# عملي



## visual1ce

Hi,

Working through al-kitaab part 1 3rd edition and I've come across this sentence:

اريد العمل في شركة خاصة لان عملي في الوزارة ليس له مستقبل​Is "amalee" an adjective here? Does the hu in the lahu refer to amalee fee lwzaarah?

Shukran,

visual1ce


----------



## AndyRoo

visual1ce said:


> Is "amalee" an adjective here?


 No it's a noun 



visual1ce said:


> Does the hu in the lahu refer to amalee fee lwzaarah?


Yes


----------



## visual1ce

so is "ee" in amalee a pronoun or...? Could you translate the sentence for me please?

Thanks,

visual1ce


----------



## AndyRoo

Hi,

The "ee" is a pronoun, yes.

It says: I want to work in a private company, because my job in the ministry has no future.


----------



## Mighis

`amalî

`amal: genitive masculine noun.
î: first person singular possessive pronoun.


Lahu

La: prefixed preposition.
hu: third person masculine singular personal pronoun.


----------



## fdb

Mighis said:


> ][/COLOR]
> 
> `amal: genitive masculine noun.



genitive ??


----------



## Mighis

AndyRoo said:


> I want to work in a private company, because my job in the ministry has no future.


I would like to have a job in a private company because my current job at the ministry doesn't secure my future.



fdb said:


> genitive ??


Yes, it is. and one (?) is enough!


----------



## fdb

According to elementary Arabic grammar _li__ʼ__anna_ requires a noun in the accusative (_man__ṣū__b_).


----------



## Mighis

fdb said:


> According to elementary Arabic grammar _li__ʼ__anna_ requires a noun in the accusative (_man__ṣū__b_).


1) So?
2) _Li-anna_ or _Inna_?


----------



## AndyRoo

fdb is right.

If for example it was "because his job..." it would be  لأنَّ عملَهُ `amal clearly accusative here.


----------



## Mighis

AndyRoo said:


> fdb is right.
> 
> If for example it was "because his job..." it would be لأنَّ عملَهُ `amal clearly accusative here.


What does a noun being genitive have to do with that?
Besides, you are paying attention to what *Inna *and its "sisters" require but you forget the *Laam *in *Li*-anna at all.
A noun can be genitive in all ways and this is, let's say, the elementary basics of grammar.
This noun gets the value of showing that it has or owns something from the first person singular possessive pronoun *î*.

Furthermore, the accusative particle in لأن عملي is the Inna's "sister" أنّ itself. So, we have here:
- prefixed preposition.
- accusative particle.
- genitive masculine noun.
- first person singular possessive pronoun.

It could be nominative or it could follow the _acc _if there was no _lâm_.


----------



## barkoosh

I'm not good at those translations of the Arabic grammar terms, but if "accusative" case means منصوب and "genitive" case means مجرور, then:
لأن accusative particle, has the same function of أنّ; the "lam" has no grammatical effect.
عملي: noun in the accusative case for being اسم لأنّ, should have a fatHa but it was replaced with kasra because the word has a ياء المتكلم (first person singular possessive pronoun). The parts عمل+ي are part of the "genitive construct" الإضافة. The part عمل is مضاف (in the accusative in this sentence, as already mentioned); the part ي is مضاف إليه, which is always in the genitive case مجرور.

Using the same term "genitive" for مجرور and for إضافة seems to cause so much confusion.


----------



## Mighis

barkoosh said:


> Using the same term "genitive" for مجرور and for إضافة seems to cause so much confusion.


I think so and let's say that sometimes we confuse _i`râb_ with _nahw_.  
But, yes; syntactically the noun is masculine genitive.
The _lâm al-tta`lîl_ runs here a syntax and semantics based function. Am I wrong?


----------



## barkoosh

> But, yes; syntactically the noun is masculine genitive.


Well, I don't know about English but in Arabic, عمل here is مضاف منصوب.


> The _lâm al-tta`lîl _runs here a syntax and semantics based function


To be frank, I didn't understand this English terminology. But all I know is that it's very common, in order to make things easier to students, to consider لأنّ the same as أنّ grammatically (_i`râb)._


----------



## Mighis

barkoosh said:


> Well, I don't know about English but in Arabic, عمل here is مضاف منصوب.
> To be frank, I didn't understand this English terminology. But all I know is that it's very common, in order to make things easier to students, to consider لأنّ the same as أنّ grammatically (_i`râb)._


_Anna _is an accusative particle and this means there has to be an object. (_nahw_)
_Anna _requires a nasb. (_i`râb_).

And I believe if there was no _lâm_, the _`mal_ noun could be nominative or even accusative and in this case there should be another object/subject related to the verb or the predicate. 

واللام لام تعليل، وأن اسمها محذوف و خبرها العمل،  و عمل: عمل مضاف، والياء مضاف إليه = *النحو*.
أن حرف نصب، و عملي: عمل اسم منصوب و الياء ضمير متصل في محل جر = *الإعراب*.


