# لم تنفك



## Taalib

Marhaban:

I recently came across a phrase that I did not recognize, "لم تنفك", which apparently means "has been" or something of that nature.  Here is a sentence I googled that has the phrase in context:

انفلونزا الطيور لم تنفكّ تتوسّع انتشاراً في إفريقيا 


Can somebody tell me what verb this is derived from and how common this phrase is?


----------



## WadiH

Taalib said:


> Marhaban:
> 
> I recently came across a phrase that I did not recognize, "لم تنفك", which apparently means "has been" or something of that nature. Here is a sentence I googled that has the phrase in context:
> 
> انفلونزا الطيور لم تنفكّ تتوسّع انتشاراً في إفريقيا
> 
> 
> Can somebody tell me what verb this is derived from and how common this phrase is?


 
It's one of the more obscure members of أخوات كان, though it more often appears as ما انفكّ.

As a reminder, أخوات كان (sisters of kana, aka الأفعال الناقصة "incomplete verbs") turn the object from the nominal case into the accusative (ترفع المبتدأ وتنصب الخبر).  Here's a list of the ones I can think of off the top of my head:

ما زال or لم يزل
ما انفكّ or لم ينفكّ
ما دام
ما برح or لم يبرح
كان
ليس
صار
ظلّ
بات
أضحى
أمسى
أصبح
غدا


----------



## Taalib

Shukran ya achi...

Question: would the verbal construct "...لم يعُدْ" (to no longer be...) count as  أخوات كان?


----------



## WadiH

Taalib said:


> Shukran ya achi...
> 
> Question: would the verbal construct "...لم يعُدْ" (to no longer be...) count as أخوات كان?


 
I think so, yes.


----------



## Mahaodeh

لم ينفك means "to continuously do" or "not to stop doing".


----------



## Mahaodeh

Wadi Hanifa said:


> I think so, yes.


 
Are you sure of that, up to my understanding يعد is a full verb and ما is ما النافية.  If you say: لم يعد يفعل it means _he no longer does_ while لم يزل يفعل means _he still does_, i.e. it is not in the state of نفي.


----------



## licinio

Wadi Hanifa said:


> It's one of the more obscure members of أخوات كان, though it more often appears as ما انفكّ.
> 
> As a reminder, أخوات كان (sisters of kana, aka الأفعال الناقصة "incomplete verbs") turn the object ...


 
Are they not called الأفعال الناسخة ? The الأفعال الناقصة should be the ones a third weak radical, such as نفى بقي and the like.


----------



## Abu Bishr

licinio said:


> Are they not called الأفعال الناسخة ? The الأفعال الناقصة should be the ones a third weak radical, such as نفى بقي and the like.


 
The term الناقص is used in two senses:

(1) in Sarf (morphology) it refers to a triliteral verb with weak end i.e. a weak final root letter, such as دعا , رمى , خفِيَ , etc.

(2) in Nahw (syntax) it refers to any verb that acts upon a subject and predicate causing the first to be in the nominative case and the second in the accusative, e.g. كان المدرِّسُ مريضاً (the teacher was sick), which was before كان acted upon this sentence: المدرسُ مريضٌ (the teacher is sick).


----------



## WadiH

Mahaodeh said:


> Are you sure of that, up to my understanding يعد is a full verb and ما is ما النافية. If you say: لم يعد يفعل it means _he no longer does_ while لم يزل يفعل means _he still does_, i.e. it is not in the state of نفي.


 
لم يعد ممكناً
ما عاد قادراً

What would the i3rab of ممكناً and قادراً be?

It's true that عاد يعود is a "full" verb when standing alone, but so are زال يزول, دام يدوم, and انفكّ ينفكّ.  It's also true that it's the opposite of لم يزل, but there's no rule that says that it has to mean the same as لم يزل (since none of the others mean the same as لم يزل either, e.g. ما دام, ما انفك).


----------



## Mahaodeh

I'm not a linguist, but I was taught in school that كان وأخواتها are 13, they are: كان - أصبح - أمسى - أضحى - صار - بات - ظل - ليس - زال - برح - فتيء - انفك - دام. The first 8 are used as is, the following 4 need nafi (ما النافية or لا) the last one needs ما الظرفية.

We were also taught that they are not used in the actual meaning of the word, when used with the actual meaning they become أفعال تامة. Example: أصبح الليل مظلما means "the night has become dark" not "the night has become dark in the morning!", so here أصبح is one of the الأفعال الناقصة; while أصبح الصباح and أصبح القوم the use of أصبح is that morning has come literally, hence the verb is فعل تام and the i3rab is

أصبح: فعل ماضي مبنى على الفتح
القوم/الصباح: فاعل مرفوع​أصبح here is فعل لازم, i.e. it does not need an object.  The exception is for ليس which has no other use and is the only one that gives a meaning of نفي, the rest are مثبت even if it is proceeded by ما النافية or لا النافية.  Additionally, ما دام is always used this way (غير متصرف) the same as ليس, if you say يدوم that is a full verb.

