Excerpts for sentences

Clauses and phrases are building blocks of sentences. A phrase is a group of words that act a part of speech but cannot stand alone as a sentence. Clauses are groups of words that have a subject and a predicate. Independent clauses express a complete thought and can stand alone as a sentence but subordinate clauses depend on the other parts of the sentence to express a complete thought.

A sentence expresses a complete thought and contains a subject, a noun or pronoun, and a predicate, a verb or verb phrase. The four basic types of sentences simple --- compound, complex, compound-complex --- uses phrases and clauses in varying degrees of complexity.

• Declarative Sentence –   Used to make a simple statement. Most sentences are declarative.

• Interrogative Sentence – Used to ask a question. See also Rhetorical Question.

• Exclamatory Sentence –  Used for emphasis and emotion.

• Imperative Sentence   –   Used for commands, with the pronoun you always implied.

• Conditional Sentence  –   Used to express what one would do if a condition were met.

• Nominal Sentence: الْجُمْلَةُ الاِسْمِيَّةُ : It is a sentences in which the subject precedes the verb. In simple terms; it is a sentence that begins with a Noun.

The subject can be a noun, a pronoun, a demonstrative pronoun, or a relative clause.  Thus there are more than one possibility for nominal sentences in the presence of an object, an adverb, a prepositional phrase, etc.

• Verbal Sentence:  الْجُمْلَةُ الْفِعْلِيَّةُ : It is a sentence that starts with the verb and the subject follows. The subject can be a noun, a pronoun, a demonstrative, or a relative clause. The defining property of a verbal sentence is that the verb precedes the subject. There are more than one possibility for verbal sentences in the presence of an object, an adverb, a prepositional phrase, etc. If the first word is neither of these two, in other words it’s a particle, then we simply ignore it and consider the first non-particle word to determine type of sentence.

Unlike English, where the change in the intonation of the speaker is probably the only way to emphasize or stress different elements of the sentence; emphasis of different elements can be achieved in Arabic by alternating between the two types of sentences.

There are three types of conditional sentences and clauses

1 - condition possible to fulfill;

2. condition in theory possible to fulfill

3. condition non possible to fulfill [too late]

Form

Type                              If clause                         Main clause

1.                       Simple Present                           Will-future (or Modal + Infinitive)

2.                       Simple Past                                Would + Infinitive

3.                        Past Perfect                           Would + have + past participle [can substitute could or might for would]

[17:75 is the example of condition sentence of type 3 impossible to fulfill]

If can be replaced by words

as long as; assuming (that); on the assumption that; provided that; supposing that; unless; with the condition

In a counterfactual or speculative^[2] conditional sentence, a situation is described as dependent on a condition that is known to be false, or presented as unlikely.

Third conditional[edit]

"Third conditional" is the pattern where the condition clause is in the past perfect, and the consequence is expressed using the conditional perfect. This is used to refer to hypothetical, counterfactual (or believed likely to be counterfactual) situations in the past

If you had called me, I would have come.

Contrast

•  In Arabic, the use of the different conditional particles determines the type of the condition, whereas in English, condition type is determined by the sequence of verb forms.
• In English, the conditional clause may precede or follow the main clause, whereas in Arabic, the conditional clause typically precedes the main clause.
• The tense of the verb of English sentences that express impossible condition is past perfective, whereas in the Arabic counterpart, the verb is in the perfect tense.
• The English conditional subordinator if has three counterparts in Arabic: ‘in’, ‘ithaa’ and ‘law’.
• Only English may have a conditional sentence without a conditional subordinator (like if).
• The verbs of the two clauses comprise an English conditional sentence agree in tense, whereas in Arabic no such tense agreement is required. Here, we say that English conditional sentences have tense harmony, whereas Arabic ones do not.
• The main clause in Arabic conditional clauses may consist of eqational (verbless) clause.

