David Wilmsen
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- December 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780198718123
- eISBN:
- 9780191787485
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198718123.001.0001
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Historical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
That some dialects of Arabic negate with a pre-posed mā alone, some with what is called ‘bipartite’ negation mā … š, and some with post-positive -š alone has invited comparisons with a similar ...
More
That some dialects of Arabic negate with a pre-posed mā alone, some with what is called ‘bipartite’ negation mā … š, and some with post-positive -š alone has invited comparisons with a similar process, called Jespersen’s Cycle, said to have occurred in French, whereby the pre-posed negator ne became associated with an emphatic post-positive particle pas ‘step’—and, in some French vernaculars, with a post-positive pas alone. Yet the similarity between Arabic and French is purely superficial, lacking supporting linguistic evidence. Forcing the facts of Arabic into preconceived theoretical constructs, both formal and functional, engenders erroneous conclusions. The source of the Arabic negator -š is polar interrogation, for which evidence does indeed exist in various Arabic dialects, including Andalusi, Egyptian, Levantine, Maltese, Tunisian, and Yemeni. The polar interrogative šī, itself derived from an existential particle, ultimately arose from the Proto-Semitic presentative ša and 3rd person pronouns šū, šī, and šunu. Supporting evidence for this comes from the West Semitic Modern South Arabian languages, which possess an existential particle, an indefinite determiner, and inchoate interrogative śi analogous in form and function to that of the Arabic šī. With this, it becomes possible to propose the operation of a different cycle in Arabic: the negative-existential (or Croft’s) cycle. Such comparative evidence from Arabic dialects and sister languages, along with historical records of an Arab presence in the Fertile Crescent centuries before the arrival of Arabic speaking Muslims in the 7th century AD, provides convincing evidence for the antiquity of the Arabic dialects.Less
That some dialects of Arabic negate with a pre-posed mā alone, some with what is called ‘bipartite’ negation mā … š, and some with post-positive -š alone has invited comparisons with a similar process, called Jespersen’s Cycle, said to have occurred in French, whereby the pre-posed negator ne became associated with an emphatic post-positive particle pas ‘step’—and, in some French vernaculars, with a post-positive pas alone. Yet the similarity between Arabic and French is purely superficial, lacking supporting linguistic evidence. Forcing the facts of Arabic into preconceived theoretical constructs, both formal and functional, engenders erroneous conclusions. The source of the Arabic negator -š is polar interrogation, for which evidence does indeed exist in various Arabic dialects, including Andalusi, Egyptian, Levantine, Maltese, Tunisian, and Yemeni. The polar interrogative šī, itself derived from an existential particle, ultimately arose from the Proto-Semitic presentative ša and 3rd person pronouns šū, šī, and šunu. Supporting evidence for this comes from the West Semitic Modern South Arabian languages, which possess an existential particle, an indefinite determiner, and inchoate interrogative śi analogous in form and function to that of the Arabic šī. With this, it becomes possible to propose the operation of a different cycle in Arabic: the negative-existential (or Croft’s) cycle. Such comparative evidence from Arabic dialects and sister languages, along with historical records of an Arab presence in the Fertile Crescent centuries before the arrival of Arabic speaking Muslims in the 7th century AD, provides convincing evidence for the antiquity of the Arabic dialects.
David Wilmsen
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- December 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780198718123
- eISBN:
- 9780191787485
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198718123.003.0001
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Historical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
Grammatical structures built upon reflexes of šī in Arabic dialects, especially interrogatives and negators, have attracted much attention within Arabic linguistics. Theoretical and descriptive ...
