# الإضافة/إضافة + possessive (my glass of water, my poetry book, my bedroom, my passport)



## trinabenina

[My glass of water]
Would "ka'siy min al-maa' " be the correct way of saying this?


----------



## Linalona

Yes. "ka'siy min al-maa'' means *"my glass of water"* 
Or, it is better to say " a glass of water," since the word "my" is not available in the Arabic sentence.

Ka'siy= A glass.
min= of
al-maa=water

This is my point of view.
Thanks!


----------



## trinabenina

Hmmm, I meant the y in ka'siy as the suffix meaning my, so would that be correct?


----------



## Linalona

Hmmm, yes, it might be correct. But it is better to say: "Ka'sty min al- maa."

Thanks!


----------



## trinabenina

Why is the t there?  Is it a taa marbuutah or a taa maftuha?

Thanks for your help


----------



## Linalona

I am so sorry

Yes, you are right, & my previous answer was wrong... I am so sorry.

Kaa'sy min al-maa = my glass of water

It is right!


----------



## Taalib

For translating "my glass of water" could you also not make "glass of water" an idafa construct, and attach a personal pronoun to the second noun?  

IE, "ka's maa'y"?


----------



## elroy

I disagree with Linalona. كأسي من الماء does not sound idiomatic at all to me. 

Taalib, that strategy works in some cases, but not all the time. كأس مائي sounds like "a glass of my water," so I wouldn't use it to translate "my glass of water."

I would suggest كأس الماء الخاص بي or كأس الماء خاصتي.


----------



## WadiH

Why not just say "كاسي"?  It's unusual that you would need to specify the contents in this situation, either in Arabic or English.


----------



## cherine

I agree with Elroy's explanation, and with Wadi's suggestion. I thought about this structure for a while, and can't get myself to accept neither كأس مائي nor كائسي من الماء.


----------



## Taalib

At the risk of sounding ignorant, I must admit that this particular structure to denote a possessive "my" is new to me: "خاص بي" following the noun.

Is this a common way of denoting personal possession?  Literally, the phrase in question would translate into "the cup of water set aside/designated for me," would it not?  Or does "khass bii" have a more idiomatic meaning?

What about لي, as in, كأس الماء لي ?  Does this mean "the cup of water is mine" or "my cup of water"?


----------



## elroy

Taalib said:


> Is this a common way of denoting personal possession?


 Yes (in MSA, that is). 





> Literally, the phrase in question would translate into "the cup of water set aside/designated for me," would it not? Or does "khass bii" have a more idiomatic meaning?


 You are confusing two phrases. 

كأس الماء الخاص بي - the glass of water belonging to me
كأس الماء المخصص لي - the glass of water set aside/designated for me


> What about لي, as in, كأس الماء لي ? Does this mean "the cup of water is mine" or "my cup of water"?


 The former (assuming we're using "glass" and "cup" interchangeably here).


----------



## trinabenina

This is brilliant, I wish I had found this forum earlier.  

What is the literal meaning of biy then?  This ties in to my other thread about prepositions and attached pronouns - im still not entirely sure of the full meaning of this word.  Also, I am familiar with the root kh S S but what do those specific words mean?  And another related question (would it be best to start a new thread here?), when a word has a miim at the beginning it seems to mean different things (I mean when it is not part of the root).  The main ones I know are "place where such and such is done" and "person who does such and such".  What does it mean in the above example (Elroy's post)?


----------



## elroy

trinabenina said:


> What is the literal meaning of biy then?


 The preposition بـ does not have one single English translation. It depends on the context. In this case, I think you just have to memorize خاص بـ as a set phrase. 





> Also, I am familiar with the root kh S S but what do those specific words mean?


 خاص usually means "special," but in this case it means something like "belonging," but only in combination with بـ (just as "belonging" is used with "to"). See below for مخصص.


> And another related question (would it be best to start a new thread here?), when a word has a miim at the beginning it seems to mean different things (I mean when it is not part of the root). The main ones I know are "place where such and such is done" and "person who does such and such". What does it mean in the above example (Elroy's post)?


 Here it is used to form the past participle of the verb خَصَّصَ (_khaSSaSa_), "to designate," "to set aside," so مُخَصَّص (_mukhaSSaS_) means "separated" or "set aside." I think the past participle of a verb with the pattern *xaxxaxa* is always *muxaxxax*.

(You should start a new thread if you wish to explore this particular point further. )


----------



## jmt356

[Moderator's Note: Merged with a previous thread of a similar topic]
Your poetry book

Suggestion:

كتابك الأشعار


----------



## elroy

كتاب الشعر خاصتك

كتابك الشعر works in Palestinian Arabic, but not in MSA.


----------



## jmt356

Why doesn't كتابك الشعر work in MSA? It seems to be correct to me. 

كتاب الشعر خاصتك does not sound correct to me. I have heard خاص used as follows: كتاب الشعر الخاصة بك.


----------



## cherine

I believe الخاص بك is more common, but you will still find خاصتك also used commonly (especially in movie subtitles).
I can't explain why كتابك الشعر is incorrect in fuS7a, but it just doesn't sound like a correct structure, maybe because الشعر here feels like an adjective when it isn't.


----------



## akhooha

cherine said:


> I can't explain why كتابك الشعر is incorrect in fuS7a


Maybe because it's an iDaafa, and the first term of an iDaafa cannot be definite?


----------



## elroy

Honestly, I don't personally like either خاصتك or الخاص بك - they both sound forced.  But they're both used, as Cherine said.  I think, though, that in many cases original Arabic texts would use different wording depending on the context.


----------



## Matat

jmt356 said:


> Why doesn't كتابك الشعر work in MSA? It seems to be correct to me.



Adding a pronoun marks the end of a definite idaafa. So when you say كتابك الشعر, the word الشعر can't be in idaafa to كتابك since the pronoun in كتابك has marked the end of its idaafa, so that would mean that الشعر would either need to be an adjective of كتابك or in apposition to it. الشعر is certainly not an adjective and if we assumed الشعر was in apposition to كتابك, the meaning would be "Your book, the poetry,...", which isn't the same as "your poetry book".

If you want it to be all in one idaafa, then the only option would be كتاب شعرك or كتاب أشعارك. However, this phrase would probably only be used in the context that the person you are speaking with wrote the poetry that is in the book.  Here are few articles which have used this phrase before.

1.


