Abstract

“What is the difference between badal and ‘aṭf bayān?” Here is a student question, quite legitimate, which, interestingly enough, does not find an immediate answer. This answer is not found neither in Arabist grammars of Arabic, nor even in the traditional Arab grammars of Arabic which, for many, only rely as a distinction between the two on the sacrosanct ’i‘rāb and in the very restricted framework of the vocative. Thus there is nothing to differentiate two examples given by Ibn Ǧinnī, illustrating respectively badal and ‘atf bayān: qāma ’aḫū-ka zaydun and qāma ’aḫū-ka muḥammadun. Moreover, a grammarian and logician like ’Astarābāḏī even explicitly states that he does not see any clear difference between badal al-kull min al-kull and the ‘atf al-bayān. This criterion is neither distributional, nor inflectional, nor even semantic and pragmatic, even if it results from the latter, but suprasegmental, and it turns out that medieval Arabic grammarians are not deaf to it, as this article will show.