Interprete replied that If there was a succession in the action, the two verbs would have been in the past and joined by a conjunction like ف, و or ثم ..
This may be something that is part of MSA. I don't know. But the content of both Tritton and Wickens is non-colloquial and non MSA Arabic. Wickens says that almost the examples in his book are real Arabic sentences taken from written Arabic sources and not made up. Allow me to quote from section 93 (page 51) of his book.
"Use of the مضارع - As remarked in para 62, the مضارع, in default of specific time indications, is normally rendered by the English present or the future. However, one of the most characteristic functions of Arabic is that of a "tense prolonger". Consider the English sentence: "He struck him on the head and killed him". It might be thought that this could be easily enough rendered into Arabic by two ماضی (i.e past) verbs in succession; this infact could be done but the tendency would then be to understand the statement as referring to two cuccessive and not necessarily related actions: he struck him on the head on one occasion, and actually went as far as to kill him on another! What would be much more normal in Arabic would be to render : he struck (ماضی) him on the head, kills (مضارع) him. It will be noted that the "and" normally disappears in such constructions, leaving something akin to our own alternative phrasing: "he struck him on the head, killing him.
Valuable hint: where two or more actions, in whatever "time" are closely related or virtually simultaneous, Arabic commonly sets the "time" in the first verb and follows with مضارع forms omitting "and" at the first juncture (though not subsequently). Conversely, a series of ماضی verbs, linked by "and", suggests a series of
separate past actions; and a succession of مضارع verbs,
all linked by "and" would suggest a series of
separate present-near future actions. Obviously, as so often in languages, borderline cases can easily arise; and, in any event, the appropriate English renderings will often be (as in the original example above) quite ambiguous."
But there is another type of Haal and you know these two types of Haal but maybe you forgot it. You have opened several threads concerning this subject, you have participated in several threads that I opened ...
So there are several types of haal ... The haal which expresses simultaneity is called الحال المقارنة and the other type of Haal is called الحال المقدرة or الحال المستقبلة.
Yes, I remember. Bearing in mind what Wickens has said above, let's look at the examples already provided and one or two more. This is not to deny the "purpose" Haal or
الحال المقدرة
اتی الی عین ماء یشرب "He came to a spring of water to drink".
This example comes from Tritton's book and the translation is his. But you would agree if the translation was "He came to a spring of water and drank", it would still be fine.
دخل الأولاد في البحر
يسبحون The boys enteres the sea to swim.
This again is from Tritton and the translation is his. One could translate this as "The boys entered the sea abd swam".
جلسنا بقرب النھر ساعة لنستریح قلیلا بعد غروب الشمس ثمّ رددنا علی الأرض و نمنا اللیل کلهِ فقمنا الغد قبل طلوع الشمس نذھب الی شغلنا الیومّي۔
We sat close to the river for an hour to rest a little after sunset. Then we strtched on the ground and slept the whole night. Then we got up the next day before sunrise to go to our daily work. (my translation)
Here again we can perhaps say, ".... and went to our daily work."
Now turning to الحال المقدرۃ. There is a book called "Written Arabic - An approach to basic structures" by A L F Beeston (1911-1955), Professor of Arabic, University of Oxford
"On page 81, he says, "A "circumstance" clause has the primary function of describing a situation which is represented as simply an attendent circumstance to the main statement; and it may begin with an imperfect verb: (i) it may begin immediately with an imperfect verb, or (ii) it may begin with وقد followed by a perfect verb, or (if negative) with ولم and an imperfect verb, or (iii) it may begin with و plus a thematic structure."
(Please read "circumstance" clause as حال, imperfect as مضارع and perfect as ماضي and "thematic structure" as جملة اسمیة.)
He then goes on to say, "A circumstance clause of type (l) may either describe a situation existing simultaneously with that of the main statement, or an intension present at that time:
خرج یحمل الکتاب في یدہ He went out carrying the book in his hand.
ذھب الی عمان یُخبِر الملک بالأخبار He went to Amman with the intention of informing the king of the news.
(The sentences and translations are the late professor's)
Now getting back to your sentence:
فلَمَّا رَبَضَ أتَى إِلَيْهِ جُرَذٌ يَمْشِي عَلى ظهْرِهِ فوَثَبَ قائِما
I have already said that, "---- a rat came walking on his (the lion's) back......" does not ring true in my mind. This would be الحال المقارنة. Applying the الحال المقدرة understanding to this sentence, it would be translated something like..
"---- a rat came to walk on his (the lion's) back...."
Without full context, we can not decide if the rat approached the lion with the intention of walking on the lion's back. Perhaps, you can add a little of what came before or after this sentence.
Now all this is only relevant if the nakirah zulHaal meets the various conditions. I have posted a list of these conditions which I repeat here.
1. When حال is before ذوالحال
جاءني راکباً رجلاً
2. When ذوالحال is نکرة موصوفة.
جاءھم کتاب من عند الله مصدّقاً لّما معھم
3. When it is a مضاف to a نکرة
جاءنی غلامُ رجل راکباً
4) After حرف نفی and حرف نھی
ما جاءني رجل راکباً
لا یدخل أحد قاعة الامتحان حاملاً حقیبةً
5) After حرف استفھام
ھل أتاک رجل راکباً
6) After و that is followed by a جملة اسمیة
جاءنی ولد و ھو یبکي
7) و صلّی وراہ رجال قیاماً (I haven't got a subtitle written down for this).
Does your sentence meet any of these conditions. I don't think it does. This implies this sentence can't be Haal. So, we are back to my suggestion that it means...
And when he (the lion) lied down, a rat came to him and walked on his (the lion's) back. So, he (the lion) jumped and stood up!
لأنها دائما تنبح في الداخل والخارج إنما الأقرب للفهم خرجت الكلاب وهي تنبح