----------



## cherine

Hi,

I think this is (was) a simple question, but it became a bit confusing. I don't think I've heard before about a difference between النحو and الإعراب , but allow me to say this:

The word عملي is a noun + pronoun: عمل = work/job, and the pronoun ي = my. So, عملي means my job or my work.

The noun عمل is اسم أن منصوب بالفتحة المقدرة، منع من ظهورها اتصال الاسم بياء المتكلم، وعمل مضاف
And the pronoun is ضمير مبني في محل جر مضاف إليه.


----------



## Mighis

Yes, but it's not a clever idea to explain _i'râb_ issues to the beginners. However, it's important to know some basics of the syntax (_nahw_) so you can become aware of the order of language's elements in a sentence and what a certain element expects or requires in it. 

For the difference between nahw and i`râb ـــــ http://www.alfusha.net/t15728.html


----------



## visual1ce

Thanks for all your help and the interesting discussion. I wonder if being able to analyse sentences in this manner helps in learning languages in general and if it is a skill that can be used across languages. How does one go about acquiring such a skill? Can you recommend some resources? I've done some searching but the results I have come up with seem either too broad in the realm of linguistics or too narrow in the sense of being isolated to a particular language. 

Here is a link to the first page of sentence diagram syntax analysis of the Holy Qur'aan: http://corpus.quran.com/treebank.jsp . ism in bi - ism is tagged as a genitive masculine noun but I think that this is an idaafa structure. One could probably find an instance of li-anna and see how they have tagged it for comparison's sake.

Personally I couldn't understand how the 'aml was genitive but I think that is perhaps because I don't know what majroor is. But the lam being a preposition definitely makes sense to me; like fa it is an easily recognisable preposition prefix.


----------



## fdb

I think all this discussion has left you more confused than you were at the beginning. Anyway, fa is not a preposition.


----------



## AndyRoo

visual1ce said:


> I wonder if being able to analyse sentences in this manner helps in learning languages in general


 I doubt it. It will only help you get good at talking about a language, not actually learning it.



visual1ce said:


> Personally I couldn't understand how the 'aml was genitive but I think that is perhaps because I don't know what majroor is.


 It's not genitive, it's accusative! Please note Mighis is wrong when he insists it's genitive (as all other posters have pointed out).


----------



## Tracer

_*


visual1ce said:



			Thanks for all your help and the interesting discussion. I wonder if being able to analyse sentences in this manner helps in learning languages in general and if it is a skill that can be used across languages. How does one go about acquiring such a skill?
		
Click to expand...


*_1.  No, it doesn't help in learning a language in the least.  It'll help in analysing a language, but that's not the same as "learning" a language.

2. "Is it a skill that can be used across languages?"  I'm not sure what you mean here. Any language can be analysed but if you attempt to take the analytical tools of one language and apply them to another (as has been done in this thread) look at the mess that you get into ! (with no final solution). 

3.  It all depends on your ultimate goals.  If you're a linguist by profession, analyzing languages is the bread and butter of your profession.  If you simply want to learn to read, write and speak another language, a linguistic analysis is an approach you should avoid.  You must know the "basics", of course (you can learn the "basic" grammar of any language in 3-6 months tops), but anything beyond that, is unnecessary, in my opinion.  This is particularly true in a language such as Arabic where there is a stark "diglossia".  How many times have you learned a linguistic "truism" for MSA, for example, only to find out later that in the dialects, that "truism" is simply unused or used entirely differently, or doesn't exist, or is the complete opposite,  etc.?

4.  Translation is another world entirely.  A linguist is usually the worst translator ultimately because he approaches language as a static object, whereas it is really the most dynamic of things with which we face the world.  What appears to be the case via an analysis of a text so often turns out to be nothing more than a theoretical interpretation which has little to do with the true meaning of the text.

Just my point of view, of course.


----------



## Mighis

visual1ce said:


> Personally I couldn't understand how the 'aml was genitive but I think that is perhaps because I don't know what majroor is. But the lam being a preposition definitely makes sense to me; like fa it is an easily recognisable preposition prefix.


I'm sorry if I caused you any confusion. I checked it further and for example English wiki mentions:
The Semitic genitive should not be confused with the pronominal possessive suffixes that exist in all the Semitic languages

e.g. Arabic بيتي _bayt-ī_ (my house) كتابك _kitābu-ka_ (your [masc.] book).


----------



## visual1ce

No worries - it's all good  Really fortunate to have such a great resource with so many willing to help out. All of you - thank you.

Right now I'm just going to concentrate on learning the language and the necessary grammar along the way.


----------



## Mighis

visual1ce said:


> Right now I'm just going to concentrate on learning the language and the necessary grammar along the way.


That's a very good decision.

Going back to your first question where you asked: is عملي an adj. ?
In that sentence not but in other constituents might be.
عملي can be a noun or an adj. and it can also be an adverb.
هذا عملي this is my work.
هذا عملي this is practical.
عمليا، هذا جيد this is practically good.


----------



## إسكندراني

There is a difference between عمل+ـي (iDAAfa) and عمل+يّ (practical).


----------

