Resolve the confusion--pronoun in 16:66 and 23:21
-
Peace --
2191 and the one guarding private part hers so blew we in her (i.e. Mary) from spirit ours and we made her and son hers sign to the creations
6612 and Mary daughter Imran the one guarding private part hers so blew we in him (i.e. Imran) from spirit ours and truthful she in words lord hers and written his and was (f/s) from the devout
fi ha - fi Maryam
fi hi - fi farj Maryam
Salaam
-
Can you please answer this question.
If we had this sentenceWainna lakum fee alanAAami laAAibratan nusqeekum mimma fee butooniHA min bayni farthin wadamin labanan khalisan saighan lilshsharibeena
We do not have this sentence. You work on guesses, not concrete sentences of Qur'aan. This sentence made by you suffers vagauness.
Meanings are not only in words but in grammar too, every case ending has meanings.Like English, Arabic has also four types of sentences. First thing is segmentation of sentences in the discourse. You must know the start and end of the sentence, otherwise, you will keep conjecturing.
I already gave you how I handle the WAW and I use this method for ALL verses.
You use your method only for some verses. The part you gave as an independent sentence, I have given you my reasons why it can never be independent. You did not comment on that, to show me wrong.Waw is used both for conjunction in compound sentences, and in circumstantial clause of a complex sentence; and inititation of a sentence.
In compound sentences with Waw the elements of first sentence need not be reiterated; the purpose of conjunction is economy of words. Compound sentence has two independent clauses/sentences which are joined by conjunction to save repetition of words. Therefore, Arabic sentence is a new independent sentence and not a dependent clause. -
Wainna lakum fee alanAAami laAAibratan nusqeekum mimma fee butooniHA min bayni farthin wadamin labanan khalisan saighan lilshsharibeena
After butooniHA if you place Howa or Innahu the sentence will be correct grammatically. And Labanan in accusative case will clarify-disambiguate that what is in butooniHA is referring to Milk.
But this sentence has no information about globules in the Milk. That is why two different sentences are in Qur'aan.
-
We do not have this sentence. You work on guesses, not concrete sentences of Qur'aan. This sentence made by you suffers vagauness.
Meanings are not only in words but in grammar too, every case ending has meanings.After butooniHA if you place Howa or Innahu the sentence will be correct grammatically. And Labanan in accusative case will clarify-disambiguate that what is in butooniHA is referring to Milk.
But this sentence has no information about globules in the Milk. That is why two different sentences are in Qur'aan.
Salaam,
I know we do not have this sentence in the Quran, I was just wondering how you would handle it with your Arabic grammar rules.
Yesterday I gave this sentence to one who has a Phd in Arabic literature and writes for many newspapers column and he answered me, that the sentence was perfect Arabic, according to the known Arabic grammar rules, and the HA was according him referring to ALAN3AAM. When I gave him the real verse, he said that both interpretation where good depends how one handles the word ALAN3AAM.
I wonder who's grammar rules are the correct ones?
Waw is used both for conjunction in compound sentences, and in circumstantial clause of a complex sentence; and inititation of a sentence.
In compound sentences with Waw the elements of first sentence need not be reiterated; the purpose of conjunction is economy of words. Compound sentence has two independent clauses/sentences which are joined by conjunction to save repetition of words. Therefore, Arabic sentence is a new independent sentence and not a dependent clause.I did not ask for your interpretation how to handle WAW and for what purposes it is used, I asked for the grammar rule which clarifies for me when we have to take WAW as the beginning of a new sentence and when not.
Salaam,
Bender -
I know we do not have this sentence in the Quran, I was just wondering how you would handle it with your Arabic grammar rules.
Yesterday I gave this sentence to one who has a Phd in Arabic literature and writes for many newspapers column and he answered me, that the sentence was perfect Arabic, according to the known Arabic grammar rules, and the HA was according him referring to ALAN3AAM. When I gave him the real verse, he said that both interpretation where good depends how one handles the word ALAN3AAM.
