Why is it written إل ياسين instead of إلياسين in 37:130?

[good_logic]

I still think it is two words.Let me elaborate more.

"Ilyas" has not become "Ill-Yaseen" as in one word . In that context "Ilyas" has become "Aal-Ilyas" shortened "Ill-Yaseen" two words, because Qoran has its own rules for grammar,spellings and pronunciation. When you look at the meaning of the verses in context ,you get the idea that GOD is saying Peace on Ilyas and AAl-Ilyas( heavy word in Arabic to say/pronounce, instead Qoran uses - Ill-Yaseen- i.e those like Ilyas( spiritual family/lineage of Ilyas).

My understanding. Unless of course someone comes up with a better understanding/explanation.
GOD bless.
Peace

[SAbboushi]

Thanks - that makes a lot of sense to me. And it seems obvious.

But then I'm mystified / dumbfounded by why the three word by word translations and websites and dictionaries I've already cited do not (to me) seem to support this explanation... and thus treat it as one word...??

[HP_TECH]

HP_TECH are you asking for evidence that 'ill yaasiin" is 2 words, or that 'ill means linneage, pact?

I was asking for evidence that ill means lineage, pact. I am still waiting for evidence of that.
There should at least be similar examples. I am also not strong in grammar of Quran and would like to verify the truthfulness of that claim.

Verification can be achieved by citations, so I am waiting...

[Mazhar]

Yes I agree I find corpus.quran.com to be very useful! I just wish Kais Dukes would finish the Syntactic Treebank, but he told me a few years ago that he does not plan to... he's too busy with wife, kids, job...

Actually their list of roots is from zekr.org which Kais believes to be an accurate verified root list for the Quran (according to his thesis for which he developed corpus.quran.com); even so, they apparently (already) changed the root provided by zekr from to .

Is it just me, or do you (or others) find a contradiction there
http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=%3CiloyaAs#(371303)
If the proper name is "" per that page, can one modify a proper name to be , and separate the first 2 letters of the proper name... (i.e. make it... two words)?

I appreciate the help you and others have given. It has helped me to reframe my question as

Why is in 37130 treated as one word instead of two?

Would appreciate any additional comments from other posters on the info I've provided in this thread

Peace--

http//haqeeqat.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/04.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20006/26.%20Ilyaas%20alahissalam/2a.gif
It has nothing to do with http//haqeeqat.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/07.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Sura%20009/17.%20Illan%20Hamza%20Laam%20Laam/1.gif stemming from Root ; similarly it has nothing to do with http//haqeeqat.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/001.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Surat%20002/2.049/2.%20Aal%20Hamza%20Waw%20Laam%20Followers/3.gif from Root .

It is proper noun and diptote. It is name of a foreign language spelled in Arabic in matching sound of the original language.

The proper names of foreign language are transcribed in target language by spelling them in such manner that they sound as near to the sound in their original language.
Moreover, it is not uncommon that a person is differently called or known by two names.
Ayah 123 to 132 is a paragraph like. The topic of the paragraph is Ilyas alahisalam.
His name is later spelled by the above word.

Except for pronunciation of the original language, the first part neither has root origin nor meanings.

[SAbboushi]

Thanks Mazhar - so it seems you're in agreement with Omar's findings

Omar (Dictionary of the Holy Quran) lists under the root (p. 29)
... According to some it is another form of Ily?s, and both words designate the same person, as Sain?' and S?n?n are both names of Mount Senai.

Even so, I'm not sure that explains why the name is written as two words instead of one?

Anyone?

[Mazhar]

Thanks Mazhar - so it seems you're in agreement with Omar's findings

Even so, I'm not sure that explains why the name is written as two words instead of one?

Anyone?

Not two words, it is one word; pause after first syllable -- if space is not there the word gets conjoined, and there will be no pause. The word is spelled to mimic the sound of name in original language.

[SAbboushi]

Interesting. Thanks-

[uq]

Peace all,

The construction is highly irregular.

The prefix is not likely to be the definite article (the) because the definite article never occurs with a Kasra in Arabic.

