Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "Like the yaa and the kaa of 'abni akramak' *** and the yaa and the haa of 'salihi maa malak'."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said: "Like the yaa and the kaa of 'abni akramak'". The yaa in 'abni' is a connected pronoun because it is not valid to begin a sentence with it, and it does not follow anything except in cases of choice. Which yaa is the one in 'abni'? It is not "what is it?" It is the yaa of the speaker. So, the yaa of the speaker, wherever it appears, if it is in the accusative or genitive case, it is from the connected pronouns. Good.
"The kaa of 'abni akramak'". This kaa is the kaa of the addressee, and in this example it is in the accusative case, is that not so? Good. The kaa of the addressee, wherever it appears, is from the connected pronouns, whether it appears in the accusative case as in the example mentioned by the author, or in the genitive case as in your saying: "Pass by you" and "your slave." In that case, the kaa here is in the position of the genitive; the first is by the preposition, and the second is by annexation.
So, the kaa is from the connected pronouns, what? Connected, because one does not begin with it, and it does not follow anything except in cases of choice. Good.
And the kaa here, there is no difference whether it is for the singular as in "I honored you," or for the dual as in "I honored you two," or for a group of males as in "I honored you all," or for a group of females as in "I honored you all."
So, the kaa, wherever it appears, is a connected pronoun, and the pronoun in it is only the kaa; what comes after it is the marker of the dual, or the plural of males, or the plural of females.
"And the yaa and the haa" means, and like the yaa and the haa "of 'salihi maa malak'". In 'salihi,' the yaa and the haa here are in the position of the accusative, but the yaa in 'salihi' is not the same as the yaa in 'abni.' 'Abni' is the pronoun of the speaker, and 'sali' is the pronoun of the addressee. The yaa, which is the pronoun of the addressee, is a connected pronoun from the connected pronouns, and it is here in the position of what?
The student: Accusative.
The Shaykh : In the position of 'salihi.' In the position of the nominative. The yaa of the addressee cannot come except in the nominative case. The yaa of the addressee does not come except in the nominative case. The haa in 'salihi,' the haa is in the position of the accusative.
So, we have now learned that the pronoun of the addressee is connected, and that the haa of the absent person, the haa of the absent person, is connected. The haa of the absent person, pay attention, unlike 'iyya' in 'iyyaahu,' which will come later as being from the separated pronouns. But we are talking about the haa, the haa of the absent person, so it is a connected pronoun, and here it is in the position of the accusative as the first object, and the "maa" in his saying: "maa malak" is the second object.
The author now gave four examples:
The yaa of the speaker.
And the second: The kaa of the addressee.
And the third: The haa of the absent person.
And the fourth: The yaa of the addressee. You understood, good.
The yaa of the speaker can be in the accusative case and can be in the genitive case.
Its example in the genitive case is: 'abni,' and its example in the accusative case is: 'akramani' (I honored me). 'Akramani,' good.
The haa, the kaa, the kaa of the addressee can be in the accusative case like: 'akramak' (I honored you), and it can be in the genitive case like: 'marrabik' (pass by you) and 'kitabak' (your book). The first is in the genitive by the preposition, and the second is in the genitive by annexation.
And it can be for the singular male as in 'akramak,' for the singular female as in 'akramaki,' for the dual as in 'akramakuma,' for a group of males as in 'akramakum,' and for a group of females as in 'akramakunna.'
The haa can be in the accusative case and can be in the genitive case. Its example in the accusative case is: 'salihi' (the author's example), and its example in the genitive case is: 'marrabih' (pass by him) or 'kitabih' (his book). Yes, good.
And it can be for the singular male, and it can be for the singular female as in 'marrabaha' (pass by her), and it can be for the dual as in: 'marrabihima' (pass by them two), and for a group of males: 'marrabihim' (pass by them), and for a group of females: 'marrabihinna' (pass by them). Complete. The yaa of the addressee can be in the nominative case and can be...
The student: In the nominative case.
The Shaykh : Only
The student: Only.
The Shaykh : Correct. The yaa of the addressee cannot be anything but in the nominative case. You say, this is the yaa of the addressee: 'akramihi' (I honored him), this is the yaa of the addressee. 'Salihi' is also the yaa of the addressee. Good.
And the author's saying: "And it does not follow anything except in choice" benefited us by showing that it may follow only in cases of necessity, like the saying of the poet: "So what do I have as a substitute except a supporting haa?". The haa here is a connected pronoun that came after 'illa' (except) out of necessity. Necessity, by its name, is used in the place of necessity and is not used in the place of choice. Good.
