# collective noun - animal



## Josh_

elroy said:
			
		

> In standard Arabic, we do not use the English words:
> 
> computer: *حاسوب* (_haasuub _- literally, "computer"  )
> mouse: *فارة* (_faara _- literally, "female mouse")
> 
> However, in colloquial Arabic you will commonly hear "kombyuuter" and "maaws."


 [overly pedantic]فار  without the ة at the end is the collective noun -- "mice."  فارة is the unit noun and can be a mouse in general, whether it be female or male. So faara, in the context of computers, is just indicating the singular, "a mouse," as distinguished from the plural mice. [/overly pedantic]


----------



## elroy

There are no "collective nouns" for animals.

فأر is masculine and فأرة is feminine.  The plural is فئران.  Notice that the standard forms have a hamza that is not found in the spoken language (which is why we say "faara" and not "fa2ra.")


----------



## Josh_

elroy said:
			
		

> There are no "collective nouns" for animals.


That is wrong, there are indeed collectives for animals, but we can open up a new thread and discuss it further, if you would like.


> فأر is masculine and فأرة is feminine. The plural is فئران. Notice that the standard forms have a hamza that is not found in the spoken language (which is why we say "faara" and not "fa2ra.")


My understanding is that either spelling is acceptable. Since you posted with the unhamzated version, I followed suit.


----------



## elroy

Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> That is wrong, there are indeed collectives for animals,but we can open up a new thread and discuss it further.


 
Feel free to do so.

Perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by "collective nouns." For nouns like vegetables, there are two plural forms, one that is used to refer to a collective quantity without specifying how many, and one used to refer to a sum of individual parts, usually when the quantity is specified.

I do not know of such a distinction for animal names. There is only one plural form used in both situations.


> My understanding is that either spelling is acceptable. Since you posted with the unhamzated version, I followed suit.


 
Only the version with the hamza is standard.


----------



## Josh_

Look up faar in your Hans Wehr (page 810 in the compact 4th edition) and you will see what I mean.

Some confusion might result due to the fact that in colloquial (I'm not sure about standard) the collective and the unit noun can be interchangeable.  I have heard both:

shuft faar
shuft ba2ar
and
shuft faara
shuft baqara
meaning I saw a mouse and I saw a cow, respectively.  Same with other animals.


----------



## elroy

Ok, I take back my generalization - your "baqar" example obviously proves it wrong. I was thinking of "fa'r" and hastily applied it to all animals without really thinking of whether there were counter-examples. So yes, some animal names have collective forms, but not all of them.

I still maintain that "faar" is not a plural form - I would _never _say "shuft faar" to mean "I saw some mice." I would definitely say "shuft firaan" - just like I'd say "sabe3 firaan."

In this case, there is no standard-colloquial divergence.

"Shuft baqar" can mean _only_ "I saw some cows."
"Shuft baqara" can mean _only_ "I saw a cow."

"Shuft faara" means "I saw a mouse." [feminine]
"Shuft faar" means "I saw a mouse." [masculine]

"Shuft firaan" means "I saw some mice."

My qualified statement, therefore, is that there is _no separate collective form for masculine nouns_. "Baqara," like "khyaara," is a feminine noun and therefore has two plural forms (baqara, baqar, baqaraat; khyaara, khyaar, khyaarat). "Fa'r," however, is like "2asad," "7imaar," "7iSaan," and all the other masculine nouns that do not have a separate collective form.

(By the way, I have split this thread from the previous one.)


----------



## Josh_

elroy said:
			
		

> Ok, I take back my generalization - your "baqar" example obviously proves it wrong. I was thinking of "fa'r" and hastily applied it to all animals without really thinking of whether there were counter-examples. So yes, some animal names have collective forms, but not all of them.


I also should have included in my statement that some animals have collective, not all. I did not mean to suggest all.


> I still maintain that "faar" is not a plural form - I would _never _say "shuft faar" to mean "I saw some mice." I would definitely say "shuft firaan" - just like I'd say "sabe3 firaan."


It also sounds odd to my ear, and I would never use it that way myself, but i have heard it used that way. According to the Hans Wehr it is a collective noun. It could also be that in MSA faar is collective, whereas in colloquial it is not.


> In this case, there is no standard-colloquial divergence.
> 
> "Shuft baqar" can mean _only_ "I saw some cows."
> "Shuft baqara" can mean _only_ "I saw a cow."
> 
> "Shuft faara" means "I saw a mouse." [feminine]
> "Shuft faar" means "I saw a mouse." [masculine]
> 
> "Shuft firaan" means "I saw some mice."


I think _only_ is a pretty strong word to use, especially since we are talking about colloquial usage. I heard those phrases from native Egyptians. I think Cherine said it best in this thread when she said, "...you take it as it is, we hear strange stuff every day."


> My qualified statement, therefore, is that there is _no separate collective form for masculine nouns_.


 I had hever thought of that before.  You might be right, although I can't argue with the Hans Wehr on faar.


----------



## elroy

Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> According to the Hans Wehr it is a collective noun. It could also be that in MSA faar is collective, whereas in colloquial it is not.
> 
> I think _only_ is a pretty strong word to use, especially since we are talking about colloquial usage.


 
It goes without saying that when talking about colloquial Arabic I am referring to _my _dialect. 

