Sunday, 1 November 2009


عطر، كلمات فؤاد سليمان ١٩١٢ - ١٩٥١، ألحان حليم الرومي ١٩١٩ - ١ نوفمبر ١٩٨٣، غنتها ماجدة الرومي في عام ١٩٨٢

أنا في الغناء قصيدة حسناء لم أُنظَم بلحنِ

أسمعها فأتذكر أنشودة المطر


نون النساء said...

هناك قصائد تحليها الأصوات بزيادة
فكيف بصوت ماجده..يأتيني من عمق طفولتي

وصباح الخير

Anonymous Farmer said...

That's what greatly differentiates Arabic songs from English songs and what they're capable of encompassing; their words. Even the simplest Arabic songs carry great words that are equally important as the tune itself.

Take, for example, Nirvana, which is a widely circulated, world-famous, and incredibly talented group. Although I am a huge fan but I gotta tell ya that while listening to the song "Heart shaped box", every time he says "I wish I could eat your cancer when you turn black" I cringe a little. Must be the Arab in me.

Fortunately, you don't find that within our songs. That topic would make great research.

Thanks for the translated poem.

Deema said...


هي و إن غنّت من غير لحن، و من غير قصيدة، سيظل صوتها أغنية

و صباح النور


Anonymous Farmer

because Arabic form of wordings is a set of derivatives so the meaning of a word comes from several locations: the three letters origin, the context, the common sense, the metaphor, the resolution, and repetition.

these values make it elastic. it needs a lot of study and practice to control its fluidity.

about the translation, I found a translation for Majda's song but I it's really bad, so I recommend not to read it :)

Anonymous Farmer said...

Miss Deema,

I beg to differ.

Despite their differences, all languages are similar in certain ways. And despite the three-letter-word origin in Arabic, our special infixes (in this case vowels that are inserted so as to employ variations of the original word) are used in exactly the same way any other language is used. So I cannot attribute song lyrics to linguistic grammar.

I can, however, attribute it to culture; what's acceptable and what isn't. What's appealing and what is not. Fortunately, our lyrics are restricted by culture and public preference, which proves that we got good taste :-)

Deema said...

Anonymous Farmer,

Vowels are very complicated in our language, it is not always an addition to produce derivatives -and not only vowels actually produce derivatives in Arabic-, but sometimes a vowel exists in an origin, and there is also the question of hamza ء which can transform to all vowels based on the word and the region.

we always tend to objectify languages, while it has many threads in question for its affect in culture_ take for example:

صدفة و أصداف
you would never know if you literally translate each word to English that they have the same origin..

coincidence, and sea shells


Anonymous Farmer said...

Miss Deema,


sudfa - asdaf = sadafa is the origin for both despite their different meanings.

yaktub - kitab = kataba is the origin, despite their different meanings.

Although these infixes are non-existent in English (or are they), yet language should be objectified in a sense that every native speaker is able to manipulate their own language so as to have it serve them well. And they are able to understand all of these grammar rules even in illiteracy (weird).

Anonymous Farmer said...

Lord, you gotta be smart as hell if you're into linguistics. I envy you.

Deema said...

Anon. Farmer

the beauty of Arabic is that it cannot be objectified unless with its origin, like form making usually objectified to its basic origins (cube, sphere, pyramid)

and what's even nicer is that our origin comes in a past tense; i.e. the complete action. so any derivative will never be taken for granted (coz it will never be a complete action), thus manipulation will always take place, and since 'sudfa' is a derivative then we shouldn't stick forever to its problem as an object but as a relation :)

what is clearly different between both Latin and Arabic is that

first, Arabic language has three numbers (singular, dual, plural) and giving credit to duality gives it a great importance into the theory of description and space.

second, verbs in Latin are based upon active infinitives, and they're mostly -and surprisingly as i just found out- all (in English language) came from Germanic origins, i.e Indo-European which traces a regional influence. and Latin nouns are established names different than verbs (even from the geographical origins)..

while all our types of nouns and verbs come from an origin which is a 'complete action'.

so you can conclude that Arabic is made to move to fly to go forward. because the origin of the word is what happened, the origin represents time (variable) meaning that our studies and stories reflects beliefs which are continuously in labor for other beliefs. while Latin has more visually/virtually centralized forms of language (meaning their studies, stories surrounds one obsolete belief in a myth_a constant) because origins represents ethical values and regions.

sorry for the long read.. ;)

Anonymous Farmer said...

Well you're up early.

Interesting read; way over my head though.

Deema said...

i was up so late in fact ;p

a good way to understand it:
(relating the folk dance the form of words will give you an interesting perception)




but anyways I'haven't studied linguistics to give definite answers, it is just a general realization, upon general opinions, upon general googling.. :)

thanks for the stimulation :)

استذئبوا قبل أن تأكلكم الذئاب said...

أغنية رائعة