Is a pronoun necessarily required to have an antecedent?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Because a pronoun must have an antecedent.
The student: This is an antecedent.
The Shaykh : But the antecedent must precede it. Therefore, if its antecedent is known and its antecedent is known by reason, it does not require the antecedent to precede it.
The student: ... one of the conditions?
The Shaykh : He says that if the context indicates it, or if it is reported from the Arabs in this way, the original rule is that a pronoun must have an antecedent, and its antecedent must precede it so that we know to whom it refers. Do you understand, Abdullah ibn Awadh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: My question is... the questioner who asked gave [an answer]. I was saying that perhaps this is from the context of the speech; if he spoke to him, you can assume whatever you wish.
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The student: This is an antecedent.
The Shaykh : But the antecedent must precede it. Therefore, if its antecedent is known and its antecedent is known by reason, it does not require the antecedent to precede it.
The student: ... one of the conditions?
The Shaykh : He says that if the context indicates it, or if it is reported from the Arabs in this way, the original rule is that a pronoun must have an antecedent, and its antecedent must precede it so that we know to whom it refers. Do you understand, Abdullah ibn Awadh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: My question is... the questioner who asked gave [an answer]. I was saying that perhaps this is from the context of the speech; if he spoke to him, you can assume whatever you wish.
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.