What is the difference between "Nissa, Amraat and Azwaj"
-
Thanks brother for your reply. However, it seems you did not bother to look at referance from Wright. With your knowledge of grammar in view I did not think that I needed to explain the difference between and alif with Medda. But may be you have accepted "Arabic on line and Dr. Abdullah Abbas Nadwi initial publication of "Learn The Language of The Holy Quran" as ultimate authority.
Finally in this part of verse 41 , which is the verb or action that denotes to? Thanks.
Badar
-
Thanks brother for your reply. However, it seems you did not bother to look at referance from Wright. With your knowledge of grammar in view I did not think that I needed to explain the difference between and alif with Medda. But may be you have accepted "Arabic on line and Dr. Abdullah Abbas Nadwi initial publication of "Learn The Language of The Holy Quran" as ultimate authority.
Finally in this part of verse 41 , which is the verb or action that denotes to? Thanks.
Badar
the Active Participle is NOT in Sura 4.1.
the Noun is in Sura 4.1, is nunation using tanwiinu alfatahati / , which makes the word indefinite.
Again, is a 'broken plural' with tanwiinu alfatahati / which indicates that the word is fully declinable, thus the gender of the noun in this case will match the gender of its singular Rajulun, meaning 'Man'.
Thus grammatically speaking, the Noun, in its fully declinable state, can not mean women or female.
Research 'Declension'
-
Thanks brother you have added something more to the mix about[ , let me do my research about it before responding.
While I do that, the rule about Alif WHEN it is properly considered female, states it be written as Alif with Madda on it followed by Ayan . In this case it becomes substansive and it is not called a letter, i.e., one does not prefix to it a word [. Based on this rule what do you make out of in 41. Thanks.
Badar
-
Thanks brother you have added something more to the mix about[ , let me do my research about it before responding.
While I do that, the rule about Alif WHEN it is properly considered female, states it be written as Alif with Madda on it followed by Ayan . In this case it becomes substansive and it is not called a letter, i.e., one does not prefix to it a word [. Based on this rule what do you make out of in 41. Thanks.
Badar
Badar, we have been through this several times Bro. does NOT Have alif-medda.
-
Yes I know, it has not. Since it has no female marker and hence, can not be considered feminine by form. Therefore, does not stand for female/females.
Badar
confused Badar, is the FEMININE MARKER attached to thus it emphatically means 'Women'
-
confused Badar, is the FEMININE MARKER attached to thus it emphatically means 'Women'
This rule applies to the singular, not the plural.
How about, for example (scientists/people of knowledge; names; directors)?
Thus grammatically speaking, the Noun, in its fully declinable state, can not mean women or female.
What does grammar have to do in deciding the meaning of a word? confused
What about what we have discussed earlier regarding this word? Why are you still insisting that it cannot be speaking of females?Yes I know, it has not. Since it has no female marker and hence, can not be considered feminine by form. Therefore, does not stand for female/females.
This is not correct a deduction. A word with a feminine marker ( ) does not necessarily have a feminine meaning ( ). Example
Aantara name of a mythical male warrier; exams/test (plural of imti7an , a masculine singular) -
Sister, your comments are well acknowledged. There are exception to rules and I am ware of some. However, my discussion with MTR is specifically from this word in 41 and his contention of it being derivative of root and coverted from common gender noun to feminine by changing form by adding .
Badar
-
This rule applies to the singular, not the plural.
How about, for example (scientists/people of knowledge; names; directors)?What does grammar have to do in deciding the meaning of a word? confused
What about what we have discussed earlier regarding this word? Why are you still insisting that it cannot be speaking of females?
This is not correct a deduction. A word with a feminine marker ( ) does not necessarily have a feminine meaning ( ). Example
Aantara name of a mythical male warrier; exams/test (plural of imti7an , a masculine singular)is Singular NOT plural
(hamzat with tanwiin dammah) is Plural
@Samia, Im sorry, but the rules of declension decompose the plural word to its singular construct and meaning , Man.
I have noticed throughout many of your very informative and insightful posts, that you, yourself use various grammatical constructs, rules, definitive s, actions, analysis, etc. in your determinations and arguments.
I dont see why in this discussion that we should exclude grammatical morphology in our determinatives and definitives regarding the word .
-
Assalaam Alaikum Samia
Would you be so kind as to provide an example from the Quran, where Allah uses the triliteral root construct R-J-L in illustrating a feminine construct and reference?
Perhaps you may wish to illustrate the application and example from the Quran by using the rules of declension that define the word Rajulan / Rajulun and/ or derivatives as referring to females and/or women
Your previous example Al-Baqarah 2.239 So if you are in fear, then on foot /
Unfortunately, did not suggest or infer that it is females or women (alone) that are being referenced by the word farijalan /
farijalan (Verbal Noun or Active Participle(?), Haal Accusative, Nasb Case) to dispel, drive away worries, to give a sense of ease, to relieve, to relax, to comfort; ?A Dictionary of the Grammatical Analysis of the Holy Quran? by Tantawi Sura 2239;
-
Futhermore, . is added as subtantive after a word to make it feminine and is not part of root. In addition if the claim that it is feminine of common gender noun by adding feminine maker is correct one should be able find this word under this root in lexicon of the language. However, it does not exsist. The only logic MTR is implying that some how Rab created a new word using grammatical rules of language. This logic really contradicts Quranic claim of use of simple language of common people of the time. Common people of any language do not even know grammar of their mother tongue.