> وأخيراً كانت كلمة لوالد الشهيد شحادة الحاج حسن، فقال: "إن حمزة كتب الشعر وهو في الرابعة عشر من عمره، وأكمل مسيرة حياته إلى أن تخرّج من الجامعة وراح يشق طريق حياته إلى أن تخرّج منها شهيداً، فالدنيا كانت بالنسبة له ممراً سريعاً". وأضاف "عزاؤنا في هذه الأمسية انك كما في حياتك تجمع المحبين *وما كتاب أشعارك إلا لغة أخرى* من اللغات الجميلة التي كنت تتواصل بها مع كل من تعرفه".



2.


> ولعله من أجل هذه الفنتازيا بالذات، والسخرية، جعلته سلمى الخضراء الجيوسي، شاعراً ما بعد حداثي. مات سميح القاسم *وفتح كتاب شعره* لنقرأه.



3.


> الشبيبي، وجمال الدين لهم قصائد خمرية. لماذا لا تهاجم بيوتهم، وتمزق صورهم، وتحرق *كتب اشعارهم؟*





EDIT: It seems that a more general term which applies to more contexts which has been used in the past is كتابك الشعري. Searching "كتابه الشعري" gives a few results.


----------



## jmt356

I am trying to understand how خاص works. Are these correct translations:

Your car: السيارة خاصتك or السيارة الخاصة بك 
I have conjugated خاص in the feminine form.

Your house: البيت خاصك or البيت الخاص بك
I have conjugated خاص in the masculine form.


----------



## Matat

jmt356 said:


> Your car: السيارة خاصتك or السيارة الخاصة بك
> Your house: البيت *خاصك* or البيت الخاص بك


I don't think these would be used since السيارة and البيت are not idaafas by themselves before you add the pronoun. You would simply hear بيتك and سيارتك. These are not comparable with كتاب الشعر since, unlike السيارة and البيت, it is already an idaafa before you add the pronoun.

Also, you need to distinguish between the noun خاصة and the adjectives خاص/خاصة. Though the noun خاصة is the exact same word as the feminine adjective, there is a difference between the use of the noun and the use of the adjectives. The noun خاصة's feminine marker doesn't get removed. So if your examples were to work, you would have had to say البيت خاصتك, not البيت خاصك. As for السيارة الخاصة بك and البيت الخاص بك, if these were to work, they would be correct since the adjectives are being used here and they must match the gender and number of the nouns البيت and السيارة, just as you wrote them.

Grammatically, I don't think خاصة (the noun) is used correctly in كتاب الشعر خاصتك, even though it is common to see this use in writing. When one says كتاب الشعر خاصتك, it's not clear what part of speech خاصتك is supposed to be. It's not an adjective and it doesn't really fall in any grammatical category. It seems to be an _MSA-ized _word from dialect. Certain dialects use words like تبع to represent possession, so a dialectal form of the phrase might be كتاب الشعر تبعك. My guess is that خاصة simply comes from this.

As for the adjectives خاص/خاصة, though they are used in a grammatically correct way in the phrases you wrote, I think their original meaning is supposed represent specificity. So when you say السيارة الخاصة بك and البيت الخاص بك, what you're saying is "the car that is specific to you" and "the house that is specific to you".


----------



## Abu Talha

Does the use of repetition sound natural:
تركت كتابك كتاب الشعر في البيت
?


----------



## cherine

It's a good solution to use البدل like this  But I don't think many would do it in MSA.


----------



## Abu Talha

cherine said:


> It's a good solution to use البدل like this  But I don't think many would do it in MSA.


Thanks.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

[Moderator's Note: Merged with a previous thread of a similar topic]
My question is about where a possessive pronoun goes in a compound word that is an iDaafa (or at least, that looks like an iDaafa to me). I was specifically thinking about "my bedroom," where bedroom is غرفة نوم. I tried googling both possibilities, i.e. غرفة نومي and غرفتي نوم but both yield quite a few results (nearly a million for the former, a few million for the latter) so it wasn't a great help.

Thanks in advance!


----------



## analeeh

In fuSHa at least the only correct option is غرفة نومي _ghurfatu nawmī_.

The results you're getting for غرفتي نوم are probably mostly _ghurfatay nawm_ 'two bedrooms'.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Ah, because the nunation on غُرْفَتَيْنِ is lost when it's the first term of an iDaafa...right! Thanks for the help, that makes sense.


----------



## bearded

analeeh said:


> In fuSHa at least the only correct option is غرفة نومي _ghurfatu nawmī_.


Am I wrong in supposing that  ''the bedroom'' and ''my bedroom'' in MSA can only be distinguished in pronunciation by means of the length of the final i (long for the latter)?


----------



## elroy

analeeh said:


> غرفة نومي _ghurfatu nawmī_


 This doesn't work for me.

The go-to - but inelegant - solution is غرفة النوم الخاصة بي or غرفة النوم خاصتي.  In most cases, however, غرفتي or غرفة النوم would be sufficient and context would clarify the meaning.  In other cases, other rewordings may be possible, such as الغرفة التي أنام فيها. 


bearded said:


> Am I wrong in supposing that ''the bedroom'' and ''my bedroom'' in MSA can only be distinguished in pronunciation by means of the length of the final i (long for the latter)?


 Well, as I said for me غرفة نومي is wrong, but either way, "the bedroom" is غرفة النوم (_ġurfatu~*n-n*awmi_).  Also, final ي is generally pronounced short.


----------



## Hemza

Is بيت usable with the meaning of "room"? Because one of my teachers taught us why we call a verse, بيت شعر, that it was the place where poets used to hide from wild animals and write their poetry. Also, in some dialects (including mine) it bears this meaning (بيت النعاس=bedroom, بيت الاستراحة=living room etc). I guess in the modern usage of Arabic, no one would use بيت instead of غرفة but I ask to know if it happened through Arabic history?


----------



## bearded

elroy said:


> غرفة النوم (_ġurfatu~*n-n*awmi_).


Oh yes, you are right. Thanks.


----------



## cherine

elroy said:


> This doesn't work for me.


Why not? It is the right way to say it, both in fus7a and colloquial. Or is it because it's used colloquially that you think it's incorrect in MSA?


> The go-to - but inelegant - solution is غرفة النوم الخاصة بي or غرفة النوم خاصتي.  In most cases, however, غرفتي or غرفة النوم would be sufficient and context would clarify the meaning.  In other cases, other rewordings may be possible, such as الغرفة التي أنام فيها.


These are correct but unnecessarily lengthy alternatives.


Hemza said:


> Is بيت usable with the meaning of "room"?


Not to my knowledge.


----------



## elroy

It sounds wrong to me in MSA.  Would you accept كرة قدمي or فرشاة أسناني?

I wouldn’t.  I think it’s because the possessed thing is the first element, not the second one.


