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

172 Gerd-R. Puin16:69 16:69 D =16:90 16:90 DH =· Not in the Standard Text at all, but in manuscripts the alif-wa(ila followingparticle ka- is left out, though rarely, e.g.:t#':llf ka_'Jl_Ja'lla'mi 42:32 42:320=~If ka __:JI•atiy 16:92 16:92DH=3.1.2.2 VERBS2:74 2:740=In the Standard Text it is normal to find that the'verbs of the eighth stem areduced by the alif-wa(ila, e.g.:(102) ..S.1;31 i) la.Jini 'Jtsabadta in StT 26:29;however, ·if the verb is connected with a preposition, the Alif-W a;;la candropped, as in(103) ..:.~ Ia _ t'aQ.agta in StT 18:77,but this feature is not unusual in the manuscripts, as in 13:16:(104) r~'~.iJJIJ1(:Ia _fa_ t'alJ.agtum. :Ja_fa_'Jtsabadtum3.2 In the middle of a word3.2.1 Plene or defective writing of the alifin mss. CF, instead ofin the Standard Text (Q 13:1.6).There is a group of nouns which evidently always have been written with anboth in manuscripts and in the Standard Text, viz. words like ._,.I.:J\ or J\.:J\.these words were the starting point for the growing notion of the a !if as alectionis for the long /a:/.In many cases there is no difference in meaning if the word isdefectively or plene, since in many passages the correct interpretation ofrasm is evident from the context (as well as the grammar of Arabic). Thistrue for the frequent double orthographies encountered in the Standard(as well as in the manuscripts): .!l~ or.!!}.,;;,~ or ..:..W , ..........,_\ or ..,.,\:...c.l , ~Vowel letters and ortho-epic writing in the Qur'an 173, ..._.£ or ..,.,1£, t--- or ('~• etc. It is not necessary to quote all of thesein detail. ,Ssa:ges introduced by the imperative "say" were originally reports that "hesaid," this would foster the idea that the Qur' an is in wide parts the collecof"logia," of the sayings and deeds of certain but unnamed authorities.Substitution of the alif by a ya'the alifbad become solely associated with the /a/ sound it had to be changedthe adequate ya '; thus we find~~ g(l" tukum in ms. HlafJidah in mss. DRinstead ofinstead of~in StT 43:24, or~.1;!1 in StT 14:37.next case, the word 'ula' i, the same change of concept has. also taken place,is not visible in the rasm, which remains the same. Unlike in the Standardin the manuscripts the final a !if marks the short vowel:Juwlali in mss. CG, and ~":1_;1 Juwlari in StT 3:119.· · more evidence is needed to clear up the relation between ":/_,\ and•. extension ..!W_,\ in view of the alternatives .!l..fl or.!!":/_,\ mentioned by Wright/dein their grammar of Arabic. 28. Wright/de Goeje, A Grammar of the Arabic Language. 2 vols., London: Cambridge Universityre-issued 1962, 1 :266ff.