Badar
-
is Singular NOT plural
(hamzat with tanwiin dammah) is Plural
What do you mean by the underlined phrase?
What's the difference between these two words?I have noticed throughout many of your very informative and insightful posts, that you, yourself use various grammatical constructs, rules, definitive s, actions, analysis, etc. in your determinations and arguments.
I do not use grammatcal tashkeel to decide the meaning of a word, becaue the grammatical signs do not change the meaning but the function of a word in a sentence I read the book, I sat on the book or the book fell, if translated into Arabic, will have (the book) demonstrating three different case endings, but its meaning is not affected.. If you are talking about me using its pattern ( morphology) then this is a completely different thing.
Your previous example Al-Baqarah 2.239 So if you are in fear, then on foot /
Unfortunately, did not suggest or infer that it is females or women (alone)Who spoke of women alone? You said it meant MEN, and that was when I interferred. You cannot decide whether a plural used in the qur'aan alludes to men only or women only, just from its morphology. You need the context to decide (exmple; ً
-
MTR let us get back to this statement of yours "Again, is a 'broken plural' with tanwiinu alfatahati / which indicates that the word is fully declinable, thus the gender of the noun in this case will match the gender of its singular Rajulun, meaning 'Man"
Let me ask you this. What is your understanding of "declinable" because you are using an Old English Grammatical term. So I first want to make sure you and I are on the same page as regards understanding of this term.
I am still waiting for your clearfication on my pervious query of this "Again, is a 'broken plural' with tanwiinu alfatahati / which indicates that the word is fully declinable. Please clearify this statement. Did you mean it is fully declinable or you meant it is fully declined? Thanks.
Badar
-
Ok, I see we are going around in circles and back and forth.
Sura Nisa 4.1 is the focus here
min-huma (dual, Masculine & Feminine)
rijalan Men, plural, 'broken plural' Noun
katheeran = countless
wa nisa'a = and Women, singularThe plural form of Nisa'a is NOT reflected grammatically or otherwise in Sura Nisa 4.1.
is plural
What makes it plural? the tanwiin dammah over the 'seated' hamzatYour mistaken, A single letter from the tashkeel system is called a Harakah (arabic for "movement", or "motion", the plural form is Harak?t. So the sound of a letter changes in correspondance to which Harak?h is found on it. Every letter has a Harakah, even if it isn't written. If a letter has Sukoon then it is usually not written at all.
Tashkeel has a great influence on the meaning of words, only one Harakah can change the whole meaning of a sentence!
@Samia, The scholars of Sarf (Arabic Morphology) have classified 'mistakes into TWO Categories 'Clear' and 'Hidden" mistakes. A 'Clear' mistake is
"Changing one letter into another or a short vowel (Harakah) into another (e.g. changing Fat-hah into Dhammah or the letter Qaaf into Kaaf, etc)"
Lastly, referring back to your reference
Fain khif-tum (object) farijalan(Haal Accusative, Verbal Noun or Active Participle?)
fain subjunctive reference to verb khif-tum (dual, masculine & feminine)
Khif-tum (dual, masculine & feminine) If you are fearful, apprehensive, afraid
farijalan (Verbal Noun or Active Participle(?), Haal Accusative, Nasb Case) to dispel, drive away worries, to give a sense of ease, to relieve, to relax, to comfort; ?A Dictionary of the Grammatical Analysis of the Holy Quran? by Tantawi Sura 2239; Al Mawrid
@Samia, your previous statement "I am female hail so when I read this verse I believe it is addressing me, among the "rijaal". Therefore, rijaalan does not mean men, and it includes women."
Thus Samia, I have clearly shown that the triliteral root construct of R-J-L is NOT and CANNOT be decomposed by the Rules of Declension to suggest ANY reference or implication of Females or Women. That construct does NOT exist in the Quran or in Standard Modern Arabic.
If you believe that you can decompose and suggest that the triliteral root construct of R-J-L can derive grammatically a definitive reference to 'Women' please illustrate. You would have to impose, gender, number, state and case to construct such a word.
-
katheeran = countless
wa nisa'a = and Women, singularThe plural form of Nisa'a is NOT reflected grammatically or otherwise in Sura Nisa 4.1.
is plural
What makes it plural? the tanwiin dammah over the 'seated' hamzatSorry MTR
Are you serious? "nisaa' " is sngular, and one line later it is plural?
You are back to your nonesense grammar. First where's this "tanween dammah over the seated hamzat" in in this verse? If you knew your baic grammar, you would know that this word in this verse is a direct object, thus has a fatha not a dammah.The even bigger problem is that, again, whether it is direct object or subject, this has no bearing on its meaning or whether it is plural or singular.