Please ask this Phd gentleman to give you the break up/parsing of the sentence. The things will become obvious that he is merely depending upon the fake reasoning the earliest exegeses suggested to consider ALAN3AAM as singular masculine and some other fake reasons.
Consult any grammar book, it will relate all the uses of Waw.
-
Please ask this Phd gentleman to give you the break up/parsing of the sentence. The things will become obvious that he is merely depending upon the fake reasoning the earliest exegeses suggested to consider ALAN3AAM as singular masculine and some other fake reasons.
Salaam,
BLUE I think you did not read what I wrote "he said that both interpretation where good depends how one handles the word ALAN3AAM".
May I ask what you mean with "earliest exegesis"? Quran or arabic grammar exegesis?
Consult any grammar book, it will relate all the uses of Waw.
I don't have any grammar book.
But I guess you have a lot of grammar books. So please provide us the rule for when we have to take the WAW as beginning of a new sentence and when not according to your grammar books, thanks in advance!!!Salaam,
Bender -
Salaam,
BLUE I think you did not read what I wrote "he said that both interpretation where good depends how one handles the word ALAN3AAM".
May I ask what you mean with "earliest exegesis"? Quran or arabic grammar exegesis?
I don't have any grammar book.
But I guess you have a lot of grammar books. So please provide us the rule for when we have to take the WAW as beginning of a new sentence and when not according to your grammar books, thanks in advance!!!Salaam,
BenderI pointed out that in the two sentences of two Ayahs of Qur'aan only the Ha refers to Mammals and not masculine pronoun. Masculine pronound does not refer to female mammals.
The sentence you structured was ambiguous and incorrect grammatically. Please check it with Phd gentleman giving him the sentence I modifed.
Please write which sentence he thinks grammatically correct, specifically ask him whether a masculine pronoun can refer to female mammals; has he ever found it in literature.
Liike English conjunction "and" Arabic conjunction Waw have a basic conventional semantic meaning and a list of pragmatic meanings. You can study it in this paper
http//versita.metapress.com/content/w4xm166745229482/fulltext.pdf -
I pointed out that in the two sentences of two Ayahs of Qur'aan only the Ha refers to Mammals and not masculine pronoun. Masculine pronound does not refer to female mammals.
The sentence you structured was ambiguous and incorrect grammatically. Please check it with Phd gentleman giving him the sentence I modifed.
Please write which sentence he thinks grammatically correct, specifically ask him whether a masculine pronoun can refer to female mammals; has he ever found it in literature.
Salaam,
RED I think you still do NOT understand what he meant with "depends how one handles the word ALAN3AAM". Try to understand what this means. If you still struggle to understand I will help you a bit, he meant to say that there are different theories.
BLUE I don't know I did not ask.
BUT obviously he could give 1666 as an evidence.
And I can give you for example THIS, tell me is there any literature, except maybe some poets who wants to imitate The Quran, where we have such phenomenon? Furthermore I am very sure your explanation in that thread can never be found in any grammar book or in any literature, except maybe some poets who wants to imitate The Quran.
I also can bring up 2197
2197
According to your own translation "The Hu'j is in the limited Days which are famous-a matter of common knowledge-information .Therefore, he who has "cut off, alienated, isolated-undertaken obligation" in these days for Hu'j, thereat neither engaging in matrimonial relations-sex affairs-all sex related excitements nor any un-restrained-abnormal act and any purposeless debating-wrangling is permissible during Hu'j."
So according to you FIHINNA is referring to ASHURUN.
Like MmKhan pointed out before we have also this ayaat
6612
Is there any literature, except maybe some poets who wants to imitate The Quran, where we have such phenomenon?And there are many more, these are only the ayaats that came at mind now.
