A topic for those who study Classical Arabic

Samia

Salaam Nadeem

I am sorry for not transliterating, nor fully vocalizing my Arabic words.
Let's reply to your querries.

What I understand from your post is that masculine and perhaps even feminine sound plurals are excempted from this rule. True?

Right, for different reasons, though.

What does it say here - -
I'm making a wild guess and reading it madris?na - madris?na - madris?na, and think of it meaning those who attend the madrasa (students?), and from the root Dal-ra-siin and 'ma' being a preposition. I'm wrong, am I notWhat does it say here - -
I'm making a wild guess and reading it madris?na - madris?na - madris?na, and think of it meaning those who attend the madrasa (students?), and from the root Dal-ra-siin and 'ma' being a preposition. I'm wrong, am I not?

I wont say wrong, but excellent attempt. mudarrisuun (with a shadda on the R..I cant find the shadda on my computer) teachers.

Let's do the word Mujrim?na.
Nom Mujrim?na
Acc Mujrim?na (No alif)
Gen Mujrim?na (No alif)

And the female sound plural '?y?tun'.
Nom ?y?tun
Acc ?y?tin
Gen ?y?tin

Correct?

Excellent!!

If I had to say something, I'd say the pattern in is a-?-i-u
True?

Absolutely.

Does Kat?ibu mean anything btw? (using the last mentioned pattern.)

Yes. It is the plural of kateeba which means regiment, squadron (army).

In my book, there is only one category of words which do not change for case nor has nunnation. These are those ending with an Alif after fatha, or an ya after fatha. Such as Bushr? (with ya), and Duny? (with alif).

These words do not show case because it is impossible to put a case on an alif.

Quote
3. is a sound feminine plural. This plural does not take the accusative sign or nunnation. So, we do not say but for both the accusative and the genetive.

I mean accusative nunnation, not nunnation per se. I explained in the "" for the accusative and not " ".

What does 'Comparative pattern' and 'verbal pattern' mean?

I don't know what it says here
Maybe Af-AAlu ? That makes most resemblance to aswadu. I can't find any resemblance between aswadu and the pattern in , so I don't know how to recognize it as a diptode.

The comparative pattern as in "akbar greater"; verbal pattern is a pattern of a verb, as in "lam aqra' I didn't read".

There is no resemblance between the two patterns. What I want to say is that a class of diptodes are plurals which follow a certain pattern. These are two of the patterns of diptodes. (There is also a third pattern of plurals which is the mafa3iil pattern, as in mafatee7 keys).

I searched google for 'diptode' and got as result the page 'Sex XXX' (link to google, safe). Where did you say you studied arabic? Just kidding -)

rotfl rotfl

nadeem

Hi Samia,

Thanks again for explaining -)

The reason nothing turns up for diptode is because it is actually diptote. I bought the book by Wheeler M. Thackston and he too explains it quite well.

I know think it is wrong that you should have to vocalize your arabic just for me when true arabic is written without, so I'm glad that Mr. Thackston teaches arabic non-vocalized. So now I can read certain words unvocalized by looking at the composition of the sentence and recognizing the role of the word in the sentence and vocalizing accordingly. A bit slow, but better than nothing.

Anyways, I was thinking about arabic and its pattern system, and I've come up with a theory which I haven't gotten confirmed yet.

It all started with my own name Nadeem. How does one pronounce it? I've found out that if it is pronounced N?dim, then it means "drinker"(idiom for drinking companion), however if the long-wowel is shifted to the i "Nad?m", then it becomes "Friend".

The first describes what i do or how i do it, whilst the second describes what or how I am. Is this true for ALL with words with this pattern?

Let's take some examples

H?kim => 'Judges' => To judge => an act a person does
Hak?m => 'Wise' => To be wise => a state a person is in

Q?bilun => 'One who accepts' => To accept => an act a person does
Qab?lun => 'Face to face' => To be face to face with => a state a person is in

R?ziq => 'Provider' => To provide => an act a person does
Razz?q => 'great provider' => To be great provider => a state a person is in

The rule seems to be that if the long vowel is at the first vowel of the word, then the word describes the persons action-wise, if the longvowel is the second and the last, then the word describes a person state-wise.

Am I correct?

Nadeem

maxq

To add to Nadeem's list...

Raheem => 'Beneficient/Merciful' => an act a someone does
Rahmaan => 'Source of Benefit/Mercy' => a state someone is in

Is this correct too?

nadeem

Hi Brother Maxq,

Thanks for the suggestions, but I think 'Raheem' also describes a state. One cannot say "To Beneficient/Merciful" as with verbs, rather one says "To be Beneficient/Merciful" as with adjectives.

