Re: Arabic -- qawsitaliyya?
From: Herb Martin (news_at_LearnQuick.com)
Date: 06/24/04
- Next message: Dmitri: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Previous message: Herb Martin: "Re: Arabic -- qawsitaliyya?"
- In reply to: Yusuf B Gursey: "Re: Arabic -- qawsitaliyya?"
- Next in thread: Yusuf B Gursey: "Re: Arabic -- qawsitaliyya?"
- Reply: Yusuf B Gursey: "Re: Arabic -- qawsitaliyya?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 05:58:36 GMT
"Yusuf B Gursey" <ybg@TheWorld.com> wrote in message
news:cbdbs1$vt4$1@pcls4.std.com...
> : I am convinced that you are both correct - as Yusuf said, "part of the
> : problem is diglossia" and yes, this extends from colloquial dialect
> : to modern spoken 'standard' Arabic to "modern standard" and into
> : classical Qur'anic Arabic.
>
> "classical Qur'anic Arabic" as opposed to another form of Qur'anic
> Arabic??? :)
Admittedly redundant but redundancy is one of the methods
of all human language communication that eliminates much of
the opportunity for misunderstanding.
I wanted anyone reading it -- not just you -- to understand the
reference.
> the Qur'an is a unique text, it has its own peculiarities. no one is
> expected to reproduce its idiom completely.
> as for classical Arabic vs. modern standard Arabic, the differnces are not
> too great, less than reading an english text of any age, and most people
> are not expected to reproduce (old style) classical arabic in daily life,
> except theologians.
Of course and at the same time they must be able to understand the
older meanings and nuances of the classical even though their dialect
and modern Arabic differ.
> : It is my opinion that the word 'diglossia' itself ignores a large
portion
> : of the problem -- it is really closer to 'triglossia' since most Arab
> : speakers
> : are also Muslim and required to study the Qur'an as well.
>
> see above.
>
> : Even "standard" Arabic and the Arabic of TV and radio are probably
> : farther apart than in written and spoken English, unless we compare
> : some rather "lax English dialect" to national newscasters.
>
>
> there are various registers in reciting arabic. flexibility is usually
> considered a plus in favor of ease.
I don't fully understand but I suspect (knowing you) that there
is something interesting to learn here if you elaborate.
>
> : Another issue in Arabic is the lack of a truly "printed" form of the
> : writing. Computers are alleviated some of the affect of this, but
> : in English we find it much easier to teach young children to read
> : and write PRINT at first, and then introduce cursive only when they
> : are (semi) literate.
>
> I don't find this a problem.
That was never the point -- that others do, especially in teaching
children is the issue.
Even among adult, you seem to be something of an exception
judging from your posts.
What is your native language? In how many languages are you
fluent or even an "expert linguist"?
How many other languages do you have at least limited fluency?
I deal with the alphabet fairly effectively and actually only took
about a week to learn it and a few months to stop making most
errors of reading, but my impression is that even that is slow
by your own personal standards....
> : And this continues into adulthood where practically everything we
> : read is in printed format. Even the art of "letter writing" by hand
> : is falling to email and the LaserJet.
-- Herb Martin
- Next message: Dmitri: "Re: Esperantist lies (Re: Learning a language)"
- Previous message: Herb Martin: "Re: Arabic -- qawsitaliyya?"
- In reply to: Yusuf B Gursey: "Re: Arabic -- qawsitaliyya?"
- Next in thread: Yusuf B Gursey: "Re: Arabic -- qawsitaliyya?"
- Reply: Yusuf B Gursey: "Re: Arabic -- qawsitaliyya?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|