los arabismos del léxico hispánico primitivo
Clicks: 112
ID: 230938
2004
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
30.0
/100
112 views
31 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #27 of 122 articles by views in nutrition and food science
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 122 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The editorial board of the recently issued Léxico Hispánico Primitivo, an indeed impressive first-rate tool for the study of the Early Hispanic lexicon, has chosen not to reproduce or update the etyma, often suggested by the initial authors and extant in their previous drafts, for a significant number of Arabic loanwords and technical terms found in their sources. Such a decision, taken in view of the difficulties met upon handling of this second ingredient of Hispanic Romance languages, must be respected as wise and preferable to taking unnecessary risks on shaky grounds, were angels fear treading. However, the absence of Arabic scholarship and expertise in this project has taken a certain toll of inaccuracies, namely, wrong attribution of borrowings in both ways, i.e., labelling as Arabic loanwords some terms of another origin (e.g., alcor, alpe, bufunaria, fatel and gardunio), and omitting to do so rightly in other instances (e.g., albar, alhodera, atursihala, bocren, cafal bafal, facenzal, mascul, etc.) or, which is worse, missing the correct meaning of not a few passages of those early documents (e.g., alfada, alguecale, alhiçem, almandra, artarfa azaguaria, azaquia, heite, hotege, oveite, racua, saibi, zamor, etc.) in the lack of access to the semantics of Arabic items. The same shortcomings are at times noticed in the case of Andalusi or Southern Romance items (e.g., armolaita, lahtag, parsair, patín, poplina[ria] and ribel). As a tribute to the memory of tihose great scholars who concerned themselves with gathering and explaining the lexical wealth of our Hispanic languages since their very beginnings, the present writer has tried to contribute a number of remarks that might fill some of those gaps.
| Reference Key |
corriente2004revistalos
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Federico Corriente |
| Journal | nutrition and food science |
| Year | 2004 |
| DOI |
10.3989/rfe.2004.v84.i1.98
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.