# Relative Pronouns



## Jamal31

For the feminine plural relative pronoun, I have come across اللاَّتِيْ ,اللاَّئِيْ ,اللَّوَاْتِيْ. I was wondering which of these is used in classical Arabic, and if more than one, then in what context (i.e. if it is relative to the accusative, nominative, genitive cases, etc.)

I was also wondering the same for the masc. plural relative pronoun الأُلَىْ, and if it is used in Islamic texts or if its use ended during Jahaliyyah.

Oh, and to provide more 'context', a relative pronoun is a a word which is used in reference  to the following word. For example الَّذِي خَلَق means "the one who created".

List of some other relative pronouns:

ألَّذِي
ألَّتِي
الَّذَانِ
الَّذَينِ
الَّتَانِ
الَّتَينِ
الَّذِينَ


----------



## akhooha

You might want to take a look at Wright's Arabic Grammar Vol. 1 page 272:




 

Some of the forms you've mentioned above do not seem to show up in Wright's list..


----------



## Matat

اللاتي اللائي اللواتي are all used in Classical Arabic. They're synonyms for the most part (though I'm sure if you really wanted to get picky, you might find some minute distinctions in meaning that only professional linguists would distinguish between). All three can be used in all cases (it's not like the dual relative pronouns).

Similarly, الذين and الألى are both used in Classical Arabic and used for all cases.

Just a note: The dual pronouns are spelled with two ل's.
اللّذان (masc. dual nominative)
اللّذَيْنِ (masc. dual accusative/genitive)
اللّتان (feminine dual nominative)
اللّتين (feminine dual accusative/genitive)
I'd guess that this is done in order for one to not confuse الذين with اللذين, though I'm not entirely certain.


----------



## Jamal31

Thanks.

@Matat would you happen to know these minute distinctions?

Also, I have heard that الأُلَى can be used as a relative pronouns for masculine AND feminine human plurals, as well as a relative pronoun plural for inanimate things. Does anyone know if there is any truth to that?



Matat said:


> Just a note: The dual pronouns are spelled with two ل's.
> اللّذان (masc. dual nominative)
> اللّذَيْنِ (masc. dual accusative/genitive)
> اللّتان (feminine dual nominative)
> اللّتين (feminine dual accusative/genitive)
> I'd guess that this is done in order for one to not confuse الذين with اللذين, though I'm not entirely certain.



I believe the one I listed above is the Uthmani script version. I've seen it in the Quran, for example 4:16:
وَ*ٱلَّذَانِ* يَأْتِيَٰنِهَا مِنكُمْ فَـَٔاذُوهُمَا ۖ فَإِن تَابَا وَأَصْلَحَا فَأَعْرِضُوا۟ عَنْهُمَآ ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ تَوَّابًۭا رَّحِيمًا

Same Ayah in modern script:
وَ*اللَّذَانِ* يَأْتِيَانِهَا مِنْكُمْ فَآذُوهُمَا ۖ فَإِنْ تَابَا وَأَصْلَحَا فَأَعْرِضُوا عَنْهُمَا ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ تَوَّابًا رَحِيمًا


----------



## Matat

I do not personally know the distinctions or if there are any.



Jamal31 said:


> Also, I have heard that الأُلَى can be used as a relative pronouns for masculine AND feminine human plurals, as well as a relative pronoun plural for inanimate things. Does anyone know if there is any truth to that?


Yes; all of this is true.



Jamal31 said:


> I believe the one I listed above is the Uthmani script version.


The Quranic script is specific only for the Quran. In the Quran itself, you'll find the same word spelled two different ways in one verse compared to the other. The spelling rules in Arabic are not based on how the Quran is spelled. All other texts today are printed in the MSA script, including old texts. اللذان is the only spelling variant I'm personally aware of, though it may be possible that الذان might be accepted by some, though it is certainly not the common way of spelling it today.


----------



## Jamal31

Matat said:


> The Quranic script is specific only for the Quran. In the Quran itself, you'll find the same word spelled two different ways in one verse compared to the other. The spelling rules in Arabic are not based on how the Quran is spelled. All other texts today are printed in the MSA script, including old texts. اللذان is the only spelling variant I'm personally aware of, though it may be possible that الذان might be accepted by some, though it is certainly not the common way of spelling it today.


Are you sure other Kufic texts don't write it the same way?


----------



## Matat

Jamal31 said:


> Are you sure other Kufic texts don't write it the same way?


I don't know how the Kufic texts would spell اللذان in specific.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Hopefully it's ok to just piggyback in this thread. 

(1) Would it be correct to write "The title of the book that I am reading is _Moby-Dick,_" this way?

"عنوان الكتاب الذي أقرأه "موبي ديك

(2) How about if I wanted to say something like "That man who was reading died." Would it be...