ما عاد and لم يعد are used to give the meaning of نفي as well as the meaning of "returning" . لم يعد ممكنا means that it previously was possible, if you return now and try again it is not possible.  The i3rab (as I think it is):​
لم: حرف نفي وجزم وقلب
يعد: فعل مضارع مجزوم، يعطي معنى الماضي لأنه جاء بعد لم. الفاعل ضمير مستتر تقديره الأمر
ممكنا: حال منصوب​
To be frank I'm not sure about the last one (ممكنا) but I think it is حال.  By the way, عاد is also فعل لازم.  Moreover, it is correct to say عاد ممكنا (or more correctly عاد الأمر ممكنا), while in الأفعال الناقصة if it requires nafi, removing the nafi makes it فعل تام and it does not give the opposite meaning (as the case above) but a totally different meaning.  Example: ما زال الصباح مشرقا is not the nafi of زال الصباح مشرقا, as a matter of fact, زال الصباح مشرقا is not really very logical.

I'm not claiming you are wrong, I'm just explaining what I have been taught.​


----------



## Abu Bishr

Hi all​ 
This is what I found inالمعجم المفصل في الإعراب 
by Tahir Yusuf al-Khatib of the al-Khizanah al-Lughawiyyah Series, and revised Dr. Imeel Ya'qub​ 
- عاد -​تأتي:​ 
 فعلاً ماضياً ناقصاً بمعنى "صار" يرفع المبتدأ وينصب الخبر، نحو: "عاد الطقس مثلجاً". ("عاد" فعل ماض ناقص ..."الطقس" اسم "عاد" ... "مثلجاً" خبر "عاد" ت - ​ 
فعلاً تامّاً في ما عدا ذلك، نحو: "عاد المزارعُ من الحقل" أيْ بمعنى: "رجع". ("عاد" فعل ماض ... "المزارع" فاعل "عاد"ت -​


----------



## WadiH

Abu Bishr said:


> Hi all​
> 
> This is what I found inالمعجم المفصل في الإعراب
> by Tahir Yusuf al-Khatib of the al-Khizanah al-Lughawiyyah Series, and revised Dr. Imeel Ya'qub​
> - عاد -​تأتي:​
> فعلاً ماضياً ناقصاً بمعنى "صار" يرفع المبتدأ وينصب الخبر، نحو: "عاد الطقس مثلجاً". ("عاد" فعل ماض ناقص ..."الطقس" اسم "عاد" ... "مثلجاً" خبر "عاد" ت - ​
> 
> فعلاً تامّاً في ما عدا ذلك، نحو: "عاد المزارعُ من الحقل" أيْ بمعنى: "رجع". ("عاد" فعل ماض ... "المزارع" فاعل "عاد"ت -​


 
بيّض الله وجهك


----------



## WadiH

Mahaodeh said:


> I'm not a linguist, but I was taught in school that كان وأخواتها are 13, they are: كان - أصبح - أمسى - أضحى - صار - بات - ظل - ليس - زال - برح - فتيء - انفك - دام. The first 8 are used as is, the following 4 need nafi (ما النافية or لا) the last one needs ما الظرفية.
> 
> We were also taught that they are not used in the actual meaning of the word, when used with the actual meaning they become أفعال تامة. Example: أصبح الليل مظلما means "the night has become dark" not "the night has become dark in the morning!", so here أصبح is one of the الأفعال الناقصة; while أصبح الصباح and أصبح القوم the use of أصبح is that morning has come literally, hence the verb is فعل تام and the i3rab is
> 
> أصبح: فعل ماضي مبنى على الفتح
> القوم/الصباح: فاعل مرفوع​أصبح here is فعل لازم, i.e. it does not need an object. The exception is for ليس which has no other use and is the only one that gives a meaning of نفي, the rest are مثبت even if it is proceeded by ما النافية or لا النافية. Additionally, ما دام is always used this way (غير متصرف) the same as ليس, if you say يدوم that is a full verb.​
> ما عاد and لم يعد are used to give the meaning of نفي as well as the meaning of "returning" . لم يعد ممكنا means that it previously was possible, if you return now and try again it is not possible. The i3rab (as I think it is):​
> لم: حرف نفي وجزم وقلب
> يعد: فعل مضارع مجزوم، يعطي معنى الماضي لأنه جاء بعد لم. الفاعل ضمير مستتر تقديره الأمر
> ممكنا: حال منصوب​
> To be frank I'm not sure about the last one (ممكنا) but I think it is حال. By the way, عاد is also فعل لازم. Moreover, it is correct to say عاد ممكنا (or more correctly عاد الأمر ممكنا), while in الأفعال الناقصة if it requires nafi, removing the nafi makes it فعل تام and it does not give the opposite meaning (as the case above) but a totally different meaning. Example: ما زال الصباح مشرقا is not the nafi of زال الصباح مشرقا, as a matter of fact, زال الصباح مشرقا is not really very logical.​
> 
> I'm not claiming you are wrong, I'm just explaining what I have been taught.​


