The Prepositions and their Phonetic and Semantic Effect in the Quranic context: A Grammatical Empirical Study Applied on the First Qarter of the Holy Quran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prepositions in general are used to represent, disclose and express ideas as they are closely related to clarifying the significance of the context in all its forms. The study of their meanings is of great importance to grammarians and commentators. Therefore, the interpretation of the meaning of these prepositions need from the researcher to go deeper to reveal how to be used to give the desired meaning، and then elicit the required result and the intended purpose as well. These facts inspired the researcher to select the current study under the title (Prepositions and their verbal and moral impact in the Qur’anic context - a semantic grammatical study on the first quarter of the Holy Qur’an). This study, therefore, dealt with the verbal and moral impact of prepositions in the context of the Holy Qur’an in the selected verses that have been chosen from the first quarter, in which these prepositions were mentioned. The purpose behind choosing the first quarter of the Holy Qur’an was that because it contains the most preposition types as well as the jurisprudent perspective، doctrinal، and ethical rulings that are the basic foundations of human life. Also because of the impact it contains in clarifying the aesthetics of the context and Qur’anic expression، which thus led to enriching the moral connotations that are one of the aspects of the miracle of the Holy Qur’an. Finally, extracting the final result of those prepositions that were mentioned in the first quarter of the Holy Qur’an in terms of their usage. indications and the number of occurrences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".