ملامح الصنعة النحوية في مبحث الحذف عند النحويين القدماء

الملخص EN

This study is based on the fact that there are two types of Deletion in Arabic syntax: the first is proper and natural employed to meet the needs of natural discourse, whereas the second is unnatural and made up by grammarians.

Though the second one has nothing to do with the linguistic reality, it is used to meet the needs of the syntactic prescriptive rules.

This study, therefore, aims at revealing the aspects of this point-of-view of the second type of deletion.

Consequently, it explores some of the examples cited by grammarians to support their argument.

The study reveals that the Deletion theory, as applied to the examples studied, is incompatible with the linguistic reality; it is rather a tool for supporting the theory of the second type of Deletion.

The grammarians used it to interpret certain structures, having no subjects or predicates, in a manner that would go with the structures they imagined.

Moreover, their view could have stemmed from the government and binding theory because it was incredible for them to accept an object case without an agent causing its objectivity.

To them, this governor is believed to be omitted, and this assumption would enable them to explain syntactic cases.

Thus, they attempted to interpret the syntactical structures incompatible with the normal rules of grammar, for example using the conditional articles with nouns though they are normally used with verbs.

To justify this usage, they would suggest an omitted verb to make this irregular structure seem compatible with the normal rules.

Finally, the study also found out that grammarians were fully aware of the inconsistency of their analyses of the second type Deletion as applied to the linguistic reality.

Nevertheless, they adopted their interpretations and justifications to prove that the rules and judgments they made up were consistent and comprehensive.