Conditional sentences with Ieza: followed by perfect verbs in both clauses: 2:11; 2:13; 2:14; 2:20; 2:76; 2:91; 2:156; 2:170;

Conditional sentence with Ieza followed by perfect verb and imperfect in second clause: 2:117;

Conditional sentence with Ieza with apodosis clause nominal sentence. 2: 177; 2:180,

Conditional sentences with "in" followed by Izan: First clause perfect verb, second clause with noun sentence: 2:145;

Conditional sentence with Lao followed by Izan: 4:67

It is an accepted academic practice that the meanings of a word can be resolved by taking recourse to collocates, words that tend to co-occur in similar environments. This method is quite frequently used in the Grand Qur'aan to render the meanings and perception of its important words unambiguously evident for the critical reader.

Academic presentations involve special requirements with regard to the quality of both content and language, so it is especially important that academic translations are free from errors.

The Transmission of the Text

The books of the Bible were written centuries before the invention of printing. They were written out by hand and copied by hand. The original manuscripts have long since disappeared, and we must determine the original text from the copies that have been preserved.

Due to human error, it is difficult to copy accurately. Down through the centuries, scribes made mistakes and then their errors were copied by others. But while one copyist was introducing an error, other copyists were presumably copying the same text accurately. Thus, unless all known manuscripts of a text are copies of the same corrupted manuscript, the original text will be preserved amidst all the errors.

By carefully comparing all available ancient manuscripts, and studying the variant readings at each point in the text, Bible scholars endeavor to reconstruct the original meanings and intent.

This is a complicated and vexing task. It is not easy to decide which manuscripts are more reliable than others, or which variant readings are copyists' errors or forgeries. Scholars disagree on these questions, and the various translations on the market reflect that disagreement.

When two interpretations are claimed for a particular text, the construction most in agreement with all the facts of the case should be adopted.

Consider the vastly different meaning of these verses, the only difference being the placement of the comma, the adding of a letter, the spacing of a letter or the changing a single word:

"I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."
"I tell you the truth today, you will be with me in paradise."

"God, (grant) me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference."
"God, (grants) me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference."

"Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is (a part) of it."
"Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is (apart) of it."

Thou shall not kill.
Thou shall not murder.

We can't have a "sure word" about the meaning of Scripture (or anything else) unless we have a sure method to interpret the words.

The following seven rules are the center of all grammatical interpretation. They have been accepted and used by scholars from Socrates to the present and they are equally applicable to legal, historical, and other such language.

The following seven rules are the center of all grammatical interpretation. They have been accepted and used by scholars from Socrates to the present and they are equally applicable to legal, historical, and other such language.

Here are the seven rules:

1) The rule of DEFINITION: What does the word mean? Any study of Scripture must begin with a study of words. Define your terms and then keep to the terms defined. The interpreter should conscientiously abide by the plain meaning of the words. This quite
often may require using a Hebrew/English or Greek/English lexicon in order to make sure that the sense of the English translation is understood. A couple of good examples of this are the Greek words "allos" and "heteros". Both are usually translated as "another" in English - yet "allos" literally means "another of the same type" and "heteros" means "another of a different type."

2) The rule of USAGE: It must be remembered that the Old Testament was written originally by, to and for Jews. The words and idioms must have been intelligible to them - just as the words of Jesus when talking to them must have been. The majority of the New Testament likewise was written in a milieu of Greco-Roman (and to a lesser extent Jewish) culture and it is important to not impose our modern usage into our interpretation. It is not worth much to interpret a great many phrases and histories if one's interpretations are shaded by pre-conceived notions and cultural biases, thereby rendering an inaccurate and ineffectual lesson.

3) The rule of CONTEXT: The meaning must be gathered from the context. Every word you read must be understood in the light of the words that come before and after it. Many passages will not be understood at all, or understood incorrectly, without the help afforded by the context. A good example of this is the Mormon practice of using 1 Cor. 8:5b: "...for there be gods many and lords many..." as a "proof text" of their doctrine of polytheism. However, a simple reading of the whole verse in the context of the whole chapter (e.g. where Paul calls these gods "so-called"), plainly demonstrates that Paul is not teaching polytheism.

