Technical Terms

in Arabic Grammatical Tradition

and Their Everyday Meanings
The Case of al-ḥāl al-muqaddara*

u r
te
ALMOG KASHER
BAR-ILAN UNIVERSITY

au
en
I. Introduction
As is well known, one of the subcategories of ḥāl in Arabic grammatical
tradition designates a state whose time is subsequent to the time of the main
m

verb,1 rather than simultaneous with it; this type of ḥāl is commonly termed
ḥāl muqaddara. As stated by Levin,2 the grammarians’ standard example for
this type of ḥāl is the sentence marartu bi-raǧulin3 maʿahu ṣaqrun (“I passed
ci

by a man with a hawk”) ṣāʾidan bihi ġadan; the ḥāl here is not simultaneous
with the passing, but rather means: “… intending to hunt with [the hawk]
é

tomorrow”. Recently, Levin dedicated an article to the meaning of the term

ḥāl muqaddara in Arabic grammatical tradition.4 He correctly shows that the
Sp

* A concise version of this article was read at WOCMES 5, Seville, July 18, 2018. I would like to
thank Jean Druel for his helpful suggestions.
1. More accurately—the time of the so-called ʿāmil al-ḥāl, that is, the operator assigning it
the accusative case, which may be a finite verb or a verbal expression, either overt or covert.
2. Levin, “What is Meant by al-ḥāl al-muqaddara?”, p. 169.
3. In this article all short vowels are transcribed, including declension markers.
4. Levin, “What is Meant by al-ḥāl al-muqaddara?”.

MIDÉO 34 – 2019
 200 Almog Kasher

grammarians posit an underlying (taqdīr)5 structure for this type of ḥāl, since
they understand ḥāl as basically designating a state that is simultaneous with
the time of the main verb. Thus, for the sentence above, the grammarians
posit the underlying structure: muqaddiran al-ṣayda bihi ġadan “intending to
hunt with [the hawk] tomorrow”.
Thus, muqaddiran is the simultaneous ḥāl, as the intention to hunt oc-
curs simultaneously with the action of passing. This ḥāl, i.e. muqaddiran, is
­muqaddara, that is, underlying, and this, according to Levin, is the explanation

r
of the term al-ḥāl al-muqaddara.

u
Levin further maintains that the term ḥāl muqaddara makes its first appear-
ance in the 10th/14th century, in the writings of the grammarian Abū Ḥayyān

te
al-Ġarnāṭī al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344). This term, Levin states, is applied by the
later grammarians to the surface ḥāl, however:

au
It is evident that the later grammarians were aware of the fact that ṣāʾidan in
the above examples cannot be a ḥāl muqaddara, because it explicitly occurs
in the literal form of the sentence (lafẓ). Hence, it is inferred that they called
sāʾidan a ḥāl muqaddara, because they believed that in the speaker’s mind,
en
the taqdīr construction of ṣāʾidan, which is muqaddiran-i l-ṣayda bihi, contains
the implicit form muqaddiran, which can be conceived of as a ḥāl muqaddara.6

He adds:
m

It seems safe to assume that for the sake of convenience, the later grammarians
preferred to ignore the exact concept of the early grammarians of this type
ci

of ḥāl. Hence, they applied the principle which Ibn Yaʿīš called taqrīb wa-taysīr
ʿalā l-mubtadiʾ ‘making [the understanding of a certain grammatical concept]7
é

easier and clearer to the beginner’, by using an inaccurate technical term,

rather than a more accurate one, originating in a complex concept.8
Sp

5. On the term taqdīr and the concept of underlying levels in Arabic grammatical tradition,
see esp. Ayoub, “De ce qui “ne se dit pas””; Carter, “Elision”; Peled, “Cataphora and taqdīr”;
Versteegh, “The Notion of ‘Underlying Levels’”; Levin, “The Theory of al-taqdīr”; Versteegh,
“Taqdīr”; Kasher, “Two Types of taqdīr?” (and the references in these articles). The everyday
meaning of the term taqdīr, from which the technical meaning originates, is a matter of dispute.
6. Levin, “What is Meant by al-ḥāl al-muqaddara?”, p. 174.
7. Square brackets in the original.
8. Ibid., p. 175.
 Technical Terms in Arabic Grammatical Traditions and Their Everyday Meanings 201

My aim in this article is twofold. The minor aim is to show that the term ḥāl
muqaddara appears much earlier than the 10th/14th century. It occurs already
in al-Zaǧǧāǧ’s (d. 311/923) Quranic commentary Maʿānī al-Qurʾān wa-iʿrābuhu.9
It also features in the Quranic commentaries composed by one of al-Zaǧǧāǧ’s
students, al-Naḥḥās (d. 338/950),10 and in the latter’s commentary on the
Muʿallaqāt.11 Later, it appears mainly in Quranic commentaries, as well as in
some commentaries on poetry and hadith.12 Although the early provenance of
this term is of a marginal importance, the fact that, as far as I could determine

r
(see below), until a rather late period it was mainly used in commentaries of

u
the Quran (and of other texts), rather than in grammars, has methodological
implications on the study of the history of Arabic grammatical terminology.

te
The second, and more important, aim of this article pertains to Levin’s
interpretation of the term, which (although this is not stated in his article)
differs significantly from the way it is understood and translated by other

au
modern scholars. It is not our intention here to survey the various translations
suggested for this term; suffice it to say that they reflect an apprehension of
the adjectival attribute muqaddar as describing the situation designated by
the ḥāl. For instance, Persson translates ḥāl muqaddar13 as “implied ḥāl”, and
en
explains that it applies “where the circumstance is ‘implied’ to hold at the
completion of the event”.14 Most such translations are incidental, with no
reference to any medieval texts. As far as I know, no scholar who suggested
such a translation ever tried to back it up by adducing a medieval source.
m
é ci
Sp

9. Several occurrences of the term in that book will be discussed below. The commentary
should not be confused with a different work, entitled Iʿrāb al-Qurʾān, (probably mistakenly)
attributed to al-Zaǧǧāǧ.
10. See below. See also al-Naḥḥās, Maʿānī, VI, p. 498‒499.
11. Al-Naḥḥās, Šarḥ, II, p. 76.
12. Some of the term’s occurrences in such works will be discussed below.
13. Modern Western studies tend to follow Wright (see Levin “What is Meant by al-ḥāl
­al-muqaddara?”, p. 167, n. 1) by using the term ḥāl muqaddar rather than ḥāl muqaddara, although
the latter is much more frequently used by medieval scholars.
14. Perrson, “Circumstantial Clause”. See also e.g. Fleischer, Kleinere Schriften, I, p. 573‒574;
Reckendorf, Arabische Syntax, p. 450.
 202 Almog Kasher

