Full download ebook at ebookname.

com

The Subjunctive Mood in Arabic Grammatical Thought

1st Edition Arik Sadan

https://ebookname.com/product/the-subjunctive-mood-in-
arabic-grammatical-thought-1st-edition-arik-sadan/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD NOW

Download more ebook from https://ebookname.com

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age 1798 1939 1st Edition

Albert Hourani

https://ebookname.com/product/arabic-thought-in-the-liberal-
age-1798-1939-1st-edition-albert-hourani/

In the Mood for Mood 1st Edition Tanja Mortelmans

https://ebookname.com/product/in-the-mood-for-mood-1st-edition-
tanja-mortelmans/

Arabic in the City Routledge Arabic Linguistics 1st

Edition Catherine Mille

https://ebookname.com/product/arabic-in-the-city-routledge-
arabic-linguistics-1st-edition-catherine-mille/

The Routledge Course in Translation Annotation Arabic

English Arabic Ali Almanna

https://ebookname.com/product/the-routledge-course-in-
translation-annotation-arabic-english-arabic-ali-almanna/
Change in Contemporary English A Grammatical Study 1st
Edition Geoffrey Leech

https://ebookname.com/product/change-in-contemporary-english-a-
grammatical-study-1st-edition-geoffrey-leech/

The Unified Dictionary of Anatomy English Arabic Arabic

Edition World Health Organization

https://ebookname.com/product/the-unified-dictionary-of-anatomy-
english-arabic-arabic-edition-world-health-organization/

Disruptive Mood Irritability in Children and

Adolescents 1st Edition Argyris Stringaris

https://ebookname.com/product/disruptive-mood-irritability-in-
children-and-adolescents-1st-edition-argyris-stringaris/

Clinical Trial Design Challenges in Mood Disorders 1st

Edition Mauricio Tohen

https://ebookname.com/product/clinical-trial-design-challenges-
in-mood-disorders-1st-edition-mauricio-tohen/

Grammatical Theory and Bilingual Codeswitching 1st

Edition Jeff Macswan

https://ebookname.com/product/grammatical-theory-and-bilingual-
codeswitching-1st-edition-jeff-macswan/
The Subjunctive Mood in Arabic
Grammatical Thought
 Studies in
Semitic Languages and
Linguistics

Editorial board
T. Muraoka, A.D. Rubin and C.H.M. Versteegh

VOLUME 66

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.nl/ssl

 The Subjunctive Mood in
Arabic Grammatical Thought

By

Arik Sadan

Leiden • boston
2012
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Sadan, Arik.
The subjunctive mood in Arabic grammatical thought / by Arik Sadan.
p. cm. — (Studies in Semitic languages and linguistics ; v. 66)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-90-04-23295-2 (hardback : alk. paper) — ISBN 978-90-04-23423-9 (e-book) 1. Arabic
language—Verb. 2. Arabic language—Mood. 3. Arabic language—Grammar—History. I. Title.

PJ6145.S23 2012
492.7’56—dc23
2012020411

This publication has been typeset in the multilingual “Brill” typeface. With over 5,100 characters
covering Latin, IPA, Greek, and Cyrillic, this typeface is especially suitable for use in the
humanities. For more information, please see www.brill.nl/brill-typeface.

ISSN 0081-8461
ISBN 978 90 04 23295 2 (hardback)
ISBN 978 90 04 23423 9 (e-book)

Copyright 2012 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Global Oriental, Hotei Publishing,
IDC Publishers and Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV
provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center,
222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

 contents

Acknowledgements ......................................................................................... ix
Preface . ............................................................................................................... xi

I ʾAn .................................................................................................................. 1
1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 1
2. ʾAn as a Particle that Induces naṣb in the Following Verb,
and with it Occupies the Position of a maṣdar ........................... 3
3. The Syntactic and Semantic Contexts of ʾan al-muxaffafa
Compared to ʾan al-maṣdariyya ....................................................... 16
4. The Separation Between naṣb-Inducing ʾan and the
Following Verb . ..................................................................................... 33
5. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 34

II Lan . .............................................................................................................. 37
1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 37
2. The Etymology of lan .......................................................................... 38
3. The Mood of the Verb Following lan ............................................. 45
4. The Utterance lan yafʿala is a Negation of the Utterance
sayafʿalu/sawfa yafʿalu . ...................................................................... 50
5. The Separation Between lan and the Following Verb .............. 56
6. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 57

III Kay .............................................................................................................. 59

1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 59
2. The Meaning of kay ............................................................................. 60
3. The Mood of the Verb Following kay . ........................................... 61
4. The Time Conveyed by the Verb Following kay ......................... 62
5. The Separation Between kay and the Following Verb .............. 63
6. Is There an ʾan muḍmara after kay? ............................................... 65
7. The Mood of the Verb Following kaymā . ..................................... 70
8. Can the Verb Following kamā be in naṣb? . ................................. 72
9. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 77

IV ʾIḏan . .......................................................................................................... 79
1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 79
ً َْ
2. The Orthography of ʾiḏan: ‫ إ�ِ ذ� ا‬or �‫ ?إ�ِ ذ� ن‬............................................... 80
vi contents

3. Is ʾiḏan a ḥarf ‘Particle’ or an ism ‘Noun’? . ................................. 83

4. Is ʾiḏan Etymologically a Noun Ending with a tanwīn
(derived from ʾiḏ or ʾiḏā), an Independent Word,
a Compound of ʾiḏ and ʾan or a Compound of ʾiḏ and the
Suffix -n? ................................................................................................ 84
5. The Grammarians’ Definition of ʾiḏan and its Meaning . ....... 88
6. How and Under What Conditions ʾiḏan Influences the
Following Verb . ................................................................................... 92
7. Is there an ʾan muḍmara after ʾiḏan? ........................................... 101
8. The Instances of ʾiḏan in the Qurʾān ............................................ 102
9. The Historical Development in the Status of ʾiḏan as an
ʿāmil among Speakers of Certain Dialects of Old Arabic ....... 104
10. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 107

V ʾAw ................................................................................................................ 111

1. Introduction . ........................................................................................ 111
2. Sentence Types in which ʾaw can be Followed by a manṣūb
Verb, and the Possibility of Putting this Verb in raf ʿ .............. 112
3. The Meaning of ʾaw Followed by a manṣūb Verb . ................... 117
4. What Induces the Verb Following ʾaw to be manṣūb? . .......... 121
5. The Separation between ʾaw and the Following Verb ............ 123
6. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 124

VI Fa- . .............................................................................................................. 127

1. Introduction . ........................................................................................ 127
2. The Mood of the Verb Following fa- . ........................................... 129
3. Sentence Types in which a manṣūb Verb can Follow fa- and
the Meaning of naṣb .......................................................................... 135
4. Sentence Types in which a manṣūb Verb cannot Follow
fa- ............................................................................................................. 159
5. Comparison Between Sentence Types in which the jawāb
Following fa- is majzūm and manṣūb . ......................................... 164
6. Dialectal Differences Related to the Mood of the Verb
Following fa- . ....................................................................................... 167
7. What Induces the Verb Following fa- to be manṣūb? ............. 168
8. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 170

VII Wa- ............................................................................................................ 173

1. Introduction . ........................................................................................ 173
2. The Mood of the Verb Following wa- ........................................... 174
 contents vii

3. Sentence Types in which a manṣūb Verb can Follow wa-

and the Meaning of naṣb . ................................................................ 177
4. The Meaning of wa- Followed by a manṣūb Verb .................... 186
5. Sentence Types in which a manṣūb Verb cannot Follow
wa- ........................................................................................................... 191
6. What Induces the Verb Following wa- to be manṣūb? ........... 192
7. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 194

VIII Ḥattā . ...................................................................................................... 197

1. Introduction . ........................................................................................ 197
2. The Morphological Pattern of ḥattā and the Possible Link
to the Root ḥtt . .................................................................................... 199
3. The Mood of the Verb Following ḥattā: naṣb or raf ʿ . ............. 201
4. Is There a Correlation between the Mood of the Verb
Following ḥattā and the Time it Conveys? ................................. 220
5. The Theory that if qalb cannot be Performed, the Verb
Following ḥattā must take naṣb ..................................................... 226
6. The Verb Following ḥattā can take rafʿ only when the
First Action Leads to the Second ................................................... 232
7. When the Main Verb is Negated or the Occurrence is
Questioned, the Verb Following ḥattā must take naṣb . ......... 234
8. When ḥattā and the Following Verb are an Essential Part
of the Sentence, the Verb must take naṣb .................................. 237
9. Is There an ʾan muḍmara after ḥattā? . ........................................ 238
10. The Separation between ḥattā and the Following Verb . ....... 242
11. The Action which the Verb Preceding ḥattā Denotes takes
Place Gradually until the Occurrence of the Action Denoted
by the Following Verb ....................................................................... 243
12. Conclusion: An Attempt to Explain the Difference between
rafʿ and naṣb following ḥattā . ........................................................ 244

IX Li- . ............................................................................................................... 249

1. Introduction . ........................................................................................ 249
2. Lām kay ‘li- [with the meaning] of kay “in order to” ’ ............. 250
3. Lām al-juḥūd . ....................................................................................... 252
4. Lām al-ʿāqiba/al-ṣayrūra . ................................................................. 256
5. Li- in the Structure ʾurīdu li(ʾan) tafʿala ...................................... 260
6. The Mood of the Verb Following the Four Kinds of li-
Discussed in the Preceding Sections . ........................................... 262
7. The Pronunciation of li- with fatḥa (la-) ..................................... 263
viii contents

8. Is There an ʾan muḍmara after li-? ................................................ 266

9. Can ʾan Appear after li-? . ................................................................. 268
10. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 270

X Free naṣb .................................................................................................... 271

1. Introduction . ........................................................................................ 271
2. Grammarians’ Opinions on the Mood of Verbs Missing a
Preceding ʾan . ...................................................................................... 272
3. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 282

XI The Possible Interchangeability of rafʿ and naṣb . ....................... 283

1. Introduction . ........................................................................................ 283
2. Al-Astarābāḏī . ...................................................................................... 284
3. Ibn Mālik ............................................................................................... 286
4. Abū Ḥayyān .......................................................................................... 287
5. Ibn Hišām .............................................................................................. 288
6. Al-Farrāʾ ................................................................................................. 288
7. The Opinion Attributed to the Kūfans, that raf ʿ and naṣb
following fa- May Possess the Same Meaning ........................... 290

Discussion and Conclusion . ......................................................................... 291

1. Introduction . ........................................................................................ 291
2. The Differences in Approach between Early (Especially
Sībawayhi and al-Farrāʾ) and Later Grammarians . .................. 291
3. Dialectal Differences and Historical Developments
Concerning the naṣb Mood ............................................................. 292
4. The Importance of the Speaker’s Intention in the
Determination of Moods in General and the naṣb Mood in
Particular ............................................................................................... 295
5. A Note on Exceptional Examples .................................................. 296

Appendix A Basic Technical Terms and Concepts ........................... 297

Appendix B Grammarians’ Biographies . .............................................. 319

Bibliography ...................................................................................................... 351

Indices ................................................................................................................. 369
.Index of Names ........................................................................................... 371
.Index of Terms ............................................................................................ 376
.Index of Qurʾānic Quotations ................................................................. 381
 Acknowledgements

This book is the result of a research project which began in 2002, when
I chose the subjunctive mood following the particle ʾiḏan in Classical
Arabic as the topic of my M.A. dissertation. After having completed this
work, I decided to continue exploring this mood and devoted my Ph.D.
dissertation to the subjunctive mood in Arabic grammatical thought. This
book is a revised and abbreviated English version of the two above-men-
tioned dissertations. I would like, first of all, to thank Prof. Aryeh Levin,
my M.A. and Ph.D. supervisor, for his efforts and the resources he contrib-
uted towards the successful completion of the two dissertations. I would
also like to thank Prof. Simon Hopkins and the second anonymous reader
of my Ph.D. dissertation for their helpful remarks and suggestions, which
were taken into account in this book.
During my work on the manuscript I was fortunate to receive aid and
guidance from several people. Prof. Yishai Peled was kind enough to give
me helpful advice related to the book’s structure and several specific
points. Prof. Etan Kohlberg was of great assistance from the beginning of
my work to its completion, having agreed to read parts of the manuscript
and to share with me his ideas and suggestions.
To conclude, I would like to thank the following persons who contrib-
uted to the completion of the manuscript: Prof. Kees Versteegh, the editor,
who showed his interest in this project from its beginning; Mrs. Jasmin
Lange, the assistant editor, who constantly assisted me in preparing the
manuscript; the anonymous reader of the manuscript, whose remarks,
corrections and suggestions helped to improve the work, even if I dis-
agreed with some of them; and Mr. Michael Guggenheimer, who meticu-
lously read the whole manuscript and improved its form and style.
 preface

1. Presentation of the Topic

This book’s primary purpose is to define and characterize the opinions

of medieval Arab grammarians concerning the naṣb mood in the verbal
system of Classical Arabic. Special attention is given to the most promi-
nent early grammarians Sībawayhi and al-Farrāʾ (see §§‎2.1.1.1–‎2.1.1.2), who
represent the schools of Baṣra and Kūfa, respectively.
The three moods which an imperfect verb can take are raf ʿ, naṣb and
jazm. These are often translated into English as indicative, subjunctive
and jussive, respectively.1 The mood endings of the imperfect verb and
the case endings of the noun form what is known as ʾiʿrāb; they stand in
opposition to bināʾ, the fixed and stable endings of the particles, the per-
fect verb and some of the nouns.2
Generally speaking, the naṣb mood in Classical Arabic, like the sub-
junctive mood in other languages (the Romance languages, for example),
is used to denote a hypothetical action or event whose occurrence is
dependent on another, such as desire and fear.3 According to Arab gram-
marians, verbs take the naṣb mood when they are preceded by certain
ʿawāmil ‘factors’ which affect and determine the form of the verb, under
certain conditions. These ʿawāmil are either separate independent words
followed by the verb, or particles which attach directly to the verb.
This book introduces and examines the linguistic situation in Classical
Arabic, as it is described by early and later grammarians. In addition, it
presents and analyzes the theories grammarians propose to explain the

1 To these three moods one must add the intensifying form called ‘energicus’ or ‘ener-
getic’ (e.g. yaf ʿalan(na) ‘he will certainly do’), which differs syntactically and semantically
from the above-mentioned three moods. For a survey on the moods in Arabic, see EALL III,
269b, s.v. Mood (Standard Arabic), especially §1. On raf ʿ, naṣb and jazm see also appendix
A, §11, §10 and §8, respectively.
2 On ʾiʿrāb, bināʾ and the case and mood endings see EI2 III, 1248b–1250a, s.v. ʾIʿrāb.
3 In Ibn El Farouk, Subjonctif, the author unsuccessfully attempts to show that the
translation ‘subjunctive’ does not fit the Arabic al-muḍāriʿ al-manṣūb. He ignores the
shared syntactic and semantic characteristics of the notions of the ‘subjunctive’ and ‘naṣb’
moods, as mentioned above. Cf. Sadan, Subjonctif, where the author points to similarities
between the naṣb mood in Classical Arabic and the subjunctive mood in French, according
to grammarians of these two languages.
xii preface
different aspects of this complex subject, and the various examples on
which they base their theories. The grammarians’ examples are taken
from the spoken language of the Bedouins, whose Arabic is considered
reliable, the Qurʾān and ancient Arabic poetry. Several later grammarians,
especially Ibn Mālik, quote Ḥadīṯ traditions, too, as evidence for their lin-
guistic theories, but this method is not common.4

2. The Sources

The book’s primary sources consist of some 160 works by approximately

85 grammarians, lexicographers and commentators on the Qurʾān and
ancient Arabic poetry. In addition, it also takes into account secondary
sources, consisting of more than one hundred books, articles and disserta-
tions relevant to the topic, from the pioneering works of the eighteenth
century, published in Latin and other languages, to contemporary schol-
arly studies. In this chapter, as throughout the entire book, all references
to primary and secondary sources are sorted according to the chronologi-
cal order of the authors.

2.1. Primary sources

The most important primary sources are the grammarians’ books, begin-
ning with Sībawayhi’s Kitāb. Classical Arabic lexicons, commentaries on
the Qurʾān and commentaries on ancient Arabic poetry are the three other
genres which belong to the primary sources. In view of the large num-
ber of primary sources, I decided to conclude the book with an appendix
devoted to concise biographical and bibliographical information on the
authors and the works used and quoted in this book (appendix B). This
solution seems to me preferable to devoting a short note to each personal-
ity where it is first mentioned.

2.1.1. Grammarians’ works

Until a few decades ago the number of edited and published grammarians’
writings was quite limited, but during the second half of the twentieth
century many early and later works have become available for scholars

4 See EI2 IX, 370b–372b, s.v. SHawāhid, §I and §II.3.

 preface xiii
in printed and electronic editions.5 The research base of this book is thus
considerably broader than that of former studies.
Below is a list of the most important grammarians whose works I con-
sulted for this study.6 Next to each grammarian the year of death and the
titles of his most relevant books are given. Before going into detail, three
remarks are in order:

a. Since Sībawayhi and al-Farrāʾ occupy a special place in this study, only
their entries in the following list contain further details, whereas other
grammarians’ entries consist of no more than the year of death and
their most prominent books.
b. The following list contains only the more important of the grammar-
ians whose works I used. The full list of grammarians whose works I
consulted can be found in the above-mentioned appendix B, as well as
in the bibliography.
c. Whenever applicable, I note the commentaries used in conjunction
with the associated book.

