Not an expert, but I remember 40 or 50 years ago, a Tunisian historian on TV say that a few ancient clasical poets praised certain poets before them who had no surviving poetry, putting a poetic way of dateing classical Arabic because their poetry was before classical Arabic was formalized.
Thinking about languages in the West is influenced by Aristotle and Darwin. Languages should not be thought of in an Aristotelian hierarchical way, as if languages were lineages, nor in the way of Darwin and biological evolution, as if languages were biological organisms evolving. All of these methods fall under a confirmation bias by forming assumptions in the mind and then project them on the reality of a language and its history. The closest statement to the truth, I believe, when following the facts is to say the emergence of the Arabic language occurred through a long process we call “spontaneous selection and election” for centuries from multiple Semitic dialects, from dialects of the north in the Levant and mesopotamia to the ones in the south in Yemen, Oman and Ethiopia. This process reached to a rich stage when Mecca became the mother of villages when it started to celebrate polytheistic pan-Arab festivals that brought together the Arabs from all areas, especially the Ukaz Festival, which played a role in the standardization of the Arabic poetic forms. In those festivals, the Arabs competed to win the title of the most poetic man of the Arabs. Our evidence for this is that the Arabic language is the richest of the Semitic languages in verb morphological forms, and it has characteristics that it shares with the Mesopotamian and Levantine dialects that we do not find in the southern dialects, such as: Dt stem, and other characteristics that it shares with the Yemeni and Ethiopian dialects, such as: L-Stem that we do not find in the Mesopotamian and Levantine languages. It is clear that the Arabic language combined the characteristics of the northern and southern dialects, and it cannot be said that it descended from one of them because we find characteristics and features that unite these dialects, nor that it evolved from a language because we find evidence to the contrary, so all that remains is to say that the Arabic language was a product of long term selection and election, and the major factors which played a role in this process are: The movement and migration of Bedouins, trade of Hijazis between the north and the south, holding Pan-Arab festivals that bring together all Arabs and their different dialects and making the Hijazi dialect the standard for the richness of the interaction of its merchants and Bedouins with the north and the south, and the Arabic language was completed with the revelation of the Qur’an.
AlJallad is always an interesting listen so thank you Mr. Muhanna for bringing him on. I hope i can get to meet him someday i find the ancient history of Arabs extremely fascinating.
@@tony.s4049 what part of it do you think it was a lie? and if you think it was all lies, what do you think the alternate view or reality is? Please I would love to hear your explanation
He's not actually contradicting the islamic jahiliyyah narrative though he imagines he is and is certainly trying to. He's admitting, it appears, the inscriptions numerically drop hundreds of years before islam, the letters weren't decide, dialects were all over the place, etc the islamic narrative is merely that during the seerah, the majority of the peninsula was illiterate he admits this vanishes around 4th century ad, one script survives, apparently few inscriptions from then on (and it's likely most arabs by then couldnt read the outdated inscriptions which used different letters) that actually proves the traditional muslim narrative is correct. haters burn
He's not out to prove or disprove anything. That's just your religious sensitivities making you interpret him in an overly defensive manner. The main focus of his research, Safaitic, doesn't even have much to do with Islam as those inscriptions are centuries before. In regards to the Paleoarabic inscriptions, the only thing they challenge would be books like Ibn al kalbi's Book of Idols, and any other aspects of the tradition that paint Muhammad's immediate environment as primarily polytheistic. Based on the epigraphic evidence, it seems the way were largely monotheistic already, or at least some flavor of. But I agree with you, and so would Al-Jallad, that this is consistent with the Quran. Orientalist scholars had already long pointed out that the immediate audience had to already be familiar with biblical stories, so it makes perfect sense they were already followed a variety of judeo-christian monotheism. I don't know why you think Al-Jallad gets off on overturning islamic tradition. After all, do you know any Muslim whose faith rides on the veracity of ibn al kalbi's Book of Idols? I sure don't. So it's irrelevant. If he was trying to be controversial and edgy, then he'd try to overturn the Quran right?
The traditional Muslim narrative is that polytheist pagans existed and were widespread in 7th century Arabia, is it not? Ahmed Al Jallad nor any other respected academic in this field would say this is true.