----------



## cherine

I'm sorry I don't have a rule or logical explanation to back my words, but yes فرشاة أسناني، فرشاة شعري are correct, though كرة قدمي isn't. And, possibly strangely, غرفة معيشتي doesn't sound correct either.


----------



## elroy

I personally think these are all colloquial influences.  If غرفة نومي is correct in MSA then كرة قدمي should be too.

Let’s see what others think.


----------



## Abu Talha

A couple of relevant threads:
my pencil
ال  for compound words
Compound words (whole wheat bread, bunk bed)

Does seem like a bit of a gray area.


----------



## Mahaodeh

elroy said:


> This doesn't work for me.


I agree. Personally, I just say غرفتي and there is actually no need to mention the bed or sleep.


cherine said:


> Why not? It is the right way to say it, both in fus7a and colloquial. Or is it because it's used colloquially that you think it's incorrect in MSA?


Yes, I've heard it in colloquial, but not so commonly, if they say the whole thing then it's more likely to be: غرفة النوم تاعتي, which as you said is unnecessarily long. Maybe غرفة نومي more common in Egypt. I do agree that غرفة نومي is an effect of colloquial and while being colloquial does not make it wrong, in this case I believe that the colloquial itself is wrong and is possibly an effect of English as English has compound words that can be used as one word, in Arabic most are used as an إضافة not as one word (with exceptions such as رأسمال ولانهاية that have become single words). I may have even used it this way in the past, but upon reflection, it is in fact wrong.

As for why, that's because when you say غرفة نومي you are saying "the room of my sleep" or "my sleep's room" rather than "my bedroom". While in practice it's the same thing, but if we are looking at a generic usage then the nuance is important. What we want to say is that the room is mine, and it happens to be a bedroom, not that the sleep is mine, and room is somehow related to my sleep. The same goes for فرشاة أسناني = the brush of my teeth. When it comes to كرة قدمي it becomes a little more complicated (the ball of my foot!) or even worse سيارة نقلي أو طاولة سفرتي أو طاقية إخفائي! I can't imagine anyone saying the last three.


cherine said:


> I'm sorry I don't have a rule or logical explanation to back my words,


It's the ياء الإضافة that is connected to the wrong word, meaning that the ownership is for the wrong word. Of course we can't add it to the correct word because the correct word is already مضاف so the only solutions are to either remove the second word and say غرفتي or add an additional word or two to explain what you want to say such as غرفة النوم الخاصة بي.

Consider this: you want to say ربّ العالمين is yours (as in, your god), would you say ربّ عالميني or jus say ربّي?


----------



## Matat

We spoke about this same topic in the Your poetry book thread and @Abu Talha proposed using a بدل. I liked this idea and found that this is actually used in Classical Arabic:
سُبْحَانَ *رَبِّكَ رَبِّ الْعِزَّةِ* عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ
Quran 37:180

Personally, I like this over all other options, so I would go with غرفتي غرفة النوم if you are really adamant about specifying that it's both a bedroom and that it's your room. This works for the other phrases as well. كرتي كرة القدم is short, sweet, and - in my opinion - elegant.


----------



## Mahaodeh

Matat said:


> is short, sweet, and - in my opinion - elegant.


----------



## elroy

Matat said:


> سُبْحَانَ *رَبِّكَ رَبِّ الْعِزَّةِ* عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ


 I read this as “your lord, the lord of...” not “your lord of...”. 


Matat said:


> short, sweet, and - in my opinion - elegant


 I don’t know, I think it highly depends on context.


----------



## Matat

elroy said:


> I read this as “your lord, the lord of...” not “your lord of...”.


The possession is on رب العزة and as a بدل, the first meaning implies the second meaning. The possession is represented and this is the only way I know of where an idaafah is possessed in CA. Analogous to Mahaodeh's question above, how else would one use a possession with رب العزة? A بدل is clearly the best way.

غرفتي غرفة النوم is better than any of the other options proposed. Considering them so far:

1) غرفة نومي is literally the "room of my sleep". Whether correct or incorrect, the possession here is on نوم and not غرفة. As you have mentioned, if we were to say كرة قدمي, for example, this type of possession would not work.
2) الغرفة التي أنام فيها means "The room which I sleep in". Not only is it lengthy, but it doesn't necessarily represent possession ("my bedroom").
3) غرفة النوم خاصتي doesn't seem grammatically correct. What is the i3raab of خاصة? Moreover, خاصة doesn't fit well in terms of its meaning either.
4) غرفة النوم الخاصة بي is grammatically correct, but the meaning is not merely that of possession, but specification. It sounds more like "the bedroom that is specific to me" or "the bedroom that is made for me" than it does "my bedroom". Additionally, this is problematic because it gives the impression that this room only belongs to me and no one else, which may not be the case if someone shares a bedroom.

غرفتي غرفة النوم is short, the meaning is clear, the grammar makes sense, and this type of construction has even been used in Classical Arabic.


----------



## elroy

As I said, I do not read ربك رب العزة the way you want it to be read, and whether غرفتي غرفة النوم works depends on the context (in many, if not most, contexts, it will not sound right or express the intended meaning).


Matat said:


> how else would one use a possession with رب العزة?


 Possibly رب العزة الذي لي (this would actually be another option to consider for "my bedroom"; غرفة النوم التي لي doesn't sound great, but it sounds infinitely better than غرفتي غرفة النوم) or maybe رب العزة الذي أعبده (cf. الغرفة التي أنام فيها; see below).

غرفة النوم خاصتي and غرفة النوم الخاصة بي are commonly used, and the meaning is "my bedroom."  This is unambiguous and firmly established.  Once again, you are ignoring actual usage and basing your views on theoretical notions of what you believe words are supposed to mean.

Yes, of course الغرفة التي أنام فيها literally means "the room that I sleep in," but in some contexts it could work.

The upshot of this is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution, much as we would all like there to be!


----------



## Matat

elroy said:


> Possibly رب العزة الذي لي (this would actually be another option to consider for "my bedroom"; غرفة النوم التي لي doesn't sound great, but it sounds infinitely better than غرفتي غرفة النوم) or maybe رب العزة الذي أعبده (cf. الغرفة التي أنام فيها; see below).


