The Diglossia Desperation to hype a total forgery.

Submitted by IamJoseph (Australia), May 11, 2010 at 02:58

Re.

Here is a good article on Arabic diglossia

http://www.innerbrat.org/Andyf/Articles/Diglossia/digl_96.htm

Quote: In the current context I feel the need to offer a coherent explanation and a proposed model for how diglossia works in Arabic. The written language was first systematically codified in the 8th century CE. The Qur'aan and the pre-Islamic poetry were the primary sources of the prescriptive standard for the written language, which has since that time been held in the highest regard by the entire Muslim community as the language of the Qur'aan and the language that the angels in heaven speak.

# We see in this article that the neo and novel term of diglossia is recent, exemplyfying its codification in the 8th Century CE Arabic, qualified as of the higest esteem spoken by the angels. One must ask, is an admix of pre-existing languages, which has contributed the greatest grammar and inspirational expressionism to all great writers and philosophers - of less esteem than the later one spoken by angels - how and why so? - aside from this, what evidence is tended the angles doth speak it? Further, what new realisaztion was derived for humanity by this new, anglespeak - any new concepts, philosophies, laws? I am assuming that angles are a metaphor for higher spiritual beings who can impart hitherto new insights - aka Revelation?

The fundamental factor has been disregarded here. There is no Arabic pre-400 CE - period. And the notion of clinging to an earier hybrid only affirms that premise. Indeed, if one can apply the term angels speak a language, it cannot apply anywhere else than the Hebrew - which appeared suddenly and in a most advanced state of speech and writ, believed by the human majority as the language spoken by the creator at Sinai, and responsible for the greatest contribution to humanity.

The said article also begs the question, are all new languages taken from an admix of older languages also spoken by the angles? Diglossia has no merit, other than to hype up a blatantly false historical premise using imaginitive stretches of the imagination by preferred prpaganda inclinations and to cover up the facts.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".