I don't have the Hans Wehr on hand so I am very curious as to whether "faar" can actually be a collective noun!


----------



## ayed

Just to add..
al-Fa'r (Collective--Masculine and feminine)

Ardh fa'rah or Maf'arah--"Mouse-filled area"
*ارض فئرة أو مفأرة*​


----------



## Rosa Fernandez

A little contribution from my Cortés Arabic-Spanish dictionary:

فأر (collective; unit name فأرة ) plural فئران: mouse, rat

فار (collective; unit name فارة ) plural فيران: mouse, rat


----------



## cherine

Interesting discussion. But I have a little problem: could you please, Josh, give me more examples of what you mean by "collective names for animals" ? Is it a different thing from "plural" ?


----------



## elroy

I tried to explain it in post #4.  What the term refers to is the form used to refer to a collective quantity, without specifying how many or emphasizing the quantity as a "group composed of individual parts."  Perhaps it would be best to give some examples.

-You go to the supermarket and you see a sign for cucumbers.  It says خيار, not خيارات.
-You like to have خيار with your dinner, not خيارات.

-You would use خيارات if there is a specific group of them, or if you specify how many.  I have six خيارات; where are the خيارات I gave you?

I hope it's clear now.   I don't know if there's an Arabic term for these forms.  I think that in Arabic they are, technically speaking, singular.


----------



## ayed

cherine said:
			
		

> Interesting discussion. But I have a little problem: could you please, Josh, give me more examples of what you mean by "collective names for animals" ? Is it a different thing from "plural" ?


 
*شرين *
*اسم جمعي يعني *
*أسم عام للمذكر والمؤنث مع بعض*
*مثال:*
*حينما نقول البقر فإننا لانقصد به نوع بعينه .أي أننا نقصد المذكر والمؤنث على السواء.لا نقصد الثورأو البقرة .*
*مثل كلمة الناس: لانقصد به المذكر فقط أو المؤنث فقط بل بكلاهما*​That is, the holonym of these masculine and feminine


----------



## cherine

Shukran 3Ayed,
but I don't think there's a collective name for everything ? we have بشر، بقر، جاموس، زرع، طير، أنعام .... but the other examples given in the thread confused me a lot, they were more of plural nouns rather than collective names. Am I right ?



			
				Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> I think _only_ is a pretty strong word to use, especially since we are talking about colloquial usage. I heard those phrases from native Egyptians.


I think Elias was right. When we say bakar, it's true we mean the plural, we'd never use it for only one cow, and when we say bakara it's _only_ one, not two nor more.
Same with faar (or fa2r), I can't say شفت فيران when there was only one unless the خَضّة was too strong 

So again guys, I think we need to make sure we're not confusing collective nouns with plurals.


----------



## Josh_

cherine said:
			
		

> Shukran 3Ayed,
> but I don't think there's a collective name for everything ?


 You're right, there are not collectives for everything. Only certain nouns (e.g. fruit, vegestables, animals) have collectives.


> we have بشر، بقر، جاموس، زرع، طير، أنعام .... but the other examples given in the thread confused me a lot, they were more of plural nouns rather than collective names. Am I right ?


Which other ones?


> I think Elias was right. When we say bakar, it's true we mean the plural, we'd never use it for only one cow, and when we say bakara it's _only_ one, not two nor more.


Well, you'll have to take that up with the Egyptians I heard it from. Maybe they miss spoke or were uneducated or maybe I misunderstood or was not listening properly. I know a lot of things can be interchangable, though. Like the word 2uTTA (cat) is really a female cat, but can also loosley be used to mean any cat. Also, a lot of times, when one sees something cute, they will use the feminine form of verbs and the diminutive forms. When I in Egypt I knew several families with small and infant sons, and they would look at them endearingly and say things like, "inti 3ayza laban," and "inti Hilwa wa-sughannana wa-kalbuuza." Anyway, I am digressing.


> Same with faar (or fa2r), I can't say شفت فيران when there was only one unless the خَضّة was too strong


I never said that. I said that I have heard "shuft faar" and "shuft faara" meaning I saw a mouse. I know this because I was there to witness the event and only saw one mouse myself. But again, maybe I was misunderstanding (in fact this is probably the case as I am not a native speaker). "shuft firaan" definitely means I saw mice -- no argument there.


> So again guys, I think we need to make sure we're not confusing collective nouns with plurals.


I don't think anyone is confused here. I know that I am not.

I am in a hurry right now and am busy with school and I can't stay long, but I will provide a small list of collectives, singulars, and plurals (Egyptian colloquial pronunciation). Hopefully this will clear up any lingering confusion. I will transliterate it as I am in a hurry. If you would like me to I will write it in Arabic, but it will have to be after Thursday.

