iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 11/09/2026

New Open Access Article: "Nāfiʿ or Ibn ʿĀmir in al-Andalus?" In this article I show that, contrary to the claim in a recent article by @VahidniaAla the Quranic manuscript Arabe 6982 follows the reading of Qālūn ʿan Nāfiʿ and not that of Ibn ʿĀmir. brill.com/view/journal...

195

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 27/08/2026

In 2025 @bnuyaminim.bsky.social and me taught a course on Comparative Semitics at the Leiden Summer School. After some cleaning up, we've decided to upload the syllabus and release it under a CC license for you and yours to peruse through. doi.org/10.17613/b4z...

27434

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 12/08/2026

Yet another bizarre reading of Sibawayh by Carter. To illustrate the concept of waṣl "connected speech", Carter attributes a form to Sibawayh that he *definitely* does not describe and no other grammarian endorses either... This passage is the only passage with فعلتم الخير in the Kitab.

020

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 10/08/2026

That is, maybe they heard a certain reading which they liked and wanted to adopt from a source other than their typical/main source. For ḥafṣ we get a report where he explicitly says he read it because of a prophetic reading report that doesn't go through his teacher ʿĀṣim:

120

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 31/07/2026

Carter in his book on Sibawayh, bizarrely claims that the pausal form of qāḍin is either qāḍī# or qāḍi#, and that the form qāḍ "is now widely accepted as correct, though only very few medieval sources explicitly refer to this form". Plenty of medieval sources refer to it... *including* Sibawayh.

161

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 30/07/2026

But a downside of it of course is that with these kinds of hitstuns, it's impossible to make "safe on hit, but unsafe on block" moves when they don't knock down. Alpha 2 devs didn't quite understand the ramifications of this, hence Rolento has an uncancellable st.HP that is punishable on *hit*

110

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 27/07/2026

But he doesn't even give a sign of being aware of this detail of al-Ṣūrī's transmission, not even to mention it and dismiss it. It's just not in the Našr. While it is rare, every now and then you can find details like this that have simply been lost in transmission, somehow.

000

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 27/07/2026

Ibn al-Ǧazarī is usually extremely meticulous, and I'm often surprised about very small, very specific details that seem to have lost living practice completely to survive in his Našr. For example, he retains the silence after an unvowelled consonant before hamz for Ibn Ḏakwān!

100

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 27/07/2026

And not only that, he gets the paths of al-Ṣūrī through al-Ramlī, also known as al-Dāǧūnī, which is the path through with al-Dānī receives him, and Ibn al-Ǧazarī explicitly mentions al-Dānī as one of the paths of al-Ramlī... so, surely we'd expect Ibn al-Ǧazarī to mention it...

100

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 27/07/2026

So what about the al-Ṣūrī transmission? al-Dānī doesn't claim to transmit from al-Ṣūrī in the Taysīr, so it is no surprise it is not mentioned. But, for Ibn al-Jazarī in his "canonical" transmission of the ten, has two transmissions for Ibn Ḏakwān: al-ʾAḫfaš and al-Ṣūrī.

100

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 27/07/2026

In several other places in the Taysīr, al-Dānī gets fairly deep into the weeds of questions of transmission, even if it concerns transmission paths entirely outside of the ʾisnāds that he is supposedly transmitting in the Taysīr, even if it concerns Ibn Ḏakwān...

100

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 27/07/2026

In al-Dānī's learner's manual (which I translated into English and which you can download for free!) he gives two transmission paths, one through tilāwah and one through riwāyah. tilāwah follows al-ʾAḫfaš riwāyah follows al-Taġlibī doi.org/10.11647/OBP...

100

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 24/07/2026

In the Kitāb al-Sabʿah, he says that Ibn Kaṯīr (transmitter not specified, so presumably both al-Bazzī and Qunbul) read al-wāḏī# with yāʾ in pause. Different from what he says in his three other books! Quite strange, considering Ibn Muǧāhid was Qunbul's direct student...

100

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 24/07/2026

For example, al-Dānī tells us that Ibn Muǧāhid mentions that Qunbul read Q89:9 bi-l-wādī with yāʾ in connected speech but as bi-l-wād# in pause. This is mentioned in his "book on yāʾāt", "book of the meccans" and "the compendium", but it is different from Kitāb al Sabʿah!

100

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 24/07/2026

While Q83:31 is dutifully reported, there is not a trace of a report at 51:60. One might wonder whether this is a corruption in the version of Kitāb al-Sabʿah that has come down to us, but it is *also* missing in his student Ibn Ḫālawayh's kitāb al-badīʿ (Q83:31 is there).

