# تكون ابنتي هذه قد حضرت....



## the-truth123

What would the following translate to?

تكون ابنتي هذه قد حضرت دروس المدرسة منذ بدء السنة ودرست الموضوع كثيراً فلماذا لا تسمعون قولها؟

Thanks a lot.


----------



## AndyRoo

Hi,

You could translate as:
This daughter of mine has attended school lessons since the start of the year and has studied the subject a lot, so why don't you listen to her?


----------



## the-truth123

AndyRoo said:


> Hi,
> 
> You could translate as:
> This daughter of mine has attended school lessons since the start of the year and has studied the subject a lot, so why don't you listen to her?



Thanks for the reply. I was under the impression that it would be in the future perfect, i.e. "This daughter of mine *will have *attended...", due to the تكون followed by the verbs in the perfect. Would you mind clarifying please?

Thanks again


----------



## Bakr

the-truth123 said:


> What would the following translate to?
> 
> تكون ابنتي هذه قد حضرت دروس المدرسة منذ بدء السنة ودرست الموضوع كثيراً فلماذا لا تسمعون قولها؟
> 
> Thanks a lot.



Something is missing in the beginning of the sentence!
Is it translated by Google?


----------



## the-truth123

Bakr said:


> Something is missing in the beginning of the sentence !
> Is it translated by Google ?



No, it's from a translation exercise in an Arabic grammar book.


----------



## Bakr

Ok, what is before: تكون ابنتي هذه قد حضرت...ـ


----------



## the-truth123

Bakr said:


> Ok, what is before: تكون ابنتي هذه قد حضرت...ـ



 The entire sentence is in the opening post of this thread, what came before was just another sentence - which isn't relevant to this one - that I was meant to translate.

Here's the full sentence again: 
تكون ابنتي هذه قد حضرت دروس المدرسة منذ بدء السنة ودرست الموضوع كثيراً فلماذا لا تسمعون قولها؟


----------



## AndyRoo

the-truth123 said:


> Thanks for the reply. I was under the impression that it would be in the future perfect, i.e. "This daughter of mine *will have *attended...", due to the تكون followed by the verbs in the perfect. Would you mind clarifying please?
> 
> Thanks again



It's not future perfect, no - it is the present and past.

To make the future perfect you would need ستكون instead of تكون and also I think to omit the قد.


----------



## jack_1313

تكون seems to be entirely redundant in this sentence.


----------



## the-truth123

Hmm, I've attached what's written in Haywood and Nahmad's grammar. It's possible that it's a mistake on their part.


----------



## AndyRoo

the-truth123 said:


> Hmm, I've attached what's written in Haywood and Nahmad's grammar. It's possible that it's a mistake on their part.



No, it's no mistake.

Maybe I was wrong about what I said above.

But it never occurred to me the sentence would be about the future as it would seem strange:

This daughter of mine will have been studying since the start of the year and will have studied the subject a lot, so why won't you listen to her [then? now?]?

Anyway, I hope others can advise.


----------



## cherine

I can't say that Haywood and Nahmad are mistaken, but this sentence doesn't sound natural. We almost never use تكون this way in Arabic, I mean not at the begning of a sentence like this. If you add a س , it would sound better: ستكون ابنتي قد حضرت .

Is the sentence in your book in Arabic? Or is this your translation from English? Could you give us the preceding sentence even if you don't think it's relevant? Maybe it will clarify the context a bit for everyone.


----------



## the-truth123

The sentence is in Arabic in the book. Attached is the relevant passage with the sentences that precede and follow the one in question. Also, earlier on in the chapter it's written that "where it is clear from the context that the Imperfect has a Future meaning, these particles [س and سوف] need not be inserted." I suppose the author thought that in this case the future meaning can be supposed from the context.


----------



## ayed

I concur with AndyRoo's #2


----------



## the-truth123

ayed said:


> I concur with AndyRoo's #2



Am I right in saying then that you disagree with it being in the future perfect?


----------



## ayed

the-truth123 said:


> Am I right in saying then that you disagree with it being in the future perfect?


Exactly so.


----------



## the-truth123

Here's what it says in Wright's grammar. It's similar to what's said in Haywood and Nahmad's though the example Wright gives conveys the usage of the future perfect more clearly.


----------



## cherine

Wright's example shows the usage of كان in the middle of the sentence, not at the beginning. I think it's the تكون at the beginning of your sentence that sounds off or strange to all of us. As I said in my previous post, we almost never use تكون/يكون at the beginning of sentences this way. Even in Wright's example, the sentence starts with the future marker س .


----------



## the-truth123

Right, I think I understand now. Thanks a lot everyone. 

If I may quickly ask, I've attached another sentence which I think may be somewhat similar except that it uses the jussive of كان. Would I be correct in translating it to something like: "The minister was not allowing for a man to sit at his side", as opposed to: "The minister did not allow for a man to sit at his side" which would be the case were يكن to be omitted? 

If that's not right then what _would_ be the difference between the attached and the sentence we would get if the يكن were omitted? (Assuming that this isn't a strange case like the last one was)


----------



## ayed

_The minister would not allow for a man to sit at his side_


----------

