# في / على الأرض



## Hemza

Hello ya jami3a,

I'm wondering if both forms are correct in Standard Arabic and/or in dialects?
As a French speaker, I find weird to say "في الأرض" because I would translate it as "*dans*" ("*in*/inside the ground") but I heard it with "في" in many instances (some people surrounding me)
while "على الأرض" sounds "more correct" to me because it translates exactly "par terre/*sur* le sol" ("*on* the ground").

Or in this case, is Arabic different from French?

Thank you .


----------



## ajamiyya عجمية

Hello ya Hemza, في الأرض is correct.  It is used in the Qur'an in Surat Al-Mulk, verse 16:  هو الذي جعل لكم الأرض ذلولاً فامشوا في مناكبها وكلوا من رزقه وإليه النشور , translated as:






​He it is Who has made the earth even and smooth for you; so traverse through its sides, and eat of His provision. And unto Him will be the resurrection.

Then, in Surat Al-Kahf, verse 18 we find:إنا جعلنا ما على الأرض زينةً لها ولنبلوهم أيهم أحسن عملاً 
 
translated as:Verily, We have made all that is on the earth as an ornament for it, that We may try them as to which of them is best in conduct.

There are three more citations of the use of على الأرض in the Qur'an.  Both prepositions are acceptable, with, perhaps, slightly different meanings.  

والله اعلم 
​


----------



## akhooha

mutalima.majhoola said:


> Hello ya Hemza, في الأرض is correct. It is used in the Qur'an in Surat Al-Mulk, verse 16: هو الذي جعل لكم الأرض ذلولاً فامشوا في مناكبها وكلوا من رزقه وإليه النشور


That verse does not have في الأرض in it. However, there are many verses that do contain في الأرض , such as 2:11
وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ لَا تُفْسِدُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ قَالُوا إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ مُصْلِحُونَ


----------



## Hemza

Thank you both of you .


----------



## ajamiyya عجمية

akhooha said:


> That verse does not have في الأرض in it. However, there are many verses that do contain في الأرض , such as 2:11
> وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ لَا تُفْسِدُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ قَالُوا إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ مُصْلِحُونَ



Well, technically, you are correct.  But the grammar of the cited verse indicates that الارض is being referred back to by  ” الضمير ”  ”ها”  in ”فامشوا في مناكبا”


----------



## Arabic_Police_999

Hemza said:


> Hello ya jami3a,
> 
> I'm wondering if both forms are correct in Standard Arabic and/or in dialects?
> As a French speaker, I find weird to say "في الأرض" because I would translate it as "*dans*" ("*in*/inside the ground") but I heard it with "في" in many instances (some people surrounding me)
> while "على الأرض" sounds "more correct" to me because it translates exactly "par terre/*sur* le sol" ("*on* the ground").
> 
> Or in this case, is Arabic different from French?
> 
> Thank you .




*في *could have the meaning of 
1_ *in*
2_ *there is/are
*and these meaning are expressed by the words order
الكرسي *في *الغرفة= the chair is *in* the room
*في *الغرفة كرسي= *there is* a chair *in* the room


----------



## Hemza

Arabic_Police_999 said:


> *في *could have the meaning of
> 1_ *in*
> 2_ *there is/are
> *and these meaning are expressed by the words order
> الكرسي *في *الغرفة= the chair is *in* the room
> *في *الغرفة كرسي= *there is* a chair *in* the room



ما قصرت يا أخي


----------



## akhooha

Arabic_Police_999 said:


> *في *الغرفة كرسي= *there is* a chair *in* the room


To get the meaning of "there is a chair in the room" wouldn't you have to say:
هناك كرسيٌ في الغرفة  or هناك في الغرفة كرسيٌ ??
I believe that "*في *الغرفة كرسي" would translate simply as: "in the room is a chair".


----------



## Seeker 1

Hello, I wonder if you can help?  I am looking for the meaning of a phrase that sounds like ( phonetically)  "col shellay shellah". I cannot read arabic so could your answer be in english? Looking forward to finding out what this phrase means. Thank You. My name is Geoff.


----------



## Arabic_Police_999

akhooha said:


> To get the meaning of "there is a chair in the room" wouldn't you have to say:
> هناك كرسيٌ في الغرفة  or هناك في الغرفة كرسيٌ ??
> I believe that "*في *الغرفة كرسي" would translate simply as: "in the room is a chair".




you are translating literally
*in the room is a chair*, I think it's a wrong English sentence,  while it's not in Arabic

that's too can carry the same meaning


----------



## ajamiyya عجمية

Arabic_Police_999 said:


> you are translating literally
> *in the room is a chair*, I think it's a wrong English sentence,  while it's not in Arabic
> 
> that's too can carry the same meaning



"In the room is a chair" is grammatically sound, in English.  That said, it doesn't sound like a full thought.  It reminds me of the structure of a story, of the sort told to children, to enhance their memories, by providing fodder to, actually, memorize.  For instance, "In the room is a chair" could be person number one's contribution.  Then, person number two must repeat it, but add something new, like, "The chair was covered in animal hair", and the third person now needs to repeat renditions one and two, plus, add his own, and so it goes....  That's what we used to do when I was a young girl, anyway.

As for *في الغرفة كرسي,  *what's wrong with translating it as, "There is a chair in the room"? 

