except those who transgress?” (The Quran, 46:35) When using the interrogative bound morpheme /Ɂ-/, most of the time that it precedes any conjunctions, as in: (أو كلَما عاهدوا عهداً) Ɂ-wa kull-ma ʕahad-u ʕahd-an INTROG-CONJ every-time promise(V)-3rd Pl promise-Acc “Has it not always been so that every time they made a covenant?” (The Quran, 2:100) In this view, Arabic syntacticians had different analyses: some of them like Sibawahi (as well as some other Arab linguists of Al-Basrah) believed that when this interrogative prefix precedes conjunctions, it appears in its default position, but may sometimes follow conjunctions. They also believed that the sentence after the conjunction is conjoined to the sentence before both the conjunction particle and the interrogative suffix. Al-Zamakhshari had another opinion. He was among a group who believed that the default position of the interrogative particle is sentence-initially but argued that the sentence after the conjunction is conjoined to an elided sentence between the interrogative prefix and the conjunction particle. In his book, Al-Kashshaf, he brought many examples and tried to account for the elliptical structures they had. For example, he believed that a question like (أفلم يسيروا؟) which translates as “and have not they travelled?" is a surface representation of the original structure (أمكثوا فلم يسيروا؟) which translates as “Have they stayed, and not traveled?” In light of this, Ibn Hisham an 8th-century Egyptian grammarian argued that Al-Zamakhshari was the first one to make this analysis, arguing for an elliptical structure between the interrogative prefix and the conjunction particle. On the other hand, Abu Hayyan a 10th-century linguist and philosopher agreed with Sibawahi and strongly rejected Al-Zamakhsahri's analysis, and indeed called it the “Zamakhshariyyan trend”. Still, another linguist known as Al-Dosugi disagreed with Ibn Hisham's view that Al-Zamakhshari was the first one to come up with this analysis; rather, he was convinced that Al-Zamakhshari's analysis is a follow up of what other earlier linguists had already discussed, but Al-Dosugi was not sure who first came up with this analysis. This view seemed to have a supporting piece of evidence because Ibn Hayyan said that Mohammad bin Masoud Al-Ghazni argued for an elided verbal phrase between the interrogative prefix and the conjunction particle, but the literature about this linguist and his analytical approaches seem to be very limited. Nevertheless, historical references showed that he (i.e., Mohammad bin Masoud Al-Ghazni) died in 1029 AD, whereas Al-Zamakhshari was born in 1074