يعجبني في الذكريات سخاؤها

[Hemza]

Hello,

I had a little clash with my Egyptian friend (that I started ) over a programme called أمير الشعراء following a recent polemic about a Libyan poet who quoted this verse: يعجبني في الذكريات سخاؤها in his poetry that an Emirati member of the judging panel "corrected" as سخاءها
As a non native Arabic speaker who is weak regarding Arabic grammar, I asked my friend why was there a polemic and who was right and who was wrong so we looked together at the verse and to me, the Libyan poet explanations sounded logical that's to say سخاء was مرفوع since it's the "one" which يعجب (فهو فاعل) the poet. And my friend said that he agreed with the Emirati member of the judging panel because to him, it was منصوب though I replied him that he certainly confused يعجبني for a فعل مبني للمجهول. I claimed that the poet was right because to me, although the sentence is kind of reversed for poetry constraints, if we reorder the words, we can say it the following way:

يعجبني سخاؤها في الذكريات​

Or even more colloquially:

سخاؤها يعجبني في الذكريات​

And that's how came to the conclusion that the poet was correct but my friend still couldn't understand why without being able to explain why he was still thinking the poet was wrong (I couldn't get more than الإعراب حاجة صعبة جدا)
Given he is a native speaker, I still have doubt about my argumentation. What do you think?

Thank you.

 

[Sadda7]

The poet was right, سخاء is فاعل so it's سخاؤها, and ي in يعجبني is المفعول به.

 

[elroy]

I replied him that he certainly confused يعجبني for a فعل مبني للمجهول

If that were the case, we would need a نائب فاعل that is not سخاء. There is no agent that could fulfill that role.

 

[WadiH]

This was not a difficult case. The verb means “to please” and the “generosity” (سخاء) was doing the pleasing, so سخاء is فاعل (technically : الاسم الذي أسند إليه الفعل الذي قبله). The “judges” on that poetry show were an embarrassment.

 

[elroy]

This was not a difficult case.

Not for me, and most certainly not for you, but I'm not at all surprised that an "Average Joe" Arab would consider this a case of الإعراب حاجة صعبة جدا.

 

[WadiH]

But if this is a صعبة جداً case then what would an "easy" case even look like? 🤣 And he said this after it was explained to him 🤦‍♂️.

 

[elroy]

what would an "easy" case even look like? 🤣

أكل الولد التفاحة

 

[WadiH]

Jokes aside, I find إعراب is one of those things that some people just refuse to engage with because they've decided in advance that it's difficult. My father is like that -- won't even give me a chance to walk him through it because he's already decided it's too complicated even though he has a PhD.

 

[elroy]

You're very right; it's way easier than people make it sound! I find it eminently accessible due to the elegance of its logical coherence.

 

[SZ24]

From مغني اللبيب:

مَا يعرف بِهِ الْفَاعِل من الْمَفْعُول
وأكثر مَا يشْتَبه ذَلِك إِذا كَانَ أَحدهمَا اسْما نَاقِصا وَالْآخر اسْما تَاما
وَطَرِيق معرفَة ذَلِك أَن تجْعَل فِي مَوضِع التَّام، إِن كَانَ مَرْفُوعا، ضمير الْمُتَكَلّم الْمَرْفُوع، وَإِن كَانَ مَنْصُوبًا ضَمِيره الْمَنْصُوب، وتبدل من النَّاقِص اسما بِمَعْنَاهُ فِي الْعقل وَعَدَمه. فَإِن صحت الْمَسْأَلَة بعد ذَلِك فَهِيَ صَحِيحَة قبله، وَإِلَّا فَهِيَ فَاسِدَة. فَلَا يجوز «أعجب زيدٌ مَا كره عَمْرٌو» إِن أوقعت «مَا» على مَا لَا يعقل، لِأَنَّهُ لَا يجوز «أعجبتُ الثَّوْبَ» وَيجوز النصب لِأَنَّهُ يجوز «أعجبني الثَّوْب». فإن أوقعت «مَا» على أَنْوَاع من يعقل جَازَ، لِأَنَّهُ يجوز «أعجبت النِّسَاء»، وَإِن كَانَ الِاسْم النَّاقِص «مَن» أَو «الَّذِي» جَازَ الْوَجْهَانِ أَيْضا.
فروع
تَقول «أمكن الْمُسَافِرَ السّفرُ» بِنصب الْمُسَافِر، لِأَنَّك تَقول «أمكنني السّفر» وَلَا تَقول «أمكنْتُ السّفرَ» وَتقول «مَا دَعَا زيدا إِلَى الْخُرُوج» وَ«مَا كره زيدٌ من الْخُرُوج» بِنصب زيد فِي الأولى مَفْعُولا وَالْفَاعِل ضمير «مَا» مستترا وبرفعه فِي الثَّانِيَة فَاعِلا وَالْمَفْعُول ضمير «مَا» محذوفًا لِأَنَّك تَقول «مَا دَعَاني إِلَى الْخُرُوج» وَ«مَا كرهت مِنْهُ» وَيمْتَنع الْعَكْس لِأَنَّهُ لَا يجوز «دَعَوْت الثَّوْب إِلَى الْخُرُوج» وَ«كره من الْخُرُوج».

