I don't believe this is true. it's not /muHammadu-nu r-rasuulu/ and
not /muHammadu-ni r-rasuulu/
This issue pertains only to reciting Quraan in the traditional
received way, which in itself is an overkill and full of phonetical
stunts :) Not to mention the different recitation traditions.
It is not part of formal speaking, not even when speaking 100% percent
classical Arabic.
The only case [I know of] is when a kasra is added and not written is
when two sukuun/consonant are consecutive, as in /la tursil[i]
errisala[h]/. Here, "tursil" is modare' magdhum with a sukun on the
"lam"; but the following word starts with "al" in which the alif also
has a sukun, hence the need to vowelise the otherwise consonant final
lam.
I hope anybody can make anything our of what I just wrote :)
Salam,
Ahmad
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Gregg Reynolds <gar at arabink dot com>
To: General Arabization Discussion <general at arabeyes dot org>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:05:08 -0500
Subject: Re: Volunteers for verifying the quran data
Thomas Milo wrote:
Even then, Arabic script does not fully cover the Arabic language from a
linguistic perspective. A (or maybe /the/) striking example is the inserted
vowel between the /n/ of tanween and any initial cluster of consonants,
e.g., /muHammadu-ni r-rasuulu/: it has no orthographic expression (I found
it described as kasra, bound to a small nuun in an Ottoman handbook, but I
never attested it in a manuscript).
(I think you mean /muHammadu-nu r-rasuulu/ ;)