...If we flipped the Arabic word into a question and said, "هل في الغرفة من كرسي؟", which means something like, "Is there any sort of chair in the room"?  the answer could be merely   "في", which is a far leap from the original, prepositional meaning of   "في " (which is "in"), and means something closer to "yes" or "affirmative" or "there are".

This is the  " في " used to indicate the presence of a thing, as opposed to the absence thereof, which can be expressed through simple negation as "ما في ".

I am stating what seems to be, to me.  Please do comment on where I may be off-track and where I seem to be correct (if such a place be....)  Thank you.


----------



## akhooha

> As for *في الغرفة كرسي,  *what's wrong with translating it as, "There is a chair in the room"?


What is wrong is that you're including a construction in the English which does not appear in the Arabic.


----------



## ajamiyya عجمية

akhooha said:


> What is wrong is that you're including a construction in the English which does not appear in the Arabic.



Hello there, akhooha.  I can see that you are very well versed in Arabic.  I am not challenging you; rather, I am asking a question of one more advanced than myself, seeking to improve my own control over Arabic.

I did, of course, see that you have responded "...that you are including a construction in the English which does not appear in the Arabic".  ...I see that you have already inserted the verb "to be" between mubtada and khabr, to render a nominal sentence (which is permissible under Arabic grammar) into an English sentence (which requires the explicit insertion of the verb "to be" in order to translate it as a sentence rather than nonsense)?   My question is in regards to this secondary meaning of * "*في*" *which I brought up in my previous post.  In Moroccan Arabic, the word "كاءن " plays a similar role.  Of course, " كاءين " is the active participle of the verb "to be".  That made it much easier for me to understand as meaning "is there/does it exist" than it was for me to ferret out the parallel meanings from Easter Arabic "في"...

I  ---fully acknowledging myself to be in need of additional teaching on this subject--- humbly solicit responses on my theory from akhooha as well as our other resident experts.  Thank you.


----------



## idquod

mutalima.majhoola said:


> Hello there, akhooha.  I can see that you are very well versed in Arabic.  I am not challenging you; rather, I am asking a question of one more advanced than myself, seeking to improve my own control over Arabic.
> 
> I did, of course, see that you have responded "...that you are including a construction in the English which does not appear in the Arabic".  ...I see that you have already inserted the verb "to be" between mubtada and khabr, to render a nominal sentence (which is permissible under Arabic grammar) into an English sentence (which requires the explicit insertion of the verb "to be" in order to translate it as a sentence rather than nonsense)?   My question is in regards to this secondary meaning of * "*في*" *which I brought up in my previous post.  In Moroccan Arabic, the word "كاءن " plays a similar role.  Of course, " كاءين " is the active participle of the verb "to be".  That made it much easier for me to understand as meaning "is there/does it exist" than it was for me to ferret out the parallel meanings from Easter Arabic "في"...
> 
> I  ---fully acknowledging myself to be in need of additional teaching on this subject--- humbly solicit responses on my theory from akhooha as well as our other resident experts.  Thank you.



I think you are right that this sentence is better expressed with the inclusion of "there is" but this isn't due to a property of في but is instead a property of the fronted prepositional predicate in Arabic.

This type of sentence, termed a جملة ظرفية by Arab grammarians, is characterized by a fronted خبر consisting of a جار ومجرور. It seems to have more of an existential emphasis than is expressed by "in the room is the chair."

Wright's Grammar translates the following جمل ظرفية with "there is":
"There is a man in the house" = "في الدار رجل"
"Under my head there is a saddle" = "تحت رأسي سرج"
"There is a leopard in Zeid's possession" = "عند زيد نمرة"
(§127)

We can also see the logical progression of this phenomenon in the dialects where في has replaced the classical هناك\ثمة in all contexts.


----------



## Arabic_Police_999

akhooha said:


> What is wrong is that you're *including a construction *in the English which does not appear in the Arabic.



No, I disagree with you
*في الغرفة كرسي* do carry the meaning of *there is a chair in the room
*words order does create more meaning
I think that  translating from Arabic into English we had to include structures which doesn't appear in the original sentence sometimes
such as
أنا عربي_ I *am *Arabic


----------



## akhooha

> Wright's Grammar translates the following جمل ظرفية with "there is":
> "There is a man in the house" = "في الدار رجل"
> "Under my head there is a saddle" = "تحت رأسي سرج"
> "There is a leopard in Zeid's possession" = "عند زيد نمرة"
> (§127)


Interestingly enough, Wright labels "في المسجد زيد"   a جملة ظرفية and translates it as "in the mosque is Zeid"...
[§115 (page 253)]
P.S. Just for the sake of discussion, the original Greek of the Bible's John 1:1 (Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος) is usually translated into English as "In the beginning was the word" and into Arabic (using a جملة ظرفية) as "فِي الْبَدْءِ كَانَ الْكَلِمَةُ ".  It would appear that translating a جملة ظرفية with the phrase "there is" is not necessarily "better", nor is it a choice based on considerations of content. Rather, it appears to be based on more subjective considerations of style...


----------



## idquod

akhooha said:


> Interestingly enough, Wright labels "في المسجد زيد"   a جملة ظرفية and translates it as "in the mosque is Zeid"...
> [§115 (page 253)]



Then at the very least we can say it can be translated in both ways, as Arabic_Police_999 initially suggested. It would depend on the context.


----------

