Between Sentence Grammar and Text Grammar

It is necessary to read an entire text in order to understand its meaning, or it may suffice to read a few pages or sentences to conclude that the content of the text or discourse is coherent and interdependent. As Arab commentators and rhetoricians have put it, the text constitutes the artistic painting in which one part does not replace the other. On the contrary, this part alone does not represent the content outside the text, it represents the inside and the question which arise here can the readers of the text extrapolate part of it without thoroughly examining and scrutinizing the entire text, and then making a judgment on the text? Therefore, this research will discuss the concept of "sentence grammar" and "text grammar" and to clarify the mechanisms of each of them in reading the text. This study follows the descriptive and analytical approaches . The research has concluded a number of results, including: 1 . and they did not deal with a unit greater than it. Arabic grammarians and many interpreters were far from treating the text as a complete structure, and they did not transcend the sentence. 2 . Whoever begins to read a text, does not have to rely, in his reading of the text, on its vocabulary and sentences that are isolated from the text to which they belong. These vocabulary and sentences are viewed by the critic, or should be seen as a building block in a large structure which is the text. and The research has concluded a number of Recommendations: including: 1. That the critic and the reader of the text depend, for the purpose of its interpretation, on the vocabulary and sentences of the text that are not isolated from the text to which they belong, these vocabulary and sentences are viewed by the critic, or should be seen as a building block in a large edifice that is the text. 2. Both sentence grammar and text grammar have their own mechanisms, concepts, and procedures, and neither the reader nor the critic should make one of them a substitute for the other. and will be divided into three parts, the first part is: the concept of syntax, the second topic is the concept of the text. As for the third axis, it is entitled: Mechanisms for reading and interpreting texts.


Introduction
Grammarians distinguished between the term speech and the term phrase. As for speech, they define it as: speech is a discourse that improves silence, whereas phrase is verb, the doer, the subject and narratives. This understanding is common and widely known, they agreed upon speech as "beneficial words "and phrase as "composed words", and so books of the late grammarians were driven by this including al-Suyuthi and the modern grammarians who followed their approach (Hamasah, 2003) One of the examples of these modern grammarians is Dr. Ibrahim Anis who defines phrase in his words: the phrase in its shortest form is the minimal words that benefits the listener meanings independently, whether it is constructed by a single term or more (Anis, 1966) Thus, does the critic or the reader rely, or should they rely on syntax alone in interpreting and reading the text? If they rely on it to read and interpret the text, is it isolated from the context of the text? Or should the reader and critic leave that approach when reading texts, and rely on interpretations based on text grammar? Is it possible to combine both approaches when interpreting the text? These questions may be answered through this research.
At the outset, I say: there is no harm in influencing and be influenced by other thing. Our heritage builds upon human features of influencing and being influenced by others linguistically and critically., whatever the comparison of human thoughts may be. Especially this one area -in of itself carries noble goal. Human ideas in this specific area are essentially the same, and they have roles like many different manifestations of life, these ideas manifest themselves in different ways, and some may have good base to grow and bloom. The ideas, if naïve, are almost known to the people of the same field, but the ones that give them their framework and shape their image are their own presentation method, their particular organization that arranges the intake, draws the results, or their laws govern them to make them a productive theory in their intellectual field (Hamasah, 2000) This is not a lexical interpretation of the text's words and vocabulary "or deduction of its meanings directly. Reading is a creative act, just like writing itself is a creative activity that reformulate words when received, and the reader's conscience and feelings are upon the text; his repertoire, experiences and taste are based on his readings, and his ability to device meanings that are absent behind the apparent textual system (Hamasah, 2000) So it was inevitable that, in my view, in reading and interpreting it, the text should be seen as a whole building that dealt with the vocal side next to the grammatical side and the linguistic side, even with all the different aspects of the text and this is; Because "dividing the aspects of linguistic research, and specializing each group in an aspect that occupies them without caring about others or benefiting from them, has torn the studied text apart, and so every aspect of the research lost its purpose, and grammar was confined to the narrow closed circle of syntax and structure that does not accommodate to reveal the effectiveness of grammar in clarifying and interpreting the text and extracting its capacities (Hamasah, 2000) The Concept Of Syntax And Its Mechanisms There are two patterns, the first one is referred to as "sentence grammar" and it is related to arabic grammar in its known form. "Sentence grammar" is a type of grammatical analysis that restricts its discussion to the limits of (phrase) or (discourse that improves silence). It is seen as the largest linguistic unit that aims o analyse and regularize (Masluh, 1990) Dr. Saad Masluh differentiates between three perceptions of arabic grammar as follows The first scenario: It is intended to be the original science of sentence structure (syntax). The scenario may be broadened to include morphological or phonetic issues by indicating sentence structure.
