# Negation of past perfect/continous/habitual



## Fragezeichen

Hello,

I've got a question about the negation of past perfect in arabic.

If you have a sentence like "كان قد كتب" (he had written) is the negation of this sentence (he hadn't written) "لم يكن كتب" or
"كان لم يكتب" ?

And what about a sentence like "كان يكتب" (he used to write)? Is the negation in this case "لم يكن يكتب" or
"كان لا يكتب"?

Thank you very much.


----------



## shafaq

Fragezeichen said:


> If you have a sentence like "كان قد كتب" (he had written) is the negation of this sentence (he hadn't written) "لم يكن كتب" or
> "كان لم يكتب" ?



To keep sense of قد كتب you have to keep it. So  it would لم يكن قد كتب where negation with  ما might create some sense shift:  ما كان قد كتب =(something) that he had written/(something) that had written.



Fragezeichen said:


> And what about a sentence like "كان يكتب" (he used to write)? Is the negation in this case "لم يكن يكتب" or
> "كان لا يكتب"?


Of course it would be as كان لا يكتب.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

shafaq said:


> Of course it would be as كان لا يكتب.


It seems that the negation "لم يكن يكتب" is correct, right ? It is often used apparently ...

What do you think?

PS : En faisant une recherche avec Google on obtient 66 100 résultats pour كان لا يكتب et 13 700 pour "لم يكن يكتب"...

Par contre "لم أكن أعرف" on obtient *376 000* résultats


----------



## shafaq

.كان يكتب =He was writing(at a certain time section ).
. كان لا يكتب=He was not writing(at a certain time section ).
. لم يكن يكتب=He never been writing(absolutely; (covering all the times)). 
It is just an intention matter. Please not that; as human being; most of all incline in to overstate our expositions. To me some people use their exaggerating right mostly in social media. 
As for  لم أكن أعرف ; it means "I never been knowing (along all the time till now that xxx was xxx" and is different than كنت لا أعرف which means "(at the certain time which the xxx was going on ) I wasn't knowing (that ..... )".


----------



## cherine

كان قد is negated لم يكن قد, for your example لم يكن قد كتب.
As for كان يكتب it becomes لم يكن يكتب. The structure كان لا يكتب is also correct, but the meaning is slightly different, although I'm not sure how to explain it.

Same for the other verb, we can say لم يكن يعرف and كان لا يعرف.


----------



## Fragezeichen

Thank you very much for all your answers.

So if I got it right, the negation of "كان قد كتب" has to be "لم يكن قد كتب" in any case in a regular sentence, but the negation of "كان يكتب" can either be "كان لا يكتب" if you want to say "he was not writing" (at a certain point of time) or "لم يكن يكتب" if you want to say "he has never written" (at any point of time)?

And I have read that in a (real) conditional clause you always have to use "كان لم يكتب" and "كان لا يكتب". Could anyone confirm that?


----------



## Drink

My guess is:

لم يكن يكتب = "he was not writing" or "what he was not doing was writing"
كان لا يكتب = "he was not writing" or "what he was doing was not writing"

Is this correct?


----------



## Fragezeichen

^Yes that sounds logical. Can anyone confirm?


----------



## cherine

Yes, I think it's a good explanation.


----------



## Arabic_Police_999

لم يكن درس negation of the ancient past
لم يكن قد درس negation of close past
لم يدرس negation of the past, in some context it means never, but it's a general negation of the past
ما كان يدرس/لم يكن يدرس/كان لا يدرس  negation of something at a particular time in the past
the difference is slight between these three
ما negation of something at the exact moment
لم negation of something before a fixed moment in the past,and at that moment too
لا negation of something after fixed moment in the past, and at that moment too
__________________________________________________________________


shafaq said:


> لم يكن يكتب=He never been writing(absolutely; (covering all the times)).



no it does not infer the meaning of never here, however if it would, it would have that meaning due to context not pure structure
900 years ago grammarians were having a fight over weather لن has the meaning of *never *included or not
one replayed
ومن رأى النفي بلن *مؤبدا*.......فقوله اردد وسواه *فاعضدا*
^_^


----------



## Fragezeichen

Thanks for this great explaination!

I have one question:
When you say "ancient past" and "close past", do you mean that when using "قد"  the meaning of the sentence is shifted (slightly) closer to the present than without that particle?


----------



## Arabic_Police_999

yes.
when you use these tenses it's something relative to you, it depends in your feeling, I might consider something of the ancient past just to exaggerate


----------



## Qureshpor

I am still not sure about this topic.

کان لا یکتب or ما کان یکتب ? What is the subtle difference?

Here are a couple of real Arabic sentences from قصص الانبیاء as opposed to made up ones.

و کان یوسف لا یرید ان یترک الامراء یاکلون اموال الناس

و ما کان یرید ان یبعد عنہ و کان یعقوب یخاف علیہ کما کان یخاف علی یوسف


----------



## Haya syr

كان لا يكتب seems wrong as a negation
It is more like a state or an adjective of a person

كان لا يكتب شعراً he has never wrote any poem in his whole life
كان قد كتب negation لم يكن قد كتب شيئاً بعد
He hasn't written anything yet


----------



## Qureshpor

Haya syr said:


> كان لا يكتب seems wrong as a negation
> It is more like a state or an adjective of a person
> 
> كان لا يكتب شعراً he has never wrote any poem in his whole life


What do you think of the two examples I have provided in #13. Are they both wrong?


----------



## love-Liebe-Lub(Arbc)

Haya syr said:


> كان لا يكتب seems wrong as a negation
> It is more like a state or an adjective of a person
> 
> كان لا يكتب شعراً he has never wrote any poem in his whole life
> كان قد كتب negation لم يكن قد كتب شيئاً بعد
> He hasn't written anything yet


 here is an ancient quote 
prophet Mohammed companion Omar once said describing someone:  كان لا يعاظل بين الكلام
kaan + laa+ present tense
I agree with you it carries that meaning, as it refers to future with respect to the time you refer too


----------



## Amin Matola

Fragezeichen said:


> Thank you very much for all your answers.
> 
> So if I got it right, the negation of "كان قد كتب" has to be "لم يكن قد كتب" in any case in a regular sentence, but the negation of "كان يكتب" can either be "كان لا يكتب" if you want to say "he was not writing" (at a certain point of time) or "لم يكن يكتب" if you want to say "he has never written" (at any point of time)?
> 
> And I have read that in a (real) conditional clause you always have to use "كان لم يكتب" and "كان لا يكتب". Could anyone confirm that?


To my understanding: كان لم يكتب all the forms point to the very past, therefore it's the same as: لم يكن قد كتب


----------

