, as in summiya (was named) and wusima (was marked).

The Kufans’ statement that ism (name) is derived from sima (mark) is correct if this kind of derivation is intended. If, however, what is intended is correspondence in both the letters and their order, then the Basrans’ view—that it is derived from sumuww (elevation)—is correct. For the verb is sammāhu (he named him), not wasamahu (he marked him); its diminutive is sumayy, not wusaym; and its plural is asmā’, not awsām.

The third kind of derivation involves correspondence in some letters but not others. More specifically, the remaining letters may belong to the same class—for example, they may be letters articulated in the throat, as in hazara, ‘azara, and azara. The root material conveys strength, while hā’, ‘ayn, and hamza belong to the same class insofar as they are throat letters.

This also includes alternation between a weak radical and a doubled consonant, as in taqaddā al-bāzī (the hawk swooped) and taqaddada. Another example is the statement that surriyya (concubine) is derived from sirr, meaning sexual intercourse. Likewise, Abū Ja‘far al-Bāqir said: “Al-‘āmma (the common people) is derived from al-‘amā (blindness).” Another example is their statement that damān (guarantee) is derived from damm (joining), meaning joining one party’s legal liability to another’s.

When it is said that one expression is derived from another, this can mean two things. The first is that there is a correspondence between them in wording and meaning, without considering