Teach me the old English please

[Danah]

^ the thread was already going off topic by some others before your first post brother Khaldun, I appreciate your concern jazakAllah khair.

There is no logical reason that I should not understand fully what the Qu'ran is saying just because I do it in English aided by commentaries etc in much the same way I can understand any book from any time - this must be true?

I am sorry to say that you are missing something here......Reading Quran in Arabic is totally different than reading it in any other language.

If you want to know the real miracle behind the eloquence of Quran you can't get that by reading the translation. How can you do that when one side of the miracle is in the language itself?
The language of the Quran itself was a challenge for the most eloquent Arab tribes on that time, they thought of it as a poem, then as a magic! they couldn't believe that this can be a talk of a man, but it was a revelation from God

 

[OurIslamic]

Read Shakespeare lol.

 

[Fishman]

Shakespeare's English isn't actually Old English. Old English was spoken by the Saxons and is like a completely different language.

Middle English is a bit more easy to understand, but is still very different to Shakespeare's writing.
:wa:

 

[Hugo]

I just thought we respect forum rules and respect the sisters thread she made, but ok.

That is where you are wrong I am afraid. A huge amount of people speak the fus-ha arabic (6th century arabic) on a daly basis and I am one of them.

The arabic the Prophet spoke and the arabic I speak is one and the same, word by word. That is what I am trying to put across.

No it must not be true, because to understand a thing on face value and understanding it in depth are two different things. And since you stated that you by studying Qur'aan through the english language would make you understand it 99% I beg to differ.

For an example studying the ancient writings on pyramids will need a person to be familiarsed with the language that was spoken at that time, you do not rely upon translations rather if you are serious then you learn the language of the ancient egyptians, otherwise you will be lost in translation to say the least.

This I find most interesting - just need to be clear are you saying that all Arabs from the middle east all speak the same Arabic in daily living? Now in a sense I understand the same English that Shakespeare spoke and I can read him with understanding but I would like any other English speaker have enormous difficulty speaking it aloud or writing it now because some words are not used any more and some words have meanings which are now obscure plus there have been changes in the underlying rhythms.

Also the colouring of some words have changed so they don't now mean quite the same thing. That is why if we want to get a fuller understanding we have to immerse ourself in Elizabethan culture and writings. In short it seem impossible that in 1400 years the Arabic language has not moved on if you are right.

In your example about the Egyptians you are in fact simply repeating what I said about Arabic that to understand it one has to transport oneself back to the 6th century. For most of us that is impossible.

In short are you arguing that we cannot understand the Qu'ran and therefore cannot understand what God has to say unless we learn 6th Century Arabic?

I just add a final note to say that Muslim scholars themselves are aware of the difficulties and obscurities of the sacred text.

1. It contain a large number of foreign words with new meaning pressed into service.

2. There are a large number of treatise by Muslim philologist and on has the exiting title 'Gharib al-Qu'ran' which can be translated as 'Strange Expressions in the Qu'ran' (Aban b. Taghlib (d758)

3. Muslim exegete's divide Qu'ranic words into 4 classes: Khass - words used in a special sense, Amm - collective or common, Mushtarak - complex words with several meaning and Mu'awwal - words with several meaning all of which are possible so require special explanation.

An interesting example of the last class is the word for slay inhar from the root nahr. Hanifa translates it in Sura 107:2 as 'sacrifice' but Shafi'i says it means 'placing the hands on the breads in prayer'. Hanafi and Shafi'i were leading fiqh scholars so this shows it is not a simple matter to know what is being said.

In the same way sentences (Ibarah) in the Qu'ran are in two classes Zahir meaning obvious and Khafi meaning hidden so again it is not always a simple matter without expert support to know what is being said.

 

[Khaldun]

Please qoute me if I said that the whole arabic world speaks one type of arabic.

What I said was that a large portion of us still speak the same arabic the Prophet spoke, word by word. The language is still alive.

First of all do not make assumptions if you do not know a language, the pure form of arabic is still spoken until this day and there is no barrier because of time.