Ahmad is mislead by the fact that he knows classical Arabic (wich is completely different from modern arabic dialects). Like when he reads "Natharto" for example. No one today will end a verb with an "O" (dammeh ضمة). And the inscription does not have a tanwin (ضمة) And actually the verb nathara is not used in dialects. Also the Hamza did not exist at the time. He is reading it the same way a religious person will read the old Quran manuscripts! I get that the layman will get impressed by his good American accent, and his overdriven classical Arabic "accent". But we should look beyond those superficial "fasades"
Interesting but unfortunately most people in earth have no clue about Arabic language and the ones that do know Arabic language always mistake classical, modern and dialect Arabic
مجرد عرض استشراقي لتاريخ العربية ولماذا التحدث بالانجليزية في موضوع اللغة العربية فالافضل هو التحدث بالعربية ثم تركيب الترجمة النصية علي الكلام, احمد الجلاد هو مجرد مستشرق ودرس علي مناهج الغرب فهو لا يعرف من العربية سوي السطح واتحدي اذا كان له قدرة علي فهم كتاب الكتاب لسيبويه او الخصائص لابن جني وغيرهم من فحول العرب والعربية, مشكلة المنهج الاستشراقي انه منهج تحليلي يهتم بوصف الظاهرة امامه واعادة تسمية الاشياء لتناسب منهجيته الوصفية دون العلم والغوص فيما يسميه علماء الاسلام بعلم الدراية, فالحقيقة في المنهج الغربي ليست ما يطابق الواقع ولكن ما يتفق مع الفرضيات التي فرضوها وتلك الفرضيات يحكمها نظرتهم الالحادية للعالم والانسان,
In Palestine it is just the Arabization of the French name Le Gèlat, they are remnants of the crusades, some remained Catholic and some converted to islam. Many families in Palestine trace their roots in Western Europe
@@DigitalWaqf yup, wikipedia google, it is no secret. Many Palestinian families have Western Europeean last names Daghlas= Douglas Kokash= Koksch/Cox Al Bardaweel= Bardwell Esbanyoli= Espanioli Rosso = Russo Gallad = le Gelat Al Almany= From Allemania, Germany Al Malti = the Maltese Al Sikelly = From Sicily Al Frengi= the Frank/French
1- Laysa (ليس) is derived from Aramaic, and is not an Arabic "oddity". 2- How would we know that tanwin existed before the invention of Tashkil (in the Abbasid era)? 3- what modern arabic dialekt uses Tanwin?!
1. As far as I know, Aramaic & Arabic are not genetically that close for this to be the case. Also, the oddity he's referring to is the complex & asymmetrical negation system that is demonstrably absent in other Semitic languages. As for 2 & 3, here are some quotes from Al-Jallad's "A Manual of the Historical Grammar of Arabic": 2. "One of the common linguistic features uniting the Old Arabic sources is the absence of nunation, tanwīn. This feature, so characteristic of Classical Arabic, is attested first in the corpus of rhymed and metered poems attributed to the pre-Islamic period by Muslim scholars. Tanwīn is an ancient feature (see 2.3.1), cognate with mimation in Akkadian and Ancient South Arabian, although its realization with a n seems to be unique to Arabic." 3. "In most modern Arabic vernaculars, case and nunation have disappeared entirely, save for loans from Classical Arabic or other dialects. These languages, nevertheless, appear to descend from a system like the QCT, where only the accusative case of the indefinite declension survived in singular/broken plural nouns."
Etymology of semitic languages, this is what I'm investigating on. Arabic has a particularity front aramaic and hebrew, the abjad : the hebrew ז is ذ or ز ; the ט is ظ or ط ; the א is ء or ى ; the ' is ء or ي ; the ח is خ or ح ; the צ is ض or ص ; the ע is ع or غ ; the ס is س and the ש is also س or ش (hebrew grammar anomalie). Thus, the arabic is the refined semitic language, because each arabic letter carries a meaning, example ع means Seen Percieve and غ unseen, covered. We see opposite meaning, so we can't confuse عرب and غرب while hebrew carries both meaning in ערב (night and arab).
Arabic is the oldest Semitic language in speech, but it’s one of the most latest in writing. Search about the Thamudic and Musnad/Sabaic Writing method, both of the two writing systems are very old and it’s 180% different(in Writing) but it’s the same in speech.
@@Al-Azdi Agree, and if it's the oldest semitic language spoken, so it's the oldest human language, but a precision: arabic had kept, preserved the oldest features in pronunciation, but also semantic ones. In my list above, I forgot the ש could be the arabic س or ش OR ث.
@@dpireader32Yes it’s true but you can’t study the Arabic language without studying Islam , that’s why famous Muslim religions scholars are very eloquent in the Arabic language
@@Iamfsaly that's absolutely not true, arabic is older than islam and thus his work focuses on what arabic looked like before the quran existed. at the time islam as a definitive religion wasn't around yet and there was no quran, so why should it matter. he's a linguist anyways, have you gone out into the field and studied ancient pre islamic arabic inscriptions?
