Sura Al Falaq
-
So we agree that should be translated as "He was created" and not as "He has created"?
Furthermore, that "he has created" is active voice and "he was created" a passive voice. I agree with you on both. However, question for you does the third person singular pronoun has also always to be "He" and can not be "It"?
-
So we agree that should be translated as "He was created" and not as "He has created"?
No unless you change the vowels on the first and second radical. Moreover, both "He was created" and "He has created" are just dependent clause and thereby incomplete and vague.
You have to relate it with some independent clause.
-
Furthermore, that "he has created" is active voice and "he was created" a passive voice. I agree with you on both. However, question for you does the third person singular pronoun has also always to be "He" and can not be "It"?
English "it" pronoun could be pleonastic; in Arabic there is no such thing.
-
Let me you give you the whole linguistic methodology used in deriving this meanings. The syntactical analysis is more important part of it. This verse as written starts of with a prepositional phrase. A prepositional phrase usually can not be a subject of a sentence unless it is "a local sentence" or which is not the situation here. Then, analysis of confirms it to be a negative sentence. A whole sentence can be a subject of another whole sentence. Whereas, although a prepositional phrase most of the time can't be a subject of sentence, but can be a predicate of sentence.
With this background knowledge if we rearrange this verse it becomes
translated as a word "He/It has been created according to measures and proportions". used with perfect denies past. Hence, translated as literal "He/it has never been created according to measures and proportions". This doesn't make much sense, does it? Furthermore, paying attention to meaning of next phrase, which is "to be among wrongdoers, unjust, corrupt and wicked". One natural question is what are natural measures and proportions for humans. Are these not what constitute our natural disposition?
So if we replace "natural disposition", in meaning of . It meaning becomes " It has never been consistent with natural disposition (created measures and proportions)" this whole sentence becomes subject of the verse. It is followed by its Predicate, a prepositional phrase meaning "to be among wrongdoers, unjust, corrupt and wicked. Therefore, the translation of the whole verse.
Surah 1132
It has never been consistent with natural disposition to be among wrongdoers, unjust, corrupt and wicked.
-
So if we replace "natural disposition", in meaning of . It meaning becomes " It has never been consistent with natural disposition (created measures and proportions)" this whole sentence becomes subject of the verse. It is followed by its Predicate, a prepositional phrase [ meaning "to be among wrongdoers, unjust, corrupt and wicked. Therefore, the translation of the whole verse.
A verbal sentence need not a predicate. Nominal sentences comprise of subject predicate. A verbal sentence is Verb-subject-object and can have time adverbs and causative and locative objects.
-
A verbal sentence need not a predicate. Nominal sentences comprise of subject predicate. A verbal sentence is Verb-subject-object and can have time adverbs and causative and locative objects.
Please read carefully what I have written. A whole sentence whether verbal or not can become a subject for a new sentence. This is the case in this verse. This whole negative verbal sentence is its subject, followed by its predicate a prepositional phrase.
-
A verbal sentence need not a predicate. Nominal sentences comprise of subject predicate. A verbal sentence is Verb-subject-object and can have time adverbs and causative and locative objects.
From very strict English terminology point of view your comment about no predicate are correct. However, various older English grammar books have used Predicate synonymous to object. This is how I used it above. This is for total clarity and honesty's sake.
a negative sentence and subject of this verse.
a prepositional phrase and object of this verse.
-
From very strict English terminology point of view your comment about no predicate are correct. However, various older English grammar books have used Predicate synonymous to object. This is how I used it above. This is for total clarity and honesty's sake.
a negative sentence and subject of this verse.
a prepositional phrase and object of this verse.
Now translate the "subject" and "predicate"; predicate being an ascription to the subject.
(However, note a prepositional phrase is neither a subject nor a predicate in a sentence---basic grammar lesson).
-
Now translate the "subject" and "predicate"; predicate being an ascription to the subject.
(However, note a prepositional phrase is neither a subject nor a predicate in a sentence---basic grammar lesson).
Mazhar you are not going to accept whatever is presented to you. I reiterate, in classic Arabic a whole sentence is and can be used as subject of a new sentence. Also a prepositional phrase is and can be used as an object of a sentence. This is the simplest explanation for you and to all for understanding and to verify. If you can't verify these facts of language, give me your references. I shall give mine. Otherwise, please don't create a state of commotion in simple things.