100

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 24/07/2026

Let us focus on the al-Taġlibī report. If we check out the ʾisnād section of the Ǧāmiʿ al-Bayān, we see that al-Dānī receives al-Taġlibī's transmission through Ibn Muǧāhid al-Dānī < ʾAḥmad b. Muḥammad < Ibn Muǧāhid < al-Taġlibī < Ibn Ḏakwān.

100

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 24/07/2026

Ibn Ḏakwān mentions in his book he read both Q51:60 and Q83:31 without vowel harmony. This is reported by: - al-Ṣūrī - ʿAlī b. al-Ḥasan b. al-Ǧunayd - al-Taġlibī - ʾAḥmad b. ʾAnas. Ibn al-Muʿallā only reports Q51:60 al-ʾAḫfaš neither

110

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 24/07/2026

So there is something slightly weird about the report of Ibn Ḏakwān in the Ǧāmiʿ al-Bayān... al-Dānī tells us that al-Taġlibī reports both Q51:60 yawmihumu llaḏī and Q83:31 ʾahlihumu nqalabū without vowel harmony for Ibn Ḏakwān... but where is he getting that info from?

110

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

The Ibn al-Muʿallā transmission is very explicitly written transmission: "I adopted it from the book of our teacher ʿAlī b. Muḥammad b. Bišr", the rest of the ʾisnād uses the typical riwāyah wording. So while the written record clearly favours this exception to the rule...

110

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

al-Dānī's ʾisnād to Ibn ʾAnas is even interrupted. Al-Dānī says "it was reported (fa-ʾuḫbirtu) to me from al-Naqqāš", such passive wording indicates no personal meeting happening between al-Dānī and al-Naqqāš (who died 90+ years before al-Dānī).

110

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

al-Dānī's ʾisnād for al-Taġlibī goes through Ibn Muǧāhid, and all the steps of the isnād to Ibn Ḏakwān are "ḥaddaṯanī". While al-Dānī's ʾisnād to al-Ṣūrī is mostly tilāwah, the first step of al-Dānī to Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Wāḥid is not.

110

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

For al-ʾAḫfaš, al-Dānī has one riwāyah ʾisnād, but a complicated network of transmission paths through the tilāwah mode. For all the other paths mentioned however, al-Dānī *only* has riwāyah ʾisnaḏs. Al-ʾAḫfaš is therefore the only hub for the oral path of Ibn Ḏakwān.

110

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

"Ibn Ḏakwān from Ibn ʿĀmir follows them (i.e. Ḥamzah and al-Kisāʾī) in terms of adding ḍammah to the hāʾ and mīm in connected speech specifically in two places according to Muḥammad b. Mūsā al-Ṣūrī, ʿAlī b. al-Ḥasan b. al-Ǧunayd, al-Taġlibī and ʾAḥmad b. ʾAnas)"

120

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

"Because al-Ḥulwānī explicitly talked abotu that in his book saying it was without hamzah, and this is what I recited in the paths of Ibn Ḥammād and Ibn ʿAbd al-Razzāq, and this is what I adopt." These three paths mentioned are all "oral" transmissions, and they conflict.

130

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

"ʾAbū Sulaymān and the majority of the transmitters of Qālūn transmit that he applied hamzah to them, and like that it was said by ʾAbū al-Fatḥ on the basis of his recitation to ʿAbd Aḷḷāh b. al-Ḥusayn from his teachers from al-Ḥulwānī. But this is a mistake."

120

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

What happens when the written records of a Quranic reading tradition conflicts with the oral? What wins out? The answer here is not always straightforward, and similar circumstances can lead to opposite outcomes. Let us have a look at two cases from al-Dānī's Ǧāmiʿ al-Bayān

181

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 21/07/2026

Harry will certainly also be remembered for his momentous four volume Dictionnaire berbère tachelḥiyt-français. Tašlḥiyt was one of the last major Amazigh dialects that did not have a large dictionary. It went from having hardly anything to having the largest of all of them.

1112

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 21/07/2026

The last text we read through completely, front to back that has been published was the final text to come out in Berber Studies: The whole cycle of Sindbad the Sailor in Tašlḥiyt. As you can imagine, a highly entertaining text to read through.

191

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 21/07/2026

Harry was the editor of the monograph series "Berber Studies" with Rüdiger Köppe Verlag, publishing 59 volumes in the iconic yellow cover, with grammars, dictionaries, text collections and conference proceedings. He published my grammar of Awjila Berber www.koeppe.de/reihe_bs-ber...

171

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 21/07/2026

Yesterday I was informed of the shocking news that Professor Harry Stroomer has unexpectedly passed away. He was emeritus professor of Afro-Asiatic linguistics at Leiden, and one the founding figures of Amazigh studies in Leiden. A short thread on what I'll remember him for.

