‘an” (p. 266). This is the claim made by the Basrians, whereas the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Kufic school believes lī- to be an operator; that is, it has a direct effect</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">on the following imperfective verb and hence assigning the subjunctive mood to</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">it (p. 267).</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Ten, FREE NAṢB (pp. 271-282), traces the tradition of assigning the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">subjunctive mood to an imperfective verb in the absence of an operator and</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">hence the word “FREE” in the title of the chapter. Sadan refers to some rare</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">instances whereby the mood of the associated verb is accounted for in terms of</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">a suppressed ‘an residing in the speaker’s mind, perhaps due to poetic license</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">as justified by Sībawayhi, for example, in two places in his work (see p.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">271). The majority of grammarians, past and present, are of the view that the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">mood of the verb must be the indicative, not the subjunctive; rarity cannot be</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">the rule (p. 282).</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Chapter Eleven, THE POSSIBLE INTERCHANGEABILITY OF RAF’ AND NAṢB (pp.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">283-290), covers the possibility of assigning the subjunctive or indicative</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">mood interchangeably to the verb following the conjuncts ‘aw, fa- and wa- and</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">their pertinent meanings. The Kufic school maintains that meaning remains</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">stable irrespective of mood; their evidence comes from Qur’anic verses. The</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Basrians, on the other hand, defend their position in saying that each mood</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">conveys a different meaning (see p. 290).</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">The last six pages (291-296) which round out the book’s whole argument under</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">the title “DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION” (pp. 291-296). These pages summarize the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">differences in approach between early grammarians, especially Sībawayhi and</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">al-Farrā’, and later ones. Dialectal differences and historical developments</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">in CA are reiterated; the Old Iraqi School, mainly represented by Kufic</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">thought, is once more brought up. In the end, the speaker’s intention cannot</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">be ignored in any grammatical analysis.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">EVALUATION</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Let me start from the bottom line: the book is without any doubt an excellent</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">piece of work that took the author a decade to complete. This book, like</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Saliha’s (2010) dissertation, which is written in Arabic, is a worm’s eye view</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">of the “subjunctive” mood overview/review of the verb in CA.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">As any book is far from perfection, a number of remarks ought to be made here.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">First of all, I am not happy with the title of the book; it is intriguing. I</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">wish the generic word Arabic was converted into CA so that an average reader</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">would be aware of what variety of Arabic is intended right from the start.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Alternatively, the author could have included discussions related to Modern</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Standard Arabic (MSA) in order to give a more comprehensive picture. For</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">example, textbook writers introducing MSA to non-native speakers do not</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">distinguish between case such as ‘accusative’, assigned to nouns, and the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">corresponding mood, e.g. subjunctive, assigned to verbs. Like all Arab</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">grammarians, ancient and modern, only one grammatical term is given for both</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">case and mood, viz. manṣūb, and this is what instructors erroneously teach at</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">the American DLIFLC (Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center), for</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">example, right now, whereas Sadan does make the correct distinction but</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">without a comment about such confusion. He is, however, to be thanked for</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">clarification.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Secondly, footnoting as well as cross-referencing is overused; the reader is</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">disrupted now and then, especially with the overused “See”, to the extent that</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">one loses focus and interest to go on reading smoothly. An average reader in</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">particular is likely to get bored; s/he will have to leave out what might be</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">called ‘redundancies’.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Four more issues are worth noting: (1) some explanations are not supported by</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">examples (see, for example, pp. 156-157); (2) examples in Arabic script are so</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">rare (but see chapter 4); (3) transcription that is intended as phonetic</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">representation that should not start with Roman capital letters as if we were</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">starting an English sentence; and (4) the inclusion of tribal variations in</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">pronunciation is unnecessary for the purpose of generalizations; a few</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">instances do not count that much in accounting for any grammatical system.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Last but not least, the only lexical mistake which I found is the word</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">“literary” (p. 316 line 10), which ought to be ‘literally’; otherwise, the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">production quality is an amazing.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">REFERENCES</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Saliha, Amal Mahmood. 2010. Operators inducing the subjunctive mood in the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">imperfective verb as documented in the book of Saḥīḥ al-Bukhāri (in Arabic):</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">An applied syntactic study. Unpublished M.A. dissertation. Ghazza Strip:</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Islamic University. Retrieved on 4 Feb. 2013:</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><a href="http://library.iugaza.edu.ps/thesis/93709.pdf" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px" target="_blank">http://library.iugaza.edu.ps/thesis/93709.pdf</a><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">ABOUT THE REVIEWER</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Dinha Gorgis is a former professor of linguistics who has taught at a number</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">of Arab universities since 1973 and is currently an Assistant Professor of</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Arabic at DLIFLC in Monterey, California. He is also ex-editor-in-chief of</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Sayyab Translation Journal, published in London, and a reviewer on the</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">editorial board of linguistik, The Linguistic Journal, and Glossa. He has</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">reviewed for the LINGUIST List and for eLanguage. His most recent contribution</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">is: “Academies of the Arabic Language and the Standardization of Arabic.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ed. Chapelle, C. A. Oxford, UK:</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Wiley-Blackwell, 2012.</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">

<br><div>--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>End of Arabic-L: 04 Apr 2013<br></div></div>