Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 8 of 8 items for :

  • All: "presentism" x
  • Morphology & Syntax x
Clear All

Series:

Beata Sheyhatovitch

will be presented later). RDA defines the expression maʿnā l-lafẓ ‘the meaning of a linguistic expression’ as “something that is meant, i.e., intended by [the expression]” ( mā yuʿnā bihi ʾay yurādu ). 6 Several characteristics of use of the term maʿnā in Šarḥ al-Kāfiya can be discerned. First

Series:

Beata Sheyhatovitch

’ to present a sentence as providing the addressee with new information about something; istiḥsān ‘preference’, referring to linguistic phenomena which are not dictated by the basic principles of the theory but by speakers’ preferences; mansūḫ ‘abrogated’, referring to an element from an underlying

Series:

Beata Sheyhatovitch

not a warning but rather an instrument of warning” ( maʿa ʾannahu laysa bi-l-taḥḏīri bal huwa ʾālatu l-taḥḏīri ). 33 In other words, the warning is an act performed by the speaker by means of a grammatical structure presented here. The linguistic expression is thus distinct from the purpose achieved

Series:

Beata Sheyhatovitch

important stage in the development of coinage theory (although the term waḍʿ is present also in earlier grammatical literature). 3.1 The Term waḍʿ in Grammatical Literature prior to RDA Some appearances of the term waḍʿ and its derivatives can be found already in early grammarians’ writings, but the

Series:

Beata Sheyhatovitch

Arabic grammatical tradition, she mostly mentions terms and principles without further elaboration or demonstration of how they facilitate the understanding of the text. Ḥakamī (2009) explores the grammatical thought of Sīrāfī (d. 368/979) as presented in Šarḥ al-Kāfiya ; Bin Ġazī (2010) addresses RDA

Series:

Beata Sheyhatovitch

iḫtilāf al-fuqahāʾ . 13 Qayrawānī (d. 386/996) uses the term twice in a discussion on the payment of zakāt from the profits from a rented house. A possible destruction of the house is presented as a “pouncing” ( ṭāriʾ ) factor. 14 The author does not explain what this means, but it is clear that this

Pieter A.M. Seuren

present-day linguists, it is as one of the editors of Saussure’s posthumous Cours de linguistque générale , but that he was a highly creative, if not prophetic, innovator of linguistic theory, rising far above Saussure and most others, is totally unknown. 2 Young linguists nowadays have never heard of

Pieter A.M. Seuren

is hardly ever mentioned in present-day theoretical linguistics. In our day, linguists, who may be less familiar with the intellectual climate in France during the fin de siècle and only know about Saussure’s Cours from a distance, might think that the social dimension of language as put forward