2.1.1.1. Sībawayhi (died ca. 180/796): al-Kitāb Sībawayhi is the most

prominent representative of the Baṣran school. His Kitāb is the earliest
known Arabic grammar, and the most important. To this day this master-
piece remains the primary source for any study of Arabic grammar. Since
it is the basis and model for the subsequent grammatical literature, it
naturally figured most prominently in my study. After a perusal of the rel-
evant chapters in the Kitāb,7 I read their various commentaries,8 as well as
the commentaries on the poetry quoted in them.9 I also used Troupeau’s
index of the Kitāb (Troupeau, Lexique), Jahn’s pioneer translation of this

5 For examples of the latter see bibliography, note 1 on the digital collections by
al-Turāṯ.
6 For two surveys of the main Arabic grammar scholars and works, see EI2 VII, 914, s.v.
Naḥw, §4; Blanc, Linguistics.
7 I used mainly the Derenbourg edition (Sībawayhi, Kitāb), but also compared all the
relevant chapters to the Būlāq edition (Sībawayhi, Kitāb (Būlāq)), in order to locate trans-
mission differences which might be significant for understanding the text. Hārūn’s edition,
which was published in Cairo between 1966–1977, was rarely used, because it usually con-
tains no significant additions to the two above-mentioned editions.
8 I used Abū Saʿīd al-Sīrāfī’s, al-Fārisī’s, al-Rummānī’s, al-Šantamarī’s and Ibn Xarūf’s
commentaries.
9 I used al-Naḥḥās’, Abū Muḥammad al-Sīrāfī’s and al-Šantamarī’s commentaries.
xiv preface
masterpiece (Jahn, Translation) and modern studies devoted to various
aspects of Sībawayhi’s grammatical thought.10

2.1.1.2. Al-Farrāʾ (died 207/822): Maʿānī l-Qurʾān Al-Farrāʾ, a contem-

porary of Sībawayhi, is the most prominent representative of the Kūfan
school. His Maʿānī, which deals with grammatical problems found in
Qurʾānic verses, is the main source from which his grammatical views
can be inferred. A comparison of al-Farrāʾ’s and Sībawayhi’s views, as
expressed in the Maʿānī and the Kitāb, respectively, sheds light on the
differences between the two rival schools which they represent, the Kūfan
and the Baṣran. I found Kinberg’s comprehensive index of the Maʿānī
(Kinberg, al-Farrāʾ) very useful and also used modern studies devoted to
specific points in al-Farrāʾ’s Maʿānī in particular and Kūfan grammatical
thought in general.11

2.1.1.3. Al-Axfaš (died between 210–221/825–835): Maʿānī l-Qurʾān

2.1.1.4. Al-Mubarrad (died ca. 285/898): al-Muqtaḍab

2.1.1.5. Ṯaʿlab (died 291/904): Majālis Ṯaʿlab

2.1.1.6. Ibn al-Sarrāj (died 316/928): al-Mūjaz, al-ʾUṣūl

2.1.1.7. Al-Zajjājī (died ca. 337/948): Ḥurūf al-maʿānī, al-Jumal,12 al-Lāmāt

2.1.1.8. Al-Sīrāfī, Abū Saʿīd (died 368/979): Šarḥ kitāb Sībawayhi13

2.1.1.9. Al-Fārisī (died 377/987): al-ʾĪḍāḥ,14 al-Taʿlīqa ʿalā kitāb Sībawayhi13

2.1.1.10. Al-Rummānī (died 384/994): Maʿānī l-ḥurūf, Manāzil al-ḥurūf

10 I refer mainly to Baʿalbakī’s, Carter’s and Levin’s studies.

11 These are Beck, ʾIḏan; al-Anṣārī, al-Farrāʾ; Dévényi, al-Farrāʾ; Dīrah, Naḥw; Kāẓim,
Naḥw.
12 I used al-Baṭalyawsī’s, Ibn ʿUṣfūr’s, Ibn Abī Rabīʿ’s and Ibn Hišām’s commentaries. I
also used al-Baṭalyawsī’s commentary on the poetry quoted in al-Zajjājī’s Jumal.
13 Cf. note 8.
14 I used al-Jurjānī’s, Ibn al-Ṭarāwa’s and Ibn Abī Rabīʿ’s commentaries. I also used Ibn
Barrī’s commentary on the poetry quoted in al-Fārisī’s ʾĪḍāḥ.
 preface xv
2.1.1.11. Ibn Jinnī (died 392/1002): al-Lumaʿ,15 Sirr ṣināʿat al-ʾiʿrāb, al-Xaṣāʾiṣ

2.1.1.12. Al-Jurjānī (died 471/1078): al-Jumal,16 al-Muqtaṣid fī šarḥ al-ʾīḍāḥ17

2.1.1.13. Al-Zamaxšarī (died 538/1144): al-Mufaṣṣal fī ṣunʿat al-ʾiʿrāb18

2.1.1.14. Ibn al-Anbārī (died 577/1181): al-ʾInṣāf fī masāʾil al-xilāf

2.1.1.15. Ibn Yaʿīš (died 643/1245): Šarḥ al-Mufaṣṣal19

2.1.1.16. Ibn al-Ḥājib (died 646/1249): ʾAmālī Ibn al-Ḥājib, al-Kāfiya,20 Šarḥ
al-Mufaṣṣal19

2.1.1.17. Ibn Mālik (died 672/1273): al-ʾAlfiyya,21 Šarḥ ʿumdat al-ḥāfiẓ, Tashīl
al-fawāʾid22

2.1.1.18. Al-Astarābāḏī (684/1285 or 686/1288): Šarḥ al-kāfiya23

2.1.1.19. Abū Ḥayyān (died 745/1344): Irtišāf al-ḍarab

2.1.1.20. Ibn Hišām (died 761/1360): Muġnī l-labīb24

2.1.1.21. Ibn ʿAqīl (died 769/1367): al-Musāʿid ʿalā tashīl al-fawāʾid,25 Šarḥ
al-ʾAlfiyya26

15 I used al-Ḍarīr’s, Ibn Burhān al-ʿUkbarī’s, al-Šarīf al-Kūfī’s and Ibn al-Xabbāz’s
commentaries.
16 I used al-Jurjānī’s own commentary, as well as Ibn al-Xaššāb’s and al-Xwārazmī’s.
17 Cf. note 14.
18 I used al-Xwārazmī’s, Ibn Yaʿīš’s, al-Saxāwī’s and Ibn al-Ḥājib’s commentaries. I also
used al-Šarīf al-Jurjānī’s commentary on the poetry quoted in al-Zamaxšarī’s Mufaṣṣal.
19 Cf. note 18.
20 I used al-Astarābāḏī’s excellent commentary and also Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn’s and al-Jāmī’s.
I also used al-Baġdādī’s Xizāna, a commentary on the poetry quoted in Ibn al-Ḥājib’s
Kāfiya.
21 I used Ibn al-Nāẓim’s (i.e. Ibn Mālik’s son), Abū Ḥayyān’s, Ibn Hišām’s, Ibn Qayyim
al-Jawziyya’s, Ibn ʿAqīl’s, al-Makkūdī’s, al-Ušmūnī’s and al-Suyūṭī’s commentaries. I also
used al-ʿAynī’s commentary on the poetry quoted in Ibn al-Nāẓim’s, al-Murādī’s, Ibn
Hišām’s and Ibn ʿAqīl’s ʾAlfiyya commentaries.
22 I used Ibn Mālik’s own commentary, as well as Abū Ḥayyān’s and Ibn ʿAqīl’s.
23 Cf. note 20.
24 I used al-Suyūṭī’s commentary on the poetry quoted in Ibn Hišām’s Muġnī.
25 Cf. note 22.
26 Cf. note 21.
xvi preface
2.1.1.22. Al-Suyūṭī (died 911/1505): al-ʾAšbāh wal-naẓāʾir, Hamʿ al-hawāmiʿ,
al-ʾItqān

2.1.2. Lexicons
In addition to the grammarians’ books, I also used Classical Arabic lexi-
cons in which grammarians’ statements and views are often quoted
and sometimes explained.27 These are al-Xalīl’s Kitāb al-ʿayn, al-Azharī’s
Tahḏīb al-luġa, Ibn Fāris’ Mujmal al-luġa, al-Jawharī’s Tāj al-luġa, Ibn
Sīda’s Muḥkam and Muxaṣṣaṣ, al-Ḥimyarī’s Šams al-ʿulūm, al-Ṣāġānī’s
Takmila, Ibn Manẓūr’s Lisān al-ʿarab, al-Fayyūmī’s Miṣbāḥ, al-Fīrūzābādī’s
Qāmūs, al-Kaffawī’s Kulliyyāt, al-Zabīdī’s Tāj al-ʿarūs and al-Bustānī’s
Muḥīṭ al-muḥīṭ.

2.1.3. Commentaries on the Qurʾān

To understand the Qurʾānic verses which grammarians and lexicographers
quote and use in their grammatical discussions, I used various Qurʾānic
commentaries. I focused on commentaries written by grammarians, which
belong to the genre of Maʿānī l-Qurʾān that treats grammatical problems
found in Qurʾānic verses.28

2.1.4. Commentaries on ancient Arabic poetry

In their grammatical discussions, grammarians often exemplify their
views with lines of poetry. To understand these I used the grammarians’
commentaries on the poetry quoted in the following books:29 Sībawayhi’s
Kitāb (see note 9), al-Zajjājī’s Jumal (see note 12), al-Fārisī’s ʾĪḍāḥ (see note
14), al-Zamaxšarī’s Mufaṣṣal (see note 18), Ibn al-Ḥājib’s Kāfiya (see note
20), the commentaries on four of Ibn Mālik’s ʾAlfiyya commentaries (see

27 For an extensive survey of Classical Arabic lexicography, see EI2 IV, 524–525, s.v.
Ḳāmūs, §1; EALL III, 30a, s.v. Lexicography: Classical Arabic. In addition to the lexicons
mentioned in this section, I made extensive usage of Lane’s indispensable lexicon (Lane,
Lexicon).
28 In some cases the grammarian’s Qurʾānic commentary is the main (and sometimes
only) book from which his grammatical views can be inferred. The most salient example
is al-Farrāʾ, the most prominent representative of the Kūfan school (see §‎2.1.1.2); a further
example is al-Axfaš (see §‎2.1.1.3). Additional grammarians’ Qurʾānic commentaries which
I used are al-Zajjāj’s Maʿānī l-Qurʾān wa‌ʾiʿrābuhu and ʾIʿrāb al-Qurʾān, al-Naḥḥās’ ʾIʿrāb
al-Qurʾān, al-Fārisī’s ʾIġfāl, Ibn Jinnī’s Muḥtasab and Ibn al-Anbārī’s Bayān. In addition,
I used Muftī’s study which is devoted to the Kūfan readings of Qurʾānic verses (Muftī,
Qurrāʾ).
29 For an extensive survey of this genre, see EI2 IX, 371b–372a, s.v. SHawāhid, §II.1.
 preface xvii
note 21) and Ibn Hišām’s Muġnī (see note 24). In addition, I used al-Fārisī’s
commentary on difficult lines of poetry (al-Fārisī, Šarḥ al-ʾabyāt), as well as
Fischer and Bräunlich’s and Yaʿqūb’s modern studies (Fischer-Bräunlich,
Šawāhid and Yaʿqūb, Šawāhid, respectively).

2.2. Secondary sources

The secondary sources are books, articles and dissertations which are rel-
evant to the topic of this study.30 These are quoted when they offer new
information or an analysis which is not found in the grammarians’ works;
my aim throughout is to analyze the grammarians’ views directly from
their own works, so modern studies are mainly used secondarily.

3. Classification of naṣb Αccording to Prevalent Opinion

among Grammarians

According to Sībawayhi and most subsequent grammarians, the particles

following which the imperfect verb takes naṣb, under certain conditions,
are divided into two groups:31 (a) particles which function as ʿawāmil and
directly induce the naṣb mood; (b) particles following which the verb is
manṣūb due to an ʾan muḍmara. The former includes ʾan ‘that’, lan ‘not’,
kay ‘in order that’32 and ʾiḏan ‘then, therefore’; in the latter we find the
conjunctions ʾaw ‘unless’, fa- ‘with the result that’ and wa- ‘with the fact
that’, and also the prepositions ḥattā ‘until/in order that’ and li- ‘in order
that’. In addition, there is evidence for a few exceptional examples in
which the imperfect verb takes naṣb without being preceded by any of
the above-mentioned particles. The naṣb mood in these examples, which
I call ‘free naṣb’, is usually explained as due to an ʾan muḍmara. Here is a
schematic description of all the above-mentioned naṣb environments:

30 I was able to locate some of these modern studies by using Fück, Studien; Bakalla,
Bibliography; al-ʿĀnī-Parkinson, Bibliography.
31 For a general survey see EI2 VII, 974b–975a, s.v. Naṣb. Cf. Ibn El Farouk, Subjonctif, 124,
§2°, where the author fails to mention ʾaw and li- as particles following which a manṣūb
verb can occur; Owens, Foundations, 318, §1.6.1, where even more relevant particles are
omitted.
32 Sībawayhi, followed by most grammarians, does not posit an ʾan muḍmara after kay,
which he conceives as the ʿāmil which affects the mood of the following verb. However, he
says that some speakers consider kay a ḥarf jarr ‘preposition’, followed by an ʾan muḍmara.
See chapter 3, §6.1 and §6.3.
xviii preface
The naṣb mood environments in Arabic
Naṣb following a particle (1–9) Naṣb not following a particle (10)

a. The particles which directly induce (10) Free naṣb

the naṣb mood:
(1) ʾan; (2) lan; (3) kay; (4) ʾiḏan
b. The particles following which
the verb is manṣūb due to an
ʾan muḍmara:
– The conjunctions (5) ʾaw; (6) fa-;
(7) wa-
– The prepositions (8) ḥattā; (9) li-

In this study I aim at a careful analysis of all the ten above-mentioned syn-
tactic environments in which it is possible to find a manṣūb verb. Each is
examined in a separate chapter, due to their unique syntactic and seman-
tic characteristics. In some chapters I deal with sentence types in which
the associated particle is not followed by a manṣūb verb and confront
them with similar sentence types where the verb takes naṣb; this compari-
son assists in understanding the syntactic and semantic contexts in which
the naṣb mood is used.

4. The Book’s Structure

This preface is followed by ten chapters devoted to the various contexts

of the naṣb mood (the chapter order corresponds to the numbers 1–10 in
the schematic description in §‎3 above). Most sections in each of these
chapters are divided into three subsections, devoted to Sībawayhi’s,
al-Farrāʾ’s and other grammarians’ views. In some cases an additional
fourth subsection is devoted to a separate analysis of modern scholars’
views on the associated issue, but these are more often included in the
discussions of the grammarians’ views (see §‎2.2 above). Every chapter
ends with a concluding section which contains a concise description of
its main ideas.
Chapter eleven is devoted to the interchangeability of raf ʿ and naṣb,
which is possible in some contexts according to several later grammar-
ians. The book ends with a concluding chapter, followed by a bibliography
and two appendices:
 preface xix
a. Appendix A: Basic technical terms and concepts. This appendix con-
tains definitions and discussions of the main technical terms and con-
cepts which the grammarians use in their discussion of the naṣb mood.
Throughout the book the reader is referred to the relevant sections in
this appendix, which is sorted alphabetically.
b. Appendix B: Grammarians’ biographies. This appendix contains bio-
graphical details on all the grammarians, lexicographers and com-
mentators on the Qurʾān and ancient Arabic poetry whose views are
quoted and referred to in this work. In addition, it provides a concise
bibliographical description of the works which I use and quote. The
appendix is sorted alphabetically according to name and concludes
with a key which is sorted chronologically according to the year of
death.

5. Technical Principles

5.1. References to primary and secondary sources

In most cases the reference to the relevant lines, and not only pages, is
given. In references to both primary and secondary sources, large roman
numbers are used to indicate volumes, en-dashes (–) are set between
inclusive page and line numbers, and the minus sign (𐄐) introduces a line
number from the bottom of a given page. When necessary, the section
number is given, preceded by the section sign (§).33

5.2. Transcription and vocalization

As a rule, all Arabic excerpts are phonetically transcribed, with the
exception of a few discussions related to orthography in which the Arabic
script is used. The lām of the definite article is always given (before sun
letters, too) and separated from the following word by a hyphen.34 Hamzas
are given throughout except when introducing a proper noun or a part
thereof.35 Complete sentences (as well as full or partial quotations from
the Qurʾān and poetry) are fully vocalized, whereas terms are not.34

33 For example, the reference “Abū Ḥayyān, Irtišāf IV, 120, 𐄐2–121, 3” stands for the five
lines in Abū Ḥayyān’s Irtišāf, fourth volume, from page 120, second line from the bottom
until page 121, third line.
34 For example, ḍarūrat al-šiʿr ‘poetic license’ (and not ḍarūratu š-šiʿr).
35 For example, “Abū l-Ḥasan al-Axfaš” and not “ʾAbū l-Ḥasan al-ʾAxfaš”.
xx preface
5.3. Qurʾānic verses
As a rule, quotations from the Qurʾān are vocalized in accordance with
the standard Egyptian text (which reproduces the reading of ʿĀṣim in the
recension of Ḥafṣ). Additional readings (qirāʾāt) are indicated when they
are relevant to the discussion. Qurʾānic verses are referred to by the word
“Qurʾān” followed by the number of the sūra, a colon and the number of
the verse.36 Quotations from the Qurʾān are followed by a translation into
English.37

36 For example, the reference “Qurʾān 2:12” stands for the 12th verse in sūra 2.
37 For that purpose I used mainly Arberry’s translation (Arberry, Koran).
 Chapter one

ʾan

1. Introduction

This chapter is devoted to ʾan, the primary particle1 that induces a fol-
lowing verb, under certain conditions, to take naṣb. It has been called
ʾan al-xafīfa ‘the light ʾan (i.e. with no šadda, in contrast to ʾanna)’,2 ʾan
al-nāṣiba ‘ʾan causing naṣb’ and ʾan al-maṣdariyya ‘ʾan [which, together
with the following verb, occupies the position] of a maṣdar’. It should be
noted that Arab grammarians mention other kinds of ʾan (see below), but
after this preface these will be treated in this chapter only in connection
with ʾan followed by a manṣūb verb.

1.1. Sībawayhi
Sībawayhi discusses ʾan in chapters 273–276 (Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 424,
5–431, 14). At the end of chapter 273 Sībawayhi introduces the four kinds
of ʾan:

a. ʾAn that causes the following verb, under certain conditions, to take
naṣb. This is the ʾan that is the subject of this chapter. Sībawayhi’s
views on it are introduced in §‎2.1.
b. ʾAn in the sense of ʾay ‘that is’. Its role is similar to a colon in the west-
ern punctuation system: it may introduce a direct quote, an elucida-
tion or an explanation. It is referred to by later grammarians as ʾan
al-mufassira ‘the elucidating ʾan’.

1 Grammarians are all agreed that ʾan is a ḥarf ‘particle’, not an ism ‘noun’. Al-Fārisī says
that the proof that ʾan is a ḥarf and not an ism is its syntactic influence on the following
verb: had it been an ism, it could not have influenced a verb, because according to the
ʿamal theory, a noun cannot be an ʿāmil of a verb. See al-Fārisī, Taʿlīqa IV, 249, 𐄐3–250, 1.
Cf. al-Fārisī, Baġdādiyyāt, 271, 𐄐3–272, 2; al-Fārisī, ʾIġfāl I, 121, 6–7; al-ʿUkbarī, Lubāb II, 126,
10–11; Ibn al-Xabbāz, Tawjīh, 515, 7; Ibn Yaʿīš, Šarḥ II, 1193, 20; Ibn al-Ḥājib, Šarḥ II, 232, 2–3;
Abū Ḥayyān, Irtišāf II, 991, 3–4; al-Suyūṭī, ʾAšbāh (1998) II, 26, 𐄐4; 31, 5.
Only one grammarian considers ʾan an ism. Al-Ṣanʿānī, Tahḏīb, 240, 8–12, argues that
among the ʿawāmil causing the verb to take naṣb, ʾan is the only one which is a noun,
whereas all the rest are particles.
2 For a discussion of the use of the root xff to indicate a form with no šadda, see Sadan,
Xiffa, 60–61, especially notes 8 and 10.
2 chapter one

c. ʾAn al-muxaffafa ‘the ungeminated ʾan (i.e. with no šadda)’, which

occupies the same position in the sentence as ʾanna. This kind of ʾan,
according to Sībawayhi, has no syntactic effect on the following imper-
fect verb (if indeed such a verb appears; a perfect verb or a noun may
also occur). §‎3.1 is devoted to Sībawayhi’s discussion of the different
contexts of this kind of ʾan in contrast to the first kind, that is followed
by a verb in naṣb.
d. ʾAn laġwan ‘ʾan with no syntactic role or semantic meaning’.3 Later
grammarians refer to this kind of ʾan as ʾan al-zāʾida ‘ʾan added [for
emphasis]’.

