# أصلهم وفصلهم



## Long_Tall_Texan

I would like to know the meaning of أصلهم وفصلهم in this sentence:

سؤال الناس عن أصلهم وفصلهم بسبب لون بشرتهم ينضح بشيء من العنصرية.


Thanks.


----------



## xebonyx

Their division and origins, respectively.


----------



## elroy

xebonyx said:


> Their division and origins, respectively.


 Division?  

It just means "origins."  Arabic uses two words but the whole phrase corresponds to one word in English.


----------



## WadiH

elroy said:


> Division?
> 
> It just means "origins."  Arabic uses two words but the whole phrase corresponds to one word in English.



Yes, فصل never appears in this context alone, but always with أصل.  So, أصل وفصل is, as you said, effectively one word.  What do you actual linguists call this?


----------



## xebonyx

elroy said:


> Division?
> 
> It just means "origins."  Arabic uses two words but the whole phrase corresponds to one word in English.



I see. So these are "doublets" that was just mentioned to me in another thread that I brought up.


----------



## djara

I'd add to the above that, to me, the "doublet" gives the additional connotation of being over inquisitive, asking too many questions on someone's origins.


----------



## clevermizo

Wadi Hanifa said:


> Yes, فصل never appears in this context alone, but always with أصل.  So, أصل وفصل is, as you said, effectively one word.  What do you actual linguists call this?



I believe people use the term "lexical doublet." There's a paper if anyone is interested by Hisham Jawad at Sultan Qaboos Univ. called "Arabic Lexical Doublets: Translation Strategies" that was published a couple years ago, I think. I can forward a copy to interested parties.


----------



## xebonyx

djara said:


> I'd add to the above that, to me, the "doublet" gives the additional connotation of being over inquisitive, asking too many questions on someone's origins.


 
Thanks for the extra info. I'm sure we can just say it's used for emphasis, then?


----------



## Josh_

I really wouldn't consider أصلهم وفصلهم a 'doublet' or 'synonymous couplet*', but more rather just a fixed expression.  As Wadi Hanifa said فصل never appears alone in this context.  Synonymous couplets are just words that are synonymous, or nearly synonymous, used in close proximity to each other. They do not generally occur as a set phrase.  Further,  فصل does not have the same meaning as أصل, although there is a connected meaning.  I also wouldn't consider it as one word, because the fact of the matter is, it is two words.  I would, however, consider it as having a single meaning.  

In addition to the above, the phrase also has a rhythmic feature to it in that it rhymes.  It reminds me of English phrases such as "_slicing and dicing_" or "_the ins and outs_," which also have rhythmic features to them.  

*I prefer 'synonymous couplet' over 'doublet', or even ' lexical doublet', for a few reasons actually, but the main one is that 'doublet' meaning two synonyms, or 'a couple of synonyms' (hence 'synonymous couplet'), is somewhat of a misnomer (in my opinion, that is).  In terms of linguistics, doublet has a different meaning.  Doublets are two words in a language, that although apparently different, come from the same etymological root, but entered the language by different means.  For example _pyre_ and _fire_, _tune _and_ tone_, _price_ and _prize_, _triumph_ and _trump_, etc.  A lot of doublets have related meanings (as we can see by the ones above) which I think may the cause, at least in part, of the "misapplication" of the word to refer to those words that are synonymous and appear in close proximity of each other.

None of this is to say that 'doublet' is wrong, per se, but I just think it is a slightly less accurate term than 'synonymous couplet'.


----------



## elroy

Josh_ said:


> I also wouldn't consider it as one word, because the fact of the matter is, it is two words.  I would, however, consider it as having a single meaning.


 Of course it's two words, but an accurate translation _into English _will use just one word (well, two counting the possessive pronoun ).


----------



## ayed

Long_Tall_Texan said:


> I would like to know the meaning of أصلهم وفصلهم in this sentence:
> 
> *سؤال الناس عن أصلهم وفصلهم بسبب لون بشرتهم ينضح بشيء من العنصرية.*
> 
> 
> Thanks.


 Asking people of their *descent* and *language* smells a bit of apartheid..


----------



## elroy

ayed said:


> Asking people of their *descent* and *language* smells a bit of apartheid..


 Language?  فصل doesn't mean "language," does it?

And "apartheid" is not a suitable translation here.


----------



## ayed

elroy said:


> Language? فصل doesn't mean "language," does it?
> *It does*
> 
> And "apartheid" is not a suitable translation here.
> *Why don't you give the suitable one, then*?


----------



## elroy

Well, I've never come across فصل used to mean "language," but even if that's the case, a literal translation wouldn't work here.  As already mentioned, the idiomatic translation of the phrase is "origins."

As for العنصرية, that's "racism."


----------



## ayed

ayed said:


> Asking people of their *descent* and *language* due *to skin color* smells a bit of (racism: corrected by Elroy)..


Correcting myself..


----------



## MightyMo

Hi everyone,

Just to add my 2 cents here. The word أصل here refers to racial origin, as in what racial group or tribe you are from.

