# subjunctive



## jmt356

Is there only an active and passive subjunctive in Arabic or are there also perfect, present and future subjunctive forms in Arabic?


----------



## ayed

It would be better had you given some examples.


----------



## Qureshpor

jmt356 said:


> Is there only an active and passive subjunctive in Arabic or are there also perfect, present and future subjunctive forms in Arabic?


The subjunctive form is only in the imperfect form of the verb. As you will no doubt be aware, it is used after certain particles like 2an, lan etc


----------



## dkarjala

jmt356 said:


> Is there only an active and passive subjunctive in Arabic or are there also perfect, present and future subjunctive forms in Arabic?



Active and passive are very broad categories that can apply to the present, past and future. As Qureshpor said, only the imperfect/'present' form can be subjunctive, even if the referenced action is in the past. For example, "before he went to the school" would be 

قبل أنْ يذهبَ إلى المدرسة


----------



## jmt356

I have been reading about this and it appears that the answer is that the only forms of the subjunctive that are available are the active (_e.g._, يَفْعَلَ) and passive (_e.g._, يُفْعَلَ) forms. 

However, while the subjunctive is a mood of the imperfect, the tense does not necessarily need to be the present. For example, 

Future Tense
Example: لن أعْرِفَ حتى آذار (I will not know until March).

Past Tense
Example: قبل أنْ يذهبَ إلى المدرسة (before he went to the school)


----------



## Tensor78

jmt356 said:


> Is there only an active and passive subjunctive in Arabic or are there also perfect, present and future subjunctive forms in Arabic?



Hi,

I think that you're conflating a few concepts here. Active and passive refer to voice while the perfect and imperfect are tenses. Of course, the subjunctive is a mood. All three concepts constitute different aspects of verbage. 

However, the bottom line is that the subjunctive is a mood of the imperfect tense only. The perfect tense exists in the indicative mood only. 



dkarjala said:


> For example, "before he went to the school" would be
> 
> قبل أنْ يذهبَ إلى المدرسة



Technically, wouldn't your example mean: before he _goes_ to the school  ???

"Before he went to the school" should be: qabla 'an dhahaba 'ilaa almadrasa(t) = qablamaa dhahaba 'ilaa almadrasa(t)  No???

Or, is it the case that the tense of the subjunctive (in translation) is governed by the tense of the verb in the main clause? Example:

I wrote before he went to school = katabtu qabla 'an yadhahaba 'ilaa almadrasa(t) (I was told that this sort of thing is wrong by another native speaker here)

I write before he goes to school = 'aktubu qabla 'an yadhahaba 'ilaa almadrasa(t) 

What do you think about these? 

Thanks.


----------



## dkarjala

Tensor78 said:


> goes[/I] to the school  ???
> 
> "Before he went to the school" should be: qabla 'an dhahaba 'ilaa almadrasa(t) = qablamaa dhahaba 'ilaa almadrasa(t)



The second example here is borderline 3aamiyya - as for the first, generally it is considered improper. You are allowed to switch from past to present with بعد أن because there is a semantic difference in terms of the independent verb. 

After I saw him, I died (I saw him, and I died)
After I see him, I'll die (I'll see him, I'll definitely die)

Before I saw him, I died (I didn't see him, but I died)
Before I see him, I'll die (I won't see him, but I'll die)

Notice that with "before" only one of the actions _has_ to occur, whereas with 'after', both actions will occur or have occured. And the subjunctive in Arabic is used for things that may or may not ever happen, so therefore it is ok to leave the verb after قبل أن in the subjunctive no matter what the tense. At any rate, this is what's taught in the textbooks and grammars (though not with the illustration I gave - it's more of a perspective than a rigorous explanation). In practice, you will see counter examples of course.


----------



## cherine

Regardless the meaning, I think what Tensor wanted to say is that the Arabic verb is in المضارع. It's the structure that gives the meaning of the past.
But we don't say قبل أن رأيته.


----------



## dkarjala

cherine said:


> Regardless the meaning, I think what Tensor wanted to say is that the Arabic verb is in المضارع. It's the structure that gives the meaning of the past.
> But we don't say قبل أن رأيته.



Exactly. And this was confusing to him and others because in English we say "before I *saw *him" and "before I *see *him" but both are in the مضارع منصوب in Arabic.


----------



## jmt356

Tensor78 said:


> I think that you're conflating a few concepts here. Active and passive refer to voice while the perfect and imperfect are tenses. Of course, the subjunctive is a mood. All three concepts constitute different aspects of verbage.


 
Actually, although perfect and imperfect are tenses in many Western languages, such as English and Spanish, in Arabic they are not tenses. They simply refer to whether an action has been complete. If an action has been complete, it is in the perfect; if it has not, it is in the imperfect. 

Both the imperfect and the imperfect can be in the past, present or future tense. For example: 

Past Imperfect
كانَ يَكْتُبُ
He was writing.

Present Imperfect
يَكْتُبُ
He is writing. 

Future Imperfect
سَيَكْتُبُ 
He will write. 

