يذكر مراسل هيئة الإذاعة البريطانية في الجزائر أن الشعب يريد الإصلاح

[Jana337]

يذكر مراسل هيئة الإذاعة البريطانية في الجزائر أن الشعب يريد الإصلاح.

yadhkuru muraasilu ha2iati l-2idhaa3ati albriiTaanyati fii l-jazaa2iri anna -sh-sha3ba yuriidu al-2iSlaaha.

The BBC correspondent in Algeria mentioned that the people want reforms.

In the text where I found this sentence (Julia Ashtiany - Media Arabic), there is a fatha in الشعب, but I do not understand why. Is it required after أن?

شكرا جزيلا

ينا

 

[Josh_]

I believe that الشعب would be the the subject of يذكر and therefore be in the accusative and thus take a fat7a as it is definite. Also, after أن the verb should be subjunctive and take a fat7a at the end, not a Damma. So it would be yuriida, not yuriidu. I'm not totally sure about sha3b though, so we'll have to wait for Elroy.

 

[Jana337]

I believe that الشعب would be the the subject of يذكر and therefore be in the accusative and thus take a fat7a as it is definite. Also, after أن the verb should be subjunctive and take a fat7a at the end, not a Damma. So it would be yuriida, not yuriidu. I'm not totally sure about sha3b though, so we'll have to wait for Elroy.

Hi Josh,

Many thanks for your replies.
How can الشعب be a subject of يذكر? What would be مراسل, then?
I was sure (well, almost) that it was an indirect speech (someone said that ...).

Jana

 

[Josh_]

I realized I mixed them up. مراسل is the subject and الشعب is the the object.

 

[cherine]

Hi Jana,
words after anna are منصوبة . The rule is pretty simple but I don't know how much grammar you already know, So i'll tell you the rule any way : أن تنصب الاسم وترفع الخبر
To apply the rule, Anna must precede a nominal sentence, which means it doesn't affect verbs (The أن Josh meant is An أنْ which does influence verbs but not nouns).
In the nominal sentence we have مبتدأ وخبر (again i don't know what they're called in English ) the word that is initially a مبتدأ takes the fat7a (if it's singular, like ash-shaba) or yaa2 if it's dual or plural (like : sha3bayn, al-muraasiliin).
The خبر of the nominal sentences is always مرفوع so it simply remains as is.
I wonder if i'm clear .. please let me know

 

[elroy]

Correcting your transliteration:

yadhkuru muraasilu hay2iati l-2idhaa3ati albariiTaaniyati fii l-jazaa2iri anna -sh-sha3ba yuriidu al-2iSlaaha.

The BBC correspondent in Algeria mentions that the people want reforms.

As for your question:

In the text where I found this sentence (Julia Ashtiany - Media Arabic), there is a fatha in الشعب, but I do not understand why. Is it required after أن?

شكرا جزيلا

ينا

As Cherine wonderfully explained, أن (as well as إن) changes the inflection of the first part of a nominal sentence (which always consists of two parts grammatically) to "accusative" while the second one remains in the "nominative." This is the opposite of what كان does. So to sum up:

Using الطقس جميل as an example sentence:

No particle -> nominative, nominative -> aT-TaqsU jamiilUN

كان -> nominative, accusative -> kaana T-TaqsU jamiilAN

إن or أن -> accusative, nominative -> inna T-TaqsA jamiilUN

By the way, there is a group of words that have the same effect as كان (called كان's sisters) and a group of words that have the same effect as إن (called إن 's sisters). I don't know if I can list them all off the top of my head - perhaps Cherine can help.

 

[elroy]

I believe that الشعب would be the the subject of يذكر and therefore be in the accusative and thus take a fat7a as it is definite. Also, after أن the verb should be subjunctive and take a fat7a at the end, not a Damma. So it would be yuriida, not yuriidu. I'm not totally sure about sha3b though, so we'll have to wait for Elroy.

الشعب is in the accusative because of the أن - deciding case does not have to do with whether the noun is definite.

The verb takes a fat7a only if it directly follows أن, as in اريد أن العب.