1329

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 29/06/2026

Forms using the sʕd root for 'nine' are also well-attested in non-Jewish varieties of Moroccan Arabic as well. So I doubt it has anything specifically to do with Tisha b'av

270

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 25/06/2026

Here's a Lam-Alif-cum-Ankh to grace your day. gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/b... You'll get a kick out of this one @majnouna.com

1307

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

al-Dānī tells us that when lā is used in a categorical negation, like lâ ǧarama, lâ rayba and lâ ḫayra, that Ḥamzah in the transmissions of Ḫalaf, al-Dūrī, Ibn Saʿdān and ʾAbū Hišām from Sulaym from Ḥamzah would make the vowel of lâ overlong.

270

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 03/06/2026

You couldn't use agete kudasai to mean "please give me beer". ageru is used for exocentric giving (so usually from "me" to someone other than "me") kureru is for endocentric giving (so usualyl from someone else to the "me"). kudasaru is like kureru like this.

110

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

And because for some godforsaken reason typesetting was better a hundred years ago than it is today now there are no technological impediments is a lost art, the font of the text edition published by Stricker actually has support for these waSl signs.

040

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Also common but barely described is the typical use of a V-shaped shaddah in Maghrebi manuscripts. (here below Salli and above mu7ammad). This *certainly* occurs in Berber manuscripts. May very well occur more-or-less side-by-side with the "normal" shaddah ((not also hamzah before alif in 'âl))

120

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Another important feature: the alif al-waSl: The alif al-waSl is a stroke, which crosses through the alif at the top if the preceding vowel is fathah, through the bottom if the preceding vowel is kasrah, and through the middle if the preceding vowel is Dammah. (dot for ibtida' with same placement)

120

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

This same principle is observed even if hamzah is written with a yellow dot instead of a hamzah sign (so the yellow dot would appear in the middle of the alif). Note that when we are looking at hamzah + fathah + alif, it is written by writing the hamzah BEFORE the alif.

120

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Word-initial hamzah on the alif for the hamzah+fathah and hamzah+kasrah work like you would expect... however for hamzah+dammah both the hamzah and sometimes the Dammah over it are written in the MIDDLE of the alif, not at the top. I've definitely seen this in Berber manuscripts!

120

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Important: in the Lam-Alif, the LEFT leg at the top is the lam, and the RIGH leg is the alif. This word spells "alarḍ" without hamzah, with a fathah on the lam. This may come up.

121

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

This feature is probably not super relevant for what you're interested in, but long vowels spelled without a consonantal waw/ya' are written with a miniature waw and ya' in the vocalisation. This, presumably, will not come up much in non-Arabic writing.

131

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

On the other place Elon Harvey found that Sakhawi preserves the correct wording. This must be it. I checked *three different editions* and all three of them reproduced this nonsensical reading. Makes you realize just how "independent" different editions of a text are.

231

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Strange use of the term 'ghayr mu3jamah' attributed to Ahmad b. Salih. This term would usually mean "without a consonantal dot" which it can't mean here since lâm doesn't take a consonantal dot. In this context clearly seems to mean "without taghlizh" (i.e. emphatic Lam)

2120

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 22/04/2026

also, shout out to our buddy who wrote a thesis on animal names in onomastic who himself carries a proper ism al-ʾasad as his last name. scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/handle/1887/...

030

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 04/04/2026

yā zaydu* without tanwīn in fact! Descriptively, I think it would be better to think of this behaviour not as a bizarre application of nominative and accusative, but rather as a separate vocative case. like so.

2123

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 18/03/2026

Someone on Reddit asked me what the difference between "Quranic Arabic" and "Classical Arabic" is. It was fun to put my thoughts together on this (and the vexed question of what "Classical Arabic" even means. Perhaps others will find this of interest too.

56922

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 27/02/2026

Correct, it's done a couple more times throughout the manuscript, which I get to look at about once a year during my Islamic manuscripts summer school class!

150

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 24/02/2026

Interestingly, even though the Taysir purportedly transmits from al-'Akhfash (tilawatan) and al-Taghlibi (riwayatan), al-Dani neglects to mention these variants attributed to (among others) al-Taghlibi's transmission even though he does mention it in his big book!

110

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 24/02/2026

An interesting report from al-Dani's Jami`: Basically every transmitter of Ibn Dhakwan reported and even Ibn Dhakwan's own book say explicitly that Q51:60 and Q83:31 break with the general rule, and have an unharmonized -humu pronoun rather than his regular -himu.

110