Quran Syntax question?
-
Salaam bkanwar2 or Badar,
Dear all,
Question is, these are two nouns here. Is it correct understanding that relation between these, from syntactical point of view is, that of "annexation" or "" or " ".
Badar
As per my knowledge
Bi = Harf-e-jar
Ism(i) = Mudhaaf
Allah(i) = Mudhaaf-e-ilaihIt is Murakkab-e-idhaafi
Because,
1- Mudhaaf ALWAYS carry 'Zamma' on its ending letter
2- Mudhaaf-e-ilaih ALWAYS carry 'Kasra' on its ending letterIn this case, it has to be 'Ism-u Allah-i' as in 6118
6118
but because of 'BI' , instead of 'Ism-u' Mudhaaf became 'Ism-i' as in 297, 1058, etc...
297
1058
Hope this help, inshaAllah.
May Allah increase us all in true knowledge pr
Mohammed M. Khan -
As per my knowledge
Bi = Harf-e-jar
Ism(i) = Mudhaaf
Allah(i) = Mudhaaf-e-ilaihIt is Murakkab-e-idhaafi
Because,
1- Mudhaaf ALWAYS carry 'Zamma' on its ending letter
2- Mudhaaf-e-ilaih ALWAYS carry 'Kasra' on its ending letterSince it could be little misleading, a little correction;
Consonant + Short vowel = Inseparable preposition/
Ism(i)=Consonant + Consonant + Short vowel = Rare Arabic Noun in original construction. Noun Definite; masculine; singular; genitive. And it is definite since it is in relation with following definite noun Possessed Noun;
Allah(i)=
Possessive Phrase-
- The noun that is possessed comes first, and is called
** The noun that is the possessor comes second/after, and is called
*** The first and the second noun worry about their own gender and plurality.
**** If the second noun is definite, the first noun derives its definiteness from the second noun.
***** Since the first noun derives its definiteness from the second definite noun, therefore, in possessive phrase the first noun will never have definite article, and nor "nunation/ .
****** The which is the suffix for duality and masculine sound plurality will also drop.
******* The first noun, whatever its grammatical state may be, which is determined by external factors, like it is genitive here because of prefixed preposition; this relationship/- will always render the second noun in the genitive case.
Word by word analysis
-
I don't know why are you so confused. It is written there that is a prepositional phrase. is placed after this. Therefore your question is primarily that whether the Prepositional phrase is the -subject of the whole sentence.
Prepositional phrase does not represent the -subject. Try to see the link.
Dear Mazhar, are you implying by red above that the is actually this part ?
Salaam bkanwar2 or Badar,
As per my knowledge
Bi = Harf-e-jar
Ism(i) = Mudhaaf
Allah(i) = Mudhaaf-e-ilaihIt is Murakkab-e-idhaafi
Because,
1- Mudhaaf ALWAYS carry 'Zamma' on its ending letter
2- Mudhaaf-e-ilaih ALWAYS carry 'Kasra' on its ending letterIn this case, it has to be 'Ism-u Allah-i' as in 6118
6118
but because of 'BI' , instead of 'Ism-u' Mudhaaf became 'Ism-i' as in 297, 1058, etc...
297
1058
Hope this help, inshaAllah.
May Allah increase us all in true knowledge pr
Mohammed M. KhanBrother Khan, thanks for helping. However your statement, "1- Mudhaaf ALWAYS carry 'Zamma' on its ending letter"
is not consistent with established rules of Arabic Grammar. Mudhaaf, can have all three irrabs i.e., Zamma, Nasab and Jerr.Badar
-
Salaam Badar,
Brother Khan, thanks for helping. However your statement, "1- Mudhaaf ALWAYS carry 'Zamma' on its ending letter"
is not consistent with established rules of Arabic Grammar. Mudhaaf, can have all three irrabs i.e., Zamma, Nasab and Jerr.Badar
I am still a student of Arabic )
I was taught that "Mudhaaf always carry 'Zamma' on its ending letter" but if it is "Ism-e-majroor" then its ending letter carries 'Kasra'.
Later I may learn what you are talking about, inshaAllah.
May Allah guide us all towards the Truth.
Mohammed M. Khan -
Dear Mazhar, are you implying by red above that the is actually this part ?
It seems you have not read what is explained about the structure of this whole sentence, in Word by Word Analysis link. The sentence has three phrases.
These are two phrases; First Prepositional Phrase, second Possessive Phrase. And third is
This is Adjectival Phrase.
-
It seems you have not read what is explained about the structure of this whole sentence, in Word by Word Analysis link. The sentence has three phrases.
These are two phrases; First Prepositional Phrase, second Possessive Phrase. And third is
This is Adjectival Phrase.
Dear Mazhar, I have read it time and again. I fully understand that is in Jerr due to particle/preposition "Be". But why can not you give a straight answer for a simple question. Instead, of going in circles. Question is, despite preposition "Be" at the start of the phrase is a or not?
Badar
-
Dear Mazhar, I have read it time and again. I fully understand that is in Jerr due to particle/preposition "Be". But why can not you give a straight answer for a simple question. Instead, of going in circles. Question is, despite preposition "Be" at the start of the phrase is a or not?