 

[Hemza]

Thank you all for your input and your replies. I also found the case pretty easy to understand since I just had to inverse the words order and to me, سخاء is the فاعل since it does the action of pleasing to the poet, it provokes the إعجاب so to me it was a priori logical that it was مرفوع but I thought I may had missed something given my friend considered it حاجة صعبة جدا so I thought I may be wrong after all.

Jokes aside, I find إعراب is one of those things that some people just refuse to engage with because they've decided in advance that it's difficult. My father is like that -- won't even give me a chance to walk him through it because he's already decided it's too complicated even though he has a PhD

This pretty much ended from him with
خلاص بقى ما توجع ليش في دماغي
And me replying سير تشوف لك شي مدرسة (nothing serious)

 

[Hemza]

Update: my friend texted me, telling me it is مجرور thus سخائها because for him, it is a بدل اشتمال. He takes as an example
سُرِرتُ من محمدٍ أدبِهِ
I told him that to me, there were two differences:

سُرِرتُ فعل مبني للمجهول​

and there is an implied إضافة since it is أدب محمد that we're talking about which is preceeded by حرف الجر من hence it is مجرور. But in the Libyan poet's sentence, it is a different case, we're not talking about سخاء الذكريات. Or am I wrong on this one? That's how I could explain the difference between سخاؤها and أدبِهِ but he's not really convinced (I'm confident about my claims but not about the explanation behind them).

He added
الشاعر الذي قام بالإعجاب فالشاعر هو الفاعل والجملة كاملة مفعول به
But to me it is rather
ليس الشاعر الذي أعجب نفسه بل هو السخاء الذي قام بإعجاب الشاعر فالسخاء فاعل والشاعر (ني في يعجبني) مفعول به

I think what misleads him is the fact he doesn't understand that أعجب is a transitive verb and not what we call in French, a reflexive one (sorry I can't find a more adapted way to call these, it's a verb whose the subjects self-applies).

 

[Sadda7]

He's confused, he gives an analogy with المبني للمجهول when there is no فاعل and then goes back and say الفاعل هو الشاعر? It's a wrong comparison.

فالشاعر هو الفاعل

Based on what?

I think what misleads him is the fact he doesn't understand that أعجب is a transitive verb

Indeed, I think he's not having an issue with it being transitive but he's perceiving it similarly to أحببتُ.
But then he's ignoring ياء المتكلم and when ياء المتكلم is attached to a verb it's always في محل نصب مفعول so the poet (المتكلم) has to be المفعول به and الفاعل is something else.

 

[Hemza]

He's confused, he gives an analogy with المبني للمجهول when there is no فاعل and then goes back and say الفاعل هو الشاعر? It's a wrong comparison.

I told him "you say something and you say something else unrelated".

Based on what?

الله أعلم

Indeed, I think he's not having an issue with it being transitive but he's perceiving it similarly to أحببتُ.
But then he's ignoring ياء المتكلم and when ياء المتكلم is attached to a verb it's always في محل نصب مفعول so the poet (المتكلم) has to be المفعول به and الفاعل is something else.

Exactly! It was inaccurate to say "transitive", rather he takes it as a verb which applies on oneself كأن أعجب نفسه while here it is not the case. I told him about your explanation and he admitted that he was wrong and added نسيت النحو.

 

[Mahaodeh]

I find إعراب is one of those things that some people just refuse to engage with because they've decided in advance that it's difficult.

I used to be one of these people, mainly due to bad teachers in secondary school (or this is what I think).

It’s been several years since I started learning on my own, and now I realize it’s actually quite easy.

and there is an implied إضافة since it is أدب محمد that we're talking about which is preceeded by حرف الجر من hence it is مجرور.

Is this actually correct? أدب is بدل اشتمال من محمد, and it’s مجرور because محمد is مجرور and any so called “implied إضافة” is irrelevant, if the sentence were, for example: مدحتُ محمدا أدبَه the أدب still has the same relationship with محمد but in this case I would say that أدب should be منصوب, or am I missing something? Perhaps I misunderstood your explanation?

But in the Libyan poet's sentence, it is a different case, we're not talking about سخاء الذكريات. Or am I wrong on this one?