What I would like to show here is that this “traditional” rendition of the
term is correct for the majority of medieval scholars. In support of this claim,
I shall discuss, in chronological order, several medieval texts, followed by
one text by the grammarian Ibn Bābašāḏ, who uses the adjective muqaddar
as pertaining to the sentential constituent labelled ḥāl, yet, differently from
what Levin suggests. But first, we should say a few words on the grammarians’
attitude to technical terms vis-à-vis their everyday meanings.

u r
II. Technical vs. Everyday Meanings of Terms

te
It has long been recognized that many expressions used by Arab gram-
marians display an ambiguity between their technical sense and the extra-
linguistic concept from which they originate.15 It has also been shown in

au
previous research that Arab grammarians themselves fully appreciated this
distinction.16 Thus, ḥāl may be used as a purely technical term, referring to
a certain sentential constituent (commonly translated as a “circumstantial
qualifier”), or in its everyday meaning, in the sense of “state, situation, cir-
en
cumstance, etc.”; it may also be used—and this seems to be the rule, rather
than the exception—as what Peled calls a “metagrammatical intuitive term”,
that is, as an expression whose semantic scope covers both its meaning as a
technical term and the everyday concept underlying it.17
m

The problem the term ḥāl muqaddara presents pertains to the status of
adjectival attributes in metalanguage:18 these can either modify the technical
meaning or the everyday meaning of their heads.19 This rather trivial point
ci

can be illustrated with the following two expressions, which are of direct
relevance to our problem. Regarding the operator assigning the accusative
é

to the vocative,20 Ibn al-Anbārī (d. 577/1181) states: fa-ḏahaba baʿḍuhum ilā

Sp

15. See esp. Mosel, Die syntaktische Terminologie bei Sibawaih, p. 9‒10, 258‒260 (on ḥāl); Versteegh,
Arabic Grammar and Qurʾānic Exegesis, p. 1, 3; Carter, “Writing the History of Arabic Grammar”,
p. 400‒401; Peled, “Aspects of the Use of Grammatical Terminology”.
16. See esp. Peled, “Aspects of the Use of Grammatical Terminology”.
17. See ibid.
18. Needless to say, the very same problem also pertains to predicates.
19. In fact, they can also modify the terms themselves, which is the case with al-mafʿūl al-muṭlaq.
See Levin “What is Meant by al‑maf ʿūl al‑muṭlaq?”; Larcher, “Les maf ʿûl mut'laq”; Kasher “How
to Parse Effective Objects”.
20. In e.g. yā ʿabda Llāhi but also in e.g. yā Zaydu, whose final -u­vowel is, according to the gram-
marians, not a case marker, but a special type of bināʾ, termed bināʾ ʿāriḍ (see Baalbaki, “Bināʾ”).
 Technical Terms in Arabic Grammatical Traditions and Their Everyday Meanings 203

anna al-ʿāmila fīhi al-naṣba fiʿlun muqaddarun, that is, according to a certain
opinion, the operator is an underlying verb, the underlying structure being
adʿū/unādī Zaydan.21 The adjective muqaddar has nothing to do with the every-
day meaning of fiʿl, viz. “action”, rather, it modifies its technical sense, viz.
“verb”, as it is the constituent which is said to be muqaddar. On the other
hand, in the term ḥāl muqārina, the antonym of ḥāl muqaddara, the adjective
muqārina ­modifies the everyday meaning of ḥāl, viz. “state”, designating that
state as one which is simultaneous with the event denoted by the main verb.

r
To the best of my knowledge, the first grammarian to use the expression ḥāl

u
­muqārina is ­al-ʿUkbarī (d. 616/1219); in his Quranic commentary al-Tibyān fī
iʿrāb al-Qurʾān, he remarks that ṣaʿiqan, in the verse:

te
“… wa-ḫarra Mūsā ṣaʿiqan” (Q VII, 143);
“... and Moses fell down thunderstruck”,22

au
is ḥāl muqārina,23 that is, the state of being thunderstruck took place simul-
taneously with the action of falling down.24
Levin interprets the adjectival attribute muqaddara as meaning that the
en
sentential constituent parsed as ḥāl is posited in the underlying structure. That
is, for him, muqaddara modifies the technical sense of ḥāl. According to the
analysis suggested here (and reflected by most translations of the term), the
word muqaddara describes the state in question, rather than the constituent.
m

This passive participle corresponds to the active participle muqaddir, which

we have seen above as posited in the underlying structure. Therefore, ḥāl
muqaddara means “intended (or: decreed) state” or “supposed (i.e. expected,
ci

anticipated) state”.25 In the abovementioned sentence, ṣāʾidan is analyzed as

ḥāl muqaddara since it designates an intended state.
é
Sp

21. Ibn al-Anbārī, Asrār, p. 226‒227. On the problems of this type of underlying structure
raises, see Larcher, “Khabar/inshāʾ”; Kasher, “The Vocative”.
22. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 161. The Quranic verses in the present article will be followed by
Jones’ translation, which should not be taken as necessarily reflecting every aspect of how the
verses were understood by the scholars interpreting them.
23. Al-ʿUkbarī, al-Tibyān, I, p. 594.
24. The reason why al-ʿUkbarī felt the need to put forward this remark is probably the ex-
istence of Quranic verses in which the verb ḫarra takes a ḥāl muqaddara, on which see below.
25. For these meanings of qaddara, see Lane, An Arabic‑English Lexicon, VII, p. 2495. See also
the excursus below.
 204 Almog Kasher

Differently put, in the underlying structure of ṣāʾidan, viz. muqaddiran

al-ṣayda, the constituent al-ṣayd—which refers to the state of hunting—is the
direct object of the active participle muqaddiran, from which it ensues that the
corresponding passive participle muqaddar “intended” can be applied to it.26
It should be stressed that this interpretation by no means implies that the
expression ḥāl muqaddara cannot be used as a technical term. That is, when
applied to a certain constituent, it is not merely used in order to indicate
that the state it designates is intended, expected, etc.; rather, ḥāl muqaddara

r
also constitutes a subcategory of the ḥāl. In this respect, it can be analogized

u
to the term al-fiʿl al-māḍī, in which the adjectival attribute al-māḍī “having
elapsed”27 modifies the everyday meaning of the term fiʿl, to wit, “action”; yet,

te
al-fiʿl al-māḍī is also a subcategory of fiʿl “verb”. Thus, the term ḥāl muqaddara
is occasionally used as a label of a syntactic function, which dictates that the
noun assuming it take the accusative. For instance, al-Naḥḥās (d. 338/950),
commenting on the verse:
au
“Inna al-insāna ḫuliqa halūʿan” (Q LXX, 19);
“Man was created anxious”,28
en
says: “wa-nuṣibat halūʿan ʿalā al-ḥāli al-muqaddarati.”29 That is, ḥāl muqaddara, as
a subcategory of ḥāl, is a label of a syntactic function dictating the noun’s case.
m
é ci
Sp

