شروح ابيات كتاب سيبويه : دراسة تحليلية == The Reviews of the Verses of Sibaweih's "Al Kitaab" (The Book) : Investigation and Analysis
Author name:
ابراهيم عبد الرحمن محمد
Supervisor name:
ليث اسعد عبد الحميد
General topic:
Arabic Language and Literature
Specific topic:
Language
Degree:
Master
University:
University of Diyala - College Of Education For Human Sciences - Department Of Arabic Language
Language:
Arabic
University location:
Diyala
First pages:
01T4745 - p.pdf
Abstract:
Sibaweih's "Al Kitaab" is regarded as the first and the most comprehensive book that reached us. It is was the book that is the mostly studied and investigated among other books. The efficiency in this book was in the originality of expression and the power of the structure.As this book has took a great deal of study, some of the many major scholars conducted reviews, comments, illustration to its verses, and investigations to its structures in most of the capitals of the Islamic states from east to west. Due to its importance, the number of those reviews reached to twenty. The only reviews that reached us are four : "The Review of Sibaweih's Verses" by Abu Ja'afar Al Nahhas (d.328 A.H.), "The Review of Sibaweih's Verses" by Ibn Al Sirafi (d. 385 A.H.), the third review was called "Tahseel Ein Al Thahab" by Al A'lam Al Shantamri (d. 476 A.H.), the last review was by Afif Eddin Al Kufi (d. 696 A.H.) which was a script that is not available in our country. So the study was based on the first three reviews. It is worth mentioning that the review of Abu Ja'afar Al Nahhas was not real. It is either a shorthand of the original review, or attributed to him, which is the truth. The study reached the following conclusions : 1. Concerning the methodology of writing and reviewing : a. The introduction of Al Nahhas's review was too short that did not cover all the aspects; Al Sirafi did not write an introduction to his review; while Al Shantamri's introduction was comprehensive and he was committed to it in his review.b. Al Shantamri followed the same order of the original book in his review while the review of Al Sirafi had some overlap and fusion of some verses. On the other hand, Ibn Al Sirafi's review was random and did not follow the original order. c. Ibn Al Nahhas's review was very brief and sometimes he did not comment on the verses, while Al Sirafi illustrated the meanings of the utterances , the rules, and the examples. Al Shantamri's review was less detailed than Al Sirafi.2. Concerning the basics of grammar.a. The authors paid much attention to irregularities without admitting that.b. The authors used less Quranic examples. In the review of Al Nahhas, 24 examples and seven in the Quran recitiations were used. In the review of Ibn Al Sirafi has 37 examples and seven examples on recitations. Al Shantamri brought 31 Quranic examples and two examples on recitations.c. The authors did not use Hadith in their examples except two examples by Al Shantamri. The study was organized into three chapters preceded by an introduction and followed by a conclusion. The introduction contained a brief illustration on the significance of Sibaweih's work and his use of poetic examples as well as the reviews written on it. It also contained a brief biography of the three reviewers.The first chapter studied the review writers' methods and their resources. It was divided into two sections. The first section discussed the reviewers methods while the second section discussed their resources. The second chapter was devoted to the study of the basics of grammar. It was divided into three sections. The first section dealt with irregularities, the second discussed assessing, while the third discussed reasoning. There was no need to make a section about the reviewers agreements because there was only two points in Al Shantamri.The third chapter was a grammatical and linguistic study to the three reviews. It was divided into three sections. The first section was a grammatical study. The second section was a linguistic study. While the third section was about poetry and poetic license.The study ended in a conclusion of the results of the study followed by a bibliography and an abstract in English
