Comments on: The First Term Of An Idaafa Cannot Have Tanween http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/ n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Wed, 23 May 2012 11:37:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Grumpy Old Man http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7143 Sat, 30 Jun 2007 18:24:15 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7143 As some of us say in non-classical English, "Yowzah!" As some of us say in non-classical English, “Yowzah!”

]]> by: Samn http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7142 Sat, 30 Jun 2007 18:20:00 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7142 Man, just wait till you get to diptotes.... (Also, there's a difference between spoken arabic- even often classical arabic read aloud and proper classical arabic grammar when it comes to the genitive. In spoken arabic, an idafah is marked with masculine nouns just by a noun with a definite article following a noun without an article and with most feminine nouns by the pronunciation of a t at the end of the first word of the construct. In proper classical arabic, an idafah is marked by its second term being in the genetive. But, there are other, more exotic types of semi-idafah's that work differently.....) Man, just wait till you get to diptotes….

(Also, there’s a difference between spoken arabic- even often classical arabic read aloud and proper classical arabic grammar when it comes to the genitive. In spoken arabic, an idafah is marked with masculine nouns just by a noun with a definite article following a noun without an article and with most feminine nouns by the pronunciation of a t at the end of the first word of the construct. In proper classical arabic, an idafah is marked by its second term being in the genetive. But, there are other, more exotic types of semi-idafah’s that work differently…..)

]]> by: Grumpy Old Man http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7137 Fri, 29 Jun 2007 23:14:53 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7137 Wikipedia is hardly definitive (in fact, you can go in yourself and change it), but <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_constructus" rel="nofollow">here</a>'s its article on <i>status constructus</i>. I think you're right about the /-t/ being from the "pause form," but it still seems that it's the possessor that changes form, and not the thing possessed. Otherwise, why go to the trouble of saying "construct state" and not just "genitive case"? And now, back to those exciting mechanic's liens . . . Wikipedia is hardly definitive (in fact, you can go in yourself and change it), but here’s its article on status constructus. I think you’re right about the /-t/ being from the “pause form,” but it still seems that it’s the possessor that changes form, and not the thing possessed.

Otherwise, why go to the trouble of saying “construct state” and not just “genitive case”?

And now, back to those exciting mechanic’s liens . . .

]]> by: Grumpy Old Man http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7136 Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:58:44 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7136 Hmm. You are probably right. I will have to dig out some books. I missed my opportunity to do what you are doing. OTOH, I know more than I want to, and less than I need to, about mechanic's liens. But, glory be to God for dappled things. Hmm. You are probably right.

I will have to dig out some books. I missed my opportunity to do what you are doing. OTOH, I know more than I want to, and less than I need to, about mechanic’s liens.

But, glory be to God for dappled things.

]]> by: Daniel Larison http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7135 Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:52:10 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7135 But, as I understand it, the first term actually doesn't end with a kesra, which is the genitive marker. The first term ends with a damma. You are transcribing the pause form of mamlikah, which would be pronounced, I believe, "mamlikatoo as-saudiyyah." After the first term, everything in a complex idaafa ends with a kesra, which seems to be the same way that German works. For example: Das ist das Buch der Bibliothek meines Vaters. In Arabic, the construction is essentially the same, except that the first term of an idaafa lacks a definite article: Hadha huwa kitab-u al-maktaba-i waalidi. Maybe I also have it wrong somewhere, since I have only been at this for two weeks, but I think that's right. But, as I understand it, the first term actually doesn’t end with a kesra, which is the genitive marker. The first term ends with a damma. You are transcribing the pause form of mamlikah, which would be pronounced, I believe, “mamlikatoo as-saudiyyah.” After the first term, everything in a complex idaafa ends with a kesra, which seems to be the same way that German works. For example: Das ist das Buch der Bibliothek meines Vaters. In Arabic, the construction is essentially the same, except that the first term of an idaafa lacks a definite article: Hadha huwa kitab-u al-maktaba-i waalidi. Maybe I also have it wrong somewhere, since I have only been at this for two weeks, but I think that’s right.

]]> by: Grumpy Old Man http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7134 Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:17:01 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/06/29/the-first-term-of-an-idhaafa-cannot-have-tanween/#comment-7134 I only studied Arabic briefly, but my understanding is that although <i>idhaafa</i> has the same basic function as a German genitive, it differs from a genitive in that the ending is on the possessor rather than the thing possessed. My transliteration is probably garbled, but as I remember <i>mamlikah</i> means "kingdom" and <i>mamlikat al-arabiyyah as-saudiah</i> means "the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia." The Indo-European way would be to add something to <i>al-arabiyyah</i>. Hebrew, which is grammatically quite similar to Arabic, has the same construction. <i>Torah</i> means "law" or "the Pentateuch," but to translate "the law of Moses" one says <i>torat Moshe</i>. And for all my pedantry, I could be quite mistaken. The Arabic was in a night class twenty-odd years ago, and what remains of it is the ability to shock and amaze my friends by reading signs in Arabic or Farsi that say "Restaurant" and "Market." I only studied Arabic briefly, but my understanding is that although idhaafa has the same basic function as a German genitive, it differs from a genitive in that the ending is on the possessor rather than the thing possessed. My transliteration is probably garbled, but as I remember mamlikah means “kingdom” and mamlikat al-arabiyyah as-saudiah means “the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.”

The Indo-European way would be to add something to al-arabiyyah.

Hebrew, which is grammatically quite similar to Arabic, has the same construction. Torah means “law” or “the Pentateuch,” but to translate “the law of Moses” one says torat Moshe.

And for all my pedantry, I could be quite mistaken. The Arabic was in a night class twenty-odd years ago, and what remains of it is the ability to shock and amaze my friends by reading signs in Arabic or Farsi that say “Restaurant” and “Market.”

]]>