There are therefore _four _rather than three concepts to be aware of in Arabic verbs: 
- Completion of the act (governed by perfect and imperfect usage)
- Voice (active or passive)
- Tense (past, present, future)
- Mood (indicative, subjunctive, jussive and imperative, all within the imperfect)



dkarjala said:


> Exactly. And this was confusing to him and others because in English we say "before I saw him" and "before I see him" but both are in the مضارع منصوب in Arabic.


Does مضارع منصوب mean imperfect subjunctive?


----------



## dkarjala

jmt356 said:


> There are therefore _four _rather than three concepts to be aware of in Arabic verbs:
> - Completion of the act (governed by perfect and imperfect usage)
> - Voice (active or passive)
> - Tense (past, present, future)
> - Mood (indicative, subjunctive, jussive and imperative, all within the imperfect)



Your first category is generally called "aspect" if you want a succinct term for it.

It's true that the uses of the past and present in Arabic are sensitive to aspectual distinctions more than temporal ones, it is still fair to refer to them as tenses in most regards, since the perfect (which, by the way, is also expressed by the 'jussive' [a bad name for it] of the imperfect) rarely has a non-past meaning. 

That said, I would add the 'optative' to your moods - and also as a counterexample to the 'completion' definition of the past. E.g.:

حَفِظَهُ الله  "may God preserve him"
بارك الله فيك "may God bless you"
جزاك الله خيرا  "may God reward you with good"
رَحِمَه الله  "may God have mercy on him (R.I.P.)"

Again, the 'jussive' form in Arabic comes from the old Semitic prefix-perfect and was once _the_ past tense form as the languages developed. So there are some holdovers and oddities in meaning because of that.




> Does مضارع منصوب mean imperfect subjunctive?



Yes, it does...literally it almost means "the accusative imperfect"...but the word "imperfect" itself means the "resembling" form because it acts like a noun/adjective in a way that the past doesn't...which further supports your assertion that the main distinction is aspectual and not temporal.


----------



## Tensor78

dkarjala said:


> Before I saw him, I died (I didn't see him, but I died)
> Before I see him, I'll die (I won't see him, but I'll die)
> 
> Notice that with "before" only one of the actions _has_ to occur, whereas with 'after', both actions will occur or have occured. And the subjunctive in Arabic is used for things that may or may not ever happen, so therefore it is ok to leave the verb after قبل أن in the subjunctive no matter what the tense.



OK. But, what about situations where qabla is used merely to connote sequence?

Example: I sat down before I ate. (Both happened)


----------



## dkarjala

Tensor78 said:


> OK. But, what about situations where qabla is used merely to connote sequence?
> 
> Example: I sat down before I ate. (Both happened)



Again, from the frame of reference of the *independent clause* (I sat down), the action may or may not happen (it was a possibility that you die before taking a bite, etc., even if you know you didn't, from the vantage point of the action that you have chosen as the *main* action). 

It is the nature of 'before' in Arabic to subordinate the other action, so simple sequence would be best indicated by coordinating conjunctions, i.e., if you are using 'before' it is because you are already preferring to draw attention to the action that you put in the independent clause. You can indicate a relationship between the actions with فـ if you want to put both actions on par with each other. جلست فأكلت

If that doesn't help, note that the subjunctive with أن is equivalent to the مصدر (as long as both actions have the same agent). The subjunctive has no tense information, but gives a formal verb the usage of a noun. 

جلست قبل الأكل
جلست قبل أن آكل

So you see, with a preposition subordinating the verb in question (eating) there is no tense information necessary, or else you couldn't replace it with a noun.


----------



## Tensor78

dkarjala said:


> If that doesn't help, note that the subjunctive with أن is equivalent to the مصدر (as long as both actions have the same agent). The subjunctive has no tense information, but gives a formal verb the usage of a noun.
> 
> جلست قبل الأكل
> جلست قبل أن آكل
> 
> So you see, with a preposition subordinating the verb in question (eating) there is no tense information necessary, or else you couldn't replace it with a noun.



Yes, I understand this. But, I can change the agent for the verbal noun if I want by using possession on the verbal noun, correct?

I sat before he ate = jalastu qabla 'an ya'kala = jalastu qabla 'aklihi correct???


----------



## dkarjala

Tensor78 said:


> Yes, I understand this. But, I can change the agent for the verbal noun if I want by using possession on the verbal noun, correct?
> 
> I sat before he ate = jalastu qabla 'an ya'kala = jalastu qabla 'aklihi correct???



I would say that generally speaking, the _maSdar_ with a possessive can be used, unless it is a transitive verb, such as 'eat', where it would be taken as the object rather than the subject. I.e., your sentence could just as well mean "I sat before eating him/it". So with transitive verbs, you almost _need _the subjunctive construction.


----------



## Tensor78

dkarjala said:


> I would say that generally speaking, the _maSdar_ with a possessive can be used, unless it is a transitive verb, such as 'eat', where it would be taken as the object rather than the subject. I.e., your sentence could just as well mean "I sat before eating him/it". So with transitive verbs, you almost _need _the subjunctive construction.



Right, but that's just a semantic issue. Grammatically, it's sound. Right?


----------



## dkarjala

Yeah, sure - as long as the pronoun is the direct object in your mind, it's grammatically correct.


----------

