• Search


  • Arabic Tree Community

    • Fi’l Mudaari’: Present and Future Tense

    By ArabicTree | September 2, 2008

    In Arabic, fi’l al-mudaari‘ (the present/future-tense verb) can represent either the present or the future tense verb. So the question arises: how do you know if it’s being used in a present or future tense?

    For example, if someone says to you:

    أَشرُبُ الشَايَ

    Does this mean “I am drinking tea” or “I will drink tea”? If you can see the person, no problem!–you can tell if they’re drinking tea or not right now. But what if you read a sentence like this in a book?

    The answer is context; the same way Arabs (meaning people who speak and understand Arabic) understand without vowels, they understand tense by context. Subhanallah! What about the rest of us?

    As it turns out, you can explicitly specify that the verb is present- or future-tense. Let’s go by example. Our original sentence was:

    أَشرُبُ الشَايَ

    If we want to make it present-tense, we say:

    أَشرُبُ الشَايَ الانَ

    The addition of al-aana (الانَ) means “now”; so you can translate this sentence as: “I am drinking tea right now.” Which makes it present-tense! Notice you could NOT say “I will drink tea right now”–it doesn’t make sense! So al-aana removes the ambiguity and makes it present-tense.

    What about future tense? There are two ways you can achieve this:

    1. By the addition of the letter seen:
      سَأَشرُبُ الشَايَ

      The addition of seen makes it future tense; so you can translate as “I will drink tea.”

    2. By the addition of the word sawfa:
      سَوفَ أَشرُبُ الشَايَ

      The addition of sawfa makes it future tense; so you can translate as “I will drink tea.”

    Both are equivalent, seen and sawfa–there’s no difference in the meaning. Also, unlike al-aana, you do not explicitly translate the seen or sawfa into a word (at least, in English).

    To summarize: Mudaari‘ verbs can be present-tense or future tense; you can explicitly specify it as present-tense (by adding al-aana) or future-tense (by adding seen or sawfa).

    Wallahu ‘alim.

    Topics: Grammar, Intermediate | 1 Comment »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!

    Words on the Pattern of Faa’il

    By ArabicTree | August 24, 2008

    Bismillah. It’s been a while since we had a post (due to family stuff); so insha’Allah we’ll go with something easy.

    In Arabic, words on the pattern of faa’il (فاعل) denote a doer of an action. Here are some common words you probably know on the pattern of faa’il:

    Here are some words from the Qur’an and Sunnah on the pattern of faa’il:

    Here are some names of Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) on the pattern of faa’il:

    Wallahu ‘alim. For more details on the intricate meanings of Allah’s names, you can try the GodNames.org sitemap (it has a list of names). You can also try Ilm Fruits, they have details on a few names (Al-Ghaffaar, Al-Ghafuwr, Al-Haleem, and Al-Qahhar).

    Topics: Vocabulary | 1 Comment »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!

    Amr and ‘Umar

    By ArabicTree | July 12, 2008

    If you know a bit about the history of the Arabic language, historically, Arabic had no dots or tashkeel (vowels). This makes life tricky; sometimes, you cannot tell what the word is except by context. Certain combination of words look the same. Like mi’atun and minhu.

    Another combination are the two names Amr (عَمَر) and ‘Umar (عُمَر). Notice that when you take the dots and tashkeel away, the two names look exactly the same! And this is a problem, because the Arabs didn’t have taskheel and dots before.

    So how do they resolve this? The same way as mi’atun and minhu: they add an extra letter. So ‘Amr is written like so:

    عَمَرو

    The extra waw is not pronounced–it simply exists to distinguish the two names.

    And why is it still there today? Allahu ‘alim, Arabs don’t put taskheel except when necessary. So the majority of written Arabic has no tashkeel in it; so these things are still necessary.

    Topics: Grammar, Intermediate | 3 Comments »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!

    Why Mi’atun has an Alif

    By ArabicTree | June 21, 2008

    If you’ve been studying Arabic for a while, you’ll notice something very interesting with respect to alif, waw, and ya.

    As a rule, every single time you see the letter alif, the letter before it takes fatha–and the alif just lengthens the “aa” sound.

    And the same with waw and yaa–waw is preceded by damma, and yaa is preceded by kasra.