But we are talking about سخاء الذكريات, aren’t we? What else does the pronoun ها refer to?

He added
الشاعر الذي قام بالإعجاب فالشاعر هو الفاعل والجملة كاملة مفعول به

Yes, this is where he’s wrong, and this is probably what the panelist that corrected the poet also thought, along with at least half of the Arabic speaking world. The reason in my opinion is that as you said they confuse المبني للمعلوم والمبني للمجهول for this particular verb (at least).

The reason is possibly because we use the verb in colloquial in the passive voice quite commonly, borrowed from MSA and in a romantic sense mostly as in محمد أُعجب بزميلته بالشغل. At the same time we use the active voice for non-romantic things as in جارنا عجب محمد لأنه ابن حلال. So the one admiring/liking is sometimes the فاعل and others the مفعول به. Obviously the confusion is that the passive voice in dialects has been replaced with صيغة انفعل so أُعجَب is not immediately recognized as passive, it needs a moment of thought.

I think he's not having an issue with it being transitive but he's perceiving it similarly to أحببتُ.

Or this could be the reason.

Notes: I’m making some guesses (hopefully educated) so I reserve the right to be mistaken on all issues mentioned except the very first one.

 

[WadiH]

I used to be one of these people, mainly due to bad teachers in secondary school (or this is what I think).

They only taught you grammar in secondary school? My first grammar class was in 4th grade.

 

[Mahaodeh]

I was in the UK until I was 12, so they didn’t really teach us Arabic at all. My mother taught me how to read and write in Arabic at home, so no grammar.

 

[WadiH]

I was in the UK until I was 12, so they didn’t really teach us Arabic at all. My mother taught me how to read and write in Arabic at home, so no grammar.

Ok I see. I never could have guessed, to be honest!

 

[elroy]

I'm kind of the opposite of @Mahaodeh! I went to an American school in Jerusalem, where Arabic wasn't taught very rigorously and I only had Arabic class until the middle of 9th grade. It was only obligatory until 8th grade, and it was an elective in high school!

A lot of what I know about إعراب wasn't ever taught to me in school -- even fairly foundational things like بدل، حال، تمييز.

 

[Hemza]

Is this actually correct? أدب is بدل اشتمال من محمد, and it’s مجرور because محمد is مجرور and any so called “implied إضافة” is irrelevant, if the sentence were, for example: مدحتُ محمدا أدبَه the أدب still has the same relationship with محمد but in this case I would say that أدب should be منصوب, or am I missing something? Perhaps I misunderstood your explanation?

I definitely misunderstood the sentence construction, I thought محمد أدبه was a kind of إضافة but "reversed" (أدب محمد)

But we are talking about سخاء الذكريات, aren’t we? What else does the pronoun ها refer to?

Indeed I was so focused on the ؤ/ء that I forgot that ها was referring to الذكريات.

Yes, this is where he’s wrong, and this is probably what the panelist that corrected the poet also thought, along with at least half of the Arabic speaking world. The reason in my opinion is that as you said they confuse المبني للمعلوم والمبني للمجهول for this particular verb (at least).

The reason is possibly because we use the verb in colloquial in the passive voice quite commonly, borrowed from MSA and in a romantic sense mostly as in محمد أُعجب بزميلته بالشغل. At the same time we use the active voice for non-romantic things as in جارنا عجب محمد لأنه ابن حلال. So the one admiring/liking is sometimes the فاعل and others the مفعول به. Obviously the confusion is that the passive voice in dialects has been replaced with صيغة انفعل so أُعجَب is not immediately recognized as passive, it needs a moment of thought.

You're certainly right although I doubt he is even aware that it could be what misled him. According to him, the only explanation is merely الأعراب حاجة صعبة ونسيته but it's been a while he stopped studying it (since high school, 17 years ago since he then entered college in France with lessons being taught in French).

I was in the UK until I was 12, so they didn’t really teach us Arabic at all. My mother taught me how to read and write in Arabic at home, so no grammar.

I'm really admirative of you and @elroy given what you went through and I wish ان شاء الله to follow the same path you did regarding Arabic self teaching. I started Arabic in middle school (+1 month spent each year in Morocco for holidays+my parents, mainly my mum though her فصحى is pretty weak) and I had one wonderful teacher for a year and after, a very bad one for 3 years who disgusted me and my few classmates of Arabic. It's only around 22 years old that I started taking Arabic lessons again at university but most of our teachers were talking in French during our lessons. What helped me improving is the fact I met a lot of Arabic speakers and I could practice with them (+listening to a lot of media and reading). In middle and high schools, I was the weakest one of my class and paradoxically I'm the only one who pursued toward translation studies .

Of course other members aren't unworthy and I thank you again all for your input.