4) The rule of HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: The interpreter must have some awareness of the life and society of the times in which the Scripture was written. The spiritual principle will be timeless but often can't be properly appreciated without some knowledge of the background. If the interpreter can have in his mind what the writer had in his mind when he wrote - without adding any excess baggage from the
interpreter's own culture or society - then the true thought of the Scripture can be captured resulting in an accurate interpretation. Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "Our only interest in the past is for the light it throws upon the present."

5) The rule of LOGIC: Interpretation is merely logical reasoning. When interpreting Scripture, the use of reason is everywhere to be assumed. Does the interpretation make sense? The Bible was given to us in the form of human language and therefore appeals to human reason - it invites investigation. It is to be interpreted as we would any other volume: applying the laws of language and grammatical analysis.

"What is the control we use to weed out false theological speculation? Certainly the control is logic and evidence... interpreters who have not had the sharpening experience of logic...may have improper notions of implication and evidence. Too frequently such a person uses a basis of appeal that is a notorious violation of the laws of logic and evidence." (Protestant Biblical Interpretation, Boston:W. A. Wilde, 1956)

6) The rule of PRECEDENT: We must not violate the known usage of a word and invent another for which there is no precedent. Just as a judge's chief occupation is the study of previous cases, so must the interpreter use precedents in order to determine whether they really support an alleged doctrine. Consider the Bereans in Acts 17:10-12 who were called "noble" because they searched the Scriptures to determine if what Paul taught them was true.

7) The rule of INFERENCE: An inference is a fact reasonably implied from another fact. It is a logical consequence. It derives a conclusion from a given fact or premise. It is the deduction of one proposition from another proposition. Such inferential facts or propositions are sufficiently binding when their truth is established by competent and satisfactory evidence. Competent evidence means such evidence as the nature of the thing to be proved admits. Satisfactory evidence means that amount of proof which would ordinarily satisfy an unprejudiced mind beyond a reasonable doubt.

Learning these seven rules and properly applying them will help keep any interpreter from making errors and will hopefully alleviate many of the disagreements unfortunately present today.

Inconsistent terminology. Generally speaking, a key term that occurs more than once should be translated by the same word each time, but the translator must first determine whether the meaning is in fact the same. If it is not, the translator may choose another word, but the decision must be a conscious one. To foster consistency, the editor can suggest that translators create a personal glossary of key terms as they work through a text.

Translators must keep in mind that syntax bears a message. Its message may not be as direct as that of, say, terminology, but it does influence the way we perceive and unpack an argument.

Syntax: The arrangement of words conveying their grammatical functions and relationships.

Differentiate between simple and compound statements.

1– The Quran Encourages People to Contemplate & Think For Themselves

Indeed, the most disliked created beings in the Sight of God are the deaf and the dumb who do not use their intellect. (Quran, 8:22)

 

You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them. (Quran, 17:36)

However, it was the Quran, with its repeated emphasis on questioning and contemplation, which made me realize the merits of free-thought. The profound statement, “Will you, then, not think?” appears numerous times in the Quran, and at regular intervals! Gradually, instead of simply believing everything I heard and read, I started analyzing things.

he idea that religion suppresses free thought and encourages blind belief certainly is, by no means, representative of the Quran. In fact, the opposite is true: those who do not reason are vehemently condemned (Quran 10:100) and are considered “no different from animals” (Quran 25:44).  It is this emphasis on free-thought and acquiring knowledge that ultimately led to what we call “The Golden Age of Islam”.

[However, a thinking population is always dangerous to the status quo, and hence these verses were gradually brushed aside, replaced by a bizarre sentiment of blindly following those in power (whether religious, or political). Add to that the notion of a heavenly reward for reading the Quran in Arabic (even for non-Arabic speakers) promoted by the clergy, and you’ve got a largely ignorant population at the whims of what religious figures teach them about Islam.]

