« Again on Bedouin-Type Arabic Syllabification | Main | How Linguistically Unified was Pre-Islamic Poetry? »




Hang on. Looking at that text, Ibn Mujāhid says that every pre-consonantal glottal stop is dropped in the reading of 'Abū `Amr; he doesn't say or imply it for Warsh.


Ack! Seems like you're right.

I overlooked the "in" in the description of Warš's tradition.

So for those who are curious what the text says exactly:

Ibn Mujāhid says: "Warš transmits on the authority of Nāfiʕ that he removed the ʔ in the likes of of yuʔminūna and what is similar to that, and likewise for the intervocalic (ʔ), like yuʔaxxira-kum, lā yuʔāxiḏu-kum and yuʔaddi-hī and what is like it."

Whereas for Abū ʕamr he says: "He did not hamzate (= apply ʔ) to each pre-consonantal ʔ, like yūminūna, yūminu and yāxiḏūna and whatever is like that."

The difference then comes down to the specific mention that each hamza is dropped, and that for Warš it is said "in the likes of" rather than "like".

And that is indeed how it is understood in the modern readings, where for Abū ʕamr, e.g. ar-raʔsu is indeed read as ar-rās.

The description is technically still somewhat ambiguous, after all what is "in the likes of" that Warš is referring to, but the lack of any mention that Warš did not apply the ʔ to each place where it is expected, makes the interpretation that we find in al-Jazarī probably a likely interpretation.

The comments to this entry are closed.