The suffix is peculiar in that it phonetically spells out the first verse of chapter 36, whether this has any bearing on the meaning I cannot say.

My suspicion is that Il Ysn is a variation of the spelling of Ilys, albeit non-Arabicized, whereas, Ilys has been Arabicized.

The most likely explanation, in my view, is the one presented by Mazhar, in that it is a phonetical 'mimicking' of the original non-Arabic name.

Bear in mind that two other Readings (Nfi' and Ibn 'mir) report the construction as meaning the family of Ysn.

God knows best.

[SAbboushi]

Thanks for your post.

The prefix is ...

I'm not sure it meets the definition of a prefix since it is written as a separate word

The prefix is ... not likely to be the definite article (the) because the definite article never occurs with a Kasra in Arabic.

Agreed -- and I find that huruf has already proven this to my satisfaction by pointing out "You are mixing up two different roots. you equate 'ill with 'aal. They are two different words from two different roots."

The suffix is peculiar in that it phonetically spells out the first verse of chapter 36, whether this has any bearing on the meaning I cannot say.

Interesting

Again, what is unique about this is that when the Quran is parsed into words, numerous translators and institutions have chosen to treat these two words as one. Even though the Quran has other proper names which consist of multiple words, they are parsed as multiple words, e.g.
Dhul-Kifl written as two words (separated by space) and parsed as 2 words
38484
38485

" " is the only instance in the Quran where two words are parsed as one word.

One can say that "But Dhul-Kifl is a proper name made from Arabic words" and " " is a foreign proper name.

Which then makes me wonder why, if it's a foreign name meaning we don't understand it's lexical/morphological construction, would it make sense to write a single proper name as two words in the first place?

And so another question that comes to my mind is whether or not there is a difference in pronunciation between " " and ""? Can any native Arabic speakers weigh in on that?

I believe Mazhar is saying that there is a difference

Not two words, it is one word; pause after first syllable -- if space is not there the word gets conjoined, and there will be no pause. The word is spelled to mimic the sound of name in original language.

I've listened to several different recitations of verses 37130 and 37123.
I can't for the life of me hear any (more of a) pause after the "" in the 37130 recitation of than after the "" in the 37123 recitation of ""
37130 http//www.openburhan.net/?sid=37&vid=130
37123 http//www.openburhan.net/?sid=37&vid=123

Can someone who speaks Arabic fluently please confirm they hear a pause?

Bear in mind that two other Readings (Nfi' and Ibn 'mir) report the construction as ...

I don't know what you mean by "report the construction". I believe the readings are "readings", not "writings" (i.e. they are written representations of a style(?) of recitation). I have "written" copies of 14 different readings (Riwayat), and all copies write it as " ". But I don't believe this confirms whether or not those two "words" are really one lexical word with an embedded space and thus one lexical meaning (i.e. a variation of the word Ily?s per Omar).

[huruf]

The word , as it happens all the time with the Qur'an is a case with the tendency to assign proper names that bear not connection to their meaning, and many times to to understand that they do not come from Arabic, but are forewign words that are transcribed some way.

In fact, if I am not seeing wrong, the word itself is a very common word pattern in Arabic of the same form as

So if we look at the value of root lam-ya-seen, its meaning is given in the dictionnaries as "to be brave, valiant, courageous" , in form II, lam-ya-ya-seen, it would be "to stick to, to plaster..."

So, in fact, Ilyas as character, whether single person or group, would be considered as a somebody distinguished by their courage and steafastness.

So indeed I tend to agree withgood logic's take that the expression 'ill yaasin, two words, is a play of words to mean the people that as 'Ilyaas who were like him, stedfast and courageous. That is, he left spiritual inheritors.

I do not see as a mere ressort to get out of a grammar or phonetical jam, but as an ingenious way to express a spiritual tradition of which 'ilyaas would be the mark and example.

And 'Ilyaas is not foreign word but a clear marking of the distinguished trait of one of the prophets and his following. It is a proper name, but a meaning that has become a proper name for their holders.

Salaam

Salaam