26.02.2013 Views

A Comparative Lexical Study of Qur?anic Arabic

A Comparative Lexical Study of Qur?anic Arabic

A Comparative Lexical Study of Qur?anic Arabic

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

568 CHAPTER FIVE<br />

1 . Only in SS H<br />

2. Only in NWS - + - -<br />

3. Only in Ug. - - + -<br />

4. Only in ES +<br />

5. SS-NWS + + --<br />

6. Ug.-ES - - + +<br />

7. SS-ES + -- +<br />

8. NWS-Ug. - + + -<br />

9. SS-Ug. + - + -<br />

10. NWS-ES - + - +<br />

11. SS-NWS-Ug. + + +-<br />

12. NWS-Ug.-ES - + + +<br />

13. SS-Ug.-ES +- + +<br />

14. SS-NWS-ES + + - +<br />

15. SS-NWS-ES + + ( \ )<br />

16. SS-NWS-Ug.-ES + + + +<br />

17. SS-NWS-Ug.-ES 9 +<br />

18. Nowhere in Semitic<br />

Table 8<br />

[+ \ \\]<br />

[\ + \ \]<br />

[\ \ + \]<br />

[ \ \ \ + ]<br />

[+ + \ \]<br />

[ \ \ + + ]<br />

[ + \ \ + ]<br />

[ \ + + \ ]<br />

[+ \ + \]<br />

[ \ + \ + ]<br />

[+ + + \]<br />

[ \ + + + ]<br />

[ + \ + + ]<br />

152 (8.9%) [765 (44.6%)]<br />

161 (9.4%) [879 (51.2%)]<br />

16 (0.9%) [395 (23.0%)]<br />

16 (0.9%) [414(24.1%)]<br />

156 (9.1%) [569 (33.1%)]<br />

2 (0.1%) [248 (14.4%)]<br />

8 (0.5%) [312 (18.2%)]<br />

23 (1.3%) [365 (21.3%)]<br />

9 (0.5%) [316 (18.4%)]<br />

45 (2.6%) [384 (22.4%)]<br />

74 (4.3%) [306(17.8%)]<br />

22 (1.3%) [245 (14.3%)]<br />

0 (0%) [ 0 (0 %)]<br />

71 (4.1%)<br />

301 (17.5%)<br />

216 (12.6%)<br />

82 (4.8%)<br />

535 (31.1%)<br />

In this table, two separate calculations have been carried out. The<br />

first calculation takes into account the cognates <strong>of</strong> <strong>Arabic</strong> lexemes<br />

attested exclusively in one particular area <strong>of</strong> Semitic (patterns 1 to<br />

4), in two areas (patterns 5 to 10), in three areas (patterns 11 to<br />

15), 6 and in all the four areas (16 to 17). 7 Distribution pattern 18<br />

has to do with <strong>Arabic</strong> lexemes for which no cognates have been<br />

found in any <strong>of</strong> the Semitic languages under consideration.<br />

In the second calculation, whose results are shown within square<br />

brackets, the number <strong>of</strong> cognates in the various patterns <strong>of</strong> distribution<br />

ignore the other areas <strong>of</strong> Semitic (shown with the symbol \). 8<br />

6<br />

Distribution pattern 15 refers to cognates attested in any language <strong>of</strong> three<br />

areal subdivisions (excluding Ugaritic). Thus, pattern 15 ignores Ug. (that is no<br />

computer 'filtering' was done in the Ug. column, thus + + \ +). This way, a<br />

different result from the one in pattern 14 (in which Ug. is included in the filtering:<br />

+ H— +) is obtained.<br />

7<br />

Pattern 17 takes into account cognates attested in all <strong>of</strong> the nine languages <strong>of</strong><br />

the corpus.<br />

8<br />

This means that whenever a search for cognates (by means <strong>of</strong> computer 'filtering',<br />

that is instructing the computer to retrieve information only from specific 'fields')

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!