26. On the possibility to apply the passive participle of a transitive verb (or the corresponding
active participle) to its direct object (e.g. ḍarabtu Zaydan “I hit Zaydˮ → maḍrūb can be applied
to Zayd), see Kasher, “The Term maf ʿūl”; idem, “How to Parse Effective Objects”.
On the possibility to posit a passive participle, i.e. muqaddaran, in the underlying structure of
at least some constructions, see the excursus below.
27. See Carter, Arab Linguistics, p. 99.
28. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 536.
29. Al-Naḥḥās, Iʿrāb, V, p. 31.
 Technical Terms in Arabic Grammatical Traditions and Their Everyday Meanings 205

III. Evidence from Medieval Texts

1. Al-Zaǧǧāǧ’s Maʿānī al-Qurʾān wa-iʿrābuhu

Consider, first, al-Zaǧǧāǧ’s (d. 311/923) commentary on the following
Quranic verse:

“Innā arsalnāka šāhidan wa-mubašširan wa-naḏīran” (Q XLVIII, 8);

r
“We have sent you as a witness and a bearer of good tidings and a warner”.30

u
After stating that šāhidan is ḥāl muqaddara, as it pertains to the Day of

te
­ esurrection, al-Zaǧǧāǧ asserts that the bearing of good tidings (bišāra) and
R
the warning (inḏār) are a state, ḥāl, in which Muḥammad is involved (mulābis)
in this world, with respect to those who met him, while they are ḥāl muqaddara

au
with respect to those who would live after him.31 The use of ḥāl in this text
is striking, as it is designed to contrast two states, one of which is described
as muqaddara.32
Our next illustration shows that grammarians also use other adjectives
en
besides muqaddara, in the sense of “intended, expected etc.”, to modify the
term ḥāl. Note that this does not prove our interpretation of the meaning of
ḥāl muqaddara; yet, the fact that other near-synonymous adjectives (according
to the interpretation presented here) are used by the grammarians in the
m

very same fashion should be taken into consideration.

In his commentary on the Quranic verse:
ci

“Wa-alqi mā fī yamīnika talqaf mā ṣanaʿū …” (Q XX, 69);

“Throw what is in your right hand, and it will swallow what they have made …”,33
é

al-Zaǧǧāǧ discusses a hypothetical34 possibility for the verb talqaf to take the
Sp

indicative mood, in the sense of ḥāl, thus meaning: alqihā mutalaqqifatan. His

30. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 471.

31. Al-Zaǧǧāǧ, Maʿānī, V, p. 21.
32. This verse is interpreted twice, the interpretation presented here being the second there-
of. Additionally, the text incorporates what seems to be an interpolation (yaʿnī bi-qawlihi …)
commenting on al-Zaǧǧāǧ’s use of the term muqaddara.
33. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 292.
34. Al-Zaǧǧāǧ does not sanction this reading. Cf., nevertheless, the reading talaqqafu
(← tatalaqqafu, by haplology), recorded in ʿUmar & Makram, Muʿǧam al‑qirāʾāt al‑Qurʾāniyya, IV, p. 93.
 206 Almog Kasher

explanation here is significant: “ʿalā ḥālin mutawaqqaʿatin”; “as an expected

state”. That this expression is synonymous with ḥāl muqaddara is made clear
by al-Zaǧǧāǧ himself, in his commentary on the next verse:

“Fa-ulqiya al-saḥaratu suǧǧadan …” (Q XX, 70);

“The sorcerers were all flung down prostrate…”.35

On suǧǧadan al-Zaǧǧāǧ states that it is also a ḥāl muqaddara, explaining that

r
when the sorcerers fell down they were not yet prostrate; rather, they fell

u
down intending to prostrate themselves (ḫarrū muqaddirīna al-suǧūda).36 This
explanation is virtually identical to the one furnished for a previous verse:

te
“… Iḏā tutlā ʿalayhim āyātu al-raḥmāni ḫarrū suǧǧadan wa-bukiyyan” (Q XIX, 58);

trating themselves and weeping”.37

au
“… When the signs of the Merciful are recited to them, they fall down, pros-

For al-Zaǧǧāǧ, suǧǧadan is ḥāl muqaddara: they fell down intending to

prostrate themselves (ḫarrū muqaddirīna al-suǧūda), since at a time of falling
en
down, one is not (yet) prostrate.38
Al-Zaǧǧāǧ thus uses the expression ḥāl mutawaqqaʿa as a synonym of ḥāl
muqaddara, in the same context. It is used on another occasion as well, this
time without any mention of the term ḥāl muqaddara:
m

“Lā tamnun tastakṯiru” (Q LXXIV, 6);

“Do not show favours, seeking gains”.39
ci

Al-Zaǧǧāǧ explains: “ay lā tuʿṭi šayʾan muqaddiran an taʾḫuḏa badalahu mā huwa

é

akṯaru minhu”; “that is, do not give something in the expectation of receiving
more in exchange for it”. Here tastakṯiru is analyzed as ḥāl ­mutawaqqaʿa.40
Sp

35. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 292.

36. Al-Zaǧǧāǧ, Maʿānī, III, p. 367.
37. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 286.
38. Al-Zaǧǧāǧ, Maʿānī, III, p. 335.
39. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 544.
40. Al-Zaǧǧāǧ, Maʿānī, V, p. 245‒246. The expression ḥāl mutawaqqaʿa is also used by later
scholars, see e.g. Ibn Ǧinnī (d. 392/1002), al-Muḥtasab, II, p. 37‒38.
 Technical Terms in Arabic Grammatical Traditions and Their Everyday Meanings 207

2. Makkī b. Abī Ṭālib’s Muškil iʿrāb al-Qurʾān

A striking explanation of the term ḥāl muqaddara is furnished by Makkī
b. Abī Ṭālib (437/1045), commenting on the following verse:

“Wa-Huwa allaḏī anšaʾa ǧannātin maʿrūšātin wa-ġayra maʿrūšātin wa-l-naḫla

wa-l-zarʿa muḫtalifan ukuluhu …” (Q VI, 141);
“It is He who produced gardens, both trellised and untrellised, and date-palms

r
and crops of different produce…”.41

u
Makkī explains that muḫtalifan is ḥāl muqaddara, since there is no ukul in

te
it42 when it grows out of the ground. “Difference in produce” can only be
said of a later stage, after the crops ripened. In contrast with ḥāl wāqiʿa ġayr
muntaẓara43 (i.e. a state which occurs [simultaneously with the occurrence of

au
the main verb], not one that is anticipated to occur at a subsequent time), in
e.g. raʾaytu Zaydan qāʾiman “I saw Zayd standing”, the ḥāl in e.g. ḫalaqa Allāhu
al-naḫla muḫtalifan ukuluhu (cf. the abovementioned verse) is ḥāl muntaẓara
muqaddara.44 Similarly, Makkī continues, in raʾaytu Zaydan musāfiran ġadan
en
“I saw Zayd, expected/intending45 to travel tomorrow”, the speaker does not
see Zayd in the state of traveling (fī ḥāli al-safari); rather, innamā huwa amrun
tuqaddiruhu46 an yakūna ġadan, that is, it is assumed that the state will take
place tomorrow. The verb (+ subject and object) tuqaddiruhu is most probably
m

used here in order to explain the meaning of the element muqaddara in the
term ḥāl muqaddara. Makkī wraps up his discussion by mentioning (according
to the version of half of the manuscripts) the contrast between al-ḥāl al-wāqiʿa
ci

41. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 142.

