« Bedouin-Type Arabic Syllabification | Main | Was Ibn Mujāhid misunderstood by al-Jazarī? »

06/16/2017

Comments

Jadhimah

I think the doubling in verbal /-at/ arises from the addition of a vowel-initial pronominal suffix to an etymologically consonant-final base. The nominal /-at/ is etymologically vowel-final (case endings). Doubling is a common strategy in Mashreqi dialects:

min+hu > minn+uh
katabtil+hu > katabtill+uh
katabat+hu > katabatt+uh

PhoeniX

That's an excellent suggestion, I had not really considered that yet!

I still think that development is probably not regular in the sense that you can write a sound law to arrive at this development.

The fact that you have form like ktibāt-uh (so a different strategy) to solve the same 'issue' would seem to suggest that it's an attempt to retain the integrity of the word-shape.

I think this is similar as with *min-uh, which would regularly yield **mn-uh, so to retain the vowel of min > minn-uh.

But there's a couple of ways you can go arguing about that.

Jadhimah

One has to wonder whether Classical Arabic /minnī/ and /'annī/ are really the result of suffixation of -nī, rather than just -ī plus doubling. All the pronominal suffixes in Classical Arabic are consonant-initial, with the exception of -ī, and /min/ and /'an/ are really the only prepositions in CA I can think of that end in a consonant.

Jadhimah

Also, if I recall correctly, according to Ingham, North Najdi actually has /mn-uh/ and /mn-ī/ without doubling.

https://books.google.com/books?id=javOCwAAQBAJ&pg=PP131&lpg=PP131&dq=north+najdi+mnuh&source=bl&ots=L4rbr19Ih-&sig=Sczb3ppPc3ZG4phn352mysY26bM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjB5cnytPXUAhVFQCYKHR7_AusQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=north%20najdi%20mnuh&f=false

North Najdi is weird as fuck when it comes to the pronominal suffixes

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)