Twitter | Search | |
This is the legacy version of twitter.com. We will be shutting it down on 15 December 2020. Please switch to a supported browser or device. You can see a list of supported browsers in our Help Center.
A.Z. Foreman
I don't think the reading traditions "fail" at preserving the original dialect of the Qur'an. The very suggestion that they fail to do so implies that that is what they were attempting to do.
Reply Retweet Like More
A.Z. Foreman Sep 22
Replying to @azforeman
But it doesn't seem likely the readers themselves were under the impression that's waas what they were doing. Otherwise it strains credulity that they would have so conspicuously obsessed over where Hamzah should and shouldn't go, knowing what they knew about Qurashi speech.
Reply Retweet Like
A.Z. Foreman Sep 22
Replying to @azforeman
The readers in all likelihood did not believe that what they were producing was a vowel-for-vowel, consonant-for consonant, morpheme-for-morpheme verbatim reproduction of anything that came out of the Prophet's mouth.
Reply Retweet Like
A.Z. Foreman Sep 22
Replying to @azforeman
The readings are highly aestheticized compositions, the product of deliberate grammatical thinking, and do not remotely resemble anything like a natural language.
Reply Retweet Like
A.Z. Foreman Sep 22
Replying to @azforeman
They deserve to be appreciated in their own right for what they are, not written off as failures to achieve what they are probably not even attempting.
Reply Retweet Like
A.Z. Foreman Sep 22
Replying to @azforeman
*impression that that's what God I need to get better at proofreading
Reply Retweet Like
A.Z. Foreman Sep 22
Replying to @azforeman
Reply Retweet Like