   collective, singular, plural, (English)
   7ajar, 7ajara, 7ajaraat (stones)
   samar*, samara, samaraat (fruit)
   lamuun, lamuuna, lamunaat (lemons)
   7'oo7', 7'oo7'a, 7'oo7'aat (peaches)
   burtu2aan, burtu2aana, burtu2anaat (oranges)
   tuffaa7, tuffaa7a, tuffaa7aat (apples)
   bidingaan, bidingaana, bidinganaat (eggplants)
   rummaan, rummaana, rummanaat (pomegranites)
   mishmish, mishmisha, mishmishaat, (apricots)
   beeD, beeDa, beeDaat, (eggs)
   bar2uu2, bar2uu2a, bar2u2aat, (plums)
   na7'l, na7'la, na7'laat, (palm trees)
   naHl, naHla, naHlaat, (bees)
   7amaam, 7amaama, 7amamaat, (pigeons)
   namuus, namuusa, namusaat, (mosquitoes)
   7abb, 7abba, 7abbaat (seeds)
   Tuub, Tuuba, Tuubaat (bricks, stones)
   naml, namla, namlaat, (ants)
   2aml, 2amla, 2amlaat, (lice)
   ba2ar, ba2ara, ba2araat, (cows)
   gamuus, gamuusa, gamusaat (buffalo)
   ghanam, ghanama, ghanamaat, (sheep)
   simsim, simsima, simsimaat (sesame seeds)
   duud, duuda, dudaat (worms)
   suus, suusa, susaat         (weevils)


    * thamar – Modern Standard pronunciaiton


----------



## elroy

Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> You're right, there are not collectives for everything. Only certain nouns (e.g. fruit, vegestables, animals) have collectives.


 
And not all of them, at that.


> Well, you'll have to take that up with the Egyptians I heard it from.... "inti 3ayza laban," and "inti Hilwa wa-sughannana wa-kalbuuza." Anyway, I am digressing.


 
I really think you must have misheard - I have a hard time imagining anyone confusing the two. And the example with using the feminine forms when addressing little boys is quite irrelevant - that's similar to using "7abiibii" to address women, which we've discussed in another thread. They are colloquial ways of showing endearment, not indications of incorrect usage. Speakers are well aware of the gender switch; indeed, that's precisely why the words sound so endearing.


> I never said that. I said that I have heard "shuft faar" and "shuft faara" meaning I saw a mouse....


The reason you heard that is that that's the way it's used! In colloquial Arabic, "faar" and "faara" are singular, and "firaan" is plural. Using "faar" as a collective noun would sound decidedly incorrect.

This is not the same as "baqar" and "baqaraat."


> 7ajar, 7ajara, 7ajaraat (stones)
> samara*, samara, samaraat (fruit)
> gamuus, gamuusa, gamusaat (buffalo)


I would not use the above collective forms - regardless of whether they may be correct in the standard language. I would say *7jaar*, *thamar* _(even though we don't really use this word, but that's what I'd say if I were to say it)_, and *jawamiis*.

*"7ajar" is possible but to me it means something else. I would say "laazem ashtri 7ajar lal-bet illi 3am babnii" _(I need to buy some stone for the house that I'm building)_ , but "shuft 7jaar barra" _(I saw some stones outside)_.
*"Thamara" is definitely singular.
*"Jamuus," although a collective in the standard language, sounds singular - to me. Just like "faar"!


----------



## Josh_

> I really think you must have misheard - I have a hard time imagining anyone confusing the two.
> 
> The reason you heard that is that that's the way it's used! In colloquial Arabic, "faar" and "faara" are singular, and "firaan" is plural. Using "faar" as a collective noun would sound decidedly incorrect.


 I looked up faar in the Hans Wehr and it says it is a collective noun. Other posts in this thread verified that. I then looked up faar in my Egyptian colloquial dictionary and it said faar was singular. So somewhere along the line faar switched form being used as a collective to being used as a singular in colloquial usage. So, when I heard the Egyptian speak, maybe they were going back and forth from colloquial usage to Standard usage. You, yourself, said that gamuus sounds singular to you although it is collective. Maybe it’s not collective in Palestinian Arabic, but it is in Egyptian Arabic (I looked it up to be sure) – but can also be used to mean one buffalo. This is what I meant when some collective nouns can be used, or thought of, as singular. Hopefully you see what I mean, and therefore see that I am not crazy.


> And the example with using the feminine forms when addressing little boys is quite irrelevant - that's similar to using "7abiibii" to address women, which we've discussed in another thread. They are colloquial ways of showing endearment, not indications of incorrect usage. Speakers are well aware of the gender switch; indeed, that's precisely why the words sound so endearing.


That’s why I said I digress. I went off on an irrelevant tangent and got back on topic.


> I would not use the above collective forms - regardless of whether they may be correct in the standard language. I would say *7jaar*, *thamar* _(even though we don't really use this word, but that's what I'd say if I were to say it)_, and *jawamiis*.


They are correct in Standard, and in Egyptian colloquial (which is really what I was referring to). And, yes, some nouns have more than one plural pattern. This, of course, adds to the confusion as to whether they are collective or not. By the way, other plurals for 7agar in Egyptian include 7igaara and 7ugaara – but they generally refer to dry cell batteries or eye-glass lenses.


> *"Thamara" is definitely singular.


Come on, ya 3ammi, that was a typo. You must have known that? I mean, the rest of the collectives I listed had no ‘a’ at the end. Plus, in my little end note (Which I listed such in case the word was not clear in other dialects) I spelled it with no 'a'. Further, no collective ends with a taa2 marbuuta. Anyway, I will go back and fix it.