2– The Quran Discourages Blindly Following Ancestral Ways and Religious Preachers

O you who believe, many religious leaders and preachers take people’s money illicitly, and repel from the path of God. (Quran, 9:34)

 

And they (the common people) will say: O our Sustainer! Behold, we paid heed unto our leaders and our great men, and it is they who have led us astray from the right path! (Quran, 33:67)

 

If you obey the majority of people on earth, they will lead you astray from God’s way. Most of the people follow nothing but conjecture and they only live by guesswork. (Quran, 6:116)

It would come as a surprise to many (even Muslims who haven’t read the Quran) that the Quran warns people about the dubious ways of many religious preachers, and asks people to be wary of them. A religion that was only devised to control and cheat people would never expose religious preachers like this, for it would be against their very interests!

Time & time again, we find passages in the Quran about people blaming themselves on the Day of Accountability because they had not reasoned for themselves, and had blindly adopted the ways of their ancestors and/or religious and political leaders. These serve as excellent reminders to continually re-evaluate one’s beliefs. As Mark Twain also once said, “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”

What did I learn from these verses? That just because a belief and/or practice is popular and accepted by many does not necessarily make it true or beneficial. These verses have taught me to question everything – be they cultural norms, religious opinions or whatever else.

[Note: This, of course, does not mean that all religious preachers are corrupt, but that people should only adhere to their advice when it makes sense to them. After all, at the end of the day, only we are responsible for what we do (Quran 2:134).]

3– The Quran Promotes Pluralism & Acknowledges There Being Multiple Paths to God [Incorrecct inference]

Surely, those who believe (in the Qur’an and call themselves Muslims), and those who are Jews, and Christians and the Sabians; whoever acknowledges God, The Day of Accountability, and does acts of reformation – their reward is with their Sustainer. For them shall be no fear from without, nor shall grief touch them from within. (Quran, 2:62)

As for those who sincerely strive for Us, We shall most certainly guide them ontopaths that lead unto Us: for, behold, God is indeed with the doers of good. (Quran, 29:69)

Sectarianism thrives on the idea of there being only one correct way to worship and serve God. By acknowledging that there are, in fact, multiple paths that lead to God, the Quran entirely discredits and nullifies sectarianism.

Truth be told, there was a time when I believed only I and people who shared my beliefs were “rightly guided.” However, these verses eventually changed my stance for the better. They made me realize that no faith or school of thought has a monopoly on truth, and that has really “broadened my horizons”, so to speak. Irrespective of wherea truth comes from, a truth is a truth and should be accepted on its own merit. And, what a liberating thought this is!

4—The Quran Champions Freedom of Conscience.

“If your Sustainer willed, all who are on earth, would have believed (by not providing free will). Would you then, compel people to become believers?” (Quran, 10:99)

 

“There is no compulsion in matters of faith.” (Quran, 2:256)

Despite what some modern Muslim majority states do in the name of God (namely, anti-blasphemy & apostasy laws), the Quran advocates total freedom of speech and expression. This is, after all, a fundamental human right. Otherwise, what would be the point in endowing human beings with free-will?

5– The Quran Asks Muslims to Be Social Activists

O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! Stand up firmly for justice, witnesses for God, even if it is against yourselves, your parents and your relatives, and whether the case is of a rich person or a poor person. God is nearer to them than you are.

Do not follow your emotions lest you fall short of justice. If you distort your testimony or turn away (from this command, know that) God is Aware of all your actions. (Quran, 4:135)

The Quranic program is centered in the pursuit of social justice, and fighting oppression. Islam is not a faith that only gives you a dogma to believe in, in return for paradise; but rather expects you to utilize your resources in helping the vulnerable and in becoming agents of peace and justice!

This repeated emphasis on social and economic justice by the Quran has restored my belief in my capabilities that I can make a difference, no matter how small.  It has inspired me to be more involved in my community, and help those in need.

