The seventh word of verse (5:13) is an indefinite feminine active participle and is in the accusative case (منصوب). The active participle's triliteral root is qāf sīn wāw (ق س و).
The analysis above refers to the thirteenth
verse of chapter 5 (sūrat
Sahih International: So for their breaking of the covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard. They distort words from their [proper] usages and have forgotten a portion of that of which they were reminded. And you will still observe deceit among them, except a few of them. But pardon them and overlook [their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good.
10th February, 2010
This could act as a tamyeez or Haal, I am not sure we can say adjective though it can fit the category. I think perhaps here the situation of the hearts are being described - what type of hearts? Hard.
Can we change it to Haal (CIRC) or Tamyeez? instead of active participle?
The verb 5:13:5 takes two direct objects and this is the second maf3ool bih. Qaasiyatan cannot be "adjective" to "quloob" because the latter is definite, by virtue of being mudhaaf, while the former is indefinite. The description "active participle" relates to the form and derivation of the word, not its function in the analysis, so there is no need to change it for a word describing its function. Perhaps Kais can explain further why the reason for the word being "accusative" is not mentioned.
Please allow me to explain the reason why we cannot yet display syntactic roles on the word-by-word grammar pages. In the Quranic Arabic Corpus, there are two related projects which are relevant here. The first, is the Quranic morphology project, and the second is the Quranic Syntactic Treebank. So far, computer analysis has given morphological information for each word, and with the help of dedicated volunteers such as yourselves, accuracy is now very reasonable. Accuracy is important because thousands of researchers and students worldwide use this website to study the Quran each day.
In contrast, the Syntactic Treebank is not yet complete and requires further manual effort. The morphology project covers the entire Quran, but the Treebank covers only chapters 1-2, and 67-114. Because the morphology project has complete coverage, we are able to state the part-of-speech, form and derivation of each word. However, the completion of the full Treebank project is required before we can display syntactic roles for each word. Inshallah, once this project is complete (hopefully later this year) we can use the information annotated in the dependency graphs to make the word-by-word pages even better. We can then mark each word as a circumstantial accusative (haal), object, possessive construction (idaafa), etc. Until then, we only have morphological information.
If you need any more information on this, please feel free to ask, I would be happy to help. In the meantime - until the Treebank is complete and we have full syntactic roles and functions for each word in the Quran - I would suggest we may want to focus on correcting the existing morphology (in particular, parts-of-speech, case endings and verb moods). There are still a few mistakes to find and correct with regards to adjective vs noun, accusative vs genitive, subjective vs jussive, relative pronoun vs conditional particle etc.
Sorry, I mean to say subjunctive vs jussive moods ('mansoob' vs 'majzoom'). In short, what I would suggest is that we may want to work on the corrections in stages.
In the initial stage over the next few months, I recommend we focus on verb moods (nominative, subjunctive, jussive), parts-of-speech (noun, adjective, verb, relative pronoun, conditional particle, etc.) and case endings (nominative, accusative, genitive), for chapters 5 to 66. If we focus on these types of correction, then that will help automatic computer analysis further on. For example, the accuracy of the treebank is dependent on case endings and verb moods being tagged correctly, since these help determine the syntactic role automatically in many situations due to inflection. In turn, once the treebank is completed, we can then have full syntactic roles (subject, object, etc.) displayed throughout the website.
I would suggest we leave issues such as gender for singular vs plurals to a later stage (although the implied gender for verb's is very important for automatic analysis, e.g. 2nd person masculine vs 3rd person feminine). To be honest, the entire concept of gender needs to be reviewed from the ground up, and later in the future I would advocate we explain in detail the different types of gender involved for each word (the primary "semantic" gender, based on the singular form, as well as gender agreement due to the function of grammatical gender). I would perhaps suggest that this can be left for later though.
These are only my suggestions, in terms of what would speed the project up with regards to feeding the computer useful information for further automatic analysis of syntactic roles. Of course all corrections are most welcome, in any order that volunteers have the time to work on. This is a volunteer project after all, and corrections are driven from dedicated individuals such as yourselves.
Mazhar A. Nurani
"the second maf3ool bih", accusative---Reference Book page 28 Vol-3 suggests the same as Abdul Rahman has said. Translation "hardened" may sound better with the perfect verb.
11th February, 2010
Thank you all for the clarification we can leave the gender issue. Perhaps Kais you can delete all the suggestions related to gender until you are ready to address it. Thank you again
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.