# Number/gender agreement in verbal/nominal sentences



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

If someone could please tell me if my understanding of verbal vs nominal sentences and how to mark gender/number in these sentences is correct, I'd appreciate it.

- In a nominal sentence, the nominal subject is the first element of the sentence. The verb that follows it (if there is one) will agree with it in gender and number (if it is human; if non-human, it will be treated as if it were grammatically feminine and singular). For example:

الرجال يسيرون إلى السوق (plural masculine human subject, plural masculine verb)
البنات يسرن إلى السوق (plural feminine human subject, plural feminine verb)
الكلب تسير في الشارع (singular masculine non-human subject, singular feminine verb)
الكلاب تسير في الشارع (plural masculine non-human subject, singular feminine verb)

- In a verbal sentence, the subject is usually the second element of the sentence, following the verb. That verb will *never *be plural, even if the subject is a human. If the subject is non-human, the verb will always be feminine. For example:

يسير الرجال إلى السوق (plural masculine human subject, singular masculine verb)
تسير البنات إلى السوق (plural feminine human subject, singular feminine verb)
تسير الكلب في الشارع (singular masculine non-human subject, singular feminine verb)
تسير الكلاب في الشارع (plural masculine non-human subject, singular feminine verb)

So if I'm understanding things correctly, you can draw a couple of conclusions from this: If a plural form of a verb is going to be used, it is only going to be in a nominal sentence, and even then, only when following human subjects. All verbs used in verbal sentences are singular. If a sentence is nominal, a non-human masculine subject (singular *or* dual *or* plural) will always be treated as if it were grammatically feminine and singular; if a sentence is verbal, a non-human masculine subject's verb will be feminine and singular.

Am I basically understanding this correctly then? I've looked through a couple of grammar books about this and it was a bit of a Goldilocks type situation: the one book went so far in depth that I was lost, and the other didn't go into depth enough for me to be sure if I'm truly grasping the principles.

شكرًا


----------



## Mahaodeh

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> الكلب تسيرفي الشارع (singular masculine non-human subject, singular feminine verb)


This happens in the plural not in general. الكلب يسير في الشارع but الكلاب تسير في الشارع. 


Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> If a plural form of a verb is going to be used, it is only going to be in a nominal sentence,


Don't hurry in drawing conclusions. It can be a verbal sentence with more than one verb! Example: رأيتُ الرجال يفعلون كذا in which the second verb is في محل نصب مفعول به ثان for the first verb.


Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> and even then, only when following human subjects.


No, not really. Technically it's not human and non-human, it's العاقل وغير العاقل, as such, angels, jinn, and demons do take plural verbs, so do sentient aliens (assuming we meet any some day) or any other non-human yet عاقل race that we might ever meet


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Mahaodeh said:


> This happens in the plural not in general. الكلب يسير في الشارع but الكلاب تسير في الشارع.



Aha, ok so then would these be correct?

الرجل يسير في الشارع
الرجال يسيرون في الشارع
الكلب يسير في الشارع
الكلاب تسير في الشارع

يسير الرجل في الشارع 
يسير الرجال في الشارع
يسير الكلب في الشارع
تسير الكلبان في الشارع
تسير الكلاب في الشارع



Mahaodeh said:


> Don't hurry in drawing conclusions. It can be a verbal sentence with more than one verb! Example: رأيتُ الرجال يفعلون كذا in which the second verb is في محل نصب مفعول به ثان for the first verb.



At the risk of drawing another set of conclusions...should I just generally think of it as nominal sentences (جمل اسمية) having agreement for number and gender (remembering that non-human/jinn/etc. masculine plural = feminine singular) whereas verbal sentences (جمل فعلية) have agreement only for gender (also remembering this non-human/jinn/etc. distinction = feminine)?


----------



## Mahaodeh

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> تسير الكلبان في الشارع


It's يسير الكلبان في الشارع, the feminine verb is exclusively for the plural. If the plural is not broken it should be جمع مؤنث سالم such as حمّام - حمّامات. 


Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> At the risk of drawing another set of conclusions...should I just generally think of it as nominal sentences (جمل اسمية) having agreement for number and gender (remembering that non-human/jinn/etc. masculine plural = feminine singular) whereas verbal sentences (جمل فعلية) have agreement only for gender (also remembering this non-human/jinn/etc. distinction = feminine)?


No. The general rule is: if the subject of the verb precedes the verb, you use the plural or dual verb for a plural or dual subject, if it follows it, you must use the singular. It's not about the nominal or verbal sentence, it's about the location of the subject in the sentence compared to the verb.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Mahaodeh said:


> It's يسير الكلبان في الشارع, the feminine verb is exclusively for the plural. If the plural is not broken it should be جمع مؤنث سالم such as حمّام - حمّامات.



يسير الكلبان ... so then it's masculine singular for كلب, masculine singular for كلبان, and feminine singular for كلاب?