But again, thanks, the pattern is further confirmed Both words are descriptive of the state and both have long second vowels.

Here are some more

First vowel long, second vowel short
Kaafir = Rejector = An act
Kaatib = Writer = An act
Qaatil = Killer = An act
Dzaalim = Wrongdoer = an act
Maalik = Owner = an act (to own)

First vowel short, second vowel long
Hisaan = Beautiful ones = A state
Kariim = Noble, generous = A state
Kabiir = Big, old = A state
Aziim = Great = a state
Saliim = safe, secure = state

Nadeem

abrar

Dear nadeem,

I have studied my three years of primary school in saudi arabia, makkah. I know fair not fluent classical arabic and i am in the process of constantly learning it. I have found a very good website about classical arabic of quran on the internet. Go to the links below
http//www.emuslim.com
http//www.emuslim.com/Quran/Dictionary_English.asp
They are attempting to explain the methodology of quran's translation techniques into any language. They are making scholarly research on arabic of quranic terms.
I hope that you will find this website helpful.

Peace

nadeem

Peace everyone,

My book says that the above means "For the believers of the earth". However, I don't see why this couldn't also mean "For the two believers of the earth".

Can someone explain?

Nadeem

nerspi

peace

i have a question for those who study classical arabic

4112 And He it is Who ordained that they become seven Heavens in two stages and assigned to each heaven its function. And We decorated the sky of the world with shining lamps, and made them secure (that they clash not in their orbits 419). That is the Design of the Almighty, the Knower.

4112 Thus, He then made them into seven universes in two days, and He inspired to every universe its affair. And We adorned the lowest universe with lamps, and for protection. Such is the design of the Noble, the Knowledgeable

4112
So He completed them as seven firmaments in two Days, and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command. And We adorned the lower heaven with lights, and (provided it) with guard. Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge.

which one is it? sky of the world? lowest universe? or lower heaven?

Samia

Hi Samia,

The first describes what i do or how i do it, whilst the second describes what or how I am. Is this true for ALL with words with this pattern?

Let's take some examples

H?kim => 'Judges' => To judge => an act a person does
Hak?m => 'Wise' => To be wise => a state a person is in

Q?bilun => 'One who accepts' => To accept => an act a person does
Qab?lun => 'Face to face' => To be face to face with => a state a person is in

R?ziq => 'Provider' => To provide => an act a person does
Razz?q => 'great provider' => To be great provider => a state a person is in

The rule seems to be that if the long vowel is at the first vowel of the word, then the word describes the persons action-wise, if the longvowel is the second and the last, then the word describes a person state-wise.

Am I correct?

Nadeem

Sorry for the belated reply!

Yes, you are. We speak of "patterns" faa3il (action-wise, doer) and fa3eei (state-wise, adjective)

To add to Nadeem's list...

Raheem => 'Beneficient/Merciful' => an act a someone does
Rahmaan => 'Source of Benefit/Mercy' => a state someone is in

Is this correct too?

They do not follow the pattern.

raheem fa3eel state-wise
rahmaan fa3laan another pattern for state-wise (example farhaan happy, 3atshaan thirsty) This pattern is more intense than fa3eel.

Peace everyone,

?????? ?????

My book says that the above means "For the believers of the earth". However, I don't see why this couldn't also mean "For the two believers of the earth".

Can someone explain?

Nadeem

It could also mean "for the two...." if we diregard the vocalization "tashkeel". mu'mineen/mu'minee plural; mu'minayn/mu'minay dual.

peace

i have a question for those who study classical arabic

4112 And He it is Who ordained that they become seven Heavens in two stages and assigned to each heaven its function. And We decorated the sky of the world with shining lamps, and made them secure (that they clash not in their orbits 419). That is the Design of the Almighty, the Knower.

4112 Thus, He then made them into seven universes in two days, and He inspired to every universe its affair. And We adorned the lowest universe with lamps, and for protection. Such is the design of the Noble, the Knowledgeable

4112
So He completed them as seven firmaments in two Days, and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command. And We adorned the lower heaven with lights, and (provided it) with guard. Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge.

which one is it? sky of the world? lowest universe? or lower heaven?

I would say the lowest/nearest heaven/sky/

nadeem

Peace Sister Samia,

Sorry for the belated reply!

