Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "So what is that which is of absence or presence, like you and he, is called a pronoun."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said in defining the pronoun:
"So what is that which is of absence or presence, like you and he, is called a pronoun"
So what is that which is of absence? Is the one of absence an indefinite noun or a definite noun?
The student: An indefinite noun.
The Shaykh : It is an indefinite noun because it is attached to an indefinite noun. Now, is it an indefinite noun that accepts the article, or one that occupies the position of the definite?
The student: One that occupies the position of the definite.
The Shaykh : One that occupies the position of the definite. "Of absence" means the one who is absent.
"Or presence, like you and he" The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What indicates absence or presence" like the indication of "you" and "he." Listen carefully. If he had said: "So what is that which is of absence or presence" and had not restricted it with the example, the definition would have been non-exclusive. Because if he had said: "What indicates absence or presence," it would be as if he were saying that the word "absent" is a pronoun. Is it a pronoun or not? No. If he had said: "So what is that which is of absence or presence" and left it unrestricted, then the word "absent" would be a pronoun and the word "present" would be a pronoun. But he restricted it. Listen. So his saying: "like you and he" is not merely an example, but it is an example that restricts the definition. That is to say, what is of absence or presence is like the indication of "you" and "he." Not every word that indicates presence is a pronoun. If every word that indicates presence were a pronoun, then the word "present" would be a pronoun and the word "absent" would be a pronoun. But he restricted what indicates absence or presence to be like "you," like the indication of "you" and "he." "Is called a pronoun" Is "you" a pronoun for the speaker or the addressee? You.
The student: The addressee.
The Shaykh : You, yes, the addressee. If "you" is for the addressee and "he" indicates the addressee, then my intention is: if "you" is for presence and "he" indicates the addressee, then "I" is even more so for presence, because I am speaking about myself, and I am known and present with myself. Therefore, "you" indicates "I" by way of priority. So we say: "I," "you (feminine)," and "you (masculine)" indicate presence. "He" indicates absence. It indicates absence.
So pronouns, then, indicate presence, encompassing the speaker and the addressee, and indicate absence, encompassing the absent one. He indicated the one indicating absence by his saying: "he", and the one indicating presence by "you". He did not give an example for "I," which indicates the speaker, because it is even more so than the addressee. Is this limit or definition by form or intrinsic?
The student: Intrinsic.
The Shaykh : Ah
The student: Intrinsic.
The Shaykh : That is, an intrinsic limit. Some people defined it with another definition, saying: "What is used in place of the explicit for brevity". What is used in place of the explicit for brevity.
They said, for example: If I say "I am standing," "I" is a word that stands in for "Muhammad ibn Salih ibn Uthaymeen is standing," or not? "I am standing" suffices for saying: "Muhammad ibn Salih ibn Uthaymeen is standing." So it is used in place of the explicit for brevity.
I am addressing, for example, Abdullah ibn Umar. I say: "Abdullah ibn Umar, understand." He is in front of me. If I say: "You, understand," we have used "you" in place of the explicit, in place of Abdullah ibn Umar, for brevity. And it is also, in addition to indicating the explicit for brevity, more indicative of the intended meaning than the explicit name. If I said to the one in front of me, "Abdullah ibn Umar, Abdullah ibn Umar is standing," it would be possible that he is present and possible that he is absent. "You are standing" does not allow for the possibility that he is absent. So we have two definitions for the pronoun.
The first: What Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted, which is that it is what indicates absence or presence, like the indication of what? "You" and "he."
And the second opinion: What is used in place of the explicit for brevity. And although this is acceptable and more concise than the author's wording, it does not contain a clear explanation. "What is used in place of the explicit" may lead to circularity, because what is used in place of the explicit is the pronoun, so the pronoun is defined by the pronoun, which is a type of circularity.
In any case, Ibn Jurum (may Allah have mercy on him) did not define it by this or that. What did he do? He listed the pronouns. He said: The pronouns are such and such and such, and that is enough. Know them by their specific forms rather than their definitions. But such high-level books that are suitable for an advanced level in grammar explain them by definitions.