    However, there is one exception–the word mi’atun (مِائَةٌ), which has a kasra before the alif. And what’s more, it’s not even pronounced! What’s up with that?

    Recall that Arabic writing evolved in stages before reaching what it is today. Earlier additions were quite different–fonts and style aside–in that they contained no nuqat (dots) or tashkeel (vowels).

    And Arabs could read and understand, subhanallah, like that!

    But, take a look at this–say you remove the extra alif in mi’atun. With nuqat and tashkeel, it looks like this: مِئَةٌ

    Once you remove the nuqat and tashkeel, it looks like this: مئه

    And notice the word minhu–with nuqat and tashkeel, it looks like this: مِنهُ and without it … it looks exactly the same as minhu: منه

    So to get around this, the Arabs added an extra alif to mi’atun. It’s not maatun, or miaatun; the alif is merely there because it disambiguates.

    Wallahu ta’ala ‘alim.

    Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!

    Separating Mudaf and Mudaf Ilayh

    By ArabicTree | June 15, 2008

    In the possessive case, the mudaf follows the mudaf ilayh. Check this out:

    هَاذا قَلَمُ مُحَمَّدٍ

    In this sentence, the mudaf is qalam, and the mudaf ilayh is Muhammad. Let’s play with this sentence; we want to say “this is Muhammad’s new pen” instead of just “this is Muhammad’s pen.” How would we accomplish this?

    If you know na’at and man’oot, you might formulate a sentence like this:

    هَاذا قَلَمُ جَدِيدُ مُحَمَّدٍ

    Not a bad first try! But there’s a problem with this sentence–you cannot separate the mudaf and the mudaf ilayh! It’s illegal (in the rules of Arabic grammar)!

    So how can you formulate the sentence, then? Perhaps like this:

    هَاذا قَلَمُ مُحَمَّدٍ الَجَدِيد

    You might ask, how do we know this doesn’t mean “this is the pen of the new Muhammad?” The answer lies in the rules of na’at and man’oot–since they match in number, gender, definitivity, and case, you can easily tell that jadeed applies to qalam–because if it applied to Muhammad, it would be jadeedin, not jadeedu.

    Topics: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!

    Transitive and Intransitive Verbs

    By ArabicTree | June 7, 2008

    In English and Arabic, we can classify verbs as both transitive and intransitive. (Does anyone know the Arabic terms for these words?)

    Transitive verbs are verbs that take a maf’ool (an object, or recipient of the verb). In English, transitive verbs include: eat (eat what?), and say (say what?).

    Intransitive verbs take no maf’ool–they’re just there by themselves. This includes verbs like swim, skate, and die (in English).

    Some transitive verbs in Arabic include:

    Some intransitive verbs in Arabic include:

    Some intransitive verbs indirectly take a maf’ool through a harful-jarr–verbs like kharaja and thahaba, which take min and ila respectfully (you’ll notice a few of the above verbs are like that).

    So you can say:

    المُدَرِّسُ خَرَجَ مِن الفَصلِ

    The teacher left from the class. Notice the use of min. Similarly, with dakhala, you can say:

    التُلابُ سَيَذهَبُ إلَ الفَصلِ

    The students went into the class. Notice the use of ila.

    And be careful! Verbs that are intransitive in English might be transitive in Arabic, and verbs that are transitive in English might be intransitive in Aarabic–so don’t assume anything! For example, thahaba (to go) is intransitive in Arabic, but transitive in English–you can say “I went home,” but you can’t say “thahabtu as-suwqa.”

    As we mentioned, some transitive verbs take more than one maf’ool; but these, we’ll cover as a separate topic, bi idhnillah.

    Topics: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!

    Fi’l Amr: The Imperative

    By ArabicTree | May 10, 2008

    When you study fi’l mudaari, one of the things teachers always place emphasis on the harakah of aynul-kalimah, the vowel on the second letter of the root word. It’s yasalu, not yasulu or yasilu.

    And this is important because it comes into play in fi’l amri. Fi’l amri–commands, or the imperative–are for second-person.

    Let’s look at the verb kataba/yaktubu. The second-person (anta) is taktubu.

