Re: mistake in Wehr's Arabic dictionary ?

From: Jerzy Lacina (mm221_at_op.pl)
Date: 03/27/05 

Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 00:14:33 +0200

Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:24:59 GMT, na sci.lang,alt.languages.arabic, Raymond
Roy napisał(a):

> Hello,
>
> according to Wehr, there is a verb 'tafarzana' derived from the
> (Persian?) root 'frzn' (queen in chess). Now, Wehr classifies it in the
> II form. In my understanding of the Arabic verbal system, 'tafarzana'
> looks more like a VII form verb. With a II form verb, I would expect a
> doubling of a middle radical; nothing like this happens here. On the
> other hand, an Arabic verb beginning with 'ta-' sounds to me like a VI
> or VII form.
>
> Can someone sort that out?
>
> Thanks
>
> Raymond

It is not mistake.
Wehr classified this verb as a second form of a quadriradical verb
(farzana). It is the same form as "tazalzala" - "to quake" and "tasalTana"
- "to become sutan".
There is a difference between the forms of quadriradical and triradical
verbs.

Jerzy Lacina

Relevant Pages

  • Re: mistake in Wehrs Arabic dictionary ?
    ... >Raymond Roy wrote: ... In my understanding of the Arabic verbal system, 'tafarzana' ... >it's the II form of quadriliteral verb. ... >the II form of quadriliterals conjugates like V of triliterals, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • mistake in Wehrs Arabic dictionary ?
    ... Wehr classifies it in the ... In my understanding of the Arabic verbal system, 'tafarzana' ... looks more like a VII form verb. ...
    (sci.lang)