Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "With its like, or a verb, or a description, it is made accusative *** And that it is the origin for these two was chosen."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : But before that: "With its like, or a verb, or a description, it is made accusative" He says: The masdar (verbal noun) is made accusative by its like, meaning: the word that makes it accusative can be a masdar like it, and it is made accusative by a verb, and it is made accusative by a description. So there are three things that make the masdar accusative: either a masdar like it, or a verb, or what?
The student: Description.
The Shaykh : A description, or a description. If you say: "I was amazed by your striking the slave a severe strike," what made it accusative?
The student: The verbal noun.
The Shaykh : The masdar, from "striking," because "striking" here is a masdar. "A severe strike" is in the accusative case due to being a masdar, and the word that makes it accusative is the masdar before it. Good, or a verb, like: "I struck"?
The student: A strike.
The Shaykh : A strike, this is the verb. "I strike a strike," "Strike a strike," this is the accusative case, or a description, like: "I am the striker of the criminal a painful strike." Where is the masdar?
The student: A strike.
The Shaykh : "A strike," the word that makes it accusative is "the striker," which is a description. Is this the slave who was struck a severe strike?
The student: The description.
The Shaykh : What is the description?
The student: The passive participle.
The Shaykh : The passive participle. The description is the passive participle. So the masdar is made accusative either by a masdar, or by a verb, or by a description. "And that it is the origin for these two was chosen" "That it is" (Kawnuhu) is the subject (mubtada'), and it is attached to the pronoun "he," and it is from the verbs that change form like "kana," so it functions like "kana." Where is the word in the position of the name (ism)? The pronoun "he" in "that it is" (kawnuhu). "Origin" (aslan) is the predicate (khabar) of "that it is" (kawn), as the predicate of "kawn" considering it is one of the words that make accusative. As for "was chosen" (intukhib), it is a sentence that is the predicate of the subject, which is "that it is" (kawn). Yes, the meaning is: According to the rule, he says that what was chosen is that the masdar is the origin for these two. What are these two? The verb and the description. The verb and the description, their origin is the masdar, because you say: "Struck" (dharaba) is derived from "striking" (dharb), so "striking" (dharb) precedes "struck" (dharaba), and precedes it, so it is the origin for it. "The striker" (dharib) is derived from "striking" (dharb). So the origin of verbs is masdars. The origin of descriptions?
The student: Masdars.
The Shaykh : Masdars. And this is what the author mentioned was chosen, and it is the correct view. Some people said: The verb is the origin, and that "striking" (dharb) is derived from "struck" (dharaba). "Striking" (dharb) is derived from "struck" (dharaba). And the author said: Verbs are built upon masdars, and likewise descriptions are built upon?
The student: Masdars.
The Shaykh : Masdars, because you say: "Struck" (dharaba) is from "striking" (dharb), and "ate" (akala) is from "eating" (akl), and "drank" (shariba) is from "drinking" (shurb)... And you say, for example: "The one standing" (qaim) is from "standing" (qiyam), not from "stood" (qama). "The one standing" (qaim) is derived from "standing" (qiyam), not from "stood" (qama). And you say, for example: "The one eating" (akil) is from what?
The student: Eating.
The Shaykh : From eating, and "the one drinking" (sharib) is from "drinking" (shurb), and "the one praying" (mussalli) is from "prayer" (salah), and so on.
The questioner : ... Is it derived from the verb according to his statement?
The Shaykh : It is the one that came third from the verb. There may be something of this in his wording. However, the most correct view is that the masdar is the origin. And Allah knows best. He said: "For emphasis" God willing, a discussion on the conflict of grammatical functions and others.
The student: The absolute object (maf'ul mutlaq).
The Shaykh : No, the absolute object (maf'ul mutlaq) later, God willing.
The student: Description.
The Shaykh : A description, or a description. If you say: "I was amazed by your striking the slave a severe strike," what made it accusative?
The student: The verbal noun.
The Shaykh : The masdar, from "striking," because "striking" here is a masdar. "A severe strike" is in the accusative case due to being a masdar, and the word that makes it accusative is the masdar before it. Good, or a verb, like: "I struck"?
The student: A strike.
The Shaykh : A strike, this is the verb. "I strike a strike," "Strike a strike," this is the accusative case, or a description, like: "I am the striker of the criminal a painful strike." Where is the masdar?
The student: A strike.
The Shaykh : "A strike," the word that makes it accusative is "the striker," which is a description. Is this the slave who was struck a severe strike?
The student: The description.
The Shaykh : What is the description?
The student: The passive participle.
The Shaykh : The passive participle. The description is the passive participle. So the masdar is made accusative either by a masdar, or by a verb, or by a description. "And that it is the origin for these two was chosen" "That it is" (Kawnuhu) is the subject (mubtada'), and it is attached to the pronoun "he," and it is from the verbs that change form like "kana," so it functions like "kana." Where is the word in the position of the name (ism)? The pronoun "he" in "that it is" (kawnuhu). "Origin" (aslan) is the predicate (khabar) of "that it is" (kawn), as the predicate of "kawn" considering it is one of the words that make accusative. As for "was chosen" (intukhib), it is a sentence that is the predicate of the subject, which is "that it is" (kawn). Yes, the meaning is: According to the rule, he says that what was chosen is that the masdar is the origin for these two. What are these two? The verb and the description. The verb and the description, their origin is the masdar, because you say: "Struck" (dharaba) is derived from "striking" (dharb), so "striking" (dharb) precedes "struck" (dharaba), and precedes it, so it is the origin for it. "The striker" (dharib) is derived from "striking" (dharb). So the origin of verbs is masdars. The origin of descriptions?
The student: Masdars.
The Shaykh : Masdars. And this is what the author mentioned was chosen, and it is the correct view. Some people said: The verb is the origin, and that "striking" (dharb) is derived from "struck" (dharaba). "Striking" (dharb) is derived from "struck" (dharaba). And the author said: Verbs are built upon masdars, and likewise descriptions are built upon?
The student: Masdars.
The Shaykh : Masdars, because you say: "Struck" (dharaba) is from "striking" (dharb), and "ate" (akala) is from "eating" (akl), and "drank" (shariba) is from "drinking" (shurb)... And you say, for example: "The one standing" (qaim) is from "standing" (qiyam), not from "stood" (qama). "The one standing" (qaim) is derived from "standing" (qiyam), not from "stood" (qama). And you say, for example: "The one eating" (akil) is from what?
The student: Eating.
The Shaykh : From eating, and "the one drinking" (sharib) is from "drinking" (shurb), and "the one praying" (mussalli) is from "prayer" (salah), and so on.
The questioner : ... Is it derived from the verb according to his statement?
The Shaykh : It is the one that came third from the verb. There may be something of this in his wording. However, the most correct view is that the masdar is the origin. And Allah knows best. He said: "For emphasis" God willing, a discussion on the conflict of grammatical functions and others.
The student: The absolute object (maf'ul mutlaq).
The Shaykh : No, the absolute object (maf'ul mutlaq) later, God willing.