الافتراض في التعليل النحوي و مكانته في رد دعوى التأثير الأرسطي

Abstract EN

The Islamic and Greek thoughts shared the same method in validating certainty, but both have different approached in arriving at it.

While the latter acknowledges the existence of mental knowledge independent from the reality and depends on it as a method to validate certainty, the former does not accept that but instead resort to experiment alone as a method to strengthen certainty.

Greek certainty is absolute in its conditions, while the Islamic certainty is hypothetical.

The researcher takes this difference as an argument against the claim that Arabic grammar is influenced by Greek logic.

By deductively and critically examining this issue in the process of hypothesizing that is inherent in Arabic.

The study concludes with the following: the objective of grammatical justification is to preserve the cohesion of the language system and to regulate its totality through its clarifying function as an agent and purpose that would protect it from any disrupting cause; of which is the raison d’etre of Arabic grammar, in particular, the Quranic grammar.

The grammarians began with syntactical general rulings in finding their suitable justification by experimenting with Arabic itself; and the Greek certainty (Aristotelian) is absolute in its condition while the Islamic certainty is hypothetical and this is the method used by the Arabic grammarians to construct the Arabic grammar that was based on linguistic rationalization through the hypothesis that represents specific understanding of reason in Islamic thought.