More
Grammatical structures built upon reflexes of šī in Arabic dialects, especially interrogatives and negators, have attracted much attention within Arabic linguistics. Theoretical and descriptive approaches to grammatical ši within the discipline largely assume that the grammatical markers are derived from the Arabic word for ‘thing’, implicitly borrowing concepts from grammaticalization theory and other theoretical orientations to describe the processes involved, thereby acquiescing in the assumption that Arabic must conform to theory, although exerting little influence on linguistic theory writ large. Furthermore, Arabic linguistics does not habitually gather insights from comparative studies of the closely related Semitic languages, tending to restrict itself to the domains of Arabic literature or dialectology. Comparison with Semitic languages, however, adds explanatory depth, often contravening theoretical concepts.Less
Grammatical structures built upon reflexes of šī in Arabic dialects, especially interrogatives and negators, have attracted much attention within Arabic linguistics. Theoretical and descriptive approaches to grammatical ši within the discipline largely assume that the grammatical markers are derived from the Arabic word for ‘thing’, implicitly borrowing concepts from grammaticalization theory and other theoretical orientations to describe the processes involved, thereby acquiescing in the assumption that Arabic must conform to theory, although exerting little influence on linguistic theory writ large. Furthermore, Arabic linguistics does not habitually gather insights from comparative studies of the closely related Semitic languages, tending to restrict itself to the domains of Arabic literature or dialectology. Comparison with Semitic languages, however, adds explanatory depth, often contravening theoretical concepts.
Solomon I. Sara
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- March 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748627950
- eISBN:
- 9780748653058
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748627950.003.0014
- Subject:
- Society and Culture, Cultural Studies
Throughout his discussion of Ɂimālah, Sībawayh frequently refers to specific tribal preferences in the use of Ɂimālah. This chapter notes that the thrust of the analysis of Ɂimālah is aimed at ...
More
Throughout his discussion of Ɂimālah, Sībawayh frequently refers to specific tribal preferences in the use of Ɂimālah. This chapter notes that the thrust of the analysis of Ɂimālah is aimed at exploring the question of who uses it and under what conditions they do so. It presents an inventory of statements about the use or non-use of Ɂimālah attributed to specific groups of speakers of Arabic and some specific dialectal characteristics. The chapter also notes that people whose Arabic is trustworthy incline where there is no trigger for inclination. A feature of the discussion of Ɂimālah by Sībawayh is that there is variation among speakers, but the triggers for the variation are common to all speakers.Less
Throughout his discussion of Ɂimālah, Sībawayh frequently refers to specific tribal preferences in the use of Ɂimālah. This chapter notes that the thrust of the analysis of Ɂimālah is aimed at exploring the question of who uses it and under what conditions they do so. It presents an inventory of statements about the use or non-use of Ɂimālah attributed to specific groups of speakers of Arabic and some specific dialectal characteristics. The chapter also notes that people whose Arabic is trustworthy incline where there is no trigger for inclination. A feature of the discussion of Ɂimālah by Sībawayh is that there is variation among speakers, but the triggers for the variation are common to all speakers.
David Wilmsen
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- December 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780198718123
- eISBN:
- 9780191787485
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198718123.003.0005
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Historical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
Polar and copular interrogatives ending in -š like those of Andalusi Arabic have been documented since the late 18th century in the peripheral Arabic dialect Maltese, that variety also negating with ...
More
Polar and copular interrogatives ending in -š like those of Andalusi Arabic have been documented since the late 18th century in the peripheral Arabic dialect Maltese, that variety also negating with -š. This is significant because Maltese retains features of the North African dialect spoken in the 8th and10th centuries in what is now Tunis, Arabic speakers populating the Maltese islands in that era. For their parts, the old urban Tunisian dialects retain a polar interrogative šī, including copular interrogative 3rd person pronouns, and they negate with -š. Remnants of copular interrogatives persist in Moroccan and Egyptian vernacular Arabic, copular negation with -š remaining productive in Arabic dialects from the Yemen, the southern and highland Levant, and across coastal North Africa.Less
Polar and copular interrogatives ending in -š like those of Andalusi Arabic have been documented since the late 18th century in the peripheral Arabic dialect Maltese, that variety also negating with -š. This is significant because Maltese retains features of the North African dialect spoken in the 8th and10th centuries in what is now Tunis, Arabic speakers populating the Maltese islands in that era. For their parts, the old urban Tunisian dialects retain a polar interrogative šī, including copular interrogative 3rd person pronouns, and they negate with -š. Remnants of copular interrogatives persist in Moroccan and Egyptian vernacular Arabic, copular negation with -š remaining productive in Arabic dialects from the Yemen, the southern and highland Levant, and across coastal North Africa.