Second scenario: the term "syntax" means a broader concept than the first one, as all that relates to the grammar of its vocal and morphological levels, sentence structure and connotation.
Third scenario: In addition to describing the buildings and functional meanings of the language, the researcher means diagnosing the place and linking it to linguistic use. These three perceptions vary in their degree of fulfilment in full terms. The first perception discusses the least whereas the third perception is the closest to ideal. However, they all fall below what is meant, because they all revolve in the orbit of the "sentence" and do not go beyond it to what is behind it. All of them reflect the need for more than just syntax, which is essentially towards my stance, but with a composite analytical device capable of describing the language composition of the text or speech (Masluh, 1990) Therefore, the text falls outside the grammatical area when the sentence and its rules are considered to be its overriding purpose, which, according to Dr. Saad Musluh, "does not recognize the text as a distinct entity whose composition must be treated in a grammatical manner that responds to the requirements of its structure and is qualified to be diagnosed and described. Thus, the text is outside grammar field. Grammatical analysis begins with the fragmentation of sentences, almost isolating them from their context in text or speech, and linguistic behaviour becomes a mere infinite investigation of a number of phrase models, and the grammar merely reveals these models and defines their laws governing their synthetic components so that all speech is under control )Masluh, 1990)

Sentence Grammar And Grammatical Relationships In The Text
"Sentence grammar" neglected many grammatical relationships in the text, to which only a rarity was heeded, relationships that in no way could be read, interpreted and understood without, for example social context; a context of great importance in linguistic study. This importance is emphasized by the functional goal which state that language is a means of communication used by members of society to achieve goals and objectives (Abd al-Majid, 1998) Sentence, in essence is these three levels "in its connotations are linked to a denominator, and this link depends on communication parties in the synthesis and analysis of speech. However, sentence grammar falls short of indicating the aspects of this connection if what spoken transgressed the level of a verbal unit to which it operates (i.e. the sentence) by increase or decrease. It is clear here that there is the need for a description device that goes beyond the limits of the sentence, that examine text connotations and structure that governs it (al-Zinad, 1993). Hence, Van Dijk sees the inadequacy of the syntax to describe phenomena that go beyond the boundaries of the sentence (Masluh, 1990) By relying on the sentence alone in reading the text without relying on these important textual mechanisms, including the context of the situation or the social context, the major complete texts have become far from the goal of linguistic studies. So the necessity arose to study the text linguistically in its completeness, and thus begin serious attempts to consider the texts as a whole as a comprehensive discourse that needs to be analysed. Thus begin the science of text and its grammar which progressed day by day, reaching an understanding of each text, on the basis of the common denominator of texts, with the breadth of each element of that common denominator of qualitative differences, produced by the type and purposes of the text and the context of its composition. Text science has thus provided a major service for communication studies to consider the text as part of communication area. (Shabl, 2009)

Sentence Between Grammatical And Textual Meaning
There is a big difference between understanding the grammatical meaning of the sentence and its textual meaning, and to understand the difference: "Let's now look at the grammatical signs that explains the sentence meaning in order to consider innovative ways of assembling the text. Suppose we have a sentence such as: the man went on his way, and we had to clarify the grammatical signs in this sentence. Grammar signs are different from textual signs, but they are needed to understand the text.