Oh, not to worry. Quite frankly I'm grateful that you even bother and that you find it worthy to help me out. You rock! bravo

Yes, you are. We speak of "patterns" faa3il (action-wise, doer) and fa3eei (state-wise, adjective)

Cool. Almost feel like a grammarian -)

It could also mean "for the two...." if we diregard the vocalization "tashkeel". mu'mineen/mu'minee plural; mu'minayn/mu'minay dual.

Let me see if I understood you correctly. Without a kasra or fatha on the , we can't say for sure if its dual or plural?

Feel free to use this arabic-typing tool if needed http//www.indiana.edu/~arabic/typing_arabic.htm

Nadeem

Samia

Thanks for the kind words!

I do not mean case ending, but inter-word vocalization.

I am using a mac. Not Arabic enabled because it has office 2004. The link you sent does not have short vowels, but great, thanks!!

I will explain where, and what short vowels in both words

mu'minain/m'uminai dual (fatha on the first nuun and sukuun on the ya)
mu'mineen/mu'minee plural (kasra under the first nuun and the ya)

There is no difference consonant-wise

decepticus

I am using a mac. Not Arabic enabled because it has office 2004. The link you sent does not have short vowels, but great, thanks!!

No more excuses with Neooffice! I am using it with my ibBook for arabic wonderful!

Mac OS X is natively arabic enabled (textedit is a good alternative but Neooffice is so powerful!) And forget about Office 2004

You can download it here http//www.neooffice.org/neojava/en/

To write arabic, just change the flag in the right corner to the green crescent, choose an arabic font (I like Baghdad and Decotype Naskh) , change the direction of the text and you can go on!

Samia

Thanks a million decepticus! You saved my wallet handshake

nadeem

Peace,

The following sentence is found in 6145. is in accusative.

My question is what does the term describe? Is it the swine as a whole, or its flesh?

My reasoning is that it is describing the meat, and not pig as a whole, since is the subject of the sentence.

Nadeem

Samia

Peace,

The following sentence ??? ????? ???? ??? is found in 6145. ??? is in accusative.

My question is what does the term ??? describe? Is it the swine as a whole, or its flesh?

My reasoning is that it is describing the meat, and not pig as a whole, since ??? is the subject of the sentence.

Nadeem

Grammatically, it could be describing either word.

maxq

That's cool! Do you know if the same functionality is in OpenOffice? I am not a java fan ... nope

For now I use SC Unipad ... while the free version has time limitations per session, it can be used indefinitely and I confirmed from their account manager and got permission to use it indefinitely as such. The good thing is, I can use it for Arabic, Urdu as well as Sindhi yes

No more excuses with Neooffice! I am using it with my ibBook for arabic wonderful!

Mac OS X is natively arabic enabled (textedit is a good alternative but Neooffice is so powerful!) And forget about Office 2004

You can download it here http//www.neooffice.org/neojava/en/

To write arabic, just change the flag in the right corner to the green crescent, choose an arabic font (I like Baghdad and Decotype Naskh) , change the direction of the text and you can go on!

nadeem

Peace Samia,

Why is that?

Nadeem

Samia

Peace Samia,

Why is that?

Nadeem

My reply is based on the sentence you presented if taken out of context. But if we consider the whole verse, and put the sentence in its context, the word "impure" describes all the prohibited food mentioned before it, including swinemeat, so it will be for meat, not swine, because swine-meat will be considered one word a kind of meat.

nadeem

Peace Samia,

Thanks -)

If you could tell briefly about the grammar involved here, I'd be grateful.

Nadeem

Samia

Peace Samia,

Thanks -)

If you could tell briefly about the grammar involved here, I'd be grateful.

Nadeem

Just the sentenc
The sentence is an equational one with a subject (which is the prefixed pronoun in ; and the predicate is ). rijs is masculine singular because the subject (the pronoun) is, too. The pronoun refers to a noun which should be also ms. We have two nouns which are both ms ,so rijs could refer to either.
Sentence in context "I do not find......anything forbidden to be eaten unless it is dead animal, blood or swine meat, as this is impure". Here, ( as this is)refers to anything forbidden. The "swine-meat" is a compound unit treated as one word since it is neither a subject in an equational sentence, nor is it followed by a direct adjective.

nadeem

Thanks Samia,

As foretold; I'm quite grateful -)

And as expected, another riddle The particle 'Inna'. From what I see, everything following the particle Inna becomes accusative (what is the Arabic term btw?), except from those words who are second members of a construct; those who are directly preceded by a preposition, and those adjectives linked to non-accusative words.

True?

And, when exactly does one use this sentence-head particle?

From what I see, they are only employed in equational sentences. True?

Nadeem