Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And as for what is other than it, raise it or lower it, and make it *** like an independent noun in apposition and substitution."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Then the author said:
"And as for what is other than it, raise it or lower it":
"What is other than it": We said that it is a noun with the definite article (al-), which includes what is other than it: what is not a noun with the definite article, and what is a noun with the definite article but contains the definite article (al-).
The student: What is the reason for the accusative case?
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: What is the reason for the accusative case?
The Shaykh : The reason for the accusative case is the grammatical position, because Zayd is built on the nominative case, because Zayd here is built on the nominative case in the position of the accusative case.
The student: Why is it built on the nominative case?
The Shaykh : It is built on the nominative case because it is a noun with the definite article. Now, write down, he says: "And as for what is other than it, raise it or lower it": And what is other than it?
The student: What is other than the noun with the definite article.
The Shaykh : What is other than the noun with the definite article, or what is a noun with the definite article that contains the definite article (al-). "Raise it or lower it": This means it is permissible for you to use the nominative case in it, and it is permissible for you to use the accusative case in it. Let us look first at what is not a noun with the definite article: O Zayd the handsome one. Look, "the handsome one" is a description of Zayd. Is it a noun with the definite article or not?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : It is not a noun with the definite article. It is permissible to say: O Zayd the handsome one (nominative), and O Zayd the handsome one (accusative). "The handsome one" (accusative) is considered in the grammatical position, and "the handsome one" (nominative) is considered in the word form. And yet they say that it is a description in the accusative case, but it has a hidden fathah on its end, the appearance of which is prevented by following, the following of the second word to the first by being built on the nominative case. And what is its original position?
The student: Its position is the accusative case.
The Shaykh : Its position is the accusative case, but we made the second word follow the first in movement only. For this reason, we say: "The handsome one" is a description of Zayd, a description of Zayd in the accusative case with a hidden fathah on its end, the appearance of which is prevented by the movement of following. This is if we build it on the nominative case, if we say: O Zayd the handsome one (nominative). But if we say: O Zayd the handsome one (accusative), then the matter is clear, because it is a description in the grammatical position. Likewise, if it is a noun with the definite article and contains the definite article (al-), if it is a noun with the definite article and contains the definite article (al-), like: O Zayd the good-faced one (nominative), and O Zayd the good-faced one (accusative). Is this a noun with the definite article or not?
The student: It is attached.
The Shaykh : But does it contain the definite article (al-)?
The student: It does.
The Shaykh : It contains the definite article (al-). For this reason, he said: "And as for what is other than it, raise it or lower it". So it has become clear to us now that the follower of the nominative case has four cases or three: that it be stripped of the definite article (al-), and the second is that it be a noun with the definite article stripped of the definite article (al-), and the third is that it be?
The student: A noun with the definite article with the definite article (al-).
The Shaykh : A noun with the definite article with the definite article (al-), and the fourth is that it be not a noun with the definite article, or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: No, it is not mentioned here in the two verses.
The Shaykh : Yes, what contradicts it is included in his saying: "And as for what is other than it": that it be not a noun with the definite article. So we now have the noun with the definite article without the definite article (al-). And what is obligatory in it?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case. And what is other than it, the nominative and accusative cases are permissible in it. How many things is what is other than it?
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : Three things: what was not made a noun with the definite article, and what was made a noun with the definite article and contains the definite article (al-). And what after?
The student: And what is devoid of the definite article (al-) and the noun with the definite article.
The Shaykh : And what is devoid of the definite article (al-) and the noun with the definite article, or not?
The student: Yes, there is a fourth!
The Shaykh : No, it appears that they are only three. It appears that they are three, because the follower of the nominative case is either a noun with the definite article or not a noun with the definite article. And the one that is not a noun with the definite article will come to us -if Allah wills- later.
So the noun with the definite article, if it does not have the definite article (al-): either it has the definite article (al-), or it does not have the definite article (al-). If it has the definite article (al-), then the nominative and accusative cases are permissible in it. And if it does not have the definite article (al-), then the accusative case is obligatory in it. And we took examples before. If we say: O Zayd the one with the tricks, what is obligatory?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : Okay, O Zayd the good-faced one?
