Dr. Ramzi Baalbaki, January 25, 2025
Session report
Introduction
The lecture delivered by Dr. Ramzi Baalbaki focused on the Arabic linguistic theory, with particular emphasis on grammar and lexicography. For a system to be considered a linguistic theory, it must be based on a comprehensive, well-defined, and coherent corpus, establish precise and structured rules, and be able to explain the irregularities and exceptions observed in the language. The objective of his presentation was to analyze the methods employed by grammarians and lexicographers to determine the extent to which they succeeded in formalizing a true linguistic theory. While this theoretical structure appears relatively complete in grammar, it remains more uncertain in lexicography, where the approach is more empirical and less systematic.
The Exhaustiveness of the Arabic Linguistic Corpus
Exhaustiveness is a fundamental criterion for any linguistic theory. Early Arab grammarians undertook a significant effort to compile a corpus as complete as possible within a century. This endeavor relied on oral transmission as well as direct observation of Bedouin dialects. Unlike Sībawayh, whose sources do not report that he personally traveled to tribes to interview Bedouin speakers, prominent figures such as al-Naḍr ibn Shumayl, al-Aṣmaʿī, and Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim ibn Sallām traversed the desert to collect linguistic data with precision. This methodical accumulation of information enabled grammarians to extract syntactic and morphological rules from the corpus.
A striking illustration of this pursuit of exhaustiveness is found in the diversity of forms attributed to a single word. For example, the verb raġā (to foam) has up to twelve different maṣadir forms (verbal nouns). This meticulous collection, sometimes pushed to excess, reflects the rigorous methodology of early Arab linguists. Furthermore, these grammarians did not merely accumulate data; they also subjected it to critical evaluation, applying methodological skepticism to ensure its reliability and relevance.
The Coherence of Grammatical Principles
The author highlights five fundamental concepts structuring Arabic grammar: grammatical operation (al-ʿamal), analogy (al-qiyās), causality (al-taʿlīl), underlying form (al-taqdīr), and base form (al-aṣl). These principles, intrinsically linked, form the backbone of the Arabic grammatical theory. For instance, the analogy between verbs and nouns explains the influence of the particle inna on nominative and accusative cases, due to its analogy to transitive verbs. Another illustration of this interdependence is the omission of the lām of the imperative in poetry. While the expected form would be Muḥammadun li-tafdi nafsaka kullu nafsin (Muhammad, may every soul sacrifice itself for you), the attested version Muḥammadun tafdi nafsaka kullu nafsin omits this lām. Rather than seeing this as mere poetic license, Arab grammarians justified this irregularity by establishing an analogy with the ellipsis of rubba after the conjunction wa-, illustrating (and preserving) the coherence of their theoretical framework.
Managing Grammatical Exceptions
A linguistic theory must not only account for general rules but also explain exceptions. The author highlights that Arab grammarians developed various strategies to integrate atypical forms within their theoretical framework. For example, the words ḫalā and ʿadā can govern either a genitive or an accusative case. To maintain grammatical coherence, they determined that these terms change category depending on context: they are verbs when governing an accusative and prepositions when followed by a genitive.
Another example concerns the rule that a preposition should not, in principle, precede another preposition. However, certain attested expressions, such as min ʿan yamīnī, seem to contradict this principle by juxtaposing min and ʿan. To resolve this apparent contradiction, grammarians proposed a solution by reclassifying ʿan as a noun in this particular context.
Critique of Lexicographical Definitions
One of the most debated aspects of Arabic lexicography concerns the quality of definitions. Several issues arise. Circular definitions are common, where a word is defined by its opposite. For example, karam (generosity) is defined as the opposite of luʾm (miserliness), which is itself defined as the opposite of karam. There are also rare words that are explained by even more obscure terms. This is the case with kunduš, a type of bird, which is often defined in ancient dictionaries by the synonymous (yet equally obscure) term ʿaqʿaq. Some dictionaries merely cite a poetic verse containing the word without providing any semantic explanation, while others simply state that the word is well known.
Conclusion
Dr. Ramzi Baalbaki concludes by highlighting the richness and rigor of Arabic grammatical theory while underscoring its limitations. While Arab grammarians successfully developed a coherent and systematic theoretical framework, lexicography, by contrast, remained more empirical and less structured methodologically. The analysis of their works reveals implicit choices, particularly in the semantic and morphological organization of lexical entries, but these choices are never explicitly justified by the authors themselves.
Dr. Baalbaki thus encourages a continued critical study of this linguistic heritage, incorporating modern approaches while avoiding excessive sacralization or glorification that could hinder its understanding and objective evaluation.
Watch the video of this session in Arabic with French subtitles…