REALITY OF GRAMMATICAL PHENOMENA, TRUTH OF GRAMMATICAL MEANING AND “CORRECTNESS” OF GRAMMATICAL FORMS IN ARABIC
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
The author assumes that the descriptions of languages with codified grammar are intended to bring the forms and constructions found in “correct” speech into the register of “correct”. In the case of classical Arabic, it is the language of Arabic texts of the classical period, even if they have been used in oral form for a long time and were recorded much later than originated.
Within the framework of the proposed study, the linguistic facts existing in the literary and modern standard Arabic are considered as a subset of the linguistic facts of the classical Arabic.
Even a cursory glance at the descriptions of the grammatical system of the Arabic is sufficient to see the difference in approaches to the description of the grammatical system from the standpoint of different grammatical traditions and schools.
If in the early stages of Arabic linguistic tradition correctness was interpreted as conformity to authoritative patterns of Arabic speech (mainly of Bedouins), then with the beginning of the codification of Arabic grammar, the rules founded on authoritative inferences based on “correct speech” began to play an increasingly important role. The judgments by analogy (qiyās), and the idea of the truth of these rules were based on the comparison of samples of real speech of that time with ideal patterns, which were considered correct and true by default due to the authority of the texts that represented them..
In other words, these patterns, as well as considerations of their correctness, were in the realm of the ideal, that is, in the “imaginary world”.
Much later, namely in the early twentieth century, the development of analytical philosophy showed possible points of conjunction of this imaginary world with the real one in the field of language and speech.
The author proposes to apply the techniques and methods that have developed in different fields of linguistic research and philosophical sciences, primarily in logic, to analyze the correlation of ideas about the “correct Arabic language” with real speech. The researcher considers the criteria by which true reasoning can be distinguished from false one both in terms of form and content, and concludes that it is impossible to define universal criteria that would unambiguously assess the correctness of Arabic grammatical forms and constructions outside the tradition of their study.
The author also notes that due to the large prescriptive component of classical studies of traditional Arabic grammar, it is important to consider the opinion of specific authoritative Arab scholars of the classical period about specific grammatical phenomena of the Arabic language in order to understand reasons leading to assessment of correctness of grammar patterns and constructions as well as the truth of criteria for such assessment.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Arabic, Arabic linguistic tradition, grammatical forms, grammatical meaning, analytical philosophy
Література:
Аристотель. Собр. соч.: в 4 т. Т. 1. Метафизика. Москва, 1976.
Армстронг К. История Бога: 4000 лет исканий в иудаизме, христианстве и исламе / Пер. с англ. 3-е изд. Москва, 2011.
Витгенштейн Л. Логико-философский трактат // Людвиг Витгенштейн. Избранные работы / Пер. с нем. и англ. В. Руднева. Москва, 2005.
Загрійчук І. Д. Вчення Платона про ідеї як конкретно-історичне розуміння істини // Вісник Житомирського державного університету імені Івана Франка. Філософські науки. Вип. 2. 2019.
Кондаков Н. И. Логический словарь-справочник. 2-е исп. и дополн. изд. Москва, 1975.
Копцева Н. П. Понимание бытия и истины в античной философии // Современные проблемы науки и образования, 2012, № 5. URL: https://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=7248 (дата звернення: 1.08.2021).
Левин Г. Д. Критерии истины // Философия науки. Вып. 15. Москва, 2010.
Меркулов И. П. Мышление как информационный процесс // Эволюция. Мышление. Сознание. (Когнитивный подход и эпистемология). Москва, 2004.
Разинов Ю. А Понятия истинного и ложного у Платона в контексте соотношения эйдоса и эйдолона // Вестник Самарской гуманитарной академии. Серия “Философия. Филология”, 2013, № 1 (13).
Рыбалкин В. С. Классическое арабское языкознание. Киев, 2003.
Смирнов А. Словарь средневековой арабской философской лексики // Средневековая арабская философия: Проблемы и решения. Москва, 1998a.
Смирнов А. Что стоит за термином “средневековая арабская философия” (рассмотрение вопроса в ракурсе проблематики истины и причинности) // Средневековая арабская философия: Проблемы и решения. Москва, 1998b.
Тренделенбург А. Элементы логики Аристотеля / Пер. Б. А. Фохта, А. Г. Вашестова, публик. и вступ. ст. М. Р. Демина. Москва, 2017.