I apologize if I sound a little frustrated, but I guess I feel a little misunderstood, or people believe that I don't know what I am talking about. I mean we already discussed the idea that we really can’t talk about grammar in terms of colloquial usage. Furthermore, given the fact that faar is collective in Fusha, and singular in colloquial usage, I do not think it is unreasonable to believe that a native Egyptian speaker would say “ana shuft faar” when referring to more than one mouse. I don’t know, it seems as though there is a lot of misunderstanding in this thread. Even I’m confused, but not about collectives.

   I really must be leaving now as I have two papers due by Thursday.


----------



## cherine

Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> You're right, there are not collectives for everything. Only certain nouns (e.g. fruit, vegestables, animals) have collectives.
> Which other ones?


You mean the ones mentioned in the thread ? well, there's firaan, khyaraat, baqaraat : these are plurals not collective nouns.

Well, you'll have to take that up with the Egyptians I heard it from. Maybe they miss spoke or were uneducated or maybe I misunderstood or was not listening properly. I know a lot of things can be interchangable, though. Like the word 2uTTA (cat) is really a female cat, but can also loosley be used to mean any cat.
Yes, A cat, not two not three. The cat's being a female or male is not the question here, no ?


Also, a lot of times, when one sees something cute, they will use the feminine form of verbs and the diminutive forms. When I in Egypt I knew several families with small and infant sons, and they would look at them endearingly and say things like, "inti 3ayza laban," and "inti Hilwa wa-sughannana wa-kalbuuza." 
Yes, and we do the opposite with girls, and call them with male adjectives (don't ask me why  )
But again, here we're speaking of masculine and feminine not singular/plural/collective

I never said that. I said that I have heard "shuft faar" and "shuft faara" meaning I saw a mouse. I know this because I was there to witness the event and only saw one mouse myself. But again, maybe I was misunderstanding (in fact this is probably the case as I am not a native speaker). "shuft firaan" definitely means I saw mice -- no argument there.
Can't agree more: shuft faar is : I saw ONE mouse, firaan more than one mouse, still a plural not a collective name (with respect to Hans Wehr). And no one would bother either determining the "sex" of the mouse  "faar" does the job pretty enough

I don't think anyone is confused here. I know that I am not.
I hope no one is confused. 

I am in a hurry right now and am busy with school and I can't stay long, but I will provide a small list of collectives, singulars, and plurals (Egyptian colloquial pronunciation). 
collective, singular, plural, (English)...
Excellent examples Josh


----------



## cherine

Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> And, yes, some nouns have more than one plural pattern. This, of course, adds to the confusion as to whether they are collective or not. By the way, other plurals for 7agar in Egyptian include 7igaara and 7ugaara – but they generally refer to dry cell batteries or eye-glass lenses.


I agree (aout the more than one plural pattern thing)
As for 7igaara/7ugaara, I just want to say they're only 2 different pronounciations not 2 different plurals (I know you know Josh, just confirming  )



			
				Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> I apologize if I sound a little frustrated, but I guess I feel a little misunderstood, or people believe that I don't know what I am talking about. I mean we already discussed the idea that we really can’t talk about grammar in terms of colloquial usage.


I'm sorry Josh if I made all this (I think that after all, my humble person was the reason behind the confusion), it's mainly because I wasn't sure I uderstood what you all meant by collective nouns, specially that some of the examples were mere plural forms not collective nouns.



			
				Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> Furthermore, given the fact that faar is collective in Fusha, and singular in colloquial usage...


As I said in my previous post, I don't think this word is collective, with all respect to Wehr. I don't want to sound stubborn   but I'm only saying what I'm sure is correct. (again not stubborn  )

Well, law za33altak ana aasfa 
cordially,
Cherine


----------



## Rosa Fernandez

Maybe you _are _being a little bit stubborn! 
I won't discuss what is and what is not collective, but I've also seen fa'r as a collective noun (unit noun fa'ra; plural fi'ran) in two different dictionaries, Julio Cortés Arabic-Spanish and Larousse Arabic-French...


----------



## elroy

Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> ... So somewhere along the line faar switched form being used as a collective to being used as a singular in colloquial usage. So, when I heard the Egyptian speak, maybe they were going back and forth from colloquial usage to Standard usage. You, yourself, said that gamuus sounds singular to you although it is collective. Maybe it’s not collective in Palestinian Arabic, but it is in Egyptian Arabic (I looked it up to be sure) – but can also be used to mean one buffalo. This is what I meant when some collective nouns can be used, or thought of, as singular. Hopefully you see what I mean, and therefore see that I am not crazy.


 
I know that you are not crazy. 

Where I feel that you misapplied what you perceive to have been a shift from the supposed collective meaning of "faar" to a singular meaning is when you extended this to _other nouns_ by claiming that you had heard "baqar" being used to refer to one cow. This is simply impossible in Palestinian Arabic - and according to Cherine in Egyptian Arabic as well. 

The fact of the matter is that *when the noun is feminine*, the collectives are used correctly, whether in the colloquial language or the standard. *When the noun is masculine*, there is *no* collective in the colloquial language. *That is why I hastily said that names of animals did not have collectives; I was thinking of "faar," which is masculine!* This discussion started because you claimed that "faara" was simply the word for "mouse," not a feminine one - and that "faar" was a collective. That is not true. I can guarantee you that no one would call a mouse that is indisputably masculine a "faara." In fact, it would be more likely for a mouse to be called a "faar" no matter what - and definitely if its gender is unidentified. 