Sībawayhi devotes the next three chapters, 274–276, to the first three
kinds of ʾan mentioned above; no chapter is devoted to the fourth kind.
While Sībawayhi discusses several contexts and usages in which ʾan can
occur in other chapters, these are not treated in the present work, since
they do not pertain to the question of the mood of the verb following this
particle. One such case is ʾan following one of the ʾaf ʿāl al-muqāraba ‘the
verbs [conveying the idea] of an action about to occur’,4 such as the com-
mon structure ʿasā ʾan yafʿala ‘he may do [something]’ and the less com-
mon kāda ʾan yafʿala ‘he almost did [something]’ (kāda is usually used
without a following ʾan, i.e. kāda yafʿalu). Another phenomenon which
is not treated in this work is omission of the ḥurūf al-jarr ‘prepositions’
before ʾan (as well as before ʾanna).5

3 According to Lane, Lexicon VIII, 3011a, 𐄐3–𐄐2, laġw, when applied to speech, has the
meanings ‘Nought; of no account; unprofitable’. Cf. Hava, Dictionary, 690b, where one of
the meanings of this term is given as ‘useless word’; Wright, Grammar II, 339, 5–6, where
this term is explained as ‘a superfluous word, which does not count in the construction’.
4 Only some of the verbs which belong to the ʾafʿāl al-muqāraba actually denote
muqāraba, i.e. an expected close occurrence of a certain action. The entire group consists
of verbs that may be divided into three semantic categories:
a. Verbs denoting muqāraba: kāda, karaba and ʾawšaka.
b. Verbs denoting rajāʾ, i.e. an expectation and wish that a certain action occur: ʿasā,
ḥarā and ixlawlaqa.
c. Verbs denoting ʾinšāʾ, i.e. the onset of a certain action: jaʿala, ṭafiqa, ʾaxaḏa. ʿaliqa
and ʾanša‌ʾa.
For Sībawayhi’s discussion of these verbs, see Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 364, 13ff. (chapter 236);
426, 10–428, 2 (last part of chapter 274). For a summary of the grammarians’ views in this
aspect, see al-Sāmarrāʾī, Maʿānī I, 268–284. For a detailed modern analysis of ʿasā, see
Ullmann, ʿAsā.
5 For Sībawayhi’s discussion of this phenomenon, see Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 425, 1ff. See
further Wright, Grammar II, 193, §70, note g. According to Fleisch, the omission of preposi-
tions before ʾan occurs mainly in certain contexts, such as order and prohibition or after
verbs denoting fear. See Fleisch, Arabe, 201–202, note b.
 ʾan 3

1.2. Al-Farrāʾ
Al-Farrāʾ in his Maʿānī refers to the first three kinds of ʾan which Sībawayhi
discusses, but does not mention the fourth kind.

1.3. Other grammarians

Like Sībawayhi, other grammarians also consider ʾan the primary ʿāmil
of all ʿawāmil that induce the following verb to take naṣb.6 Most of them
enumerate and discuss the same four kinds of ʾan as Sībawayhi.7 A few
mention other meanings, in addition to the four kinds mentioned above.
Al-Harawī, for example, presents seven kinds of ʾan.8

2. ʾAn as a Particle that Induces naṣb in the Following Verb, and

with it Occupies the Position of a maṣdar

2.1. Sībawayhi
Sībawayhi refers to this kind of ʾan in several places in his Kitāb. The refer-
ences are as follows:

a. In chapter 233, devoted to the imperfect verbs, Sībawayhi mentions

that the particles which induce the following verb to take naṣb are ʾan,
kay and lan.9 He thoroughly discusses only the etymology of the latter

6 See, for example, al-Sīrāfī, Šarḥ (Cairo) I, 78, 11–12, where the author introduces his
discussion of the naṣb mood saying ʾammā ʾani l-xafīfatu fahiya ʾummu l-ḥurūfi fī hāḏā
l-bābi wal-ġālibatu ʿalayhi wal-qawiyyatu fīhi ‘as for ʾan with no šadda [which affects the
following verb to take naṣb], it is the primary particle in this chapter, the first and stron-
gest in it’. Cf. Ibn al-Ḥājib, Šarḥ II, 13, 4–5; Ibn al-Ḥājib, ʾAmālī II, 799–800 (ʾimlāʾ 109); Ibn
ʿAqīl, Musāʿid III, 59, 10–11; al-Suyūṭī, Hamʿ IV, 88, 2–3.
7 See, for example, al-Mubarrad, Muqtaḍab I, 48, 13–49, 13; II, 361–362; Ibn Sīda,
Muxaṣṣaṣ XIV, 55, 5–8.
8 See al-Harawī, ʾAzhiya, 59–74, where the author discusses the four kinds of ʾan men-
tioned above extensively, but adds three more kinds, that allegedly occur in the Qurʾān
and poetry. These are: ʾan meaning liʾallā ‘in order that not’ (ibid., 70, 2–71, 8), ʾan meaning
ʾiḏ ‘because’ (ibid., 71, 9–74, 4) and ʾan meaning lā ‘not’ (ibid., 74, 5–10). In my opinion,
however, these three additional kinds actually reflect usages of ʾan al-nāṣiba. In the first
two the preposition preceding ʾan was omitted (see note 5 above); as for the third, exem-
plified by Qurʾān 3:73, the common opinion among grammarians and Qurʾān commenta-
tors is that the clause which ʾan introduces is a kind of a parenthesis.
For other grammarians and lexicographers who mention additional kinds of ʾan, some
based on al-Harawī’s view, see al-Baṭalyawsī, ʾIṣlāḥ, 382–387; Ibn al-Šajarī, ʾAmālī, 422–426;
Abū Ḥayyān, Irtišāf IV, 1693, 6–11; al-Murādī, Janā, 215–227; al-Fīrūzābādī, Qāmūs (1913) II,
199, 9–18; al-Suyūṭī, Hamʿ IV, 144–149; al-Zabīdī, Tāj (1994) 37a, 𐄐2ff.
9 There is actually a fourth particle that directly induces a following verb to take naṣb:
ʾiḏan, discussed in chapter 4.
4 chapter one

(see chapter 2, §2.1), and provides just one example each for ʾan and
kay. His example of the usage of ʾan is ʾurīdu ʾan taf ʿala ‘I want you to
do [something]’.10
b. In chapter 273, in which the four kinds of ʾan are introduced, Sībawayhi
defines the first as one in which takūnu fīhi ʾan wamā taʿmalu fīhi mina
l-ʾafʿāli bimanzilati maṣādirihā ‘ʾan and the verbs which it syntactically
influences [to take naṣb] are equivalent in it (i.e. in this kind) to their
verbal nouns (i.e. the verbal nouns of these verbs)’.11 From this defini-
tion it is clear why later grammarians refer to this kind of ʾan as ʾan
al-maṣdariyya. The examples Sībawayhi provides of ʾan in chapter 274
(see c. below) are explained as cases in which ʾan and the following
verb occupy the position of a maṣdar.
c. Chapter 274 of the Kitāb is where the main discussion of ʾan followed
by a verb in naṣb takes place. The title of this chapter reveals the most
important characteristic that Sībawayhi attributes to this ʾan: hāḏā
bābun min ʾabwābi ʾani llatī takūnu wal-fiʿla bimanzilati maṣdarin ‘this
is one of the chapters [devoted to the kind of] ʾan which is, together
with the [following] verb, equivalent to a verbal noun’. Sībawayhi dem-
onstrates this principle by three examples:12
1. ʾAn ta‌ʾtiyanī xayrun laka ‘for you to come to me is good for you’. This
sentence, says Sībawayhi, is equivalent to the sentence al-ʾityānu
xayrun laka ‘the arrival is good for you’.
2. A Qurʾānic verse: ʾan taṣūmū xayrun lakum ‘for you to fast is good
for you’ (Qurʾān 2:184).
3. A line of poetry: ʾinnī ra‌ʾaytu mina l-makārimi ḥasbakum / ʾan
talbasū ḥurra l-ṯiyābi watašba‌ʾū ‘I believe that among the honor-
able deeds it is enough for you to wear the best clothes and to be
satiated’.13 Sībawayhi explains that an equivalent sentence with the
same meaning would be ra‌ʾaytu ḥasbakum lubsa l-ṯiyābi.

Subsequently in the same chapter14 Sībawayhi notes the resemblance

between ʾan and ʾanna, both of which form, together with the following

10 See Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 361, 14–15.

11 See Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 424, 5–6.
12 These examples are discussed in Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 424, 17–425, 1.
13 A verse in the kāmil meter, by ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Ḥassān or his son Saʿīd. See
Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 424, 19 and al-Sīrāfī, ʾAbyāt II, 169, 1–7, respectively. According to Fischer-
Bräunlich, Šawāhid, 141a, 2, the poet is either Jarīr or ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Ḥassān.
14 See Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 425, 9ff.
 ʾan 5

utterance, a phrase that is equivalent to a verbal noun.15 Here are two of

his examples: iʾtinī baʿda ʾan yaqaʿa l-ʾamru ‘come to me after the thing
will have happened’ and ʾatānī baʿda ʾan waqaʿa l-ʾamru ‘he came to me
after the thing had happened’. In both sentences, says Sībawayhi, ʾan and
the following utterance can be substituted by a verbal noun, in this case
baʿda wuqūʿi l-ʾamri ‘after the thing’s happening’.

2.2. Al-Farrāʾ
Contrary to Sībawayhi, al-Farrāʾ does not equate ʾan and the following
verb with a verbal noun. However, he does refer to the time that this verb
indicates (see below).

2.2.1. The time conveyed by the manṣūb verb following ʾan

According to al-Farrāʾ, the naṣb mood of a verb following ʾan represents
future time, whereas rafʿ represents present time. He expounds this view
in his discussion of the contexts in which the verb following ʾan should
take rafʿ or naṣb (see §‎3.2).

2.3. Other grammarians

Many early and later grammarians give this kind of ʾan the name ʾan
al-xafīfa, i.e. ʾan with no šadda, and emphasize, with Sībawayhi, that the
utterance it introduces with the following verb is equivalent to a maṣdar.16
Many also use the same Qurʾānic verse quoted by Sībawayhi in this con-
text (Qurʾān 2:184) to show this equivalence.17 Other grammarians call it
ʾan al-nāṣiba lil-fiʿl ‘ʾan that induces the [following] verb to take naṣb’.18

2.3.1. The time conveyed by the manṣūb verb following ʾan

Most grammarians emphasize that the manṣūb verb following ʾan denotes
an action in the future.19 Ibn al-Xabbāz and al-Saxāwī, who express this

15 Sībawayhi also treats this resemblance in chapter 261, which is devoted to ʾinna and
ʾanna. See Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 410, 4–8. Cf. ibid. II, 336, 8–10.
16 See, for example, al-Axfaš, Maʿānī (1985) I, 294, 1–3; al-Zajjājī, Jumal, 194, 𐄐1; Ibn Jinnī,
Lumaʿ, 77, 2 last lines; 78, 4ff.
17 See, for example, Ibn al-Sarrāj, ʾUṣūl (1996) I, 237, 9–10; al-Zajjājī, Jumal, 333, 2–3; 338,
7–9; al-Sīrāfī, Šarḥ (Cairo) I, 45, 𐄐1–46, 1; 78, 3 last lines; al-Fārisī, Baġdādiyyāt, 271, 2–3;
al-Fārisī, Manṯūra, 176, 7–9; al-Fārisī, ʾIġfāl I, 124, 3–5; al-Zubaydī l-Išbīlī, Wāḍiḥ, 132, 4–12;
al-Warrāq, ʿIlal, 69, 𐄐3–𐄐2; al-Rummānī, Maʿānī, 71, 𐄐2–72, 3.
18 See, for example, al-Rummānī, Manāzil, 66, 𐄐1–67, 6; al-Ḥarīrī, Šarḥ, 309, 3 last lines.
19 See, for example, al-Sīrāfī, Šarḥ (Cairo) I, 78, 12–13; al-Fārisī, ʾIġfāl II, 99, 𐄐5–𐄐4;
al-Warrāq, ʿIlal, 71, 11–13; al-Rummānī, Manāzil, 66, 10–67, 1; al-Šantamarī, Nukat I, 692,
6 chapter one

view, attribute this to the fact that the occurrence in such a construction
is not certain, as for example in the case when ʾan follows a verb denoting
a desire (see §‎3.3.2.3).20
Al-Mubarrad says that the verb following ʾan may convey either a future
or a past time. The future is conveyed when an imperfect verb follows
ʾan, as in yasurrunī ʾan taḏhaba ġadan ‘it makes me happy that you will
go tomorrow’, while the past is conveyed when it is a perfect verb, as in
yasurrunī ʾan ḏahabta ‘it makes me happy that you went’.21
Contrary to this view of al-Mubarrad, al-Zajjājī notes that an imperfect
verb following ʾan may convey past time.22 This he does as part of a dis-
cussion of whether it is possible to say ʾurīdu ʾan ʾaf ʿala kaḏā wakaḏā ‘I
want to do so-and-so’, when the verb (ʾafʿala) denotes an action that has
already occurred. The answer given is that it is not possible, unless it is a
kind of a ḥikāya, i.e. either quoted direct speech or an imitation of a pre-
vious utterance, as, for example nurīdu ʾan namunna ‘we want to pardon’
(Qurʾān 28:5). According to the context, it is clear that the verb denotes an
action in the past. Therefore, the taqdīr structure of this verse is wakāna
min ḥukminā yawma‌ʾiḏin ʾan namunna ‘it was [part] of our judgment
on that day to pardon’ and the original verse should be understood as a
ḥikāya, the manṣūb verb namunna denoting an action that had already
taken place. Subsequently al-Zajjājī quotes another similar Qurʾānic verse
(Qurʾān 19:15), with the same explanation.

2.3.2. Evidence for exceptional jazm or rafʿ following ʾan al-xafīfa

Some grammarians mention that there are exceptional instances in which
the verb following ʾan al-xafīfa is not manṣūb, as expected, but rather
majzūm or marfūʿ. However, evidence for such constructions found in
poetry is rejected as invalid by some, who consider such cases as manifes-
tations of poetic license.

6–7; al-Ḥarīrī, Durra, 91, 3–4; al-Zamaxšarī, ʾUnmūḏaj, 112, 7–9; Ibn al-Anbārī, ʾAsrār, 129,
𐄐4–𐄐3; Ibn Xarūf, Šarḥ, 248, 3–4; al-Xwārazmī, Šarḥ al-mufaṣṣal IV, 65, 1–3; 126, 6–9; Ibn
al-Ḥājib, Šarḥ II, 231, 7–10; al-Astarābāḏī, Šarḥ al-kāfiya (1998) IV, 472, 3 last lines.
20 See Ibn al-Xabbāz, Tawjīh, 357, 𐄐4–𐄐3; 515, 7–9; al-Saxāwī, Šarḥ, 185, 7ff.
21 See al-Mubarrad, Muqtaḍab I, 48, 14–18; II, 6, 3–6; 30, 3–7; 361, 4–6; III, 5, 3–8. Cf.
Ibn Burhān al-ʿUkbarī, Šarḥ II, 341, 3–7; al-Zamaxšarī, Mufaṣṣal, 149, 1–6; Ibn al-Xaššāb,
Murtajal, 201, 9ff.
22 For this discussion, see al-Zajjājī, Majālis, 298–299 (al-majlis al𐄐136). Cf. al-Suyūṭī,
ʾAšbāh (1942) III, 33–34 (referred to by the editor of al-Zajjājī’s Majālis), where this discus-
sion is mentioned as having taken place in Mecca between Yāsīn al-Zayyāt, who posed the
question, and Abū Muḥammad Yaḥyā b. al-Mubārak al-Yazīdī, who answered him.
 ʾan 7

Ibn Mālik reports on the views of some early Kūfan grammarians on

this issue. In al-Jawāliqī’s writings he found a statement attributed to
Salma, which al-Farrāʾ transmitted from his master al-Kisāʾī and the latter
from al-Ruʾāsī, according to which the eloquent speakers of the Bedou-
ins ( fuṣaḥāʾ al-ʿarab) put the verb following ʾan wa‌ʾaxawātuhā in naṣb,
but others below them (i.e. inferior to them) put it in raf ʿ and others
further below—in jazm.23 Ibn Mālik criticizes this opinion, attributed to
the Kūfans (see §‎2.3.2.1 below), but the evidence he cites seems to be of
great value.24 In §§‎2.3.2.1–‎2.3.2.2 below I present cases of such exceptional
occurrences of jazm and rafʿ, respectively.

2.3.2.1. Evidence for an exceptional jazm following ʾan al-xafīfa and possible
explanations The grammarians cite three lines of poetry in which the
verb following ʾan is majzūm. In two cases there exist other versions of
the relevant verbs, in which there is no evidence for such an exceptional
use of jazm. As for the third case, some explain the majzūm verb there as
poetic license. These are the three verses:

a. ʾAbat Quḍāʿatu ʾan taʿrif lakum nasaban / wabnā Nizārin fa‌ʾantum

bayḍatu l-baladi ‘[the members of the tribe of ] Quḍāʿa refused to
acknowledge your genealogy, while the two sons of Nizār and you are
the best of the people’.25 Ibn Šuqayr cites this verse as an exceptional
example for jazm following ʾan.26 Other versions of this verse, however,
do not present this exceptional phenomenon.27

23 The Arabic word denoting the difference among the three groups is dūna. Rabin also
understands this word as denoting levels of hierarchy. See Rabin, West-Arabian, 187, 5–8
(part of §nn). For a detailed reference to Rabin’s words in this aspect, see §‎2.4.1.2 below.
24 See Ibn Mālik, Šarḥ al-tashīl II.2, 13, 16–14, 1. Cf. Abū Ḥayyān, Irtišāf IV, 1642, 𐄐4–𐄐2
and al-Murādī, Janā, 226, 3 last lines, where most of Ibn Mālik’s words appear without his
name being explicitly mentioned. See further Ibn ʿAqīl, Musāʿid III, 65, 11–13 and al-Suyūṭī,
Hamʿ IV, 91, 9ff., where al-Ruʾāsī is cited; Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn, Šarḥ II, 927, 6–8, where this view is
attributed to some of the Kūfans.
25 A verse in the basīṭ meter, by al-Rāʿī l-Numayrī. According to Lane, Lexicon I, 282c,
the expression bayḍat al-balad means ‘the egg which the ostrich abandons’ and can be
used as insult or praise. I believe that in this verse, the intention is the latter.
26 See Ibn Šuqayr, Muḥallā, 184, 3 last lines.
27 In the poet’s Dīwān the verb is tarḍā (see Ibn Šuqayr, Muḥallā, 184, note 2), a form
which represents both raf ʿ and naṣb (in this context, the latter is the regular mood and
thus more probable).
Ibn Jinnī has the version lā taʿrif lakum instead of ʾan taʿrif lakum (See Ibn Jinnī, Xaṣāʾiṣ
(1990) II, 343, 5–6). His version is also problematic, because after lā the rafʿ mood is
expected. Ibn Jinnī explains that in this case fahuwa ʾashalu listiṯqāli l-ḍammati ‘it (i.e.
this version) is easier [to pronounce compared to the regular version lā taʿrifu] because of
8 chapter one

b. ʾIḏā mā ġadawnā qāla wildānu ʾahlinā / taʿālaw ʾilā ʾan ya‌ʾtinā l-ṣaydu
naḥṭibi ‘when we arrive in the morning, the children of our people say:
come until the game comes to us and we will gather wood for fire’.28
Al-Fārisī attributes the version ʾilā ʾan ya‌ʾtinā to al-Farrāʾ and criticizes
it in strong terms as a xaṭa‌ʾ fāḥiš ‘a rude mistake’. Al-Fārisī argues that
the correct version is ʾilā ʾan ya‌ʾtiyanā (in naṣb).29
c. ʾAlā ṭāla kitmānī Buṯaynata ḥājatan / mina l-ḥājji mā tadrī Buṯaynatu
mā hiyā; ʾuḥāḏiru ʾan taʿlam bihā fataruddahā / fatatrukahā ṯiqlan
ʿalayya kamā hiyā ‘for a long time I have hidden a [certain] matter
from Buṯayna, [and] Buṯayna does not know what it is. I fear that she
knows it, rejects it and turns it into a burden upon me, as it is’.30 Ibn
Mālik says that the Kūfans explain the jazm of the verb taʿlam follow-
ing ʾan as a general phenomenon. He criticizes this view and says it
should be explained as poetic license.31

These three verses are not the only evidence that at least some Bedouins
put the verb following ʾan in jazm. Abū Ḥayyān reports evidence by Abū
ʿUbayda and al-Liḥyānī that this was the accepted usage in the dialect of
the Banū Ṣabāḥ.32

