Resolve the confusion--pronoun in 16:66 and 23:21
-
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.
-
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?
The most important thing for understanding a discourse is the segmentation of sentences. We must know where it beigins and where it ends. In DNA translation there is "start codon" and termining-ending codon; similarly in protein there is a start amino acid and ending amino acid.
Waw is the most important starting particle and also indicator of ending of earlier sentence.
Two very simple books of Grammar Syntax are
Hidaya and Fawaid
It is better to download them and keep in grammar folder for referenceHidaya http//www.al-islam.org/file/al-hidayah-fi-nahw
Fawaid http//www.jaffarya.org/main/docs/books/al-Fawaaid%20as-Samadiyyah.pdf
About waw and discourse segmentation
http//wa.amu.edu.pl/psicl/files/34/18Fareh.pdf
http//www.ijens.org/vol%2011%20i%2001/112701-8989%20ijecs-ijens.pdfYou may also like to have this book in your treasures
From the treasures of Arabic Morphology
http//special.worldofislam.info/Arabic/pdf/Treasures_of_Arabic_Morphology.pdf -
We 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.htmsalaam,
RED maybe better to replace it with I, because I and some others here have options.
REST Very interesting, when people do the same for AlAn3aam then they commit "fake reasoning (from) the earliest exegeses" but when you do it, then "we" have no option but to accept it.
Salaam,
Bender -
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.Salaam,
I have to give you one thing and that is that you have a big determination and patience with your work.
RED sorry I have to refuse it, simply because I am to lazy for this and it does also not help that I am not the biggest fan of your translations.
salaam,
Bender -
RED maybe better to replace it with I, because I and some others here have options.
Okay, I have no choice/option but to accept a non-native language exactly as it is, if I sincerely wish to understand a discourse in that laguage. The logic is that langauge is a long cherished convention of a people to whom that language belongs. If they call Sun is feminine, I cannot take it as masculine, though my mother language treats it as masculine.
-
All translators religiously following the traditional exegeses relate the masculine singular pronoun and feminine pronoun to feminine plural noun occuring in exactly identical first sentences in both Ayahs.
I could not find any rule in Arabic grammar to agree with all of them. Can you reconcile?
Salam Mazhar ,
The key rule to resolve this lies In the quantity of the word In question is it "many " or only a "few " . In arabic There is gross quantity ( ) and small quantity ( ة and for each There is a rule when it comes to describe it with Feminine pronom or with masculin
The rule In Quraan and in basic arabic is That
When the word describe something That is " many " ( ) or a "lot" the end pronom used is in feminine form , same as In the second verse you quoted. ( )
And when the word describe something That is "few " or " little" th? end pronom is used In masculin form , same as In the first verse you quoted ( ه
Examples of that rules from the Qur'aan
1- first example when the the word describe something that is " many " ( ) so the feminine pronom is used
verse 3/42
- 3 - 42
(kaalt AL Malaa'yika) , kaalt is in the femminie form because the "AL Malaa'yika" are too many , eventhough the "AL Malaa'yika" are not female.
Another example
verse 14/10
- 14 - 10
(kaalt Rusuluhum) , eventhough the " AL Rusul " ( messemgers ) are not female kaalt is In the femminine form because "AL Rusul" ( the messemgers are too many , .
There are other exemple of that rule That includes names also who ends up with ( taa' t'nyit) or the plurals under the pattern fa"ul and af"ul , like shuhur and "ashhur ", both are plurals but "shuhur " are more in counting. And there are many other rules like that. And those rules are not arbitrary but follow the "real " , " physical "" natural " "phenomena "
1- second example when the the word describe something that is " few " or " little" ( ) so the masculin pronom is used
Verse 12/30
- 12 - 30
( Kaala Niswah) , eventhough the " Niswah " (womens ) are female the verbe "Kaala " is in masculin form because the " Niswah" (Womens) who was with Yusuf (S) where only a few womens.
So how in the verse you quoted , those rules fit
Notice the first verse 23/21(2) - 23 - 21
( ا is in feminin form because it talks about many things that we can get from AL An"aam ( The 8 pairs animal) notably the verse is listing ( milk , many benefits , and we eat from them ) , so do we get milk from the male of these animals or only from the females , surely from the females only , so the verse is including in that verse males and females of these 8 pair animals because it does talk about all the benefits from both gender , by so they are many , and this is why the verse use the feminine form of the pronom at the end of the word in question.
In the second verse 16/66 it talk only about Milk
- 16 - 66
So it only talk about the female of the 8 pairs from these animals so they are few compared to the other verse which includ both gender , so this is why in the second verse he used the masculin form at the end of the word in question.
-
-
- 23 - 21
( ا is in feminin form because it talks about many things that we can get from AL An"aam ( The 8 pairs animal) notably the verse is listing ( milk , many benefits , and we eat from them ) , so do we get milk from the male of these animals or only from the females , surely from the females only , so the verse is including in that verse males and females of these 8 pair animals because it does talk about all the benefits from both gender , by so they are many , and this is why the verse use the feminine form of the pronom at the end of the word in question.
In the second verse 16/66 it talk only about Milk
- 16 - 66
So it only talk about the female of the 8 pairs from these animals so they are few compared to the other verse which includ both gender , so this is why in the second verse he used the masculin form at the end of the word in question.
Salamun alaika,
Thanks for relevant input about grammar delicacies.
But here the noun is the same one towards which you are relating both the pronouns; i.e. ; thus there is not the issue of plural of paucity and plural of abundance involved here. Moreover the verb can't be taken to have any relevance with other benefits people draw from mammals. -
-
The most important thing for understanding a discourse is the segmentation of sentences. We must know where it beigins and where it ends. In DNA translation there is "start codon" and termining-ending codon; similarly in protein there is a start amino acid and ending amino acid.