"Jaamuus" is a similar case; if I went to the zoo and saw several of them, I would _not_ say "jaamuus" - because that's also the singular noun! 

I would not do this in standard Arabic either. Perhaps a sentence with various names of animals might help clarify.


ذهبت إلى حديقة الحيوانات ورأيت بقراً وعنزاً وحميراً وأسوداً وفئراناً وجواميساً.




*I used "baqaran" and "3anzan" because those are feminine nouns so the collective noun is appropriate.
*I used "7amiiran" and "usuudan" (regular plural forms) because those are masculine nouns that do not have a separate collective form.
*I used "fi2raanan" and "jawamiisan" because it would be unthinkable to use "fa2ran" and "jaamuusan" in this context. My explanation is that they are masculine nouns - but either way - if I said "fa2ran" and "jaamuusan" I would mean that I saw *one* mouse and *one* buffalo.

Incidentally, I think that also explains my issue with "7ajar." I would not use it collectively (if i saw a bunch of stones) because it is identical to the singular form.

Perhaps we avoid so-called collectives when they are identical to the masculine forms???



> They are correct in Standard, and in Egyptian colloquial (which is really what I was referring to).


 
I would be interested in knowing whether an Egyptian would say "shuft 7ajar barra" to mean that he saw "some stones outside." Or "Jaamuus" to mean several. 



> And, yes, some nouns have more than one plural pattern.


 
That's not the point.  The point is that I would say _only_ "7jaar" (Egyptian "7igaara") if there were several stones. 



> I apologize if I sound a little frustrated, but I guess I feel a little misunderstood, or people believe that I don't know what I am talking about. I mean we already discussed the idea that we really can’t talk about grammar in terms of colloquial usage. Furthermore, given the fact that faar is collective in Fusha, and singular in colloquial usage, I do not think it is unreasonable to believe that a native Egyptian speaker would say “ana shuft faar” when referring to more than one mouse.


 
Josh, I think the problem is that you being too prescriptive, while we are being descriptive. Frankly, I don't care whether "fa2r" is technically a collective (even though I still can't come to terms with that); I would _never_ use it to refer to more than one mouse - whether in the standard or the colloquial.

Your analysis may sound plausible in theory, but it doesn't hold water in practice. I would find it VERY unusual - I hesitate to say it's impossible only because I'm not Egyptian - if an Egyptian, or any Arab, said "faar" to refer to more than one mouse. ​


----------



## elroy

Rosa Fernandez said:
			
		

> Maybe you _are _being a little bit stubborn!
> I won't discuss what is and what is not collective, but I've also seen fa'r as a collective noun (unit noun fa'ra; plural fi'ran) in two different dictionaries, Julio Cortés Arabic-Spanish and Larousse Arabic-French...


 
Well and good, but do you have a sample sentence from an authoritative source in which it's used this way?


----------



## Josh_

cherine said:
			
		

> You mean the ones mentioned in the thread ? well, there's firaan, khyaraat, baqaraat : these are plurals not collective nouns.


I don't think anyone was claiming that those were collectives.  I know that they are not.


> I never said that. I said that I have heard "shuft faar" and "shuft faara" meaning I saw a mouse. I know this because I was there to witness the event and only saw one mouse myself. But again, maybe I was misunderstanding (in fact this is probably the case as I am not a native speaker). "shuft firaan" definitely means I saw mice -- no argument there.
> Can't agree more: shuft faar is : I saw ONE mouse, firaan more than one mouse, still a plural not a collective name (with respect to Hans Wehr). And no one would bother either determining the "sex" of the mouse  "faar" does the job pretty enough


I figured out what they confusion was about.  You believe that I am using the word firaan (*فئران* ) as the collective, right? No, no, that is not what I am doing. firaan is definitely the plural. What I am saying, or more rather relaying, is that fa2r or faar (*فأر* or *فار* ) is the collective (according to the Hans Wehr, three other dictionaries I have, two dictionaries that Rosa has, and Ayed's post) and fa2ra or faara (*فأرة *or *فارة *) is the unit, or singular, noun. And since no one would bother determining the sex, that fits fine. Maybe I should have included it in my list:
faar, faara, firaan
Yes, I realize that it is not used that way in colloquial.  And I do not use it that way.
 
I won't argue about what is collective and not, but think about this:
If you look at what animals, fruits, veggies, etc., that have collectives it is not hard to figure out why. Most of the animals that have a collective noun are herding animals -- where it does not matter so much how many there are. A lot of the fruits and veggies you would buy in bunches and counting them out is not important. The same with the grains. Not too many people would only buy 5 simsimaat -- so it has a collective noun. Mice would fit into this category because they are usually innumerable or counting them is unimportant. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule.


----------



## cherine

Latest News : Stubborn Cherine renounces !​(can't see that ? fine  )

Ok, guys, I got this "flashing" idea just a minute ago :
faar is a collective noun in fus7a (yes. have to admit that) BUT (yes, still a bit stubborn after all) when it's definite :
al-fa2r : collective noun for mice
al-7isaan : collective noun for horses
Actually it was this that changed my mind : I remembered we say الحصان العربى to speak of the animal in general, regardless of its numbers or sex (feminine for 7isaan is faras فَـرَس not 7isaana, and in Egyptian Arabic we even say farasa more than faras).