The word فصل is used here to mean "class" as in social class or social standing. This expression is used frequently in Egyptian Arabic. Remember also that the word فصل is used in Arabic to mean Class, as in a School class, also meaning a chapter in a book or a document, as well as a chapter in a theatrical play. 

Also, ينضح means to overflow or to spill, and not to smell. So when a liquid overflows a container, it becomes more visible than smellable, which gives a much stornger presence and indication of its exsitance.

So for the above mentioned sentence, the word for word translation would be:

Asking people of their *origin* and *class*, due to the color of their skin, spills of a bit of racisim.

And a better translation would be:

Asking people of their *origin* and *class*, due to their skin color, shows a bit of racisim.

Cheers,
MightyMo


----------



## xebonyx

MightyMo said:


> Asking people of their *origin* and *class*, due to their skin color, shows a bit of racisim.
> 
> Cheers,
> MightyMo




So your understanding of it is that it _doesn't_ translate as one word into English.


----------



## djara

A non-literal translation of this sentence could be:
Asking people who they are and where they come from just because they [happen to] have a different complexion oozes with racism.


----------



## elroy

I disagree with MightyMo's translation. Regardless of the literal meaning, _in practice_ the phrase always refers to one's *origins* - and not to social class.

I think it's interesting to discuss the etymology of the Arabic expression, but we shouldn't let that affect the way we would translate it into English.


----------



## ayed

In *Dictionary of Maqayyees al-lluGhah*, al-Kisai' says:
*لا أصل له ولا فصل *
*الأصل : الحسب*
*والفصل: اللسان*


----------



## djara

ayed said:


> In *Dictionary of Maqayyees al-lluGhah*, al-Kisai' says:
> *لا أصل له ولا فصل *
> *الأصل : الحسب*
> *والفصل: اللسان*



Granted  but you'll agree, I hope, that --while the expression is very current today-- the wide majority of native Arabic speakers does not know that  الفصل means "language". 
خطا شائع افضل من صحيح ضائع


----------



## djamal 2008

Their origins and what seperates them.


----------



## elroy

I can't believe this discussion is still going on. 

I thought it was clear several posts ago that the most idiomatic and faithful translation into English is simply "origins."


----------



## ayed

djara said:


> Granted  but you'll agree, I hope, that --while the expression is very current today-- the wide majority of native Arabic speakers does not know that الفصل means "language".
> خطا شائع افضل من صحيح ضائع


 Thank you, djar.
I like to reorder the Arabic saying to be :
*صحيح ضائع أفضل من خطأ شائع*


----------



## WadiH

ayed said:


> thank you, djar.
> I like to reorder the arabic saying to be :
> *صحيح ضائع أفضل من خطأ شائع*



لكن عندما تترجم كلاماً، فيجب أن تأخذ بعين الاعتبار مقصد الشخص صاحب الكلام الأصلي.  هل تتوقع أن القائل الأصلي خطر على باله أن فصل تعني لسان؟  لا شك أنه لم يكن يعرف ذلك.  لهذا الترجمة إلى الإنجليزية يجب أن لا تتضمن الإشارة إلى اللغة أو اللسان إذا أردنا أن نعبر عن مقصد القائل بشكل صحيح.


----------



## ayed

*يبدو لي من تعليقك أنك تذهب إلى ترجمتها إلى كلمة يتيمة؟*
as "origins"?
*أرى -وهو الأصح-ترجمتها إلى كلمتين منفصلتين طالما أن بينهما حرف عطف(واو)وإلا صارت ما يسمى في علم اللغة بالإتباع*


----------



## elroy

الترجمة السليمة لا تتقيد بعدد الكلمات باللغة المصدر. أحيانًا يحتاج المترجم كلمات إضافية، وأحيانًا عليه أن يقلل من الكلمات، وذلك حسب محتوى النص. القاعدة الذهبية في الترجمة هي أنه على المترجم أن يعبر عن مقصد الكاتب بلغة سليمة وطبيعية دون أن يضيف إلى ما قاله الكاتب أو ينقص منه - وذلك من حيث المغزى والمقصد وليس من حيث عدد الكلمات. إن التقيد الأعمى بتركيب الجملة باللغة المصدر عند ترجمتها إلى لغة أخرى يؤدي في كثير من الأحيان إلى ترجمات ركيكة لا تعبر بشكل سلس عن مقصد الكاتب.


----------



## Mahaodeh

ayed said:


> *صحيح ضائع أفضل من خطأ شائع*


 
Personally, I would agree and try my best to follow that when _I_ speak or write; but I'm sure you would also agree that it's not practical.

Like Wadi and elroy mentioned, the whole point is to convey what the writer/speaker _intends to mean_ in the other language, not wat the phrase _technically means_ . You also have to keep in mind what people would _understand; _there's no point saying something because it's techncially correct when everyone would mis-understand, is it?


----------



## Long_Tall_Texan

Thanks for all your help guys.  I did not know this was such a contentious issue.


----------

