×
Home Current Archive Editorial board
News Contact
Review paper

SENTENCE IN THE ARABIC LANGUAGE- SOME REMARKS ON CRITERIA OF MODERN DIVISIONS AND CLASSIFICATIONS

By
Mejra Softić
Mejra Softić
Contact Mejra Softić

Islamic pedagogical faculty in Zenica,

Abstract

Modern syntactical researches conducted by Arabs are under great influence of traditional grammar. That as a consequence has various methodological approaches to interpretation of a sentence, its definitions and classifications. Even though some classical Arabic grammarians make semantic distinction between terms ğumla and kelam, today they are perceived as synonyms, under the influence of contemporary linguistic developments. Modern Arabic syntax does not strictly define criteria of classification of an Arabic sentence. In addition to traditional classification to a nominal and verbal sentence, the classification supported and accepted as the only or the most significant one by most Arabic authors, these criteria vary from one author to another. However, it is noticeable that the criterion of functionality, criterion of predicativity, structure and declinability of a sentence are distinguished as contemporary norms in syntactic classifications of the Arabic language. Oriental writings in classification of Arabic sentences often use conventions of foreign languages and apply criteria that are not characteristic of the Arabic language. That does not reflect the actual state of Arabic syntax and it also belittles efforts and contributions of Arabic grammarians in this field. Keywords: Arabic syntax, sentence, divisions and types of sentences, Orientalistic attitudes, comparative analysis

Citation

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.