    To convert a mudaari‘ verb to an amr, you need to:

    1. Delete the ta (harf-ul-mukhaatabah, the letter of second-person). So taktubu تَكتُبُ becomes ktubu كتُبُ.
    2. Put sukoon on the last letter. Ktubu becomes ktub كتُب.
    3. Add a hamzatul-wasl to the front. Because you can’t pronounce a word with sukoon on the first letter. So it becomes uktub اُكتُب.

    And why uktub and not aktub or iktub? Because of the harakah on aynul-kalimah–damma!

    Let’s take another example–jalasa/yajlisu. So starting with tajlisu تَجلِسُ, we:

    1. Slash the ta–jlisu جلِسُ
    2. Add sukoon to the end–jlis جلِس
    3. Add alif to the front–ijlis اِجلِس

    Got it? No, wait! Let’s try fataha/yaftahu (starting with تَفتَحُ:

    1. Slash the ta–ftahu فتَحُ
    2. Add sukoon to the end–ftah فتَح
    3. Add alif to the front–aftah? No! Not aftah–it looks like aftuhu (the mudaari‘ for waahid mutakallim). It becomes iftah! اِفتَح

    And the harakah on the hamza? It depends on the harakah on aynul-kalimah in mudaari. Kasra in mudaari becomes kasra in amr; damma in mudaari‘ becomes damma in amr; and fatha in mudaari‘ becomes kasra in amr.

    So it’s easy–just follow the three steps. And once you get practiced at it, your brain will fil in the three steps for you, and you can jump straight from mudaari‘ to amr.

    What about for pronouns other than anta? Compare them to anta, and see the additions.

    And that’s fi’l amri, the imperative form!

    Topics: Grammar, Intermediate | No Comments »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!

    Badal: Something that Stands in for Something Else

    By ArabicTree | May 3, 2008

    البَدَل–badal–means “something that stands in for something else,” or “something that replaces something else.”

    The rules for badal are:

    1. The badal itself must be an ismul-ishaarah (demonstrative pronoun)–such as haadhaa.
    2. The word after the badal must be a common-noun (not a proper name)
    3. The word after the badal must be definite (with alif-lam, usually)

    And that word–the definite common-noun that follows the badal–is the word that the badal stands in for.

    So if you say:

    هاذا البَيتُ كَبِيرٌ

    (This house is big.) In this sentence, haadha is the badal–it’s ismul-ishaarah, it’s followed by a common noun (bayt) that’s definite with alif-lam.

    Another example is:

    هؤلاء حُجَّاجُ مِن أمرِيكا

    (These hujjaaj–pilgrims–are from America.) The badal here is haoolaai; it’s ismul-isharah, and it’s followed by a common noun (hujjaaj) that’s definite with alif-lam.

    But why do we care about which word is badal? Why does it mater,grammatically?

    Check out this sentence:

    قَلَمُكِ فِي هاذِهِ الهَقِيبَةِ يا عاإشَةُ

    (Your pen is in this bag.) The badal here is haadhihi; it’s ismul-ishaarah, and it’s followed by a common-noun (haqiybah) that’s definite with alif-lam.

    And notice that the badal never changes case–rather, the word that the badal is standing in for takes its case.

    Like here–the badal is haadhihi, and the word it’s standing in for is haqiybah. And haqiybah is majruwr, because of fiy–fiy affects haadhihi, and haadhihi is badal–so it passes on themajruwr case to haqiybah!

    Here’s another example to demonstrate that:

    قَرَأتُ هاذِهِ السُورَةَ فِي صَلاةِ الفَجرِ

    (I recited this surah in Salaatil-Fajr). The badal here is haadhihi–ismul-ishaarah, followed by a common noun with alif-lam. The badal stands in for surah.

    And here, surah is mansoob. Why? Because of qara’a–qara’a has a mafool, haadhihi. But because haadhihi is badal for surah, surah becomes mansoob, not haadhihi.

    And that’s badal!–something that stands in for something else. You can think of badal as a rubber ball–whatever case hits it, bounces onto the next word (that it affects).

    To recap:

    What ayaat of the Qur’an have badal in them? Post some in the comments insha’Allah (quoting the verse and pointing out the badal).

    Topics: Beginner, Grammar | 3 Comments »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!