يسير الرجل
يسير الرجلان
يسير الرجال
يسير الكلب
يسير الكلبان
تسير الكلاب

الرجل يسير
الرجلان يسيران
الرجال يسيرون
الكلب يسير
الكلبان يسيران
الكلاب تسير

Is this correct?

(Sorry, I know this isn't exactly riveting stuff for a native/fluent speaker to go over)


----------



## Mahaodeh

Yes, this time it's all correct.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Mahaodeh said:


> Yes, this time it's all correct.



Great. And for feminines, would this be correct?

تسير البنت
تسير البنتان
تسير البنات
تسير القطة
تسير القطتان
تسير القطاط

البنت تسير 
البنتان تسيران
البنات يسرن
القطة تسير
القطتان تسيران
القطاط تسير


----------



## Mahaodeh

The verbs are all correct. One mistake, the plural of قطة is قِطَط, without the alif.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Thank you


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

I was so fixated on the third person, that I completely overlooked how the first and second persons fit into this system. Does the same phenomenon of subject-verb agreement in gender but not number in verb-initial sentences also occur in instances where the first and second person are the subjects?

For example, if we said "I studied in Morocco" it'd be

درست في المغرب

But what if we wanted to say "We (plural) studied in Morocco"? Would it also be

درست نحن في المغرب (singular verb because the verb can never be plural in the first position?)

or would it be

درسنا نحن في المغرب

How about "you two (dual) studied in Morocco"? Would it be

درستما أنتما في المغرب

or

درست أنتما في المغرب

شكرا


----------



## Matat

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> But what if we wanted to say "We (plural) studied in Morocco"? Would it also be
> 
> درست نحن في المغرب (singular verb because the verb can never be plural in the first position?)


No. This wouldn't work. You'd have to say درسنا نحن في المغرب or just درسنا في المغرب. The فاعل (verbal subject) is not نحن. It is actually the ـنا in the verb. If you add the نحن as in the first sentence, it would be called a توكيد من الفاعل (emphasizing the verbal subject) and would not be the verbal subject itself. It's not like ذهب المعلمون إلى صفوفهم where المعلمون is the فاعل (verbal subject).



Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> How about "you two (dual) studied in Morocco"? Would it be
> 
> درستما أنتما في المغرب
> 
> or
> 
> درست أنتما في المغرب


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

I have another question related to the topic of verbal agreement, so I think it's better if I just post it in this thread rather than start a new one.

Here's the sentence in question: كان المراسل الصحفي يكتب التقرير

Two things: (1) What mood is يكتب in? Is that indicative, subjunctive or jussive? Is the meaning "The journalist is writing the report"? (2) If I wanted to make everything in this sentence plural and retain the same word order, would it be كان المراسلون الصحفيون يكتب التقارير? Or would يكتب be conjugated as يكتبون because it follows المراسلون الصحفيون, which is plural and human (or intelligent, or however you want to label that grammatical category)?

!شكرًا


----------



## Mahaodeh

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> (1) What mood is يكتب in? Is that indicative, subjunctive or jussive? Is the meaning "The journalist is not writing the report"?


It's in the indicative. The meaning is: the journalist was writing the report. While the verb itself is in the present tense, the use of كان in the beginning implies that all that is after it happened in the past. 
I have a question, why would you think that the statement is negated? Or was that just a typo?


Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> (2) If I wanted to make everything in this sentence plural and retain the same word order, would it be كان المراسلون الصحفيون يكتب التقارير? Or would يكتب be conjugated as يكتبون because it follows المراسلون الصحفيون,


It would be كان المراسلون الصحفيون يكتبون التقارير, because as mentioned earlier: 1) المراسلون are considered to عاقلون; and 2) the verb comes after the subject.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Mahaodeh said:


> It's in the indicative. The meaning is: the journalist was writing the report. While the verb itself is in the present tense, the use of كان in the beginning implies that all that is after it happened in the past.
> I have a question, why would you think that the statement is negated? Or was that just a typo?



Not a typo, just a brain-o, haha. I misremembered كان as ليس. I actually just realized my error and came back to edit my post, but you had already answered (thanks, by the way!).



> It would be كان المراسلون الصحفيون يكتبون التقارير, because as mentioned earlier: 1) المراسلون are considered to عاقلون; and 2) the verb comes after the subject.



Great, thanks. So is كان + verb is essentially equivalent to the past progressive in English, then?

P.S. Journalists are "considered" to be عاقلون? Are you throwing some shade at journalists, Mahaodeh?


----------



## elroy

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> human (or intelligent, or however you want to label that grammatical category)


 The term is “animate.” 


Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> So is كان + verb is essentially equivalent to the past progressive in English, then?


 In many cases, yes. 


Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> Journalists are "considered" to be عاقلون? Are you throwing some shade at journalists, Mahaodeh?


 

She means “are grammatically analyzed as.”


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

elroy said:


> The term is “animate.”
> In many cases, yes.
> 
> 
> She means “are grammatically analyzed as.”



Thanks!


----------