Show your evidence. He's never divulged his religious beliefs. Neither has he appeared on "Christian channels" unless you mean Gabriele Reynolds channel, which is called "Exploring the Quran and the Bible". At any rate, don't be a halfwit. Address his arguments if you disagree with them
هو مستشرق ودرس علي مناهج الغرب فهو لا يعرف من العربية سوي السطح واتحدي اذا كان له قدرة علي فهم كتاب الكتاب لسيبويه او الخصائص لابن جني وغيرهم من فحول العرب والعربية, مشكلة المنهج الاستشراقي انه منهج تحليلي يهتم بوصف الظاهرة امامه واعادة تسمية الاشياء لتناسب منهجيته الوصفية دون العلم والغوص فيما يسمي علماء الاسلام بعلم الدراية
@@aladdinbinschamar2442 الدولة السعودية الثالثة نعم, فتلك الدولة بدءت في القرن العشرين وهي صنيعة الاستعمار مئة في المئة, اما الدولة السعودية الاولي والثانية فلا اعتقد
@@ME-yp7fn المشكلة انه للأسف الدولة العربية حاليا قمعية فصعب الواحد يعمل دراسات تاريخية في المنطقة، ك جرائم ال سعود، غير انه في كثير قبائل في الجزيرة العربية، فلا أرى انه اسم المنطقة السعودية مناسب، ويجب عزل ال سعود، وحقيق نوع من انواع الديمقراطية التي تحمي حق الافراد واستقلايية عن أمريكا واي دولة استعمارية وعاشت الثورة عاشت الثورة، الموت لاسرتئيل الموت لاسرتئيل
I hear a pathetic orientalist deformation of history ( as I did many times before from Jallad and his western dictators). First, the term " Semitic" is not a historical term nor is it founded in any objective scientific research. It is rather a biblical genealogy term that has nothing to do with the reality and progress of languages and people in Arabia and the fertile crescent. This fallacious genealogy of peoples and their languages defies the effective real history of people and their languages in the region. It purports a high patriarch "Shem" ( Sam) that encompasses all the peoples of the region with a shared photo-language as such. The reality of historical and linguistic record show two main streak of ancient languages in the region distinct in their number of alphabets, phonetic sounds and script. The more ancient one ( from the second millennium BCE) is made of 29 characters and it written in two forms of script' cuneiform in Mesopotamia and Ugarit and early Canaani andThamoudic Musnad scrpit, The second and latter one is made of 24 letters only and emerged at earliest in first millennium BCE which is Aramaic written in cuneiform in Mesopotamia and Canaani adapted script termed by historians as Aramaic. Classical Arabic shares all features and characteristics of the older linguistic lines discussed above. It retained the same 29 characters and was written in the Mussnad ( Thamoudic scrpit). All ancient Yemeni ( so called languages by orientalist historians) are intelligible to classical Arabic hold many similar characteristics with it and more importantly have identical root and derivation morphs. The orientalist fallacious tradition ( that Jallad ascribes to as we was so dictated) holds that Arabic as a linguistic phenomenon appeared in the first Millennium BCE depicted in Aramaic derived script and holds that all Thamoudic script ( and all related other inscriptions as Safaitic) are different languages than Arabic based on nonsense arguments that only shows lack of adequate knowledge in Arabic. So any cognates in Thamoudic / Safaitic / Saba'ic that are not used in current Arabic are termed to be different cognates although well documented in classical Arabic ( weather in ancient pre - Islamic poetry or in classical old Arabic dictionaries i.e Lassan Al-Arab or Moujam Al-A'yn). The same applies to grammatical rules were it seems that his alien and shallow knowledge of simplified Arabic ( grammar for elementary students) rules his ( and his orientalist ignorant tutors ) determination of Arabic grammar. Hence, they declared that these Thamoudic texts are not Arabic and they base Arabic on Aramaic instead. when someone who's name is Julian or Simon etc. makes this flagrant error one would say that their detachment of Arabic and their merger knowledge thereof my explain ( not excuse ) the mistake . But here we have ignorance and distortion impregnating an Arab immigrant to US Salt Lake city who allows his lack of knowledge to input his depiction of his ancestral language. What a shame, go study real Arabic as genuine real Arab scholar would, and then read ancient Ugaritic and Thamoudic texts anew and you will discover that you were fed a load of biblical nonsense and that Arabic your " ethnic" mother tongue did you no harm so stop doing it harm.
@@saadhamid6226 you're assuming what you wrote is a paragraph. Run on ideas smashed together don't make a paragraph, just because it has the esthetic of one and you decide to call it that.
@@boxerfencer Hahahaha.... Another idiot rambling. It seems that Mickey mouse cartoons and its offsprings made fools of you. Are these tidy enough paragraphs for your thick mind to read ?? Or maybe some emojies to embellish ??
