The Kitāb Sībawayh of ʾAbū al-Ḥasan ʾAḥmad b. Naṣr: A non-Sīrāfian recension of the Kitāb

Druel
{"title":"The Kitāb Sībawayh of ʾAbū al-Ḥasan ʾAḥmad b. Naṣr: A non-Sīrāfian recension of the Kitāb","authors":"Druel","doi":"10.13173/zeitarabling.71.0029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Milan-Kazan codex of SĪBAWAYH’s (d. ca 180/796) Kitāb is a 5th/11th century North-African parchment today split between three collections: 1) Milan, Ambrosiana, X 56 sup. (115 folios), 2) Kazan, National Archives of the Republic of Tatarstan 10/5/822 (48 folios), and 3) London, Bernard Quaritch Ltd catalogue 2018/3, item number 11 (6 folios). When put together, these three manuscripts contain only one fourth of the whole text of the Kitāb. This codex sheds a new light on the gradual stabilisation of SĪBAWAYH’s text. Its recension is linked to a certain ʾABŪ AL-ḤASAN ʾAḤMAD B. NAṢR, mentioned on the first folio of the Milan fragments. Focusing on one specific issue, namely the possibility to form the diminutive of the names of the days of the week, this paper compares SĪBAWAYH’s teaching according to the text as accepted by scholars to date (as in DERENBOURG 1881‒1889), along with the early commentaries and the recension of the Milan-Kazan codex according to its four successive hands. At this point, it is impossible to say that this recension is pre-Mubarradian, that is to say one that escaped the “authoritarian stranglehold” on the text by AL-MUBARRAD (HUMBERT 1995:92). However, the Milan-Kazan codex surely contains a non-Sīrāfian recension of SĪBAWAYH’s Kitāb, that is a recension which, unlike the “received” text of the Kitāb, was not influenced by AL-SĪRĀFĪ’s commentary.","PeriodicalId":351341,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift für arabische Linguistik","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift für arabische Linguistik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13173/zeitarabling.71.0029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Milan-Kazan codex of SĪBAWAYH’s (d. ca 180/796) Kitāb is a 5th/11th century North-African parchment today split between three collections: 1) Milan, Ambrosiana, X 56 sup. (115 folios), 2) Kazan, National Archives of the Republic of Tatarstan 10/5/822 (48 folios), and 3) London, Bernard Quaritch Ltd catalogue 2018/3, item number 11 (6 folios). When put together, these three manuscripts contain only one fourth of the whole text of the Kitāb. This codex sheds a new light on the gradual stabilisation of SĪBAWAYH’s text. Its recension is linked to a certain ʾABŪ AL-ḤASAN ʾAḤMAD B. NAṢR, mentioned on the first folio of the Milan fragments. Focusing on one specific issue, namely the possibility to form the diminutive of the names of the days of the week, this paper compares SĪBAWAYH’s teaching according to the text as accepted by scholars to date (as in DERENBOURG 1881‒1889), along with the early commentaries and the recension of the Milan-Kazan codex according to its four successive hands. At this point, it is impossible to say that this recension is pre-Mubarradian, that is to say one that escaped the “authoritarian stranglehold” on the text by AL-MUBARRAD (HUMBERT 1995:92). However, the Milan-Kazan codex surely contains a non-Sīrāfian recension of SĪBAWAYH’s Kitāb, that is a recension which, unlike the “received” text of the Kitāb, was not influenced by AL-SĪRĀFĪ’s commentary.
SĪBAWAYH的米兰-喀山手抄本(约180/796年)Kitāb是一份5/ 11世纪的北非羊皮纸,今天分为三个收藏:1)米兰,安布罗西亚纳,x56 sup(115对开本),2)喀山,鞑靼斯坦共和国国家档案馆10/5/822(48对开本),3)伦敦,伯纳德·夸里奇有限公司目录2018/3,项目编号11(6对开本)。把这三份手稿放在一起,只占Kitāb全文的四分之一。这个手抄本为SĪBAWAYH文字的逐渐稳定提供了新的线索。它的衰落与某个在米兰残片的第一对开本中提到的经书ABŪ AL-ḤASAN AḤMAD B. NAṢR有关。专注于一个具体的问题,即形成一个星期的日子的名字的小的可能性,本文比较SĪBAWAYH的教学根据学者接受的文本(如DERENBOURG 1881年至1889年),随着早期的评论和米兰-喀山手抄本的修订,根据它的四个连续的手。在这一点上,不可能说这次衰退是前穆巴拉克式的,也就是说,它逃脱了AL-MUBARRAD (HUMBERT 1995:92)对文本的“专制束缚”。然而,米兰-喀山抄本肯定包含了SĪBAWAYH的Kitāb的non-Sīrāfian修订版,这是一个修订版,不像Kitāb的“收到”文本,没有受到AL-SĪRĀFĪ评论的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信