Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And 'in' and 'la' are the lam of beginning or oath *** Likewise, and the interrogative, this is what is required for it."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"And 'in'": The waw is a letter of coordination. 'In' is coordinated with what precedes it, meaning before the negation of 'in' and 'la', meaning before the negation of 'la'. So according to this, 'in' is coordinated with 'ma' and 'la' is coordinated with 'ma'. "Lam": What is it?
The student: The lam of beginning.
The Shaykh : Yes, the lam of beginning, with you it is with the nominative case.
The student: With the nominative case.
The Shaykh : The lam, yes, with the nominative case. It is the lam of beginning, and beginning is a noun with a genitive attached to it. "Or oath" is coordinated with beginning, meaning or the lam of oath. "Likewise" means just as 'in' and 'la', meaning that the lam of beginning and the lam of oath require suspension (ta'liq).
"And the interrogative, this is what is required for it"
The interrogative: The first subject (mubtada').
And "this": The second subject.
And "for it": A preposition and its object, connected to "is required" (inhtama).
And "is required": A sentence which is the predicate (khabar) of the second subject. And the sentence consisting of the subject and predicate is the predicate of the first subject.
We return to the meaning. He says: Adhere to suspension, which is the invalidation of the grammatical operation (amal) in form (lafz) but not in position (mawrid), before these matters: the negation of 'ma', the negation of 'in', the negation of 'la', the lam of beginning, the lam of oath, and the interrogative. Six places.
Suspension is obligatory in six places. The first place is before the negation of 'ma', meaning if the negating 'ma' is attached to the two parts of the subject and predicate, suspension is obligatory. Its example is:[Hud 11:79] [Hud 11:79] "Ilm" (knowledge) is a past verb that takes two objects. The first, yes, it takes two objects. The first object and the subject, and the second object is the predicate. "I knew."
And the taa: The doer (fa'il).
"Ma" is a negation.
And "these": The name of 'ma', because it is in the Hijazi dialect.
And "they speak": The sentence is the predicate of 'ma'. And it is known that the sentence "these people speak" is a declarative sentence, but the operator (amil) has authority over it in form, and it has authority over it in position, not in form. So we say: The sentence "these people speak" is in the position of the accusative case, filling the place of the two objects of "I knew." This is one. And you say: "I thought that Zayd is standing," meaning I thought the negation of Zayd standing. This is the meaning. So we say in "I thought that": "I thought" is a verb and a doer, and "ma" is a negator, and "Zayd" is the subject, and "standing" is its predicate, except according to the language of the Hijazis, in which we say: "I knew that Zayd is..." What? "Standing." Good.
The second is before the negation of 'in', as He, the Exalted, said:[Al-Isra 17:52] [Al-Isra 17:52] And it is known that "you think" is a transitive verb from "to think," so it takes two objects. But this verb is suspended due to the entry of 'in' into the two parts of the declarative sentence.
The second is before the negation of 'la'. You say: "I knew that Zayd is not standing, nor 'Amr," or "Zayd is not standing, nor sitting."
So "I knew": Verb and doer.
And "la": Negator.
And "Zayd": Subject.
And "standing": Predicate of the subject.
And "nor 'Amr": The waw is a letter of coordination.
And "la": Negator.
And "'Amr": Subject, and the predicate is omitted, and the implied meaning is "nor 'Amr is standing." And if you wish, say that it is coordinated with "Zayd is not."
The lam of beginning, is this the third or the fourth?
The student: The fourth.
The Shaykh : The fourth, meaning if the declarative sentence occurring in the context of these verbs is accompanied by the lam of beginning, then the lam of beginning requires the suspension of the verb. You say: "I knew that Zayd is departing," and it is not correct for me to say "I knew that Zayd is departing" (accusative), but I say "I knew that Zayd is departing" (nominative).
So "I knew": Verb and doer.
And the lam: The lam of beginning.
And "Zayd": Subject.
And "departing": Its predicate. And the sentence is in the position of the accusative case, filling the place of the two objects of "I knew." Or oath, meaning the lam of oath, as the poet said:
"And you have surely known that you will meet my death *** For the fates do not miss their arrows"
The evidence is his saying: What? "That you will meet." And for this reason, we cannot say that the sentence "you will meet" is in the position of the accusative case, meaning as an object, and that the verb has authority over it. Rather, we say: The sentence consisting of the verb and the doer fills the place of the two objects of "I thought," because if you said that the sentence is in the position of the accusative case, you would need the second object, but we do not need it because the operation is now suspended. Good. And the third.
The sixth: The sixth: He said "And the interrogative, this is what is required for it", meaning also, if the sentence after these verbs is an interrogative, then it is suspended. You say: "I knew where Zayd is. I knew where Zayd is."
"I knew": Verb and doer.
And "where": An interrogative noun, and it is the predicate of the subject, placed before it.
And "Zayd": The subject, placed after it. And the sentence is in the position of the accusative case, filling the place of the two objects of "I knew." And likewise, if you said: "I knew whether Zayd is with you or 'Amr," we say: The hamza is for interrogation, and "Zayd" is the subject, and "with you" is the adverb of place, which is the predicate. And "or" is a letter of coordination, and "'Amr" is coordinated with "Zayd." And the sentence is in the position of the accusative case, filling the place of the two objects of "I knew." Good.