So, what do you guys think ?


----------



## elroy

cherine said:
			
		

> Latest News : Stubborn Cherine renounces !​
> (can't see that ? fine  )
> 
> Ok, guys, I got this "flashing" idea just a minute ago :
> faar is a collective noun in fus7a (yes. have to admit that) BUT (yes, still a bit stubborn after all) when it's definite :
> al-fa2r : collective noun for mice
> al-7isaan : collective noun for horses
> Actually it was this that changed my mind : I remembered we say الحصان العربى to speak of the animal in general, regardless of its numbers or sex (feminine for 7isaan is faras فَـرَس not 7isaana, and in Egyptian Arabic we even say farasa more than faras).
> 
> So, what do you guys think ?


 
Unfortunately, I don't think that resolves it.  English, too, uses the singular in such cases to refer to the animal in general, but that's not what Josh and the others meant by "collective noun."  After all, if referring to a cow here you would use the singular as well: البقرة.

Look at my sample sentence above, about the animals that you saw at the zoo.  If you went to the zoo and saw "some cows and some mice," you would say بقر (not بقرة or بقرات) but would you say فأر?  I know I wouldn't, unless I meant exactly one mouse.

I think you might be having trouble coming to terms with this because you (like me) speak and use the language intuitively, without thinking about these impractical rules.  As I said above, it really is of no relevance to me whether it is "technically" considered a collective.  I will not use it that way - whether in speech or in writing - because it feels wrong and I've never heard or read it used that way.


----------



## cherine

Elias, dana masadda2t 7asseit enny fhemt.
Let's try it again 

1- I was talking about Fus7a not 3ammeyya; though some of the examples we all discussed can be used in 3ammeyya (ba2ar, gamoos -yes, in 3ammeyya masreyya, gamoos refers to more than one gamousa).

2- Now, to fus7a. What I said is that the word can be a singular (and sometimes plural) AND a collective noun; and the differenciation is with the الـ . example :
fa2r = 1 mouse
al-fa2r = this particular kind of animals; so it's a collective noun

7isaan = 1 horse
al-7isaan = the animal horse; again a collective noun

baqar = more than one cow. رأيتُ بقـرًا
al-baqar = collective noun درسنا فصائل البقر

Any sense ?



			
				elroy said:
			
		

> I think you might be having trouble coming to terms with this because you (like me) speak and use the language intuitively, without thinking about these impractical rules.


This may be true, but it's interesting re-learning our own language according to rules we never knew of before. It particularly helps those who wish to teach their language to foreigners.


----------



## elroy

cherine said:
			
		

> Elias, dana masadda2t 7asseit enny fhemt.
> Let's try it again
> 
> 1- I was talking about Fus7a not 3ammeyya; though some of the examples we all discussed can be used in 3ammeyya (ba2ar, gamoos -yes, in 3ammeyya masreyya, gamoos refers to more than one gamousa).
> 
> 2- Now, to fus7a. What I said is that the word can be a singular (and sometimes plural) AND a collective noun; and the differenciation is with the الـ . example :
> fa2r = 1 mouse
> al-fa2r = this particular kind of animals; so it's a collective noun
> 
> 7isaan = 1 horse
> al-7isaan = the animal horse; again a collective noun
> 
> baqar = more than one cow. رأيتُ بقـرًا
> al-baqar = collective noun درسنا فصائل البقر
> 
> Any sense ?


 
Yes, of course - but as I said above this is not the same.  Even in English, one would say "We studied the species of the *cow*" (or "the mouse" or "the horse") so that does not prove that "fa2r" is a collective.

I'd like to ask you to look at my sentence again.   If you went to the zoo and you saw "mice," would you say "fa2r"?! (in fus7a!)


----------



## Josh_

cherine said:
			
		

> Latest News : Stubborn Cherine renounces !​  (can't see that ? fine  )
> 
> Ok, guys, I got this "flashing" idea just a minute ago :
> faar is a collective noun in fus7a (yes. have to admit that) BUT (yes, still a bit stubborn after all) when it's definite :
> al-fa2r : collective noun for mice
> al-7isaan : collective noun for horses
> Actually it was this that changed my mind : I remembered we say الحصان العربى to speak of the animal in general, regardless of its numbers or sex (feminine for 7isaan is faras فَـرَس not 7isaana, and in Egyptian Arabic we even say farasa more than faras).
> 
> So, what do you guys think ?


Well, *خيل *is the collective for horse.

You must be thinking about a general statement. Singular nouns can be used to make a general statement about all.  That does not make it collective.

*الحصان العربي أفضل حصان
*The Arabian horse is the best horse.
*الأسد ملك الغاب *
The lion is the king of the jungle.

*الجري تمرين جيد.
*Running is good exercise.
al-insaan laazim yi3iish
Man must live.

Do you see what I mean?