 هذا الرجل الذي كان يقرأ مات 

I ask because the examples given for the use of the resumptive pronouns that I've seen never seem to end with two verbs next to each other (like in my example where يقرأ and مات are side by side) or with an equational statement following a verb in a relative clause (in my example, أقرأه موبي ديك) so I was wondering if this was grammatically incorrect, or considered bad style, or something like that. It looks a little odd to my beginner's eyes, but perhaps it looks perfectly normal to a proficient speaker. Thanks!


----------



## Mahaodeh

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> I was wondering if this was grammatically incorrect, or considered bad style, or something like that.


Oh no, it's perfectly correct and perfectly idiomatic. 


Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> هذا الرجل الذي كان يقرأ مات


The note I have here is not about the use of the presumptive pronoun, it's the unnecessary addition of هذا. While grammatically it's correct, usually we don't add 'this' at the beginning of such a sentence because it doesn't serve any semantic purpose.


Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> I've seen never seem to end with two verbs next to each other (like in my example where يقرأ and مات are side by side)


The two verbs are two separate and complete sentences, but each one of them serves as something else. Both are intransitive verbs with the pronoun that serves as the subject (هو in both verbs) mandatorily omitted because they are understood from the context. يقرأ is a verbal sentence that is في محل نصب خبر كان; the nominal sentence كان يقرأ is related to the presumptive pronoun, and مات a verbal sentence that is في محل رفع خبر for the whole sentence.

It might be easier to see how correct it is if you break it down. It is originally: الرجل مات a simple nominal sentence. الذي كان يقرأ is an additional clause that is used to describe which man it is (in leu of a simple adjective). Hence while the two verbs come next to each other in the final version, they are not directly related.

The same goes to the first sentence: موبي ديك is related directly to عنوان.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Thank you!

I see you referred to الرجل مات as a nominal sentence, despite it having a verb. I read in (I believe) Karin Ryding's _Arabic: A Linguistic Introduction_ that there are two schools of thought on this nominal/verbal sentence dichotomy, yet unfortunately they both use the same terminology. One school is that of the Arab grammarians, who define a sentence that begins with a noun as a nominal sentence, and one that begins with a verb as a verbal sentence. Then there is the school that calls equational sentences lacking a verb as nominal, and every other sentence with a verb, regardless of its position, a verbal sentence. So I take it you're in the former school of thought, then, defining sentences based on the first word in it (I guess ignoring particles)?


----------



## cherine

This is off-topic, so if you need to take if further, please open a new thread. But I just wanted to say that in Arabic, a sentence begining with a noun is جملة اسمية and one begining with a verb is a جملة فعلية, so الرجل مات is a جملة اسمية (nominal sentence). At least this is what we're taught in schools.

As for the sentence, هذا الرجل الذي كان يقرأ مات I think the only incorrect choice here is هذا because  it indicates proximity, so it's better to go for ذلك or ذاك. Other than that, I don't think it's wrong to use an اسم إشارة at the begining of the sentence. But yes, it is not strictly necessary.


----------



## Mahaodeh

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> So I take it you're in the former school of thought


I don't follow a specific school of thought, I just follow what we were taught in school: a nominal sentence is one that is composed of مبتدأ وخبر or any similar one (such as a sentence composed of إنّ وأخواتها or كان وأخواتها), a verbal sentence is one that is composed of a verb and subject (object depends on type of verb, obviously) is a verbal sentence. An overall sentence can be composed of more than one embedded sentence, but you name the overall based on the frame, and the embedded sentence based on what they are.

Hence الرجل مات is nominal because the frame is composed of مبتدأ وخبر, however, the خبر that should be a noun is composed of a verbal sentence مات (which is a complete sentence in itself because the subject is an omitted pronoun) that replaces a hypothetical noun ميّت; hence the verbal sentence is embedded within the nominal sentence that in theory does not have a verb الرجل ميّت.

I have no idea what different schools of thought say, but this is what we learnt at secondary school.



Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> I guess ignoring particles



Oh no, not really. I suppose it depends on the sentence but most particles are semi-sentences شبه جملة that act as مبتدأ or خبر hence a nominal sentence, in rare cases a حال أو صفة أو ظرف in a verbal sentence (example: في الصباح خرجتُ is verbal because في الصباح is شبه جملة في محل نصب ظرف زمان and the sentence is originally or hypothetically خرجتُ صباحا).


----------



## zj73

If these are all relative pronouns what is the difference between them and ما and من?

قرأتُ ما كتبته
قرأتُ الذي كتبته 
I read what she wrote.


----------



## Mahaodeh

ما and من are مبهمة, which obscure or ambiguous. الذي refers to someone or something specific.

In some contexts it doesn’t make much difference but in others it does.


----------



## Ali Smith

But both قَرَأْتُ ما كَتَبَتْهُ and قَرَأْتُ الَّذِيْ كَتَبَتْهُ mean "I read what she wrote.", don't they? There doesn't seem to be a difference between them.


----------



## Mahaodeh

In _this_ context there is no or negligible difference.


----------

