HiSyrian Arabic: I was born
I believe “I was born” is the same in Syrian Arabic as in MSA:
However, I believe I have heard it as:
But wouldn’t this mean “I created”?
Or perhaps what I am really hearing is the passive:
ْوُلِدَت?It's not pronounced khala2et, it's khli2et. There's no internal passive in dialect but it's also not pronounced like the active form.
انولدت (passive) is occasionally used but far less frequent.
وُلِدت (wulidet) would just be a full-on fuSHa form. Not impossible to hear in colloquial but not very likely in normal speech - more likely in an interview or a more structured context.
I'm not Syrian, but both are used. In Moroccan, we say "خَلَقْتُ" wich is as you said, the passive, "I have been created". Both are correct.
"2na 5leqet" lit: I was created .
"2na wledet" lit: I was born .
They both mean the same meaning .
خلق in Moroccan dialect (and I think this goes for other dialects as well) is specifically linked to God creation. Hence using خلق for making something would sound presumptuous. I think that for "I created something" we would sayHow would one say 'I created [something]' and 'I gave birth' in Moroccan and Syrian? Perhaps (خلّقت) and (ولّدت)?
I generally say 5al2aan خلقان when saying I was born. I used to say wildaan ولدان, but I learned that 5al2qaan is more common in Syrian.I know that this thread is a bit old, but...
In my online Syrian Arabic program, they have "My grandmother was born in Lebanon" as "ستي خلقانة بلبنان." Is this also correct?
(As I understand it, Syrians frequently use the active participle or an adjective ending in ان/derived from a verb [e.g. تعبان from تعب] to speak of states or emotions. خلقان would fall in the latter category, as odd as it seems in my mind to use this would-be-stative adjective to describe something in the past.)