Introduction
Arabic is the primary language of about 300 million people in North Africa and the Middle East. A recent study found that Arabic is the second most spoken language in Pakistan, the Philippines, and Iran. According to Ayoub (2018), Arabic is the official language in Chad. Minorities speak Arabic in nations including Iran, Cyprus, Turkey, various countries in central Africa, and even in former Soviet republics. In North and South America, Europe, and Australia, considerable immigrant populations speak Arabic as their first language. There are six different scripts for the Arabic language, which is an official UN language (Shah, 2012). The massive use of Arabic languages after the Islamic conquest has produced the field of Arabic linguistics. The tradition of this scientific area continues even in the modern-day, and the current linguistical thought has been influenced by foreign schools due to globalization. However, despite the popular opinion in a Western scientific society, the origins of Arabic linguistical thought are independent, which is the claim that is proven in the paper.
Evolution of the Arabic Language
The Arabic language is part of a broader family known as Semitic languages, including Akkadian, Aramaic, and Hebrew, and is spoken in the north of the Arab peninsula. Between 250 and 328 AD, the earliest written forms of the language were discovered (Baalbaki, 2008). Tombstones, ruins, and papyri all include some form of script or fragments of a script found. Arabic was widely spoken both before and after the arrival of Islam. The limited use of literature also contained a few remarkable poems and religious compositions that stood out from the others. Textual records were an exception to the oral traditions that prevailed throughout that period. Aside from that, the Holy Qur’an and poetry were some of the essential sources for the type of Arabic that was spoken at the time. As a result, poetry’s glorious literary history was not written down until about the eighth century, at the time of the establishment of Islam and the discovery of the Holy Quran.
Muslims helped unify the several Arabic dialects spoken in the Arabian Peninsula, which had distinct phonetic characteristics. Various dialects of different tribes’ Classical Arabic (CA) continued in use as Islamic dominion spread, resulting in different geographically spoken Arabic variations in subsequent stages. Long periods of Islamic control saw Arabic as the language of culture, civilization, and scientific knowledge (Sartori, 2021). It was not until the 13th and 15th s centuries that Arabic teachings were relegated to merely quoting verses from the Qur’an that it began to stagnate. Languages utilized in government administrations shifted to Spanish, Persian, and Turkish. Arabic became stagnant due to the small number of published books and articles focused on religious studies (Shah, 2006). The creation of Arab independent rule in the 19th century led to the establishment of national education systems in Arabic, which were sometimes replaced by other languages like English and French in reaction to the foreign rule’s strategy.
Linguistics Background
An introduction to the Arabic notion of language, literature, and linguistics might be made for a better understanding of the subject. Arabic literature, like other parts of contemporary Arab society, has been shaped by several external cultural influences and internal causes throughout the previous two centuries. Literary criticism and thinking, which have dominated the contemporary Arabian linguistic scene, have been shaped by internal and external forces (Kaye, 1999). Modern Arabian lingual criticism has been conscious of and responded to the combined impact of social, economic, political, and cultural changes by gradually seeking to build an Arabic and modern approach. Additionally, the current Arab linguistics has attempted to incorporate some of the ideas and components of foreign culture into their works, which have also been subjected to external and internal influences as foreign culture. However, the roots of the linguistical thought were not influenced by the exterior ideas, which is proven later in the paper.
The Claim of the Foreign Roots of Arabic Linguistical Thought
As was mentioned earlier, some scholars have promoted a theory about the foreign roots of Arabic linguistical thought. For example, Owens (2012) speculates that “at times, even remarkable parallels do exist between the Arabic grammatical model and modern linguistics” (p. 94). However, the researcher reminds that the danger has been and still is that in seeking parallels with modern linguistics, scientists may be tempted to strongly identify Arabic grammatical theories and models with a specific Western approach (Owens, 2012). Yet, they become unaware of the distinctive sociohistoric frame of reference of Arabic grammar and the concerns that are specific to the information on which it is rooted and to the Islamic fields of study to which it is connected.
The comparison of the origins of Arabic linguistics with modern theories is obviously erroneous, yet, scholars propose other arguments to prove, in this case, Greek and Sanscrit’s influence on the emerging Arabic grammar. According to Baalbaki (2017), many experts have long assumed that Arabic grammar descended from Greek via Syriac, naming it the Greek hypothesis. The background of this argument is the European setting, in which philology has sometimes been interpreted to relate solely to Greek philology through logic. As such, Owens (2012) believes that the linguistic definition of Arabic cannot be considered apart from the Greek heritage. The evidence of Greek influence, which is normally conveyed via an intermediary Syriac–Aramaic stage, is considerably more significant in the natural sciences, philosophy, and music theory.
