Linguistic work? The page is badly torn, and the sentences are broken, but the discussion revolves around the 'jins', kind, class, category and the 'fusul', sections into which the 'jins' is divided, as well as on the 'anwa'' (pl. of 'naw'', kind, type; the accepted opinion of the grammarians is that the 'jins' is a more general term than the 'naw''). An addition was made (by the scribe's hand?) on the left margins of Ar. 146-1.
description
Linguistic work? The page is badly torn, and the sentences are broken, but the discussion revolves around the 'jins', kind, class, category and the 'fusul', sections into which the 'jins' is divided, as well as on the 'anwa'' (pl. of 'naw'', kind, type; the accepted opinion of the grammarians is that the 'jins' is a more general term than the 'naw''). An addition was made (by the scribe's hand?) on the left margins of Ar. 146-1.
Description
false