1. Linguists do not group Semitic languages together because of a story about a biblical patriarch, they group them together because they share a set of features that all other languages lack, suggesting a common origin. 2. Languages are distinct from scripts. Scripts do not always perfectly represent the sounds of a language. Varieties of Arabic were written in both script families you mention, in different places at different times. But it was the Nabatean *script*, derived from Aramaic *script*, that ultimately became what people now know as Arabic *script*. It did not have enough letters to distinguish all of the Arabic consonants so it was eventually adapted mainly by adding dots. Al-Jallad never said that Arabic was not written in the other scripts. He even talks about such inscriptions and recites some from memory in this very video. So I'm not sure where you even got the idea that he thinks Arabic is "based on Aramaic". The SCRIPT is based on Aramaic. The language is a different story, which you'll only ever figure out if you pay better attention.
According to what historical phonetic evidence do read the letter Jeem (ج) in the inscription as a "Ga" sound ?? basing Arabic phonetics and distorting it to conform with Hebrew phonetics??!!!
We know it was from coins written during the Rashidun times, which wrote Arabic with Greek letters. They used Gamma for ģim. Omani and Egyptians use gim as well. The Sudani one is also a palatalised G.
@@NK-vd8xi And is their any letter in Greek to dipict the sound J as in jeem ?? You really are excelling in arrogant ignorance. Do you know at all of Al-farahidi's linguistic and particularly phonetic illustration of Arabic pronunciation along with its anatomic graph showing each letter's source and vocal organ ( early 2nd Higri) followed by his student Sibawiah's elaborate work. Or you only choose to determine alien rules discarding clear and unequivocal Arabic rules. Your either intentionally sabotaging information or you simply allow ignorance to drive to sabotage knowledge . If you stated this argument against proven facts as stated in any other case you would not pass the class. And you shan't pass this one either. Go learn elementary sound Arabic before you make fools of your selfs...
Not sure why you specifically singled out Hebrew, even though in all Semitic languages Gimel is pronounced with a hard-G sound. Nonetheless, if the Arabic Jeem existed in the language Arabic descended from (I assume you take this to be non-controversial), then how do you explain its absence from other languages? Unless, of course, you assume that the inscription he's vocalizing & which is dated more than almost 2000 years before the Quran should be pronounced the same way!
@@tabushanan I use Hebrew because I know the depiction and its sickness very well. All western frenzy with ancient Middle eastern languages was and still is infested with Biblical attitudes and methodologies. Up until the late seventies of the past century Hebrew was forced as a model language to gauge and study ancient languages stemming from a belief ( assumption) that according to Bible it is the oldest. Although this idiocy is now being masked, yet the entire flawed epistemology persists under the banner of Aramaec precedence. The letter ج and its pronunciation as Jeem needs as in any other language to be attested in its own to establish it self if I am addressing a geniun linguist. The question is and should have been to any objective scientific enquiry is whether this particular character Jeem was unequivocally attested in Arabic phonetic logs?? and it was in all Arab linguists and philologists cataloging the traits of Arabic in 2nd Hijra . If you have an argument that contradicts what Arab learned scholars have stated and illustrated as the standard spelling of a character and against continued classical Arabic spelling ( not colloquial) stemming from the same language lets hear it. Yet you do not have such an argument so we will continue to hear ignorance uttered by people masquerading in pseudo knowledge guise.
![เขามัทรี - เอ็กซ์ ศุภกฤต - จอนนี่มิวสิค [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/AS9ufKuQIVs/mqdefault.jpg)
Fascinating. As soon as I saw an interview with AlJallad I stopped everything to watch. He is always interesting.
I simply the choice of topics you present and of course, the content is mostly discussed in an "easy-to "-absorb and process" manner. Thank you.
ممتاز وشكرا
Arabic preserved more Semitic mother language than Hebrew and Aramaic
Not an expert, but I remember 40 or 50 years ago, a Tunisian historian on TV say that a few ancient clasical poets praised certain poets before them who had no surviving poetry, putting a poetic way of dateing classical Arabic because their poetry was before classical Arabic was formalized.
This is sooooo cool
Will the transcript (and an article, even better 😉) be available later?
Very bright man, cool interview!
Thinking about languages in the West is influenced by Aristotle and Darwin. Languages should not be thought of in an Aristotelian hierarchical way, as if languages were lineages, nor in the way of Darwin and biological evolution, as if languages were biological organisms evolving. All of these methods fall under a confirmation bias by forming assumptions in the mind and then project them on the reality of a language and its history.
