It's common for Islamic scholars to make grandiose claims about the literary inconceivability and ingenuity of the Quran. Was the Quran revolutionary in a textual sense, and if so to what degree compared to other landmark works?

by Oedium
tropical_chancer

The Qur'an is an Arabic text, so to really understand the Qur'an you have to understand Arabic, and specifically Quranic Arabic. There is internal poetics to the Qur'an on how Arabic is used that gets completely lost in translation.

8th century Arabs placed very high cultural value on poetry and recitation. So the Qur'an was a continuation of that tradition, but at the same time was different from the tradition. The Qur'an is meant to be primarily recited. Devout Muslims will recite verses (either aloud or silently) from the Qur'an at least 17 times a day. In fact "Qur'an" means "the recitation" in Arabic. Prior to the birth of Islam, most Arabic poetry and recitations were things like eulogies, or tales of your tribe's battles. Trace of this can be found in the Quran, but the Qur'an diverged on exactly what the text was about. Never had it focused on religion in the Abrahamic tradition. For a good view of Arabic poetry around the time of the birth of Islam, see the poetry of al-Khansaa who lived during the time of Muhammed. So the Qur'an is a product of this tradition and can be looked at as almost a long form poem that is meant to be recited, as opposed to read.

But from a historical linguistic viewpoint the Quran was revolutionary. It helped to standardize Arabic orthography. It helped to turn Arabic into a literary language. It was probably the first Arabic work to go meticulous writing down. It helped to give an official register to Arabic. Modern Standard Arabic is based on Quranic Arabic.

In regards to comparing it, do you mean other landmark religious works, or Arabic texts in general?