For the sake of consistency, if we are considering that ربك رب العزة literally means "your Lord, the Lord of Glory", then we must take the literal meaning of رب العزة الذي لي as "The Lord of Glory that is mine". Neither can be read literally as "My Lord of Glory", unlike how we'd literally read ربي as "My Lord". However, both of these give us the meaning we want. In my opinion though, رب العزة الذي لي is unnecessarily wordy and not as elegant as simply ربك رب العزة.



elroy said:


> غرفة النوم خاصتي and غرفة النوم الخاصة بي are commonly used, and the meaning is "my bedroom." This is unambiguous and firmly established. Once again, you are ignoring actual usage and basing your views on theoretical notions about what words are supposed to mean.


I'm not ignoring that. You have yourself declared that these are inelegant and I agree. The only difference between you and me is that I would take this one step further and say these are also wrong as I have described (e.g. they imply sole ownership), irrespective of usage. And if something is inelegant, wrong, and can be misunderstood, why would we use it over the more elegant and correct phrase which wouldn't be misunderstood? The fact that these are wrong may not immediately be seen in غرفة النوم الخاصة بي, but it can clearly be seen how these are wrong if we were to say رب العزة الخاص بي.


elroy said:


> Yes, of course الغرفة التي أنام فيها literally means "the room that I sleep in," but in some contexts it could work.


Agreed.


----------



## elroy

How is "the Lord of Glory that is mine" different (in meaning) from "my Lord of Glory"? 

"My Lord, the Lord of Glory" does _not_ necessarily mean "my Lord of Glory."  It means he is 1) my Lord, and he also happens to be 2) the Lord of Glory.  "My Lord of Glory" suggests that other people may have other Lords of Glory. 


Matat said:


> I would take this one step further and say these are also wrong as I have described (e.g. they imply sole ownership)


 But you are wrong about them being wrong.  They mean "my bedroom" and there is no room for misunderstanding.

"The bedroom that was specifically designated for me" (or "specific to me" or "made for me," to use your wording) would be غرفة النوم المخصّصة لي, *not* غرفة النوم الخاصة بي or غرفة النوم خاصتي.  Sole ownership is not implied - at least no more and no less than it is in "my bedroom." 

You must accept that غرفة النوم الخاصة بي and غرفة النوم خاصتي are established ways to say "my bedroom" (in MSA). 

Yes, I don't find them elegant, but that's a personal preference and has nothing to do with meaning.  I generally avoid using them if I can, but sometimes one of them may be the best (or least bad) choice.


Matat said:


> most can clearly see how these are wrong if we were to say رب العزة الخاص بي.


 I agree that that doesn't work.  I never said nor implied that خاصتي or الخاصة بي works in _every_ case.  In fact, I specifically said 


elroy said:


> there is no one-size-fits-all solution


 I empathize with your desire to find one (I'd like there to be one, too), but I'm afraid the بدل option is not it.


----------



## Abu Talha

Matat said:


> 1) غرفة نومي is literally the "room of my sleep". Whether correct or incorrect, the possession here is on نوم and not غرفة. As you have mentioned, if we were to say كرة قدمي, for example, this type of possession would not work.
> 2) الغرفة التي أنام فيها means "The room which I sleep in". Not only is it lengthy, but it doesn't necessarily represent possession ("my bedroom").
> 3) غرفة النوم خاصتي doesn't seem grammatically correct. What is the i3raab of خاصة? Moreover, خاصة doesn't fit well in terms of its meaning either.
> 4) غرفة النوم الخاصة بي is grammatically correct, but the meaning is not merely that of possession, but specification. It sounds more like "the bedroom that is specific to me" or "the bedroom that is made for me" than it does "my bedroom". Additionally, this is problematic because it gives the impression that this room only belongs to me and no one else, which may not be the case if someone shares a bedroom.


Maybe we can add to this list:
5) غرفتي النومية
6) غرفتي ذات النوم
What do you think? Of course, some are more awkward than others in different contexts. غرفة and نوم in this case are placeholders.


----------



## Qureshpor

elroy said:


> I personally think these are all colloquial influences.  If غرفة نومي is correct in MSA then كرة قدمي should be too.
> Let’s see what others think.


I am in agreement with you because both, though iDaafa constructions, are to be considered as compound words. If we can have جواز سفری for "my passport", why can't we have غرفة نومي and كرة قدمي for "my bedroom" and "my football" respectively?


----------



## elroy

Actually, I think you misunderstood my post, Qureshpor.  I think all of those (غرفة نومي، كرة قدمي، جواز سفري) are incorrect in MSA.


Abu Talha said:


> 5) غرفتي النومية
> 6) غرفتي ذات النوم


 Interesting suggestions.

5 might work for certain constructions: if the adjectival form already exists or can be productively formed and doesn't alter the meaning.
6 would only work for a very limited number of constructions (if any), I think.


----------



## Matat

elroy said:


> "The bedroom that was specifically designated for me" (or "specific to me" or "made for me," to use your wording) would be غرفة النوم المخصّصة لي, *not* غرفة النوم الخاصة بي or غرفة النوم خاصتي. Sole ownership is not implied - at least no more and no less than it is in "my bedroom."



To clarify, I wouldn't say خاص would necessitate _ownership_ in every case, rather it indicates some sort _specificity, uniqueness, etc._ In the case of غرفة النوم الخاصة بي, that specificity in this context would (probably) be in the ownership. Without going into the differences between مخصَّص and خاص, that's the very dictionary definition of خاص, even in اللغة العربية المعاصر.



> خاصّ :-
> 1 - اسم فاعل من خَصَّ 1 وخَصَّ 2 وخَصَّ 3
> • قانون خاصّ : قانون متعلِّق بالحقوق القانونيّة للأفراد وعلاقاتهم ، قانون يسري على أفراد أو جهات معيَّنة دون غيرها ، - مبعوث خاصّ : مُوفَد لمهمَّة معيَّنة .
> 2 - *متفرِّد ، مُتميِّز ومتفوِّق على غيره :*- لهذا الأمر قيمة خاصَّة في عيني .
> 3 - ما يصدُق على حالة واحدة أو عدَّة حالات من نوع واحد :- هذه الحالة هي إحدى الحالات الخاصّة .
> 4 - مُنفَّذ أو مدعوم من قِبَل فرد أو منظمة أو شركة غير حكوميَّة ، عكس عامّ أو حكوميّ
> • مَدْرسَة خاصَّة : مَدْرسَة تُدار وتُدعم من قبل أشخاص أو شركة خاصَّة وليس من قبل الحكومة أو مؤسّسة عامة ، - مشروع خاصّ : نشاط تجاريّ لا تديره الدولة ولا تمتلكه .
> 5 - *ما يخصّ شخصًا معيّنًا ، منفرد به شخص بعينه :- هذا الرُّكن من الغرفة خاصٌّ بي* .