The closest statement to the truth, I believe, when following the facts is to say the emergence of the Arabic language occurred through a long process we call “spontaneous selection and election” for centuries from multiple Semitic dialects, from dialects of the north in the Levant and mesopotamia to the ones in the south in Yemen, Oman and Ethiopia. This process reached to a rich stage when Mecca became the mother of villages when it started to celebrate polytheistic pan-Arab festivals that brought together the Arabs from all areas, especially the Ukaz Festival, which played a role in the standardization of the Arabic poetic forms. In those festivals, the Arabs competed to win the title of the most poetic man of the Arabs. Our evidence for this is that the Arabic language is the richest of the Semitic languages in verb morphological forms, and it has characteristics that it shares with the Mesopotamian and Levantine dialects that we do not find in the southern dialects, such as: Dt stem, and other characteristics that it shares with the Yemeni and Ethiopian dialects, such as: L-Stem that we do not find in the Mesopotamian and Levantine languages. It is clear that the Arabic language combined the characteristics of the northern and southern dialects, and it cannot be said that it descended from one of them because we find characteristics and features that unite these dialects, nor that it evolved from a language because we find evidence to the contrary, so all that remains is to say that the Arabic language was a product of long term selection and election, and the major factors which played a role in this process are: The movement and migration of Bedouins, trade of Hijazis between the north and the south, holding Pan-Arab festivals that bring together all Arabs and their different dialects and making the Hijazi dialect the standard for the richness of the interaction of its merchants and Bedouins with the north and the south, and the Arabic language was completed with the revelation of the Qur’an.
Historical Linguistics is already a scientific field that does see languages as pseudo biological entities
Leave the linguistics analysis to the experts, and not your folk tales.
@@pheeel17 leave commenting on things you don't understand.
AlJallad is always an interesting listen so thank you Mr. Muhanna for bringing him on. I hope i can get to meet him someday i find the ancient history of Arabs extremely fascinating.
Brilliant.!….Exactly what I’ve been looking for
Exactly the lies your ears wanted to hear
@@tony.s4049 what part of it do you think it was a lie? and if you think it was all lies, what do you think the alternate view or reality is? Please I would love to hear your explanation
I’m so excited for this
He's not actually contradicting the islamic jahiliyyah narrative though he imagines he is and is certainly trying to. He's admitting, it appears, the inscriptions numerically drop hundreds of years before islam, the letters weren't decide, dialects were all over the place, etc
the islamic narrative is merely that during the seerah, the majority of the peninsula was illiterate
he admits this vanishes around 4th century ad, one script survives, apparently few inscriptions from then on (and it's likely most arabs by then couldnt read the outdated inscriptions which used different letters)
that actually proves the traditional muslim narrative is correct. haters burn
He's not out to prove or disprove anything. That's just your religious sensitivities making you interpret him in an overly defensive manner. The main focus of his research, Safaitic, doesn't even have much to do with Islam as those inscriptions are centuries before. In regards to the Paleoarabic inscriptions, the only thing they challenge would be books like Ibn al kalbi's Book of Idols, and any other aspects of the tradition that paint Muhammad's immediate environment as primarily polytheistic. Based on the epigraphic evidence, it seems the way were largely monotheistic already, or at least some flavor of. But I agree with you, and so would Al-Jallad, that this is consistent with the Quran. Orientalist scholars had already long pointed out that the immediate audience had to already be familiar with biblical stories, so it makes perfect sense they were already followed a variety of judeo-christian monotheism.
I don't know why you think Al-Jallad gets off on overturning islamic tradition. After all, do you know any Muslim whose faith rides on the veracity of ibn al kalbi's Book of Idols? I sure don't. So it's irrelevant. If he was trying to be controversial and edgy, then he'd try to overturn the Quran right?
The traditional Muslim narrative is that polytheist pagans existed and were widespread in 7th century Arabia, is it not? Ahmed Al Jallad nor any other respected academic in this field would say this is true.
Will the conference in Qatar be accessible virtually? 🙏🏼
Not fully but we will publish segments here and on the podcast :-) Stay tuned!
You want to tell me that "shifto Barratt echchibek" is arabic?😃
Darast l lahjeh l lbnenieh tlet sneen bas Tla3t ma be7ke 3arabi. Ta3llemt lu3’a tanieh. Oh well. C’est la vie.
Ahmad is mislead by the fact that he knows classical Arabic (wich is completely different from modern arabic dialects).
Like when he reads "Natharto" for example. No one today will end a verb with an "O" (dammeh ضمة). And the inscription does not have a tanwin (ضمة)
And actually the verb nathara is not used in dialects.
Also the Hamza did not exist at the time. He is reading it the same way a religious person will read the old Quran manuscripts!
I get that the layman will get impressed by his good American accent, and his overdriven classical Arabic "accent". But we should look beyond those superficial "fasades"
Interesting but unfortunately most people in earth have no clue about Arabic language and the ones that do know Arabic language always mistake classical, modern and dialect Arabic
I'm not sure where he says this, since he clearly mentions that the Arabic spoken by contemporary Arabs in formal contexts omits case endings.