6– The Quran Considers Belief as a Means to an End, and Not an End in Itself:

Do people think that they will be left (at ease) simply because they say, “We believe”, and will not be put to test? (Quran, 29:2)

I am so glad that this verse is so explicit, because so many religious people (Muslims included) today exhaust all their energies on “believing this” and “believing that”, all the while failing to translate that belief into some meaningful action. It is unfortunate that for many, religion has devolved into a list of things they must believe in, in order to be eligible for paradise.

But, it is what you do that is the main concern of the Quran: how you translate that belief into action. And this teaches me that “believing” in values like honesty, justice, loyalty etc. is not the point – living these values is.

And that’s how my faith inspires me to evolve as a human being!

• The Predicate الخبر of the nominal sentence refers to the part that completes the meaning of the Subject. It tells us about the subject or gives us information about it.
•  Now what are the types of the Predicate (Khabar) ?   

Types of the Khabar أنواع الخبر   

The Khabar can be any of the following types:

1) A Singular Predicate خبر مفرد  :

    The Khabar can be a singualr noun which means that it is not a sentence nor a semi-sentence;

                                     e.g. – الكتابُ صديقٌ = The book is a friend.

                                           – النصرُ قريبٌ   = Victory is near.

                                           – الصحةُ نعمةٌ   = Health is a blessing.

                                           – الفريقان متنافسانِ  = The two teams are rivals.

                                           –الأمهاتُ رحيماتٌ   = Mothers are merciful.

(Note that the Predicate here is the same in number and gender as its subject.)

 2) A Sentence (Jomlah) جملة   :

     The Khabar can by itself be a sentence. This sentence of the Khabar has two types:

                 A) Nominal Sentence (Jomlah Ismiyah)جملة اسمية  

                       It is that sentence that starts with a noun and a pronoun that refers back to the first subject (the Mubtada)  

                                      e.g. – الشعرُ أساسُهُ العاطفة  = The essence of poetry is emotion. .

                                            – السيارةُ سعرُها مرتفعٌ = The Price of the car is high.

                 B) Verbal Sentence (Jomlah fi’liyyah) جملة فعلية

                     The predicate can be a Verbal sentence which means that it can be a sentence that starts with a verb and a pronoun that must refer back to the first subject.

                                        e.g. – السعادةُ تنبعُ من الداخلِ = Happiness arises from the inside.

                                              – الولد يلعبُ الكرةَ  = The boy is playing football.   

                                              – الرجلانِ شاركا فى الحرب = The two men participated in the war.

                                              – المصريون يصنعون التاريخ  – The Egyptians are making history.

(Note that the sentence of the predicate must contain a pronoun that must agree with the Mubtada in gender and number)

3) A Phrasal Predicate (Khabar Shib’h Jomlah) خبر شبه جملة   : 

     This kind of predicate is that which contains a preposition or an adverb. 

      This Khabar often comes after the subject.                       

                                  e.g. – الجنةُ تحتَ أقدامِ الأمهاتِ  =Paradise is under mothers’ feet.

                                        – كتابُك فى الحقيبةِ = Your book is in the bag.

Grammar and structure of sentences

Speech is a continuous stream of sound without a clear division into units, but it can be analyzed into meaningful elements which recur and combine according to rules. In writing, such an analysis is expressed through the division into words and sentences. Far more distinctions are needed, however, for a proper grammatical description.
Grammatical terms and categories: The essence of grammatical units is that they are meaningful and combine with each other in systematic ways. We may distinguish hierarchy of units as shown below:
 

(sentence)

clause

phrase

word

morpheme - phoneme/grapheme.

More typically, a unit consists of one or more elements:
Clause consists of one or more phrases, a phrase consists of one or more words, a word of one or more morphemes, etc.
The grammatical units, from morpheme to sentence, form a system connecting sound/writing, and discourse.

