Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And a separated [verb] occupied by a preposition *** or by an annexation, like a connected one, proceeds."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
"And a separated [verb] occupied by a preposition *** or by an annexation, like a connected one, proceeds"
"Fasl" (separation) is the subject, and it is annexed to "mashghul" (occupied). "Bi-harf jarr" (by a preposition) is attached to "mashghul." "Au bi-idhafa" (or by annexation) is conjoined to "bi-harf jarr," meaning: or occupied by annexation. "Ka-wasl" (like a connection) is a prepositional phrase, and "yajri" (proceeds) is a present-tense verb, which is the predicate of the question "What is the ruling?"
The student: Fasl.
The Shaykh : Fasl, meaning: its meaning is that the occupied [verb], which is the verb, if it is separated from the occupier by a preposition, it is as if the occupier were connected to it. Do we have an occupied [verb], an occupied-from [noun], and an occupier, right or not? Good. If the occupied [verb] is separated from what? From the occupier by a preposition, it is as if it were connected to it. So if you say: "Zayd, pass by him," what is the stronger position? "Zayd, pass by him"?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Good, if I said: "Zayd, hit him," "Zayd, hit him," what is the stronger position?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case, because it is a verb of request. Good, "Zayd, pass by him"?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Because the separation here by the preposition is like a connection. And based on this, we say: "Zayd [accusative], pass by him" is stronger than "Zayd [nominative], pass by him." Good, likewise, "Zayd, I passed by him," are both positions permissible or not? "Zayd, I passed by him"?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : Are both positions permissible or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Which is stronger?
The student: The nominative case.
The Shaykh : The nominative case, because there is no cause that necessitates the contrary. "And the nominative case in other than what has passed is stronger". Good, likewise, if it is occupied by annexation, the separation of the occupied [verb] by annexation, meaning: by an annexed noun, it is like a connected one. If the occupied [verb] is separated from the occupier by an annexed noun, it is as if it were connected to it. So you say: "Zayd, ride his car," "Zayd, ride his car," what is the stronger position?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Because it is a verb of request.
The Shaykh : Because the occupied [verb] is a verb of request, so your saying: "Zayd [accusative], ride his car" is stronger than saying: "Zayd [nominative], ride his car." Good, if I said: "Zayd, I honored his boy," "Zayd, I honored his boy," are both positions permissible or not?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : And the stronger position is the nominative case. So we benefit from this that the occupier, there is no difference between it being connected to the occupied [verb] or separated by what?
The student: A preposition.
The Shaykh : By a preposition or annexation, yes.
"And a separated [verb] occupied by a preposition *** or by an annexation, like a connected one, proceeds"
"Fasl" (separation) is the subject, and it is annexed to "mashghul" (occupied). "Bi-harf jarr" (by a preposition) is attached to "mashghul." "Au bi-idhafa" (or by annexation) is conjoined to "bi-harf jarr," meaning: or occupied by annexation. "Ka-wasl" (like a connection) is a prepositional phrase, and "yajri" (proceeds) is a present-tense verb, which is the predicate of the question "What is the ruling?"
The student: Fasl.
The Shaykh : Fasl, meaning: its meaning is that the occupied [verb], which is the verb, if it is separated from the occupier by a preposition, it is as if the occupier were connected to it. Do we have an occupied [verb], an occupied-from [noun], and an occupier, right or not? Good. If the occupied [verb] is separated from what? From the occupier by a preposition, it is as if it were connected to it. So if you say: "Zayd, pass by him," what is the stronger position? "Zayd, pass by him"?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Good, if I said: "Zayd, hit him," "Zayd, hit him," what is the stronger position?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case, because it is a verb of request. Good, "Zayd, pass by him"?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Because the separation here by the preposition is like a connection. And based on this, we say: "Zayd [accusative], pass by him" is stronger than "Zayd [nominative], pass by him." Good, likewise, "Zayd, I passed by him," are both positions permissible or not? "Zayd, I passed by him"?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : Are both positions permissible or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Which is stronger?
The student: The nominative case.
The Shaykh : The nominative case, because there is no cause that necessitates the contrary. "And the nominative case in other than what has passed is stronger". Good, likewise, if it is occupied by annexation, the separation of the occupied [verb] by annexation, meaning: by an annexed noun, it is like a connected one. If the occupied [verb] is separated from the occupier by an annexed noun, it is as if it were connected to it. So you say: "Zayd, ride his car," "Zayd, ride his car," what is the stronger position?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Because it is a verb of request.
The Shaykh : Because the occupied [verb] is a verb of request, so your saying: "Zayd [accusative], ride his car" is stronger than saying: "Zayd [nominative], ride his car." Good, if I said: "Zayd, I honored his boy," "Zayd, I honored his boy," are both positions permissible or not?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : And the stronger position is the nominative case. So we benefit from this that the occupier, there is no difference between it being connected to the occupied [verb] or separated by what?
The student: A preposition.
The Shaykh : By a preposition or annexation, yes.