1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Justifying the absurd and teaching linguistics 101 to wannabe Arab

Reader comment on item: Ban Islam?
in response to reader comment: Ignorant friend

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Dec 24, 2012 at 08:56

For the readers: Muslims try every possible twist and turn to justify the many mistakes in the Qur'an and no the Arabic language is not any different from any other language

Ya habibi the language of the Arabs is not any better or worse than any other language and you need to take a class in liguistics to learn what is really a language is all about

You see my dear friend your ignorance of the very wide literature in the arabic language and the old history is such a proof with all the poets and poems that used to be written at those times all proves the real wide use of the language and the very different structures of it unlike the poor language you speak (English) which is very limited and that's why it's so easy to learn that even someone like me didn't have to take an courses or special education to know how to speak with it.

gobbledygook

But I'm curious did you ever take a class in linguistics? Let me guess da mawdoo3 sa3b right?

To make things clear one of the miracles of the Quran is that it was revealed with such structure to challenge the best poets and language experts of that time who always bragged about their control over the poets they write and how noone can compete them because after all the arabic lands had no other special thing to compete at so the poem was their only shelter that most of the poets used it for living.

More gobbledygook

I'm only interested in why does Allah use the word butinh then he fixed it and used the correct butuniha you tell me

The next thing you should know that the grammatical rules of the arabic language were put after the Quran was revealed

This is true but this does not mean that the Arabs before thr rise of Islam and their imperialism were using Arabic that is devoid of grammar

(of course they were used but not known as grammatical rules instead they were used naturally in the course of thei everyday spoken language)

No you are ignorant Noam Chomsky proved that language is HARD WIRED in human brains which means that even baby talk has its unique grammar this means that even prior to the rise of Arabian imperialism aka Islam the Arabs were using the Arabic language based on the grammar that they were already hard wired with and all Sibawyhe who was not even an Arab deciphered was what is the grammar of the Arabic language

How come you did not know that?

when other nations from other origins started to enter islam and don't know how to speak arabic or how to pronounce the words correctly so all rules were collected and studied well and then the Quran scriptures began to include those accents all over them to help the readers pronounce the verses correctly.

And who says that islam is not the religion of the Arabs only and you ain't no Hijazi Arab but what does this have to do with the disaster of Q16:66 and 23:22 and Butunih v. Butuniha you tell me

The answer to your so called mistake and still you use the same attitude that you know everything which is not right.

I read this as: I know what I'm talking about and I'm not BS'ing you as you do

I know you know arabic obviously so I found no need to translate for you read the next paragraph about the plurals in arabic (alhaqeeqy wa almajazy) and know that the wordAlana'am is not (moa'nath haqeeqy) a real feminine word and can indeed be used as a masculine.

Really? then you tell me which is correct and which is not correct

1. الانعام في قلوبه

2. الانعام في قلوبها

Hint: number 1 is a mistake and you tell me if a child in a grammar class use the qulubih instead of qulubiha what would happen to him? let me help you he will flunk but even a child will not make such mistake and do you know why? because his/her brain is hard wired from uttering correct grammar

الحقيقيّ والمجازيّولأجل ما سلف من اختلاف بين الذكر والمذكر وبين الأنثى والمؤنث كان من التذكير أو التأنيث ما هو حقيقيّ وما هو مجازي. أما الحقيقي فهو ما كان فيه اتفاق بين المذكر والذكر الفرد وما كان فيه اتفاق بين المؤنث والأنثى من الإنسان أو الحيوان. قال الدماميني:"وكل منهما أي من المذكر والمؤنث حقيقي وهو ما له زوج من الحيوان كامرأة ورجل وناقة وجمل فكل من الرجل والجمل مذكر حقيقي وكل من المرأة والناقة مؤنث حقيقي. ومن النحويين كأبي البركات بن الأنباري وابن مالك من صرح بربط دلالة اللفظ المؤنث على الحقيقة التأنيثية بدلالته على ما له جهاز تأنيث

ومتى انفكت هذه العلاقة خرجت الظاهرة إلى دائرة المجاز. فالتذكير أو التأنيث في غير الإنسان والحن مجاز. وهو مجاز في اسم الحيوان المحتمل للدلالة على الذكر أو الأنثى. وهو في الجموع مجاز. ويثير الرضي قضية مجازية التأنيث في الجموع فيستثني منها جمع المذكر السالم، قال: وكل جمع غير ما على حد التثنية، وهو جمع المذكر السالم، مؤنث غير حقيقي فحكمه حكمه على نحو ما مرّ ولو كان جمع مؤنث حقيقي كالهندات إذ للجمعية تأنيثه أي لأن تأنيثه إنما هو بالتأويل لكونه جماعة ولم يعتبر التأنيث الحقيقي الذي كان في المفرد لأن المجاز الطارئ أزاله كما أزال التذكير الحقيقي في رجال وإنما لم يبطل الجمع بالواو والنون التذكير الحقيقي في الزيدون، لبقاء لفظ المفرد فيه فاحترموه

This is what I call justifying the mistakes and the absurd so you tell me is it butuniha or butunih? Hint: Butuniha

you still think I'm a victim of ignorance? well Im have to tell you that you are the real victim of ignorance because as it seems you don't know alot of things and still argue with such severe tone trying to impose your idea as the right ones but they are not.

Yes you are a victim of poor uncritical education and no more

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Justifying the absurd and teaching linguistics 101 to wannabe Arab by dhimmi no more

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)