I recently came across رجال السلطة ونساؤها as a translation of "men and women of power." I suspect the translator used this instead of رجال ونساء السلطة to avoid a "stranded مضاف" (i.e. to avoid leaving رجال without an (explicit) مضاف إليه). This strategy works in most cases, but in this case the translation bothered me. After thinking about it for a bit, I figured out why, and I'd like to share my thoughts with you and see if you agree. When we say رجال السلطة, the meaning is الرجال ذوو السلطة, i.e. "men who have power," whereas when we say, for example, رجال الأمن, the meaning is الرجال التابعون للأمن, i.e. "men who are affiliated with/belong to the security forces." In a way, these are almost opposite meanings: the men have the power, but the security forces "have" the men (figuratively). We cannot reword the second one as الرجل ذوو الأمن. So we see that an إضافة construction with two nouns can have (at least) two possible meanings, i.e. two possible relationships between the two elements. My feeling is that we cannot replace the second noun with a pronoun if the relationship is a "ذو relationship" (as in رجال السلطة), because السلطة ورجالها, to me, sounds like the power owns the men and not the other way around. To make an analogy with English, السلطة ورجالها to me sounds like "the power's men" as opposed to "men of power." In English, an apostrophe and s cannot be used if we have a "ذو relationship," and that's what the pronoun construction sounds like to me. Other examples: رجال النفوذ / العِلْم / الأصالة الرجال ذوو النفوذ / العِلْم / الأصالة النفوذ ورجاله / العِلْم ورجاله / الأصالة ورجالها رجال الشرطة / الجيش / الدولة الرجال ذوو الشرطة / الجيش / الدولة الشرطة ورجالها / الجيش ورجاله / الدولة ورجالها What do you think?