Preliminary Notes on the Arabic Material in the Petra Papyri

New Nabataean inscriptions from Umm al‐Jimāl

“…It suggests an active participle of the second stem of the root lm corresponding to Classical Arabic mu allim . The simplification of the doubled consonant l does not speak against this assumption, since similar scribal practices are attested in the Greek inscriptions in the southern Levant (24).…”

The Arabic of the Islamic conquests: notes on phonology and morphology based on the Greek transcriptions from the first Islamic century

“…); marbaṣ (the only one with a citation); and al-Mawfa ʿah . The terms of which Al-Ghul's 2006 interpretation is preferred are only five: Ḥagiyāt , Ḥaram , arbāḍ , ʿUrsīyāt, al-Qaṣāqiṣ . The remaining terms have similar or identical interpretations in both Al-Ghul 2006 and Al-Jallad et al 2013. Ελθαις (P. Petra 23, 8): The vocalization [et-tays] or [et-tēs] ignores the fact that the assimilated article is written as such in other examples.…”

“…The terms of which Al-Ghul's 2006 interpretation is preferred are only five: Ḥagiyāt , Ḥaram , arbāḍ , ʿUrsīyāt, al-Qaṣāqiṣ . The remaining terms have similar or identical interpretations in both Al-Ghul 2006 and Al-Jallad et al 2013. Ελθαις (P. Petra 23, 8): The vocalization [et-tays] or [et-tēs] ignores the fact that the assimilated article is written as such in other examples. This pre-Islamic attestation reflects the non-assimilating article (Al-Jallad 2014b: 13–5; forthcoming, §5.5), and emphasizes the need to keep the pre-Islamic and conquest period material separate.…”

“…However, since he included several terms from the Petra Papyri, which fall outside the scope of the current study, I will engage with those in this appendix. Note also that Kaplony claims to follow the interpretations of Al-Ghul 2006 over the edition of P.Petra 17 (Al-Jallad et al 2013); however, in most of the difficult cases, his appendix gives the interpretation of the edition instead of the one suggested by Al-Ghul 2006, without explicitly stating so. These include, following his transcriptions, al-Uǧum ; al-barāḥ ; al-Baṣṣa ; al-maḍīqa ; al-Qaṣab ; qalb ; al-naṣba (with an Aramaic source as well!…”

“…The terms of which Al-Ghul's 2006 interpretation is preferred are only five: Ḥagiyāt , Ḥaram , arbāḍ , ʿUrsīyāt, al-Qaṣāqiṣ . The remaining terms have similar or identical interpretations in both Al-Ghul 2006 and Al-Jallad et al 2013.…”