Objectives: The research aims to assess the stance of advanced scholars towards Sibawayh's views, examining their agreement or disagreement and the subsequent impact on later grammarians. The goal is to contribute to the enrichment of grammatical studies in general.
 Methods: The study employs a descriptive and analytical approach to discuss the issue. It presents the attitudes of grammarians towards Sibawayh's statements, scrutinizing and favoring the strong ones while rejecting the weak ones. The grammatical position according to Sibawayh's statements is examined, comparing them with the views of commentators and other grammarians who supported or contradicted him. The grammarians' perspectives are carefully documented, even if not found in their available books, indicating sources with phrases such as "attributed to" when applicable.
 Results: Sibawayh's opinions on the parsing of the dual and the sound masculine plural were diverse, reflecting more than one perspective. After careful examination, it becomes evident that his understanding was either incorrect or subject to misconceptions. The correct interpretation, as deduced from his statements, indicates parsing with letters in the nominative, accusative, and genitive cases. However, the scholars who wrote annotations (Al Hawashi) contradicted Sibawayh's opinion and offered corrections.
 Conclusion: Establishing a clear stance for any grammarian, especially someone of Sibawayh's stature, on grammatical issues holds significant importance, given the potential impact on the grammar lesson. The research recommends a thorough investigation of Sibawayh's opinions from his own works or those of respected grammarians.
Read full abstract