@@tabushanan did you listen to the podcast?!
@@gk-qf9hv I did, unless I misheard something. Would you link to the timestamp of the point you were arguing against?
10:59 Bro haven't heard yet of "بيدش، مش عاوز، مودي، ماريد، ما ابي، الخ" xD
btw I know he knows
مجرد عرض استشراقي لتاريخ العربية ولماذا التحدث بالانجليزية في موضوع اللغة العربية فالافضل هو التحدث بالعربية ثم تركيب الترجمة النصية علي الكلام, احمد الجلاد هو مجرد مستشرق ودرس علي مناهج الغرب فهو لا يعرف من العربية سوي السطح واتحدي اذا كان له قدرة علي فهم كتاب الكتاب لسيبويه او الخصائص لابن جني وغيرهم من فحول العرب والعربية, مشكلة المنهج الاستشراقي انه منهج تحليلي يهتم بوصف الظاهرة امامه واعادة تسمية الاشياء لتناسب منهجيته الوصفية دون العلم والغوص فيما يسميه علماء الاسلام بعلم الدراية, فالحقيقة في المنهج الغربي ليست ما يطابق الواقع ولكن ما يتفق مع الفرضيات التي فرضوها وتلك الفرضيات يحكمها نظرتهم الالحادية للعالم والانسان,
Who choses the name Jallad?
In Palestine it is just the Arabization of the French name Le Gèlat, they are remnants of the crusades, some remained Catholic and some converted to islam.
Many families in Palestine trace their roots in Western Europe
@@fadyalqaisyany reference for this, and any other names that signify this western european origin ?
@@DigitalWaqf yup, wikipedia google, it is no secret.
Many Palestinian families have Western Europeean last names
Daghlas= Douglas
Kokash= Koksch/Cox
Al Bardaweel= Bardwell
Esbanyoli= Espanioli
Rosso = Russo
Gallad = le Gelat
Al Almany= From Allemania, Germany
Al Malti = the Maltese
Al Sikelly = From Sicily
Al Frengi= the Frank/French
1- Laysa (ليس) is derived from Aramaic, and is not an Arabic "oddity".
2- How would we know that tanwin existed before the invention of Tashkil (in the Abbasid era)?
3- what modern arabic dialekt uses Tanwin?!
1. As far as I know, Aramaic & Arabic are not genetically that close for this to be the case. Also, the oddity he's referring to is the complex & asymmetrical negation system that is demonstrably absent in other Semitic languages.
As for 2 & 3, here are some quotes from Al-Jallad's "A Manual of the Historical Grammar of Arabic":
2. "One of the common linguistic features uniting the Old Arabic sources is the absence of nunation, tanwīn. This feature, so characteristic of Classical Arabic, is attested first in the corpus of rhymed and metered poems attributed to the pre-Islamic period by Muslim scholars. Tanwīn is an ancient feature (see 2.3.1), cognate with mimation in Akkadian and Ancient South Arabian, although its realization with a n seems to be unique to Arabic."
3. "In most modern Arabic vernaculars, case and nunation have disappeared entirely, save for loans from Classical Arabic or other dialects. These languages, nevertheless, appear to descend from a system like the QCT, where only the accusative case of the indefinite declension survived in singular/broken plural nouns."
@@gk-qf9hv ليس is not Aramaic than please tell me what’s the Arabic version of ليس
Etymology of semitic languages, this is what I'm investigating on. Arabic has a particularity front aramaic and hebrew, the abjad : the hebrew ז is ذ or ز ; the ט is ظ or ط ; the א is ء or ى ; the ' is ء or ي ; the ח is خ or ح ; the צ is ض or ص ; the ע is ع or غ ; the ס is س and the ש is also س or ش (hebrew grammar anomalie). Thus, the arabic is the refined semitic language, because each arabic letter carries a meaning, example ع means Seen Percieve and غ unseen, covered. We see opposite meaning, so we can't confuse عرب and غرب while hebrew carries both meaning in ערב (night and arab).
Arabic is the oldest Semitic language in speech, but it’s one of the most latest in writing.
Search about the Thamudic and Musnad/Sabaic Writing method, both of the two writing systems are very old and it’s 180% different(in Writing) but it’s the same in speech.
@@Al-Azdi Agree, and if it's the oldest semitic language spoken, so it's the oldest human language, but a precision: arabic had kept, preserved the oldest features in pronunciation, but also semantic ones. In my list above, I forgot the ש could be the arabic س or ش OR ث.
