Continuation of the Explanation of the Dual Marker
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : "Al-Umran" came as the dual of "al-Umran"
The student: As intended
The Shaykh : No, yes, this is what... If they are intended to mean 'Umar and 'Umar, it is a dual. If Abu Bakr and 'Umar are intended, it is not a dual, but it is inflected like a dual because it is annexed to it. Because if you say "al-Umran" while you mean Abu Bakr and 'Umar, "al-Umran" stands in for two non-identical entities. It stands in for two non-identical entities. Is that correct or not? Good. It stands in for Abu Bakr and 'Umar. Good. You say: "The two fathers spoke." "The two fathers spoke." Is it a dual or annexed?
The student: A dual.
The Shaykh : If you say it is annexed, we say you are wrong. If you say it is a dual, we say you are wrong. Yes. "The two fathers spoke" requires a detailed explanation. As long as in the general case you would be wrong with either this or that, a detailed explanation is necessary. If you mean by "the two fathers" a father and a father, it is a dual. If you mean by "the two fathers" the mother and the father, it is annexed to the dual. Because if "the two fathers" is intended to mean the father and the mother, the added letter did not suffice for two identical entities, but for two different entities. Because "the two fathers" sufficed for a father, what? And a mother. "The two moons." Ah, is it a dual or annexed?
The student: Annexed
The Shaykh : If you say it is annexed, you are wrong. If you say it is a dual, you are wrong. It is the same thing. If you want to be patient, if you want to be patient. If you mean by "the two moons" a moon and a moon, this is a dual. And this can be, can be, two beautiful men. Yes, you say "two moons" meaning that they are like the beauty of the full moon, it is appropriate. If you mean by "the two moons" the sun and the moon.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Because it sufficed for two non-identical entities. Non-identical. Good. We want to know the definition of the dual again. It is what indicates two or two females with an addition that sufficed for two identical entities, what? Identical. It sufficed for two identical entities. This is the dual. And what is other than that, it becomes annexed to it. "Two sons"
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, oh, it went back... Let's take Ibn Jinni as an example. Everything has two opinions. "Two sons."
The student: A dual.
The Shaykh : Meaning, break it down: a son and a son. So it is a dual. Two.
The student: It is annexed.
The Shaykh : It is annexed because we do not have a name "two." Does one person, for example, say "I have a man two" instead of "I have one man"? No, he does not say that. Good. So "athnan" and "athnatan" are annexed to the dual. Good. From what is annexed to the dual are "kulla" and "kullata." From what is annexed to the dual are "kulla" and "kullata," on the condition that they are added to a pronoun. Pay attention, everyone. The things annexed to the dual are four words. Four words are annexed to the dual: "athnan" and "athnatan," and "kulla" and "kullata." "Athnan" and "athnatan" are not added. "Kulla" and "kullata" are added, but sometimes they are added to a pronoun and sometimes they are added to an explicit noun. I hope you pay attention, everyone. If "kulla" and "kullata" are added to a pronoun, they become annexed to the dual. And if they are added to an explicit noun, they become defective, meaning they are inflected like a singular noun with hidden movements on the alif. With movements hidden on the alif. Is this Arabic or non-Arabic? Good.
So "kulla" and "kullata" are not used except with addition. This is one. "Kulla" and "kullata" are added to a pronoun. This is two. "Kulla" and "kullata" are added to an explicit noun. Good. If they are added to a pronoun
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Then they are annexed to the dual. If they are added to an explicit noun, they are inflected like a singular noun with movements hidden on the alif. Are you with us? Good. Let's look now. "The two men came to me, both of them." "The two men came to me, both of them." What is this?
The student: Annexed
The Shaykh : Annexed to the dual. Why?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It was added to a pronoun. "The two women came, both of them."
The student: It is annexed.
The Shaykh : Annexed to the dual because it was added to a pronoun. Good.[Al-Kahf 18:33]
The student: Not annexed to the dual
The Shaykh : Not annexed to the dual because it was added to an explicit noun. And for this reason, when I inflect "kullata al-jantayn," I say: "Kullata" is a subject, raised with a hidden dammah on the alif, prevented from appearing by difficulty. And "kullata" is a mudaf, and "al-jantayn" is a mudaf ilayh. Good. "Al-jantayn." Yes, is it a dual or not a dual?
The student: A dual.
The Shaykh : "Al-jantayn"
The student: A dual.
The Shaykh : Think
The student: A dual
The Shaykh : "Al-jantayn" is annexed
The student: A dual
The Shaykh : Good. Let's see if the definition of the dual applies to it or not? Does it indicate two with the addition of the yaa and the noon? Did it suffice for two identical entities or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Identical
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good. So it is a dual. Because the singular is "jannah" and "jannah." "Jannah" and "jannah." How many? "Jantani." Clear? Good. So "kullata" is not a dual, but annexed to it. And "al-jantayn" is a true dual because the definition of the dual applies to it. I don't know about the time now. Is it over?
