reynolds-the-quran-in-its-historical-context-2

284 Christoph Luxenberg14 He had believed that (God) did not observe him;15 But his Lord saw him (well indeed)That which Noldeke described regarding syntax in Syriac, which ispuzzling to Arabists, is equally evident in the phrase that introduces theconcerns us here. The unity of the phrase, which has been broken by theinsertion of a verse division (after hawa), was not recognized by thetors and translators. In fact, the opening two verses comprise one phraseof a protasis (Verse 1) and an apodosis (Verse 2). Thus the syntax of theas follows: ·a The first word (wa-l-najm) is not the subject of Verse 1 but an oaththat has no role other than to introduce the following phrase. Thus itbe translated, "By the star!" and not "By the star when it falls!"b The temporal phrase that follows (idha hawa; "when it falls") is athe subject of which is named in the apodosis of Verse 2: $a/:zibulatm;companion". One shoulArabic ra/.zima > ra 'ima ("to love tenderly"). We note finally that Lisan al- 'arabDar $adir, 1955, 2:45la) cites under the root r-.f-/.1 a saying of 'Umar who, on the occasionhis marriage to Umm Kulthlim, the daughter of 'All, is to have said raffi/.ztini, by whichmeant, "Tell me that which is to be said to the newlywed," i.e. (according to the practicecurrent in our day in advance of or at the occasion of a marriage), "say tefralr ('may youhappy!')" (thus the appellation fara/.1 for the wedding ceremony in Egypt, for example).explains for us the secondary form of the Arabic verb faril.za ("to rejoice, to be merry"),is a metathesis of the Syro-Aramaic root r-f-lr (n.b. The Arabic variant r-q-/.1 cited in thesense by the Lis an is manifestly the result of a false pointing which produced q instead ofWe would draw attention also to a final secondary Arabic variant of this same root, due to the'.a~tenuiati