Old Hijazi Arabic
Old Hejazi, or Old Higazi, is a variety of Old Arabic attested in Hejaz from about the 1st century to the 7th century. It is the variety thought to underlie the Quranic Consonantal Text and in its later iteration was the prestige spoken and written register of Arabic in the Umayyad Caliphate.
Classification
Old Ḥejāzī is characterized by the innovative relative pronoun ʾallaḏī, ʾallatī, etc., which is attested once in the inscription JSLih 384 and is the common form in the QCT, as opposed to the form ḏ- which is otherwise common to Old Arabic.The infinitive verbal complement is replaced with a subordinating clause ʾan yafʿala, attested in the QCT and a fragmentary Dadanitic inscription.
The QCT along with the papyri of the first century after the Islamic conquests attest a form with an l-element between the demonstrative base and the distal particle, producing from the original proximal set ḏālika and tilka.
The emphatic interdental and lateral were realized as voiced, in contrast to Northern Old Arabic, where they were voiceless.
Phonology
Consonants
The sounds in the chart above are based on the constructed phonology of Proto-Semitic and the phonology of Modern Hejazi Arabic.Notes:
- The consonants and were voiced, in contrast with Northern Old Arabic, where they may have been voiceless
- The glottal stop was lost in Old Hejazi, except after word-final . It is still retained in Modern Hejazi in few positions.
- Historically, it is not well known in which stage of Arabic the shift from the Old Hejazi phonemes,, and to Modern Hejazi , , and occurred. Although the change in and has been attested as early as the eighth century CE, and it can be explained by a chain shift → →.
Vowels
The QCT attests a phenomenon of pausal final long -ī dropping, which was virtually obligatory.
Example
Here is an example of reconstructed Old Hejazi side-by-side with its classicized form, with remarks on phonology:Old Hejazi | Classicized |
bism allāh alraḥmān alraḥīm 1) ṭāhā 2) mā anzalnā ʿalayk alqurān litašqē 3) illā taḏkirah liman yaḫšē 4) tanzīlā mimman ḫalaq alarḍ walsamāwāt alʿulē 5) alraḥmān ʿalay alʿarš astawē 6) lah mā fī lsamāwāt wamā fī larḍ wamā baynahumā wamā taḥt alṯarē 7) waïn taǧhar bilqawl faïnnah yaʿlam alsirr waäḫfē 8) allāh lā ilāh illā huww lah alasmāʾ alḥusnē 9) wahal atēk ḥadīṯ mūsē 10) iḏ rāʾ nārā faqāl liählih amkuṯū innī ānast nārā laʿallī ātīkum minhā biqabas aw aǧid ʿalay alnār hudē 11) falammā atēhā nūdī yāmūsē 12) innī anā rabbuk faäḫlaʿ naʿlayk innak bilwād almuqaddas ṭuwē | bismi llāhi rraḥmāni rraḥīm 1) ṭāhā 2) mā ʾanzalnā ʿalayka lqurʾāna litašqā 3) ʾillā taḏkiratan liman yaḫšā 4) tanzīlan mimman ḫalaqa lʾarḍa wassamāwāti lʿulā 5) ʾarraḥmānu ʿalā lʿarši stawā 6) lahū mā fī ssamāwāti wamā fī lʾarḍi wamā baynahumā wamā taḥta ṯṯarā 7) waʾin taǧhar bilqawli faʾinnahū yaʿlamu ssirra waʾaḫfā 8) ʾallāhu lā ʾilāha ʾillā huwa lahū lʾasmāʾu lḥusnā 9) wahal ʾatāka ḥadīṯu mūsā 10) ʾiḏ raʾā nāran faqāla liʾahlihī mkuṯū ʾinnī ʾānastu nāran laʿallī ʾātīkum minhā biqabasin ʾaw ʾaǧidu ʿalā nnāri hudā 11) falammā ʾatāhā nūdiya yāmūsā 12) ʾinnī ʾana rabbuka faḫlaʿ naʿlayka ʾinnaka bilwādi lmuqaddasi ṭuwā |
Notes:
- Basmala: final short vowels are lost in context, the /l/ is not assimilated in the definite article
- Line 2: the glottal stop is lost in /qurʾān/, proto-Arabic */tišqaya/ collapses to /tašqē/
- Line 3: /taḏkirah/ < */taḏkirat/ < */taḏkirata/. The feminine ending was probably diptotic in Old Hejazi, and without nunation
- Line 4: /tanzīlā/ from loss of nunation and subsequent lengthening. Loss of glottal stop in /alarḍ/ has evidence in early scribal traditions and is supported by Warsh
- Line 5: Elision of the definite article's vowel in /lʿarš/ is supported by similar contextual elision in the Damascus psalm fragment. /astawē/ with fixed prothetic /a-/ is considered a hallmark of Old Hejazi, and numerous examples are found in the Damascus psalm fragment and support for it is found as well in Judeo-Christian Arabic texts. The word /ʿalay/ contains an uncollapsed final diphthong.
- Line 8: Old Hejazi may have had /huww/ < */huwwa/ < */hūwa/ < */hūʾa/ with an originally long vowel instead of /huwa/ < */huʾa/ as in Classical Arabic. This is supported by its spelling هو which indicates a consonantal /w/ rather than هوا had the word ended in a /ū/.
- Line 10: The orthography indicates /rāʾ/, from */rāʾa/ < */rāya/ < */raʾaya/
Grammar