The fifteenth word of verse (4:61) is an indefinite masculine verbal noun and is in the accusative case (منصوب). The verbal noun's triliteral root is ṣād dāl dāl (ص د د).
The analysis above refers to the 61st
verse of chapter 4 (sūrat
Sahih International: And when it is said to them, "Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger," you see the hypocrites turning away from you in aversion.
Asim Iqbal 2nd
12th June, 2011
Again to demonstrate that weights are important and form I verbal nouns are many, giving importance to weights is also required.
Suad daal daal
Lane's Lexicon and your sources give 2 options for form I verbal noun
sudood on the weight fu'ool
sadd on the weight fa'l (fall)
But if both are verbal nouns of form I, both must have exactly the same meaning, i.e. basic meaning of the root form, but below, I show that both have some difference in meaning. Here we get help from the Qur'an which has used both these weights.
In corpus site also both are labelled as verbal noun (form I) , i.e. your sources also give 2 verbal nouns of form I. Now in this example we find both the weights , so called verbal nouns of form I, supposed to have the same meaning, are used in the Qur'an with different meanings according to translators since they translated them differently. This is an important point.
Sudoon has been translated by most in the sense of aversion
Sadd has been translated by most in the sense of hinderance.
Mazhar A. Nurani
Like the verb a verbal noun is either intransitive or transitive since the Masdar governs with the government of its corresponding verb, with exception only if it is the Absolute Object [مفعول مطلق], as is the case here.Here both verb and verbal noun used as Absolute Object are intransitive.
13th June, 2011
Then it is the absolute object , and not the basic verbal noun, as it is a kind of maf'ool formed using the masdar but using the word masdar or verbal noun alone for it is not acceptable. As verbal nouns don't have any reference to object, subject, or time.
Quote: "The Absolute Object (المفعول المطلق) is a special type of object that serves to emphasize the meaning of the main verb. It is typically formed by using the verbal noun (المصدر) derived from the main verb in the accusative form, e.g.
انتصر الجيش انتصاراً.
The nomenclature of the word will remain the same as correctly mentioned in the corpus notwithstanding its use as (المفعول المطلق)/Absolute Object or Cognate Adverb, in the sentence. Only verbal nouns, often indefinite or in phrases like possessive construction can act/be used as المفعول المطلق, for placing emphasis, indicating the manner in whcih action takes place or to provide multitude in which the action takes place.
Its reading alongwith 63:05 might clear the perception infolded herein.
the corpus site is giving word by word analysis of the Qur'an, not of words as isolated from the context, so translation keeps the context in mind, so should the labelling. So if alone the word is labelled by lexicons as verbal noun but in the Qur'an it is labelled as maf'ool e mutlaq by both syntax references imkam and i3rabQnDr, why should corpus limit the labelling to verbal noun. i.e. if brother Kais takes a decision on the labelling, and if he keeps verbal noun then some one else may ask a similar question as this discussion will be archived once settled, so why not give maximum possible labelling for words in the Qur'an as they have been used in the Qur'an and not in isolation, labelling maf'ool e mutlaq can clarify further instead of merely writing verbal noun.
But dear, there is no such description المفعول المطلق for a Noun. Verbal Noun is the proper description, and its use is as المفعول المطلق which is indicated in the Syntactic Tree bank.
Pl correct the tag in Tree for it as المفعول المطلق instead of Direct Object of verb.
I didn't say add description maf'ool e mutlaq for a noun.
verbal noun is used as maf'ool e mutlaq in this context, so in my opinion writing verbal noun alone is not enough, and writing "verbal noun used as absolute object" ( maf'ool e mutlaq) instead of "verbal noun" alone will not do any harm and will not violate any rule of Arabic Grammar.
Thank you both for your recent suggestions. At the moment, the website only displays syntactic roles (e.g. مفعول مطلق) on the treebank page. The word-by-word pages lists morphological derivation (e.g. verbal noun). In general, a word may be both of these things at the same time, since the first refers to its role in the sentence, whereas the latter refers to the surface form of the word.
Currently, the treebank covers only 40% of the Quran, but we are working on a more complete version inshallah. Once the treebank is completed, we will be able to show syntactic roles on the word-by-word page as well for the entire Quran.
You can sign in to add a message if this information could be improved or requires discussion.
Copyright © Kais
Dukes, 2009-2017. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org. This is an open source project.