    The Nominal Sentence

    By ArabicTree | April 26, 2008

    In Arabic, the easiest type of sentence to understand is the nominal sentence (or the noun sentence). The nominal sentence tells you about a thing. It has two parts–the mubtada (the subject), and the khabr (information about the subject).

    The mubtada and khabr have only a few simple rules:

    1. They must match in gender
    2. They must match in number.
    3. The mubtada must be definite
    4. The mubtada must be marfoo‘

    Let’s run through some simple examples.

    1. المَسجِدُ كَبِيرٌ

      Al-masjidu qabiyrun: the masjid is close. The mubtada is al-masjid, which is definite (because it has alif-lam), and the khabr is kabiyrun. Both are singular and masculine.

    2. عَائشَةُ جَالِسَةٌ

      ‘Aishatu jaalisatun: ‘Aisha is sitting. The mubtada is ‘Aisha (which is feminine, singular, and definite–it’s a name), and the khabr is jaalisatun (which is singular and feminine).

    3. الطُلابُ جُدُدٌ

      At-tullaabu jududun: the students are new. At-Tullaab is the mubtada, and it’s masculine, definite (with alif-lam), and plural; jududun is masculine and plural.

    Nominal sentences are really as easy as that! But you can make them much more complex if you throw in prepositions, possessive case, or if the khabr becomes a full, stand-alone verbal sentence. (And that the khabr doesn’t have to be marfoo‘–which it isn’t in this example):

    الإمَامُ فِي المَسجِدِ

    Al-Imaamu fiy al-masjidi: The imam is in the masjid. Here, the mubtada is the imam, and the khabr is “fiy al-masjidi,” a preposition and a majruwr noun.

    And that’s nominal sentences in a nutshell.

    Topics: Beginner, Grammar | 3 Comments »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!

    Intermediate Topics in Masdar

    By ArabicTree | April 19, 2008

    When we discussed the masdar–the “verbal noun“–we mentioned that it’s a noun, it can take any case, depending on how it’s used; and that the masdar takes the pattern of fu’ool.

    One of the difficulties of the masdar is the pattern. The masdar falls on the pattern of fu’ool (فُعُول), but it can also fall on other patterns. So the question arises, how do you know which pattern the masdar for a given verb falls on?

    The answer is, you learn it and memorize it. There is no pattern that determines which verb has which masdar–just like there’s no pattern that tells you which past-tense verb follows which form in the present-tense for three-letter roots. It’s just something you memorize and know through frequent use.

    The second issue is “how do you translate the masdar?” You can translate it on the pattern of “verb-ing”–so if the masdar is “dukhool,” you can translate it as “entering.” Or if it’s “khurooj,” you can translate it as “exiting.”

    But does this really make sense? Take a look at the following Arabic sentence:

    رَأيتُ دُخُولَ المُدِيرِ

    Translation: I saw the entering of the principal.

    Now, this sentence makes perfect grammatical sense in Arabic; but what about English? Not really. It’s a bit awkward and clumsy.

    What if you translate it as “I saw the entrance of the principle?” It makes more sense. The masdar doesn’t mean the place of the verb, but the action itself, so be careful and make sure you don’t get confused.

    What if you translate it as “I saw the principle enter”? That makes sense too–and, in fact, if you read Arabic translations, they often translate the masdar as the verb. And that’s fine–eloquent, even.

    But why would they do this? Because the masdar, in Arabic, is intrinsically related to the verb. In fact, the two are perfectly interchangeable.

    Like the sentence above–we originally started with:

    رَأيتُ دُخُولَ المُدِيرِ

    What if we, instead, wrote it as:

    رَأيتُ أن دَخَلَ المُدِيرُ

    You can translate that as “I saw the principle enter.” It makes sense in English, and it makes sense in Arabic.

    But you might notice we slipped in an “an” there. Why? Because the following formula holds true:

    المَسدَرُ = أن + الفِعل

    In other words: the masdar is equivalent to its verb plus the particle “an.” You can replace the masdar with its verb plus the particle, or you can replace the verb with the particle with the equivalent masdar.

    If you’re interested in even more advanced topics in the masdar, check the related posts.

    Topics: Grammar, Intermediate | No Comments »

    Related Posts: Can't get enough of Arabic? Subscribe to our RSS feed or email notification to get instant updates for new posts!
    « Previous Entries