 
Nothing you've said prevents عاد and ما عاد from being "af3al naqiSah". There's no rule that says they all have to be identical (otherwise they would all look like "9ar" or they would all look like "ma zala"), and there's no rule that says they have to be "'3ayr muta9arrif" (otherwise they would all be). There's also no rule that says "ma 3ad" has to be the same meaning as "ma zal" (notice that "kan" and "9ar" are opposite as well).

Surely you realize there's more to our 3,000 year old language than can be contained in a middle school grammar book! Follow your "saliqah", not some random list my friend.

Now the reason the second word is more likely to be "khabar ma 3ada" rather than a "7al" is that if you omit a "7al", the verb's meaning should stay essentially the same, whereas here the meaning of "3ad" will change from the non-literal to the literal if you omit "mumkin".

In any case, this is a pedantic question, and I'm a pragmatist when it comes to grammar. Whether you treat the second word as "khabar 3ada" or as a "7aal" you'll always end up with the same result so it's not that important a question. The point is that it's going to be man9uub.


----------



## Mahaodeh

Well, that also makes sense. Anyway, as I said before, I'm just recalling what I learnt 20 years ago (please don't dwell on the number ).


----------



## Josh_

I checked into one of my Arabic language grammars, معجم لغة النحو العربي by the Arab grammarian, Antoine al-Dahdah, and here is what I found:

أخوات كان

أفعال ناقصة تنتني إلى مجموعة النواسخ وتدخل على الجملة الاسمية فترفع المبتدأ ويسمي اسمها وتنصب الخبر ويسمي خبرها .  كان وأخواتها ثلاثة أقسام:

 1 -- أفعال تتصرف تصرفا تاما:  *أصبح ، أضحى ، أمسى ، بات ، صار ، ظل ، كان*
2-- أفعال تتصرف تصرفا ناقصا:  *ما أنفك ، ما برح ، ما زال ، ما فتئ*
3 -- أفعال لا تتصرف أصلا :  *ليس ، ما دام*
​ 
ويلحق بها:  *ارتد ، استحال ، آض ، انقلب ، تبدّل ، تحوّل ، حار ، راح ، رجع ، عاد ، غدا *.
​-----------------
For anyone interested in knowing what this says in English:
(Text between [] added to help with the flow of the English text and text between () is for explanatory purposes).


Sisters of kaana
[These are] deficient verbs that belong to the group of converters to accusative (an-nawaasikh).  [When] added to a nominal sentence they convert the subject (mubtada2) to the nominative, which is [then] called its "ism" (ism kaana, ism 2asbaHa, etc.), and converts the predicate (khabar) to the accusative, which is [then] called its "khabar" (khabar kaana, khabar 2asbaHa, etc.).  Kaana and its sisters [comprise] three groups:

Verbs that conjugate completely: 2asbaHa, 2aDHaa, 2amsaa, baata, Saara, DHalla, kaana.
Verbs that conjugate partially:  maa 2anfakka, maa bariHa, maa zaala, maa fati2a.
-------(Notice that all of these are in the negative)
Verbs that do not conjugate:  laysa, maa daama.

[Verbs] affiliated with them (kaana and its sisters):  irtadda, istaHaala, 2aaDa, inqalaba, tabaddala, taHawwala, Haara, raaHa, raja3a, 3aada, ghadaa
 -------------

So, according to this there are 13 أخوات كان and 11 ملحق mulhaq (affiliated) verbs.
Maybe this is where some of the confusion arises.  According to this عاد is not considered a full member of the أخوات كان (or, as it were, a full sister ( أخت شقيقة )).  Rather it is considered as mulhaq verb (أخت ملحق an affiliated sister? ).  There is no further explanation on this, so I take it to mean that only under certain conditions عاد is considered إحدى أخوات كان .  What do  the أخوات كان have in common?   I think Mahmoud al-Batal, et. al. sum it up nicely in the "al-kitaab" series part 3:  They "delineate the onset, duration, or continuation -- or lack thereof -- of an event or action."  Or maybe Karyn Riding's description of "verbs of being, becoming, and remaining."  So maybe 3aada, when it fits into this delineation, i.e. when it has the meaning of to no longer be, it is considered a فعل ناقص and  إحدى أخوات كان , as has already been implied in this thread.  Otherwise, it is considered a full verb.


----------



## Mahaodeh

Thanks Josh, that clears it up for me.


----------