é

42. It is unclear what is, in Makkī’s mind, the antecedent of the pronoun in ukuluhu.
­ lthough it is prima facie zarʿ, Makkī consistently uses the feminine pronoun in this discus-
A
Sp

sion (li-annahā, ḫurūǧihā, fīhā, fa-tūṣafa, fīhā and iṭʿāmihā). Moreover, in one of his illustrations
(see in what follows) he uses the same construction, but this time with al-naḫl as the antecedent
of the pronoun. Cf. the discussion in al-Bayḍāwī (d. late 7th or early 8th century/late 13th or
early 14th century), Anwār, II, p. 185, where three options are suggested for the antecedent of
the pronoun.
43. For another text where muntaẓar is used as a (near) synonym of muqaddar, see below.
44. The word muqaddara is missing in one of the manuscripts.
45. See in what follows.
46. One manuscript reads taqdīruhu, and one—muqaddarun. In these cases, the doer of the
taqdīr is not explicit. For a discussion on the identity of the doer of the taqdīr, see the excursus
below.
 208 Almog Kasher

and al-ḥāl al-muqaddara al-muntaẓara.47 Here muqaddara and muntaẓara are

used as (near‑)synonyms.

3. Al-ʿUkbari’s al-Lubāb fī ʿilal al-bināʾ wa-l-iʿrāb

After first making a distinction between two types of ḥāl, muqārina48 and
muntaẓara49 (he calls the latter al-ḥāl al-muqaddara),50 al-ʿUkbarī (d. 616/1219)
further divides ḥāl into four types, based on, inter alia, whether or not it is

r
muqārina. A ḥāl that is not muqārina is, again, termed muntaẓara, exemplified

u
with the sentence marartu bi-raǧulin maʿahu ṣaqrun ṣāʾidan bihi ġadan. Al-ʿUkbarī
explains that in this sentence the hunting (ṣayd) does not occur simultaneously

te
(muqārin) with the passing, but is muqaddar,51 a word which here cannot be
interpreted as pertaining to the underlying structure. Note that it is not the
contrast itself between muqaddara and muqārina that proves that these two

au
terms modify the term ḥāl from the very same aspect;52 rather, it is al-ʿUkbarī’s
use of the term muqaddar as describing the action designated by the ḥāl, in
contradistinction to muqārin, that constitutes evidence for our argument.
en
4. Al-Tilimsānī’s al-Iqtiḍāb fī ġarīb al-Muwaṭṭaʾ
wa-iʿrābihi ʿalā al-abwāb
A direct explanation of the term ḥāl muqaddara is found in this commentary
m

on Mālik b. Anas’ (d. 179/795) al-Muwaṭṭaʾ. On the sentence “fa-arsaltu al-atāna

tartaʿu”53 “and I let the she-ass loose to pasture”, al-Tilimsānī (d. 625/1228)
remarks that the ḥāl(-clause) is named ḥāl muqaddara here li-annahu lā yursiluhā
ci

fī ḥāli rutūʿihā innamā arsalahā qablahu, that is, because the action of letting
loose did not take place in a state (ḥāl) of the she-ass’ pasturing, but rather
é

prior to it.54 The term ḥāl muqaddara is here explained by referring to the time
of the ḥāl in the sense of “state”, not in the technical sense. Needless to say,
Sp

the explanation does not contain any mention of an underlying structure.

47. Makkī b. Abī Ṭālib, Muškil, I, p. 274.

48. See above.
49. See above.
50. Al-ʿUkbarī, al-Lubāb, I, p. 293.
51. Ibid., I, p. 294‒295
52. cf. e.g. the contrast al-māḍī vs. al-muḍāriʿ.
53. Al-Tilimsānī does not quote the text itself. See Mālik b. Anas, al-Muwaṭṭaʾ, I, p. 155‒156.
54. Al-Tilimsānī, al-Iqtiḍāb, I, p. 182.
 Technical Terms in Arabic Grammatical Traditions and Their Everyday Meanings 209

5. Al-Fākihī’s Šarḥ Kitāb al-ḥudūd fī al-naḥw

In a similar vein, al-Fākihī (d. 972/1564) defines the term ḥāl muqaddara as
follows: ay mustaqbalatun fa-wuǧūduhā mutaʾaḫḫirun ʿan wuǧūdi ʿāmilihā.55 That
is, al-Fākihī explains muqaddara as meaning mustaqbala,56 elucidating that its
(i.e. the ḥāl in the sense of “state”) occurrence is posterior to the occurrence
designated by its operator.57

u r
6. Ibn Bābašāḏ’s Šarḥ al-Muqaddima al-muḥsiba
One grammarian who uses the term muqaddar in reference to the senten-

te
tial constituent labelled ḥāl (that is, to the circumstantial qualifier), rather
than to the state it designates, is Ibn Bābašāḏ (d. 469/1077), although in a way
that differs from the one suggested by Levin. First, Ibn Bābašāḏ explains the

au
distinction between ṣifa (here in the sense of adjectival attribute) in e.g.  ǧāʾa
Zaydun al-ḍāḥiku “Zayd the laugher (or: who laughs, the laughing [one])
arrived”, and ḥāl, in e.g. ǧāʾa Zaydun ḍāḥikan “Zayd arrived laughing”, by
indicating that the latter, in contrast with the former, is muntaqila “mobile”,
en
i.e. transient,58 in the sense that the occurrence of the laughter is simultaneous
with the occurrence of the arrival.59 Ibn Bābašāḏ states that ḥāl can also be
muqaddaratan bi-l-muntaqili, e.g. hāḏā Zaydun ṣāʾidan ġadan “this/here is Zayd,
intending to hunt tomorrow”; underlying this type of ḥāl is a ­muntaqil (waǧaba
m

an ­yuqaddara bi-mā yantaqilu), such as muqaddiran (or nāwiyan or muʿtaqidan),

thus hāḏā zaydun muqaddiran al-ṣayda ġadan, this being the true ḥāl.60 This
text is a commentary on the matn of the same grammarian’s al-Muqaddima,
ci

