Formulation of the Claim
The phonetic, phonemic, and rhythmic dimensions of exegesis have not yet been studied with sufficient seriousness.
Explanation
Arkoun acknowledges that this analytical field is still incomplete, and that what has been accomplished in it does not meet the demands of the subject. The reference to rhythm therefore does not appear as an isolated addition, but rather as a reminder of an existing deficiency in prior studies.
From within this horizon, the call to attend to sound and rhythm appears tied to the limits of available knowledge, not to a fully formed alternative proposal. The atom points to a flaw in analytical practice more than it offers an independent theory.
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This atom falls within Arkoun’s critique of the tools used by earlier research when it treated texts without giving due weight to the sonic dimension. It is connected to his atlas’s effort to highlight areas of methodological omission that prevent a more layered reading of religious and cultural discourse.
Limits of the Claim
The atom does not imply that nothing has been written in this field, but rather that the treatment has remained insufficient in light of the importance of the subject. Nor does it mean that rhythm alone explains the text; it means only that it is a dimension neglected by earlier treatment.