# Genitive of possession



## Bilbo Baggins

Hello everyone,

I've just learned of the genitive of possession. My text uses three types of examples: both possessor and possession are definite, both are indefinite, and the possessor is definite while the possession is indefinite. 

However, my text does not discuss the possessor-indefinite possession-definite scheme. My text says that for the possessor is definite and the possession is indefinite model, we break the two nouns apart with a preposition. For example, بَيتٌ لِلرَجُلِ for "a house of the man." Would I do the same for the possessor-indefinite possession-definite scheme? For example, if I wanted to say "The house of a man" would it be: أَبَيتُ لِرَجُلٍ ?

Thanks.


----------



## AndyRoo

Bilbo Baggins said:


> For example, بَيتٌ لِلرَجُلِ for "a house of the man." Would I do the same for the possessor-indefinite possession-definite scheme? For example, if I wanted to say "The house of a man" would it be: أَلبَيتُ لِرَجُلٍ ?
> 
> Thanks.


 
No - the house of a man is بيتُ رجلٍ . This structure is called إضافة iDaafa, and I think you can find lots of threads on it here.


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

I'm confused; according to my text, what you posted above would be translated as: "a house of a man". My text says that when the possessor is indefinite, so is the possession automatically.


----------



## AndyRoo

بيتُ رجلٍ definitely means "the house of a man", so either your text is wrong or you are misreading it somehow. The first part of an idaafa structure is always definite (in meaning), but never has ال .


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

I see the problem. You're right as is my text. However, my original post has the preposition "Li" attached to "a man". Read it again and tell me what you think. 

Thanks.


----------



## Mahaodeh

Actually, all can be correct. بيتٌ لرجلٍ - البيتُ لرجلٍ - بيتُ رجلٍ - بيتٌ للرجلِ - البيتُ للرجلِ - بيتُ الرجلِ. There are nuances in meaning of course, some are إضافة and others are not.

I don't know why your texts says that the possession becomes indefinite automatically because that is not always the case.


----------



## AndyRoo

Bilbo Baggins said:


> I see the problem. You're right as is my text. However, my original post has the preposition "Li" attached to "a man". Read it again and tell me what you think.
> 
> Thanks.


 
Do you mean بَيتٌ لِلرَجُلِ ? This means "a house of the man". It's not an idaafa because it has the preposition ل . Idaafa's are only formed by nouns joined directly together (the last noun with or without ال).


----------



## Ibn Nacer

Bilbo Baggins said:


> I'm confused; according to my text, what you posted above would be translated as: "a house of a man". My text says that when the possessor is indefinite, so is the possession automatically.



Indeed, for me your text is right. I also think it is possible to translate بيتُ رجلٍ by "the house of a man" but in arabic grammar بيتُ is indefinite.

What are the references of your text please?


----------



## AndyRoo

Ibn Nacer said:


> I also think it is possible to translate بيتُ رجلٍ by "the house of a man" but in arabic grammar بيتُ is indefinite.


 
I don't think that's right. In "بيتُ رجلٍ" ,the word بيتُ is definite - it is defined by the following noun.

Just to back this up:

بيت رجل الجميل means "the beautiful house of a man". The adjective must agree with the noun, so بيت must be definite.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

AndyRoo said:


> I don't think that's right. In  "بيتُ رجلٍ" ,the  word بيتُ is definite - it is defined by the following noun.



Sorry, my English is bad so I'll explain in French and then I'll try to  summarize the explanation in English in another post unless someone does  it.

 L'annexion apporte : 

- Soit une détermination (ta3rîf) ce qui est le cas lorsque le mudhâf ilayhi est défini.
- Soit une spécification/particularisation (takhsîs) ce qui est le cas lorsque le mudhâf ilayhi est indéfini

Le mudhâf ne sera défini que si l'annexion apporte une détermination   (ta3rîf) mais si  l'annexion apporte une spécification/particularisation  (takhsîs) alors  le mudhâf sera particularisé/spécifié (مُخَصَّص) mais il ne sera pas défini.

Maintenant effectivement l'expression " بيتُ رجلٍ" est moins vague que "بيتٌ"  car elle nous fournie un    information supplémentaire, il est question  d'une maison appartenant à un    homme et non à une femme ou autres.  Ici le mudhâf   ilayhi apporte une "spécificité" ou "particularité" ainsi donc le mudhâf est dit "particularisé" ou "spécifié" (مُخَصَّص) mais il n'est pas dit défini (معرفة).