At each level, grammatical units can be characterized in four ways:

Structure: Units can be characterized in terms of their internal structure, e.g. words in terms of bases and affixes, phrases in terms of head and modifiers, and clauses in terms of clause elements/

Syntactic role: Units can be described in terms of their syntactic role, i.e. their role in building up larger syntactic units. There is no one-to-one correspondence between structure and syntactic role. Note, in particular, that each phrase type characteristically has a number of different syntactic roles.

Meaning: Units can be described in terms of meaning. Although it is often possible to establish broad correspondences, there is no simple relationship between structure and meaning, or between syntactic role and meaning. Note, in particular, that elements of the clause may correspond to a range of semantic roles and that independent clauses may have different speech act functions.

Distribution and discourse function: In this grammar, grammatical units are further characterized with respect to their distribution. A great deal of emphasis is placed on patterns of selection and use, especially in different register, and on the interpretation of distributional differences in terms of discourse function.

The three major word classes
Words can be broadly grouped into three classes according to their main function and their grammatical behaviour: lexical words, function words, and inserts.

Lexical words: Lexical words are the main carriers of meaning in a text. In speech they are generally stressed. They are characteristically the words that remain in the information-dense language of telegramds, lecture notes, headlines, etc.; arriving tomorrow (telegram) Family killed in fire (newspaper headline). Lexical words are numerous and are members of open classes. They often have a complex internal structure, and they can be the heads of phrases. There are four main clauses of lexical words: nouns, verbs, adjective, and adverbs.

Function words: While lexical words are the main building blocks of texts, function words provide the mortar which binds the text together. Function words have a wide range of meanings and serve two major roles: indicating relationships between lexical words or larger units, or indicating the way in which a lexical word or larger unit is to be interpreted.
Function words are members of closed systems. They are characteristically short and lack internal structure. In speech they are generally unstressed. They are frequent and tend to occur in any text, whereas the occurrence of individual nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs varies greatly in frequency and is bound to the topic of the text. However, there is also a great deal of variation in the frequency of function words depending upon the type of text.

Typical difference between lexical words and function words:

Frequency:  Lexical words Low      function words    high

head of phrase  yes       no

length      long              short

lexical meaning   yes      no

morphology variable    invariable

openness   open        closed

number      large        small

stress       strong         weak

Newmark (1988a, 1988b) points out that in order to b able to translate a text, one has to understand it and analyse it first. For this reason, translation theories should have a criteria to be followed by the translator. The intention of text -the translator has to forget about his/her own views about a subject and translate it following the author's intention and never alter it. The intention of the translator -whether s/he is trying to reproduce the emotiveness of the original, or whether s/he is trying to combine the cultural sense of the SL.

Categories of anaphora include pronouns, demonstratives, relative pronouns, and interrogative pronoun type adverbs. They further refer to three main tasks in this process, namely, determining the elements of a sentence that are anaphors, allocating the antecedent candidates of a given anaphora, and deciding which phrase or simple word of the possible candidate list is the antecedent of the given anaphora. In this vein, it is worth differentiating between anaphoric and cataphoric relations. Anaphora refers to the kind of relationship when a pronoun, as a grammatical substitute, is used to refer to a preceding noun phrase. Cataphoric reference, on the other hand, is the use of pro-forms or other grammatical fors to refer to a following noun phrase. These two types of relation are referred to as retrospective and anticipatory anaphora.

A simple rule of Arabic rhetoric is that a noun indicates continuity and permanence while use of a verb signifies occurrence and generation of an act. In the first sentence a verb is used while recurring word is a possessive phrase signifying that it refers to a principle.

There’s a simple rule of thumb that can differentiate between the two types. Given a sentence, we call the speaker a liar. If this makes sense, then the sentence was an informative one, and if it doesn’t, then it was non-informative. For example, when someone says “I went for a walk today”, we can say “you‘re lying” and this makes perfect sense. On the other hand, when someone says “can I play?”, we cannot say “you’re lying.”