Olivia C. Harrison
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- May 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780804794213
- eISBN:
- 9780804796859
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Stanford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.11126/stanford/9780804794213.003.0003
- Subject:
- Literature, World Literature
Chapter Two analyzes the figure of Palestine in Kateb Yacine’s Algerian Arabic play, “Mohamed arfad valiztek” (Mohamed pack your bags) as the vehicle of a two-pronged critique of the postcolonial ...
More
Chapter Two analyzes the figure of Palestine in Kateb Yacine’s Algerian Arabic play, “Mohamed arfad valiztek” (Mohamed pack your bags) as the vehicle of a two-pronged critique of the postcolonial Algerian state and of French and Israeli colonial discourses. The play compares France-Algeria and Israel-Palestine to condemn both anti-immigrant racism in France and Israel’s treatment of its Palestinian subjects. Aimed at a popular Algerian public, it also satirizes the Algerian state’s instrumentalization of the Algerian and Palestinian revolutions to rally popular support. Kateb’s popular theater begins to make evident the convergences and overlaps between two apparently antithetical discourses, which will be the focus of the final three chapters of Transcolonial Maghreb: the discourse of assimilation, characteristic of French colonial discourse (Algeria is France), and the principle of separation that undergirds Zionism and the Israeli state (Jews/Arabs).Less
Chapter Two analyzes the figure of Palestine in Kateb Yacine’s Algerian Arabic play, “Mohamed arfad valiztek” (Mohamed pack your bags) as the vehicle of a two-pronged critique of the postcolonial Algerian state and of French and Israeli colonial discourses. The play compares France-Algeria and Israel-Palestine to condemn both anti-immigrant racism in France and Israel’s treatment of its Palestinian subjects. Aimed at a popular Algerian public, it also satirizes the Algerian state’s instrumentalization of the Algerian and Palestinian revolutions to rally popular support. Kateb’s popular theater begins to make evident the convergences and overlaps between two apparently antithetical discourses, which will be the focus of the final three chapters of Transcolonial Maghreb: the discourse of assimilation, characteristic of French colonial discourse (Algeria is France), and the principle of separation that undergirds Zionism and the Israeli state (Jews/Arabs).
David Wilmsen
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- December 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780198718123
- eISBN:
- 9780191787485
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198718123.003.0003
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Historical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
Explanations of the grammatical reflexes of the Arabic particle šī, especially in interrogation and negation, are generally mistaken on two counts: they begin their developmental sequences (clines) ...
More
Explanations of the grammatical reflexes of the Arabic particle šī, especially in interrogation and negation, are generally mistaken on two counts: they begin their developmental sequences (clines) with the Arabic of writing, and they propose structures that, while appearing to be well-formed, are nevertheless not idiomatic. Assuming an origin in the Arabic of writing is especially perilous because, without supporting evidence, it assumes that that variety is the original, when the gatekeepers of Arabic writing proscribe the types of change proposed for the spoken language that are supposed to have originated with it. Consideration of the many grammatical functions of šī provides contrary evidence that the phenomena were always elements of the dialects, arising independently of and probably before writing.Less
Explanations of the grammatical reflexes of the Arabic particle šī, especially in interrogation and negation, are generally mistaken on two counts: they begin their developmental sequences (clines) with the Arabic of writing, and they propose structures that, while appearing to be well-formed, are nevertheless not idiomatic. Assuming an origin in the Arabic of writing is especially perilous because, without supporting evidence, it assumes that that variety is the original, when the gatekeepers of Arabic writing proscribe the types of change proposed for the spoken language that are supposed to have originated with it. Consideration of the many grammatical functions of šī provides contrary evidence that the phenomena were always elements of the dialects, arising independently of and probably before writing.
