Author(s): Åahin ÅÄ°MÅEK
After a rapid development in process, syntax science (nahiv), which completed its formation in a very short time, was exposed to some criticisms not very long. In these criticisms in practical and pedagogical sense, it is expressed that it was difficult to teach nahiv with the books in hand and methods of the time. Linguists, stating the difficulties of nahiv, exhibited various approaches in terms of facilitating its teaching dimension. Within this context, as a result of eliminating the difficulties stemming from language and wording in nahiv books and of studies to develop method intended for copyright, comprehensive nahiv books were shortened; and by simplifying the incomprehensible and intricate language used in these books, efforts were focused on facilitating nahiv practically. Also, as in the example of Ibn Rushd, in the period in question, totalitarian approaches in copyright and presentation of nahiv, based on sentence instead of irâb and depending on general rules were revealed. However, it is difficult to state that the efforts of this classical period eliminated all the challenges emerging from nahiv teaching. Because as a result of shortening of nahiv books, the fact that books, which were poor in examples and exercises; and where an intensive language was used, appeared to bring some hardships together. Again, although it is extremely important, the suggestions that Ibn Rushd expressed as “scientific method” were not met with approval since they did not depend on irab and âmil-mamul basically.
The Journal of International Social Research received 7760 citations as per Google Scholar report