If you have the right to make such jumps and thinking, then the people who take ALAN3AAM different as how you take it, have also this right. So if one wants to judge others, they have to be first themselves consistent, and you are everything but consistent in your translations and interpretations.Liike English conjunction "and" Arabic conjunction Waw have a basic conventional semantic meaning and a list of pragmatic meanings. You can study it in this paper
http//versita.metapress.com/content/w4xm166745229482/fulltext.pdfLooks like you have a hard time to understand the question I gave you. I did not ask for the interpretation of YAGI & ALI how to handle WAW and for what purposes it is used, I asked for the grammar rule which clarifies for me when we have to take WAW as the beginning of a new sentence and when not.
Besides this I have checked quickly their paper and they did not even give their interpretation of when to take WAW as a beginning of a new sentence.
I kindly ask you again to give me this mysterious grammar rule on which you have based your understanding to take the waw of " " as the start of a new sentence.You did not not answer me on the exegesis question. And I also like to know why my understanding on 2321 is not correct. You said it was not correct but not why.
Salaam,
Bender -
I also can bring up 2197
2197
According to your own translation "The Hu'j is in the limited Days which are famous-a matter of common knowledge-information .Therefore, he who has "cut off, alienated, isolated-undertaken obligation" in these days for Hu'j, thereat neither engaging in matrimonial relations-sex affairs-all sex related excitements nor any un-restrained-abnormal act and any purposeless debating-wrangling is permissible during Hu'j."
So according to you FIHINNA is referring to ASHURUN.
Yes that is correct. But what you are inferring?
-
I asked for the grammar rule which clarifies for me when we have to take WAW as the beginning of a new sentence and when not.
Man of Faith had the same problem, it was explained
Simple connector/conjunction Waw-
Its function is to join two related nouns, verbs, nominal sentences or two verbal sentences. Their features should match. It is frequently used in compound sentences two sentences/independent clauses joined by connector waw for economy of words, as is the case with English "and".
In the case under discussion the verbs of both the sentences do not match. Hence the second sentence is a new one unrelated to the previous but is a discourse coordinator.http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/016.%20An%20Nahl/16.66a.gif
Note both words are in genitive case-exact match.
Waw recommencing particle-discourse coordinator, initiator of a new sentence
Its identification feature It joins two unrelated adhesive sentences. It is recognized from the features of the two sentences before and after it. There are different structures; one is that the sentence before and after is verbal sentence and nominal sentence as is the case in 2321.
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/023.%20A3.gif
It is verbal sentence
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/23.21c.gif
It is inverted nominal sentence.
Again a new sentence which is verbal
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/23.21d.gifIt is telling not all mammals are for eating; some of them we eat, others are for carriage etc.
I hope it might clarify.
-
Sorry. I take the essence of what a passage talks about to see whether it is same sentence or not. The issue was 20130 and 20131 and I consider them to belong with each other due to the context. If there is any other issue with verbs as according to Mazhar it has to be his own obsession with grammar rules of what he knows that causes a problem. Except otherwise why should the person be content in 20130 if it was not to not crave for the wealth of others in 20131.
If his verb issues cause a hesitation I am sure that the grammar he knows will not avail him the slightest in the pursuit of the real meaning of the recitation but instead hamper the understanding. Scholar grammar is more important than the literal quality according to him and applying those rules is more important than creating a fluent text. Instead of saying I am wrong investigate why 20131 from a literal standpoint seems to be a continuation of 20131 despite "mismatched verbs". Challenge your so-called Arabic grammar knowledge instead and try to learn or are you thinking that you are fully learned?
Take a logical approach; You do something to be content and why is that? Yes; not to be upset by something else. And in 20131 it starts "and not crave for.. bla bla". How about a continuation of passages there?
But for your sake I am going to get to the bottom of that sentence too and analyze it to pieces. I will show you that it continues on from 20130.
Peace
-
Salaam,
See my first post.
