Do all grammarians agree on the conditions for including a word in the plural of masculine soundness?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : They differ on this.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : I say: They differ on this; they are not in agreement on these conditions.
The questioner : There are examples. May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : These are the examples.
The questioner : Which one?
The Shaykh : These examples, for instance, why do I not say "sukranun" for "sukran" (drunk)?
The questioner : It has not been heard.
The Shaykh : No, it has not been heard. It is not a condition of hearing. I say it is not a condition of hearing. If we say: We cannot pluralize except what has been heard, that is analogy. Yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : I say: They differ on this; they are not in agreement on these conditions.
The questioner : There are examples. May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : These are the examples.
The questioner : Which one?
The Shaykh : These examples, for instance, why do I not say "sukranun" for "sukran" (drunk)?
The questioner : It has not been heard.
The Shaykh : No, it has not been heard. It is not a condition of hearing. I say it is not a condition of hearing. If we say: We cannot pluralize except what has been heard, that is analogy. Yes.