It's like saying, "Since I don't speak English or American..."

A hallmark of Aramaic is that nouns have an "emphatic" status that essentially ends in -? and is represented by an aleph. In many cases, Arabic final -a(n) is not actually an accusative, particularly when it is claimed to be a "topical accusative" that actually acts as the predicate of a sentence, but the remnant of an Aramaic-influenced writing system (since there is no significant evidence of written Arabic prior to the Qur'an outside a few petroglyphs bearing no resemblance to the current Arabic script).

The 'Alaq sura reading has a few other corrections. It's hard to see sometimes in the translation because often, the words have been translated correctly as the result of people guessing the context, but the actual etymology proposed in the Lisan or by Tabari is completely bogus and an Aramaic root is the likely source.

In that particular sura, he devotes a lot of time to the transition from Aramaic qr? to Arabic qar? and how the Arabic "end-hamza" is a contrived form that arises out of a misreading of Syriac forms of verbs like q(a)r? and b(a)r?.

He also shows that istaghna does not mean "considers himself his own master" but rather, "he has become rich", and then in Line 7, the conjunction anna, introducing a dependent clause, was contorted to be inna, the intensifying particle introducing a new main clause.

A lot of it is very technical.

As for Islamic theology, I think there is a definite connection between the "anti-intellectual streak" and "anti-critical thinking" that arose in the late medieval period and the decline of the Islamic world generally.