# explicit dual



## Whodunit

I guess that one uses the word "اثنان + dual noun" to express the explicit dual, i.e. to emphasize that you mean "two men" (e.g.) and not "three men".

Is that true or is it uncommon to use اثنان + noun instead of a normal dual noun?


----------



## cherine

If you could provide precise examples that would make your question clearer, at least to me 

But to me, as long as the context is clear we don't use the words اثنان-اثنتان-اثنين-اثنتين  .

Still waiting for further, more precise, examples (of course if only you wish so)


----------



## Whodunit

Okay, let me write one example sentence and then you can tell me which one sounds most natural to you. 

(Only) two (and not three) men are going to the two churches.

*.يذهبان رجلان اثنان الى الكنيستان الثانية*
*.يذهبان رجلان الى الكنيستان*
*.يذهبان رجلان اثنان الى الكنيستان*​


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> (Only) two (and not three) men are going to the two churches.
> 
> *.يذهبان رجلان اثنان الى الكنيستين الاثنتين*
> *.يذهبان رجلان الى الكنيستين*
> * .يذهبان رجلان اثنان الى الكنيستين*​


#3 is the one that expresses what you want to say. You are right; *اثنان *can be used *after* a dual noun to emphasize that there are two, no more and no less. 
#2 is neutral.
#1 emphasizes that there are *two* mean and *two* churches.


----------



## Whodunit

Thanks for the corrections (ahh, genitive! ) and your thorough explanations.



			
				elroy said:
			
		

> #3 is the one that expresses what you want to say. You are right; *اثنان *can be used *after* a dual noun to emphasize that there are two, no more and no less.


 
When can it be used before a noun?


----------



## cherine

Dear Daniel, sorry to give you bad news, but all three sentences have mistakes (but the second one is the best, the more correct) :

First, when the verb comes at the begining of the sentence it's conjugated as singular (even with dual and plural)

Second : you forgot to put the correct declination for the churches.

Third, and most important, the word ithaan is not necessary in either of the three sentences.

On more thing : in the first sentence, the word ثانية means "second" not "two", you should've used الكنيستين الاثنتين (if you wanted, but again it's not necessary)

*.يذهب رجلان اثنان إلى الكنيستين الثانية*
*.يذهب رجلان إلى الكنيستين*

*.يذهب رجلان اثنان إلى الكنيستين*​


----------



## cherine

Ok, again I come few minutes late after al mudir (fair enough) 


			
				Whodunit said:
			
		

> When can it be used before a noun?


In one case -to my knowledge- when you say اثنان من 
like : اثنان من الرجال، اثنتان من النساء، اثنان من التلاميذ


----------



## Whodunit

cherine said:
			
		

> Dear Daniel, sorry to give you bad news, but all three sentences have mistakes (but the second one is the best, the more correct):


 
No problem. I'm still learning. 



> First, when the verb comes at the begining of the sentence it's conjugated as singular (even with dual and plural)


 
Well, I didn't know that that holds for the dual as well. Thanks for your correction. But why didn't Elroy correct it?



> Second : you forgot to put the correct declination for the churches.


 
Yes, because I considered it nominative. 



> Third, and most important, the word ithaan is not necessary in either of the three sentences.


 
Even not if I want to emphasize that there are two men only? 



> On more thing : in the first sentence, the word ثانية means "second" not "two", you should've used الكنيستين الاثنتين (if you wanted, but again it's not necessary)


 
Ok, that was a stupid mistake.


----------



## Josh_

cherine said:
			
		

> Third, and most important, the word ithaan is not necessary in either of the three sentences.


Yes, we all realize that, but it _can_ be used for emphasis, right? Like you can use waaHid to emphasize that only one of something is intended -- اشتريت قميسا واحدا (فقظ( .


----------



## cherine

Ok, you're both right about the emphasizing role of "ithnaan". What I meant to say is that using it is not indispensable.

Josh, qamiis is written with a ص not a س 

As for Elroy's not correcting the verbs يذهبان I think it's because he was paying more attention to the rest of the sentence (the part with ithnaan)


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> Well, I didn't know that that holds for the dual as well. Thanks for your correction. But why didn't Elroy correct it?


Oversight. The mudír is not perfect. 


			
				Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> Yes, we all realize that, but it _can_ be used for emphasis, right? Like you can use waaHid to emphasize that only one of something is intended -- اشتريت قميصا واحدا (فقط) .


Yes, Josh, you can.


----------



## Josh_

Curses! Those crazy typos get me again.


----------



## zooz

> Even not if I want to emphasize that there are two men only?


 
The word *رجلان* is already emphasizing on the duality, as well as *كنيستين*.


