Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And the specified is mentioned after a subject *** or a predicate, a noun that never appears."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The author said:
"And the specified is mentioned after a subject *** or a predicate, a noun that never appears"
The author described the usage of *nima* and *bisa* by saying: "And the specified is mentioned after", meaning after the subject or after the qualifier. If the subject is implied, it is mentioned after, being a subject. So his saying: "a subject" is a state of the substitute for the subject in "is mentioned"; the specified is mentioned after, in the state of being a subject. "or a predicate of a noun" is conjoined to "subject," meaning: or it is mentioned as a predicate, or as the predicate of a noun that does not appear, meaning: this noun does not appear, meaning: it does not manifest ever. So the author (may Allah have mercy on him) has informed us that the specified is mentioned after completing the subjects of *nima* and *bisa*, or the qualifier that stands in for the subject—settle down, everyone—the specified is mentioned after. The specified is mentioned; what is its grammatical analysis? We say: there are two positions for its analysis: either it is a subject and the sentence before it is the predicate, so it is a delayed subject and the sentence before it is the predicate; or it is the predicate of a deleted subject that is obligatory to delete and not mentioned. For example, you say: *Nima al-rajulu Zayd* (What a good man Zayd is). The analysis: *Nima* is a past tense verb built on fathah, *al-rajul* is a subject raised by the visible dammah, and for *Zayd* there are two positions in its analysis: *Zayd* is a subject raised by the beginning, and its sign of raising is the visible dammah, and its predicate is the previous sentence *nima al-rajul*; or we say: *Zayd* is the predicate of a deleted subject, estimated as *huwa Zayd* (it is Zayd), *nima al-rajul huwa* (the good man is he), meaning the one I praise is Zayd. Do you understand? So the meaning of the verse points to a rule, which is the rule: the specified is mentioned after completing the subjects of *nima* and *bisa*, or what indicates them from the qualifier. And this specified is either a subject whose predicate is the sentence before it, or the predicate of the deleted subject. Is the deletion obligatory or permissible?
The student: Obligatorily.
The Shaykh : It is obligatory, and for this reason he said: "it never appears".
The student: It is contrary to the rule.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: It is contrary to the rule.
The Shaykh : Which rule?
The student: Because it is a hidden pronoun estimated as *huwa* (he), and it is permissible.
The Shaykh : No, no, that pronoun is the subject or the substitute for the subject; it is not the subject (mubtada').
The student: Is it general?
The Shaykh : No, it is not general. All right, we have finished with this.
"And the specified is mentioned after a subject *** or a predicate, a noun that never appears"
The author described the usage of *nima* and *bisa* by saying: "And the specified is mentioned after", meaning after the subject or after the qualifier. If the subject is implied, it is mentioned after, being a subject. So his saying: "a subject" is a state of the substitute for the subject in "is mentioned"; the specified is mentioned after, in the state of being a subject. "or a predicate of a noun" is conjoined to "subject," meaning: or it is mentioned as a predicate, or as the predicate of a noun that does not appear, meaning: this noun does not appear, meaning: it does not manifest ever. So the author (may Allah have mercy on him) has informed us that the specified is mentioned after completing the subjects of *nima* and *bisa*, or the qualifier that stands in for the subject—settle down, everyone—the specified is mentioned after. The specified is mentioned; what is its grammatical analysis? We say: there are two positions for its analysis: either it is a subject and the sentence before it is the predicate, so it is a delayed subject and the sentence before it is the predicate; or it is the predicate of a deleted subject that is obligatory to delete and not mentioned. For example, you say: *Nima al-rajulu Zayd* (What a good man Zayd is). The analysis: *Nima* is a past tense verb built on fathah, *al-rajul* is a subject raised by the visible dammah, and for *Zayd* there are two positions in its analysis: *Zayd* is a subject raised by the beginning, and its sign of raising is the visible dammah, and its predicate is the previous sentence *nima al-rajul*; or we say: *Zayd* is the predicate of a deleted subject, estimated as *huwa Zayd* (it is Zayd), *nima al-rajul huwa* (the good man is he), meaning the one I praise is Zayd. Do you understand? So the meaning of the verse points to a rule, which is the rule: the specified is mentioned after completing the subjects of *nima* and *bisa*, or what indicates them from the qualifier. And this specified is either a subject whose predicate is the sentence before it, or the predicate of the deleted subject. Is the deletion obligatory or permissible?
The student: Obligatorily.
The Shaykh : It is obligatory, and for this reason he said: "it never appears".
The student: It is contrary to the rule.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: It is contrary to the rule.
The Shaykh : Which rule?
The student: Because it is a hidden pronoun estimated as *huwa* (he), and it is permissible.
The Shaykh : No, no, that pronoun is the subject or the substitute for the subject; it is not the subject (mubtada').
The student: Is it general?
The Shaykh : No, it is not general. All right, we have finished with this.