2.3.2.2. Evidence for an exceptional rafʿ following ʾan al-xafīfa and possible
explanations The instances in which the verb following ʾan takes
rafʿ instead of an expected naṣb are usually explained in two different
ways. The first is that ʾan is like mā, in having no syntactic effect, and thus

the heaviness of the ḍamma [in terms of pronunciation]’. (For the idea that pronouncing
a ḍamma is more difficult than pronouncing a sukūn, i.e. a non vocalized consonant, see
Sadan, Xiffa, 66, §2.)
28 A verse in the ṭawīl meter, by Imruʾ al-Qays. For the context of this verse and the
verses preceding and following it, see al-Suyūṭī, Šarḥ šawāhid (1966) I, 91–93.
29 See al-Fārisī, Baṣriyyāt I, 259 (masʾala 12). Al-Irbilī (see al-Irbilī, Jawāhir, 192, 8–10)
quotes this verse in a similar context, but attributes the use of jazm following ʾan to the dia-
lect of the Banū Ḥanīfa. For other grammarians and lexicographers who also use this verse
as an example, see al-Murādī, Janā, 226, 𐄐2–227, 2; Ibn Hišām, Muġnī (1979), 45, 10–12; Ibn
Qayyim al-Jawziyya, ʾIršād II, 353, 5; Ibn ʿAqīl, Musāʿid III, 65, 3 last lines; al-Fīrūzābādī,
Qāmūs (1913) II, 199, 12–14; Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn, Šarḥ II, 927, 5 last lines; al-Ušmūnī, Šarḥ II, 190,
2–4; al-Zabīdī, Tāj (1994) 36b, 10–12; al-Bustānī, Muḥīṭ I, 43b, 2–4.
30 A verse in the ṭawīl meter, by Jamīl Buṯayna.
31 See Ibn Mālik, Šarḥ al-tashīl II.2, 13, 16–14, 1. Cf. al-Murādī, Janā, 227, 3–5; Ibn Hišām,
Muġnī (1979), 45, 10–46, 2; al-Ušmūnī, Šarḥ II, 191, 1–4.
32 See Abū Ḥayyān, Irtišāf IV, 1642, 2 last lines. It seems that the source for this claim
is al-Ruʾāsī, whose name is previously mentioned (see ibid., 1642, 𐄐4). Cf. al-Murādī,
Janā, 226, 5–7; Ibn Hišām, Muġnī (1979), 45, 10ff.; Ibn ʿAqīl, Musāʿid III, 65, 3 last lines;
al-Ušmūnī, Šarḥ II, 190, 2ff.; al-Suyūṭī, Hamʿ IV, 91, 𐄐3–𐄐2.
 ʾan 9

is syntactically treated in the same way as the latter. The second is that
ʾan is ʾan al-muxaffafa, conceived as occupying the position of ʾanna, and
so has no syntactic effect on the following verb. Some grammarians use
only one of these explanations while others mention both. In any case,
ʾan followed by rafʿ is considered exceptional, and is associated only with
certain dialects or speakers.

a. The explanation of tašbīh ʾan bimā ‘comparing ʾan to mā [and thus

syntactically treating the former in the same way as the latter]’
Ṯaʿlab cites a famous line of poetry in which the verb following ʾan is unex-
pectedly marfūʿ, and says hāḏihi luġatun tušabbahu bimā ‘this (i.e. putting
the verb in rafʿ instead of the expected naṣb) is dialectal usage. It (i.e.
ʾan) is compared [by the speakers] to mā [which has no syntactic effect
on the following verb]’.33 The line of poetry he cites is the last of the fol-
lowing three: yā ṣāḥibayya fadat nafsī nufūsakumā / waḥayṯumā kuntumā
lāqaytumā rašadā; ʾan taḥmilā ḥājatan lī xaffa maḥmaluhā / wataṣnaʿā
niʿmatan ʿindī bihā wayadā; ʾan taqra‌ʾāni ʿalā ʾAsmāʾa wayḥakumā / minnī
l-salāma wa‌ʾan lā tuxbirā ʾaḥadā ‘my two friends, I wish that my soul will
redeem your two souls and that wherever you shall be, you will meet the
right way. [I ask you]34 to carry for me something which is easy to carry
and to do me by this a favor,35 [this thing being]36 that you give Asmāʾ my
greeting and that you inform no one’.37
Al-Sīrāfī provides the same explanation as Ṯaʿlab, wabaʿḍu l-ʿarabi
rubbamā rafaʿū mā baʿda ʾan tašbīhan bimā ‘some of the Bedouins some-
times put what follows ʾan (i.e. the imperfect verb) in raf ʿ, comparing [ʾan]
with mā’. As examples he quotes the above-mentioned line of poetry and
a Qurʾānic verse with a reading in which the verb following ʾan is in raf ʿ:
wal-wālidātu yurḍiʿna ʾawlādahunna ḥawlayni kāmilayni liman ʾarāda ʾan

33 See Ṯaʿlab, Majālis I, 322, 3 last lines. Cf. Ibn Jinnī, Xaṣāʾiṣ (1990) I, 391, 4–5.
34 This translation is based on al-Sīrāfī’s explanation wal-maʿnā fīhi ʾasʾalukumā ʾan
taḥmilā ‘and the meaning in it (i.e. in the verse) is I ask you to carry’. See al-Sīrāfī, Šarḥ
(Cairo) I, 80, 9. Cf. al-Xwārazmī, Šarḥ al-mufaṣṣal IV, 128, 𐄐4–𐄐3; Ibn Yaʿīš, Šarḥ II, 1194,
15–16; al-Baġdādī, Šarḥ II, 440, 𐄐4–𐄐3.
35 The word yad here is a synonym of niʿma or maʿrūf, meaning ‘favor’. See Lane, Lexi-
con VIII, 3963a.
36 This translation is based on al-Šarīf al-Jurjānī’s explanation ḥājatī ʾilaykumā ʾan
taqra‌ʾāni. See al-Šarīf al-Jurjānī, Šarḥ, 609, 1–2. Cf. al-ʿAynī, Maqāṣid IV, 381, 1–2; al-Suyūṭī,
Šarḥ šawāhid (1966) I, 100, 𐄐4.
37 The author of this verse, in the basīṭ meter, is unknown despite the fact that it is
often quoted by grammarians.
10 chapter one

yutimmu l-raḍāʿata ‘[divorced] mothers will nurse their children two full
years, if they wish to complete the [period of] nursing’ (Qurʾān 2:233).38

b. The explanation of ʾan al-muxaffafa

Ibn Jinnī attributes the explanation of tašbīh ʾan bimā (which Ṯaʿlab first
presents, introduced above) to the Kūfans, rejects it, and argues that the
correct explanation is that ʾan followed by a verb in raf ʿ is actually ʾan
al-muxaffafa. He adds that although this usage is exceptional, since the
separation expected and needed between this ʾan al-muxaffafa and the
following verb (for this separation, see §‎3.1.1 and §‎3.3.1) does not exist, this
explanation is far more reasonable than the Kūfans’, which suffers from
buʿd ‘improbability’. The improbability, he explains, lies in the fact that
ʾan and mā impose different times on the actions indicated by the verbs
following each of them: whereas the imperfect verb following ʾan cannot
convey an action in the present but only one in the future, the imperfect
verb following mā does convey an action in the present (for example, mā
taqūmu ḥasanun means qiyāmuka llaḏī ʾanta ʿalayhi ḥasanun ‘your [situa-
tion of] standing, in which you [currently] are, is good’). It is thus wrong
to compare ʾan to mā and to argue that the former behaves like the latter
syntactically, since each occurs in contexts in which the other does not
occur.39
It is interesting to note that the explanation of tašbīh ʾan bimā in Ibn
al-Anbārī’s ʾInṣāf is said to derive from the Baṣrans,40 whereas Ibn Jinnī
explicitly attributes it to the Kūfans.

c. Grammarians who use both explanations

According to al-Astarābāḏī and al-Suyūṭī, instances in which ʾan
al-maṣdariyya does not induce the following verb to take naṣb can be
explained by one of the two above-mentioned explanations. The two
grammarians do not express a preference for one over the other.41

38 See al-Sīrāfī, Šarḥ (Cairo) I, 80, 3–9. Cf. al-Zamaxšarī, Mufaṣṣal, 147, 14–17; Ibn Yaʿīš,
Šarḥ II, 1194, 10–20; Ibn al-Ḥājib, Šarḥ II, 233, 𐄐4–234, 3.
39 See Ibn Jinnī, Sirr II, 549, 1–13. Cf. Ibn Sīda, Muḥkam X, 476, 𐄐5–477, 7; Ibn Yaʿīš, Šarḥ
II, 918, 18–21; Ibn ʿUṣfūr, Ḍarāʾir, 163, 5–165, 5.
40 See Ibn al-Anbārī, ʾInṣāf, 232, 8–18. Later grammarians such as Ibn Mālik and Abū
Ḥayyān also attribute the explanation of tašbīh ʾan bimā to the Baṣrans, and the explana-
tion of ʾan al-muxaffafa to the Kūfans. See Ibn Mālik, Šarḥ al-tashīl I.2, 44, 12–45, 3; II.2,
10, 𐄐3–11, 13; Abū Ḥayyān, Irtišāf IV, 1642, 1–6; al-Murādī, Janā, 220, 5–11; Ibn Hišām, Muġnī
(1979), 46, 3–7; Ibn Hišām, Taxlīṣ, 389, 1–7; al-Ušmūnī, Šarḥ II, 193, 4–9; al-Azharī, Taṣrīḥ
II, 362, 17–363, 7.
41 See al-Astarābāḏī, Šarḥ al-kāfiya (1998) IV, 32, 4 last lines; al-Suyūṭī, Hamʿ IV, 91,
6–8.
 ʾan 11

d. Instances of defective verbs put in rafʿ instead of the expected naṣb

as poetic license
Ibn Jinnī reports that in poetry it often happens that a wāw or yāʾ ending
a word lose the expected fatḥa that indicates naṣb (mood or case), and
that this can be explained as poetic license. He provides three examples
of such verses, one of which is famā sawwadatnī ʿĀmirun ʿan warāṯatin /
ʾabā llāhu ʾan ʾasmū biʾummin walā ʾabi ‘[the tribe of] ʿĀmir did not make
me a head [of a tribe] due to heredity, God refused that I be noble due to
a mother or a father’.42 In this verse the expected form of the verb follow-
ing ʾan is ʾasmuwa (in naṣb) and not ʾasmū (in raf ʿ).43 Ibn Jinnī says that
this happens less frequently with wāw than with yāʾ.44

2.4. Secondary sources

2.4.1. Evidence for an exceptional jazm or rafʿ following ʾan al-xafīfa and
possible explanations
Modern research notes that in poetry and the Qurʾān there are some
exceptional examples of a verb in jazm or raf ʿ following ʾan, instead of
the expected naṣb.45 Two main explanations have been given for this:
(1) a historical development in the usage of ʾan; (2) dialectal variety.

2.4.1.1. Conceiving the exceptional jazm and rafʿ as related to the historical
development of the usage of ʾan
a. Fleischer’s analysis
Fleischer dedicates a long discussion to the usage of ʾan in comparison
with ʾanna in Old Arabic, and the mood of the verb following ʾan.46 He

42 A verse in the ṭawīl meter, by ʿĀmir b. al-Ṭufayl. For the context of this verse and
some explanations of the words, see al-Suyūṭī, Šarḥ šawāhid (1966) II, 953–954; al-ʿAynī,
Maqāṣid IV, 242–247.
43 See Ibn Jinnī, Xaṣāʾiṣ (1990) II, 344, 1–7; 294, 1–3. Cf. Ibn Jinnī, Muḥtasab I, 125, 𐄐3–126,
2. For other grammarians who express a similar opinion, see al-Zamaxšarī, Mufaṣṣal, 184,
5–6; Ibn al-Xabbāz, Tawjīh, 353, 1–5; al-Astarābāḏī, Šarḥ al-kāfiya (1998) IV, 20, 1–2; Abū
Ḥayyān, Irtišāf V, 2406, 1–2; al-Ušmūnī, Šarḥ I, 80, 𐄐3–81, 3.
44 See Ibn Jinnī, Munṣif II, 115, 6–9.
45 See, for example, Freytag, Lexicon I, 61a, 𐄐11–𐄐5; Wright, Grammar II, 27, §15, note
b.; Howell, Grammar II, 592–594, §572; Lane, Lexicon I, 104b–104c; Nöldeke, Grammatik,
70, 𐄐2–71, 4 (beginning of §58).
46 For the whole discussion, see Fleischer, Schriften I.2, 525–532. The discussion’s
starting point is Fleischer’s criticism of de Sacy’s view on structures in which ʾan and a
perfect verb follow a verb conveying an order or a decision, as in the example ʾamara
ʾan faʿala. According to de Sacy (de Sacy, Grammaire II, 21, note 2), this usage is abusive
(‘improper’), an imitation of a corresponding structure in Persian, and requires a taqdīr
structure ʾamara biʾan yaf ʿala fafaʿala ‘he ordered that [something] be done, and it was
done’. Fleischer states (Fleischer, Schriften I.2, 525–526; II.1, 356) that de Sacy is mistaken,
12 chapter one

argues that the dialectal usage of ʾan with a marfūʿ verb is to be explained
by the historical development in the usage of ʾan and ʾanna.47 Despite
the basic rule of the grammarians that ʾan follows verbs conveying hope,
order, etc., whereas ʾanna is used after verbs conveying solid knowl-
edge (see §‎3.3.2 and especially notes 99–100 there), Fleischer cites many
examples in which verbs of desire, hope, etc., such as tamannā ‘to hope’,
ʾamara ‘to order’ and ʾarāda ‘to want’ are followed by ʾanna instead of
the expected ʾan.48 According to these examples and others in which ʾan
and ʾanna occur in the exact same contexts, it is inferred that the syntac-
tic status of ʾan followed by a verb in naṣb became identified with that
of ʾanna followed by a noun in naṣb.49 The next phase was the usage of
ʾan in the sense of ʾanna with a following verb in raf ʿ and in contexts in
which the latter was used (this ʾan was referred to by the grammarians
as ʾan al-muxaffafa). Afterwards, the usage of ʾan with a following marfūʿ
verb expanded even more to contexts in which ʾan was formerly used
with a verb in naṣb, such as Qurʾān 2:233 with the reading of the verb
following ʾan with raf (. . . liman ʾarāda ʾan yutimmu l-raḍāʿata) and the
line of poetry containing the utterance ʾan taqra‌ʾāni (both examples are
discussed in detail in §‎2.3.2.2).50

b. Fischer’s analysis
In his concise and clear article dedicated to the usages of ʾan and ʾanna
(Fischer, ʾAn), Fischer does not refer to Fleischer’s theory introduced

that the structure ʾamara ʾan faʿala is common in Arabic and represents conceiving the
object of the main verb (in the above example: the verb ʾamara) as a true fact and not as
a desired idea. In order to convey the latter, the appropriate structure is ʾamara ʾan yafʿala.
Cf. Wright, Grammar II, 25, 𐄐7–𐄐2 and Reckendorf, Verhältnisse, 739, 6–17 (part of §242),
who both refer to Fleischer’s view.
47 Fleischer refers to this theory in another place in his book: Fleischer, Schriften I.2,
512, 𐄐3ff.
48 Cf. Gaudefroy-Demombynes-Blachère, Grammaire, 433, §425.c and 438–440, §§434–
435, where the authors indicate the basic rule introduced above for the distinction in usage
between ʾan and ʾanna, but add that it seems that this distinction was not absolute.
49 For the most striking example, see Fleischer, Schriften I.2, 527, 𐄐2ff. Cf. Wright, Gram-
mar II, 25, 𐄐2ff.; Reckendorf, Verhältnisse, 739, 18–740, 2, where the author argues, contra
Fleischer, that the usage of ʾanna followed by a noun in naṣb in contexts in which ʾan was
expected is not common.
50 Fleischer also describes (Fleischer, Schriften I.2, 529, 𐄐1ff.) the next phase, which
does not concern ʾan but ʾanna: after ʾan had begun to be used both with a marfūʿ as well
with a manṣūb verb, the language went one step further and replaced the verbal predi-
cate of the sentence introduced by ʾanna, that expressed a movement, with a nominal
predicate expressing non-movement, as in the following sentence by al-Mutanabbī: ištahat
ʾannahā qabrun ‘she wished she [would be] a grave’.
 ʾan 13

above, but he seems to be guided by the same one as Fleischer, namely

that when examining the usages of ʾan one has to take into account the
historical developments which the syntactic roles of ʾan and ʾanna under-
went. Fischer begins by arguing that ʾin and ʾinna, exactly like lākin and
lākinna, are actually variants of the same morpheme, whose allomorphs
were only secondarily given different functions.51 With this in mind, he
adds, it is possible to examine the parallel process of the historical devel-
opment which occurred in Arabic in the aspect of ʾan and ʾanna. The goal
of his article is thus to show the nature of this historical development. His
main ideas and theories are as follows. According to example sentences in
Sībawayhi’s Kitāb in which the mood of the verb following ʾan can be jazm,
naṣb or rafʿ,52 and also in light of pre-classical texts, Fischer concludes
that usages of ʾan in pre-classical Arabic were not constrained by formal
limitations.53 Fischer then cites numerous examples from the Qurʾān in
order to demonstrate the variety of contexts in which ʾan is used: followed
by an imperfect verb in naṣb or rafʿ, an imperative verb, a perfect verb or a
particle.54 From these examples Fischer infers that in pre-classical Arabic
ʾan was not a particle which required the naṣb mood,55 but rather that this
latter gave the sentence its final meaning. Whereas ʾan has no syntactic
affect on the structure of the following sentence, ʾanna is always attached
to an explicit noun or an attached pronoun and requires that they be put
in naṣb. In addition, ʾanna points to this noun (or attached pronoun) and
emphasizes it, just as ʾinna does. Therefore, at the functional level the
opposition between ʾanna and ʾan corresponds to the opposition between
emphasis and non-emphasis, respectively. According to Fischer, emphasis
by ʾanna was connected to conceiving the idea expressed in the following
sentence as a real fact, and therefore most grammarians argue that herein
lies the difference between the usage of ʾan and that of ʾanna (see §‎3.3.2
and especially notes 99–100 there). Fischer argues that since the second
half of the eighth century the naṣb mood no longer had the independent

51 See Fischer, ʾAn, 24, second paragraph. Cf. Reckendorf, Verhältnisse, 353–366 (§128
is devoted to ʾinna and ʾanna and §129 deals with lākinna) and especially the beginning
of §128.
52 These are sentences beginning with katabtu ʾilayhi ʾan ‘I wrote to him [saying] that’
(see Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 430, 5–8), which are thoroughly discussed in §‎3.1.2.5.
53 For Fischer’s approach to pre-classical Arabic, see Fischer, Perioden.
54 For these examples, see Fischer, ʾAn, 27 (in note 12 there Fischer clarifies that only
examples from the Qurʾān have been taken into account, because examples from poetry
might have been affected by the meter, but even these reflect the same linguistic reality).
55 Reckendorf seems to hold this opinion, too. See Reckendorf, Verhältnisse, 731, 6–9
(end of §237).
14 chapter one

function of shaping the final meaning of the sentence (which it used to

have in pre-classical Arabic), but became formally dependent on subordi-
nating particles, including ʾan. The original opposition between ʾanna and
ʾan, emphasis and non-emphasis, respectively, was replaced with an oppo-
sition between the perception of an action as realized or hypothetical,
non-realized. Another way of looking at this change, according to Fischer,
is that the decision whether to use ʾanna or ʾan changed from depending
on the following sentence to depending on the preceding, main sentence.
Whereas in pre-classical Arabic the decision to use ʾanna or ʾan depended
on the speaker’s desire to emphasize or not to emphasize the following
clause, in Classical Arabic it became dependent on the semantic structure
of the main sentence, i.e. on whether the speaker conceived it as express-
ing a real fact or an unrealized action, respectively.