The student: As intended
The Shaykh : No, yes, this is what... If they are intended to mean 'Umar and 'Umar, it is a dual. If Abu Bakr and 'Umar are intended, it is not a dual, but it is inflected like a dual because it is annexed to it. Because if you say "al-Umran" while you mean Abu Bakr and 'Umar, "al-Umran" stands in for two non-identical entities. It stands in for two non-identical entities. Is that correct or not? Good. It stands in for Abu Bakr and 'Umar. Good. You say: "The two fathers spoke." "The two fathers spoke." Is it a dual or annexed?
The student: A dual.
The Shaykh : If you say it is annexed, we say you are wrong. If you say it is a dual, we say you are wrong. Yes. "The two fathers spoke" requires a detailed explanation. As long as in the general case you would be wrong with either this or that, a detailed explanation is necessary. If you mean by "the two fathers" a father and a father, it is a dual. If you mean by "the two fathers" the mother and the father, it is annexed to the dual. Because if "the two fathers" is intended to mean the father and the mother, the added letter did not suffice for two identical entities, but for two different entities. Because "the two fathers" sufficed for a father, what? And a mother. "The two moons." Ah, is it a dual or annexed?
The student: Annexed
The Shaykh : If you say it is annexed, you are wrong. If you say it is a dual, you are wrong. It is the same thing. If you want to be patient, if you want to be patient. If you mean by "the two moons" a moon and a moon, this is a dual. And this can be, can be, two beautiful men. Yes, you say "two moons" meaning that they are like the beauty of the full moon, it is appropriate. If you mean by "the two moons" the sun and the moon.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Because it sufficed for two non-identical entities. Non-identical. Good. We want to know the definition of the dual again. It is what indicates two or two females with an addition that sufficed for two identical entities, what? Identical. It sufficed for two identical entities. This is the dual. And what is other than that, it becomes annexed to it. "Two sons"
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, oh, it went back... Let's take Ibn Jinni as an example. Everything has two opinions. "Two sons."
The student: A dual.
The Shaykh : Meaning, break it down: a son and a son. So it is a dual. Two.
The student: It is annexed.
The Shaykh : It is annexed because we do not have a name "two." Does one person, for example, say "I have a man two" instead of "I have one man"? No, he does not say that. Good. So "athnan" and "athnatan" are annexed to the dual. Good. From what is annexed to the dual are "kulla" and "kullata." From what is annexed to the dual are "kulla" and "kullata," on the condition that they are added to a pronoun. Pay attention, everyone. The things annexed to the dual are four words. Four words are annexed to the dual: "athnan" and "athnatan," and "kulla" and "kullata." "Athnan" and "athnatan" are not added. "Kulla" and "kullata" are added, but sometimes they are added to a pronoun and sometimes they are added to an explicit noun. I hope you pay attention, everyone. If "kulla" and "kullata" are added to a pronoun, they become annexed to the dual. And if they are added to an explicit noun, they become defective, meaning they are inflected like a singular noun with hidden movements on the alif. With movements hidden on the alif. Is this Arabic or non-Arabic? Good.
So "kulla" and "kullata" are not used except with addition. This is one. "Kulla" and "kullata" are added to a pronoun. This is two. "Kulla" and "kullata" are added to an explicit noun. Good. If they are added to a pronoun
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Then they are annexed to the dual. If they are added to an explicit noun, they are inflected like a singular noun with movements hidden on the alif. Are you with us? Good. Let's look now. "The two men came to me, both of them." "The two men came to me, both of them." What is this?
The student: Annexed
The Shaykh : Annexed to the dual. Why?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : It was added to a pronoun. "The two women came, both of them."
The student: It is annexed.
The Shaykh : Annexed to the dual because it was added to a pronoun. Good.
Each of the two gardens produced its fruit
كلتا الجنتين آتت أكلهاBoth of the two gardens
كلتا الجنتينThe student: Not annexed to the dual
The Shaykh : Not annexed to the dual because it was added to an explicit noun. And for this reason, when I inflect "kullata al-jantayn," I say: "Kullata" is a subject, raised with a hidden dammah on the alif, prevented from appearing by difficulty. And "kullata" is a mudaf, and "al-jantayn" is a mudaf ilayh. Good. "Al-jantayn." Yes, is it a dual or not a dual?
The student: A dual.
The Shaykh : "Al-jantayn"
The student: A dual.
The Shaykh : Think
The student: A dual
The Shaykh : "Al-jantayn" is annexed
The student: A dual
The Shaykh : Good. Let's see if the definition of the dual applies to it or not? Does it indicate two with the addition of the yaa and the noon? Did it suffice for two identical entities or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Identical
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good. So it is a dual. Because the singular is "jannah" and "jannah." "Jannah" and "jannah." How many? "Jantani." Clear? Good. So "kullata" is not a dual, but annexed to it. And "al-jantayn" is a true dual because the definition of the dual applies to it. I don't know about the time now. Is it over?