Ahmed jallad is an atheist western academic, I saw him in a lot of the Christians channels talking about how Islam was created
He might be a liberal academic, but he is not an atheist
Might be true, but he is not a religious scholar, he is a scholar of the Arabic language, a linguist
@@dpireader32Yes it’s true but you can’t study the Arabic language without studying Islam , that’s why famous Muslim religions scholars are very eloquent in the Arabic language
@@Iamfsaly that's absolutely not true, arabic is older than islam and thus his work focuses on what arabic looked like before the quran existed. at the time islam as a definitive religion wasn't around yet and there was no quran, so why should it matter. he's a linguist anyways, have you gone out into the field and studied ancient pre islamic arabic inscriptions?
Show your evidence. He's never divulged his religious beliefs. Neither has he appeared on "Christian channels" unless you mean Gabriele Reynolds channel, which is called "Exploring the Quran and the Bible". At any rate, don't be a halfwit. Address his arguments if you disagree with them
Bro taking about the scientific criterion as like yo everyone knows
Dear, there are few fatal mistakes. You might need to study languages sounded Arabia to reach a better solution. Ask me and I will tell you!
Going, and going in circles. Weird to say the least!
Call it Najd and Hejaz pls if you want to be scientifically precise and not use the colonizer's language xD
هو مستشرق ودرس علي مناهج الغرب فهو لا يعرف من العربية سوي السطح واتحدي اذا كان له قدرة علي فهم كتاب الكتاب لسيبويه او الخصائص لابن جني وغيرهم من فحول العرب والعربية, مشكلة المنهج الاستشراقي انه منهج تحليلي يهتم بوصف الظاهرة امامه واعادة تسمية الاشياء لتناسب منهجيته الوصفية دون العلم والغوص فيما يسمي علماء الاسلام بعلم الدراية
@@ME-yp7fn انا بقصد انه السعودية دولة تأسست بمساعدة الاستعمار وانفرضت على المنطقة، واتوقع هوة بعرف يحكي عربي كويس
@@aladdinbinschamar2442 الدولة السعودية الثالثة نعم, فتلك الدولة بدءت في القرن العشرين وهي صنيعة الاستعمار مئة في المئة, اما الدولة السعودية الاولي والثانية فلا اعتقد
@@ME-yp7fn المشكلة انه للأسف الدولة العربية حاليا قمعية فصعب الواحد يعمل دراسات تاريخية في المنطقة، ك جرائم ال سعود، غير انه في كثير قبائل في الجزيرة العربية، فلا أرى انه اسم المنطقة السعودية مناسب، ويجب عزل ال سعود، وحقيق نوع من انواع الديمقراطية التي تحمي حق الافراد واستقلايية عن أمريكا واي دولة استعمارية وعاشت الثورة عاشت الثورة، الموت لاسرتئيل الموت لاسرتئيل
I hear a pathetic orientalist deformation of history ( as I did many times before from Jallad and his western dictators). First, the term " Semitic" is not a historical term nor is it founded in any objective scientific research. It is rather a biblical genealogy term that has nothing to do with the reality and progress of languages and people in Arabia and the fertile crescent. This fallacious genealogy of peoples and their languages defies the effective real history of people and their languages in the region. It purports a high patriarch "Shem" ( Sam) that encompasses all the peoples of the region with a shared photo-language as such. The reality of historical and linguistic record show two main streak of ancient languages in the region distinct in their number of alphabets, phonetic sounds and script. The more ancient one ( from the second millennium BCE) is made of 29 characters and it written in two forms of script' cuneiform in Mesopotamia and Ugarit and early Canaani andThamoudic Musnad scrpit, The second and latter one is made of 24 letters only and emerged at earliest in first millennium BCE which is Aramaic written in cuneiform in Mesopotamia and Canaani adapted script termed by historians as Aramaic. Classical Arabic shares all features and characteristics of the older linguistic lines discussed above. It retained the same 29 characters and was written in the Mussnad ( Thamoudic scrpit). All ancient Yemeni ( so called languages by orientalist historians) are intelligible to classical Arabic hold many similar characteristics with it and more importantly have identical root and derivation morphs. The orientalist fallacious tradition ( that Jallad ascribes to as we was so dictated) holds that Arabic as a linguistic phenomenon appeared in the first Millennium BCE depicted in Aramaic derived script and holds that all Thamoudic script ( and all related other inscriptions as Safaitic) are different languages than Arabic based on nonsense arguments that only shows lack of adequate knowledge in Arabic. So any cognates in Thamoudic / Safaitic / Saba'ic that are not used in current Arabic are termed to be different cognates although well documented in classical Arabic ( weather in ancient pre - Islamic poetry or in classical old Arabic dictionaries i.e Lassan Al-Arab or Moujam Al-A'yn). The same applies to grammatical rules were it seems that his alien and shallow knowledge of simplified Arabic ( grammar for elementary students) rules his ( and his orientalist ignorant tutors ) determination of Arabic grammar. Hence, they declared that these Thamoudic texts are not Arabic and they base Arabic on Aramaic instead. when someone who's name is Julian or Simon etc. makes this flagrant error one would say that their detachment of Arabic and their merger knowledge thereof my explain ( not excuse ) the mistake . But here we have ignorance and distortion impregnating an Arab immigrant to US Salt Lake city who allows his lack of knowledge to input his depiction of his ancestral language. What a shame, go study real Arabic as genuine real Arab scholar would, and then read ancient Ugaritic and Thamoudic texts anew and you will discover that you were fed a load of biblical nonsense and that Arabic your " ethnic" mother tongue did you no harm so stop doing it harm.