----------



## cherine

Josh, I confess : I'm a total stupid أنا أغبى مما كنت أعتقد

Ok, one last try. Let's put the mouse example aside, please, can you give few more examples of collective nouns of animals ?
Thank you. and sorry. I must be one frustrating student 

P.S. Look at the bright side: if you really want to be a teacher, you should thank me for giving you a chance to practice how to deal with students of turned-off brain


----------



## Rosa Fernandez

Cherine, don't call yourself stupid! To be honest, I got lost in this thread a long time ago, and to be really really honest, I'm not convinced yet that "fa2r" is a collective noun in the same way that "army" or "flock" are collectives (even though I supported Josh's statement because that's what my dictionaries say)! Sorry for mentioning "fa2r"!


----------



## cherine

Thank you Rosa, you gave me back some hope 



			
				Rosa Fernandez said:
			
		

> Sorry for mentioning "fa2r"!


 
Yes please, no more mice in this thread  

Josh, waiting for you


----------



## Josh_

> Yes please, no more mice in this thread


Ok.  I'll go get my 2u66a and she can chase all the mice away


*بط ،  بطة ،  بطات*
   baTT, baTTa, baTTaat, duck(s)
*سمك ،  سمكة ،  سمكات*
   samak, samaka, samakaat
*فراش، فراشة، فراشات*
   faraash, faraasha,
*قراد ،  قرادة ،  قرادات وقردان*
   2uraad, 2uraada, 2uradaat or qirdaan, tick(s)
*ذباب ، ذبابة ، ذبابات وذبان*
   thubaab, thubaaba, thubabaat and thibbaan, fly(ies)
*عث ، عثة ، عثث*
   3uth, 3utha, 3uthath, moth(s)
*بق ،  بقة ، بقات*
   baqq, baqqa, bedbug(s)

*أكلان ، إكلانة ، أكلانات*
   akalaan, akalaana, akalanaat, bedbug(s) (Egyptian colloquial)


   If there is a collective for the animal, then you use it when you talk about the animal in general, i.e. uhibb as-samak *أحب السمك* ; *نذهب إلى البحر لمشاهدة البط**.*  But, when you want to specify a quantity, you would use the plural, i.e. *أريد خمس سمكات* ; *يربي الولد ثلاث بطات **. * And of course the singular after ten, i.e. *أريد 15 سمكة** ;  **تربي الفتاة 21 بطة* .  I hope this helps.   

When there is no collective, then you use either the singular or plural to make a general statement depending what you want to say.
   This is off the top of my head so if I am wrong someone can correct me.
   If you want to make a statement about some action towards the animal in question then you would use the plural:
*ذهبت إلى المزرعة لمشاهدة الأحصنة*
   I went to the farm to see horses.

   If you wanted to make a statement about the nature of the animal you would use the singular:
*الحصان العربي أفضل حصان*


----------



## elroy

Great explanation, Josh. 

By the way, I have spoken to my dad about "fa2r" and he agrees with me: whether or not some dictionary says it's a collective, it is not used that way - neither in speech nor in writing.


----------



## Josh_

I spoke to one of the Arabic professors (the other one is very elusive, zayy shabaH, and never seems to be in his office) and she agreed that that faar was a singular noun and did not know why it is marked as collective in dictionaries.


----------



## elroy

Josh Adkins said:
			
		

> I spoke to one of the Arabic professors (the other one is very elusive, zayy shabaH, and never seems to be in his office) and she agreed that that faar was a singular noun and did not know why it is marked as collective in dictionaries.


 
Well, I guess that settles it then! 

I, too, am intrigued: there must be _some_ explanation for this crazy designation if it's found in that many dictionaries!

(I would say "zayy *ish*-shaba7," even if I mean "like *a* ghost." Don't know if this applies to all dialects.)


----------



## cherine

elroy said:
			
		

> I, too, am intrigued: there must be _some_ explanation for this crazy designation if it's found in that many dictionaries!


Maybe the mistake started with one dictionary then was copied by others. Even lexicographers can make mistakes, no ?



			
				elroy said:
			
		

> (I would say "zayy *ish*-shaba7," even if I mean "like *a* ghost." Don't know if this applies to all dialects.)


It applies to Egyptian dialect. and to fus7a too : mithl ash-shaba7 مثل الشبح, kash-shaba7 كالشبح . If we ommit the "al" we can say : كأنه شبح


----------



## Josh_

elroy said:
			
		

> (I would say "zayy *ish*-shaba7," even if I mean "like *a* ghost." Don't know if this applies to all dialects.)



Actually I wrote it that way but then went against my better judgement and changed it.  I don't know why -- it didn't even sound right when I posted it.  I know that the definite article in Arabic functions differently than the definite article in English.


----------



## Fractal7

Hello I was trying to memorise plurals in the site http://arabic.desert-sky.net/index.html

Some plurals are given as the form without ta marbuta. Are they wrong? I don't want to memorise wrong forms.

Let me put those here:


بطّة بطّ حمامة حمام يمامة يمام إوزّة إوزّ دجاجة دجاج بومة بوم نعامة نعام بجعة بجع بغوضة بغوض ذبابة ذباب نحلة نحل نملة نمل قملة قمل دودة دود فراشة فراش ريشة ريش 
 
 
Thanks​


----------



## Mahaodeh

All these words are similar to the 'baqara _ baqar' example; they are collective nouns.


----------



## Fractal7

Thank you. So these plurals are given wrong in that site. And so removing ة is not a broken plural type.

Sorry for repeating this again but I want to end this pain here and forever. I didn't see anything about masculine forms.