The student: The hamza of interrogation...
The student: The lam of beginning.
The Shaykh : Yes, the lam of beginning, with you it is with the nominative case.
The student: With the nominative case.
The Shaykh : The lam, yes, with the nominative case. It is the lam of beginning, and beginning is a noun with a genitive attached to it. "Or oath" is coordinated with beginning, meaning or the lam of oath. "Likewise" means just as 'in' and 'la', meaning that the lam of beginning and the lam of oath require suspension (ta'liq).
"And the interrogative, this is what is required for it"
The interrogative: The first subject (mubtada').
And "this": The second subject.
And "for it": A preposition and its object, connected to "is required" (inhtama).
And "is required": A sentence which is the predicate (khabar) of the second subject. And the sentence consisting of the subject and predicate is the predicate of the first subject.
We return to the meaning. He says: Adhere to suspension, which is the invalidation of the grammatical operation (amal) in form (lafz) but not in position (mawrid), before these matters: the negation of 'ma', the negation of 'in', the negation of 'la', the lam of beginning, the lam of oath, and the interrogative. Six places.
Suspension is obligatory in six places. The first place is before the negation of 'ma', meaning if the negating 'ma' is attached to the two parts of the subject and predicate, suspension is obligatory. Its example is:
They said, "You have already known
قالوا لقد علمت ما هؤلاء ينطقونThey said, "You have already known
قالوا لقد علمت ما هؤلاء ينطقونAnd the taa: The doer (fa'il).
"Ma" is a negation.
And "these": The name of 'ma', because it is in the Hijazi dialect.
And "they speak": The sentence is the predicate of 'ma'. And it is known that the sentence "these people speak" is a declarative sentence, but the operator (amil) has authority over it in form, and it has authority over it in position, not in form. So we say: The sentence "these people speak" is in the position of the accusative case, filling the place of the two objects of "I knew." This is one. And you say: "I thought that Zayd is standing," meaning I thought the negation of Zayd standing. This is the meaning. So we say in "I thought that": "I thought" is a verb and a doer, and "ma" is a negator, and "Zayd" is the subject, and "standing" is its predicate, except according to the language of the Hijazis, in which we say: "I knew that Zayd is..." What? "Standing." Good.
The second is before the negation of 'in', as He, the Exalted, said:
and think that you had not remained [in the world] except for a little."
وتظنون إن لبثتم إلا قليلاًand think that you had not remained [in the world] except for a little."
وتظنون إن لبثتم إلا قليلاًThe second is before the negation of 'la'. You say: "I knew that Zayd is not standing, nor 'Amr," or "Zayd is not standing, nor sitting."
So "I knew": Verb and doer.
And "la": Negator.
And "Zayd": Subject.
And "standing": Predicate of the subject.
And "nor 'Amr": The waw is a letter of coordination.
And "la": Negator.
And "'Amr": Subject, and the predicate is omitted, and the implied meaning is "nor 'Amr is standing." And if you wish, say that it is coordinated with "Zayd is not."
The lam of beginning, is this the third or the fourth?
The student: The fourth.
The Shaykh : The fourth, meaning if the declarative sentence occurring in the context of these verbs is accompanied by the lam of beginning, then the lam of beginning requires the suspension of the verb. You say: "I knew that Zayd is departing," and it is not correct for me to say "I knew that Zayd is departing" (accusative), but I say "I knew that Zayd is departing" (nominative).
So "I knew": Verb and doer.
And the lam: The lam of beginning.
And "Zayd": Subject.
And "departing": Its predicate. And the sentence is in the position of the accusative case, filling the place of the two objects of "I knew." Or oath, meaning the lam of oath, as the poet said:
"And you have surely known that you will meet my death *** For the fates do not miss their arrows"
The evidence is his saying: What? "That you will meet." And for this reason, we cannot say that the sentence "you will meet" is in the position of the accusative case, meaning as an object, and that the verb has authority over it. Rather, we say: The sentence consisting of the verb and the doer fills the place of the two objects of "I thought," because if you said that the sentence is in the position of the accusative case, you would need the second object, but we do not need it because the operation is now suspended. Good. And the third.
The sixth: The sixth: He said "And the interrogative, this is what is required for it", meaning also, if the sentence after these verbs is an interrogative, then it is suspended. You say: "I knew where Zayd is. I knew where Zayd is."
"I knew": Verb and doer.
And "where": An interrogative noun, and it is the predicate of the subject, placed before it.
And "Zayd": The subject, placed after it. And the sentence is in the position of the accusative case, filling the place of the two objects of "I knew." And likewise, if you said: "I knew whether Zayd is with you or 'Amr," we say: The hamza is for interrogation, and "Zayd" is the subject, and "with you" is the adverb of place, which is the predicate. And "or" is a letter of coordination, and "'Amr" is coordinated with "Zayd." And the sentence is in the position of the accusative case, filling the place of the two objects of "I knew." Good.
The student: The hamza of interrogation...