Zuhriyyatul Athiroh, Muhammad Syamsul Arifin, Ahmed Salim Moosa Alkharusi

TYPES OF IḌĀFAH AND THEIR APPROACHES IN CLASSICAL ARABIC AND MODERN STANDARD ARABIC: A COMPARATIVE HISTORICAL LINGUISTIC STUDY | أنواع الإضافة وطرائق تناولها بين العربية الكلاسيكية والعربية الفصحى الحديثة: دراسة لغوية مقارنة تاريخية

Introduction

Types of iḌĀfah and their approaches in classical arabic and modern standard arabic: a comparative historical linguistic study | أنواع الإضافة وطرائق تناولها بين العربية الكلاسيكية والعربية الفصحى الحديثة: دراسة لغوية مقارنة تاريخية. Explore iḍāfah (genitive construct) in Classical and Modern Standard Arabic. A comparative historical linguistic study analyzing types, approaches, and grammatical shifts.

Abstract

This study investigates the phenomenon of iḍāfah (genitive construct) in Arabic from a comparative-historical (diachronic) perspective. It aims to analyze the types of iḍāfah in Classical Arabic and Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), to examine how each period approaches these types, and to identify similarities and differences between them. The study employs library research and comparative-historical linguistic analysis, drawing on six purposively selected primary sources three classical (al-Zajjājī, Ibn Ājurrūm, Ibn Mālik) and three MSA (Caspari, Ryding, Badawi et al.). Data analysis followed the diachronic comparative method via Verhaar and Hopper-Traugott’s framework as elaborated by Crowley and Bowern. Both periods agree on two fundamental types: iḍāfah maʿnawiyyah and iḍāfah laḏẓiyyah. However, Classical Arabic employs systematic, detailed exposition with subcategories, while MSA adopts a descriptive-communicative orientation prioritizing functional usage. This difference is classified as Substitution in Hopper and Traugott’s theory, indicating a shift in analytical perspective rather than disappearance of the grammatical category. This study contributes to Arabic comparative linguistics by bridging classical and modern traditions.تتناول هذه الدراسة ظاهرةَ الإضافة في اللغة العربية من منظور مقارن-تاريخي ديكروني، إذ تهدف إلى تحليل أنواع الإضافة وطرائق تناولها في العربية الكلاسيكية والعربية الفصحى الحديثة. اعتمدت الدراسة منهجين هما البحث المكتبي والدراسة اللغوية المقارنة-التاريخية، مستندةً إلى ستة مصادر أولية ثلاثة منها تمثّل العربية الكلاسيكية وثلاثة تمثّل العربية الفصحى الحديثة. وتوصّلت الدراسة إلى أن كلا الفترتين تتّفقان على تقسيم الإضافة إلى نوعين أساسيين: الإضافة المعنوية والإضافة اللفظية. غير أنهما تختلفان في أسلوب التناول: إذ تميل العربية الكلاسيكية إلى العرض التفصيلي المنهجي، بينما تميل العربية الفصحى الحديثة إلى التوجّه الوصفي التواصلي. وصُنِّف هذا الاختلاف ضمن فئة الاستبدال وفق نظرية هوبر وتراوغوت

Review

This study offers a timely and insightful comparative-historical linguistic analysis of *iḍāfah* (genitive construct) in Arabic, meticulously examining its manifestation across Classical Arabic and Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). The authors clearly articulate their objective: to dissect the types of *iḍāfah* and the distinct analytical approaches employed in each period, ultimately identifying their points of convergence and divergence. Employing a robust methodology encompassing library research and diachronic comparative analysis, the research draws upon a judicious selection of six primary sources—three seminal classical texts and three authoritative modern grammars. The application of Verhaar and Hopper-Traugott’s framework, elaborated by Crowley and Bowern, provides a strong theoretical underpinning for the comparative analysis. The study's core findings reveal a fascinating dynamic. It establishes that both Classical Arabic and MSA agree on the two fundamental types of *iḍāfah*: *iḍāfah maʿnawiyyah* and *iḍāfah laḏẓiyyah*. However, the divergence lies in their pedagogical and analytical orientations. Classical Arabic, as the research indicates, favors a systematic, detailed exposition replete with subcategories, reflecting a foundational, taxonomic approach to grammar. In contrast, MSA grammars adopt a more descriptive-communicative perspective, prioritizing functional usage and practical application. This shift in analytical focus, rather than a disappearance of the grammatical category itself, is theoretically classified as "Substitution" within Hopper and Traugott’s framework, highlighting a fundamental evolution in how the phenomenon is conceptualized and presented across historical linguistic traditions. This research makes a valuable contribution to Arabic comparative linguistics by successfully bridging the divide between classical and modern grammatical traditions. By meticulously tracing the historical evolution of *iḍāfah* analysis and framing its differences within established linguistic theory, the study not only enriches our understanding of this crucial grammatical construct but also illuminates broader trends in linguistic description. The insights gleaned from classifying the analytical shift as "Substitution" offer a sophisticated lens through which to view diachronic changes in grammatical frameworks, making this work highly relevant for scholars of Arabic linguistics, historical linguistics, and language pedagogy.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.