Open main menu



Arabick (not comparable)

  1. Obsolete spelling of Arabic

Proper nounEdit


  1. Obsolete spelling of Arabic
    • 1682, Richard Simon, A Critical History of the Old Testament, page 113:
      I shall not spend time here in observing, how this Arabick Translation differs from the other Translations, and the Hebrew Text in calculation, because there is nothing more common than these sorts of Differences; it however usually agrees with the Syriack Translation, although in some places it agrees neither with the Syriack, Hebrew, or the Septuagint.
    • 1722, Francis Lee, “To the Reverend Mr. Simon Ockley, Professor of Arabick in the University of Cambridge”, in An Epistolary Discourse Concerning the Books of Ezra, Genuine and Spurious:
      When you was pleased to communicate to me some Years ago, your Arabick Version of the Apocryphal Esdras, the Manuscript Copy whereof you was so kind as to leave with me []
    • 1739, Richard Parker, An Essay on the Usefulness of Oriental Learning, page 28:
      If we admire the Italian Language for its Frequency of Vowels, we ought surely to pay the same regard to the Arabick, which, in words genuinely Arabick, never suffers two Consonants to concur, but always interposes a Vowel, or, at least, softens that harshness of sound, which the concurrence of two Consonants often occasions, by such means as the Language is capable of without obscuring the Sense.