Badar
Dear Badr, if you really are not blind, what hampers after having read time and again to find it written therein that after truncating "bi" the other two words are Possessive Phrase, and in the diagram too, both words are connected with a curved line beneath which is written Possessive Phrase which is called .
-
Seems like, I have asked another difficult question. Although, I am only asking questions, right from the alley of those claimant of knowing Quranic Arabic and its Grammar well.
Peace,
Badar
Dear Badr,
Questions are usually less difficult, you are more difficult to handle-----as can be observed from these two pages----and in the end you at times abandon the thread.
Please again see the graphic presentation. It is indicated that there is an elided verb before the sentence. And in an earlier reply this was explained, which may shed some light about the delicacies of the sentence
Prepositional phrase does not represent the -subject. Try to see the link.
Now consider two persons confronting each other, one says to the other; "You please read the presented Book with the Name of your Sustainer Lord". Do you think that the other man needs to say, while opening the Book, "Well I read the Book, or I start reading the Book" or he should straight say that while starting doing what he has been asked to do? May be this clarifies to you the concept of elisions in a written text.
I put it this way
or he should straight say that while starting doing what he has been asked to do. From this I understand that this relates to the elided predicate and subject. -
Dear Badr,
Questions are usually less difficult, you are more difficult to handle-----as can be observed from these two pages----and in the end you at times abandon the thread.
Please again see the graphic presentation. It is indicated that there is an elided verb before the sentence. And in an earlier reply this was explained, which may shed some light about the delicacies of the sentence
I put it this way
or he should straight say that while starting doing what he has been asked to do. From this I understand that this relates to the elided predicate and subject.Now you mean to say that God forgot to make clear statements/sentences and skipped parts. Or else, this book was only meant for person directly addressed. (again just a belief, without been able to prove).
Or else, my point that nobody understands the book. Even available Grammatical rules are insufficient to give complete understanding. Hence, we need to work to revive the language first. However, we shall be able to do this only once we realize above facts about Grammar being incomplete and language being lost. Additionally, this will also require to take Quran just as a book, and not words coming out of Gods mouth.
Peace,
Badar
-
I didn't think you will prove my word in very next post.
Questions are usually less difficult, you are more difficult to handle
You don't percieve about a very common practice of ellisions in speech and writing in almost all languages. More than any other language of the world, Arabic language presumes its listener and reader an intelligent, rational, attentive and a person of mind. And Allah has sent the Qur'aan in Arabic as a blessing. It is personal choice if one wish to turn out as a stupid, retarded difficult for handling.
When I pick up Grand Qur'aan from the rack, my intention gets manifested, and I believe that I should start reading it with the Name of Allah. I need not say "I read the Qur'aan" instead say
-
Let us keep the discussion to the topic in question. It is about syntax of Quran. We are just using first verse as an example for analysis.
So you say "Prepositional phrase does not represent the -subject. Try to see the link.". So it can not be a nominal sentence. Correct? Additionally, can a prepositional phrase start or occur at the begining of a sentence?
Peace,
Badar
-
Let us keep the discussion to the topic in question. It is about syntax of Quran. We are just using first verse as an example for analysis.
So you say "Prepositional phrase does not represent the -subject. Try to see the link.". So it can not be a nominal sentence. Correct? Additionally, can a prepositional phrase start or occur at the begining of a sentence?
Peace,
Badar
What makes you to conclude like that/blue? What do you perceive from the term "Nominal sentence" and what are its constituent elements?
-
The subject/topic of a Nominal sentence is either a single word which will be in nominative case, or it may be a phrase of undetermined length. But it cannot be a complete sentence. However, it should be remembered that when the topic of a sentence is a phrase, that phrase may itself contain embedded sentence. The subject/topic of a sentence cannot be one of the following two things.
- a prepositional phrase
** an adverbial phrase
When these two entities appear to be the topic of a sentence i..e. they are in the beginning, they are in fact relating to the elided comment/predicate.
-
When these two entities appear to be the topic of a sentence i..e. they are in the beginning, they are in fact relating to the elided comment/predicate.
Did you mean to imply elided predicate or subject?
The subject/topic of a sentence cannot be one of the following two things.
- a prepositional phrase
Are familiar with, what is called a
Peace,
Badar
-
Let me try to put it together, what you have said so far can not be.
- A sentence as it does begin with a preposition.
The subject/topic of a sentence cannot be one of the following two things.
- a prepositional phrase
** an adverbial phrase
- Whatever, it is, not a sentence, but somehow should have had a predicate. However, Its predicate/ is also elided. As it does begin with "a prepositional phrase"
When these two entities appear to be the topic of a sentence i..e. they are in the beginning, they are in fact relating to the elided comment/predicate.
Would you kindly share. What is this? What kind of a syntax, it is? Which syntactical rules to apply to understand it? Or else, this is just a jargon of words without any comprehensable meanings?
Badar
-
Quote from Mazhar on Yesterday at 024025 PM
When these two entities appear to be the topic of a sentence i..e. they are in the beginning, they are in fact relating to the elided comment/predicate.
Would you kindly share. What is this? What kind of a syntax, it is? Which syntactical rules to apply to understand it? Or else, this is just a jargon of words without any comprehensable meanings?
That is the basic information about sentences. See this
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9601909.0