The origin of this claim is the historical consequences of the Arabic expansion in the Early Middle Ages and their interaction with other cultures. Following the initial Arab conquests of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt, the earliest Umayyads maintained both Greek-speaking bureaucrats and the Greek tongue in their imperial government in Damascus. Some administrators only translated the administrative system into Arabic during the reigns of ‘Abd-al-Malik or his son, Him (r. 685-705 and 724-43, respectively) (Gutas, 1998, p.23). Hence, it is argued that the achievements of Greeks in the grammatical field were borrowed by the Arabs through translations.
Moreover, it is also argued that Arabic lexicography also has a foreign origin. As such, the likelihood of Indian influence on Arabic lexicography derives from alleged phonetic connections between the Arabic and Indian traditions (Baalbaki, 2014). Some propose the probability of direct impact in the Greek tradition founded on the predominance of verse in Greek language studies and poetry šawāhid in Arabic lexicography (Baalbaki, 2014). Finally, Gutas (1998) claims that interpretations from Greek into Pahlavi, or Middle Persian, and from Pahlavi into Arabic played a crucial role in the development of the Abbasid Graeco-Arabic translation movement, literary studies, and social culture. Hence, it is believed that the sources for lexicographic analysis (both theoretical and textual) were not Arabic. At first look, these hypotheses might seem sound, but they could be disproved after thorough research that follows the paragraph.
Criticism of the Claim of the Foreign Roots of Arabic Linguistical Thought
The parts of the theory of foreign influence could be treated separately so that to evaluate them properly. The first premise presented earlier is that Arabic linguistical thought somewhat parallels modern linguistics; for some authors, similar content of the different traditions might imply that, at some point, borrowing was made. However, the Arabic linguistics field is somewhat different from Western schools in its theories, classifications, and philosophical understanding of the concept of language. For example, Arab grammarians describe predicates in their works, while Western linguists distinguish the same structures as left-dislocated topics (Owens, 2013). Next, the Kitāb of Sībawayhi serves as the foundation for the explanation of parts of speech, roles, and types in phrasal subgroups. However, this form of structuralist analysis has been unseen in the Western world until the twentieth century. As cited in Owens (2013), “utterances are analyzed not into eight Greek-style “parts” but into more than seventy function classes. … Sībawayhi’s method is remarkably similar to immediate constituent Analysis” (p.205). This evidence demonstrates that the early Arabic grammarian tradition not only differs from the one that the Greeks had developed but also predates similar Western ideas.
This argument is present in the studies of other prominent Arabic researchers as well. Baalbaki (2017) posits that “Sībawayhi would nowadays be classed among the (Bloomfieldian) functional grammarians, that is, broadly, those who are concerned with the behavior of words rather than their meaning” (p.78). This notion suggests that Arabic linguists treated language as a part of human behavior rather than as a logical construct as the Greeks did. According to Baalbaki (2017), the Greek argument is grounded only on the information derived from the chronology of Greek, Syriac, and Arabic grammar. Thus, Arabic linguistic thought originates not from a foreign conceptual framework but provides its own understanding of linguistics.
The Influence of Translation on the Development of Arabic Linguistic Thought
The following premise of the theory about foreign influence is the abundance of translations of primarily Greek works that predate Arabic ones. It is argued that the books that deal with grammar were used when the first Arabs compiled their analogous papers. The first and the most influential Arabic grammar was Sībawayhi’s Kitāb, composed during the Umayyad period (Gutas, 1998). However, the translation of scientific works does not appear to have occurred throughout the Umayyad period. All of these Graeco-Arabic translation attempts throughout the Umayyad period are examples of haphazard adaptation to the demands of the moment. The majority of the translated material – bureaucratic, legal, economic, and commercial documents – was done for expediency and to encourage conversation between the ruling dynasty and the subject peoples (Gutas, 1998). Moreover, Indian linguistic literature also has not been available but only works in astronomy, mathematics, and medicine (Gutas, 1998). At this point, it is improbable that Sībawayhi has used the translations of Greek and Indian authors for his work.
However, the period of the emergence of early linguistic thought in Arabic might be examined more thoroughly. In fact, “the Arabic grammatical tradition … extends from the Sībawayhi (d. 785) … up to the relatively recent past with authors like Suyūtī (d. 911…) and Baġdādī (d. 1093…) (Gutas, 1998, p.2). It is also claimed that there was a pre-Sībawayhi stage, which explains the primary linguistic activity before the era of grammatical literature; the next stage is represented by the Kitāb by its substance, conceptions, and practices it includes (Gutas, 1998). It is also known that “al-Mansur (r. 754-75) and his son al-Mahdi (r. 775~85) are of paramount importance in the search for the origins of the Graeco-Arabic translation movement” (Gutas, 1998, p.28). These rulers began the arrangement of the translation work, which now included more than administrative texts. Therefore, it is probable that Sībawayhi had access to their translations that might have included linguistic works, although it is not necessary.
