# لِـ + الـ + لـ



## greg from vancouver

Hello forum.
I am wondering whether it is possible to have three "laams" in a row?  If yes, is it considered aesthetically inadvisable or is it considered perfectly normal?

For example:     لللطف أو لللطيف

"... to the kindness, or ... to the kind one"

Thanks,
Greg


----------



## nurah

Hello Greg,

as far as I know, it is grammatically incorrect to use three lams in a row when the preposition "li" in concerned. Whenever you combine this preposition with a determinated noun that begins with lam, the lam of the article al is omitted. 
If you read for example this expression:  للغة
it could be "for the language" as well as "for a language", there is no visible difference in the writing of the determinated and the indeterminated noun.


----------



## Razin'

Actually, there must be. If you mean "for *the* language" , I think it's necessary to put a "shadda" on the second laam, since the shadda represents a letter. In addition, it will eliminate the ambiguity.
People tend to ignore the shadda when writing, but from a strict (conservative?) point of view, it is not as optional as the "fat'ha" or the "dhamma"


----------



## Mahaodeh

It's not allowed, it should be written: لِلُّطف ولِلَّطيف.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

[Moderator's Note: Merged with a previous thread]
Hello

Is this correct:
 لِ + التَّاجِرِ = لِلتَّاجِرِ
لِ + اللهِ = لِلهِ 
لِ + اللَّحم = لِلَّحم 
​I think if the word begins with the letter al laam (like لحم) then the "L" of the article "al" is removed (not written) when it is preceded by the preposition al laam, is that correct?

    لِللَّحم or لِللحم (without cheddah) and  لِللهِ are corrects or no ?

Merci.


----------



## apprenantx

salut 
dans la langue  arabe on peut jamais trouver un mot ou il y a 3 lettres similaires ( c'est un peu gênant dans la prononciation )
c'est pour ça que le premier essaie est correcte


----------



## Ibn Nacer

Merci. J'ai eu un doute car on trouve l'usage de للله exemples : https://www.google.fr


----------



## barkoosh

I think it's limited in MSA to ل where you can't have three consecutive ل. But I don't think it applies to other letters. For example:
بـ (حرف الجر) + ببغاء = بببغاء
هو فتّت الصخر، هي فتّتت الصخر
هو يتتبّع الأخبار، هي تتتبّع الأخبار
و (حرف عطف) وَافق المجلس على المشروع، ووُوفق على المشروع


----------



## Ibn Nacer

Merci pour cette précision.


----------



## fre.dub

apprenantx said:


> dans la langue  arabe on peut jamais trouver un mot ou il y a 3 lettres similaires ( c'est un peu gênant dans la prononciation )



Est-ce qu'il n'y a pas au moins une exception à cette explication phonologique, à savoir الله ?


----------



## Saley

Wright’s grammar (vol. i, p. 23–24) has the answer to the original question:


> *21.* ٱ is altogether omitted in the following cases.
> <...>
> (_c_) In the article اَلْ, when it is preceded:
> (α) by the preposition لِ _to_, as لِلرَّجُلِ _to the man_, for لِٱلرَّجُلِ. If the first letter of the noun be ل, then the ل of the article is also omitted, as لِلَّيْلَةِ _to the night_, for لِللَّيْلَةِ, and that for لِٱللَّيْلَةِ.
> (β) by the affirmative particle لَ _truly, verily_, as لَلْحَقُّ, for لَٱلْحَقُّ.​<...>


But what happens when ل is prefixed to words that begin with ال, but this ال isn’t the article (e.g. التزام، التفات، التقاء)? I think the ا is retained in writing and we get the following spellings:

اِلْتِزَامٌ _iltizaam_ [2il.ti.zām]
لِٱلْتِزَامٍ _li-ltizaam_ [lil.ti.zām] (لِ + التزام)
اَلِٱلْتِزَامُ _al-iltizaam_ [2a.lil.ti.zām] (ال + التزام)
لِلِٱلْتِزَامِ _li-l-iltizaam_ [li.lil.ti.zām] (لِ + ال + التزام)
Is the spelling of (2) correct? Is the pronunciation of (4) correct?


----------



## barkoosh

Saley said:


> Is the spelling of (2) correct? Is the pronunciation of (4) correct?


Yes.

PS: Some people nowadays use همزة القطع instead, esp. with 4. It's easier for them to say لِلْإِلْتِزَام [lil.2il.ti.zām].


----------



## Saley

Thank you for confirming. I’ve seen للتزام on the web as well, but that must be a mistake some people make.


----------



## elroy

barkoosh said:


> لِلْإِلْتِزَام [lil.2il.ti.zām].





Saley said:


> للتزام


 Both of these are incorrect.


----------



## Rallino

[Moderator's Note: Merged with a previous thread]
Hello,

I have a question about orthography. When adding the prefix Li- to a word starting with the definite article Al-, the Alif disappears but the L is kept, so we get words like: القلم -> للقلم. With this logic shouldn't الله become للله?


----------



## fdb

It is the same as in لليل (not للليل). The rule is that you do not have three lāms in a row.


----------



## elroy

Which is curious, because three bā’s in a row, for example, is allowed: بِبَبَّغاء.


----------



## Rallino

Oh wow I had no idea. Thanks so much fdb and elroy


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

[Moderator's Note: Merged with a previous thread]
My question is more of a historical nature, I suppose. The way I understand it, the الله ligature is comprised of

(1) an _alif_
(2) a _lam _(which, along with the previous _alif_, represents the definite article ال)
(3) a second _lam_ with a _shadda _and a dagger _alif_
(4) a _haa'_

This is a contraction of الإله. The _kasra _on the _alif_ following the definitive article is dropped, and the _shadda_ over the _lam_ is added because it is a "sun letter" and assimilates the _lam_ of the definite article. My question, then, is why have we ended up with للّه (as in الحمد للّه) and not *لللّه? Is it simply because the people that standardized Arabic orthography found the three _lams_ in a row to be aesthetically displeasing? Is there a general principle I should be aware of like this, where perhaps a combination of letters is found to be jarring and the word altered to look better but less phonetically descriptive? Or is اللّه / للّه unique in this regards?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Ghabi

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> Or is اللّه / للّه unique in this regards?


No really unique, as shown by some of the examples above (see previous posts).


----------

