I don't believe this is true. it's not /muHammadu-nu r-rasuulu/ and not /muHammadu-ni r-rasuulu/
This issue pertains only to reciting Quraan in the traditional received way, which in itself is an overkill and full of phonetical stunts :) Not to mention the different recitation traditions. It is not part of formal speaking, not even when speaking 100% percent classical Arabic. The only case [I know of] is when a kasra is added and not written is when two sukuun/consonant are consecutive, as in /la tursil[i] errisala[h]/. Here, "tursil" is modare' magdhum with a sukun on the "lam"; but the following word starts with "al" in which the alif also has a sukun, hence the need to vowelise the otherwise consonant final lam. I hope anybody can make anything our of what I just wrote :) Salam, Ahmad ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Gregg Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: General Arabization Discussion <[email protected]> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:05:08 -0500 Subject: Re: Volunteers for verifying the quran data Thomas Milo wrote: > Even then, Arabic script does not fully cover the Arabic language from a > linguistic perspective. A (or maybe /the/) striking example is the inserted > vowel between the /n/ of tanween and any initial cluster of consonants, > e.g., /muHammadu-ni r-rasuulu/: it has no orthographic expression (I found > it described as kasra, bound to a small nuun in an Ottoman handbook, but I > never attested it in a manuscript). (I think you mean /muHammadu-nu r-rasuulu/ ;)
_______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
