پژوهشی در الصّراح من الصّحاح

Abstract
The Arabic–Persian dictionary Al-sorāh men al-sehāh, compiled by Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad Qarshi, is a concise Persian translation of Tāj al-loghat va Sehāh al-Arabiyyat by Abu Nasr Ismail ben Hammād Jowhari (d. 393 AH). Qarshi completed Al-sorāh men al-sehāh in Kāshghar in 700 AH. In 1397 SH/2018 CE, Mohammad-Hosayn Heydariān produced a critical edition of Al-sorāh men al-sehāh; this edited text forms the basis of the present study. Focusing on the Persian equivalents, this article systematically catalogs the dictionary’s rare, prominent, and valuable lexical items. First, the Persian equivalent is recorded as the headword, followed by its Arabic original, or by the Arabic original together with a definition containing the equivalent. When the Arabic source is obscure or archaic, modern equivalents or succinct definitions, drawn from comparative consultation of classical lexica, are supplied. Numerous Persian renderings found in Al-sorāh men al-sehāh also appear in earlier and later Arabic–Persian dictionaries, attesting to reciprocal intertextual influences between Qarshi’s work and its lexicographical predecessors and successors. To elucidate these diachronic and intertextual networks, each entry is cross-referenced with relevant early Arabic–Persian dictionaries. Finally, a quantitative analysis delineates the intertextual relationships between Al-sorāh men al-sehāh and other early Arabic–Persian dictionaries, shedding light on its place within the broader tradition of bilingual lexicography.
Keywords: Al-sorāh men al-sehāh, Jamāl Qarshi, Rare Lexical Units, Intertextuality, Early Arabic–Persian Dictionaries
1. Introduction
Al-sorāh men al-sehāh is an Arabic–Persian dictionary and one of the works of Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled, known as Jamāl Qarshi (see: Qarshi, 1397: 1/«ح‌ح‌ح»; Zāker al-Hosayni, 1382: 12–13, 18). This book is essentially a concise translation of Tāj al-loghat va Sehāh al-Arabiyyat by Abu Nasr Ismail ben Hammād Jowhari (d. 393 AH). Qarshi spent a considerable period abridging Sehāh and translating its lexical items into Persian, and completed Al-sorāh men al-sehāh in 700 AH (see: Qarshi, 1397/2018, pp. 2/2170; Monzavi, 1337/1958, pp. 145, 147).
In 1397/2018 SH, Mohammad-Hosayn Heydariān edited and published Al-sorāh men al-sehāh. This edited text serves as the basis of the present research. Focusing on the Persian sections and equivalents, this article records and examines the rare, prominent, and valuable lexical items of this dictionary and, finally, through a quantitative method, discusses the intertextual relationships between Al-sorāh men al-sehāh and other early Arabic–Persian dictionaries.
2. Literature Review
Heydariān (1397/2018) in his introduction to Al-sorāh men al-sehāh, mentions a number of the text’s Persian “unknown or low-frequency words” and “examples of simple and compound verbal nouns.” He does not, however, provide a comprehensive and rigorous definition of these lexical units, nor does he offer a comparative, intertextual, or statistical examination of them. Instead, he merely presents a brief alphabetical list of low-frequency equivalents together with their Arabic originals.
Sāhebi (1402/2023), in an article, discusses the method of editing Al-sorāh men al-sehāh from a critical perspective. He examines Heydariān’s errors and misreading’s by consulting the manuscripts used by him and offers his own proposed correct readings. He notes discrepancies and inconsistencies between the readings of the printed text and those of the manuscripts, and points to some of the defects and shortcomings of the edited text in comparison with the manuscript witnesses.
3. Methodology
In this study, the low-frequency words recorded in Al-sorāh men al-sehāh as equivalents of Arabic headwords are presented and examined in alphabetical order. In each case, the Persian equivalent is first given as the headword, followed by its Arabic original, or by the Arabic original together with a definition containing the equivalent. Unfamiliar Persian words have been vocalized on the basis of the printed text of Al-sorāh men al-sehāh, its manuscripts, and Persian dictionaries. Whenever the Arabic original is not sufficiently clear, explicit, or familiar, a modern definition or synonym has been provided for each lexical unit through consultation of other dictionaries and sources.
Some of the low-frequency Persian equivalents found in Al-sorāh men al-sehāh are also attested in Arabic–Persian dictionaries composed both before and after it. To demonstrate these intertextual relationships, references to other early Arabic–Persian dictionaries are cited in the documentation of each entry.
4. Results
Table 1 presents those Arabic–Persian dictionaries that predate Al-sorāh men al-sehāh and share with it at least three low-frequency equivalents in the sense intended by Qarshi. The table lists both the number of similar cases and the degree of overlap expressed as a percentage (for the dates of composition or transcription of these works, see: Karamaini, 1385/2006, front cover; Monzavi, 1337/1958, pp. 11, 19–27, 42–43, 65–69, 136–138; Mohaqqeq, 1382/2003, p. 13).
Those early Arabic–Persian dictionaries compiled after Al-sorāh men al-sehāh that likewise share at least three low-frequency equivalents with it in the sense intended by Qarshi are presented in Table 2 (for the dates of composition of these works, see: Monzavi, 1337/1958, pp. 152, 169–171, 246; Mohtadi, 1393/2014, pp. 45–47).