in which this type of ḥāl is termed muqaddaran according to one version,

muqaddaran bi-l-muntaqili according to another.61 Even if one adopts the
é

55. Al-Fākihī, Šarḥ, p. 228. See also ibid., p. 230.

Sp

56. For another case where mustaqbala is used as an explanation for ḥāl muqaddara, see
Ibn Hišām (d. 761/1360), Muġnī, V, p. 428.
57. On ʿāmil al-ḥāl see above.
58. See Carter, Arab Linguistics, p. 373.
59. Note that in contrast with other grammarians, for Ibn Bābašāḏ muntaqil implies simul-
taneity. Cf. e.g. al-ʿUkbarī, al-Lubāb, I, p. 294‒295.
60. Ibn Bābašāḏ, Šarḥ, p. 311.
61. Ibid., p. 310; Ibn Bābašāḏ, al-Muqaddima, 358. I am grateful to Dr Avigail Noy for sending
me this edition. Another version is found in a manuscript of the Muqaddima (which is, how-
ever, replete with mistakes): … muntaqilan aw muqaddaran aw muwaṭṭiʾan bi-l-muntaqilu [sic] …
(University Library, Cambridge University, ff.5.10, 23r).
 210 Almog Kasher

latter version, it is highly plausible that, since the term ḥāl muqaddara was
already in circulation in Ibn Bābašāḏ’s time, muqaddaran bi-l-muntaqili is this
grammarian’s interpretation of the meaning of this term. At any rate, this
expression needs some elucidation.
When the verb qaddara (as a technical term), or one of its derivatives, takes
the preposition bi‑, the latter’s object designates the underlying constituent.
An example for such a usage is found later in the same text, when Ibn Bābašāḏ
says (in the matn of his al-Muqaddima) that the ḥāl should be muqaddaratan

r
bi-f ī,62 that is, it takes the preposition fī in the underlying structure. In

u
other words, whereas “X is muqaddar” means that X is what is posited in the
­underlying structure, “X is muqaddar bi-Y” means that Y is what is posited in

te
the underlying structure (for X). Therefore, the adjective muqaddara in the
expression muqaddaratan bi-l-muntaqili does not mean that the ḥāl in question
belongs to the underlying structure, but rather that in the underlying struc-

au
ture it is provided with an expression, which is characterized as muntaqil.
As for the version muqaddaran (without bi-l-muntaqili) in the matn of
­al-Muqaddima, it is most probably used as a shortened form for muqaddaran
bi-, the latter being its explanation in the commentary authored by our
en
grammarian.

IV. Conclusion
m

According to the explanation given by the majority of the scholars dis-

cussed here, the adjectival attribute muqaddara in the term ḥāl muqaddara
ci

modifies the everyday meaning of the term ḥāl, describing it as intended,

expected etc. This explanation spares us the need to take recourse to the idea
é

that the grammarians’ application of the term ḥāl muqaddara to the surface
ḥāl was inaccurate, being a case of taqrīb.63 The term muqaddara is a (near-)
Sp

synonym of e.g. muntaẓara and mutawaqqaʿa, and an antonym of e.g. muqārina

and wāqiʿa.

62. Ibn Bābašāḏ, Šarḥ, p. 312. See ibid., p. 313‒314 for Ibn Bābašāḏ’s Commentary.
63. One may even draw an argumentum ex silentio from the fact that no known grammarian
regards the common usage of ḥāl muqaddara as inaccurate or as a taqrīb, as grammarians do
in such cases (see e.g. Levin, “What is Meant by al-ḥāl al-muqaddara?”, p. 175; Kasher, “Early
Pedagogical Grammars”).
 Technical Terms in Arabic Grammatical Traditions and Their Everyday Meanings 211

As for Ibn Bābašāḏ, although muqaddar pertains for him to the underlying
level, the term is also (accurately) applied to the surface ḥāl, taking the form
of muqaddar bi- discussed above.
This article stresses the importance of sources outside grammars per se
for our understanding of medieval grammatical terminology. Regarding its
near absence in almost all early extant grammars, it should be kept in mind
that, as Levin shows, some early grammarians who discuss this distinction do
not mention the term ḥāl muqaddara (or any similar term).64 Since we have at

r
our disposal “only a fraction of the number of known titles”65 of grammat-

u
ical texts, it is, unfortunately, impossible to assess the extent of interest in
naḥw, generally and diachronically, in the semantic distinction between ḥāl

te
muqaddara and ḥāl muqārina.
The relative popularity of the term ḥāl muqaddara (as well as its synonyms
and antonyms) in Quranic commentaries (as well as commentaries on other

au
texts) can be readily explained by the need in commentaries for compact
labels conveying this important semantic distinction. One may also raise
the possibility of the existence of grammatical terminological trends in such
genres, a possibility which deserves further study.
en
Excursus:
Muqaddaran, muqaddiran and the Identity of the muqaddir
m

The participle MQDR in the abovementioned underlying structure of the

sentence marartu bi-raǧulin maʿahu ṣaqrun ṣāʾidan bihi ġadan was read as an
active participle, i.e. muqaddiran al-ṣayda bihi. The doer of the action of taqdīr
ci

is thus the referent of the ḥāl’s antecedent (the so-called ṣāḥib al-ḥāl), here
raǧul “man”. In certain cases, however, it must be read as a passive participle,
é

for instance, in Tafsīr al-Ǧalālayn on ḫālidīna fīhā in the following verses:

Sp

“Inna allaḏīna āmanū wa-ʿamilū al-ṣāliḥāti lahum ǧannātu al-naʿīmi. ḫālidīna fīhā
…” (Q XXXI, 8-9);
“Those who believe and do righteous deeds will have the gardens of bliss, In
which they will stay for ever … ”.66

64. Levin, “What is Meant by al-ḥāl al-muqaddara?”, p. 169‒172.

65. Carter, “Writing the History of Arabic Grammar”, p. 389.
66. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 376
 212 Almog Kasher

The Tafsīr reads: ḥālun muqaddaratun ay muqaddaran ḫulūduhum fīhā iḏā

daḫalūhā,67 that is, when they enter the gardens, their staying in them forever
is decreed.68 Note that the term ḥāl muqaddara in such cases is more transpar-
ent than it is in cases where the active participle is posited in the underlying
structure: here the ḥāl, viz. state, which is the staying forever (ḫulūd), is said
to be muqaddar.
This issue leads us to a related question, which is whether the doer of the
action of taqdīr, viz. the muqaddir, must be identical with the referent of the

r
ḥāl’s antecedent (the so-called ṣāḥib al-ḥāl). An answer in the affirmative is

u
expressed by Ibn Hišām (d. 761/1360), in his discussion, in Muġnī al-labīb, of
the following verses:

te
“Wa-ḥifẓan min kulli šayṭānin māridin. Lā yassammaʿūna ilā al-malaʾi al-aʿlā …”
(Q XXXVII, 7-8);

au
“And [we have placed them]69 as a protection against every rebellious devil.
They cannot listen to the highest host… ”.70