The student: Both options are permissible.
The Shaykh : Both cases are permissible. If you say: O Zayd the handsome one?
The student: The nominative and the accusative.
The Shaykh : The nominative and accusative cases. Is there a fourth case? There is not, there is not. Three cases, he said:
"And make it *** like an independent noun in apposition and substitution":
"Make it like an independent noun in apposition and substitution": Now I have excluded from the followers apposition and substitution, or not?! And what remains with us?! Here: the description, the emphasis, and the explanatory conjunction. Where is the one in which the cases we heard are permissible? As for apposition, which is what is conjoined by one of the letters of conjunction, the follower becomes like the independent noun, it has no connection to what came before it. And likewise, if it is a substitute, it becomes like the independent noun. You say: O Zayd and 'Amr, correct. O Zayd and 'Amr (nominative), and 'Amr (nominative). Like this: O called one, the letter of calling, Zayd is the called one, and the waw is the letter of conjunction, and 'Amr is conjoined to Zayd, built on the nominative case in the position of the accusative case, because if you called 'Amr independently, you would build it on the nominative case. O Zayd and 'Abdullah (accusative)?
The student: The accusative is obligatory.
The Shaykh : Is the accusative case obligatory?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Because if the called one were independent, its accusative case would be obligatory. O Zayd and a mountain-climber (accusative)?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case is obligatory. O Lord, and gentle to the servants, is the accusative case obligatory or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : So: if the follower is by means of a letter of conjunction, it is made like the independent noun. And what does "like the independent noun" mean? If it is a definite noun or an intended indefinite noun, it is built on the nominative case. And if it is a noun with the definite article or similar to a noun with the definite article, its accusative case is obligatory. So you say: O Zayd and a man (nominative), O Zayd and 'Amr (nominative), O Zayd and 'Umar's slave (accusative), or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : O Zayd and a mountain-climber (accusative). And likewise the substitute.
"And as for what is other than it, raise it or lower it":
"What is other than it": We said that it is a noun with the definite article (al-), which includes what is other than it: what is not a noun with the definite article, and what is a noun with the definite article but contains the definite article (al-).
The student: What is the reason for the accusative case?
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: What is the reason for the accusative case?
The Shaykh : The reason for the accusative case is the grammatical position, because Zayd is built on the nominative case, because Zayd here is built on the nominative case in the position of the accusative case.
The student: Why is it built on the nominative case?
The Shaykh : It is built on the nominative case because it is a noun with the definite article. Now, write down, he says: "And as for what is other than it, raise it or lower it": And what is other than it?
The student: What is other than the noun with the definite article.
The Shaykh : What is other than the noun with the definite article, or what is a noun with the definite article that contains the definite article (al-). "Raise it or lower it": This means it is permissible for you to use the nominative case in it, and it is permissible for you to use the accusative case in it. Let us look first at what is not a noun with the definite article: O Zayd the handsome one. Look, "the handsome one" is a description of Zayd. Is it a noun with the definite article or not?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : It is not a noun with the definite article. It is permissible to say: O Zayd the handsome one (nominative), and O Zayd the handsome one (accusative). "The handsome one" (accusative) is considered in the grammatical position, and "the handsome one" (nominative) is considered in the word form. And yet they say that it is a description in the accusative case, but it has a hidden fathah on its end, the appearance of which is prevented by following, the following of the second word to the first by being built on the nominative case. And what is its original position?
The student: Its position is the accusative case.
The Shaykh : Its position is the accusative case, but we made the second word follow the first in movement only. For this reason, we say: "The handsome one" is a description of Zayd, a description of Zayd in the accusative case with a hidden fathah on its end, the appearance of which is prevented by the movement of following. This is if we build it on the nominative case, if we say: O Zayd the handsome one (nominative). But if we say: O Zayd the handsome one (accusative), then the matter is clear, because it is a description in the grammatical position. Likewise, if it is a noun with the definite article and contains the definite article (al-), if it is a noun with the definite article and contains the definite article (al-), like: O Zayd the good-faced one (nominative), and O Zayd the good-faced one (accusative). Is this a noun with the definite article or not?