Yet, the analysis of Sībawayhi’s Kitāb and other early language scholars demonstrates that it is not likely that the author was familiar with Greek grammarians. On the one hand, an initiative has been taken to codify language into a systematic descriptive framework based on clear general norms and principles. Each specific class of facts was precisely supplied for its proper rank and place (Bohas, Guillaume and Kouloughli, 1990). On the other hand, they sought to explain the insights of their perception of Arabic to demonstrate that their practice had not only real-world applications but could also open up whole domains of high speculation (Bohas, Guillaume and Kouloughli, 1990). Most importantly, Greek borrowings had no effect on the most theoretical level of linguistics (the categories and processes utilized in the description and analysis of linguistic material (Bohas, Guillaume and Kouloughli, 1990). Therefore, early Arabic linguistic thought had its own distinctive objectives, theories, and dimensions.
The argument about the lack of evidence of Greek terminology is highlighted by other authors as well. According to Baalbaki (2007), the Kitāb does not include any terms that denote the abstract concept of grammar or suggest the existence of grammar as a separate science. One must conclude that if such a phrase existed, or if Sībawayhi was aware of such actions, at least some echoes of them might have been detectable in the Kitāb. For example, Aristotle discusses a variety of grammatical issues in the Organon, Hermeneutics, and Poetics that were summarized by Abdallāh Ibn al-Muqaffa. In fact, “if the grammatical terms employed by Abdallāh Ibn al-Muqaffa in his epitome of the Hermeneutics are compared with the terms utilised by Sībawayhi, it will be found that they differ almost entirely” (Baalbaki, 2007, p. 242). Hence, it is not probable that the first linguistic work in Arabic contains any foreign influence.
Finally, the lexicography of the Arab linguists also does not seem to incorporate the works of foreign writers. A closer examination of the widespread parallels between the ancient Indian and Arabic phonetic teachings reveals that these similarities only reflect a superficial resemblance. The core concepts underlying the two approaches are vastly different (Baalbaki, 2016). The evidence of the use of Sanscrit poetry and other texts, as well as Greek writings, for compiling vocabulary also does not exist.
The Qur’an
The Holy Qur’an is a rich source of inspiration and a fruitful foundation for Islamic sciences. Arabic linguistics, a subfield of linguistics devoted to the scientific study of the Arabic language, is unmistakably impacted by the Qur’an. The fundamental rules of Arabic grammar were established by the end of the first century following Hijra (Gwynne, 1990). Adopting such grammatical and linguistic competence presented several difficulties. The language used inside a country profoundly affects its people’s culture, habits, conventions, and traditions. Before the coming of Islam, the Arabian Peninsula was home to the Arabic language. According to others, certain Arabs speak the same language, a phenomenon that developed suddenly and naturally (Ryding, 1998). At the same time, the Arab tribes communicated in various dialects before the entrance of the Holy Qur’an, and a more formal and elegant vernacular developed.
Nonetheless, for a variety of sensible reasons, Arabic is the only shared language among Arabs. Meanwhile, the essential characteristics of a common language should not be contingent on a tiny population. Many poets and spokespeople see Qur’anic Arabic as the most eloquent and thorough Arabic language (Gwynne, 1990). Due to the presence of Islam and the Holy Qur’an, Arabic civilization is endowed with a thirst for knowledge. The sacred Qur’an paved the path for scientific and cultural activity, as well as knowledge progress, throughout Arabic cultures. The positive mental attitude of individuals with various backgrounds toward Islam and its sacred book created the way for and enhanced the probability of mistakes in analyzing and understanding the Holy Qur’an (Baalbaki, 2017). Innumerable authors cite this matter as a primary reason for creating Arabic grammar.
Since linguistic aspects impacted the Arabic language and the way the Holy Qur’an was recited, it mainly had positive results. As a result, several Arab experts, notably Qur’anic reciters, jurists, syntactic specialists, and morphologists, made significant efforts to protect the Arabic language from degradation and corruption (Ayoub, 2018). They gave reasoning and evidence to support their views, which are somewhat extraneous to the paper’s subject matter. The jurists attempted to analyze the verses and get a more profound knowledge of them in order to achieve Sharia-based verdicts and decrees on diverse economic, legal, and religious issues. Syntacticians and morphologists endeavored to codify Arabic grammar as rules and laws. To do this, they went widely across the deserts, gathering unique terminology from local people and striving to develop Arabic grammar by founding rival syntactic schools.