-
Mazhar you are not going to accept whatever is presented to you. I reiterate, in classic Arabic a whole sentence is and can be used as subject of a new sentence. Also a prepositional phrase is and can be used as an object of a sentence. This is the simplest explanation for you and to all for understanding and to verify. If you can't verify these facts of language, give me your references. I shall give mine. Otherwise, please don't create a state of commotion in simple things.
Nothing has been presented so far. What is presented is this
a negative sentence and subject of this verse.
a prepositional phrase and object of this verse.
I asked please translate the subject and predicate,
-
Nothing has been presented so far. What is presented is this
I asked please translate the subject and predicate,
Surah 1132
Subject ObjectIt has never been consistent with natural disposition to be among wrongdoers, unjust, corrupt and wicked.
Translation of Subject Translation of Object -
Surah 1132
Subject ObjectIt has never been consistent with natural disposition to be among wrongdoers, unjust, corrupt and wicked.
Translation of Subject Translation of ObjectThe "it" in the beginning is referent to what is the translation of object.
This way now you have converted the verb as active voice while earlier you determined it "passive".
From where come "consistent with"; "never" and "be" structures?
-
The "it" in the beginning is referent to what is the translation of object.
"It" is referring to "that which has been created according to measures and proportions".
This way now you have converted the verb as active voice while earlier you determined it "passive".
Please look up at the beginning. I translated with active voice. I misunderstood your question and discussion went into a wrong and different direction.
From where come "consistent with"; "never" and "be" structures?
No language can be translated into another language verbatim. It is the concepts from target language that needs to be translated according to the rules of the language these concepts are being translated into in order for translation to make sense.
When literally means "created according to specific measures and proportions". Wouldn't this concept be same as to what would constituent and determine the natural disposition this created thing/being? This is where natural disposition is coming from.
If literally translated would look like this "It has never natural disposition". However, due requirements of English language for it to be meaningful and comprehensible require that whole sentence be written as "It has never been consistent with natural disposition".
The never is the translation of negative . If you don't like use of never, one could use "not" instead. "It has not been consistent with natural disposition".
Or even if one wants to be literal and feels better it could be translated as "he has not been created according to measures and proportions to be among wrongdoers, unjust, corrupt and wicked". I just feel that "It has never been consistent with natural disposition to be among wrongdoers, unjust, corrupt and wicked", reads more elegantly.
-
From where come "consistent with"; "never" and "be" structures?
Dear Mazhar, I want to thank you for posing pertinent questions (I really mean it). Your final question that really is important about my use of "been" in this translation. This makes translation in English as "perfect progressive tense". Question is very prudent how come? Since Classic Arabic primarily has only two tenses. The two broad categories are a Perfect and an Imperfect tense. Under perfect Wright has described several sub types, including what is called Past tense in English, as well English Perfect tense. This English Perfect tense is the one that uses Has/Have.
Please remember, Quranic Arabic rules were written and completed in far later times. It is after Tabari's translation was already established as real translation and was used as the reference in deciding these rules. Hence, there is lack of a Perfect Progressive rule description in linguistic rules. This lack of description could mean two things. Either, the language of Quran lacked a Perfect progressive tense or the translation by Tabari is imperfect and hence rules developed based upon his translation are imperfect as well. I know it is the later of the two. How can I say this?
This is the reason I have translated here as perfect progressive tense with "have been". This is based upon Quran's own textual as well other linguitic evidence. The word, has really been described as only a concept of "an act of creation by using specific measure and proportions, with no reference to a creator" in the Lane. Furthermore, if one pays attention to this act itself and especially in relationship to humans, it becomes apparent that it started in past, continues in present and will continue in future. Isn't this a kind of an act/verb which would be considered as Perfect Progressive in English? Hence, to describe such an act or verb, in English one has to use Perfect Progressive Tense.
Finally, my purpose is not to establish myself as an authority. I want to raise the awareness to what all consider Quran is not the real Quran. It is just a translation done by an individual few hundred years after it's inception. This translation is faulty. We will never be able to fix a faulty translation no matter how much efforts we keep putting into it. We really need to direct our efforts to the text of Quran anew with realization that we don't understand a word of Quran. Not only we don't understand a word of Quran, all what we understand is wrong. I am doing my paltry efforts and sharing with all those who might care about these issues.
Regards,
-
Finally, Dear Waqas, this much evidence, reason and logic should be enough to keep me compliant of Forum rules?
For everyone's ease to verify how Lane has principally translated concept of from Arabic sources as only "an act of creating according to specific proportions and measures without any reference to a creator" please see following link. Beginning of first page and little down on second page.