You are going in circles, one time you are agreeing with me then you are saying it is impossible? It is not impossible and that is what makes arabic unique from other dead tongues.

So now you are a scholar of Qur'aanic arabic? Do you even know why the scholars made these books that you refer too? It is not because it is odd words as such, but rather it is the fact that it might only appear one or two times in the entire Qur'aan and thus it is refered to as Ghareeb, it has nothing to do with what you are referring to I am afraid.

And as for the words that you qouted, if it comes as a suprise to you that one word can have more then one meaning without the meanings being contradicting then I suggest you study abit more about languages.

 

[OurIslamic]

Shakespeare's English isn't actually Old English. Old English was spoken by the Saxons and is like a completely different language.

Middle English is a bit more easy to understand, but is still very different to Shakespeare's writing.
:wa:

I thought the OP was referring to the type of English which Shakespeare used. Wasn't his early modern english?

 

[Fishman]

I thought the OP was referring to the type of English which Shakespeare used. Wasn't his early modern english?

Yeah, Shakespeare spoke Early Modern English, which is not that different to today's speech.

 

[Hugo]

Please qoute me if I said that the whole arabic world speaks one type of arabic.

What I said was that a large portion of us still speak the same arabic the Prophet spoke, word by word. The language is still alive.

First of all do not make assumptions if you do not know a language, the pure form of arabic is still spoken until this day and there is no barrier because of time.

Hugo - I cannot quote you as saying that the whole Arab world speak the same Arabic and I did not say you did. I asked for clarification - were you saying that every Arab spoke 6th Century Arabic. If there is no barrier because of time then Arabic is like no other language except dead ones and that the way a 6th century Arab would understand a word would be the same as you understand it now.

You are going in circles, one time you are agreeing with me then you are saying it is impossible? It is not impossible and that is what makes arabic unique from other dead tongues.

Hugo - I am looking for clarification so its nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing. Everything I have read talks about many different dialects back in the 6th century and now plus the existence of a diglossia or literary and spoken forms. So I find it very surprising that you and many can write and speak lets say easily in the Arabic of the Qu'ran in daily life.

So now you are a scholar of Qur'aanic arabic? Do you even know why the scholars made these books that you refer too? It is not because it is odd words as such, but rather it is the fact that it might only appear one or two times in the entire Qur'aan and thus it is refered to as Ghareeb, it has nothing to do with what you are referring to I am afraid.

Hugo - no I am not a scholar of Qu'ranic Arabic. Of course I know why philologists constructed such books because there was need to standardise the language and enable later scholars to understand more fully what the words and constructs meant because there are difficulties with the Arabic in the Qu'ran just as there would be in any ancient writings - if there were not why would scholars bother to spend years doing this kind of painstaking work. You make no comment on what I said about classification of Qu'ranic words or sentences or the example I gave of the kind of difficulty so I assume - can I assume, you agree?

And as for the words that you qouted, if it comes as a suprise to you that one word can have more then one meaning without the meanings being contradicting then I suggest you study abit more about languages.

It is obvious from you comment that you do not understand the differences between the classifications of Mushtarak and Mu'awwal. It is clear and indeed I think everyone knows that in many languages (including English) the same word can have several different meanings and sometimes as in Arabic opposite meanings and we can make sense of this usually by the context in which they are used. However, in the Qu'ran there are cases where a word has several meaning but its exact meaning in that context is unknown or it is unsure. I am not making this up your own scholars knew all this centuries ago and it is common in probably every language.

 

[Khaldun]

I realise where the problem lies now. You are like many other people, knowledgable concerning one language [english] and then now you apply your knowledge of this particular language to arabic which is totally different.

My point still stands, to understand the Qur'aan fully you have to learn the language it was revealed in i.e 6th century arabic.

 

[Hugo]

I realise where the problem lies now. You are like many other people, knowledgable concerning one language [english] and then now you apply your knowledge of this particular language to arabic which is totally different.

My point still stands, to understand the Qur'aan fully you have to learn the language it was revealed in i.e 6th century arabic.

