Abstract
This article aims to present an overall reconstruction of the debate on the definition and etymology of Arabic ism (‘noun’, ‘substantive’), by discussing and comparing texts from the Arabic linguistic tradition. The first part deals with the definition of the grammatical element and its functions, while the second is fully dedicated to the examination of the etymological issues, focusing on the two assumed roots of derivation for ism (namely s-m-w and w-s-m). The arguments are presented through the collation of the opinions of the relevant Arabic grammarians, examining both the wider debate between the early grammatical schools of Baṣra and Kūfa (2nd/8th–3rd/9th centuries), and the reports of the arguments as described by later scholars.Key words: Arabic linguistic tradition, Arabic grammar, Arab grammarians, Root, Philosophy of language
Highlights
Within the Arabic linguistic tradition, that language consists of three parts of speech (ʾaqsām al-kalām), namely nouns, verbs, and particles
The delineation of the tripartite vision is usually ascribed to Sībawayhi (d. 180/796) who opens the Kitāb by defining the partes orationis: “words are noun, verb, and particle.”[1]
Each category presents differences in status and characteristics, as pointed out by later grammarians, with distinctions mainly based on the role played within an utterance
Summary
Within the Arabic linguistic tradition, that language consists of three parts of speech (ʾaqsām al-kalām), namely nouns, verbs, and particles. 1.1 Definition Sībawayhi does not provide clear definitions of the ism in the Kitāb, but—relying on a common linguistic practice—reduces his explanations to a tamṯīl,[3] providing few examples of what may be considered a ‘noun’, as for instance ‘man’, ‘horse’, and ‘wall’ (fa’l-ism raǧul wa-faras wa-ḥāiṭ).[4]. This represents the starting point from which grammarians of later periods drew inspiration to formulate their own definitions, examining the ism according to its intrinsic features and grammatical peculiarities. As a matter of fact, the lack of a clear definition in the Kitāb left room to a profound discussion on the subject, so that grammarians after Sībawayhi could define the nature of the category and focus on providing further details to delineate the characteristics of the noun
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