Ibn Hišām raises the question of whether or not it is possible to parse

en
yassammaʿūna as ḥāl muqaddara, in the sense of wa-ḥifẓan min kulli šayṭānin
māridin muqaddaran ʿadamu samāʿihi, ay baʿda al-ḥifẓi, namely, in a state in which
the lack of hearing by every rebellious devil is muqaddar, i.e. subsequent to
the occurrence of the protection. Ibn Hišām rejects this possibility, on the
m

ground that the muqaddir is identical with the referent of the ḥāl’s anteced-
ent (­allaḏī yuqaddiru wuǧūda maʿnā al-ḥāli huwa ṣāḥibuhā). Whereas in marartu
bi-raǧulin maʿahu ṣaqrun ṣāʾidan bihi ġadan the man is said to be muqaddiran
ci

(elsewhere71 Ibn Hišām expresses his preference that murīdan “willing” be

posited in the underlying structure), the devils are not so: wa-l-šayāṭīnu lā
é

yuqaddirūna ʿadama al-samāʿi wa-lā yurīdūnahu.72

Sp

67. Al-Maḥallī (d. 864/1459) & al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), Tafsīr al-Ǧalālayn, p. 411.
68. This structure is termed ḥāl sababiyya. See e.g. al-Suyūṭī, Hamʿ al-hawāmiʿ, III, p. 240, where
this term is applied to the ḥāl in the sentence ǧāʾa Zaydun ṭāliʿatan al-šamsu ʿinda maǧīʾihi “Zayd
arrived while the sun was rising (lit.: at the time of his arrival)ˮ.
69. Square brackets in the original.
70. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 408.
71. Ibn Hišām, Muġnī, II, p. 85‒86.
72. Ibid., V, p. 43‒45.
 Technical Terms in Arabic Grammatical Traditions and Their Everyday Meanings 213

This argument was criticized by al-Damāmīnī (d. 827/1424), in his com-

mentary on Muġnī al-labīb. First, he maintains that identity between the
muqaddir and the referent of the antecedent of the ḥāl is not necessary,
­allowing one to posit the underlying muqaddaran in marartu bi-raǧulin ­maʿahu
ṣaqrun ṣāʾidan bihi ġadan, i.e. muqaddaran al-ṣaydu bihi,73 whether or not the
muqaddir is the man. However, even if one adopts Ibn Hišām’s view that the
muqaddir is identical with the referent of the antecedent of the ḥāl, the devils
can nevertheless be regarded as the muqaddirūn, because it is possible that

r
they anticipate (yuqaddirūna) not hearing, subsequently to the action of the

u
protection. This, however, does not tally with Ibn Hišām’s identification
between muqaddir and murīd, which is rejected by al-Damāmīnī, by adducing

te
the sentence: udḫul al-siǧna ḫālidan fī ʿaḏābihi “enter jail, expecting to remain
in its torment for ever” (for which it makes no sense to posit an underlying
murīdan). Interestingly, al-Damāmīnī explains that he did not adduce the

au
Quranic udḫulū abwāba ǧahannama ḫālidīna fīhā (Q XXXIX, 72; XL, 76)74 “Enter
the gates of Jahannam, to dwell in it for ever”,75 as one may argue that by dint
of their sin of kufr, they were counted as muridūn.76
en
Bibliography

Primary Sources
m

al-Bayḍāwī (d. late 7th or early 8th century/late 13th or early 14th century), Nāṣir
al-Dīn Abū al-Ḫayr ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿUmar b. Muḥammad, Anwār al-tanzīl wa-asrār
ci

al-taʾwīl al-maʿrūf bi-Tafsīr al-Bayḍāwī, Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Marʿašlī

(ed.), Bayrūt, Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāṯ al-ʿArabī, n.d.
é

al-Damāmīnī (d. 827/1424), Badr al-Dīn, Tuḥfat al-ġarīb fī al-kalām ʿalā Muġnī al-labīb,
Muḥammad b. Muḫtār al-Lawḥī (qism al-adāwāt wa-l-ḥurūf) & Muḥammad ʿAbd Allāh
Sp

Ġanḍūr (qism al-tarkīb) (eds.), Irbid, ʿĀlam al-Kutub al-Ḥadīṯ, 2011.

73. The text reads muqaddaran ʿadamu al-ṣaydi bihi; al-Šumunnī (d. 872/1468) (al-Munṣif, II,
p. 120) regards it as a slip of the pen. This error is probably due to the occurrence of ʿadam in
the underlying structure of the abovementioned verse.
74. Q XVI, 29 reads: fa-dḫulū …
75. Jones, The Qurʾān, p. 427. Or: “Enter the gates of Jahannam, in which you will remain
for everˮ, id., p. 435.
76. Al-Damāmīnī, Tuḥfa, I/1, p. 84. See al-Šumunnī, al-Munṣif, II, p. 120 for a defence of
Ibn Hišām’s view against al-Damāmīnī’s criticism.
 214 Almog Kasher

al-Fākihī (d. 972/1564), ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad, Šarḥ Kitāb al-ḥudūd fī al-naḥw, al-Mutawallī
Ramaḍān Aḥmad al-Damīrī (ed.), al-Qāhira, Dār al-Taḍāmun, 1988.
Ibn al-Anbārī (d. 577/1181), Abū al‑Barakāt ʿAbd al‑Raḥmān b. Muḥammad b. Abī Saʿīd,
Kitāb asrār al‑ʿarabiyya, Muḥammad Bahǧat al‑Bayṭār (ed.), Dimašq, al-Maǧmaʿ
al-ʿIlmī al-ʿArabī, 1957.
Ibn Bābašāḏ (d. 469/1077), Ṭāhir b. Aḥmad, al-Muqaddima al-muḥsiba fī ʿilm al-naḥw,
Ḥusām Saʿīd al-Nuʿaymī (ed.), Maǧallat Kulliyyat al-Dirāsāt al-Islāmiyya 3, 1970,

r
p. 329‒386.

u
Ibn Bābašāḏ (d. 469/1077), Ṭāhir b. Aḥmad, Šarḥ al-Muqaddima al-muḥsiba, Ḫālid
ʿAbd al-Karīm (ed.), al-Kuwayt, s.n., 1976‒1977.

te
Ibn Ǧinnī (d. 392/1002), Abū al-Fatḥ ʿUṯmān, al-Muḥtasab fī tabyīn wuǧūh šawāḏḏ
­al-qirāʾāt wa-l-īḍāḥ ʿanhā, ʿAlī al-Naǧdī Nāṣif et al. (eds.), 2nd edition, [Istanbul],
Dār Sezgin, 1986.

au
Ibn Hišām (d. 761/1360), Muġnī al‑labīb ʿan kutub al‑aʿārīb, ʿAbd al-Laṭīf Muḥammad
al‑Ḫaṭīb (ed.), al-Kuwayt, al-Maǧlis al-Waṭanī li-l-Ṯaqāfa wa-l-Funūn wa-l-Ādāb,
al-Turāṯ al-ʿArabī, 2000‒2002.
al-Maḥallī (d. 864/1459) & al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), Tafsīr al-Ǧalālayn, muḏayyalan bi-Kitāb
en
lubāb al-nuqūl fī asbāb al-nuzūl li-l-Suyūṭi, al-Qāhira, Dār al-Manār, n.d.
Makkī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 437/1045), Abū Muḥammad, Muškil iʿrāb al-Qurʾān, Ḥātim Ṣāliḥ
al-Ḍāmin (ed.), 2nd edition, Bayrūt, Muʾassasat al-Risāla, 1984.
m