Table 1
Classical Arabic–Persian Dictionaries Predating Al-sorāh men al-sehāh and Their Degree of Lexical Overlap




Title


Number of similar cases


Degree of similarity




Tāj al-asāmi


25


27.17%




Takmelat al-asnāf of Karamaini


34


36.95%




Dastur al-loghat and al-merqāt of Adib Natanzi


5


5.43%




Qānun al-adab of Taflisi


4


4.34%




Ketāb al-masāder of Zuzani


4


4.34%




Lesān al-tanzil


3


3.26%




Moqaddamat al-adab of Zamakhshari


17


18.47%




Table 2
Classical Arabic–Persian Dictionaries Postdating Al-sorāh men al-sehāh and Their Degree of Lexical Overlap




Title


Number of similar cases


Degree of similarity




Kholāsat al-loghāt of Jonābezi


6


4.65%




Dastur al-ekhvān of Dahhār


13


10.07%




Montahā al-arab of Safipuri


110


85.27%




5. Conclusion
Some of the low-frequency Persian equivalents found in Al-sorāh men al-sehāh are also attested in Arabic–Persian dictionaries compiled both before and after it. This suggests that the author of Al-sorāh men al-sehāh was probably influenced by earlier dictionaries and that Al-sorāh men al-sehāh itself, in turn, influenced later lexicographical works. If rare words are taken as the statistical sample, it may be concluded that Al-sorāh men al-sehāh’s indebtedness to Takmelat al-asnāf and Tāj al-asāmi, as well as its influence on Montahā al-arab, is significant and worthy of closer examination in future research. Moreover, it should be noted that Al-sorāh men al-sehāh exhibits the highest degree of intertextual relations with Montahā al-arab.
Bibliography
Adib Natanzi, Badiʿ al-Zamān Abu ʿAbdollāh Hosayn. (1384/2005). Dastur al-loghat (ʿAli Ardalān Javān, Ed.). Beh-Nashr. [In Persian]
Adib Natanzi, Badiʿ al-Zamān Abu ʿAbdollāh Hosayn. (1346/1967). Al-merqāt (Seyyed Jaʿfar Sajjādi, Ed.). Bonyād-e Farhang-e Irān. [In Persian]
Dahhār, Qāżi Khān Badr Mohammad. (1349–1350/1970–1971). Dastur al-ekhvān (Saʿid Najafi Asadollāhi, Ed.). Bonyād-e Farhang-e Irān. [In Persian]
Heydariān, Mohammad-Hosayn. (1397/2018). Introduction. In Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled Qarshi, Al-sorāh men al-sehāh (Mohammad-Hosayn Heydariān, Ed.). Anjoman-e Āthār va Mafākher-e Farhangi. [In Persian]
Jonābezi, Mohammad Moʾmen ben Abu al-Hasan. (1393/2014). Kholāsat al-loghāt (Hosayn Mohtadi, Ed.). Majmaʿ-e Zakhāyer-e Eslāmi. [In Persian]
Karamaini, ʿAli ben Mohammad ben Saʿid. (1385/2006). Takmelat al-asnāf (ʿAli Ravāqi, Ed.). Anjoman-e Āthār va Mafākher-e Farhangi. [In Persian]
Lesān al-tanzil. (1382/2003). Mahdi Mohaqqeq (Ed.). Elmi va Farhangi. [In Persian]
Mohaqqeq, Mahdi. (1382/2003). Introduction. In Lesān al-tanzil. Mahdi Mohaqqeq (Ed.). ʿElmi va Farhangi. [In Persian]
Mohtadi, Hosayn. (1393/2014). Introduction. In Mohammad Moʾmen ben Abu al-Hasan Jonābezi, Kholāsat al-loghāt (Hosayn Mohtadi, Ed.). Majmaʿ-e Zakhāyer-e Eslāmi. [In Persian]
Monzavi, A. (1337/1958). Arabic-to-Persian dictionaries. University of Tehran. [In Persian]
Qarshi, Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled. (1382/2003). ʿOrāżat al-ʿArūżiyyin (Mohsen Zāker al-Hosayni, Ed.). Nāmeh-ye Farhangestān, Supplement 13. [In Persian]
Qarshi, Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled. (1397/2018). Al-sorāh men al-sehāh (Mohammad-Hosayn Heydariān, Ed.). Anjoman-e Āthār va Mafākher-e Farhangi. [In Persian]
Safipuri, ʿAbd al-Rahim ben ʿAbd al-Karim. (1397/2018). Montahā al-arab fi loghāt al-Arab: Arabic–Persian (ʿAlirezā Hājiān-Nezhād, Ed.). Sokhan. [In Persian]
Sāhebi, Sayyed Mohammad. (1402/2023). A critique of the edition of Al-sorāh men al-sehāh. Kohan-Nāmeh-ye Adab-e Pārsi, 14(2), 197–229. https://doi.org/10.30465/CPL.2023.41615.3108.
Tāj al-asāmi. (1367/1988). ʿAli Owsat Ebrāhimi (Ed.). Markaz-e Nashr-e Dāneshgāhi. [In Persian]
Taflisi, Abu al-Fazl Hobaysh ben Ebrāhim ben Mohammad. (1350–1351/1971–1972). Qānun al-adab (Gholām-Reżā Ṭāher, Ed.). Bonyād-e Farhang-e Irān. [In Persian]
Zāker al-Hosayni, Mohsen. (1382/2003). Introduction. In Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled Qarshi, ʿOrāżat al-ʿArūżiyyin (Mohsen Zāker al-Hosayni, Ed.). Nāmeh-ye Farhangestān, Supplement 13. [In Persian]
Zamakhshari, Jārallāh Abu al-Qāsem Mahmud. (1386/2007). Moqaddamat al-adab: Based on the Leipzig 1843 edition (Mahdi Mohaqqeq, Intro.). Institute of Islamic Studies, University of Tehran–McGill University. [In Persian]
Zuzani, Abu ʿAbdollāh Hosayn ben Ahmad. (1374/1995). Ketāb al-masāder (Taqi Binesh, Ed.). Alborz. [In Persian]