Arabic-L:LING:Plurals

[Dilworth Parkinson]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arabic-L: Wed 13 Jun 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:Plurals
2) Subject:Plurals
3) Subject:Plurals

-------------------------Messages-----------------------------------
1)
Date: 13 Jun 2007
From:"haider bhuiyan" <haider.bhuiyan.2 at m.cc.utah.edu>
Subject:Plurals

Peace to all:

Out of the three observations, I would like to make a point about the  
observation (1).
I think here the rule is of situation/condition/position which in  
Arabic called حال , not of plural of any kind. Please note, in the  
verse 7:160 the word at question is أسباطا not أسباط shown  
in the question as plural. The word أسباطا may be analyzed this  
way: أسباط is plural of سبط that does not take ،ا،  but  
this plural noun has one. Why? Because this ،ا، is independent of  
the original plural noun أسباط and it is the ،ا، of  
situational structure of the sentence called حال . I hope I am  
making some sense.

Best regard

Haider Bhuiyan


> On the "broken plurals," my colleague, Dr. Schub, raises a few  
> probing questions:
>
>
> (1) He wonders why the plural / أسباط / is used instead of the  
> singular / سبط / in the qur'anic verse: / وقطّعناهم  
> اثنتي عشرة أسباطا أمما /, VII: 160.
>
> I'm afraid there is no violation of the grammatical code here.  We  
> are to be alerted that / أسباطا / is not a noun of  
> distinction /تمييز /; rather, it is a noun in apposition /  
> بدل / to the number / اثنتي عشرة /.   As a relevant  
> detail, may I add that even the masculine singular / سبط / would  
> not fit as a noun of distinction after the feminine composite  
> number / اثنتي عشرة /.   Exegetes and grammarians construe  
> the verse as:
>
> /                     اثنتي عشرة ، أسباطا أمما   
> [ فرقا] قطّعناهم /.
>
> Incidentally, the word / سبط / has / سُبطان / as another,  
> yet rarely used, plural of abundance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
2)
Date: 13 Jun 2007
From:"Schub, Michael B." <Michael.Schub at trincoll.edu>
Subject:Plurals

no one should have to sacrifice the dearest of his own family, even  
for the sublimities and profundities of Arabic  
grammar....                      ms

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
3)
Date: 13 Jun 2007
From:"Dr. M Deeb" <muhammaddeeb at gmail.com>
Subject:Plurals


The qur'anic text in my response to Dr. Schub turned out in a jumbled  
form, thus defeating the basic argument.

  (1) This was the way it was posted last time:
  ---------------------------------------------

/ اثنتي عشرة ، أسباطا أمما  [ فرقا]  
قطّعناهم/

----------------------------------------------

(2) This is how exegetes and grammarians construe the verse in question:
  ---------------------------------------------

/ قطعناهم اثنتي عشرة   ـ فِرقا ـ  أسباطا  
امما /

---------------------------------------------

(3) Much as I loathe it, a transliteration may be the next best thing  
to the Arabic script.  Here it is in the case of any electronic glitch:


[qaTTa'naahum ithnatay 'ashrata
- firaqan -,
asbaaTan 'umaman].

Appreciating your patience,

*MD

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
End of Arabic-L:  13 Jun 2007
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/arabic-l/attachments/20070613/c9869e9d/attachment.htm>