2.4.1.2. Exceptional jazm and rafʿ as a dialectal phenomenon

a. Rabin’s analysis
Rabin first discusses instances of “free naṣb”, in which an expected ʾan
does not occur in the sentence and the relevant verb which should have
followed it takes rafʿ, and characterizes them as typical to the dialect
of Ḥijāz (see chapter 10, §2.4.1). He then moves to some unexpected
instances in which a marfūʿ verb follows ʾan,56 exemplified by Qurʾān
2:233 mentioned above, and a line of poetry quoted by al-Farrāʾ and later
grammarians (the second of the following two): ʾiḏā mittu57 fadfinnī ʾilā
janbi karmatin / turawwī ʿiẓāmī baʿda mawtī ʿurūquhā; walā tadfinannī fī
l-falāti fa‌ʾinnanī / ʾaxāfu ʾiḏā mā mittu57 ʾan lā ʾaḏūquhā ‘when I die, bury
me next to a grape vine, the roots of which will saturate my bones after
my death; do not bury me in the desert, as I am afraid that when I die I
will not taste it (i.e. the wine produced from the grape vine)’.58 Accord-
ing to Rabin, this construction was not typical to the dialect of Ḥijāz, but
rather used by some people there, who habitually omitted ʾan and put
the verb which would have followed it in raf ʿ; since they were unfamiliar
with the usage of ʾan, they sometimes followed it with a marfūʿ verb. With
respect to the above-mentioned Qurʾānic verse, Rabin assumes that there
were two readings: ʾarāda yutimmu and ʾarāda ʾan yutimma. Rabin quotes

56 See Rabin, West-Arabian, 186–187, §nn.

57 The more common form of the verb is muttu (see Lane, Lexicon VII, 2741a, 6ff.), but
the two verses are cited with the version mittu.
58 A verse in the ṭawīl meter, by Abū Miḥjan al-Ṯaqafī. For the context of this verse, see
al-Suyūṭī, Šarḥ šawāhid (1966) I, 101–103.
 ʾan 15

statements attributed to al-Ruʾāsī and al-Liḥyānī on putting the verb fol-

lowing ʾan in jazm (these are discussed in §‎2.3.2 and §‎2.3.2.1) and also
briefly refers to evidence that the verb following lan may be put in jazm
(see chapter 2, §3.4).59 Rabin assumes that putting the verb following ʾan
in jazm (as in verses b–c discussed in §‎2.3.2.1), was more common in the
center and eastern parts of Arabia. He argues that these dialects may have
had no manṣūb forms at all, and that therefore the jazm mood was used
in subordinate clauses, as in Ethiopic.

b. Fleisch’s analysis
Fleisch, like Rabin, also explains instances of verbs in an unexpected mood
following ʾan as a dialectal issue.60 He repeats the view of the grammar-
ians on the semantic contexts in which ʾan and ʾanna are used (uncertain
and certain actions, respectively), and notes that this distinction is sub-
ject to many exceptions (cf. Fleischer’s opinion discussed in §‎2.4.1.1 and
note 48 there). He then mentions the theory of ʾan al-muxaffafa, accord-
ing to which a verb in rafʿ may follow ʾan as long as there is a separation
between them (see §‎3 and especially §‎3.1.1 and §‎3.3.1). However, some
grammarians, Ibn Mālik for example, state that a separation is not com-
pulsory but only preferable (see §‎3.3.1.2), and indeed, there are instances
of ʾan followed directly by a marfūʿ verb, with no separation between the
two. In addition, Fleisch mentions instances of “free naṣb”, which Rabin
also mentions in this context (see the beginning of the previous section).
All these instances lead Fleisch to the conclusion that the form yaf ʿala of
the imperfect verb was an innovation in Western Semitic. In his opinion,
there was a time in which (some) speakers of Arabic used the form yaf ʿalu
in indicative as well as in subjunctive contexts, and these speakers contin-
ued using this one form only. At that time, Fleisch hypothesizes, the form
yafʿala of the imperfect verb began to spread and eventually came to be
considered the only possible form in contexts of the subjunctive, but there
were still remains of the previous linguistic system of the speakers who
used the form yafʿalu exclusively. These remains are the above-mentioned
instances, in which one finds ʾan yafʿalu (instead of yaf ʿala). Fleisch thus
argues that there is no basis for the theory of ʾan al-muxaffafa and con-
siders the instances of “free naṣb” in which ʾan is omitted and the verb is

59 Cf. Lipiński, Grammar, 358, §39.17, where the author briefly associates ʾan with lan in
this aspect, but unlike Rabin, does not base himself on any example.
60 For the whole discussion, see Fleisch, Arabe, 198–200.
16 chapter one

marfūʿ as further evidence for his theory of speakers who used the form
yafʿalu exclusively.
As Fleisch mentions in his book,61 the above-mentioned theory and his
conclusion with respect to the dialectal differences concerning the usage
of ʾan, are the result of an extensive study on the form yaf ʿala, focusing
on the usage of ʾan followed by an imperfect verb.62 Fleisch examined
the form yafʿala (or, in his formulation, yaqtula) in the Semitic languages,
the evidence in Arabic for a subjunctive form yaf ʿalu (or, in his formu-
lation, yaqtulu), the views of Arab grammarians on these examples, and
their theories in this aspect. At the end of the article he suggests the con-
clusion detailed above. Fleisch cites examples from poetry in which the
form yafʿalu occurs instead of the expected yaf ʿala, and Qurʾān 2:233 men-
tioned above (some of the poetry was also cited above). As he correctly
says, the grammarians do not reject these examples but rather explain
them with the theory of ʾan al-muxaffafa and the contexts in which it
appears (these contexts stand in contradiction to those of ʾan causing the
following verb to take naṣb; for this issue see §‎3). However, Fleisch notes,
this theory does not explain all the above-mentioned examples; he argues
instead that the form yafʿalu was used in contexts of the subjunctive too,
at least until the second century AH, and that this usage was dialectal.
The examples in which the form yafʿalu occurs instead of the expected
yafʿala form should therefore be understood as remains of the old system,
in which only the form yafʿalu existed, and which was replaced by the
newer system comprising the two forms yafʿalu: yaf ʿala for indicative and
subjunctive contexts, respectively.

3. The Syntactic and Semantic Contexts of ʾan al-muxaffafa

Compared to ʾan al-maṣdariyya

Grammarians in their discussions of the different kinds of ʾan pay consid-

erable attention to the syntactic and semantic contexts of ʾan followed by
an imperfect verb, and to the question of when ʾan is to be conceived as
ʾan al-muxaffafa, i.e. ʾan meaning ʾannahu that does not affect the follow-
ing imperfect verb, and when as ʾan al-maṣdariyya, i.e. ʾan which causes
the following imperfect verb to take naṣb. According to Sībawayhi and
most later grammarians, the syntactic context required for conceiving ʾan

61 See Fleisch, Arabe, 200, 14–16.

62 For this study, see Fleisch, Yaqtula.
 ʾan 17

as ʾan al-muxaffafa is that it be separated from the following imperfect

verb by a certain particle. As for the semantic context of ʾan al-muxaf-
fafa compared to ʾan al-maṣdariyya, most grammarians argue that ʾan al-
muxaffafa is used after verbs conveying certain knowledge, whereas ʾan
al-maṣdariyya is used after verbs conveying lack of certain knowledge,
fear or desire.

3.1. Sībawayhi
In chapter 273 Sībawayhi introduces the four kinds of ʾan (see §‎1.1), and
defines the third kind as bimanzilati ʾannahu muxaffafatan maḥḏūfatan
‘equivalent to ʾannahu, [occurring] with no šadda and [with the attached
pronoun -hu] omitted’.63 By this he means that ʾan of this kind conveys the
same meaning as ʾannahu, but unlike the latter, it is muxaffafatan ‘with
no šadda’64 and maḥḏūfatan ‘with omission’ of the attached pronoun -hu
of ʾannahu.65 From this definition it is clear why later grammarians refer
to this kind of ʾan as ʾan al-muxaffafa. Sībawayhi explains the examples
of this kind of ʾan, introduced in chapters 275–276, as being equivalent
to ʾannahu. These examples also demonstrate the syntactic and semantic
contexts in which this kind of ʾan is used, in contrast to the cases in which
ʾan induces the following verb to take naṣb. It is important to notice that
the conception of ʾan as a shortened form of ʾannahu is the ground for the
claim that it has no syntactic influence on the following verb: since this
kind of ʾan has the meaning of ʾannahu, which has no syntactic effect on
the following verb, it also has no such effect.

3.1.1. The syntactic contexts of ʾan al-muxaffafa compared to

ʾan al-maṣdariyya
Sībawayhi’s view is that ʾan in the sense of ʾannahu cannot be used in
all syntactic contexts. At the end of chapter 275 he argues that such ʾan
can occur before a marfūʿ verb only when the two are separated by one
of the following particles: lā, sawfa, sa- or qad. This requirement he con-
siders proof that each of these four particles is a kind of a ʿiwaḍ ‘com-
pensation’ for what has been omitted from ʾannahu (which occurs in

63 See Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 424, 6–7 = Sībawayhi, Kitāb (Būlāq) I, 475, 4–5. The passage
quoted above is the shorter version, found in the Būlāq edition. This seems to be the
correct version, a view also held by Jahn. See Jahn, Translation II.2, 124, note 2 of chapter
273.
64 For this meaning, see note 2 above.
65 Cf. Jahn, Translation II.1, 221, 𐄐15–𐄐13.
18 chapter one

the taqdīr structure), thus creating ʾan (which occurs in the pronounced
literal utterance).66 As for ʾan in the sense of ʾannahu used to express a
duʿāʾ, which is not separated from the following verb, see §‎3.1.2.4.

3.1.2. The semantic contexts of ʾan al-muxaffafa compared to

ʾan al-maṣdariyya
3.1.2.1. The usage of ʾan following verbs denoting certain knowledge
According to Sībawayhi, there are several different usages of ʾan following
verbs denoting certain knowledge. If ʾan precedes an imperfect verb in
such a context, it will usually induce rafʿ, and be explained as having the
sense of ʾannahu (see a. below). On the other hand, if the verb denoting
certain knowledge is negated, the verb following ʾan will be manṣūb (see
b. below). In two very different structures, namely when ʾan is followed
by a nominal sentence or a conditional one (see c. and d. below, respec-
tively), it is also conceived as occurring in the sense of ʾannahu.

a. ʾAn al-muxaffafa followed by rafʿ

Here are the five examples which Sībawayhi provides at the beginning of
chapter 276 for ʾan occurring in the sense of ʾannahu:67

1. Qad ʿalimtu ʾan lā yaqūlu ḏāka ‘I knew that he would not say that’. The
taqdīr structure in the speaker’s mind, according to Sībawayhi, is [qad
ʿalimtu] ʾannahu lā yaqūlu [ḏāka].
2. Qad tayaqqantu ʾan lā tafʿalu ḏāka ‘I knew for sure that you would not
do that’. The taqdīr structure here is similar to the one in the previous
sentence: [qad tayaqqantu] ʾannaka lā taf ʿalu [ḏāka].
3. The Qurʾānic verse ʾafalā yarawna ʾallā yarjiʿu ʾilayhim qawlan ‘do they
not know that he will not respond to them at all?’ (Qurʾān 20:89).
4. The Qurʾānic verse liʾallā yaʿlama ʾahlu l-kitābi ʾallā yaqdirūna ʿalā
šayʾin min faḍli llāhi ‘so the people of the book know that they do not
have a right of possession over the grace of God’ (Qurʾān 57:29).
5. The Qurʾānic verse ʿalima ʾan sayakūnu minkum marḍā ‘he knew that
there would be sick people among you’ (Qurʾān 73:20).

66 See Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 429, 18–21 (end of chapter 275); 430, 21–431, 2 (middle of chap-
ter 276). Cf. al-Jurjānī, Muqtaṣid I, 484, 5–11, where the author explains this issue, based on
ṣāḥib al-Kitāb ‘the author (literally: owner) of the Kitāb’, i.e. Sībawayhi.
67 These five examples are discussed in Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 430, 1–5.
 ʾan 19

In these five examples the main verb in the sentence followed by ʾan
denotes certain knowledge: ʿalima, tayaqqana and ra‌ʾā.68 Sībawayhi
explains that ʾan does not induce the following verb to take naṣb in these
examples because their context is mawḍiʿ yaqīn wa‌ʾījāb ‘a [syntactic] place
of certain knowledge and affirmation’. It can be thus inferred that ʾan
which induces the following verb to take naṣb occurs after verbs which do
not denote ‘certain knowledge and affirmation’, whereas ʾan in the sense
of ʾannahu does occur after verbs that possess such denotations.
To these five examples one can add three more with verbs denoting
certain knowledge, about which Sībawayhi argues that they are only theo-
retical and do not exist in the language. The first is discussed at the end of
chapter 275: *ʿaraftu ʾan taqūlu ḏāka ‘I knew that you would say that’, and
the other two are mentioned in chapter 276, after a discussion of verbs
denoting doubt, and those denoting fear and desire (§‎3.1.2.2 and §‎3.1.2.3,
respectively): *qad ʿalimtu ʾan tafʿalu ḏāka ‘I knew that you would do that’
and *qad ʿalimtu ʾan faʿala ḏāka ‘I knew that he had done that’.69 The
reason that these examples are only theoretical and impermissible in the
language is that the verb directly follows ʾan, with no separation by any of
the four particles which Sībawayhi mentions (see §‎3.1.1).

b. ʾAn followed by naṣb after verbs denoting certain knowledge in the

context of double negation (using both a negative particle and ʾillā)
Towards the end of chapter 276 Sībawayhi discusses examples in which
a main verb denoting certain knowledge is negated twice, by a negative
particle and by ʾillā. The examples are mā ʿalimtu ʾillā ʾan taqūma ‘I did not
know other than that you would stand’ and mā ʾaʿlamu ʾillā ʾan ta‌ʾtiyahu
‘I do not know other than that you will come to him’.70 Sībawayhi states
that ʾan followed by a manṣūb verb is possible after a verb denoting cer-
tain knowledge when the speaker does not say that he knows that a cer-
tain action will undoubtedly take place in reality, but rather expresses an
ʾišāra ‘hint or indication’,71 as in the example ʾarā mina l-ra‌ʾyi ʾan taqūma

68 The verb ra‌ʾā may denote certain knowledge or doubt. The commonly held opin-
ion on Qurʾān 20:89 cited above is that ra‌ʾā there denotes certain knowledge; Sībawayhi
explicitly says this with respect to all five examples cited above, including this verse. Later
in chapter 275 (Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 430, 8–9), he includes ra‌ʾā in the category of verbs
denoting doubt; for the usage of ʾan following these verbs, see §‎3.1.2.2.
69 For references, see note 66 above.
70 See Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 431, 6–10. Cf. Reckendorf, Verhältnisse, 740, 𐄐1–741, 3 (§242,
end of note 4), where the author refers to the first example and explains it.
71 Al-Sīrāfī explains Sībawayhi’s usage of the term ʾišāra as mašwara ‘advice’. See Jahn,
Translation II.2, 129, note 11 of chapter 276.
20 chapter one

‘I think, from [the verb with the meaning of the verbal noun] ra‌ʾy ‘holding
an opinion’, that you will stand’. In this example, too, the speaker does
not state that an action of standing has occurred or will occur in real-
ity. Sībawayhi concludes that had the speaker meant otherwise, he would
have said mā ʿalimtu ʾillā ʾan sayaqūmūna ‘I did not know other than that
they will stand’. In other words, he believes that using a marfūʿ verb after
ʾan is possible when ʾan and the verb are separated (in this sentence, by
the particle sa-) and when the utterance mā ʿalimtu ʾillā expresses the
speaker’s certain knowledge of an action which has occurred or will occur
in reality.

c. ʾAn al-muxaffafa before nominal sentences

At the end of chapter 276 Sībawayhi discusses sentences in which ʾan is
followed by a nominal sentence, as in ʿalimtu ʾan ʿAmrun ḏāhibun ‘I knew
that ʿAmr was going away’.72 Sībawayhi explains that the same sentence
with the same meaning could be formed with ʾanna, i.e. ʿalimtu ʾanna
ʿAmran ḏāhibun. However, when a verb in raf ʿ directly follows ʾan the
sentence cannot be formed with ʾanna. This is the reason for the separa-
tion between ʾan and the following marfūʿ verb (see §‎3.1.1): the speaker
did not want both to shorten ʾannahu (to ʾan) and to have a marfūʿ verb
directly after it (such a verb being impermissible following ʾanna, from
which this ʾan was created).73
At the end of chapter 247, which is devoted to nouns introducing a con-
ditional clause such as man ‘whoever’, Sībawayhi compares two structures
in which ʾan occurs in the sense of ʾannahu, after a verb denoting certain
knowledge and before a nominal sentence.74 Sībawayhi’s examples for the
first structure are ʿalimtu ʾan lā yaqūlu ḏāka ‘I knew that he would not
say that’, in which the taqdīr structure contains ʾannahu instead of ʾan,
and Qurʾān 20:89 cited above, consisting of the utterance ʾallā yarjiʿu. As
examples for the second structure, he quotes two lines of poetry and the
sentence qad ʿalimtu ʾan ʿAbdu llāhi munṭaliqun ‘I knew that ʿAbdallāh
was going away’. Sībawayhi argues that the structure with a nominal sen-
tence following ʾan is not as (grammatically) good (qawiyy) in speech as
the structure with a marfūʿ verb following ʾan: in the latter there is a com-
pensation for shortening ʾannahu to ʾan (in the form of an element that

72 For the whole discussion, see Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 431, 10–14.

73 It seems that al-Mubarrad’s explanation is identical to Sībawayhi’s. See al-Mubarrad,
Muqtaḍab III, 10, 1–3. Cf. Ibn al-Sarrāj, ʾUṣūl (1996) I, 239, 6–8; II, 796, 7–9.
74 For the whole discussion, see Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 390, 18ff.
 ʾan 21

separates between ʾan and the following marfūʿ verb), while in the former
no such compensation is found.75

d. ʾAn al-muxaffafa before conditional clauses

Sībawayhi discusses the structure in which ʾan precedes a conditional
clause in chapter 247.76 His example is ʿalimtu ʾan man ya‌ʾtinī ʾātihi ‘I knew
that whoever comes to me, I will come to him’. Sībawayhi contends that
the speaker has in mind the concealed attached pronoun -hu, so that the
taqdīr structure of this sentence is ʿalimtu ʾannahu man ya‌ʾtinī ʾātihi. He
concludes that there is no other way to analyze this sentence syntactically.

3.1.2.2. The usage of ʾan following verbs denoting doubt

Sībawayhi emphasizes that ʾan after verbs denoting doubt, such as
ẓanantu, ḥasibtu, xiltu and ra‌ʾaytu,77 can either cause the following verb
to be manṣūb or have the meaning of ʾannahu, the following verb being
marfūʿ.78 Sībawayhi first demonstrates the second possibility: ḥasibtu ʾallā
yaqūlu ḏāka ‘I thought that he would not say that’ and ʾurā ʾan sayaf ʿalu
ḏāka ‘I think that he would do that’. His third example is a verse with
the reading of the relevant verb with rafʿ: waḥasibū ʾan lā takūnu fitnatun
‘and they thought that there would not be a punishment’79 (Qurʾān 5:71).80
Sībawayhi states that the rafʿ mood in these examples is due to the fact
that the speaker is certain that the action which the verb following ʾan
denotes will take place. In other words, a verb denoting doubt and pre-
ceding ʾan may be perceived by the speaker as possessing a meaning close
to that of a verb denoting certain knowledge (after which a marfūʿ verb
appears). After discussing this possibility of raf ʿ, Sībawayhi goes on to the
possibility of putting the verb in naṣb, under the same circumstances. In
this possibility, the verbs denoting doubt are posited as the verbs whose
basic meaning is fear, xašītu and xiftu ‘I was afraid’, after which ʾan is
followed by a manṣūb verb (see §‎3.1.2.3). Three examples of this type are
the following: the sentence ẓanantu ʾallā tafʿala ḏāka ‘I thought that you
would not do that’; the verse taẓunnu ʾan yufʿala bihā fāqiratun ‘they fear

75 See Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 391, 4–7. Cf. al-Fārisī, Taʿlīqa II, 182, 1–8, where the author
interprets Sībawayhi’s view on this issue.
76 For references, see note 74 above.
77 For the verb ra‌ʾā, see note 68 above.
78 For the whole discussion, see Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 430, 8–17.
79 The word fitna has several meanings; for some of them, see Lane, Lexicon VI,
2335c–2336a.
80 It should be noticed that in all these examples there is a separation between ʾan and
the marfūʿ verb, according to Sībawayhi’s principle as explained in §‎3.1.1.
22 chapter one

(literally: think) that a big disaster will occur to them’ (Qurʾān 75:25); the
verse ʾin ẓannā ʾan yuqīmā ḥudūda llāhi ‘if they think that they keep the
rules of God’ (Qurʾān 2:230). Sībawayhi adds that the addition of the nega-
tive particle lā following ʾan does not change the utterance. He does not
elucidate this statement, but it seems probable that his intention is that
the mood of the verb following ʾan does not change due to this addition.

