Some more challenge for Arab linguists
-
Dear all, my contention about the word in question in verse 1111; is that, it is neither a verb nor a noun. The ones who content it to be noun are presenting twisted rules of established Arabic grammar just to make it fit as a noun in the verse. Which, I have shown clearly in discussion above. Also shown the break down into two separate words, of this so called word; based on simple Arabic grammar rules above. Which not body has said to be not according to the rules. Based on rules discussed the translation is presented as well. Please read and re-read this translation. Does it not appear to elevate that status of Rabb and message, at much higher level? Please contrast this understanding with traditional one. In traditional understanding, it appears that Rabb is acting just like any other human, cursing and threatening others, when not in agreement. Is this how, we know or want to know our Rabb?
Peace.
Badar
-
Dear all, my contention about the word in question in verse 1111; is that, it is neither a verb nor a noun.
Badaryes,it is neither a verb nor a noun.
it is composed of Three initals (أ and (ب and (ي .i will count the number of occurences in that chapter of every initial and with some luck , maybe they will add up to 19 divisible.
rotflsalam
-
Dear quickduck, I greatly appreciate your willing to participate in this discussion. Although we may have different takes on things, but eventually open discussions may help mutually.
My next query to all is this, in Arabic any noun used has to be appropriated from four grammatical points. In order for it be properly used in a sentence. One of these points is sex of the noun. The sex of a noun in Arabic can be determined in three ways.
- A natural sex, for instance natural pairs. Like mother and father. What they call as .
- By listening to people of language as what they consider as male or female.
- Finally all nouns sex in Arabic, is considered as male unless there are markers present to make and identify nouns as females. These markers are , and .
For instance, word means green. However, to make fit a female sense it will be used as .
It would be hard to English only understanding people, to understand the difference rendered by these markers to the meanings of respective words. But there are Urdu speaking people on this forum as well. For them,
In Urdu we say , using female of green. whereas we also say (I am using an arabic type writer, hence can not type gaaf, therefore typed it with a kaf). The Arabic is equivalent of first sense of Green in Urdu, and second
My question based on the above is, that it clearly proves that adding these makers do not change, the root meanings of the said word. These only change these markers bring is, of sex from male to female noun, without altering core root meanings conveyed by "alphabetic/consonant root". Is this a correct understanding?
Peace
Badar
-
It seems like, I have asked a very difficult question again.
Peace,
Badar
yes
......
For instance, word means green. However, to make fit a female sense it will be used as .
.......First of all, let me remind you that the rule for sex nouns in arabic (for nouns that have the weight Af3al)
Green (male) =
Green (female) =
Green (plural) =.
Quran 7621Salam
-
quickduck, greatly appreciate your response. I would be happy to discuss grammatical issues, you are raising about the word under discussion. But let me ask, do you agree with my conclusion about female makers as not a part of roots of words? In addition, not imparting or changing actual meanings of the roots, besides just changing sex of the meaning of root word.
Peace,
Badar
-
Dear Mazhar, any one who loves his/her Rabb and cares about, what he had said and is now concealed from masses.
Badar
Nothing is concealed from masses. Same words are before us which were listened and read to people 1400 years back but there were people who responded
And they said "Our hearts are in veil from that towards which you invite us and in our ears is heaviness,
and between us and between you is a barrier, therefore, you act as you like, indeed we are acting the way we like"
-
Very disappointing again. People have no answers for very basic questions. I do not know, how one can look into mirror have clear conscious? When claiming to understand the message. Acting according to message would be really a stretch under such circumstances.
Peace,
Badar
-
If you think that they are basic questions , then why disappointed when having no answer. just try google !
salam
Disappointed due to the dichotomy between claims to know all without proof of it. Due lack of interest in efforts to understand Rabb's message, despite seeing proof of lack of such understanding. Due lack of appetite in progress and continued apathy in a nation, who has already hit rock bottom of all nations. Who was supposed to be a leader in all fronts of knowledge? Due this lack in knowledge, they can not claim for Rabb to be a rabbi alAAalameen, for them. The list can go on and on.