I agree and if you look at my post that is exactly what I have been saying the only difference is that I do it at a distance through lexicons and commentaries. Of course it is different from English which uses for example word order to covey meaning whereas Arabic characteristically does it by word endings. But at the same time Arabic derives from the Semitic family which include Hebrew and Aramaic so because the Bible is so well known there is a sense that we are used to some of the forms and constructions.

However, I come back to my original point that for you an Arabic speaker it is obviously easier to understand but even you have to transport yourself back to the 6th Century to be sure you have understood the words correctly.

Interestingly, many Arabic words and some forms entered European languages because of Muslim conquests in the 10th centuries and Arabic texts on medicine, history, science, language and translations of Greek works circulated widely at that time.

So whilst in some ideal world it would be best to learn 6th century Arabic to understand the Qu'ran it is not a practical solution for the vast majority of people and I cannot see how God would be limited by Arabic or any other language - do you agree or do you see another way forward?

 

[Khaldun]

What you seem to have difficulty in grasping is that the 6th century arabic is the arabic I speak today! It is refered to as Fus-ha and has not changed abit through out the ages.

And with all due respect you are only confusing me, in the beginning of your post you say we agree, then you say you cannot see how God could limit Himself to 6th century arabic?

 

[Hugo]

What you seem to have difficulty in grasping is that the 6th century arabic is the arabic I speak today! It is refered to as Fus-ha and has not changed abit through out the ages.

And with all due respect you are only confusing me, in the beginning of your post you say we agree, then you say you cannot see how God could limit Himself to 6th century arabic?

Of course there is standard Arabic but my point and what I thought I was agreeing to was that the connotations, shades of meaning etc that you need to be aware of are 6th century ones not 21st century ones and its is hard to see that these could be unchanged.

A question - if you stick to just 6th century Arabic then there are 1000s of modern terms that are absent from the language and it would therefore be inadequate if it really has not changed a bit?

A Question - I am not sure whether you are saying that to understand what God is saying is only possible in Arabic - is this your view?

 

[Khaldun]

Throughout your posts you have only made assumption after assumption and not brought any evidence. Arabic is not like other languages you have studied so please do not assume things.

Of course there is standard Arabic but my point and what I thought I was agreeing to was that the connotations, shades of meaning etc that you need to be aware of are 6th century ones not 21st century ones and its is hard to see that these could be unchanged.

A question - if you stick to just 6th century Arabic then there are 1000s of modern terms that are absent from the language and it would therefore be inadequate if it really has not changed a bit?

A Question - I am not sure whether you are saying that to understand what God is saying is only possible in Arabic - is this your view?

Assumption after assumption, if you do not have any evidence for whatever it is you are claiming [because quite frankly I am lost since you agree with me yet disagree at the same time] then I will leave the debate here.

May Allah guide us to that which He loves and pleases Him the most.

 

[Hugo]

Throughout your posts you have only made assumption after assumption and not brought any evidence. Arabic is not like other languages you have studied so please do not assume things.

Assumption after assumption, if you do not have any evidence for whatever it is you are claiming [because quite frankly I am lost since you agree with me yet disagree at the same time] then I will leave the debate here.

May Allah guide us to that which He loves and pleases Him the most.

I cannot quite see where I have made any assumptions and mostly I have asked questions. You are doing that it seem - here you say Arabic is not like other languages but it clearly is part of its own family - it as far as I know is not an isolate like for example German?

I can provide all sorts of evidence if you wish to continue but in that case we need I think at this point a new thread - it might be a very useful thread as we all have much to learn and language is such a vital and central part of all our lives - do you want to continue?

 

[Khaldun]

You did not ask questions rather you put words in my mouth and only posed them as a question.

Feel free to open a seperate thread if you like, but since you have not studied arabic in any great depth I think any discussion regarding this matter will be futile to say the least.

But me personally I can tell when it is worth discussing a matter and when it is not.

And the servants of the Beneficent God are they who walk on the earth in humbleness, and when the ignorant address them, they say: Peace. [Surah Furqaan]