3.1.2.3. ʾAn following verbs denoting fear and their similarity to those denot-
ing desire After Sībawayhi’s discussion of the verbs denoting doubt,
he discusses those denoting fear, such as xašītu.81 He says that what hin-
ders these verbs from being like verbs denoting doubt on the one hand
and certain knowledge on the other, after which the raf ʿ can be found
and is found, respectively, is that for the speaker the utterance which ʾan
introduces does not indicate an action that has taken place in reality, but
rather one about which it is not known whether it has or has not taken
place. This aspect is common to both verbs denoting fear and those denot-
ing desire, such as ʾarjū ‘I want’ and ʾaṭmaʿu ‘I wish’. Verbs denoting fear
and desire according to Sībawayhi do not inform of an occurrence of a
certain action in reality, but rather of a fear and a desire, respectively, that
this action will take place. It is thus improper to say ʾarjū ʾannaka taf ʿalu
‘I want that you do [something]’ and ʾaṭmaʿu ʾannaka fāʿilun ‘I wish that
you do [something]’, since the particle ʾanna introduces a clause implying
an occurrence in reality. Nevertheless, Sībawayhi ends his discussion say-
ing that an example such as ʾaxšā ʾan lā taf ʿalu ‘I fear that you shall not
so [something]’ is possible, if the speaker wishes to inform of an action
which he believes will occur in reality. In other words, if the speaker
intends that the clause introduced by ʾan indicate an action conceived as
taking place in reality, the verb following ʾan may be marfūʿ, even if the
main verb in the sentence denotes fear. Sībawayhi remarks, however, that
this structure is not common in speech.
From this discussion it is clearly inferred that Sībawayhi’s distinction
between using ʾan with a marfūʿ and a manṣūb verb, or in other words
between the rafʿ and naṣb moods, respectively, corresponds to the way the
speaker conceives the action that this verb conveys: whether he believes
that it did (or will) occur in reality or he is uncertain about this.

81 For the whole discussion, see Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 430, 17–21.

 ʾan 23

3.1.2.4. The use of ʾan al-muxaffafa in order to convey duʿāʾ ‘invocation’

According to Sībawayhi, when using ʾan in the sense of ʾannahu in order
to express duʿāʾ, the particles sa- or qad should not separate it from the
following verb (unlike other contexts, where separation is required; see
§‎3.1.1 above).82 Accordingly, one says ʾamā ʾan jazāka llāhu xayran ‘indeed,
may God have rewarded you well’ and ʾamā ʾan yaġfiru llāhu laka ‘indeed,
may God forgive you’. Sībawayhi does not elaborate on the possibility of
pronouncing the verb directly, with no separation, after ʾan in the sense
of ʾannahu; he merely says ʾinnamā ʾajāzūhu liʾannahu duʿāʾun ‘they (i.e.
the speakers) allowed it (i.e. this structure) because it is a duʿāʾ’. As Jahn
correctly notes,83 the use of sa- or qad is not possible in the context of
a duʿāʾ, since both imply that the action of the following verb is certain,
which is not the case in a duʿāʾ, as far as the speaker is concerned. As for
lā and sawfa, the two other particles which Sībawayhi mentions in other
contexts as separators between ʾan in the sense of ʾannahu and the fol-
lowing verb, Jahn refers in his note to lā alone, correctly saying that it
cannot be used in this context, because it would change the meaning of
the duʿāʾ from positive to negative. As for sawfa, it is rather clear that it
has the same meaning and function as the prefix sa- and is thus treated in
the same way. For the explicit explanations given by al-Mubarrad, al-Sīrāfī
and other grammarians why any of the separating particles is not needed
in the context of a duʿāʾ, see §‎3.3.2.4.

3.1.2.5. Structures in which ʾan may be followed by a verb in raf ʿ, naṣb or

jazm One of the first sentence types which Sībawayhi introduces in
chapter 276 is katabtu ʾilayhi ʾan ‘I wrote to him that’.84 Sībawayhi says
that the verb following ʾan in this structure may be put in any of the three
moods: one can say katabtu ʾilayhi ʾan lā yaqul ḏāka ‘I wrote to him: let
him not say that!’, katabtu ʾilayhi ʾan lā yaqūla ḏāka ‘I wrote to him that he
should not say that’ and katabtu ʾilayhi ʾan lā taqūlu ḏāka ‘I wrote to him
that you do not say that’.85 Sībawayhi explains that in the first example
the jazm is used because of the imperative nature of what is expressed;

82 For the whole discussion, see Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 431, 3–4. Cf. Ibn al-Sarrāj, ʾUṣūl
(1996) I, 240, 4–9; II, 210, 7–10.
83 See Jahn, Translation II.2, 128, note 9 of chapter 276.
84 For the whole discussion, see Sībawayhi, Kitāb I, 430, 5–8. Cf. Ibn al-Sarrāj, ʾUṣūl
(1996) II, 210, 12–14; al-Fārisī, Manṯūra, 143, 11–14 (part of masʾala 150); al-Harawī, ʾAzhiya,
67, 𐄐2–68, 2.
85 For two modern studies that quote and elucidate these three examples, see Recken-
dorf, Syntax, 454, note 4 (part of §223); Fischer, ʾAn, 25–26.
24 chapter one

in the second example, the naṣb is used because the speaker’s intention
is to express a purpose, as if the speaker had said [katabtu ʾilayhi] liʾan lā
yaqūla ḏāka ‘I wrote to him in order that he not say that’; and in the third
example the rafʿ is used because the speaker reports an occurrence which
took place in reality, as if what was said were katabtu ʾilayhi liʾannaka
lā taqūlu ḏāka ‘I wrote to him because you do not say that’ or katabtu
ʾilayhi biʾannaka lā taqūlu ḏāka ‘I wrote to him that you do not say that’.
Sībawayhi emphasizes that in this last example the speaker reports an
action occurring in reality. This is further evidence that the raf ʿ mood
according to Sībawayhi presents an actual occurrence, in contrast to naṣb,
which involves only a potential occurrence.

3.2. Al-Farrāʾ
Al-Farrāʾ contends that in some structures the verb following ʾan is marfūʿ,
in others—manṣūb, and that there are also cases in which both moods are
possible. Some of these are also mentioned by Sībawayhi, but explained
differently. Here are al-Farrāʾ’s views on these structures.
a. In his extensive discussion of the particle ḥattā, al-Farrāʾ contends
that when the following verb is negated by lā, both naṣb and raf ʿ are pos-
sible. However, the rafʿ mood is possible only if lā can be replaced by
laysa without rendering the sentence ungrammatical. In other words, the
naṣb mood is the only possibility when lā cannot be replaced by laysa
(for his theory concerning ḥattā, see chapter 8, §3.2.1.2). Al-Farrāʾ says
that the same rule applies to the mood of the verb following ʾan when
it is negated by lā. He demonstrates his view with two Qurʾānic verses
in which the verb is negated by lā and can be put in naṣb or raf ʿ. The
verses are Qurʾān 5:71 and 20:89, cited by Sībawayhi, too, and discussed
in §‎3.1.2.2 and §‎3.1.2.1-a, respectively.86 Al-Farrāʾ explicitly says that had
the verbs not been negated by lā, only the naṣb mood would have been
possible. He argues that rafʿ is possible in these contexts, since lā can be
replaced by laysa and the sentence remains permissible, as in ḥasibtu ʾan
lasta taḏhabu fataxallaftu ‘I thought that you were not going and thus I
stayed behind’, which is equivalent to ḥasibtu ʾan lā taḏhaba/u fataxal-
laftu, in which the verb following ʾan may be either manṣūb or marfūʿ. But
when lā cannot be replaced by laysa only naṣb is possible, as in ʾaradtu ʾan
lā taqūla ḏāka ‘I wanted that you do not say that’. Al-Farrāʾ himself does
not explain the logic behind his theory and I will shortly offer a possible

86 For the whole discussion, see al-Farrāʾ, Maʿānī I, 135, 9ff.

 ʾan 25

explanation. In any case, the examples which al-Farrāʾ introduces in his

discussion show that like Sībawayhi (and most subsequent grammarians),
he also believes that after verbs denoting doubt (such as ḥasiba), the verb
following ʾan may be manṣūb or marfūʿ, whereas after verbs denoting a
desire (such as ʾarāda), only naṣb is possible.
Despite al-Farrāʾ’s explicit statement that it is the existence of lā
in these examples that makes it permissible to put the verb in naṣb or
rafʿ,87 he then apparently contradicts himself and says that it is possible
to find a marfūʿ verb following ʾan even if it is not negated by lā. Thus
al-Farrāʾ explains the rafʿ mood in the sentence ḥasibtu ʾan taqūlu ḏāka
‘I thought that you said that’, in a very similar way to Sībawayhi: liʾanna
l-hāʾa taḥsunu fī ʾan fataqūlu ḥasibtu ʾannahu yaqūlu88 ḏāka ‘because the
[attached pronoun] -hu can be joined to ʾan [thus creating ʾannahu], as in
the example ḥasibtu ʾannahu yaqūlu ḏāka’.
Another reference to the replacement between lā and laysa, found in
another place in his Maʿānī and also related to the mood of the verb fol-
lowing ʾan, elucidates al-Farrāʾ’s intention and may even resolve the con-
tradiction referred to in the previous paragraph. The context is al-Farrāʾ’s
commentary on Qurʾān 3:41, in which the verb following ʾan is negated by
lā: qāla rabbi jʿal lī ʾāyatan qāla ʾāyatuka ʾallā tukallima/u l-nāsa ṯalāṯata
ʾayyāmin ʾillā ramzan ‘he said: my lord, give me an omen. [God] said [in
response]: your omen is that you shall not speak to the people for three
days but by signs’. According to al-Farrāʾ, if the verb following ʾan denotes
a real, absolute future (al-istiqbāl al-maḥḍ), the verb should be manṣūb,
whereas if the present time is intended, the verb should be marfūʿ.89 In
view of this, it can be inferred that al-Farrāʾ’s intention in the replace-
ment “test” of lā with laysa is related to the time which the negated verb
conveys. If lā can be replaced by laysa, a verb denoting a present time,
the negated verb may be put in rafʿ, because it thus does not convey an

87 Wa‌ʾiḏā ʾalqayta minhu lā lam yaqūlūhu ʾillā naṣban ‘if you remove lā from it (i.e.
from the sentence in which lā negates the verb following ʾan), they (i.e. the speakers) will
pronounce it (i.e. the verb following ʾan) only in naṣb’ (al-Farrāʾ, Maʿānī I, 135, 11–12).
88 The change from a verb in the second person (in the first sentence with ʾan) to
one in the third person (in the second sentence with ʾannahu) occurs in the printed edi-
tion (al-Farrāʾ, Maʿānī I, 136, 1–2); the difference thus either involves an inconsistency in
al-Farrāʾ’s words or an error in the edition.
89 See al-Farrāʾ, Maʿānī I, 213, 3–6. Cf. Tawāma, Zaman, 58, 6–11, where al-Farrāʾ’s view
is discussed. See further al-Naḥḥās, ʾIʿrāb I, 375, 1–2, where the author says that according
to the Kūfans, the raf ʿ mood in the above-mentioned verse is possible, because lā occurs
there in the sense of laysa.
Al-Farrāʾ expresses the same opinion in his commentary on the almost identical verse
Qurʾān 19:10. See al-Farrāʾ, Maʿānī II, 162, 𐄐3–163, 4.
26 chapter one

action in the future. If, on the other hand, this replacement is not possible,
the verb must be manṣūb, as it denotes a future time. If this hypothesis is
correct, it means that even if the verb is not negated by lā, it may yet be
marfūʿ, as long as it conveys an occurrence in the present and not in the
future; this resolves the seeming contradiction mentioned above.
b. From his discussion of the line of poetry quoted in §‎2.4.1.2 above,
ʾaxāfu [. . .] ʾan lā ʾaḏūquhā, it is clear that al-Farrāʾ allows putting the verb
following ʾan in rafʿ, despite the fact that the preceding main verb denotes
fear (ʾaxāfu). Al-Farrāʾ argues that rafʿ in this context is possible because
the verb denoting fear in this context is similar in meaning to that of a
verb denoting doubt (ʾaxāfu ‘I fear’ and ʾaẓunnu ‘I think’, respectively).
Since the rafʿ mood is possible in the context of verbs denoting doubt, as
in Qurʾān 5:71 which he cites (and which Sībawayhi cites and discusses,
too; see §‎3.1.2.2), it is also possible in the context of ʾaxāfu, a verb denot-
ing fear.90 Al-Farrāʾ’s discussion and conclusion here resemble those of
Sībawayhi in the same context (see §‎3.1.2.3), but whereas Sībawayhi con-
siders the rafʿ mood in this context not common in speech, al-Farrāʾ does
not seem to share this opinion.
c. From al-Farrāʾ’s discussion of li- in the structure ʾurīdu li(ʾan) taf ʿala
(see chapter 9, §5.2), two conclusions can be inferred with respect to his
views on the mood of the verb following ʾan:

– I n his opinion, the manṣūb verb following ʾan denotes an action in a

future time. This is inferred from his view that li- can replace ʾan after
verbs denoting a desire, since both particles necessitate that the fol-
lowing verb convey future and not past time.91 This view shows again
that al-Farrāʾ considers the manṣūb verb indicating an action in a future
time.
– Al-Farrāʾ argues that when the main verb in the sentence expresses
doubt, ʾan can be followed by a verb denoting past or future, as in
ʾaẓunnu ʾan qad qāma Zaydun ‘I think that Zayd has stood’ and ʾaẓunnu
ʾan sayaqūmu Zaydun ‘I think that Zayd will stand’, respectively. Since
after a verb of doubt ʾan is not necessarily followed by a verb denoting
a future time, one cannot replace it with li- (after which the verb neces-
sarily denotes a future time) and say *ẓanantu litaqūma ‘I thought that
you will stand’.

90 See al-Farrāʾ, Maʿānī I, 146, 1–10. A similar view is attributed to ġayr al-baṣriyyīna
‘non-Baṣrans’ in al-Harawī, ʾAzhiya, 67, 4–13 and al-Saxāwī, Šarḥ, 186, 4–6.
91 For references and further details, see chapter 9, §5.2.
 ʾan 27

3.3. Other grammarians

3.3.1. The syntactic contexts of ʾan al-muxaffafa compared to
ʾan al-maṣdariyya
3.3.1.1. Grammarians who posit a compulsory separation between ʾan al-
muxaffafa and the following verb Most grammarians emphasize, along
with Sībawayhi, that in the case of ʾan in the sense of ʾannahu which is
followed by an imperfect verb, ʾan and this verb must be separated by one
of the particles lā, sawfa, sa- or qad.92
Al-Jurjānī and al-Zamaxšarī are two of the first grammarians who
say that not only lā but all negative particles can be used as separators
between ʾan and a following marfūʿ verb.93 Many later grammarians have
adopted this view as well.94 Al-Jurjānī, al-Zamaxšarī and some of these
later grammarians quote two Qurʾānic verses in which the separators are
the negative particles lan and lam, each of which is also considered the
ʿāmil of the following manṣūb verb. These are ʾayaḥsibu ʾan lan yaqdira
ʿalayhi ʾaḥadun ‘does he think that no one shall overcome him?’ (Qurʾān
90:5) and ʾayaḥsibu ʾan lam yarahu ʾaḥadun ‘does he think that no one
shall see him?’ (Qurʾān 90:7).

3.3.1.2. Grammarians who do not posit a compulsory separation between

ʾan al-muxaffafa and the following verb Al-Zajjājī is the earliest
grammarian who does not refer at all to the separation between ʾan
al-muxaffafa and the following verb. The salient evidence that in his
view such a separation is not necessary is one of his examples for ʾan al-
muxaffafa: ʿalimtu ʾan taqūmu ‘I knew that you would rise’.95 In his other

92 See, for example, al-Mubarrad, Muqtaḍab II, 31, 10ff.; III, 5, 9ff.; Ibn al-Sarrāj, ʾUṣūl
(1996) I, 239, 𐄐2–240, 4; al-Sīrāfī cited in Jahn, Translation II.2, 128, note 5 of chapter 276;
al-Fārisī, Manṯūra, 142, 𐄐3–143, 10 (masʾala 149); Ibn Jinnī, Sirr II, 682, 4–14; Ibn al-Anbārī,
Bayān I, 301, 11–13; al-Xwārazmī, Šarḥ al-mufaṣṣal IV, 65, 6–7.
93 See al-Jurjānī, Šarḥ al-jumal, 109, 1–5; 110, 3; al-Zamaxšarī, Mufaṣṣal, 138, 1–2; 138,
12–13; al-Zamaxšarī, ʾAḥājī, 80, 5–9 (beginning of masʾala 39); al-Zamaxšarī, ʾUnmūḏaj, 104,
𐄐5–𐄐4.
94 See Ibn al-Xaššāb, Murtajal, 228, 5–229, 2; Ibn al-Anbārī, Bayān II, 472, 11–12; al-ʿUkbarī,
Lubāb I, 221, 2 last lines; al-Xwārazmī, Šarḥ al-jumal, 145, 𐄐2–146, 6; Ibn Muʿṭī, Fuṣūl, 202,
2–3; Ibn al-Xabbāz, Šarḥ II, 447, 3–11; al-Saxāwī, Šarḥ, 182, 5–183, 1; 184, 9–11; Ibn al-Ḥājib,
Šarḥ II, 191, 12ff.; al-Astarābāḏī, Šarḥ al-kāfiya (1998) IV, 29, 𐄐1–30, 8; Ibn al-Nāẓim, Šarḥ,
130, 9ff.; Ibn Abī Rabīʿ, Kāfī III, 902, 10–903, 1; al-Murādī, Janā, 218, 8ff.; Ibn Hišām, ʾAwḍaḥ
I, 187, 𐄐1–188, 3; Ibn Hišām, Šarḥ qaṭr (1963), 62, 7ff.; al-Makkūdī, Šarḥ I, 238, 9ff.; Ṣalāḥ
al-Dīn, Šarḥ II, 1135, 2–7; al-Ušmūnī, Šarḥ I, 322, 1ff.; al-Suyūṭī, ʾAšbāh (1998) I, 280, 𐄐5–𐄐3.
95 See al-Zajjājī, Jumal, 206, 𐄐2–207, 2, where al-Zajjājī explicitly says that ʾan in this
example is ʾan al-muxaffafa and that its taqdīr structure is ʿalimtu ʾannaka taqūmu.
28 chapter one

examples the marfūʿ verb is separated from the preceding ʾan, but this
example and the fact that al-Zajjājī says nothing about such a separa-
tion prove that he does not consider it necessary. Indeed, for this view
al-Zajjājī is criticized by some of his commentators.96
Al-Harawī, too, does not contend that the separation between ʾan al-
muxaffafa and the following verb is compulsory. In his opinion, when the
verb is marfūʿ and ʾan precedes it, it is best (al-ʾaḥsan) to separate these
two by one of the particles mentioned already by Sībawayhi.97 Al-Harawī
thus accepts the usage of ʾan al-muxaffafa with a marfūʿ verb directly
following it.
Al-Astarābāḏī, too, says that it is possible to find ʾan al-muxaffafa with-
out an ʿiwaḍ ‘compensation’, i.e. without a particle separating it from the
following verb. He says that al-Mubarrad reports that this usage exists
among al-baġādida ‘the people of Baghdad’, and provides as an example the
sentence ʿalimtu ʾan taxruju ‘I knew that you would go out’. Al-Astarābāḏī
concludes with the comment that this construction is exceptional.98