The Qur’an has deeply influenced the Arabic language in a variety of ways. It breathed new life into the Arabic language and balanced Arabic accents, allowing it to become the dominant language of Muslim nations and a medium of teaching. Furthermore, the Qur’an enhanced the Arabic language, which was initially spoken by nomads and desert villages. Qur’an may have served as a roadmap or framework for jargon and slang, the formation of Islamic sciences and engineering, and innovation in coining religious terminology (Sartori, 2021). Thus, the richness of the meanings imparted via its verses is one of the Holy Qur’an’s other features.
As previously said, the Holy Qur’an paved the way for the development of the Arabic language, which was initially examined by Arabic linguistics since people needed Arabic vocabulary before the syntacticians established grammatical norms. That is why syntacticians such as Khalil Ibn Al-Farahidi began collecting samples from the deserts of Hijaz, Najd, and Tahama (Baalbaki, 2017). Considering the preceding, the Qur’an would not require Arabic language grammar if punctuation marks were used. However, this is not a sound conclusion, as grammar involves other factors, including sentence structure and text comprehension (Larcher, 2019). Although certain historical concepts of syntactic argumentation lead some to think of the inconsequentiality of punctuation, others believe in its importance. The advancement of Arabic grammar as a subject has made it simpler to prevent speaking blunders. This, in turn, inspired a large number of scholars to publish books about speech and accent.
Poetic Recensions
The study of the Qur’an also aided Pre-Islamic poetry collection efforts. ‘Readers,’ who were pioneers in the field of Qur’anic exegesis, sometimes needed to refer to examples from poetry in order to explain, justify, or respond to detractors who questioned how closely the text of the Qur’an matched the norms of Arabic speech, or to find a way to respond to those detractors (Gwynne, 1990). It was not until later that poetic language began to be studied as a topic of study in and of itself. Problems arising in conjunction with poetry citations to clarify or support Qur’anic usage necessitated cross-checking.
As a result, in the early years of the eighth century, a ‘corpus’ of old poetry and the Qur’an was already available for grammatical and pedological study. There were always more and more dialectal facts to be discovered (Baalbaki, 2017). Therefore grammatical and philosophical observations kept expanding. Quranic studies were separated from the study of language in this way. Even though most of the poetry in the Arabian Peninsula is by poets from its center and eastern regions, philological and grammatical research has focused on Iraq. Basra was home to the first generation of academics. It was not long before Kufa became a center of activity in this subject.
Conclusion
To conclude, Arabic linguistic thought’s roots are distinct from those that various authors theorize. It is highly improbable that the first linguists had access to the translation of other peoples’ grammar, not the works of Arabs containing evidence of foreign borrowing. Thus, Arabic linguistics originates from the scholarly inquiry of Islamic scientists who made their conclusions through the context of their experience, knowledge, faith, and culture.
References List
Ayoub, G., Versteegh, K. (eds.) (2018), The grammatical and lexicographical traditions. The Foundations of Arabic Linguistics III, pp.50–75. Leiden: Brill.
Baalbaki, R. (2008), The legacy of the Kitab: Sibawayhi’s analytical methods within the context of the Arabic grammatical theory. Boston: Brill.
Baalbaki, R. (2014), The Arabic lexicographical tradition: From the 2nd/8th to the 12th/18th century. Leiden: Brill.
Baalbaki, R. (ed.) (2017), The early Islamic grammatical tradition. Washington, D.C Georgetown University Press.
Bohas, G., Guillaume, J., Kouloughli, D. (1990) The Arabic linguistic tradition. London: Longman.
Gutas, D. (1998), Greek thought, Arabic culture: The Graeco–Arabic translation movement in Baghdad and Early Abbasid Society (2nd–4th/8th–10th Centuries). London & New York: Routledge.
Gwynne, R.W. (1990), ‘The A Fortiori argument in Fiqh, Naḥw, and Kalām’, Studies in the History of Arabic Grammar II, p165 [online].
Kaye, A.S. (1999), The Near and the Middle East – Aryeh Levin: Arabic linguistic thought and dialectology. Jerusalem: Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Larcher, P. (2019), Grammar and semantics in Medieval Arabic: A study of Ibn-Hisham’s “Mughni l-Labib. Surrey: Curzon.
Owens, J. (2013), The Oxford handbook of Arabic linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ryding, K. C. (ed.) (1998), (ed.), Early Medieval Arabic: Studies on al-Khalīl ibn Ahmad. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Sartori, M. (2021), ‘Arabic in context’, Bulletin critique des Annales islamologiques, 35, p23.
Shah, M. (2006), ‘Michael G. Carter: Sibawayhi’, Makers of Islamic Civilization, 69(1), p142–145. London and New York: Oxford University Press.
Shah, M. (2012), ‘The Early Islamic Grammatical Tradition’, Journal of Qur’anic Studies, 14(1), p365. Aldershot: Ashgate.