Arabic Indefinites, Interrogatives, and Negators: A Linguistic History of Western Dialects (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics)

## Abstract That some dialects of Arabic negate with a pre-posed mā alone, some with what is called ‘bipartite’ negation mā ... š, and some with post-positive -š alone has invited comparisons with a similar process, called Jespersen’s Cycle, said to have occurred in French, whereby the pre-posed negator ne became associated with an emphatic post-positive particle pas ‘step’—and, in some French vernaculars, with a post-positive pas alone. Yet the similarity between Arabic and French is purely superficial, lacking supporting linguistic evidence. Forcing the facts of Arabic into preconceived theoretical constructs, both formal and functional, engenders erroneous conclusions. The source of the Arabic negator -š is polar interrogation, for which evidence does indeed exist in various Arabic dialects, including Andalusi, Egyptian, Levantine, Maltese, Tunisian, and Yemeni. The polar interrogative šī, itself derived from an existential particle, ultimately arose from the Proto-Semitic presentative ša and 3rd person pronouns šū, šī, and šunu. Supporting evidence for this comes from the West Semitic Modern South Arabian languages, which possess an existential particle, an indefinite determiner, and inchoate interrogative śi analogous in form and function to that of the Arabic šī. With this, it becomes possible to propose the operation of a different cycle in Arabic: the negative-existential (or Croft’s) cycle. Such comparative evidence from Arabic dialects and sister languages, along with historical records of an Arab presence in the Fertile Crescent centuries before the arrival of Arabic speaking Muslims in the 7th century ad, provides convincing evidence for the antiquity of the Arabic dialects. This Book Traces The Origins And Development Of The Arabic Grammatical Marker š/šī, Which Is Found In Interrogatives, Negators, And Indefinite Determiners Over A Broad Dialect Area That Stretches From The Southern Levant To North Africa And Includes Dialects Of Yemen And Oman. David Wilmsen Draws On Data From Old Vernacular Arabic Texts And From A Variety Of Arabic Dialects, And Shows That, Contrary To Much Of The Literature On The Diachrony Of This Morpheme, š/šī Does Not Derive From Arabic šay 'thing'. Instead, He Argues That It Dates Back To A Pre-arabic Stage Of West Semitic And Probably Has Its Origins In A Semitic Demonstrative Pronoun. On This Theory, Arabic šay Could In Fact Derive From š/šī, And Not Vice Versa. The Book Demonstrates The Significance Of The Arabic Dialects In Understanding The History Of Arabic And The Semitic Languages, And Claims That Modern Arabic Dialects Could Not Have Developed From Classical Arabic. It Will Be Of Interest To Historical Linguists Of All Persuasions From Graduate Level Upwards, Particularly All Those Working On Arabic And Other Semitic Languages.-- 1: Introduction: Theory, Convention, And The Assessment Of Facts -- 2: On The Age And Origins Of Spoken Arabic Vernaculars : An Unresolved Question -- 3: Fīš Wa Biddīš : The Functions Of šī-- 4: Andalusi Arabic Negators And Interrogatives: Early Evidence Of Grammatical šī -- 5: Interrogation And Negation With šī In North African And Levantine Arabic -- 6: Origins Of Grammatical šī : Southern Arabia Or The Levant? -- 7: Proto-semitic And Proto-arabic Origins Of Grammatical šī -- 8: On Explanation And Theory In Arabic Linguistics -- Afterword -- Appendix: Points Of Divergence Between Written And Spoken Arabic. David Wilmsen. Includes Bibliographical References (pages 216-237) And Index. This book traces the origins and development of the Arabic grammatical marker s/si , which is found in interrogatives, negators, and indefinite determiners over a broad dialect area that stretches from the southern Levant to North Africa and includes dialects of Yemen and Oman. David Wilmsen draws on data from old vernacular Arabic texts and from a variety of Arabic dialects, and shows that, contrary to much of the literature on the diachrony of this morpheme, s/si does not derive from Arabic say 'thing'. Instead, he argues that it dates back to a pre-Arabic stage of West Semitic and probably has its origins in a Semitic demonstrative pronoun. On this theory, Arabic say could in fact derive from s/si , and not vice versa. The book demonstrates the significance of the Arabic dialects in understanding the history of Arabic and the Semitic languages, and claims that modern Arabic dialects could not have developed from Classical Arabic. It will be of interest to historical linguists of all persuasions from graduate level upwards, particularly all those working on Arabic and other Semitic languages. This book traces the origins and development of the Arabic grammatical marker š/šī, which is found in interrogatives, negators, and indefinite determiners in many Arabic dialects. It argues that š/šī does not derive from Arabic šay 'thing' but from a Semitic demonstrative pronoun. This book traces the origins and development of the Arabic grammatical marker s/si, which is found in interrogatives, negators, and indefinite determiners in many Arabic dialects. It argues that s/si does not derive from Arabic say 'thing' but from a Semitic demonstrative pronoun.