3.3.2. The semantic contexts of ʾan al-muxaffafa compared to

ʾan al-maṣdariyya
The vast majority of grammarians emphasize that ʾan followed by a verb
in naṣb is used after verbs denoting uncertainty with respect to an action,
such as verbs of fear and desire, whereas ʾanna followed by a noun in naṣb
is used after verbs indicating that the speaker is certain that the relevant
action has occurred or will occur in reality, such as verbs denoting certain
knowledge.99 Only al-Astarābāḏī holds an exceptional view with regards
to the syntactic contexts in which ʾanna is used.100

96 See, for example, al-Baṭalyawsī, ʾIṣlāḥ, 258, 1–10.

97 See al-Harawī, ʾAzhiya, 65, 3–67, 13. Cf. Ibn al-Šajarī, ʾAmālī, 419, 5ff.; Ibn Mālik,
Šarḥ al-kāfiya I, 219, 8; 221, 4ff.; II, 112, 1–6. See further Abū Ḥayyān, Manhaj, 84, 24ff. (for
the Arabic text and its translation into German, see Bergter, ʾInna, 52, 3ff. and 114, 20ff.,
respectively), where Abū Ḥayyān expresses his view that the separation between ʾan and
the following verb is not compulsory but only preferable, adding that other grammarians
consider it compulsory.
98 See al-Astarābāḏī, Šarḥ al-kāfiya (1998) IV, 32, 1–2. Cf. Ibn Hišām, Taxlīṣ, 383, 2ff.,
where the author characterizes the separation between ʾan al-muxaffafa and the marfū
verb as occurring ġāliban ‘usually’.
99 See, for example, al-Fārisī, Taʿlīqa II, 275, 3 last lines (and also note 4 there, where
a similar opinion of al-Sīrāfī is quoted); al-Fārisī, ʾĪḍāḥ I, 482, 6–9 (cf. the commentaries of
al-Jurjānī and Ibn Abī Rabī in al-Jurjānī, Muqtaṣid I, 482, 11–483, 2 and Ibn Abī Rabīʿ, Kāfī
III, 942, 7ff.); al-Fārisī, Baṣriyyāt I, 705–711 (masʾala 83); al-Fārisī, ʾIġfāl I, 122, 𐄐6–123, 7; Ibn
al-Ḥājib, Šarḥ II, 193, 3ff.; al-Kaffawī, Kulliyyāt, 191a, 𐄐2–192a, 1.
100 In al-Astarābāḏī’s opinion ʾanna can be used whether the main verb preceding it
denotes certain knowledge or doubt. He quotes and opposes the opinions of Sībawayhi and
 ʾan 29

As a rule, most grammarians argue that ʾan following verbs denoting

fear and desire is followed by a manṣūb verb, whereas ʾan after verbs
denoting certain knowledge is followed by a verb in raf ʿ (this ʾan being
referred to as ʾan al-muxaffafa). As for ʾan after verbs denoting doubt, it
can be followed either by a verb in naṣb or raf ʿ.
One of the grammarians who elucidate this usage of ʾan in a clear way is
Ibn al-Sarrāj.101 He argues that the verbs are divided into three kinds (with
respect to the speaker’s view of a certain action as known, expected, etc.):
verbs denoting certain knowledge, such as ʿalimtu ‘I knew’; those denot-
ing expectation, such as rajawtu ‘I wanted’ and xiftu ‘I was afraid’; and
those which are intermediate between the first two, having the potential
to denote both certain knowledge and expectation, such as ẓanantu and
ḥasibtu ‘I thought’. He goes on to say that ʾan occurring after verbs of the
first kind is ʾan al-muxaffafa, followed by a verb in raf ʿ, whereas ʾan occur-
ring after verbs of the second kind is ʾan al-nāṣiba, followed by a verb in
naṣb. Verbs of the third kind can be followed either by a verb in naṣb or raf ʿ,
according to the speaker’s intention: ʾin kāna ḥisbānuka qadi staqarra kānat
muxaffafatan mina l-ṯaqīlati wa⁠ʾin ḥamaltahu ʿalā l-šakki kānat xafīfatan ‘if
your thought is solid (i.e. denoting certain knowledge), it (i.e. ʾan) is ʾan
al-muxaffafa [occurring in the position of ʾannahu, after which the verb
is marfūʿ], and if you consider it (i.e. your thought) as [denoting] doubt,
it (i.e. ʾan) is ʾan al-xafīfa [after which the verb is manṣūb]’.102 An exam-
ple for this third kind, according to Ibn al-Sarrāj and other grammarians,

al-Zamaxšarī (and most other grammarians as well ) who maintain that ʾanna implies the
certain occurrence of the action expressed in the clause it introduces. He argues that ʾanna
emphasizes and confirms the relevant action, whether what precedes it is a verb denot-
ing certain knowledge or doubt. One of his arguments is that had the meanings of ʾanna
and al-tamannī ‘wish’ contradicted each other (ʾanna implying certainty and al-tamannī a
wish, necessarily for an uncertain action), one could not have said layta ʾannaka qāʾimun
‘I wish you stood!’. Since this sentence is possible and normal in the language, he believes
it proves that ʾanna does not necessarily imply certainty. See al-Astarābāḏī, Šarḥ al-kāfiya
(1998) IV, 27, 6–28, 7. Al-Astarābāḏī’s opinion seems to correspond the views of Fleischer
and Fischer in this aspect, discussed in §‎2.4.1.1 above.
101 See Ibn al-Sarrāj, ʾUṣūl (1996) II, 209, 3ff. For a similar discussion, see al-Rummānī,
Maʿānī, 72, 6–73, 5.
102 See Ibn al-Sarrāj, ʾUṣūl (1996) II, 209, 11–12. Cf. al-Fārisī, Taʿlīqa II, 276, 3–7; al-Fārisī,
ʾĪḍāḥ I, 482, 6–9; 483, 4–5; 486, 5–6 (and the commentary in al-Jurjānī, Muqtaṣid I, 486,
8ff.); al-Ḍarīr, Šarḥ, 236, 𐄐3–237, 4; al-Šantamarī, Nukat II, 794, 𐄐2–795, 𐄐4; al-Ḥarīrī, Šarḥ,
309, 1ff.; al-Zamaxšarī, Mufaṣṣal, 138, 14ff. (and the detailed commentary in al-Saxāwī,
Šarḥ, 185, 2ff.); Ibn al-Šajarī, ʾAmālī, 420–421; Ibn al-Anbārī, Bayān I, 301, 11–18; al-Xwārazmī,
Šarḥ al-mufaṣṣal IV, 64, 11–65, 5; al-Irbilī, Jawāhir, 194, 2–11; Ibn al-Ḥājib, Šarḥ II, 193, 3–194,
4; Ibn al-Ḥājib, ʾAmālī II, 727–728 (ʾimlāʾ 40); Ibn ʿUṣfūr, Šarḥ II, 174, 3ff.; Ibn al-Nāẓim,
Šarḥ, 475, 20–476, 4.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
alamme hänestä vähitellen jäädä. Nyt hän jo katoaakin vuorisen
kunnaan taakse.

Noin tunnin kuluttua näemme hänet jälleen. Odottamatta hän

kallioiselta penkereeltä hypähtää luoksemme. "Orjalaivan kapteeni ja
Vale-Mumin", hän huudahtaa, "ovat luullakseni sama henkilö. Tosin
en ol'… Katsokaa… kat… so… kaa, tuolla — korkealla kukkulalla —
hän on, hiipii ison kiven suojaan. Tunnen hänet, se on Nola, se on
orjalaivan entinen kuljettaja."

Minäkin olin huomannut miehen, minäkin olin tuntenut hänet,

mutta en
Nola'ksi, vaan Vale-Argad'iksi, verivihollisekseni, rakkaan Surya
Me'eni ja ijäkkään Darjan peljätyksi vainoojaksi.

Sanomaton raivo valtasi minut, ja välittämänä siitä josko muut

tulivat perässä tahi ei, kapusin kiireesti vuorta ylös. Kädet ja polveni
löivät verille ja vaatteeni repeytyivät terävissä kallionsärmissä, mutta
minulla ei ollut aikaa ja halua semmoisista pikkuseikoista huolehtia.

Koko ajojoukostamme oli Mumin ainoa, joka pysyi rinnallani, toiset

minne lienevätkään jääneet? Yhteinen vihan-esineemme kiihoitti
meitä ponnistuksissamme äärimäisyyksiin.

Ennen pitkää olimme kiven kohdalla, jonka sivustaa olimme

nähneet
"Nolan" hiipivän. Enää hän ei ollut siellä.

Kiersimme kiven ja kiipesimme vähäisen ylemmäksi. Pysähdyimme

täällä leveälle paadelle ja silmäilimme ympärillemme.
 Vihdoinkin oli vaivamme palkittu. Suoraan sivullepäin, noin
sataviisikymmentä askelta meistä, oli kalliossa pari kolme metriä
leveä railo ja heti tämän toisella puolella pieni vuoripolku. Nola asteli
polkua ylöspäin.

Nyt ihmismetsästyksemme muuttui äskeistäkin hurjemmaksi,

mutta emme olleet ehtineet edes paadelta alas, kun Nolakin
puolestaan havaitsi meidät.

Olimme miehelle vanhat tutut, sen sanoi meille jo hänen

ensimäinen liikkeensä. Salaman nopeudella hän kyykistyi ja lähti
voimiensa tiestä pakosalle. Tuossa tuokiossa olimme mekin railon
partaalla. Mumin Argad oli yhdellä hyppäyksellä ylitse. Minun jalkani
lipesi ja olisin pudonnut kymmeniä metriä syvään kuiluun, mutta,
viime hetkessä sain kiinni halkeaman reunasta.

Kun pääsin ylös, oli Nola seisahtunut. Pilkallisesti ja voitonvarmasti

hymyillen hän tempasi pyssyn olaltaan, tähtäsi kylmäverisesti ja
ampui — ampui kolme neljä laukausta perätysten. Niistä yksi lensi
suhahtaen korvieni ohitse ja toinen sattui hartioihini. Purin tuskasta
ja kiukusta hampaitani, mutta olipa toveriinikin luoti osunut. Hänen
oikea poskipäänsä oli yltä päältä verissä.

Haavamme eivät kuitenkaan olleet mitenkään vaarallista laatua,

eivätkä sanottavasti estäneet liikkeitämmekään. Ne — niinkuin
jälestäpäin tutkiessamme huomasimmekin — olivatkin vain
vähäpätöisiä lihanaarmuja.

Nolan yritys oli siis täydellisesti epäonnistunut, ja aikaa hänellä ei

enää ollut asettaan uudestaan ladata.
 Omaksi turmioksensa hän näin ollen oli pyssyyn luottanut.
Toivottomana hän heittikin sen käsistään ja turvautui toistamiseen
juoksutaitoonsa.

Mumin Argad tarttui silloin vuorostansa ampuma-aseeseensa ja

hyvällä menestyksellä, Nola jatkoi kulkuansa pahasti liikaten. Vasen
jalka oli haavoittunut.

Äkkiä vihollisemme kompastui ja kaatui.

Nyt yllätin hänet, mutta vieläkään hän ei antautunut, ja sylitysten,

rajussa painissa vyöryimme pitkin kalliota.

Mumin kiirehti avukseni, ja yksissä voimin lannistimme konnan,

mutta vasta niin kiivaan ja ankaran taistelun jälkeen, että sen
loputtua kykenimme väsymyksestä tuskin jäsentäkään
hievahtamaan. Raskaasti ja vaivaloisesti hengittäen makasimmekin
sentähden maassa, mutta yhtä uupunut oli vastustajammekin. Kädet
omaan pyssynkantimeensa kytkettyinä Nola loikoi vieressämme.

"Olette voittaneet", hän mutisi hampaittensa välistä, "muukalainen

koira on purrut, ja hindu on avustanut kilpakosijaansa."

Vaalenin, olisiko Mumin Argad tullut Surya Me'etä vaatiaksensa?

Levottomuuteni oli aiheeton.

— Valehtelet, roisto, sanoi Mumin — olen naimisissa.

— Naimisissa, huudahdin kummastuneena — ette ole siitä

ennemmin maininneet.

— En ole. Vaimoni on egyptiläinen.

 — Asuu Kairossa?

— Asuu.

Tähän lyhyt puhelumme keskeytyi, sillä seuralaisemme — joskin

myöhästyneinä — saapuivat paikalle.

Selitin heille muutamin sanoin syyn tuliseen ajoomme, ja tuokion

vielä levähdettyämme päätimme palata Radzim'iin, mutta emme
olleet vankinemme edes vuoren juurella, kun jo valtava pimeys kattoi
seudun. Yö oli joutunut.

Eteenpäin ei ollut ajattelemistakaan. Kokosimme sentähden

äkkipäätä lehtiä ja puita. Näistä teimme pian rovion ja täten
valmistetun nuotiotulen ääressä valvoimme keskustellen ja
tarinoiden.

Toisinaan näkyi pimeästä kiiluva silmäpari ja kuului hiljaisia,

hiipiviä askeleita. Siellä verenhimoinen tiikeri läheni valkeatamme.
Äänettöminä tartuimme aseisiin, mutta askeleet etenivät, silmät
katosivat, ja helpoituksen huokaus nousi rinnastamme. Uhkaava
vaara oli silmänräpäykseksi torjuttu.

Toisinaan taasen kalliot kumahtelivat ja metsät raikuivat peto-

eläinten kaameasta karjunnasta. Kylmät väreet kulkivat silloin pitkin
selkäpiitämme, mutta Nola — mitä liikuttivat häntä pedot, mitä yön
kauhut? Mennyttä miestä hän oli joka tapauksessa. Nojaten
palmupuun runkoon hän puoleksi istuvassa asennossa uinaili
rauhallisena.

*****
 Yö oli ajan vuolaaseen virtaan vaipunut, samoin päivä ja
useampikin. Likimain kokonainen viikko olikin äskeisestä vierähtänyt.
Tällöin eräänä aamuna tuli joukollemme kiireellinen lähtökäsky
Kalkutasta.

Suurella hopulla laittauduttiin matkakuntoon. Tavarat — mitä

vietävää oli — säälittiin kokoon, aseet tarkastettiin ja puhdistettiin.
Yli kaiken kaikuivat upseerien kovaääniset komentosanat ja
signalistin kirkkaan puhtaat puhallukset.

Iltapuoleen oli kylämme jo asujamitta, pitkä matkamme kohden

Ganges-virran suuhaaroja oli alkanut.

Surya Me'elleni ja hänen ijäkkäälle isälleen olin hankkinut

tilapäisesti tehdyt kantotuolit. Nola'a kuljettivat sotilaat vangittuna
mukanaan.

Vanha Laksmi ja Mumin Argad kävelivät rinnallani, edellinen —

ikäänkuin jotakin odotellen — tuon tuostakin silmäillen taaksemme.

Ehtoohämärässä — olimme silloin vaeltaneet noin kolme

penikulmaa — pysähdyimme alavalle kunnaalle, sinne
yöpyäksemme.

Tällöin Lakhsmi odottamatta nyhjäsi kyynäspäähäni. "Sahib,

katsokaa", hän lausui ja voitonriemuisena lisäten, "enkö sitä
sanonut?"

Noudatin kehoitusta. Kaukana takanamme oli taivas yhtenä

tulimerenä, ja sankat savupatsaat kohosivat ylä-ilmoille.

Oliko se Radzim, joka siellä paloi? Minä luulen niin, Lakhsmi oli
ollut oikeassa.
KUUDES LUKU.

Kuusi vuotta eteenpäin ajassa. Karannut vanki. Kohtaus

kuolinvuoteen ääressä. Jää hyvästi, jää hyvästi, India!

Kuusi vuotta voi vaikuttaa paljo ihmiselämään. Näin pitkä aika oli
siitä, kun etäiseltä kunnaalta sisämaassa olin katsellut Radzim'in
paloa. Monia muutoksia oli sitten tämän hetken tapahtunut olossani.

Nuoresta ja kokemattomasta Albion'in pojasta oli tullut suuren

Kalkutan ensimäinen lääkäri, mies mainehikas ja kaikkien
kunnioittama.

Tarvinneekohan minun edes mainita, että Surya Me oli puolisonani.

Sitä hän oli ollut jo nelisen vuotta.

Darja Argad, appeni, oli vielä elossa, mutta hyvin vanhentunut.

Hänen ilonaan oli hypitellä polvellaan pientä kummilastaan, Surya
Me'en ja minun rakasta "silmäterää".

Lakhsmi oli kuoleman tuvilla. Kaiholla muistelimme usein ijäkästä

ja uskollista palvelijatarta.
 Mumin Argad oli Kairosta hakenut vaimonsa, kauniin ja
hilpeämielisen Hathor'in, ja asui kanssamme Darjan upeassa
palatsissa. Mumin oli toisella Kairon-käynnillään tutustunut
Hathor'iin, joka oli egyptiläisen kauppiaan tytär, ja mennyt naimisiin.
Ne olivat muka "kauppatoimet", jotka olivat pidättäneet häntä
kotimatkalta.

Nola oli konnantöistään tuomittu elinkautiseen vankeuteen ja

lähetetty
Ceylon'iin.

Surya Me'eni entinen sairashuone oli laboratooriuminani.

Olin täydellisesti onnellinen ja kuitenkin olisin halusta nähnyt

jälleen syntymämaani.

*****

Oli ilta, ja me olimme palatsissa kokoontuneet isohkoon saliin

juodaksemme siellä teetä kattolampun viehkeässä valossa. Surya Me
oli emäntänä, ja Harthor kertoi meille ajan kuluksi egyptiläisistä
oloista, maansa ihmeellisistä muistomerkeistä, jättisuurista
pyramiideista ja kummallisista obeliskeista, kalliohaudoista ja
lukemattomista temppeliraunioista.

"Kenties ette tiedä", hän muun muassa lausui, "että nimelläni

tavallansa on historiallinen kuuluisuus? Kaukaisessa muinaisuudessa
on sitä kantanut jumalatar, joka…"

— Oliko hänkin kauppiaan tytär? kysyin piloillani.

— Eihän toki, Harthor vastasi nauraen — mutta…

 Mitä hän aikoi sanoa, jäi salaisuudeksi. Palvelija tuli
hengästyneenä saliin ja katkaisi keskustelun. "Ulkona kadulla", hän
lausui, "on outo mies, joka väkisten pyrkii sisälle".

— Etkö ole käskenyt hänen poistua? kysyin palvelijalta.

— Olen tehnyt sen, mutta hän palaa aina takaisin. Viime kerralla
olin kuulevinani hiljaista vaikeroimista. Kehoitin häntä silloin
odottamaan. Ehkä hän on sairas? Sanoo olevan tärkeätä asiaa.

Menin ulos. Siellä näköjään vanha, raihnainen mies nojasi

vaivaloisesti hengittäen seinustaa vastaan.

Puhuttelin outoa, mutta äänettömänä — rinta raskaasti koristen —

hän vaipui maahan.

Pudistelin ukkoa, mutta en saanut vastausta.

Huusin tällöin Mumin Argad'ia ja palvelijaa, joka oli pysähtynyt

oven suuhun.

Yhdessä kannoimme nyt vanhuksen sisälle ja laitoimme

vuoteeseen.

