Syntactic Analysis of Mā al-Taʻajjubīya

The Arabic structure known as ما التعجّبيّة mā al-taʻajjubīya, or the “exclamatory mā”, expresses wonder or astonishment:

ما أَعْجَبَ الأَمْطارَ!
Mā aʻjaba l-amṭāra!
“How marvellous are the rains!”

ما أَكْرَمَ ضِرْغاماً!
Mā akrama Ḍirghāman!
“What a generous person Dirgham is!”

Traditionally, this has been analyzed as follows: The whole is a nominal sentence (جملة اسميّة), where the indeclinable particle (حرف مبني) ما mā stands in lieu of the topic (في محلّ مبتدأ). In place of the predicate (في محلّ خبر) is a verbal sentence (جملة فعليّة) comprising the rest of the exclamation. What looks like a superlative adjective (e.g., أعجب aʻjab) is actually a past-tense verb (فعل ماضٍ) of form IV, and the noun being exclaimed at (المتعجّب منه, e.g., الأمطار al-amṭār) is this verb’s direct object (مفعول به) in the accusative case (حالة النصب).

This analysis seems to me illogical, misleading and needlessly complex. Common sense would suggest we are in fact dealing with a superlative adjective (اسم التفضيل) for the “astonishing” quality. There’s no sense of verbal action, and certainly not of causation as form IV would imply. And there seems no reason for regarding the noun as a direct object, except a contrived attempt to account for the accusative case. It may have tradition behind it, but we can do better.

Here is an attempt at a more sensible analysis: ما mā is simply an “exclamatory particle” (حرف التعجّب) which by its nature governs the accusative (أداة النصب), just as إنّ inna, لا lā and other particles do. Next comes a true superlative, accusative by virtue of ما mā (منصوب بما التعجّبيّة). Since superlative adjectives are diptotes (ممنوع من الصرف), this explains the lack of nunation on the adjective as well. Finally we have a noun in apposition (بدل) with that adjective, which naturally agrees with its referent in case.

ما: حرف التعجّب وهو أداة النصب.
أَعْجَبَ: اسم التعجّب وهو منصوب بالفتحة.
الأَمْطارَ: متعجّب منه بدل من ‹أعجب› منصوب بالفتحة.