The first indicator is the structural indicator and its representations and manifestations in a sentence and with it combined indicator, rank indicator, associate indicator and attribute indicator which is a moral indicator benefiting from the relationship between the act and the actor and the expression indicator. Together with these signs (or clues), we have come to understand the grammatical meaning of the sentence, but we have not understood the textual meaning in terms of which we do not know who the man is or the circumstances that led him to go as far as we do not know from the speaker or the hearing. Together with these signs (or indicators), we have come to understand the grammatical meaning of the sentence, but we have not understood the textual meaning in terms of which we do not know who the man is or the circumstances that led him to go just like we do not know who the speaker is and who the audience. Hence the campaign became a grammatical example and falls short from the textual illustration (Hassan, 2007 ) The Concept Of Textual Grammar And Its Mechanisms Although the phrase, as Brinker puts it Brinker )2005) stated that "is grammatically the focal unit of the text structure and is cut off from a text, it is described through a point or question mark, or call mark, and is thus described as a relatively independent unit. I say, however, there are many tasks that sentence grammar cannot do, and we can only find its presence in test grammar, De Bojrand and Dressler have "revealed the function it (sentence grammar) cannot perform which is to differentiate between the pattern of texts such as what is information (News), what is scientific (Science Textbooks), what is a poem and so on. It seems reasonable that it requires science of texts, which should be able to describe or explain all features and distinctions between these texts, or text patterns.
Text grammar presents "information on pieces of speech beyond the sentence, which reveals relationships between successive sentences that cannot be disclosed only by considering the individual sentence" (Al-Shawsh, 2001). This means that "many synthetic phenomena have not been adequately and convincingly interpreted by sentence grammar. The situation might change if the description were to consider these phenomena within a larger unit of the sentence, which could be the text. Thus, many of the phenomena dealt with in the text as a major unit were, in fact, the focus of many previous grammatical research that used to consider the sentence as the largest unit of analysis. Text grammar takes into account in its description and analysis other elements not previously taken into account and, in its interpretations, resorts to semantic and logical rules in the vicinity of synthetic bases, and attempts to provide accurate holistic formulations of text buildings and their interconnectedness rules. In summary, the text had set out specific tasks that could not be accomplished strictly if sentence limit was adhered to (Buhairi, 1997) In addition, (text grammar) enables the diagnosis of relationships not considered in sentence grammar), which are relationships beyond the sentence: between sentences, paragraphs and text excellently at lexical level, grammatical level (Sound, morphology and structure) and semantic level (Abdul Majid, 1998) Text grammar is able to offer multiple possibilities in understanding the broad space of interpretation, limiting the composition of the sentence, and thus the partial rules that govern to provide it (Buhairi, 1999) Sentence grammar and text grammar are both different in approach, concepts, tools and procedures. In addition to that, the difference between text grammar and sentence grammar also lies "in the total perception that characterizes both and the cognitive breadth that is unique to it. The analysis of the text in the science of language is foreign to fragmentation, does not stop at borders, and does not accept preconditions, the description moves from one level to another freely and in an organized manner within the framework of a total unity. The gradation between levels is achieved and the differences between structures, semantics, and purposes are taken into account in the contexts of social communication. The research of text is linked to the research of elements outside the actual text related to the text production process, the role of the author, the role of the recipient, the mechanisms of understanding, assimilation, remembering, retrieval, reconstruction, interpretation, and other things that explains the nature of this science (Buhairi, 1997) Since text grammar has such possibilities and mechanisms for reading texts, no one who proceeds to read a text of any kind may rely in his reading of the text on its terms and sentences, isolated from the text to which it belongs. These vocabulary and sentences are seen by the critic or should be seen as a building block in the text. "A true understanding of the linguistic phenomenon requires that the language be studied in text rather than through sentences, in search for their models and marginalize the study of meaning. The study of texts is a study of natural matter that brings us to understand examples of the phenomenon of language; because people don't pronounce when they pronounce, they don't write when they write a phrase or a sequel of sentences, they were expressed in a living linguistic situation