AndyRoo said:


> Just to back this up:
> 
> بيت رجل الجميل means "the beautiful house of a man". The adjective must agree with the noun, so بيت must be definite.


It's a good question, for me, we must to write بيت رجل جميل without the definite article.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

Hi,

Read this in arabic :

 أ- الإِضافة نسبة بين اسمين *ليتعرف أولهما بالثاني إن كان الثاني معرفة، أو  يتخصص به إن كان نكرة*،    مثل: (أَحضرْ كتاب سعيد وقلم حبر) فـ(كتاب) نكرة  تعرفت حين أُضيفت إلى    سعيد المعرفة، *و(قلم) نكرة* تخصصت بإضافتها إلى (حبر)  النكرة أيضاً.
​ 
* Source :* http://www.islamguiden.com/arabi/m_a_r_50.htm​


----------



## AndyRoo

Ibn Nacer said:


> It's a good question, for me, we must to write بيت رجل جميل without the definite article.


 
بيتُ رجلٍ جميلٌ to me would read: "the house of a man is beautiful". I don't know if it can also be read as "a beautiful house of a man".

The example in the Arabic text of قلم حبر, meaning "an ink pen" - I believe this is a kind of exception to the idaafa rule that the first noun is definite. But I think this is only used when denoting the material from or for which a thing is made (I think the word مخصص in your example applies here).

There are other examples: e.g. قطعة لحم a piece of meat, براد شاي a teapot, ساعة ذهب  a gold watch.


----------



## إسكندراني

AndyRoo said:


> بيتُ رجلٍ جميلٌ to me would read: "the house of a man is beautiful". I don't know if it can also be read as "a beautiful house of a man".


The مبتدأ must be definite in a nominal sentence so this is only viewable as an إضافة followed by a صفة


AndyRoo said:


> The example in the Arabic text of قلم حبر, meaning "an ink pen" - I  believe this is a kind of exception to the idaafa rule that the first  noun is definite. But I think this is only used when denoting the  material from or for which a thing is made (I think the word مخصص in  your example applies here).
> There are other examples: e.g. قطعة لحم a piece of meat, براد شاي a teapot, ساعة ذهب  a gold watch.


There exists no 'idaafa rule that the first noun is definite' as far as I know.


----------



## AndyRoo

إسكندراني said:


> There exists no 'idaafa rule that the first noun is definite' as far as I know.


 
Doesn't بيت رجل mean "*the* house of a man" and بيت الرجل mean "*the* house of the man"?


----------



## Ibn Nacer

It's a very interesting topic...



AndyRoo said:


> بيتُ رجلٍ جميلٌ to me would read: "the house of a  man is beautiful". I don't know if it can also be read as "a beautiful  house of a man".



In general the mubtada is defined so I think you understand this sentence like "the house of a man is beautiful" because for you  the word بيتُ is defined.



AndyRoo said:


> The example in the Arabic text of قلم حبر, meaning "an ink pen" - I believe this is a kind of exception to the idaafa rule that the first noun is definite. But I think this is only used when denoting the material from or for which a thing is made (I think the word مخصص in your example applies here).
> 
> There are other examples: e.g. قطعة لحم a piece of meat, براد شاي a teapot, ساعة ذهب  a gold watch.



You may be right, I try to understand with you ...

 But I think this is just one example to illustrate the rule mentioned just before: *...* الإِضافة نسبة بين اسمين *ليتعرف أولهما بالثاني إن كان الثاني معرفة، أو  يتخصص به إن كان نكرة*​  It seems that this rule is general. What do you think?

 In any case, it is a very interesting question.

*
EDIT : *


> The Status Constructus and the Genitive.
> ​ The idea of one noun is very often more closely determined (يَتَخَصَّصُ) or defined (يَتَعَرَّفُ) by that of another*.
> ...
> 
> * [The* تَخْصيّصٌ* consists in qualifying an *indefinite* noun by an adjective, or an expression equivalent to an adjective, as a preposition with a genitive, or *the genitive of an undefined noun*, *تَعْريفٌ* is the defining of the noun *by the genitive of a defined noun*.]