Ушакова Г. П. Cоотношение “мнения” и “знания” в античности и “знания” и “веры” в средневековье // Вестник Нижегородского университета им. Н. И. Лобачевского. Серия: Социальные науки, 2002, № 1 (2).
Філософський енциклопедичний словник / НАН України, Ін-т філософії ім. Г. С. Сковороди; голов. ред. В. І. Шинкарук. Київ, 2002.
Фролов Д. В. Сибавайхи Абу Бишр ‘Амр. Китаб. Введение (главы 1–7). Перевод и комментарии. Москва, 2018.
Хоменко И. В. Ложь как аргументативный феномен // Модели рассуждений – 3: когнитивный подход. Сб. науч. ст. Калининград, 2010.
Черникова И. В. Истина и объективность в современной эпистемологии // Проблема истины в философии и науке: Сборник Всероссийского семинара молодых ученых им. П. В. Копнина. Томск, 2008.
Черч А. Введение в математическую логику. Т. 1 / Пер. с англ. В. С. Чернявского. Москва, 1960.
Al-Anbārī. Kitābu l-’asrāri l-‘arabiyya [Книга таємниць арабської мови]. Dimašq, 1957.
Derenbourg J. Quelques remarques sur la déclinaison arab // Journal asiatique. T. IV. 1844.
Dewart L. Religion, Language and Truth. New York, 1970.
Hasan A. The principle of qiyas in islamic law – an historical perspective // Islamic Studies. Vol. 15, No. 3. 1976.
Pinker S., Prince A. Regular and Irregular Morphology and the Psychological Status of Rules of Grammar // The Reality of linguistic rules / Susan D. Lima, Roberta L. Corrigan, and Gregory K. Iverson (eds). Amsterdam, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.26.21pin
Shah M. Exploring the Genesis of Early Arabic Linguistic Thought: Qur’anic Readers and Grammariansof the Kūfan Tradition (Part I) // Journal of Qur’anic Studies. Vol. 5, No. 1. 2003a. https://doi.org/10.3366/jqs.2003.5.1.47
Shah M. Exploring the Genesis of Early Arabic Linguistic Thought: Qur’anic Readers and Grammariansof the Baṣran Tradition (Part II) // Journal of Qur’anic Studies. Vol. 5, No. 2. 2003b.
Wansbrough J. Quranic studies: sources and methods of scriptural interpretation / Foreword, translations, and expanded notes by Andrew Rippin. New York, 2004.
Zaid A. The epistemology of Ibn Khaldun. Routledge, 2004.
References:
Aristotel’ (1976), Sobraniye sochineniy: in 4 vols, Vol. 1. Metafizika, Mysl’, Moscow. (In Russian).
Armstrong K. (2011), Istoriya Boga: 4000 let iskaniy v iudaizme, khristianstve i islame, Transl. from English, 3rd ed., Al’pina non-fikshn, Moscow. (In Russian).
Vitgenshteyn L. (2005), “Logiko-filosofskiy traktat”, in Lyudvig Vitgenshteyn, Izbrannyye raboty, Transl. from German and English by V. Rudnev, Territoriya budushchego, Moscow, pp. 11–228. (In Russian).
Zahriychuk I. D. (2019), “Vchennya Platona pro ideyi yak konkretno-istorychne rozuminnya istyny”, Visnyk Zhytomyrs’koho derzhavnoho universytetu imeni Ivana Franka. Filosofs’ki nauky, Issue 2, pp. 92–100. (In Ukrainian).
Kondakov N. I. (1975), Logicheskiy slovar’-spravochnik, 2nd ed., Nauka, Moscow. (In Russian).
Koptseva N. P. (2012), “Ponimaniye bytiya i istiny v antichnoy filosofii”, Sovremennyye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya, No. 5, available at: https://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=7248 (accessed August 1, 2021). (In Russian).
Levin G. D. (2010), “Kriterii istiny”, Filosofiya nauki, Issue 15, Moscow, pp. 58–73. (In Russian).
Merkulov I. P. (2004), “Myshleniye kak informatsionnyy protsess”, in Evolyutsiya. Myshleniye. Soznaniye. (Kognitivnyy podkhod i epistemologiya), Kanon plus, Moscow, pp. 228–260. (In Russian).