through complex multilateral dialogue with others. And so, we see that while writing, there are multiple interrelationships between the components of language formulation, their impairments bounce back and relationships are intertwined in a complex fabric between form and content in such a way that the entire response to phrases or sentence models is disregarded in the phenomenon studied. In response to artificial simplicity that disrupts its essence and leads to the isolation of the essentials, residences and cultural frameworks, it is considered to exist out of syntax (Masluh, 1990) That is why grammarians and many interpreters distance themselves from addressing the text as such, and they refrain from going beyond the sentence, which indicates that there is a distance that separating ancient grammarians. Many interpreters thinks that the best way to approach texts for the purpose of reading, interpreting and analysing them is by transcending the sentence beyond the sentence or into the text, except for what we see at Malaki in his book Paving Buildings or Moradi in his book Al-Gena Al-Dani or Ibn Hisham in his book Al-Labib The Singer. I say, "They didn't use the term paving, which often refers to the image of context-building, both within and above the sentence whereas critics have been influenced from the outset by the phrase "well-paved". The grammarians were more inclined to dismantle it into structures; The first is that the phrase expresses word by word and carry meanings of the word in the context of the individual phrase. The phrase is then only exceeded by its compassion, sympathy, acquiescence, interpretation or response to a phrase such as clause, section, etc. In most of their work, critics of literature have turned to the text in its entirety, especially to the non-introspective stereotypical aspect of this text. Hence, they had to use terms equivalent to their interest in the relevant context. They came up with terms different from grammarians such as systems, composition, aspirations, paving, arrangement and weaving, taking into account the similarities between text, simulations, metals, structures and attires. These are things that appear in their composition and creation to resemble the structure of the text, their attribution were similar to the text in its structure of perfection and beauty (Hassan, 2007) The phrase in Arabic syntax is "the maximum extent to which the grammarians stood, they did not address a larger unit, even when the grammarians was talking about the flexion of sentences, or about correction, striking, etc., They start with the relationship of sentence with another, and not once included them together with a single term that transcended the concept of the sentence (Hassan, 1981) I emphasize that there is no trade-off between them, each having its own mechanisms, concepts and procedures, and one cannot be a substitute for the other, or say if you want, as Dr. Tamam Hassan says, may God rest his mercy, "And no one has two directions to cancel the other. Text recognition does not cancel analytical studies and analytical studies do not detract from the recognition of text study. In our Arab heritage, there are indications of the need to combine the two methodologies, as it is our fascination that the al-Quran interprets each other, and that the Sunnah separates the totality of the al-Quran. The purpose of these matters is to use the text in its entirety to demonstrate its fulfilment of its purposes and then to indicate the use of the text in clarifying its ambiguous objectives (Hassan, 1998)

Conclusion and Results
1. The sentence in Arabic grammar was the maximum extent at which grammarians stopped, and they did not deal with a unit greater than it. Arabic grammarians and many interpreters were far from treating the text as a complete structure, and they did not transcend the sentence. 2. Whoever begins to read a text, does not have to rely, in his reading of the text, on its vocabulary and sentences that are isolated from the text to which they belong. These vocabulary and sentences are viewed by the critic, or should be seen as a building block in a large structure which is the text.
3. Sentence grammar is a type of grammatical analysis that restricts its treatment to the limits of (sentence) or (useful saying is good for silence), in which the largest linguistic unit aspires to be analysed and regularized. 4. I emphasize that there is no trade-off between them, each having its own mechanisms, concepts and procedures, and one cannot be a substitute for the other. 5. Text grammar takes into account, in its description and analysis, other elements not previously taken into account and, in its interpretations, resorts to semantic and logical rules in the vicinity of synthetic rules, and attempts to provide accurate holistic formulations of text structures and their interconnectedness Recommendations 1. That the critic and the reader of the text depend, for the purpose of its interpretation, on the vocabulary and sentences of the text that are not isolated from the text to which they belong, these vocabulary and sentences are viewed by the critic, or should be seen as a building block in a large edifice that is the text. 2-Both sentence grammar and text grammar have their own mechanisms, concepts, and procedures, and neither the reader nor the critic should make one of them a substitute for the other.