Salaam,
Not sure sure why you come up again with this amino example when I already told you that I don't even know what they are.
Waw is the most important starting particle and also indicator of ending of earlier sentence.
Two very simple books of Grammar Syntax are
Hidaya and Fawaid
It is better to download them and keep in grammar folder for referenceHidaya http//www.al-islam.org/file/al-hidayah-fi-nahw
Fawaid http//www.jaffarya.org/main/docs/books/al-Fawaaid%20as-Samadiyyah.pdf
About waw and discourse segmentation
http//wa.amu.edu.pl/psicl/files/34/18Fareh.pdf
http//www.ijens.org/vol%2011%20i%2001/112701-8989%20ijecs-ijens.pdfYou may also like to have this book in your treasures
From the treasures of Arabic Morphology
http//special.worldofislam.info/Arabic/pdf/Treasures_of_Arabic_Morphology.pdfThank you for all those pdf's.
I've gone very quickly through them. What I have seen are just some studies from some sholars. Thus not 1 reference from a grammar book.The references they use for their work are in the best case some grammarians from the past. The oldest grammarian they have referenced lived at least 100 years after the start of the so called hi-zjri calendar. So it looks like there is no grammar book at all, just opinions of people, while you present here your grammar rules as facts. Actually some of the grammar rules are directly based on the hadiths of Bukharie & Co (for example WAW alqasam). One of the authors had even this in his thank word
"Surely we seek Your favour through Your beloved Muhammed, leader of the Messengers, and his descendants, the infallible Aimmah, the prayers of Allah and his peace be upon them all."salaam,
Bender -
It was perhaps in relation to Phd gentleman that he may have taken position on "hi" masculine pronoun referring to feminine plural because the earlier exegeses of Qur'aan said so.
Salaam,
So just like you did with 2197 and many many many many many many other verses.
salaam,
bender -
Peace Bender,
A reason why I know that we are living with a book called Quran misinterpreted tremendously and one must be wary about the slightest piece of connotation on the words and their description in lexicons. As far as I know there are no lexicons earlier than the composition of the book called Quran so one can never swear 100% that a definition is completely accurate.
Popular is Lane's, but it is also post-Quran age as far as I know by at least 200-300 years and also the age where that crappy hadith about Muhammad got in circulation. Quite suspicious actually.
One must thus use their ability to render a book by the literal quality and by reason and logic just as much as learning the grammar and meaning of the language. Just because a word has meant a specific thing for 1000 years is no guarantee that it originally had that meaning.
Take praying birds or dogmatic behavior towards people who do not keep "salat". Is salat then "contact prayer" or something else? Let people activate their brains instead of living in a delusion created by men without understanding.
Have faith
-
Okay, I have no choice/option but to accept a non-native language exactly as it is, if I sincerely wish to understand a discourse in that laguage. The logic is that langauge is a long cherished convention of a people to whom that language belongs. If they call Sun is feminine, I cannot take it as masculine, though my mother language treats it as masculine.
salaam,
Sure, but the non-native language here is the text of The Quran, not the arabic of the arabs.
salaam,
Bender -
Entire sensible world admits that the grammar of Arabic is based upon the Qur'aan. It is the basic document for framing the grammar rules.
Salaam,
So why then do you present your grammar rules as the ultimate truth while you know that they are not more then a guess from mostly the same sort of people who made the ahadith?
Salaam,
Bender -
1- second example when the the word describe something that is " few " or " little" ( ) so the masculin pronom is used
Verse 12/30
- 12 - 30
( Kaala Niswah) , eventhough the " Niswah " (womens ) are female the verbe "Kaala " is in masculin form because the " Niswah" (Womens) who was with Yusuf (S) where only a few womens.
Peace, good observation?
1230 and said (m/s) nis'watun (i.e. few womenfolk in the community) in the town lady the mighty seeking to seduce youth hers about soul his/himself hence infatuated her love surely we surely see her in misguidance clear
Could be a typo with missing alef ? don?t know dairy giving animal with 3 or more stomachs?
1666 and surely for you in the cattle surely lesson we give drink you from what in bunihi/stomachs his/its (m/s) from between bowels and blood milk of pure of palatable of to the drinkers
2321 and surely for you in the cattle surely lesson we give drink you from what in bunih/stomachs theirs (f/p) and for you in her/therein gains numerous and from her/it thou eating
Perhaps best to peruse older texts if available and check for consistency in transcription.
-
Peace Bender,
A reason why I know that we are living with a book called Quran misinterpreted tremendously and one must be wary about the slightest piece of connotation on the words and their description in lexicons. As far as I know there are no lexicons earlier than the composition of the book called Quran so one can never swear 100% that a definition is completely accurate.
Popular is Lane's, but it is also post-Quran age as far as I know by at least 200-300 years and also the age where that crappy hadith about Muhammad got in circulation. Quite suspicious actually.
One must thus use their ability to render a book by the literal quality and by reason and logic just as much as learning the grammar and meaning of the language. Just because a word has meant a specific thing for 1000 years is no guarantee that it originally had that meaning.
Take praying birds or dogmatic behavior towards people who do not keep "salat". Is salat then "contact prayer" or something else? Let people activate their brains instead of living in a delusion created by men without understanding.
Have faith
salaam,
Of course I know there is not a single grammar book or lexicon before The Quran on which the Quran is based. But some people here use man made lexicons and man made grammar as evidence when they talk about the ayaats of The Quran.
salaam,
Bender