Viritimme valkean. Hämmästyksen huudahdus pääsi huuliltamme.

Sänkyyn asettamamme henkilö oli — Nola, mutta kuinka ajan ja
kärsimysten runtelemana? Nuoresta, elinvoimaisesta miehestä oli
tullut raihnas, heikkouttaan vapiseva ukko.

Pettivätkö näköaistimme?

Eivät pettäneet. Sairas avasi silmänsä, ja silloin saimme varmuutta

asiassa. Hän tunsi meidät, sen voimme selvästi huomata hänen
arasta katseestaan, mutta muutakin ilmeni siinä — iloista
tyytyväisyyttä, minkä johdosta, se oli toistaiseksi arvoitus.

Viimeisenkin epäilyksen — jos sitä enää olikaan — poistivat hänen

sanansa. "Olen Nola", hän raukealla äänellä ryhtyi puhumaan. "Olen
Ceylonista paennut".

Karannut vanki oli siis edessämme ja vielä lisäksi tämä mies oli —
Nola, verivihollisemme. Mitä tekisimme, heittäisimmekö hänet ulos ja
jättäisimmekö hänet poliisiviranomaisille?

"Olin sanomattomasti rikkonut", hän jatkoi, "en saanut rauhaa.

Janosin anteeksiantoa… ja sentähden — karkasin… En tahtonut…
kuol'… kuolla anteeksi pyytämättä. Missä ovat Surya Me… ja Darja?
Elävätkö he vielä?"

Mumin Argad kutsui heidät huoneeseen.

Helpoituksen huokaus kohosi tällöin Nolan rinnasta, mutta jotakin

hän sittenkin etsi. Silmät kääntyivät kysyvinä minuun.

Ymmärsin tarkoituksen. "Lakhsmi on kuollut", sanoin.

— Kuollutko?

— Niin.

Nolan silmät vettyivät.

Surya Me nähdessään entisen vainoojansa vapisi, mutta hänen

pelkonsa oli turha.

*****
 "Kun kuulin elinkautisen vankeustuomioni julistettavan", Nola
kertoi, "valtasi minut ääretön raivo. Olisin mielelläni repinyt teidät
kappaleiksi, kaikki, kaikki, tuomarit, Surya Me'en, Darjan, Mumin'in
Kahleet pidättivät minua toteuttamasta kiihkoisaa haluani, mutta
sydämessäni vannoin lujan valan, koettaisin vankilassa voitavani,
katkoisin raudat, surmaisin vartijat, pakenisin. Sitten palaisin
Kalkuttaan ja… ja…

"Olen kansallisuudeltani hindu ja syntyäni rikasta, ylhäistä sukua,

mutta jo aivan pienenä, tuskin kolmevuotiaana, kadotin molemmat
vanhempani. Kauhea rutto riisti heidät minulta. Omaksi ja suuren
omaisuuteni holhojaksi määrättiin setäni, mutta tämäkin kuoli
viidentoista ikäiseksi päästyäni, ja nyt olin sukulaisitta ja ystävittä
maailmassa.

"Ollen kokematon nuorukainen jouduin helposti tunnottomien

keinottelijain käsiin ja — ennenkuin osasin aavistaakkaan — olin
menettänyt varallisuuteni, jopa niin tarkkaan, että ropoakaan ei
jäänyt rikkaudestani. Päälläni olevat vaatteet olivat ainoat, joita
saatoin ominani pitää.

"Syystä olinkin katkeroittunut koko maailmaan, luonnollisesti

etenkin kunnottomiin liiketovereihini, mutta vielä en kuitenkaan
vihannut kanssaihmisiäni.

"Halusin kunniallisella työllä ansaita elatukseni, ja

merimiesammatti miellytti eniten. Kovaan työhön en tosin ollut
tottunut, mutta se ei peloittanut. Kärsivällisyydellä ja lujalla tahdolla
toivoin voittavani vastukset.

"Antauduinkin merimieheksi ja otin ensi aluksi pestin erääseen

englantilaiseen höyryalukseen… Jokusen kuukauden kuluttua palasin
samalla laivalla takaisin Kalkuttaan, kotikaupunkiini. Olimme käyneet
Australiassa ja Kiinassa ja olin hyvin tyytyväinen matkaani.
Kapteenimme olikin ollut erittäin ystävällinen ja suosiollisesti
opastanut minua kaikessa, joten tehtäväni olivat tuntuneet kevyeiltä
täyttää. Olinkin sentähden aikeissa ruveta uudestaan hänen
palvelukseensa. Onnettomuudekseni tapasin tällöin satamassa erään
entisistä kauppatovereistani, jonka petollisuutta minun ehkä
etupäässä oli kiittäminen omaisuuteni menettämisestä. Tekeytyen
mitä parhaimmaksi ystäväkseni hän loistavilla lupauksilla oli
houkutellut minua moneen suureen liikeyritykseen. Seurauksena oli
ollut köyhtymiseni, mutta hän sitävastoin oli rikastunut ja minulta
voittamillansa rahoilla… Kuljin tervehtimättä miehen ohitse. Silloin
hän nauroi, ja kun käännyin katsomaan, hänen huulensa olivat
kylmän ylenkatseellisessa hymyssä. Veret nousivat poskilleni, mutta
vielä hillitsin itseäni ja aijoin jälleen jatkaa kävelyäni. 'Etkö enää
tunne minua', hän samalla kysyi purevan pisteliäästi, 'vai enkö ole
ollut ystäväsi?' 'Sinä ystäväni', vastasin katkerasti, 'omaisuuteni
ryöstäjä.' 'Siksikö jätit tervehtimättä', hän jatkoi ivallista puhettaan.
'Oma syysi. Jokaisen tulee itse katsoa eteensä, mutta voinhan sinua
entisen ystävyytemme tähden hiukan auttaa. Kas, tästä saat kolikon,
kerjäläinen', ja pieni hopearaha vierähti jalkoihini… Nyt olin malttini
kadottanut…

"Surmasin hänet, tapoin kuin koiran, mutta minkätähden hän

yllyttikin minua mielettömään raivoon? Sitä oikeus ei kuitenkaan
kysynyt, ja murhaajana tulin tuomituksi vankeuteen.

"Näin olivat siis jalot pyrintöni rauvenneet. Tästä hetkestä vihasin

ihmiskuntaa ja vannoin sille kostoa.
 "Paljon ei minulla ole enää surulliseen elämäntarinaani lisättävää.
Karkasin vankilasta ja siitä päivin en ole valinnut keinoja
kanssaihmisiäni vahingoittaakseni. Alennuinpa lopulta niin syvälle,
että ryhdyin orjalaivan kuljettajaksi ja…"

Ja muitten konnantöittesi ohella, sanoi tähän Mumin Argad —

heitätit minut laivaruumaan ja sittemmin myit Arabiassa
orjamarkkinoilla.

— Niin tein.

— Anastit takkini taskusta, arkun pohjalta, päiväkirjani?

— Mistä te sen tiedätte?

— Erehdynkö?

— Ette, otin sen todellakin.

— Luitte kirjan?

— Luin.

— Ja päätitte käyttää tietoja hyväksenne?

— En heti, mutta eräänä päivänä kuulin merimiesteni sanovan,

että ruumiinkooltani ja ulkomuodoltani oikein hämmästyttävässä
määrässä muistutin teitä. Tällöin kypsyi vähitellen mielessäni
ajatus…

— Esiintyä oikean kasvattipojan sijaisena?

— Niin, olin kyllästynyt hurjaan olintaani.

 — Mutta ette ajatelleet, mitä minä orjana mahdollisesti kärsisin?

— En.

— Etkä myös, mikä suunnaton rikos olisi petollisesti tunkeutua

toisen perheeseen?

— He eivät koskaan saisi petoksestani vihiä.

— Ja silläkö te lohdutitte itseänne, kurja olento. Sairas ei

vastannut.

— Nimenne on Nola? jatkoi Mumin tiedustelujaan.

— On.

— Vasemman kätenne peukalon te…?

— Sen, sanoi Nola keskeyttäen — leikkasin pois. Uhraus oli

välttämätön, jos tahdoin onnistua tuumissani.

— Matkustitte Indiaan Kairon kautta.

— Matkustin. Tulin Bilma'sta, Afrikan sisäosista. Pian sen jälkeen

kun orjalastimme olin vienyt Arabiaan, haaksirikkoutui laivani
Tamataven edustalla, Madagaskar'in ulkopuolella. Miehistö hukkui,
mutta minä — ehkä rikollisin kaikista — pelastuin rannalle. Monien
seikkailujen ja vaiheitten perästä jouduin Bilma'an. Täällä olostin
useamman vuoden, mutta — tein murhan ja katsoin silloin
viisaimmaksi paeta. Jo kuukautta ennen olin tahallani katkaissut
vasemman peukaloni… Suuntasin kulkuni Kairoon ja sieltä —
Kalkuttaan… Kalkutassa minulla oli alussa hyvä menestys, mutta
kuinka lopulta kävi, tiedätte. Olin tottunut hurjaan elämään ja
sentähden en uusissa oloissakaan malttanut kauvan hillitä itseäni, ja
pian alkoi huolestuttavia huhuja tunkeutua Darja Argad'inkin ja
hänen tyttärensä korviin. Huomasin sen heidän yhä enemmän
vieroksuvasta käytöksestään, ja toisinansa Argad tiedusteli minulta
ankarana syytä outoihin kuulumisiin, mutta väitin kiven kovaa huhuja
valheeksi ja vakuutin viattomuuttani. Jo aikaisemmin, jopa ensi
hetkestä saakka, olin välistä ollut havaitsevinani Surya Me'essä
vaistomaista vastenmielisyyttä minua kohtaan, mutta en ollut siitä
sen erikoisempaa välittänyt. Toivoin aikaa myöden voivani hänen
mielialaansa vaikuttaa. Niin ei kuitenkaan käynyt, ja välimme
rikkoutumista jouduttamassa oli luultavasti sekin, että Surya Me
epäili minun Brahma'a palvelevan. Tavallansa hän ei siinä ihan
väärässä ollutkaan, sillä jos yleensä saatan laisinkaan sanoa silloin
mitään uskontoa tunnustaneeni, oli se Brahma'n, jota minulle
pienenä lapsena oli opetettu, mutta hyvin vähät siitäkin välitin. Vain
sattumalta — vanhasta tottumuksesta — lausuin joskus Brahma'n
nimen ja ainoastansa kerran muistan häntä täällä rukoilleeni. Tein
sen Surya Me'etä uhmaillakseni. Hän oli juuri nuhdellut minua
muuttuneesta käytöksestäni ja kristinuskosta luopumisesta, ja sen
johdosta harmistuin. Odottamaton yllätys olikin minulle se, että
Darja ja hänen tyttärensä olivat kristittyjä. Anastamassani
päiväkirjassa ei siitä sanallakaan oltu mainittu. Siksi en osannutkaan
olla tarpeeksi varovainen. Oikean kasvattipojan osaa ruvetessani
näyttelemään olin luonnollisesti lähinnä ajatellut Darja Argad'in
suurta omaisuutta, ja suunnitelmanani oli saada se Surya Me'en
välityksellä, ottamalla hänet ainoana perijänä avio-vaimokseni.
Yhtäkään silmänräpäystä en mielessäni ollut kuitenkaan kuvitellut
rakkautta, mutta vähitellen se syntyi sydämeeni ja tulisen
intohimoisena, koko olemustani kalvavana liekkinä. Surya Me'en
puhtaassa nais-olennossa oli jotakin käsittämätöntä, mikä
vastustamattomalla voimalla kiinnitti, mutta samalla
saavuttamattomana raivostutti minua. Kuinka hän olisikaan mennyt
minun kaltaiselle miehelle, enkä vieläkään voi ymmärtää rohkeuttani
astua hänen huoneeseensa ja kaiken tapahtuneen jälkeen pyytää
häntä vaimokseni, mutta olinkin mieletön, rajusti myrskyävien
tunteitteni orja, ja tahdoin pakoittaa häntä, jos hän ei hyvällä
suostuisi, sillä vastauksen — sen arvasin jo edeltäkäsin. Nöyrät
rukoukset eivät auttaneet, eivät peloittavat uhkaukset, ja silloin aloin
vainota häntä ja hänen isäänsä. Hyökkäyksen! pienellä syrjäkadulla
epäonnistuttua poistuin vielä samana yönä kaupungista ja kun
muutaman viikon kuluttua uskalsin palata sinne takaisin, oli Surya
Me kadonnut, ja poissa olivat Darja ja Lakhsmi'kin. Minne he olivat
lähteneet? Hain heitä kiihkeästi ja vihdoin sainkin vihiä heidän
olinpaikastaan. Se oli Radzim, mutta täällä tapasin heidän
englantilaisten soturien lujasti suojelemina. Mitä minun näin ollen oli
tehtävä? Luulin keksineeni keinon. Levitin ympäristön asujainten
keskuuteen huhua, että radzimilaiset olivat syvästi loukanneet
uskontoamme. He olivat muka eräänä päivänä löytäneet kyläkadulta
Brahmajumalan kuvan, joka nähtävästi oli taivaasta pudonnut, ja
suurella melulla sekä häpeällisten laulujen kaikuessa polttaneet sen.
Näin — kun koko kylään kohdistaisin kansani vihan — toivoin
varmasti kukistavan! viholliseni. Piirsin lehtiin syd'…

Keskeytin tässä Nolan, "olen nähnyt kuviot", lausuin, "ja Lakshsmi

on selittänyt niitten merkityksen".

"Lakhsmiko myös kaiversi pääkallojen ympärille seitsemän

tähteä?"

Vastasin myöntävästi.
 "Huolella valmistamani verkko oli täten repeytynyt piloille", jatkoi
Nola kertomustaan, "ja otukset toistaiseksi välttäneet surman. Kuljin
epätoivoisena päämäärättä kalliota ja harkitsin uusia suunnitelmia,
mutta vastaiseksi ei mikään keksimistäni miellyttänyt. Tällöin te —
kesken mietteitäni — yllätitte minut, oikea Mumin Argad, joka
tuhokseni oli tullut kotimaahansa, ja englantilainen lääkäri, jonka
aikoja sitten olin luullut kuolleen kaukaisella vuorenulkonemalla. —
Olen nyt täällä, en enää kostonhimoisena vaan nöyrästi rukoillen…
rikoksiani… anteeksi. Ruumiini ja sieluni voimat ovat murtuneet,
eivät kahleitten painosta, eivätkä raskaan vankeusorjuuden
rasituksista. Tuimat omantunnontuskat ovat niitä juuria myöden
kalvaneet, ja jo… jo on loppuni lähenemässä. En valehtele. — Eikö
muotonikin todista, että sisäiset sydämen taistelut ovat raadelleet
olemustani? Minä, nuoruuteni kukoistuksessa oleva mies, joka
ijältäni olen tuskin neljää vuotta Mumin Argad'ia vanhempi, olen
lyhyessä ajassa muuttunut raihnaaksi, ikäkuluksi vanhukseksi…
Siunaan teitä kantamistani raudoista. Välillisesti niiden kautta olen
minäkin saanut tiedon ainoasta, oikeasta Jumalasta, pakanoitten
Vapahtajasta, minunkin Lunastajastani… Ceylon'iin lähdin ylpeänä,
uhkamielisenä… tuumien perikatoa ja kuolemaa vastustajilleni.
Sielunpaimenenamme täällä oli eräs valtion määräämä pappi,
nimeltä S——n. Hän huomasi synkän mielialani… ja puhui minulle
kristinopista. Jumalan poika, Jeesus Kristus, on tullut maailmaan
syntisiä vapahtaaksensa… Kuuntelin hämmästyksen sekaisella
ihmettelyllä… Ensi kerran minulle… saarnattiin ainoasta, elävästä
Jumalasta… Olin sanomattomasti rikkonut, minun olisi sentähden
kaduttava ja jos uskoisin… Jeesukseen, olisi minulla syntein
anteeksiantamus, elämä ja autuus… Nämät kaikki olivat minulle
vallan uusia asioita. Halusin kuulla enemmän ja pappi luki
Raamatusta syntiinlankeemuksesta… tuhlaajapojasta… Vähitellen
lämpeni sydämeni — kova ulkokuori oli sulanut — ja puhkesin
valtavaan itkuun… Minäkin… oli tuhlaajapoika, joka… tarvitsin
sovintoa… Tästä hetkestä oli… elämässäni tapahtunut käänne.
Tekemäni pahat työt lepäsivät suunnattoman taakan tavoin
hartioillani… En saanut rauhaa, ja lopuksi öitten valvomiset, päivien
tuskat… raihnauttivat… ruumiini… Teitäkin vastaan… olin kovasti
rikkonut… Sentähden omantuntoni… ajamana… olen kulkenut…
tänne saakka. Vankilan muurit… eivät ole voineet… pidättää minua.
Mikä… vast', vastaus… vastaus… teillä on annettavana… kurjalle?"

Nola vaikeni. Levottomin, rukoilevin katsein hän silmäili

ympärillänsä olevia.

Tällöin Surya Me kyynelehtien tarttui hänen käteensä. "Rukoilkaa

Jumalaa, että hän teitä armahtaisi. Me puolestamme olemme teille
anteeksi antaneet", hän sanoi ja meihin päin kääntyen, "eikö niin?"

Nyökäytimme liikutettuina päätämme.

Nolan silmät loistivat ilosta. Onnellisesti hymyillen, kädet ristissä

rinnoilla hän hiljaa laski päänsä patjalle. "Jeesus Kristus", kuulimme
hänen kuiskaavan, "minä kiitän Sinua!"

Vielä pari hengenvetoa, ja Nola ei liikahtanut enää — hän oli

kuollut.
Pitkä ja rasittava keskustelu oli vienyt hänen viimeisetkin voimansa.

Emmepä todellakaan olisi luulleet lopun näin pian tulevan.

Paras oli kuitenkin niinkuin oli tapahtunut. Hän oli kuollut

rauhassa.
 Olin aikonut tiedustella häneltä missä kaukainen vuoriluola oli,
mutta nyt se oli jo liian myöhäistä.

*****

Noin vuoden viivyin vielä Kalkutassa. Tämän ajan kuluessa oli

appeni, vanha Darja Argad'kin kuollut. Päätimme silloin, Surya Me ja
minä, ainaiseksi muuttaa Englanttiin.

Isältänsä Surya Me oli perinyt tämän omaisuuden kaikkineen.

Palatsimme irtaimistoineen myimme Mumin'ille. Jo sitä ennen olin
virastani jättänyt eronhakemuksen.

Samoin kuin päivä, jolloin saavuin Kalkuttaan, samoin nyt

lähtöpäivämmekin oli erittäin kaunis, ja aurinko säteili hohtavan
kirkkaana.

Rannalta laivalla laskiessamme viittasimme nenäliinoillamme

Harthor’ille ja Mumin Argad'ille jäähyväisiksi.

Pian olimme ulkona ulapalla, ja mannermaa alkoi vähitellen kadota

näkyvistämme.

Tällöin — viimeisten rajapiirteitten häämöittäessä kaukana — pieni

Darjamme heilautti vielä kerran terveisiksi nenäliinastaan ja huudahti
kimeällä lapsenäänellään; "Jää hyvästi, jää hyvästi, India!"

Merkilliset tapahtumat olivat enää vain pelkkinä muistelmina.

 *** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MERKILLISIÄ
TAPAHTUMIA ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying
copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of
Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything
for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund
from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law
in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated
with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this
agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached
full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge
with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the
terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears,
or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning
of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or
expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or
a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original
“Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must
include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in
paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive
from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
 about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt
that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project
Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for

the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3,
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the
Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim
all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR
NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR
BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK
OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL
NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF
YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving
it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or
entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide
a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation,

the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation,
anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with
the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the
following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or
any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission

of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many
small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to
maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About

Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.