And, who is contesting that is plural? And where did you get this funny "proof of plural" (underlined in your post)? What about ? Isn't it singular?
BTW, when I respond to you, I do this only for the other members whom you confuse, and I am just trying to stop this attempt to confuse the others. As for you, I am sorry to say it, but I am starting to believe that you have some hidden agenda. I cannot believe that anyone, even a beginner in Arabic, would make such rediculous statements as you do.
And for the second time, please keep away from grammatical analysis.
If you believe that you can decompose and suggest that the triliteral root construct of R-J-L can derive grammatically a definitive reference to 'Women' please illustrate. You would have to impose, gender, number, state and case to construct such a word.
This is funny! "rijl leg" is feminine! If you can derive a masculine from it, why not a feminine?
As long as we can derive a verb from this root, we can derive a reference to women from it
verb meaning to walk on foot; are the active participle; plural on foot; generic masculine (meaning it can contain women). active paticiple meaning a woman on foot. If you have 99 women and one man all on foot, you will say they are . -
MTR, Please get yourself Arabic Grammar of William Wright, by WOLFDIETRICH FISCHER and Lane's lexicon. In my humble opinion these people have done greatest service to Islam by translating Arabic work into English. Compare and contrast their work with A Dictionary of the Grammatical Analysis of the Holy Quran? by Tantawi and with Dr. Abdullah Abbas Nadwi initial publication of "Learn The Language of The Holy Quran' in 1989 or any other. Keep your mind open. Thanks and with lots of love.
Badar
-
@Samia, (685)
(686) (687)
(68 (689) (6810)
(6811) (6812) (6813)
(6814)
maftoonu (passive participle, masculine, singular) one who is afflicted with madness;Root word Fatana, seduce from faith by any means, sow dissension or difference in opinion, put in confusion, cause to err, lead to temptation
Dictionary of the Holy Quran page 416-417 (fatana) -
Sorry MTR
Are you serious? "nisaa' " is sngular, and one line later it is plural?
You are back to your nonesense grammar. First where's this "tanween dammah over the seated hamzat" in in this verse? If you knew your baic grammar, you would know that this word in this verse is a direct object, thus has a fatha not a dammah.The even bigger problem is that, again, whether it is direct object or subject, this has no bearing on its meaning or whether it is plural or singular.
And, who is contesting that is plural? And where did you get this funny "proof of plural" (underlined in your post)? What about ? Isn't it singular?
BTW, when I respond to you, I do this only for the other members whom you confuse, and I am just trying to stop this attempt to confuse the others. As for you, I am sorry to say it, but I am starting to believe that you have some hidden agenda. I cannot believe that anyone, even a beginner in Arabic, would make such rediculous statements as you do.
And for the second time, please keep away from grammatical analysis.
This is funny! "rijl leg" is feminine! If you can derive a masculine from it, why not a feminine?
As long as we can derive a verb from this root, we can derive a reference to women from it
verb meaning to walk on foot; are the active participle; plural on foot; generic masculine (meaning it can contain women). active paticiple meaning a woman on foot. If you have 99 women and one man all on foot, you will say they are .Samia, My request has been consistent throughout this thread. Again, the focus is the Quran.
Where can I find this reference , (for some reason you claim is an active participle) in the Quran?
Samia it seems that whenever you encounter a grammatical term or construct that you are NOT aware of, your response is to slander, threaten and insult not only my intelligence but those who are following the thread.
May I suggest that you at the very least show some deference to myself and others, again as I stated earlier the thread and forum is bigger than you and I.
There are individuals who view this thread that are quite knowledgeable regarding Sarf, Tashkheel, Tajweed, etc.
You my have the highest number of posts and designated as an 'admin' in this category, but that doesnt confirm that you know everything about Quranan Araabiyyan.
Relax, stop threatening, slandering and acting dictatorial, you can learn too.
-
This was your question
If you believe that you can decompose and suggest that the triliteral root construct of R-J-L can derive grammatically a definitive reference to 'Women' please illustrate. You would have to impose, gender, number, state and case to construct such a word.
And it was about a general rule. I responded accordingly. If you have any disagreement with it bring it out.
Everytime I "describe" your bizarre Arabic, you accuse me of defamation and slander. If your posts sound rediculous, don't blame others. Look where you go wrong. You chanage your own Arabic rules from bizarre to silly, and you do not listen to others. Every time I respond to you I highlight where you went wrong and give you examples to show you your mistake, but then you turn around and accuse me of slander, and continue on with your funny grammar. You are really wasting everybody's time and confusing many others. If you ever come again with any unfounded grammatical rule and do not back it up, expect the second step of disciplining.
You my have the highest number of posts and designated as an 'admin' in this category, but that doesnt confirm that you know everything about Quranan Araabiyyan.
Relax, stop threatening, slandering and acting dictatorial, you can learn too.