Mālik b. Anas (d. 179/795), al-Muwaṭṭaʾ, Muḥammad Fuʾād ʿAbd al-Bāqī (ed.), Bayrūt,
Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāṯ al-ʿArabī, 1985.
ci

al-Naḥḥās (d. 338/950), Abū Ǧaʿfar Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Ismāʿīl, Iʿrāb al-Qurʾān,
Zuhayr Ġāzī Zāhid (ed.), 2nd edition, s.l., ʿĀlam al-Kutub, 1985.
al-Naḥḥās (d. 338/950), Abū Ǧaʿfar, Maʿānī al-Qurʾān al-Karīm, Muḥammad ʿAlī
é

­al-Ṣābūnī (Ed.), Makka, Ǧāmiʿat Umm al-Qurā, 1988‒1989.

Sp

al-Naḥḥās (d. 338/950), Ibn al-Naḥḥās, Abū Ǧaʿfar Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Ismāʿīl
b. Yūnus, Šarḥ al-qaṣāʾid al-mašhūrāt al-mawsūma bi-l-Muʿallaqāt, Bayrūt, Dār ­al-Kutub
al-ʿIlmiyya, 1985.
al-Šumunnī (d. 872/1468), Taqī al-Dīn Aḥmad b. Muḥammad, al-Munṣif min
al-kalām ʿalā Muġnī Ibn Hišām, wa-bi-hāmišihā šarḥ al-imām Muḥammad b. Abī Bakr
al-Damāmīnī ʿalā matn al-Muġnī al-maḏkūr, [al-Qāhira], al-Maṭbaʿa al-Bahiyya ­bi-Miṣr,
1305/[1887‒1888].
 Technical Terms in Arabic Grammatical Traditions and Their Everyday Meanings 215

al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), Ǧalāl al-Dīn, Hamʿ al-hawāmiʿ f ī šarḥ Ǧamʿ al-ǧawāmiʿ,
ʿAbd al-Salām Muḥammad Hārūn & ʿAbd al-ʿĀl Sālim Makram (eds.), Bayrūt,
Muʾassasat al-Risāla, 1992, (t. 4-7, al-Kuwayt, Dār al-Buḥūṯ al-ʿIlmiyya, 1979‒1980).
al-Tilimsānī (d. 625/1228), Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq b. Sulaymān,
al-Iqtiḍāb fī ġarīb al-Muwaṭṭaʾ wa-iʿrābihi ʿalā al-abwāb, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Sulaymān
al-ʿUṯaymīn (ed.), al-Riyāḍ, Maktabat al-ʿUbaykān, 2001.
al-ʿUkbarī (d. 616/1219), Abū al-Baqāʾ ʿAbd Allāh b. al-Ḥusayn, al-Lubāb fī ʿilal al-bināʾ

r
wa-l-iʿrāb, Ġāzī Muḫtār Ṭulaymāt & ʿAbd al-Ilāh Nabhān (eds.), Bayrūt, Dār al-Fikr

u
al-Muʿāṣir, 1995.
al-ʿUkbarī (d. 616/1219), Abū al-Baqāʾ ʿAbd Allāh b. al-Ḥusayn, al-Tibyān fī iʿrāb

te
al-Qurʾān, ʿAlī Muḥammad al-Baǧāwī (ed.), [al-Qāhira], ʿĪsā al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī, [1976?].
al-Zaǧǧāǧ (d. 311/923), Abū Isḥāq Ibrāhīm b. al-Sarī, Maʿānī al-Qurʾān wa-iʿrābuhu,
ʿAbd al-Ǧalīl ʿAbduh Šalabī (ed.), Bayrūt, ʿĀlam al-Kutub, 1988.

Secondary Sources
au
Ayoub, Georgine, “De ce qui “ne se dit pas” dans le Livre de Sībawayhi: La notion de
en
tamṯīl”, Kees Versteegh & Michael G. Carter (eds.), Studies in the History of Arabic
Grammar II: Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on the History of Arabic Grammar, Nijmegen,
27 April‒1 May 1987, Amsterdam, J. Benjamins, p. 1‒15.
Baalbaki, Ramzi, art. “Bināʾ”, Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics, Online
m

Edition (2011).
Carter, Michael G., Arab Linguistics: An Introductory Classical Text with Translation and
ci

notes, Amsterdam, J. Benjamins, 1981.

Carter, Michael G., “Elision”, Kinga Dévényi & Tamás Iványi (eds.), Proceedings of the
é

Colloquium on Arabic Grammar, Budapest, 1‒7 September 1991 (The Arabist 3‒4), Budapest,
Eötvös Loránd University Chair for Arabic Studies and Csoma de Kőrös Society
Sp

Section of Islamic Studies, 1991, p. 121‒133.

Carter, Michael G., “Writing the History of Arabic Grammar”, Historiographia
Linguistica 21, 1994, p. 385‒414.
Fleischer, H.L., Kleinere Schriften, Leipzig, S. Hirzel, 1885‒1888.
Jones, Alan, trans., The Qurʾān, [Cambridge], Gibb Memorial Trust, 2007.
Kasher, Almog, “Two Types of taqdīr? A Study in Ibn Hišām’s Concept of ‘Speaker’s
Intention’”, Arabica 56, 2009, p. 360‒380.
 216 Almog Kasher

Kasher, Almog, “The Term maf ʿūl in Sībawayhi’s Kitāb”, Amal E. Marogy (ed.),
The Foundations of Arabic Linguistics: Sībawayhi and the Early Arabic Grammatical
Theory, Leiden, Brill, 2012, p. 3‒26.
Kasher, Almog, “The Vocative as a ‘Speech Act’ in Early Arabic Grammatical
Tradition”, Histoire Épistémologie Langage 35, 2013, p. 143‒159.
Kasher, Almog, “Early Pedagogical Grammars of Arabic”, Georgine Ayoub & Kees
Versteegh (eds.), The Foundations of Arabic Linguistics III. The Development of a Tradition:

r
Continuity and Change, Leiden, Brill, 2018, p. 146‒166.

u
Kasher, Almog, “How to Parse Effective Objects According to Arab Grammarians?
A  Dissenting Opinion on al-maf ʿūl al-muṭlaq”, Manuela E.B. Giolfo & Kees

te
Versteegh (eds.), The Foundations of Arabic Linguistics IV: The Evolution of Theory,
Leiden, Brill, 2019, p. 198-211.
Lane, Edward W., An Arabic‑English Lexicon, London, Williams & Norgate, 1863‒1893.