"Like you and he, is called a pronoun". "Is called" is a verb of command, meaning "call it a pronoun," and it is derived from "concealment" (idmar).
And I am pleased that I was once a teacher at the Institute of Science, and we used to test students before they entered the institute on grammar and some issues and some jurisprudence and tawhid. So I tested a student and I said to him: "Zayd stood up. Where is the subject of 'stood up'?" So he thought for a moment and said: "The subject of 'stood up' is hidden. Hidden. It is." He gave the meaning, because "hidden" means "concealed." Instead of saying "concealed," he said "hidden." And the student was intelligent, so I knew that the man came up with it on his own, but he hit the mark in meaning. So I gave him full marks. Why? Because I knew that he understood. That is, if he had said to you "concealed," it is possible that the man just said "it is concealed" and that was it. But if he said "hidden," I knew that the man understood fully, because I know that he is intelligent.
So if a person like this defines by meaning, he should be thanked for that, as long as he hit the mark in meaning, when he expresses it with his own wording.
Now, what is the parsing? The parsing of the verse. How do you parse it?
"What": A relative pronoun meaning "which."
"And that which is of absence": A prepositional phrase serving as the relative clause of the relative pronoun.
"And is called": The sentence is in the position of the predicate of "what." That is, "which is of absence or presence is called a pronoun."
Now, the word "by the pronoun." Is the "ba" here said to be extra, or is it said to be original? We say it is original, because "to name" can be transitive by itself, as in the saying of Allah the Exalted:[Ali 'Imran 3:36] And He did not say: "I named her Maryam." And it can be transitive with "ba," so you say: "I named my son Abdullah." End. Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : We did not say it is a prepositional phrase attached to "settled." It is a relative pronoun, a prepositional phrase serving as the relative clause of the relative pronoun.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : What?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : That is, there is disagreement regarding the intended indefinite noun. Some say: It is definite. And some say: It is not definite.
The student: "And the yaa and the haa from 'selnihi' (what I own)
And every pronoun requires the state of being indeclinable *** And the word 'ma' (what) is genitive like the word 'ma' (what) is accusative".
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "So what is that which is of absence" to the end of it.
"So what is that which is of absence or presence, like you and he, is called a pronoun"
So what is that which is of absence? Is the one of absence an indefinite noun or a definite noun?
The student: An indefinite noun.
The Shaykh : It is an indefinite noun because it is attached to an indefinite noun. Now, is it an indefinite noun that accepts the article, or one that occupies the position of the definite?
The student: One that occupies the position of the definite.
The Shaykh : One that occupies the position of the definite. "Of absence" means the one who is absent.
"Or presence, like you and he" The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What indicates absence or presence" like the indication of "you" and "he." Listen carefully. If he had said: "So what is that which is of absence or presence" and had not restricted it with the example, the definition would have been non-exclusive. Because if he had said: "What indicates absence or presence," it would be as if he were saying that the word "absent" is a pronoun. Is it a pronoun or not? No. If he had said: "So what is that which is of absence or presence" and left it unrestricted, then the word "absent" would be a pronoun and the word "present" would be a pronoun. But he restricted it. Listen. So his saying: "like you and he" is not merely an example, but it is an example that restricts the definition. That is to say, what is of absence or presence is like the indication of "you" and "he." Not every word that indicates presence is a pronoun. If every word that indicates presence were a pronoun, then the word "present" would be a pronoun and the word "absent" would be a pronoun. But he restricted what indicates absence or presence to be like "you," like the indication of "you" and "he." "Is called a pronoun" Is "you" a pronoun for the speaker or the addressee? You.
The student: The addressee.
The Shaykh : You, yes, the addressee. If "you" is for the addressee and "he" indicates the addressee, then my intention is: if "you" is for presence and "he" indicates the addressee, then "I" is even more so for presence, because I am speaking about myself, and I am known and present with myself. Therefore, "you" indicates "I" by way of priority. So we say: "I," "you (feminine)," and "you (masculine)" indicate presence. "He" indicates absence. It indicates absence.
