Significance of alef in بِاسمِ
-
"connecting hamza(t)" to the middle of a word (i.e. ِ
It is not a word. It is a phrase. is a rare two consonant word like some othhers, In all three occurrences without connecting hamza prepositional phrase is at the start of speech and is followed by a word beginning with connecting hamza(t). May be you find some clue in it.
-
Mazhar -- Thanks for your help.
My observations
• I find 3 occurences of and 4 occurences of
• All 7 words begin with
• I don't believe there are any "disconnecting hamza(t)" in these words; and I believe the latter 4 each have a "connecting hamza(t)"
I am struggling to understand how your post relates to these observations, nor what rule or convention would add a "connecting hamza(t)" to the middle of a word (i.e. ِ. Did I misunderstand something?
What I also notice is that the the use of is always followed by (i.e. ) whereas the use of is not. Is this merely coincidence?
Salaam,
Thank you for this info
Salaam,
Bender -
And may peace be with you Bender -
You are welcome. I just wish someone could help me make sense of it )
Salaam SAbboushi,
At the moment I have no idea
You said I find 3 occurences of and 4 occurences of
I could only find 2 occurences of in 1141 and in 2730. Where is the 3rd one?Salaam,
Bender -
Mazhar
In all three occurrences without connecting hamza prepositional phrase is at the start of speech and is followed by a word beginning with connecting hamza(t).
It took me a few days to process this. Are you saying that the 3 occurences of differ from the 4 occurences of in another way, namely that when used as the first word of a sentence, is used?
Also, are you saying that in the 4 occurences, the alef is not a connecting hamza(t)?
Confused... but trying to get through it!
-
Hours of research later... so many questions (
-
If an Arabic grammarian were asked to translate (in writing) these phrases into Arabic ("In the name of God", "So glorify the name of your Lord", "Read in the name of your Lord", for what reason(s) would they (or would they not) choose to use or in each case?
-
The link provided by Mazhar on hamza(t) leads me to believe that the hamza wasl is only pronounced if it is the first utterance of a statement; but in all 7 cases I have cited, the preposition insures that a hamza wasl is not pronounced. Is that correct?
-
Since there is a difference between writing and speaking is a word whose first letter is not vowelled (such as ) always (or generally?) written with a hamza wasl regardless of whether it is not the first thing uttered in a statement?
Thanks for any help--
Samir -
-
He He! Still clueless
This is still above my pay grade
So, focusing on understanding the things within my graspPeace-
Salaam,
You are not the only one Just don't give up!
Most of time when I study a subject I learn a lot of other interesting things which have nothing to do with the subject at hand but handy for my overall knowledge.Salaam,
Bender -
If really want to taste the eternal and unending mercy of "One who is not at all deity for worship". Please look up under root Ba-Siin-Miim and Alif-Siin-Miim (Siin-Miim-Waw/Ya), in lane and you shall have your answer.
Regards,
Badar
Salam Badar, Wiil you please elaborate the answer by your own words?
-
SAbboushi, thanks for bringing this up. I looked at it a long time ago and could not untangle preconceived understanding enough. You are correct so much to learn and so little time.
is the noun from same root.
is a noun from root Alif-Siin-Miim or Siin-Miim-Waw. There is preposition Ba pre fixed to it.
Now let me correct my own understanding of first two verses of Quran and convey the concepts in simple English without adhering literally to original language
Surah 11
In order to taste the eternal and everlasting mercy of One who is not at all a deity for worship.
Surah 12
The praise, is not at all a deity for worship, rather is the Rabb (sustainer, maintainer, fosterer and accomplisher) of all the disciplines of knowledge.
-
Now let me correct my own understanding of first two verses of Quran and convey the concepts in simple English without adhering literally to original language
John Dryden in seventeenth century identified three types of translation
Metaphrase involving "word by word" and "line by line" translation
Paraphrase involving "sense for sense" translation
Imitation involving variance from words and sense by abandoning the text of the original as the translator sees fit. Translation Theoryp/url]
-
Now let me correct my own understanding of first two verses of Quran and convey the concepts in simple English without adhering literally to original language
Surah 11
In order to taste the eternal and everlasting mercy of One who is not at all a deity for worship.
Surah 12
The praise, is not at all a deity for worship, rather is the Rabb (sustainer, maintainer, fosterer and accomplisher) of all the disciplines of knowledge.
Let me clarify my above comment. So no one tries to misconstrue these, the word meanings used is as literal as it can get. In translation of lost language of Quran. The problem is always with syntax, for it to flow in English one can not adhere to order in Quran. Otherwise, this translation is an open challenge to anyone to prove a single word meaning as wrong.
Regards,