Not only is there nowhere in any dictionary which gives a simple possession meaning, but it is very clear and indisputable that adding الخاص بـ adds a meaning of specificity which could be misunderstood. This certainly does not add a purely possessive meaning without adding more baggage to the meaning.



elroy said:


> I agree that that doesn't work. I never said nor implied that خاصتي or الخاصة بي works in _every_ case. In fact, I specifically said


I already knew that you wouldn't accept it as correct because it clearly isn't. What's important though is: why wouldn't it be accepted? The reason is clear. In رب العزة الخاص بي, the context seems to indicate that the Lord of Glory is somehow uniquely yours and no one else's.



elroy said:


> How is "the Lord of Glory that is mine" different (in meaning) from "my Lord of Glory"?
> 
> "My Lord, the Lord of Glory" does _not_ necessarily mean "my Lord of Glory." It means he is 1) my Lord, and he also happens to be 2) the Lord of Glory. "My Lord of Glory" suggests that other people may have other Lords of Glory.


You're talking about an issue which has nothing to do with the badal pronoun possession and exists before adding the badal. It has to do with the original idaafah itself. We were never trying to achieve a meaning of "My Lord of Glory" where other people could have other lords of glory.  This is an issue which existed before we added any pronoun and would have had to do with whether the original رب العزة meant "The Lord of Glory" or "a lord of Glory". If it meant the former, then adding the badal would give the first meaning you mentioned. If the latter, adding the baal would give the second meaning you mentioned. However, the issue had already existed before we added the badal which had nothing to do with it.

Think about "كرة القدم" (not the game, but the actual ball). Does this mean "the soccer ball" or "a soccer ball"? It could mean either, depending on the context. However, adding the badal to it would not affect this issue. We'd have the issue either way. If it originally meant the former, كرتي كرة القدم would mean "my ball, the soccer ball" (which means 1. it is my ball, which also happens to be 2. the soccer ball). If it originally meant the latter, كرتي كرة القدم would mean "my ball, a soccer ball"  or "my soccer ball", which suggests other people may have other soccer balls.


----------



## elroy

I cannot continue to discuss خاصتي and الخاصة بي with you because you insist on dismissing real, idiomatic usage and arguing using dictionaries and dictionary definitions.  This is not productive. 

رب العزة and كرة القدم can only mean "the Lord of Glory" and "the soccer ball," respectively.


----------



## Matat

elroy said:


> I cannot continue to discuss خاصتي and الخاصة بي with you because you insist on dismissing real, idiomatic usage and arguing using dictionaries and dictionary definitions. This is not productive.


If it's incorrect and inelegant, then yes, I'll dismiss it as incorrect and inelegant. What do you find so problematic about that? It further perplexes me that you take issue with me rejecting this when you reject جواز سفري، فرشاة أسناني ،غرفة نومي, etc. I also don't find all of these to necessarily be correct, but these are definitely real, idiomatic uses as well. In fact, I find غرفة نومي to be a far better suggestion than غرفة النوم خاصتي and غرفة النوم الخاصة بي, yet you rejected the former and suggested the two latter ones. Searching on Google News alone, غرفة نومه is used at a frequency that is over 100 times more than غرفة النوم الخاصة به and غرفة النوم خاصته combined.



elroy said:


> رب العزة and كرة القدم can only mean "the Lord of Glory"


We were trying to make رب العزة possessive. You are stating that this was already definite. If that's the case, then we already could not give it the meaning that others can have their own lords of glory when adding a possession since that would have required the phrase to be indefinite in the first place. This issue was present before the addition of the second-person badal possession. It was not the possession itself which affected the meaning to mean "the Lord of Glory" where no one else could have their own.


----------



## Qureshpor

Matat said:


> Think about "كرة القدم" (not the game, but the actual ball). Does this mean "the soccer ball" or "a soccer ball"? It could mean either, depending on the context. However, adding the badal to it would not affect this issue. We'd have the issue either way. If it originally meant the former, كرتي كرة القدم would mean "my ball, the soccer ball" (which means 1. it is my ball, which also happens to be 2. the soccer ball). If it originally meant the latter, كرتي كرة القدم would mean "my ball, a soccer ball"  or "my soccer ball", which suggests other people may have other soccer balls.


Does n't "كرتي كرة القدم" mean "My ball is ball of the foot" ?


----------



## Matat

Qureshpor said:


> Does n't "كرتي كرة القدم" mean "My ball is ball of the foot" ?


If that was the complete sentence where كرتي was subject and كرة القدم was the predicate, then yes. However, as a badal, no.
ضربت كرتي كرة القدم
"I kicked my ball, the soccer ball."


----------



## Qureshpor

elroy said:


> Actually, I think you misunderstood my post, Qureshpor.  I think all of those (غرفة نومي، كرة قدمي، جواز سفري) are incorrect in MSA....


Interesting. The جواز سفري example that I have provided is from the "Linguaphone" course which came out in 1977.
الضابط : هل معکم جوازات سفر؟
علي الحلبی :ھاهو جواز سفري


----------



## Ihsiin

The sticking point of this thread would seem to me to be that in Arabic it is not common to explicitly apply possession _and_ invoke the bed-ness of the room when referring to ones bedroom. As has been said in this thread, the common phrases would be غرفتي or غرفت النوم with the additional meaning being understood from context. Even in vernacular Arabic, where for example I could easily say غرفت النوم مالتي, it would be much more common to simply say غرفتي. As such, any formulation that insists on explicating both elements would sound contrived.

On the note of ربك رب العزة, I do not read this as 'Your Lord of glory', nor do I think that the phrase 'Your Lord of glory' in English is a very natural or sensible one. Clearly the meaning is 'Your Lord [who is] *the* Lord of glory.'


----------



## elroy

Matat said:


> If it's incorrect


 It is not incorrect.


Matat said:


> جواز سفري، فرشاة أسناني ،غرفة نومي [...] are definitely real, idiomatic uses as well.


 They may be real, but they may exist only because of dialectal influence.  In such cases - as in this particular case - native speakers will often disagree about what is and is not correct in MSA.  It's a gray area, as someone else said earlier.

With خاصتي and الخاصة بي, however, native speakers do not disagree about these being correct ways to say "my" in MSA.  The only thing native speakers will disagree on is elegance and euphony, which is inherently subjective.


Matat said:


> We were trying to make رب العزة possessive.


 What would the product mean in English?


Ihsiin said:


> On the note of ربك رب العزة, I do not read this as 'Your Lord of glory', nor do I think that the phrase 'Your Lord of glory' in English is a very natural or senisble one. Clealry the meaning is 'Your Lord [who is] *the* Lord of glory.'


