Textual History of the Qur'an: Difference between revisions

<ref>For a twitter thread by van Putten summarising this chapter, see [https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1500955045755604994 Twitter.com] - 7 March 2022 [https://web.archive.org/web/20220307220749/https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1500955045755604994 archive] It also includes a link to threads summarising other chapters of his book.</ref> In the book he further marshals many additional lines of evidence, all supporting that the QCT was composed in Hijazi Arabic and that it lacked ʾIʿrab (grammatical case vowel endings) as well as tanwin present in "classical" Arabic and the canonical readings. Other features in this reduced grammatical case system, pragmatic considerations, and extra-linguist hints would have resolved to a large extent the resulting ambiguities. Nevertheless, "to the Quranic reciters, placement of ʔiʕrāb and tanwīn was a highly theoretical undertaking, not one that unambiguously stemmed from its prototypical recitation and composition."<ref>Ibid. pp. 153-154.</ref> Chapter 8 usefully puts the findings of the book in the context of the historical development of the reading traditions.