In John Wansbrough's work, Quranic studies: sources and methods of scriptural interpretation, several theses are put forth regarding the material known as asbāb al-nuzūl, occasions of revelation; the overall view of Wansbrough is one which is derived (critically) from al-Suyūṭī, which is that the asbāb material has its primary reference point in works devoted to deriving law from the text of the Qur'ān, that is, halakhic works. He suggests that the presence of asbāb material as found in a haggadic or narrative tafsīr such as that of Muqātil is ‘accidental’ because, while the narrative asbāb reports serve as anecdotes, they do not fulfil what Wansbrough sees as the ‘essential function’, that of establishing ‘a chronology of revelation

It might appear that the Qur'ān does not establish the wuḍū', or ‘lesser ablution’. It mentions only ġasl and tayammum the distinction between which is most clearly expressed in Q. 4: 43:

Do not approach the [place of] prayer when you are befuddled, until you know what you are saying, nor in a state of ritual impurity (junub)—except for those merely passing through [the place of prayer]—until you have cleansed yourselves (taūtasilū); and if you should be ill or on a journey, or come from the lavatory or have touched women, and cannot find water, then make for (tayammamū) some pure soil and wipe your faces and your hands

Arabs have always had a particular taste for brief, concise and witty idioms and proverbs. Whereas an idiom is a ‘transition point’, a necessary introduction to the forthcoming discussion, a proverb is, instead, the climax of that event, the most important domain for the display and evaluation of verbal art. The view is occasionally expressed that proverbs are in fact a dead trait in the modern world. This view is due, at least in part, to the mistaken assumption that only illiterates use proverbs. It is doubtful whether increased literacy and education have seriously affected the quality and quantity of proverbial speech, at least in Arabic culture. Arabs' gatherings, formal and informal, are marked by highly formalized relationships. A formalized relationship gives rise to highly predictable and normalized language such as idioms and proverbs.

The discovery of the Anatolian family of languages early in the present century' confronted Indo-Europeanists with a verbal system of considerably less complexity than that which had been assumed, largely on the basis of Greek and Indo-Iranian evidence, to have existed in the latest common period of the parent language. This raised questions which are still keenly debated today. Did the simplicity of the Anatolian system represent something more primitive than the classic image of Indo-European, out of which the latter could be explained as a subsequent development, or was it the simplified outcome of an originally more complex system, close to that which had been reconstructed before the Anatolian family was known? Where Anatolian had isolated features (such as the ending -i(š) of the 3 s. preterite of the –ḫi conjugation) corresponding to features which characterized the whole of a paradigm in Indo-European (such as –s– in the sigmatic aorist), had it preserved a relic of a once fully-formed s– aorist which had been largely lost as a result of merger with other categories, or was this a 3 s. ending which had subsequently become incorporated into the stem to form a new kind of paradigm?.

Thailand has had a rich literary tradition in which, until recently, serious literature has always been equated with poetry. Classical Thai poetry written during the past 700 years has covered a vast range of topics: religion, history, romance, legendary figures, imaginary worlds and their inhabitants, to name a few areas. For each major composition, Thai literary anthologies provide representative excerpts, plot summaries, descriptions of verse forms used, biographical data for the author when known, and historical background information. Discussions of the organizational principles that lie behind the literary compositions, on the other hand, rarely occur. Rather, a tacit assumption seems to exist that the structural organization of a work is the same as the plot. An examination of literary selections, however, implies otherwise.