So pronouns, then, indicate presence, encompassing the speaker and the addressee, and indicate absence, encompassing the absent one. He indicated the one indicating absence by his saying: "he", and the one indicating presence by "you". He did not give an example for "I," which indicates the speaker, because it is even more so than the addressee. Is this limit or definition by form or intrinsic?
The student: Intrinsic.
The Shaykh : Ah
The student: Intrinsic.
The Shaykh : That is, an intrinsic limit. Some people defined it with another definition, saying: "What is used in place of the explicit for brevity". What is used in place of the explicit for brevity.
They said, for example: If I say "I am standing," "I" is a word that stands in for "Muhammad ibn Salih ibn Uthaymeen is standing," or not? "I am standing" suffices for saying: "Muhammad ibn Salih ibn Uthaymeen is standing." So it is used in place of the explicit for brevity.
I am addressing, for example, Abdullah ibn Umar. I say: "Abdullah ibn Umar, understand." He is in front of me. If I say: "You, understand," we have used "you" in place of the explicit, in place of Abdullah ibn Umar, for brevity. And it is also, in addition to indicating the explicit for brevity, more indicative of the intended meaning than the explicit name. If I said to the one in front of me, "Abdullah ibn Umar, Abdullah ibn Umar is standing," it would be possible that he is present and possible that he is absent. "You are standing" does not allow for the possibility that he is absent. So we have two definitions for the pronoun.
The first: What Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted, which is that it is what indicates absence or presence, like the indication of what? "You" and "he."
And the second opinion: What is used in place of the explicit for brevity. And although this is acceptable and more concise than the author's wording, it does not contain a clear explanation. "What is used in place of the explicit" may lead to circularity, because what is used in place of the explicit is the pronoun, so the pronoun is defined by the pronoun, which is a type of circularity.
In any case, Ibn Jurum (may Allah have mercy on him) did not define it by this or that. What did he do? He listed the pronouns. He said: The pronouns are such and such and such, and that is enough. Know them by their specific forms rather than their definitions. But such high-level books that are suitable for an advanced level in grammar explain them by definitions.
"Like you and he, is called a pronoun". "Is called" is a verb of command, meaning "call it a pronoun," and it is derived from "concealment" (idmar).
And I am pleased that I was once a teacher at the Institute of Science, and we used to test students before they entered the institute on grammar and some issues and some jurisprudence and tawhid. So I tested a student and I said to him: "Zayd stood up. Where is the subject of 'stood up'?" So he thought for a moment and said: "The subject of 'stood up' is hidden. Hidden. It is." He gave the meaning, because "hidden" means "concealed." Instead of saying "concealed," he said "hidden." And the student was intelligent, so I knew that the man came up with it on his own, but he hit the mark in meaning. So I gave him full marks. Why? Because I knew that he understood. That is, if he had said to you "concealed," it is possible that the man just said "it is concealed" and that was it. But if he said "hidden," I knew that the man understood fully, because I know that he is intelligent.
So if a person like this defines by meaning, he should be thanked for that, as long as he hit the mark in meaning, when he expresses it with his own wording.
Now, what is the parsing? The parsing of the verse. How do you parse it?
"What": A relative pronoun meaning "which."
"And that which is of absence": A prepositional phrase serving as the relative clause of the relative pronoun.
"And is called": The sentence is in the position of the predicate of "what." That is, "which is of absence or presence is called a pronoun."
Now, the word "by the pronoun." Is the "ba" here said to be extra, or is it said to be original? We say it is original, because "to name" can be transitive by itself, as in the saying of Allah the Exalted:
And I have named her Mary
وإني سميتها مريمThe student: ... .
The Shaykh : We did not say it is a prepositional phrase attached to "settled." It is a relative pronoun, a prepositional phrase serving as the relative clause of the relative pronoun.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : What?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : That is, there is disagreement regarding the intended indefinite noun. Some say: It is definite. And some say: It is not definite.
The student: "And the yaa and the haa from 'selnihi' (what I own)
And every pronoun requires the state of being indeclinable *** And the word 'ma' (what) is genitive like the word 'ma' (what) is accusative".
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "So what is that which is of absence" to the end of it.