 


Ihsiin said:


> the common phrases would be غرفتي or غرفت النوم with the additional meaning being understood from context.


 


Ihsiin said:


> any formulation that insists on explicating both elements would sound contrived.


 Most likely, yes.


----------



## cherine

Ihsiin said:


> On the note of ربك رب العزة, I do not read this as 'Your Lord of glory', nor do I think that the phrase 'Your Lord of glory' in English is a very natural or sensible one. Clearly the meaning is 'Your Lord [who is] *the* Lord of glory.'


Thank you, Ihsiin. I was thinking how to explain this and couldn't come with something as clear as this. 

Regarding غرفة نومي it is commonly used in writing, but maybe we need to look at it as meaning the room where I sleep rather than a literal translation of my bedroom. As for "my bedroom", I agree with those who said that the most common way to say it, both in colloquial and fuS7a, is غرفتي.

Regarding خاصتي، الخاص(ـة) بي they are new, but have become commonly used in MSA. I don't know how they're dealt with i3raab-wise, but this doesn't seem to bother those who use it. So I suggest you, Matat, take it into consideration instead of your suggestion which I, frankly, don't find neither short nor elegant. Sorry.


----------



## elroy

cherine said:


> Regarding خاصتي، الخاص(ـة) بي they are new, [...] I don't know how they're dealt with i3raab-wise


 I would say

غرفة النوم الخاصة بي
الخاصة: نعت
بي: جار ومجرور

غرفة النوم خاصتي
خاصتي: خاصة بدل وهو مضاف، والياء مضاف إليه

Right?


----------



## Mahaodeh

I don't know, I liked Matat's suggestion. I wouldn't use it for 'my bedroom' because it seems a bit much for that but it can be useful in other cases. Maybe it's just me.

With regards to خاصتي, I've seen it a lot but I'm not comfortable with it and feel it replaces a colloquial word such as تاعتي / تبعي / مالتي / حقتي الخ using a word that just doesn't seem right - it just seems incorrect without the باء. Maybe it's just me, but this is how I feel. If it were ملكي I think it might work in some contexts although it's not common at all.

As for الخاصة بي I'm much more comfortable with this one. I could use it although I usually try to reword it if I had the option. The word doesn't give the exact meaning technically but I suppose words get new meanings with time and this is might be an example of one.


----------



## elroy

Mahaodeh said:


> I don't know, I liked Matat's suggestion.


 To clarify, I did not mean to summarily reject this option.  It could work in _some_ contexts, but I think those contexts are few.  In any case, it doesn't work as a one-size-fits-all solution, for me.

As for خاصتي and الخاصة بي, I believe these are translationese, or subtitle-ese.  In other words, I believe they arose through translation.  I am convinced that most authentic Arabic texts, texts written originally in Arabic, use different ways to express the idea (or keep it implicit), depending on context.

For example, in English an immigrant officer might say "your passport, please."  In Arabic, the common wording is جواز السفر لو سمحت.  The possessive is implicit.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

This conversation has gone much deeper than I can follow, but I'd like to ask a more basic question about this phenomenon of possessive pronouns attached to a collocation (like bedroom or passport, etc.). 

From my understanding, the first term in an idaafa can never be marked as definite. If it is semantically definite, it will only be clear by looking at the last term of the idaafa. If that's an inviolable rule, then the first term of an idaafa cannot have a possessive pronoun, right? Because in Arabic a possessive pronoun is considered in an idaafa relationship with the noun it is attached to and marks that noun as definite, thus violating the rule that the first noun cannot be definite?


----------



## elroy

That’s mostly correct, yes.  There are exceptions, but going into them here would take this thread beyond its scope.


----------



## Mahaodeh

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> From my understanding, the first term in an idaafa can never be marked as definite.



Technically, merely being the first term in an iDhafa marks it as definite. But if you mean that it can't take the definite article or anything else that would mark it as definite, then yes you are correct, a noun can only take one definite marker at a time.



Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> then the first term of an idaafa cannot have a possessive pronoun, right? Because in Arabic a possessive pronoun is considered in an idaafa relationship with the noun it is attached to and marks that noun as definite, thus violating the rule that the first noun cannot be definite?



I would say, _violating the rule that a noun can only carry one definite marker at a time_, be it a possessive pronoun, the definite article, an iDhaafa, or any other means of making it as definite.


----------



## elroy

I also want to add that حجرتي is even clearer than غرفتي.  There’s also the literary مضجعي.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Mahaodeh said:


> Technically, merely being the first term in an iDhafa marks it as definite. But if you mean that it can't take the definite article or anything else that would mark it as definite, then yes you are correct, a noun can only take one definite marker at a time.



Right, what I meant to say is it's semantically definite but in form it's not obvious it is, since it lacks anything marking it as definite other than being the first term in a definite idaafa (assuming the final term is definite).

How would one say "my passport" then? جواز in جواز سفر can't take a possessive pronoun can it? And by extension, the possessive suffixes have to be affixed to the final member of an idaafa, no?


----------



## elroy

Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out said:


> How would one say "my passport" then?


 Oh no!  You’re taking us back to square one! 

Much of what has been said in this thread applies to “passport.”  The best way to say it will depend on the context.


----------



## Calvary Scars II/Aux. Out

Oh no, the dreaded word _context_. My brain loves rules and patterns; hates context 

Thanks for the help


----------



## Mahaodeh

elroy said:


> also want to add that حجرتي is even clearer than غرفتي. There’s also the literary مضجعي.


حجرتي is not a bad idea although حجرة is sometimes used as a synonym for غرفة, which brings us back to square one. In MSA مضحعي is used for rather commonly to refer to bedroom, but in CA it more commonly referred to 'my bed' so for some it might be a little confusing.


elroy said:


> Much of what has been said in this thread applies to “passport.” The best way to say it will depend on the context.


I agree. Another case in which it's more common to say جوازي rather than جواز سفري.


----------



## Qureshpor

Mahaodeh said:


> As for why, that's because when you say غرفة نومي you are saying "the room of my sleep" or "my sleep's room" rather than "my bedroom".


My understanding is that compounds such as غرفة النوم and جواز السفر for "bedroom" and "passport" are a relatively recent innovation into MSA and as I have suggested before, they are to be taken as one unit. So the "my" prefix is not for "naum" or "safar" but for the whole unit.