The student: It is attached.
The Shaykh : But does it contain the definite article (al-)?
The student: It does.
The Shaykh : It contains the definite article (al-). For this reason, he said: "And as for what is other than it, raise it or lower it". So it has become clear to us now that the follower of the nominative case has four cases or three: that it be stripped of the definite article (al-), and the second is that it be a noun with the definite article stripped of the definite article (al-), and the third is that it be?
The student: A noun with the definite article with the definite article (al-).
The Shaykh : A noun with the definite article with the definite article (al-), and the fourth is that it be not a noun with the definite article, or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: No, it is not mentioned here in the two verses.
The Shaykh : Yes, what contradicts it is included in his saying: "And as for what is other than it": that it be not a noun with the definite article. So we now have the noun with the definite article without the definite article (al-). And what is obligatory in it?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case. And what is other than it, the nominative and accusative cases are permissible in it. How many things is what is other than it?
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : Three things: what was not made a noun with the definite article, and what was made a noun with the definite article and contains the definite article (al-). And what after?
The student: And what is devoid of the definite article (al-) and the noun with the definite article.
The Shaykh : And what is devoid of the definite article (al-) and the noun with the definite article, or not?
The student: Yes, there is a fourth!
The Shaykh : No, it appears that they are only three. It appears that they are three, because the follower of the nominative case is either a noun with the definite article or not a noun with the definite article. And the one that is not a noun with the definite article will come to us -if Allah wills- later.
So the noun with the definite article, if it does not have the definite article (al-): either it has the definite article (al-), or it does not have the definite article (al-). If it has the definite article (al-), then the nominative and accusative cases are permissible in it. And if it does not have the definite article (al-), then the accusative case is obligatory in it. And we took examples before. If we say: O Zayd the one with the tricks, what is obligatory?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : Okay, O Zayd the good-faced one?
The student: Both options are permissible.
The Shaykh : Both cases are permissible. If you say: O Zayd the handsome one?
The student: The nominative and the accusative.
The Shaykh : The nominative and accusative cases. Is there a fourth case? There is not, there is not. Three cases, he said:
"And make it *** like an independent noun in apposition and substitution":
"Make it like an independent noun in apposition and substitution": Now I have excluded from the followers apposition and substitution, or not?! And what remains with us?! Here: the description, the emphasis, and the explanatory conjunction. Where is the one in which the cases we heard are permissible? As for apposition, which is what is conjoined by one of the letters of conjunction, the follower becomes like the independent noun, it has no connection to what came before it. And likewise, if it is a substitute, it becomes like the independent noun. You say: O Zayd and 'Amr, correct. O Zayd and 'Amr (nominative), and 'Amr (nominative). Like this: O called one, the letter of calling, Zayd is the called one, and the waw is the letter of conjunction, and 'Amr is conjoined to Zayd, built on the nominative case in the position of the accusative case, because if you called 'Amr independently, you would build it on the nominative case. O Zayd and 'Abdullah (accusative)?
The student: The accusative is obligatory.
The Shaykh : Is the accusative case obligatory?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Because if the called one were independent, its accusative case would be obligatory. O Zayd and a mountain-climber (accusative)?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case is obligatory. O Lord, and gentle to the servants, is the accusative case obligatory or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : So: if the follower is by means of a letter of conjunction, it is made like the independent noun. And what does "like the independent noun" mean? If it is a definite noun or an intended indefinite noun, it is built on the nominative case. And if it is a noun with the definite article or similar to a noun with the definite article, its accusative case is obligatory. So you say: O Zayd and a man (nominative), O Zayd and 'Amr (nominative), O Zayd and 'Umar's slave (accusative), or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : O Zayd and a mountain-climber (accusative). And likewise the substitute.