Talk:Sibawayh

Sibawayhi's full name is: ʕAmr ibn ʕUthmān ibn Qanbar - al-mulaqqab bi-"Sibawayhi". That is: "ʕAmr ibn ʕUthmān ibn Qanbar - a.k.a. Sibawayhi". Compare: The article in Britannica. yhever 23:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

What's this BS nonsense about arab racism? Inferiority complexed self-victimizataion, anyone? Anyway, I'll take the POV points off. Please try to find some sources and write the article in a neutral way rather than going of in a racist tirade calling other people racists, okay? Thank you. 195.229.241.181

The etymology provided here seems unlikely; it should be cited. ——Jasper Zanjani (talk) 23:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

The citation I gave from Kees Versteegh was called into question, so I thought I'd provide a full quote. I am not an expert on this matter, & don't wish to argue it with those who know better, but I don't think I'm misreading Versteegh:

"In spite of the reputation of the Kitâb we know surprisingly little about Sîbawayhi’s life. The few facts that are reported by the biographers can be told quickly. His full name was ’Abû Bishr ‘Amr ibn ‘Uthmân ibn Qanbar; he was born somewhere around 750 in Persia and received the nickname of Sîbawayhi, which in Persian means 'smell of apples', according to some sources because he had a sweet breath." (29)

That said, the current version is a problem: The claims made in the sentence aren't supported by the cited source, and actually implicitly contradict it. I'm removing the particularly problematic part—that the name likely references his eminence as a grammarian. (Again: This seems very probable, but it is in conflict with the cited source.) I'm also changing the romanisation of the Persian to match the Manual of Style. Pathawi (talk) 21:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

there is an image of his tomb in shiraz found here. i don't know about the copyright.--Xashaiar (talk) 01:20, 15 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

He was far from the greatest IMO, and as such that statesment is obviously POV. The guy simply compiled books from three generations of Arab gramatarians before him - contributing nothing new. It is unsourced and so removed. Pink Princess (talk) 12:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

You were correct in removing the POV, but your characterization is absolutely wrong, sir. Sibawayh wasn't merely compiling work of grammarians before him; he quoted from authorities, but no scholar of the Arabic language - East or West - claims what you're claiming here. MezzoMezzo (talk) 21:55, 20 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

I just obtained source 3 from university Metalib. The use of it in the statement is biased towards a Persian Nationalism agenda - it quotes the opinions of his followers as to the partisanship of the scholars in the debate, but not the opinions of the scholars that the guy's knowledge of the Arabic language was frankly not good enough. I have removed that biased quote as it firstly serves no purpose but to flasely bolster the greatness of the guy for political agendas. Pink Princess (talk) 12:20, 11 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have researched this individual extensively and I have never seen, at any time, from a recognized scholar of the Arabic language from any part of the world, the claim that Sibawayh's knowledge "wasn't good enough." While the removal of overtly rosy POV should be removed as you did, pushing a fringe POV shouldn't be allowed either. MezzoMezzo (talk) 21:57, 20 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

The section on Al Kitab is completely unsourced and full of POV with an agenda to bolster his achievements. Section removed due to lack of sources and purpose. Pink Princess (talk) 12:24, 11 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Could someone come up with a citation for the death date? That seems pretty critical. -- Spizzirroj (talk) 03:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)Reply