غرفة النوم)ي)

جواز السفر)ي)


----------



## Mahaodeh

Qureshpor said:


> My understanding is that compounds such as غرفة النوم and جواز السفر for "bedroom" and "passport" are a relatively recent innovation into MSA


Not as recent as you think. I wouldn't call طاقية الإخفاء recent, it's part of traditional folk stories that have existed for hundreds of years. The use of the iDaafa as one unit when adding personal pronouns is the recent innovation. That's why not everyone is comfortable with it.

Personally, I don't have a problem with innovations - that's what a living language does! But when the meaning sounds wrong or inaccurate, I'd rather use something else.


----------



## elroy

Qureshpor said:


> they are to be taken as one unit. So the "my" prefix is not for "naum" or "safar" but for the whole unit.


 Yes, clearly that is what is going on.

The question is, is this valid in MSA?  What would the إعراب be?

Can we say

جواز سفري
جواز: مضاف
سفر: مضاف إليه
*والمضاف والمضاف إليه في محل رفع/نصب/جر مضاف*
الياء: مضاف إليه

?

That's the only thing that would make sense to me.  The مضاف can't just be سفر, because the meaning is not "the permit of my travel."


----------



## Mahaodeh

elroy said:


> *والمضاف والمضاف إليه في محل رفع/نصب/جر مضاف*


I've never seen anything like that, what I have seen is a single word that can be both muDaaf and muDaaf illaihi. 

On the other hand, I can't claim that I've seen all there is to see in i3raab! 

I just remembered, in Classical Arabic capital was رأس مال, two separate words that are an iDaafa. It was used with a pronoun: رأس مالي، رأس ماله but in this case the meaning is accurate because the 'head' (or initial, not sure what to call it in English) is the 'head' of the money, and the money is in fact mine or his. 

I don't know if this is helpful here, I just thought I'd mention it.


----------



## elroy

Yes, indeed, in some cases it's semantically plausible to think of the possession as referring to the second element only.

In an earlier post, Cherine intimated that this could work for "my bedroom":


cherine said:


> maybe we need to look at it as meaning the room *where I sleep* rather than a literal translation of my bedroom


 (emphasis mine)

Personally, I think that one's a stretch, but in other cases (like رأس مال) it makes more sense.

In other cases - like كرة قدم - it definitely doesn't work at all.


----------



## Ghabi

Would the following examples sound stilted to a contemporary reader/listener (taken from Qabbani's poetry)?

لأنني أستحي أن أصفع امرأة
تحمل في حقيبة يدها البيضاء
أحلى أيام حياتي

اشربي فنجان قهوتك
واستمعي بهدوء إلى كلماتي


----------



## elroy

Interesting examples!

For me, they definitely sound like "the bag of *your hand*" and "the cup of *your coffee*," but I have two observations:

1.) A study I participated in suggested that as an English-dominant bilingual, I prefer low attachment to high attachment, whereas studies show that native speakers of Arabic prefer high attachment.  This could be a factor influencing my readings (dominant language transfer).
2.) I think there's a good chance Qabbani was using some poetic license here.  Even in colloquial, I wouldn't say فنجان قهوتك.  Not only is that not idiomatic in Palestinian Arabic, but it could be confusing, because we often use قهوتك to mean القهوة اللي إنت بتعمليها.  We don't have a literal equivalent of حقيبة يدك, but we do say ساعة إيد, and again, I wouldn't say ساعة إيدك.


----------



## Matat

elroy said:


> What would the product mean in English?





Ihsiin said:


> Clearly the meaning is 'Your Lord [who is] *the* Lord of glory.'


Yes, more or less. This is what was intended. It was never intended to mean 'My lord of Glory' the way it would in English. We're retaining the definite meaning of رب العزة, but simply making it possessive. Perhaps if we wanted 'My lord of Glory' as it would mean in English, we may get rid of the article and keep the badal, as in:

إن هذا ربي ربُّ عزة = this is my lord, a lord of glory.

Either way, it would have to be within the context. The الـ article in Arabic doesn't work as it does in English. Whether one likes the suggestion or not, no one confuses غرفتي غرفة النوم to mean 'my room [which is] the bedroom' in the sense that no one can have any other bedroom of their own.



cherine said:


> Regarding خاصتي، الخاص(ـة) بي they are new, but have become commonly used in MSA. I don't know how they're dealt with i3raab-wise, but this doesn't seem to bother those who use it. So I suggest you, Matat, take it into consideration





elroy said:


> With خاصتي and الخاصة بي, however, native speakers do not disagree about these being correct ways to say "my" in MSA. The only thing native speakers will disagree on is elegance and euphony, which is inherently subjective.


They are commonly used and I was not unaware of this, but usage alone does not make them good suggestions or correct suggestions or go-to suggestions. I looked on other threads to see other opinions and didn't find much, but what I did find was either negative or pure rejections of them, like here and here.


> وكذلك أردت أن أسألك عن أسلوب *استقبحته هو قولهم " قرأت الكتاب الخاص بك " مثلا أو الخاص بي *...إلخ الاتيان بكلمة خاصة أصحيحة هي ؟
> وكذلك أستاذي -بعد إذنكم - ألا ترى أن الكتب الأدبية الأروبية المترجمة أعني الترجمة الحديث في الغالب *لا تجد فيها طعم اللغة العربية و ذوقها* ؟





> ( الكتاب الخاص بك ) جائز* على ركاكته* ، *وأقبح منه قولهم ( الكتاب خاصتي ) ولا أراه جائزا،* أو لا يحضرني له وجه الآن.





> " ليس في العربية ضمائر للملكية، وإنما تستفاد الملكية من ضمائر الجر بإضافة الاسم إليها، أو التعدي إليها بالجار.
> تقول في العربية: هذا قلمي، أو: هذا القلم لي.
> وأما قول معلمي اللغة الإنجليزية:* هذا القلم خاصتي، فترجمة ركيكة، تنبو عنها السليقة العربية السليمة الجارية على الاستعمال الفصيح*.


From these, I don't find Elroy's statement to be entirely accurate that their correctness is not disputed by native speakers. I find غرفة نومي, قرة قدمي, جواز سفري - irrespective of their correctness or not - to be more correct and idiomatic uses in MSA.


cherine said:


> instead of your suggestion which I, frankly, don't find neither short nor elegant. Sorry.


No need to apologize, but I must disagree with you. I don't think there is much room to dispute that it's short, with due respect. It's certainly not as long as something like غرفة النوم التي هي لي. As for whether it's elegant or not, that's a matter of opinion. Maha seemed to like the use of كرتي كرة القدم and it answers her original question of how one would possess something like رب العالمين. However, I was surprised to hear you didn't like it because when Abu Talha suggested كتابك كتاب الشعر last year, you said:


cherine said:


> It's a good solution to use البدل like this  But I don't think many would do it in MSA.





