I’m studying Arabic and have just learned that the verb “to be” does not exist. For instance, to make the statement “the man is tall” one would simply say “the man tall.”
My question is this: What is the value of the verb “to be”? Does it make it easier to express a specific idea (affirmation, for instance, the man is tall), or does it simply clutter up our sentences with unnecessary words?
Couldn’t you define “is” as “exists as” or simply “exists”?
What about the kind of Zen sentence: “The man is.”
I should point out that my study is at the third week. If anything I said about arabic grammar is incorrect or misleading, please correct me. For instance, how would one add emphasis as in the above message? Is there a specific word or prefix for this?
From a linguistic perspective, you can’t really say that any word is more valuable than any other (similarly, you cannot say that any language/dialect is superior to any other).
MonkeyMan- not being familiar with Arabic, can you tell me if “to be” doesn’t exist, or is assumed? There’s a big difference.
“to be” is, IMHO, the basest verb of self-affirmation. Saying “I am” carries some weight.
What is the value of any word? They express concepts, ideas, lots of things. Language is an imperfect too, but humanity does the best it can.
[quote]
What about the kind of Zen sentence: “The man is.”
[quote]
Or God’s quote to Abraham’s question “who are you”: “I Am.”
Or DeCartes- “I think therefore I am.” (wouldn’t an even more elemental quote be “thought therefore existence”? Isn’t the “I” an assumption?)
Andygirl sed
I hope (and don’t think) I said this. What I was asking was whether or not one system or another is preferable for expressing certain ideas- about existence for instance.
Not that I can speak with any authority, but I’m sure the concept of existence is a part of the language, or can be expressed. My interpretation of what little I understand of the system is that it is assumed. “The man tall” is translated to “The man is tall”. Statements of existence seem almost superfluous (sp?) unless you’re having an existential debate, so is there a reason (other than “that’s the way it is”) to have “is, am, are” sprinkled throughout our language when their absence wouldn’t make any difference in understanding?
Yes, within an existential debate, but we don’t use it that way very often. The weighty statement “I am” can be translated to “I exist” without any loss in meaning.
Some words express ideas better than others. Some ideas are weighed down by too many words. I’m asking a question about a system of language and its ability to express ideas. If existence can be assumed in everyday language, what is the purpose of using “to be” as freely as we do?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by MonkeyMan *
**Andygirl sed
Yes, within an existential debate, but we don’t use it that way very often. The weighty statement “I am” can be translated to “I exist” without any loss in meaning.
[QUOTE]
Hmmm… I don’t know, I kind of like the fact that there’s little hidden existential statements and so forth hidden in the everyday. Maybe not the most efficient for languuage, but more fun!