Peace,
Badar
-
Disappointed due to the dichotomy between claims to know all without proof of it. Due lack of interest in efforts to understand Rabb's message, despite seeing proof of lack of such understanding. Due lack of appetite in progress and continued apathy in a nation, who has already hit rock bottom of all nations. Who was supposed to be a leader in all fronts of knowledge? Due this lack in knowledge, they can not claim for Rabb to be a rabbi alAAalameen, for them. The list can go on and on.
Peace,
Badar
I can't remember...can you please tell which one of the members claimed ti know all ?? or os this just in your mind ?
Salam
-
Peace,
Quickduck, you are completely correct about your conclusions. So that you didn't sound arrogant to non-Arabic speakers (dialect or otherwise) you should have pointed to the fact that you were educated in Arabic and were born into an Arabic speaking family. To be honest, you might have been born into a family that speaks Arabic dialects but not the Classical Arabic of the Jahiliyyah and the Quran as is the case for most Arabs. So I'm not knocking you, as again you are much more correct than Badar. (honestly I don't even understand what Badar's motives are, as they don't seem to be education). But being born an Arabic speaker (technically no one is born speaking any language, but they are born into a family that speaks a certain language) doesn't automatically make you a qualified expert on Arabic grammar. Believe me I've seen it many times with people born into Arabic speaking families or countries. It's more about how you were educated in Classical Arabic (since first grade, your father or mother taught you (not a dialect but Classical), kindergarten, in a university, etc., etc) that makes you qualified.
Godbless,
AnwarI can't remember...can you please tell which one of the members claimed ti know all ?? or os this just in your mind ?
Salam
Peace,
i was born arabic speaker, i don't need to bring any argument.
Who can see any verb in the name of Abou/abaa/abii hurayra ?? You ??
So, you better change your signature because you're far far away from respecting it !salam,
yes,it is neither a verb nor a noun.
it is composed of Three initals (أ and (ب and (ي .i will count the number of occurences in that chapter of every initial and with some luck , maybe they will add up to 19 divisible.
rotflsalam
Peace, may be you did not mean it. But this is how it came across.
Badar
-
Badar,
Please do not use my quote to try to insinuate that quickduck thinks he knows it all. I never said that, insinuated that or thought that. I was just trying to help him be more transparent on why he does know 50 times more than you on the subject of Arabic grammar so that you can know why he knows 50 times more than you know about Arabic grammar. Please by all means, defer to him. I don't meant to insult you but your questions are oftentimes . . well . . . meaningless from my perspective and are things that you should be able to figure out on your own. Why you cannot, I am not really sure why. Which is what makes me think that you really have figured out the answers to your questions and are asking them for some alternative motive. Look at the provocativeness of this topic or in how you taunt to try to get someone to answer you. It makes me think that you are not really seeking education, but maybe just a good fight. Anyway please defer to quickduck if he chooses to answer any of your questions. I'll be sure to jump in and make corrections if need be, to help you understand a point. Well, I'm done.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Badar,
I'll be sure to jump in and make corrections if need be, to help you understand a point. Well, I'm done.Godbless,
AnwarPeace, please help quickduck here, he needs it desperately. Has not been able figure out this one,
quickduck, greatly appreciate your response. I would be happy to discuss grammatical issues, you are raising about the word under discussion. But let me ask, do you agree with my conclusion about female makers as not a part of roots of words? In addition, not imparting or changing actual meanings of the roots, besides just changing sex of the meaning of root word.
Peace,
Badar
Badar,
It makes me think that you are not really seeking education, but maybe just a good fight. Anyway please defer to quickduck if he chooses to answer any of your questions. I'll be sure to jump in and make corrections if need be, to help you understand a point. Well, I'm done.
Godbless,
AnwarMay be your are talking animals education, where the transfer of information is thought to be one way. Or is it again indicative of same mind frame that, lead me to include your post with quickduck's. I know it all. Either, as birth right or just because I think so. Both of these characteristics are determinant for education.
There is no fight here. Only purpose is to understand message, by learning linguistic principles. When more than one principle is applicable, to question. Why one is considered over other, in translation? Specially when one principle seems to make meaning more profound and universal compared with, one used in traditional translations.
Peace,
Badar