Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And every hidden pronoun must be built *** And the form of what is genitive is like the form of what is accusative."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said: "And every hidden pronoun must be built" The author included this hemistich as an introduction to what follows, because its ruling is well known from the preceding chapter in his statement:
"And the noun is either inflected or built *** Due to its resemblance to letters, it is a townsperson
Like the resemblance in placement in the names of 'jii'tuna' (we came to you)"
In any case, all pronouns are built. This relieves the weak student of grammar, because he holds the pronoun and considers its building to be uniform, whether it is nominative, accusative, or genitive. So what are all the pronouns built upon? All the pronouns are built upon what? Some are built upon sukun (stillness), some upon dammah (raised vowel), some upon fathah (open vowel), some upon kasrah (lowered vowel), and some upon... yes, this is what it is now.
We return to it a second time. Some are built upon dammah, such as: "we" (nahnu).
And some are built upon sukun, such as: "I" (ana).
And some are built upon fathah, such as: "you stood" (qumta) [addressing a male].
And some are built upon kasrah, such as: "you stood" (qumti) [addressing a female].
All the vowel movements and sukun are also bases for building. So it has four aspects in its building: dammah, fathah, kasrah, and sukun.
"And the form of what is genitive is like the form of what is accusative" This means that if a pronoun is suitable for both genitive and accusative cases, its form is the same. If it is suitable for nominative and accusative cases, its form is the same.
What is an example? The "ya" of the speaker is suitable for accusative and genitive. You say: "He honored me" (akramani), which is accusative. And you say: "Pass by me" (murr bi), which is genitive. Did it change? No, it did not change. Similarly, the "ha" (he/him): you say "He honored him" (akramahu), which is built upon dammah, built upon dammah. And you say: "Pass by him" (murr bihi), which is built upon what? Upon kasrah. So the rule is broken. Why? Because of the presence of the kasrah before it, because of the presence of the kasrah before it. All right.
"Pass by her" (murr biha) and "He honored her" (akramaha). Now, "the form of what is genitive is like the form of what is accusative". The rule mentioned by Ibn Malik has an exception for cases where there is no cause requiring deviation. If there is a cause requiring deviation, then it follows what that cause necessitates.
"And the noun is either inflected or built *** Due to its resemblance to letters, it is a townsperson
Like the resemblance in placement in the names of 'jii'tuna' (we came to you)"
In any case, all pronouns are built. This relieves the weak student of grammar, because he holds the pronoun and considers its building to be uniform, whether it is nominative, accusative, or genitive. So what are all the pronouns built upon? All the pronouns are built upon what? Some are built upon sukun (stillness), some upon dammah (raised vowel), some upon fathah (open vowel), some upon kasrah (lowered vowel), and some upon... yes, this is what it is now.
We return to it a second time. Some are built upon dammah, such as: "we" (nahnu).
And some are built upon sukun, such as: "I" (ana).
And some are built upon fathah, such as: "you stood" (qumta) [addressing a male].
And some are built upon kasrah, such as: "you stood" (qumti) [addressing a female].
All the vowel movements and sukun are also bases for building. So it has four aspects in its building: dammah, fathah, kasrah, and sukun.
"And the form of what is genitive is like the form of what is accusative" This means that if a pronoun is suitable for both genitive and accusative cases, its form is the same. If it is suitable for nominative and accusative cases, its form is the same.
What is an example? The "ya" of the speaker is suitable for accusative and genitive. You say: "He honored me" (akramani), which is accusative. And you say: "Pass by me" (murr bi), which is genitive. Did it change? No, it did not change. Similarly, the "ha" (he/him): you say "He honored him" (akramahu), which is built upon dammah, built upon dammah. And you say: "Pass by him" (murr bihi), which is built upon what? Upon kasrah. So the rule is broken. Why? Because of the presence of the kasrah before it, because of the presence of the kasrah before it. All right.
"Pass by her" (murr biha) and "He honored her" (akramaha). Now, "the form of what is genitive is like the form of what is accusative". The rule mentioned by Ibn Malik has an exception for cases where there is no cause requiring deviation. If there is a cause requiring deviation, then it follows what that cause necessitates.