Source : A Grammar of the Arabic Language - Wright, William, William Robertson Smith, and M J de Goeje p198 V2.


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

AndyRoo said:


> Do you mean بَيتٌ لِلرَجُلِ ? This means "a house of the man". It's not an idaafa because it has the preposition ل . Idaafa's are only formed by nouns joined directly together (the last noun with or without ال).



No, no. I didn't have that second laam that I highlighted in red. I attached the Li directly to an _indefinite_ rajul, and I had the definite article attached to bayt.



AndyRoo said:


> Doesn't بيت رجل mean "*the* house of a man" and بيت الرجل mean "*the* house of the man"?



Not according to my text. I'm using A New Arabic Grammar by Haywood and Nahmad. My text says that  بيت رجل
means "a house of a man".


----------



## clevermizo

I'm not sure if there's a rule that the مضاف is automatically معروف but perhaps that's the case. (I think this has been discussed before but I can't find the thread right now.)

At any rate, we might better compare بيت رجل to the English construction "a man's house". 

Does this mean: _the house of a man_ or _a house of a man_?

Honestly, if I wanted to make sure with absolute certainty that I was saying "a house of a man" I would say بيتٌ لرجلٍ and not use إضافة. 

To me, with بيت رجل the "important" information being conveyed is that the man is "a man" and the "house" goes along for the ride as its his house. Again, I bring up the English "a man's house." There are more emphatic structures we could create to stress the indefiniteness. We could say أي بيت لأي رجل　"any house of any man". To me it depends at the moment of utterance what information needs to be conveyed.

Just my two.


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

How would you translate:    البيتُ لرجلٍ


----------



## Ibn Nacer

I modified my post #*15* to add a passage from a book.



Bilbo Baggins said:


> How would you translate:    البيتُ لرجلٍ



I think : "The house of a man"

.............​ 
 Here is an author who agrees with AndyRoo: http://arabic.tripod.com/GenitiveConstruction.htm


> بَاْبُ مَنْزِلٍ  ----- *The* door of            *a* house
> بَاْبُ  الْمَنْزِلِ ----- *The* door of *the* house
> ​





> When a noun is in the        construct state, it will not have neither a definite nor an indefinite        marker. However,* it will be always a definite        noun*, even if there were no definite article attached.





> "A" Thing of a Thing





> A final issue about        the genitive construction is how we translate the following sentence to        Arabic:
> 
> ​  _*A* door of a house
> 
> _​ *We know that it is        impossible in Arabic for the first part of a genitive construction to be        indefinite.* Thus, this kind of sentences is usually translated in Arabic        to:
> *
> ...*
> ​


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

Ibn Nacer said:


> I modified my post #*15* to add a passage from a book.
> 
> I think : "The house of a man"


At long last! I hope this is right; I would like closure.


Ibn Nacer said:


> Here is an author who agrees with AndyRoo: Arabic Online - Free Comprehensive Resource of Arabic Grammar


My book disagrees with the first.


----------



## AndyRoo

After consulting a few sources, it would seem that most agree that بيت رجل means "a house of a man" and not "the house of a man". I apologise for all my misleading statements above . It's weird this seems to be a not uncommon mistake.

So I guess for "I visited a beautiful house of a man", this would be one way of saying it:

زرتُ بيتَ رجلٍ جميلًا

though to me the vowels look a little strange with the fatHa on بيت but tanwiin on جميل.


----------



## Bilbo Baggins

Cool. Thanks for your help.


----------



## zj73

Bilbo Baggins said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> I've just learned of the genitive of possession. My text uses three types of examples: both possessor and possession are definite, both are indefinite, and the possessor is definite while the possession is indefinite.
> 
> However, my text does not discuss the possessor-indefinite possession-definite scheme. My text says that for the possessor is definite and the possession is indefinite model, we break the two nouns apart with a preposition. For example, بَيتٌ لِلرَجُلِ for "a house of the man." Would I do the same for the possessor-indefinite possession-definite scheme? For example, if I wanted to say "The house of a man" would it be: أَبَيتُ لِرَجُلٍ ?
> 
> Thanks.


I believe there are actually TWO ways of saying "A house of the man."

baitun lirrajuli

baitun min buyouti rrajuli


----------



## Ali Smith

You're right. Look at the attached file. It's from Thackston's _An Introduction to Koranic and Classical Arabic_.


----------