The necessity found among the Arabs is accepted by Muslims, because we cannot subject the Arabs to the rules of grammar. But if we wanted to compose poetry ourselves, do we have the right to follow this path? The answer is: Yes, we have the right to follow it, because the people of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance are not more deserving of excuse than us, even though they are more knowledgeable than us and they are the people of Arabness. But I say: the one who permitted it to them may perhaps permit it to us. But if a man came to us with a poem that is all necessity, would we accept it?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Fine.
"The kaa of 'abni akramak'". This kaa is the kaa of the addressee, and in this example it is in the accusative case, is that not so? Good. The kaa of the addressee, wherever it appears, is from the connected pronouns, whether it appears in the accusative case as in the example mentioned by the author, or in the genitive case as in your saying: "Pass by you" and "your slave." In that case, the kaa here is in the position of the genitive; the first is by the preposition, and the second is by annexation.
So, the kaa is from the connected pronouns, what? Connected, because one does not begin with it, and it does not follow anything except in cases of choice. Good.
And the kaa here, there is no difference whether it is for the singular as in "I honored you," or for the dual as in "I honored you two," or for a group of males as in "I honored you all," or for a group of females as in "I honored you all."
So, the kaa, wherever it appears, is a connected pronoun, and the pronoun in it is only the kaa; what comes after it is the marker of the dual, or the plural of males, or the plural of females.
"And the yaa and the haa" means, and like the yaa and the haa "of 'salihi maa malak'". In 'salihi,' the yaa and the haa here are in the position of the accusative, but the yaa in 'salihi' is not the same as the yaa in 'abni.' 'Abni' is the pronoun of the speaker, and 'sali' is the pronoun of the addressee. The yaa, which is the pronoun of the addressee, is a connected pronoun from the connected pronouns, and it is here in the position of what?
The student: Accusative.
The Shaykh : In the position of 'salihi.' In the position of the nominative. The yaa of the addressee cannot come except in the nominative case. The yaa of the addressee does not come except in the nominative case. The haa in 'salihi,' the haa is in the position of the accusative.
So, we have now learned that the pronoun of the addressee is connected, and that the haa of the absent person, the haa of the absent person, is connected. The haa of the absent person, pay attention, unlike 'iyya' in 'iyyaahu,' which will come later as being from the separated pronouns. But we are talking about the haa, the haa of the absent person, so it is a connected pronoun, and here it is in the position of the accusative as the first object, and the "maa" in his saying: "maa malak" is the second object.
The author now gave four examples:
The yaa of the speaker.
And the second: The kaa of the addressee.
And the third: The haa of the absent person.
And the fourth: The yaa of the addressee. You understood, good.
The yaa of the speaker can be in the accusative case and can be in the genitive case.
Its example in the genitive case is: 'abni,' and its example in the accusative case is: 'akramani' (I honored me). 'Akramani,' good.
The haa, the kaa, the kaa of the addressee can be in the accusative case like: 'akramak' (I honored you), and it can be in the genitive case like: 'marrabik' (pass by you) and 'kitabak' (your book). The first is in the genitive by the preposition, and the second is in the genitive by annexation.
And it can be for the singular male as in 'akramak,' for the singular female as in 'akramaki,' for the dual as in 'akramakuma,' for a group of males as in 'akramakum,' and for a group of females as in 'akramakunna.'
The haa can be in the accusative case and can be in the genitive case. Its example in the accusative case is: 'salihi' (the author's example), and its example in the genitive case is: 'marrabih' (pass by him) or 'kitabih' (his book). Yes, good.
And it can be for the singular male, and it can be for the singular female as in 'marrabaha' (pass by her), and it can be for the dual as in: 'marrabihima' (pass by them two), and for a group of males: 'marrabihim' (pass by them), and for a group of females: 'marrabihinna' (pass by them). Complete. The yaa of the addressee can be in the nominative case and can be...
The student: In the nominative case.
The Shaykh : Only
The student: Only.
The Shaykh : Correct. The yaa of the addressee cannot be anything but in the nominative case. You say, this is the yaa of the addressee: 'akramihi' (I honored him), this is the yaa of the addressee. 'Salihi' is also the yaa of the addressee. Good.
And the author's saying: "And it does not follow anything except in choice" benefited us by showing that it may follow only in cases of necessity, like the saying of the poet: "So what do I have as a substitute except a supporting haa?". The haa here is a connected pronoun that came after 'illa' (except) out of necessity. Necessity, by its name, is used in the place of necessity and is not used in the place of choice. Good.
The necessity found among the Arabs is accepted by Muslims, because we cannot subject the Arabs to the rules of grammar. But if we wanted to compose poetry ourselves, do we have the right to follow this path? The answer is: Yes, we have the right to follow it, because the people of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance are not more deserving of excuse than us, even though they are more knowledgeable than us and they are the people of Arabness. But I say: the one who permitted it to them may perhaps permit it to us. But if a man came to us with a poem that is all necessity, would we accept it?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Fine.