Learn to write in paragraphs
@@boxerfencer learn to read paragraphs
@@saadhamid6226 you're assuming what you wrote is a paragraph. Run on ideas smashed together don't make a paragraph, just because it has the esthetic of one and you decide to call it that.
@@boxerfencer Hahahaha.... Another idiot rambling.
It seems that Mickey mouse cartoons and its offsprings made fools of you.
Are these tidy enough paragraphs for your thick mind to read ??
Or maybe some emojies to embellish ??
1. Linguists do not group Semitic languages together because of a story about a biblical patriarch, they group them together because they share a set of features that all other languages lack, suggesting a common origin.
2. Languages are distinct from scripts. Scripts do not always perfectly represent the sounds of a language. Varieties of Arabic were written in both script families you mention, in different places at different times. But it was the Nabatean *script*, derived from Aramaic *script*, that ultimately became what people now know as Arabic *script*. It did not have enough letters to distinguish all of the Arabic consonants so it was eventually adapted mainly by adding dots. Al-Jallad never said that Arabic was not written in the other scripts. He even talks about such inscriptions and recites some from memory in this very video. So I'm not sure where you even got the idea that he thinks Arabic is "based on Aramaic". The SCRIPT is based on Aramaic. The language is a different story, which you'll only ever figure out if you pay better attention.
According to what historical phonetic evidence do read the letter Jeem (ج) in the inscription as a "Ga" sound ?? basing Arabic phonetics and distorting it to conform with Hebrew phonetics??!!!
We know it was from coins written during the Rashidun times, which wrote Arabic with Greek letters. They used Gamma for ģim.
Omani and Egyptians use gim as well. The Sudani one is also a palatalised G.
@@NK-vd8xi And is their any letter in Greek to dipict the sound J as in jeem ?? You really are excelling in arrogant ignorance. Do you know at all of Al-farahidi's linguistic and particularly phonetic illustration of Arabic pronunciation along with its anatomic graph showing each letter's source and vocal organ ( early 2nd Higri) followed by his student Sibawiah's elaborate work. Or you only choose to determine alien rules discarding clear and unequivocal Arabic rules. Your either intentionally sabotaging information or you simply allow ignorance to drive to sabotage knowledge . If you stated this argument against proven facts as stated in any other case you would not pass the class. And you shan't pass this one either. Go learn elementary sound Arabic before you make fools of your selfs...
Not sure why you specifically singled out Hebrew, even though in all Semitic languages Gimel is pronounced with a hard-G sound. Nonetheless, if the Arabic Jeem existed in the language Arabic descended from (I assume you take this to be non-controversial), then how do you explain its absence from other languages? Unless, of course, you assume that the inscription he's vocalizing & which is dated more than almost 2000 years before the Quran should be pronounced the same way!
@@tabushanan I use Hebrew because I know the depiction and its sickness very well. All western frenzy with ancient Middle eastern languages was and still is infested with Biblical attitudes and methodologies. Up until the late seventies of the past century Hebrew was forced as a model language to gauge and study ancient languages stemming from a belief ( assumption) that according to Bible it is the oldest. Although this idiocy is now being masked, yet the entire flawed epistemology persists under the banner of Aramaec precedence. The letter ج and its pronunciation as Jeem needs as in any other language to be attested in its own to establish it self if I am addressing a geniun linguist. The question is and should have been to any objective scientific enquiry is whether this particular character Jeem was unequivocally attested in Arabic phonetic logs?? and it was in all Arab linguists and philologists cataloging the traits of Arabic in 2nd Hijra . If you have an argument that contradicts what Arab learned scholars have stated and illustrated as the standard spelling of a character and against continued classical Arabic spelling ( not colloquial) stemming from the same language lets hear it. Yet you do not have such an argument so we will continue to hear ignorance uttered by people masquerading in pseudo knowledge guise.
Stop quoting Wittgenstein randomly 🥱