No there is a differnce in the structure. Maybe if you can quote the verse you have in mind I can try to show you the difference.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
BenderSalaam brother,
Sorry for late reply -298
2285
3179
18106
The following needs to be checked carefully.
2174
2220
2321
I may get back to you with more references inshaAllah. But till then please go through the aayaat quoted above.
May Allah increase our knowledge and guide us on His path pr
mmKhan -
But for your sake I am going to get to the bottom of that sentence too and analyze it to pieces. I will show you that it continues on from 20130.
Good, it is the appropriate method of getting the message, it is like the process-digestive system by which the food intake becomes the part of us.
-
Yes that is correct. But what you are inferring?
Salaam,
How do you explain that you used a feminine plural to refer to a masculine plural?
Man of Faith had the same problem, it was explained
Simple connector/conjunction Waw-
Its function is to join two related nouns, verbs, nominal sentences or two verbal sentences. Their features should match. It is frequently used in compound sentences two sentences/independent clauses joined by connector waw for economy of words, as is the case with English "and".
In the case under discussion the verbs of both the sentences do not match. Hence the second sentence is a new one unrelated to the previous but is a discourse coordinator.Finally, thank you. I understand now when we have to take WAW as a start of a new sentence according to this rule.
Can you show me the book or give me a link where I can find this grammar rule?
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/016.%20An%20Nahl/16.66a.gif
Note both words are in genitive case-exact match.
We were are already agreeing on this verse.
Waw recommencing particle-discourse coordinator, initiator of a new sentence
Its identification feature It joins two unrelated adhesive sentences. It is recognized from the features of the two sentences before and after it. There are different structures; one is that the sentence before and after is verbal sentence and nominal sentence as is the case in 2321.
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/023.%20A3.gif
It is verbal sentence
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/23.21c.gif
It is inverted nominal sentence.According to you and the above grammar rule " " is unrelated to the previous. If it is unrelated then to what is FEEHAA related then.
Again a new sentence which is verbal
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/23.21d.gifWhy did you not start it then with a capital in your translation? click
I have gone through some of your translations to see if you are loyal to this grammar rule but from what I have seen it looks more like a random process.
If you like I can give you a lot of examples from your own translation where you did not follow this grammar rule. But maybe at the time you wrote your translation the above grammar rule you mentioned was not yet known by you.It is telling not all mammals are for eating; some of them we eat, others are for carriage etc.
I hope it might clarify.
yes we are getting somewhere now.
Salaam,
Benderps. do not forget the exegesis question.
-
Salaam,
I understand that something is broken in here, but I do not understand how a masculine singular becomes a feminine plural.
Salaam,
BenderWe have no option but to accept as the language is. Plural nouns in Arabic
http//arabic.tripod.com/Nouns3.htmIrregular/broken plural nouns
http//arabic.tripod.com/Nouns5.htm -
Why did you not start it then with a capital in your translation? click
I have gone through some of your translations to see if you are loyal to this grammar rule but from what I have seen it looks more like a random process.
If you like I can give you a lot of examples from your own translation where you did not follow this grammar rule. But maybe at the time you wrote your translation the above grammar rule you mentioned was not yet known by you.Thanks, yes you have correctly pointed out the mistake. I started translation following the laid down academic rules of reading and understanding a book and thereafter translation. That translation was the second stage, segmentation of sentences and putting down meanings without much caring for the target language delicacies.
Third time translation is now undersay; upto 940, kindly see those and point out omissions, I will be much grateful for help. -
According to you and the above grammar rule " " is unrelated to the previous. If it is unrelated then to what is FEEHAA related then.
The above query was in relation to this quote
http//Its identification feature It joins two unrelated adhesive sentences. It is recognized from the features of the two sentences before and after it. There are different structures; one is that the sentence before and after is verbal sentence and nominal sentence as is the case in 2321
The answer was already in the quote, highlighted. New sentence giving different information-making statement about the subject under discussion not related but adhesive to previous sentence.