Arab Scholars’ Perspectives on the Conflict between Samāʿ (Attested Usage) and Qiyās (Analogical Reasoning) in the Arabic Lexicon

Abstract

This study addresses a subtle linguistic issue represented by the conflict between samāʿ (attested usage) and qiyās (analogical reasoning) in the Arabic lexicon. This issue has occupied scholars since the earliest periods of the Arabic language due to its significant impact on the formation of grammatical rules and standards of eloquence. The study aims to survey the perspectives of both classical and modern Arab scholars by analyzing their positions regarding the primacy of samāʿ over qiyās, or vice versa, and clarifying the theoretical foundations of each approach. Furthermore, it examines the implications of this conflict for lexicographical practice, particularly how lexicographers have dealt with lexical items attested through usage without analogical support, or those derived through analogy without evidence. The study presents applied examples from major Arabic dictionaries and adopts a descriptive, analytical, and comparative methodology, concluding that reconciling samāʿ and qiyās is a methodological necessity.