au
Larcher, Pierre, “Les maf ʿûl mut’laq “à incidence énonciative” de l’arabe classique”,
Claude Guimier & Pierre Larcher (eds.), L’adverbe dans tous ses états: Travaux
linguistiques du CERLICO 4, Rennes, PUR 2, 1991, p. 151‒178 (= Larcher, Pierre,
Linguistique arabe et pragmatique, Beyrouth, Presses de l’ifpo, 2014, p. 291‒316).
en
Larcher, Pierre, “Khabar/inshāʾ, une fois encore”, Bilal Orfali (ed.), In the Shadow of
Arabic: The Centrality of Language to Arabic Culture. Studies Presented to Ramzi Baalbaki
on the Occasion of His Sixtieth Birthday, Leiden, Brill, 2011, p. 49‒70.
m

Levin, Aryeh, “What is Meant by al‑maf ʿūl al‑muṭlaq? ”, Alan S. Kaye (ed.), Semitic
Studies: In Honor of Wolf Leslau on the Occasion of His Eighty‑Fifth Birthday, November
14th, 1991, Wiesbaden, O. Harrassowitz, 1991, II, p. 917‒926.
ci

Levin, Aryeh, “The Theory of al-taqdīr and Its Terminology”, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic
and Islam 21, 1997, p. 142‒166.
é

Levin, Aryeh, “What is Meant by al-ḥāl al-muqaddara? ”, Georgine Ayoub & Kees
Versteegh (eds.), Foundations of Arabic Linguistics III. The Development of a Tradition:
Sp

Continuity and Change, Leiden, Brill, 2018, p. 167‒177.

Mosel, Ulrike, Die syntaktische Terminologie bei Sibawaih, PhD diss., Munich, University
of Munich, 1975.
Peled, Yishai, “Cataphora and  taqdīr  in Medieval Arabic Grammatical Theory”,
Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 15, 1992, p. 94–112.
 Technical Terms in Arabic Grammatical Traditions and Their Everyday Meanings 217

Peled, Yishai, “Aspects of the Use of Grammatical Terminology in Medieval Arabic

Grammatical Tradition”, Yasir Suleiman (ed.), Arabic Grammar and Linguistics,
Richmond, Curzon, 1999, p. 50‒85.
Persson, Maria, art. “Circumstantial Clause”, Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and
Linguistics, Online Edition (2011).
Reckendorf, Hermann, Arabische Syntax, Heidelberg, Carl Winter, 1921.
ʿUmar, Aḥmad Muḫtār & Makram, ʿAbd al-ʿĀl Sālim, Muʿǧam al‑qirāʾāt al‑Qurʾāniyya,

r
2nd edition, Kuwait, University of Kuwait, 1988.

u
Versteegh, Kees, Arabic Grammar and Qurʾānic Exegesis in Early Islam, Leiden, Brill, 1993.

te
Versteegh, Kees, “The Notion of ‘Underlying Levels’ in the Arabic Grammatical
Tradition”, Historiographia Linguistica 21, 1994, p. 271‒296.
Versteegh, Kees, art. “Taqdīr”, Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguisticsi, Online
Edition (2011).
au
Abstract / Résumé / ‫مل ّخص‬
en
It has been long recognized that many expressions used by Arab grammari-
ans display an ambiguity between their technical senses and the extralinguistic
concepts in which they originate. This article addresses the problem stemming
m

from the fact that adjectival attributes of technical terms can either modify
the technical meanings of their heads or their everyday meanings. In a recent
article on the term ḥāl muqaddara, Levin argues that the adjective muqaddara,
ci

in the sense of “underlying”, modifies the technical meaning of the term ḥāl,
i.e. circumstantial qualifier. The present article shows that most medieval
é

scholars apprehended the adjective muqaddara, in the sense of “expected,

intended, decreed, etc.”, as modifying the everyday meaning of the term ḥāl,
Sp

viz. “state”. It also demonstrates the importance of texts outside grammars

per se for the study of medieval grammatical terminology.
Keywords: Arabic grammatical tradition, qurʾānic exegesis, tafsīr, al-ḥāl
al-muqaddara.
 218 Almog Kasher

•
On sait depuis longtemps que de nombreuses expressions utilisées par
les grammairiens arabes recèlent une ambiguïté entre leur sens technique
et les concepts extralinguistiques d’où elles tirent leur origine. Cet article a
pour objet l’ambivalence des qualificatifs de ces termes, qui peuvent modifier
soit leur sens technique soit leur sens commun. Dans un article récent sur
le terme ḥāl muqaddara, Levin soutient que l’adjectif muqaddara, dans le sens

r
technique de « sous-jacent », qualifie le terme ḥāl dans son sens technique

u
de complément circonstanciel. Le présent article montre que la plupart des
auteurs médiévaux comprenaient l’adjectif muqaddara, au sens commun de

te
« attendu, envisagé, décrété, etc. », comme modifiant le sens commun du terme
ḥāl « état ». Cet article montre aussi l’importance des textes non-grammaticaux
pour l’étude de la terminologie grammaticale médiévale.

au
Mots-clefs: tradition grammaticale arabe, exégèse coranique, tafsīr, al-ḥāl
al-muqaddara.
en
•
‫غموض بين‬
ٍ ‫ن طو يل أ ّن كثيرًا من المصطلحات النحو يّة تحتوي على‬
ٍ ‫من المعروف منذ زم‬
‫ت‬ْ ‫اللغوي ال ّذي استم َ ّد‬
ّ ‫الاصطلاحي الدقيق وبين مفهومها في أصل وضعها‬
ّ ‫إطلاقها بالمعنى‬
m

‫ يتناول هذا المقال الإشكال الواقع من أ ّن نعوت هذه المصطلحات تصف معانيها‬.‫منه‬
ٍ ‫ في مقا‬.‫الاصطلاحيّة الدقيقة تارة ً ومعانيها العامّة تارة ً أخرى‬
‫ل ن ُش ِر مؤ ّخرًا حول مصطلح‬
ci

‫ أر يه لڤين إلى أ ّن النعت «المق ّدرة» بمعنى «الكامن في البنية‬.‫ د‬.‫«الحال المق ّدرة» يذهب أ‬
‫ يُظهِر مقالُنا هذا أ ّن معظم علماء التراث فهموا‬.‫الاصطلاحي للحال‬
ّ ‫العميقة» يصف المعنى‬
é

.‫العام لمصطلح الحال‬

ّ ٍ
‫كوصف للمعنى‬ »‫ إلخ‬،‫ مُقرّر‬،‫ مقصود‬،‫النعت «المق ّدرة» بمعنى «مُتوق ّع‬
Sp

ّ
‫نوضح هنا أهمّيّة النصوص الواقعة خارج إطار الدراسات النحو يّة نفسها من أجل دراسة‬
.‫المصطلحات النحو يّة التراثيّة‬

.‫ الحال المقدّرة‬،‫ تفسير القرآن‬،ّ‫ التراث النحويّ العربي‬:‫كلمات مفتاحيّة‬