Hello, In your opinion what is the grammatical function of the sentence in red : جَلَسَ وليدٌ يقرأُ باهتمامٍ قصَّةً كانَ قدْ اشْترَاها عندمَا زارَ مع أبيهِ مَعْرِضَ الكتابِ الدَّوليَّ الذي أُقيمَ في مَرْكَزِ المعارضِ بمدينةِ الرِّياض I think it's a "jumlah hâliyyah", What do you think? How would you translate the beginning of the sentence (جَلَسَ وليدٌ يقرأُ باهتمامٍ قصَّةً) ? Thank you.
Thank you, so your understanding is as if you had a sentence like this جَلَسَ وليدٌ لقراءة باهتمامٍ القصة. So, in this case, the sentence يقرأُ باهتمامٍ قصَّةً expresses the purpose for which the action (جَلَسَ) takes place/is performed. But I do not know if a sentence can be "في محل نصب المفعولِ لأجله"... I rather think it was في محل نصب حال but I'm not sure.
Yes, but I can't help you with grammar. However, while I hold my previous translation to be correct, a different interpretation, borrowed from dialect use, would not translate جلس to "sat" but rather to the meaning of ظل. "Waleed kept attentively reading..." I'm not sure if this meaning holds in MSA though.
I'm not sure about the i3rab either, but a French translation would drop the verb جلس : Walid lisait une histoire/un roman...
En français d’après le traduction en anglais (Waleed sat to attentively read a story ...) serait : Walîd s'est assis pour lire attentivement une histoire, non ?
I think you were right the first time: it is a ḥāl clause. So: “Walid sat attentively reading the story which he had purchased....”
Merci. Mais en français ce serait étrange : "Walîd s'est assis lisant/en lisant attentivement une histoire" En principe avec le hâl on devrait avoir une simultanéité des deux actions s’asseoir et lire mais ici on sent que Walîd s'est assis puis s'est mis à lire : Walîd s'est assis pour lire attentivement une histoire, non ?
We have not come to a consensus on this. Perhaps it all depends on the style and register of the text in question. I can only say that in classical Arabic it is very common to find a ḥāl clause consisting of a verb in the imperfect without any introductory particle, of the type جاء زيد يضحك jāʼa zaydun yaḍḥaku “Zayd came laughing”. I think this construction is not so common in modern Arabic, but it is definitely good fuṣḥā.
Here’s how I’m looking at it: Waleed didn’t sit down BECAUSE he was reading and he didn’t sit down IN ORDER TO READ. He sat down independently of what he was doing before he sat down. Therefore, I would say: Waleed sat down absorbed in reading the story which……. or even better: Waleed sat down absorbed with the story which……. ===================== Actually, I see a problem with what comes after the above sentence. The original Arabic goes on to say that he “bought the story” at some place or another. But at least in English, it sounds strange to say you bought a story (?). You don’t buy a story…you buy a book, or a pamphlet or a newspaper and so on, but not a story. (You can “buy a story” if you’re an editor of a newspaper and want to publish that story in your newspaper…..but that’s not what’s meant here). You can also say "I don't buy your story" which means "I don't believe you" but again, it's not this idiom at work here with Waleed. Therefore, I would finally translate the passage as: Waleed sat down absorbed with the book which he……….. (Note: In this sentence, "absorbed" strongly suggests that you're reading the book now. Therefore, using "reading" would be redundant.)
Merci. Je pense que tu comprends le français étant donné que c'est ta langue maternelle apparemment. Oui je suis tout à fait d'accord avec toi c'est bien pour cela que je pose la question car d'un point de vu grammatical je pense aussi que nous avons là un hâl (jumlah hâliyyah) mais du point de vue du sens cela semble étrange car si nous avons bien un hâl alors cela implique que nous avons une simultanéité de deux actions "s'assoir" et "lire" ce qu'on peut tarduire par un gérondif en français : "Walîd s'est assis en lisant attentivement une histoire". Mais le problème c'est le sens : cela signifie que walîd lisait attentivement une histoire pendant qu'il s'asseyait, ce qui est étrange, non ? Alors peut-être que la phrase n'est pas correcte ? Peut-être que l'auteur voulait exprimer la raison, le but, la cause de l'action : "Walîd s'est assis pour lire attentivement une histoire". Comme si on avait en arabe جَلَسَ وليدٌ ليقرأَ باهتمامٍ قصَّةً ou جَلَسَ وليدٌ لقراءة باهتمامٍ قصَّةً ? Merci.
جلس doesn't mean here the action of sitting down. It means assuming the position of sitting down. There's no cause or reason or goal in جلس وليد يقرأ.
I'm sorry, but I continue to have problems accepting "une histoire" or " قصَّةً " in light of your original complete sentence above. You can't really buy a "story" as such......you have to buy the book in which the story is found. However, if you choose to disregard the complete sentence, then I have no problem with your latest French rendition.
In Arabic it's perfectly okay to say : اشتريت قصة. Besides, it's the most natural way to say "I bought a book in a story form".
Really? I can't speak for Arabic since I'm not native, but in French the sentence "j'ai acheté une histoire (un conte)" or the Spanish "Compré un cuento" or the English "I bought a story"..... or the German "Ich kaufte mir eine Geschichte" (in a bookshop), sounds awfully peculiar to me. But maybe it's just me.
Without further context...this is my two pence worth. Waliid was sitting, reading attentively a story-book (which he had bought when he visited with his father the national book exhibition which was held at the exhibition centre in the city of Riyadh.)
It's the same in English, Spanish etc. But it all depends on context. My point here is that if the context is that you are buying or you have bought the item in a bookstore - which is the context of this thread - even the Arabic اشتريت قصة sounds as peculiar and out of place as it does in other languages. In fact, I contend it's totally wrong. You can't walk into a bookstore to "buy a story" or to "buy a قصة " without sounding absurd.
While it's incorrect in other languages, it's very common to say in Arabic اشتريت قصّة for "I bought a story book", even if you don't find this definition of قصة in Arabic dictionaries. This is called مجاز in Arabic.
D'accord. Which goes back to my original point. You can't translate قصَّةً as given in the OP's original text into English as "story". You have to translate it as "book" or at least "story book". That's all I'm saying. (After all, the OP is asking for a translation). You "could" translate قصَّةً as "story" IF you ignore the last half of the original sentence, but the OP has not indicated that he is doing or is willing to do that. C'est a dire: Waleed sat down attentively reading a story. Waleed sat down attentively reading a story which he had bought at a book exhibition. (?) He sat down attentively reading a book which he had just bought.
Our colleague cherine is right, you don't have to translate the verb to sit at all! Except when you try to describe multiple actions related to alike to sit (to stand, got tired, to walk, to lean..). قصَّة = novel.
Another example : ثُمَّ جَلَسْتُ أَتلُو آيَاتٍ مِنْ كِتَابِ اللهِ In this case, the sentence in red expresses the purpose for which the action (جَلَسْتُ) takes place/is performed ?
I am sure, the context will make it clear for your whether a) Then I sat reading verses from the book of God.....or b) Then I sat to read verses from the book of God I was reading an Arabic grammar book (in English) in which the author described this kind of construction with the above two meanings; with the two acts occurring at the same time (or almost) and the second act occurring after the first one, which invariably results in the English "to do" construction.
جلست أتلو is probably meant to indicate the action of sitting. In contrast, جلس يقرأ usually means something like أخذ يقرأ or ظل يقرأ Such a construction doesn't exist in every language.