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume2/00000435.pdf
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume2/00000436.pdf -
The word, has really been described as only a concept of "an act of creation by using specific measure and proportions, with no reference to a creator" in the Lane. Furthermore, if one pays attention to this act itself and especially in relationship to humans, it becomes apparent that it started in past, continues in present and will continue in future. Isn't this a kind of an act/verb which would be considered as Perfect Progressive in English? Hence, to describe such an act or verb, in English one has to use Perfect Progressive Tense.
In English Frame Index the Creation, Create physical artwork, Create representation, Intentionally create is defined "The Creator creates a new entity, the Created entity, possibly out of Components"; "A Creator creates an artifact that is typically an iconic Representation of an actual or imagined entity or event. The Representation may also be evocative of an idea while not based on resemblance"; A Creator produces a physical object which is to serve as a Representation of an actual or imagined entity or event, the Represented".
In Arabic the semantic frame Creation is embedded in Root . Ibn Faris in his famous lexicon stated about this Root
That it signifies the act of determining the measures and proportionality of a thing to other things, and then smoothness of the object.
Its general perception and meanings as creation are well known to everyone who knows Arabic. The basic perception is that of the idea and intention of giving existence to the intended object. Thus the thing is created and exists firstly in Abstract Realm before it takes existence in the Physical Realm.
The words that stem from this Root are result oriented. The irreducible semantic features of this Root are
(1) A living Who is the creator of the object;
(2) The will - decision taken by the living to create;
(3) The purpose the Creator has in mind to create the object;
(4) For what or for whom it is meant;
(5) Idea - blue print - determination of measures and proportionality of the thing to other things that creates interrelationships before the object takes existence;
(6) The span of time it will continue to exist or live.
(7) Assigning a name to the object for its cognition.
Also consider Qad, and Kana construction to further know about verbs.
-
Also please realize that Ayah 1-5 from first word "Qul" to end is just one sentence in Arabic,
It is important to determine the start and end of a sentence in Arabic since it has no capital word to indicate start nor had end markers.
Have you thought or read somewhere in grammar books about this aspect of sentences in Arabic. Arabic has all the four types of sentences by structure.
-
In English Frame Index the Creation, Create physical artwork, Create representation, Intentionally create is defined "The Creator creates a new entity, the Created entity, possibly out of Components"; "A Creator creates an artifact that is typically an iconic Representation of an actual or imagined entity or event. The Representation may also be evocative of an idea while not based on resemblance"; A Creator produces a physical object which is to serve as a Representation of an actual or imagined entity or event, the Represented".
In Arabic the semantic frame Creation is embedded in Root . Ibn Faris in his famous lexicon stated about this Root
That it signifies the act of determining the measures and proportionality of a thing to other things, and then smoothness of the object.
Its general perception and meanings as creation are well known to everyone who knows Arabic. The basic perception is that of the idea and intention of giving existence to the intended object. Thus the thing is created and exists firstly in Abstract Realm before it takes existence in the Physical Realm.
The words that stem from this Root are result oriented. The irreducible semantic features of this Root are
(1) A living Who is the creator of the object;
(2) The will - decision taken by the living to create;
(3) The purpose the Creator has in mind to create the object;
(4) For what or for whom it is meant;
(5) Idea - blue print - determination of measures and proportionality of the thing to other things that creates interrelationships before the object takes existence;
(6) The span of time it will continue to exist or live.
(7) Assigning a name to the object for its cognition.
Also consider Qad, and Kana construction to further know about verbs.
Do you have some reference from older time for written in red or is it just an extrapolation from description of Ibne Faris's meaning of the root?
-
Also please realize that Ayah 1-5 from first word "Qul" to end is just one sentence in Arabic,
It is important to determine the start and end of a sentence in Arabic since it has no capital word to indicate start nor had end markers.
Have you thought or read somewhere in grammar books about this aspect of sentences in Arabic. Arabic has all the four types of sentences by structure.
Please give the syntactically analysis of this one sentence. Which is Subject and Object? Or however you feel the break down of this sentence is? Also references for such break down or reason or logic used for considering such analysis.
-
Do you have some reference from older time for written in red or is it just an extrapolation from description of Ibne Faris's meaning of the root?
A word is like a container - retainer. It has to be emptied to get what is stored in it. It has features. It has irreducible semantic elements. And conversely those features that it does not have.
Simple example of word woman; it has basic features - elements in it. Other words may share its some elements but will retain their distinction if some feature of it is not present in them.