Razinov Yu. A. (2013), “Ponyatiya istinnogo i lozhnogo u Platona v kontekste sootnosheniya eydosa i eydolona”, Vestnik Samarskoy gumanitarnoy akademii. Seriya “Filosofiya. Filologiya”, No. 1 (13), pp. 21–30. (In Russian).
Rybalkin V. S. (2003), Klassicheskoye arabskoye yazykoznaniye, Stilos, Kyiv. (In Russian).
Smirnov A. (1998a), “Chto stoit za terminom ‘srednevekovaya arabskaya filosofiya’ (rassmotreniye voprosa v rakurse problematiki istiny i prichinnosti)”, in Srednevekovaya arabskaya filosofiya: Problemy i resheniya, Vostochnaya literatura RAN, Moscow, pp. 42–81. (In Russian).
Smirnov A. (1998b), “Slovar’ srednevekovoy arabskoy filosofskoy leksiki”, in Srednevekovaya arabskaya filosofiya: Problemy i resheniya, Vostochnaya literatura RAN, Moscow, pp. 379–520. (In Russian).
Trendelenburg A. (2017), Elementy logiki Aristotelya, Transl. by B. A. Fokht and A. G. Vashestov, preface by M. R. Demin, Kanon plus ROOI “Reabilitatsiya”, Moscow. (In Russian).
Ushakova G. P. (2002), “Cootnosheniye ‘mneniya’ i ‘znaniya’ v antichnosti i ‘znaniya’ i ‘very’ v srednevekov’ye”, Vestnik Nizhegorodskogo universiteta im. N. I. Lobachevskogo. Seriya: Sotsial’nyye nauki, No. 1 (2), pp. 247–254. (In Russian).
Filosofs’kyy entsyklopedychnyy slovnyk (2002), NAN Ukrayiny, In-t filosofiyi im. H. S. Skovorody; V. I. Shynkaruk (ed.), Abrys, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).
Frolov D. V. (2018), Sibavaykhi Abu Bishr ‘Amr. Kitab. Vvedeniye (glavy 1–7). Perevod i kommentarii, Izdatel’skiy dom VKN, Moscow. (In Russian).
Khomenko I. V. (2010), “Lozh’ kak argumentativnyy fenomen”, in Modeli rassuzhdeniy – 3: kognitivnyy podkhod, Izd-vo RGU im. I. Kanta, Kaliningrad, pp. 100–119. (In Russian).
Chernikova I. V. (2008), “Istina i ob”yektivnost’ v sovremennoy epistemologii”, in Problema istiny v filosofii i nauke: Sbornik Vserossiyskogo seminara molodykh uchenykh im. P. V. Kopnina, Izd-vo TGU, Tomsk, pp. 154–157. (In Russian).
Cherch A. (1960), Vvedeniye v matematicheskuyu logiku, Vol. 1, Transl. from English by V. S. Chernyavskiy, Izdatel’stvo inostrannoy literatury, Moscow. (In Russian).
Al-Anbārī (1957), Kitābu l-’asrāri l-‘arabiyya, Al-Mağma‘u l-‘Ilmī l-‘Arabī, Damascus. (In Arabic).
Derenbourg J. (1844), “Quelques remarques sur la déclinaison arabe”, Journal asiatique, T. IV, pp. 209–220.
Dewart L. (1970), Religion, Language and Truth, Herder and Herder, New York.
Hasan A. (1976), “The principle of qiyas in islamic law – an historical perspective”, Islamic Studies, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 201–210.
Pinker S. and Prince A. (1994), “Regular and Irregular Morphology and the Psychological Status of Rules of Grammar”, in Susan D. Lima, Roberta L. Corrigan and Gregory K. Iverson (eds), The reality of linguistic rules, Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 321–352. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.26.21pin
Shah M. (2003a), “Exploring the Genesis of Early Arabic Linguistic Thought: Qur’anic Readers and Grammariansof the Kūfan Tradition (Part I)”, Journal of Qur’anic Studies, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 47–78. https://doi.org/10.3366/jqs.2003.5.1.47
Shah M. (2003b), “Exploring the Genesis of Early Arabic Linguistic Thought: Qur’anic Readers and Grammariansof the Baṣran Tradition (Part II)”, Journal of Qur’anic Studies, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 1–47.
Wansbrough J. (2004), Quranic studies: sources and methods of scriptural interpretation, Foreword, translations, and expanded notes by Andrew Rippin, 1st ed., Prometheus, New York.
Zaid A. (2004), The epistemology of Ibn Khaldun, Routledge.