Leaving Islam




Linguistic Structure of the Quran Part II

Hamza Tzortzis vs. Ali Sina 

<<  go to part I 


Hello Mr Sina,  

First and foremost the issue is the Quran as an inimitable text. Your "maths" issue relating to inheritance is a way for you to run away from the topic. Lets take one topic at a time, otherwise it will be counter productive. Your "maths" issue is dealt with on this site www.answering-christianity.com and many other sites. This does not relate to my discussion so I will focus on the Quran as an inimitable text.


That was just an example of clarity. I did not want to talk about the errors of the Quran. If you read carefully this point is clear in my last paragraph.  Many Muslims have tried to explain this error and they all have failed. But let us leave the errors of the Quran for another time. Let us concentrate on your list of the unique linguistic features of the Quran and see what do Chandelier Structures, Multi-Tiered Structures, Long Argumentative Structures, Hysteron and Proteron and other gobbledygook you enumerated mean and in what ways they make the Quran an inimitable piece of literature.  


I will take your first paragraph as irrelevant as it is your way of trying to contextualise your argument which has no evidence or basis.

The linguistic features will obviously make no sense to you because you have no idea about literature or linguistics. That is why I laugh when I read your site as it is so unacademic when it comes to the Quranic discourse. 


Keep your laughter for the end. Now try to explain what those “linguistic features” mean and how they make the Quran superior to other books.


Also, if you say that you can make a list of linguistic features in any book, then show me a list with textual examples, try and use my list. I am not saying that you can not provide a list, you can - however I am just trying to highlight a contradiction as you said you do not even know what linguistic features are. You obviously failed to read the "Intoduction to the Qurans Linguistic and Literary excellence" article - so I suggest you read it as it will provide you with examples and a western scholarly point of view. Please try and read all the information I have given you as it will save me time. It also deals with your "subjective" argument. 


You claimed that the Quran has unique linguistic features and you gave me a long list of them. I asked you to go over that list one item at a time, explain what they mean and tell us why the Qurna is different. You are asking me to go and read other articles. Let me remind you that this debate will be read by others and you must keep them in mind when you write. People don’t have time to go and read long articles to understand you. You must concisely explain everything. Please don’t be verbose. You are not going to win by boring people to death. Limit your responses to around 500 words. We do not want to bore our readers.    


As for the list I will give you a very simple small taster (below), the extensive explanations will have to wait as you can imagine it will take sometime. At the end of the example I have provided you with a list of western perspectives, I am sure you wil appreciate that most of these Arabists have actually translated the Quran and are probably in a better position than you in realising the reality of the Quranic discourse. Furthermore I have provided you with a few more simple examples of the Quranic discourse as you have to wait for my explanations to the more complex list I sent you.: 


Stop right here. Argumentum ad verecundiam or appeal to authority is not a valid argument especially when some of these “authorities” were believers themselves. And if they were not believers then why not? Were they sincere or did they have other motives? If they sincerely believed the Quran is miraculous why they did not convert? I am not interested to hear the opinion of the third parties. You must show us why Islam is superior to other books in a clear and convincing way the way I have shown the errors of the Quran. I am not saying so and so says the Quran is mistaken, I show you that it is. So please show us the superiority of the Quran to other books.


Unique Style/Genre  


Is the Quran prose? poetry? By scratching the surface we se that it can not fit in neither. Please see:





Writing in rhyme is not a miracle but rather a symptom of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy and a very strong proof that Muhammad suffered from this disease. See this  

There are other symptoms associated with TLE and most of them were present in Muhammad as I have shown in this article:



Please also see:  

Neal Robinson. 2004. Discovering the Qur'an: A Contemporary Approach to a Veiled Text. Georgetown University Press.  

Hussein Abdul-Raof.The linguistic Architecture of the Qur'an. Journal of Quranic studies Vol. 2, Issue 2. Edinburgh University Press.

M. Abdullah Draz. 2001.The Qur'an an Eternal Challenge (al-Naba' al-'Azim).The Islamic Foundation. 


As I said argumentum ad verecundiam and opinions are not valid arguments. All these people could easily be wrong. Foe every person who thinks the Quran is great there are at least four who thinks it is a very stupid book. You promised to prove that the Quran has linguistic features that are not seen in any other book. Give us that proof. 

I am going to publish these quotes in smaller fonts for those who don’t want to waste their time reading them. They are worthless as proof. In future, I will simply delete them. You are welcome to give us links but please don’t bore the readers by quoting people's opinions.  They are not valid arguments.

[Small example]

"As a literary monument the Koran thus stands by itself, a production unique to the Arabic literature, having neither forerunners nor successors in its own idiom. Muslims of all ages are united in proclaiming the inimitability not only of its contents but also of its style… and in forcing the High Arabic idiom into the expression of new ranges of thought the Koran develops a bold and strikingly effective rhetorical prose in which all the resources of syntactical modulation are exploited with great freedom and originality."

This statement coming from the famous Arab grammarian H. Gibb, is an apt description of the Qur'anic style, but this genre is not simply a subjective conclusion, it is a reality based upon the use of features that are abundant in all languages. This may seem strange that the Qur'an has developed its own style by using current literary elements. However, it should be noted that the Qur'anic discourse uses these common elements of language in a way that has never been used before.

Penrice acknowledges the Qur'an's literary excellence:  "That a competent knowledge of the Koran is indispensable as an introduction to the study of Arabic literature will be admitted by all who have advanced beyond the rudiments of the language. From the purity of its style and elegance of its diction it has come to be considered as the standard of Arabic…"


The Qur'an is an independent genre in its own right.Its unique style is realised through two inseparable elements; rhetorical and cohesive elements. From a linguistic point of view rhetoric can be defined as the use of language to please or persuade.  

Cohesiveness is the feature that binds sentences to each other grammatically and lexically. It also refers to how words are linked together into sentences and how sentences are in turn linked together to form larger units in texts. 


This is not unique to the Quran. Every book that you can think of has arguments that are rhetoric. Every person can speak in rhetoric. This is no proof that the Quran is from God. As for cohesiveness, the Quran fails that criterion. This book is a mishmash of different verses and a hodgepodge of deliriums of a sick mind written during 23 years and they are jumbled together with no connection to each other. No other book is as confused as the Quran. Without tafseer (interpretation) no one can understand it. Why should a book that claims to be clear need so many tafseers?  This is the most incohesive and incoherent book that is ever compiled. Various ideas are scattered all over. Each sentence says something different and they often contradict each other. Hence the “science” of nasekh val mansookh was invented to make sense of the book.    


<   back      next  > 





Articles Op-ed Authors Debates Leaving Islam FAQ
Comments Library Gallery Video Clips Books Sina's Challenge

  ©  copyright You may translate and publish the articles in this site only if you provide a link to the original page.