Are they all female animals ? If possible of course. I have no idea about insects...
Do all the male ones have different name like  دجاجة ديك  and  بقرة ثور or is it the same as the collective one or feminine one?


----------



## be.010

Fractal7 said:


> Are they all female animals ? If possible of course. I have no idea about insects...
> Do all the male ones have different name like  دجاجة ديك  and  بقرة ثور or is it the same as the collective one or feminine one?


In Classical Arabic, yes for most animals, if not all. However, not many people know these male-names of animals nowadays. You see, ديك and ثور are two of the common male-names... Some of the uncommon ones are: ظليم:ذكر النعام , صدى:ذكر البوم... 
Usually, when you need to specify a male animal and you don't know the right name of it, you could just use ذكر... e.g. ذكر البط, ذكر النعام...etc. That works for many of them (not all, of course...), and that what most natives do.


----------



## Fractal7

Thanks. That explains a lot.
So should I always specify male / female name? Or no one cares?
More specifacally, will it be considered wrong to use these below for female animals? Or should I add ة for all?
كلب عجل غنم خروف حمار ماعز خنزير أرنب


----------



## Mahaodeh

Fractal7 said:


> Thank you. So these plurals are given wrong in that site. And so removing





Fractal7 said:


> ة is not a broken plural type.



 
Yes and No, if you check "Lisaan Al Arab" (as well as other Arabic dictionaries), you will find that he gives several meanings, he would say that it is a collective noun اسم جنس, and it is a plural جمع and it is even a singular مفرد! (but he mentions that الحمامة أخص من الحمام).
 
It's also worth noting that he says:
الحمامة طائر، تقول العرب: حمامة ذكرٌ وحمامة أنثى، والجمع حمام.
 
I've noticed that in most of the other similar nouns.
 
Regarding the male/female, I read once (a long time ago so I can't quote) that in larger animals where it's easy to distinguish the male from the female, there is a male and female name (even if most people don't know it), for animals that it requires inspecting the animal to find out it's gender, then using the same name for both is acceptable (such as the case of the pigeons), but it's also acceptable to distinguish if you know the gender; for animals that it is impossible (at least in classical times) to tell whether it's male or female, then it depends on the name - as an example: it's always نملة (female) no matter what the gender is and it's always صرصر (male) no matter what the gender is.
 ​


----------



## Xence

Getting back to _fa2r_, I personally have no problem considering it as a collective noun. In Algerian, when we say, for example, كاين الفار في هاذ الدار , that means _there are plenty of mice in this house_.

Besides, if you look in Lisanu-l-Arab in the entry فأر you will see that this name is a plural in itself:


> الفَأْرُ، مهموز: جمع فَأْرَةٍ. ابن سيده: الفَأْر معروف، وجمعه فِئْرانٌ وفِئَرَةٌ، والأُنثى فَأْرَةٌ، وقيل: الفَأْرُ للذكر والأُنثى كما قالوا للذكر والأُنثى من الحمام: حَمامة. ابن الأَعرابي: يقال لذكر الفَأْرِ الفُؤْرور


 
By the way, another collective noun I haven't read in this thread is الجراد . And I am quite sure there are many others.


----------



## Josh_

Oh boy, it's brutal reading old threads sometimes.  But I'd like to think that I am a little older and wiser now, as are all of us. At that time I may have been a bit of a language prescriptionist and relied on dictionaries too much. But now I am a descriptionist and believe that dictionaries should serve merely as an introduction to a word.  The real meaning of a word is its use in the language.

Thanks Xence for the Lisan quote.  I was actually going to quote it myself in response to Elroy and Cherine's questions:



elroy said:


> I, too, am intrigued: there must be _some_ explanation for this crazy designation if it's found in that many dictionaries!





cherine said:


> Maybe the mistake started with one dictionary then was copied by others. Even lexicographers can make mistakes, no ?



In addition to the Lisaan, I looked through Jahiz's كتاب الحيوان, out of curioisty, to see how he used the word in context.  Here are a few quotes:

"القول في العقارب والفأر والسنانير"

"نقول في العقارب والفأر والسنانير بما أمكن من القول.  وإنما ذكرنا العقارب مع ذكرنا للفأر، للعداوة التي بين الفأر والعقارب."ـ
​ 
The above seems to indicate that he is using it as a collective.  Otherwise, it would seem odd that he put both  العقارب والسنانير in the plural, but not الفأر.

I should note, however, that later on he writes this:

فإن قلت: قد عرفنا عداوة الفأر للعقرب، فكيف تُعادى الفارةُ السنّور، والفأرة لا تقاوم السنّور؟
...in which it seems like he is using it as a singular, unless عقرب was also used as a collective.

Anyway, the answer as to why dictionaries list in as a collective is because, apparently, it was used as a collective at one time.  I don't think it is a crazy designation at all considering what I said above about about animals that exist in large numbers, especially small animals such as rodents and bugs (in which individuality is an unimportant matter), often having collectives to refer to them.

I also don't think it is crazy considering that languages change through time.  This of course includes changes and shifts in meaning.  This seems to be the case with فأر. The word was used to refer to mice collectively (a long time ago), but through the course of time the meaning shifted and is now used to refer to only one mouse.


----------

