short vowel between two identical consonants

Jana337

Senior Member
čeština
When studying the comparative, I learned that I cannot say "aqlal" (like "akbar") due to the following rule: A short vowel cannot occur between two identical consonants.

Is it a reliable rule? I have some doubts because you have many occurances of "tat-" at the beginnings of verbs etc. But derived words may not count, I don't know.

I will appreciate your comments. :)

Jana
 
  • borhane

    Senior Member
    Algerian Arabic
    please , can you explain more !
    what you are saying sound wrong if you are speaking Arabic !! I'm just joking :D
     

    Jana337

    Senior Member
    čeština
    OK, more information. :)
    Geminate roots: Comparative adjectives from geminate roots (where the second and third root consonants are the same) have a variant comparative form due to a rule which prevents a short vowel from occuring between two identical consonants. Thus instead of 2af3al, the form is 2afall, and the two identical consonants are together, spelled with a shadda:
    qaliil - 2aqall
    haamm - 2ahamm
    jadiid - 2ajadd
    Source: Karin Ryding - A Reference Grammar of Modern Standard Arabic
    Jana
     

    cherine

    Moderator
    Arabic (Egypt).
    Hi Jana,
    Sorry for the late reply, but I wasn't so sure about this and they way your book presents the "rule" looks strange to me.
    So here's my take :
    1- there's no rule forbidding short vowels between two identical consonants. The only rule I know of about vowelisation is : there can't be two consecutive silent consonant لا يجوز التقاء ساكنين , this is why lots of Arabic native speaker find great difficulty pronouncing words like (cheat, chalk, ....) because of the consecutive t+sh sounds, so they add a short (e) between them.

    2- the word aqall is still على وزن أفعل for the simple reason that the verb qall قـَلَّ is على وزن فعل the two lam are equivalent of (3ein, lam) consecutively. Its being a doubled letter doesn't mean that the verb is على وزن فعّ , for when giving the morphological equivalent of any word we must فَـك الإضغام (not sure how to say in English, but let's say the عّ are 2 ع so we put them back as 2 ع before forging any form of the word.

    We don't say "aqlal" simply because it's not the usage. The usage is to generally "merge" إضغام the doubled letter. Aqlal is morphologically right, it's actually how we learned the "shadda" when we were at school, to learn that the الحرف المشدد is actually two letters in one (if I may say it this way).

    I'm not sure my explanation is clear, so please if you feel the same let me know and I'll try to give further explanation :)
    Cherine
     

    Jana337

    Senior Member
    čeština
    Thanks, Cherine. :)

    I thought the rule was quite fishy. If I happen to find another reference to the same in the book, I will keep you posted. :)

    Jana
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top