 

[elroy]

Hi Jana,
words after anna are منصوبة . The rule is pretty simple but I don't know how much grammar you already know, So i'll tell you the rule any way : أن تنصب الاسم وترفع الخبر
To apply the rule, Anna must precede a nominal sentence, which means it doesn't affect verbs (The أن Josh meant is An أنْ which does influence verbs but not nouns).
In the nominal sentence we have مبتدأ وخبر (again i don't know what they're called in English ) the word that is initially a مبتدأ takes the fat7a (if it's singular, like ash-shaba) or yaa2 if it's dual or plural (like : sha3bayn, al-muraasiliin).
The خبر of the nominal sentences is always مرفوع so it simply remains as is.
I wonder if i'm clear .. please let me know

My attempt:

مبتدأ - first part of a nominal sentence
خبر - second part of a nominal sentence

 

[Josh_]

الشعب is in the accusative because of the أن - deciding case does not have to do with whether the noun is definite.

The verb takes a fat7a only if it directly follows أن, as in اريد أن العب.

I know definiteness does not decide case, but it decides whether a tanwiin is used or not.

sha3ban
ash-sha3ba

That's all I was saying.

 

[Josh_]

My attempt:

مبتدأ - first part of a nominal sentence
خبر - second part of a nominatl sentence

What if they becomes خبر مقدم and مبتدأ مؤخر .

Just joking. The مبتدأ and خبر are subject and predicate respectively with regards to nominal sentences.

 

[elroy]

What if they becomes خبر مقدم and مبتدأ مؤخر .

Just joking. The مبتدأ and خبر are subject and predicate respectively with regards to nominal sentences.

We're treading muddy waters again.

كان, meaning "was," would be part of the predicate in English, but not in Arabic if we translate خبر as "predicate." Nevertheless, I can see how subject and predicate are not entirely unreasonable translations.

 

[cherine]

What if they becomes خبر مقدم and مبتدأ مؤخر .

This is worth a new Thread. But i'll try to give a quick answer. Maybe Elroy would split it from here.
Muqaddam and mu2akhkhar are words to express that the two parts of the nominative sentence "switch places". But they keep the infliction ought to them; which means that the mubtada2 remains mansuub (after Inna) even if it comes later (mu2akhkhar), and that the khabar remains marfuu3 even if it comes first.
Why do they swithc places ? This is definitely worth another thread.
As for Inna's sisters, they are many, but i'll just name the main used ones : إنَّ، أنَّ، كأنَّ، لكن، ليت، لعل
Kana's sisters : كان، أصبح، أمسى، صار، ليس، عسى

 

[elroy]

This is worth a new Thread. But i'll try to give a quick answer. Maybe Elroy would split it from here.
Muqaddam and mu2akhkhar are words to express that the two parts of the nominative sentence "switch places". But they keep the infliction ought to them; which means that the mubtada2 remains mansuub (after Inna) even if it comes later (mu2akhkhar), and that the khabar remains marfuu3 even if it comes first.
Why do they swithc places ? This is definitely worth another thread.
As for Inna's sisters, they are many, but i'll just name the main used ones : إنَّ، أنَّ، كأنَّ، لكن، ليت، لعل
Kana's sisters : كان، أصبح، أمسى، صار، ليس، عسى

I will leave this post here, mostly because the last part is relevant to the overall discussion of differing inflections in nominal sentences. However, those that which to pursue the "خبر مقدم and مبتدأ مؤخر " issue further are encouraged to open a new thread.

 

[Josh_]

This is worth a new Thread. But i'll try to give a quick answer. Maybe Elroy would split it from here.
Muqaddam and mu2akhkhar are words to express that the two parts of the nominative sentence "switch places". But they keep the infliction ought to them; which means that the mubtada2 remains mansuub (after Inna) even if it comes later (mu2akhkhar), and that the khabar remains marfuu3 even if it comes first.
Why do they swithc places ? This is definitely worth another thread.
As for Inna's sisters, they are many, but i'll just name the main used ones : إنَّ، أنَّ، كأنَّ، لكن، ليت، لعل
Kana's sisters : كان، أصبح، أمسى، صار، ليس، عسى

One down side to internet forums is the lack of personal contact. As such one does not have body language and/or tone of voice to indicate the the emotion behind the words. Elroy just translated mubtada2 as the first part of the nominal sentence and khabar as the second part. I thought it was meant humorously (I was probably wrong), so I tried to respond in a humorous manner by asking about خبر مقدم and مبتدأ مؤخر . I do know what they mean and their functions, though.