Cherine's corrections are quite fair. However, I'd say either:
*يذهب رجلان إلى الكنيستين*
or
*يذهب رجلان إلى كنيستين اثنتين*

*الكنيستين الاثنتين* could be correct, or not, but it doesn't sound lithe for me in that example.




> No problem. I'm still learning.


 
Believe me, you're doing better than many natives. 




> Curses! Those crazy typos get me again.


 
In some forums there are the "spell check" feature. If it's available in Arabic, that'd be something, Josh.


----------



## elroy

zooz said:
			
		

> The word *رجلان* is already emphasizing on the duality, as well as *كنيستين*.


Hm, I don't think those forms express emphasis.  They simply say that there are two, but there's no special emphasis on the fact that there are two.  


> *يذهب رجلان إلى كنيستين اثنتين*
> 
> *الكنيستين الاثنتين* could be correct, or not, but it doesn't sound lithe for me in that example.


I think the difference is that the first means "two churches" while the second means "*the* two churches."  Both are correct.


----------



## zooz

elroy said:
			
		

> Hm, I don't think those forms express emphasis. They simply say that there are two, but there's no special emphasis on the fact that there are two.


 
Is there any possibility other than they refer to two persons or objects??


----------



## Whodunit

zooz said:
			
		

> Is there any possibility other than they refer to two persons or objects??


 
In English you can say "only two men" or "exactly two men". I thought that one could omit the adverb in Arabic if you use إثنان.


----------



## elroy

zooz said:
			
		

> Is there any possibility other than they refer to two persons or objects??


 
No, but there's no emphasis.

When you emphasize something, you repeat it or express it more forcefully in some way, to make it stick out.


----------



## elroy

Whodunit said:
			
		

> In English you can say "only two men" or "exactly two men". I thought that one could omit the adverb in Arabic if you use إثنان.


No, اثنان does not correspond to "exactly" or "only." As Zooz said, رجلان already means "exactly/only two men." The اثنان is used for emphasis.

For example,

لم أر رجلاً واحداً بل رجلين اثنين
I did not see one man, but *two* men.

In English the emphasis is accomplished by intonation only - by laying emphasis on the word "two" when pronouncing it.


----------



## Whodunit

elroy said:
			
		

> No, اثنان does not correspond to "exactly" or "only." As Zooz said, رجلان already means "exactly/only two men." The اثنان is used for emphasis.
> 
> For example,
> 
> لم أر رجلاً واحداً بل رجلين اثنين
> I did not see one man, but *two* men.
> 
> In English the emphasis is accomplished by intonation only - by laying emphasis on the word "two" when pronouncing it.


 
When I say "exactly two men" it means the same as "two men, and not only one or three".


----------



## ausermilar

Hello!

Two Egyptian-speaker friends of mine have told me that in Egyptian we must use numerals instead of duals when we talk about amounts (at the shop and in recipes : اتنين مشمش ), when we talk about money (اتنين جنيه) and... when we talk about people (and the example was اتنين مهندسين, pronounced "muhandisiin", sound plural).  
BUT, my teacher says بنتين  ، ولدين and uses the  dual ending with people, and now I don't see clearly what's this rule about persons and duals.

Has any sense this rule  about the limitation of duals to things (and animals, maybe)?

Thanks for your help.


----------



## cherine

ausermilar said:


> Hello!
> 
> Two Egyptian-speaker friends of mine have told me that in Egyptian we must use numerals instead of duals when we talk about amounts (at the shop and in recipes : اتنين مشمش ), when we talk about money (اتنين جنيه) and... when we talk about people (and the example was اتنين مهندسين, pronounced "muhandisiin", sound plural).
> BUT, my teacher says بنتين  ، ولدين and uses the  dual ending with people, and now I don't see clearly what's this rule about persons and duals.
> 
> Has any sense this rule  about the limitation of duals to things (and animals, maybe)?
> 
> Thanks for your help.


Hi,

I've been trying several examples in my mind, and I think you're friends are neither entirely wrong nor entirely correct. Some words are usually or more commonly used with the word اتنين, maybe because the dual can be confused with the plural, like the 2 engineers example مهندسين. It sounds clearer to say etneen mohandesiin than mohandeseen. The same for two male teachers اتنين مدرسين not modareseen.
I don't know what they mean by اتنين مشمش, are they referring to kilos? If so, then yes we always sasy اتنين كيلو, but for grams, meters, litres... we say جرامين، مترين، لترين.
Double-check with your friends if they say بنتين، ولدين، مُدَرِّستين، رَجْلين (but اتنين ستات, though setteteen is also used even if less commonly), and please let us know what they'll say.


----------