Qureshpor said:


> My understanding is that compounds such as غرفة النوم and جواز السفر for "bedroom" and "passport" are a relatively recent innovation into MSA and as I have suggested before, they are to be taken as one unit. So the "my" prefix is not for "naum" or "safar" but for the whole unit.


These particular terms are recent, but the concept of having one unit in a مضاف ومضاف إليه form is not recent.



elroy said:


> جواز سفري
> جواز: مضاف
> سفر: مضاف إليه
> *والمضاف والمضاف إليه في محل رفع/نصب/جر مضاف*
> الياء: مضاف إليه
> ?


No. This would only work if جواز سفر is a محكية, but that is not the case here, since its declension changes based on where it is in the sentence.


----------



## cherine

Ghabi said:


> Would the following examples sound stilted to a contemporary reader/listener (taken from Qabbani's poetry)?
> تحمل في حقيبة يدها البيضاء
> [..]
> اشربي فنجان قهوتك



Good examples 
They don't sound stilted at all to me, and I don't think they stopped many Arabic native speakers when they read them.
I still believe such structure (add the pronoun at the end of the iDaafa) feel very natural with certain items and strange (if not plain wrong) with others, even if I can't pinpoint how or why, nor forge a rule for this.


elroy said:


> I think there's a good chance Qabbani was using some poetic license here.  Even in colloquial, I wouldn't say فنجان قهوتك.  Not only is that not idiomatic in Palestinian Arabic, but it could be confusing, because we often use قهوتك to mean القهوة اللي إنت بتعمليها.  We don't have a literal equivalent of حقيبة يدك, but we do say ساعة إيد, and again, I wouldn't say ساعة إيدك.


In Egypt, قهوتك can be both the one you make and the one you drink, it depends on the context. Like saying وَحَشِتْني قهوتك to someone who used to make you a great cup of coffee; and saying to your friend خَلَّص قهوتك عشان نمشي when you're at a coffee shop. The difference is clear.
As for the handbag, it's very common and natural to say شنطة إيدك shanTet iidek.


----------



## elroy

elroy said:


> 1.) A study I participated in suggested that as an English-dominant bilingual, I prefer low attachment to high attachment, whereas studies show that native speakers of Arabic prefer high attachment. This could be a factor influencing my readings (dominant language transfer).
> 2.) I think there's a good chance Qabbani was using some poetic license here. Even in colloquial, I wouldn't say فنجان قهوتك. Not only is that not idiomatic in Palestinian Arabic, but it could be confusing, because we often use قهوتك to mean القهوة اللي إنت بتعمليها. We don't have a literal equivalent of حقيبة يدك, but we do say ساعة إيد, and again, I wouldn't say ساعة إيدك.


 It sounds like a third important aspect is:

3.) What sounds natural in a native speaker's dialect may influence what they perceive to be natural in MSA.

In Palestinian Arabic, it's very common to say غرفتي النوم.  In fact, I think I'm much more likely to say this than غرفة نومي (in Palestinian Arabic).  Similarly, I would say فنجانك القهوة and ساعتك الإيد (in the case of the latter, ساعتك is usually enough as it will be obvious from the context that a watch is meant, but ساعتك الإيد is what I would say if I had to specify the type of ساعة.)  It was recently brought to my attention that غرفتي النوم, etc. may be a uniquely Palestinian structure.  This could be an additional factor explaining my rejection of غرفة نومي, etc. in MSA.

@cherine, I don't disagree that غرفة نومي _sounds_ better than كرة قدمي, but I feel like in MSA, the _structure_ has to be either correct or incorrect, regardless of the specific phrase in question.  Also, if it's correct, then what is the إعراب (see #73)?  I think a good litmus test for whether something is correct or not in MSA is whether we can find a convincing إعراب for it, right?


----------



## cherine

Matat said:


> They are commonly used and I was not unaware of this, but usage alone does not make them good suggestions or correct suggestions or go-to suggestions. I looked on other threads to see other opinions and didn't find much, but what I did find was either negative or pure rejections of them, like here and here.


I totally agree with those opinions. It doesn't make any sense and there is absolutely no reason to say الكتاب خاصتي أو الكتاب الخاص بي when you can simply add the pronoun in a concise and naturally-sounding Arabic كتابي. The problem is that those quotes are addressing the use of خاصتي، الخاص بي with single words, not with compound words/iDaafa, which is the "problem" we're facing here, so I think they don't help us in the discussion we're having here.


> I don't think there is much room to dispute that it's short


Well, compared to غرفة نومي (two words), غرفتي غرفة النوم (three words) is less short 


> I was surprised to hear you didn't like it because when Abu Talha suggested كتابك كتاب الشعر last year, you said:
> 
> 
> cherine said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a good solution to use البدل like this  But I don't think many would do it in MSA.
Click to expand...

Yes, I said that كتابك كتاب الشعر is a good solution, but I didn't say it's perfect and I did say that not many would use it in MSA (i.e. it sounded old and wouldn't be used commonly in MSA).


----------



## Matat

cherine said:


> Well, compared to غرفة نومي (two words), غرفتي غرفة النوم (three words) is less short


Fair enough . A three-word phrase is still short, in my opinion.



cherine said:


> The problem is that those quotes are addressing the use of خاصتي، الخاص بي with single words, not with compound words/iDaafa, which is the "problem" we're facing here, so I think they don't help us in the discussion we're having here.


I see your point, but from the context of the conversation, they were rejecting the actual use of خاصتي and الخاص بـ in general and not simply the fact that they were describing non-idaafa nouns. From their descriptions and the context, I think it's fair to say that even if an idaafah example was used, their opinions would have been no different. That's not to say they would have used the badal suggestion I was talking about in their place.


----------



## elroy

Matat said:


> We're retaining the definite meaning of رب العزة, but simply making it possessive.


 You haven't answered my question.  What would the result of "retaining the definite meaning but simply making it possessive" _translate to_ in English?  "My Lord, (who is) the Lord of Glory", which is what we've all said the phrase means and which you just endorsed, is not "making it possessive."


Matat said:


> They are commonly used and I was not unaware of this, but usage alone does not make them good suggestions or correct suggestions or go-to suggestions.


 Usage matters *a lot* (something you don't seem to want to recognize).  You also have to define what you mean by "good suggestions," "correct suggestions," and "go-to suggestions."  Here's how I understand these descriptions:

_good suggestions_: This is a subjective value judgment (similar to "elegant," which has come up in this thread).  Assuming something is correct, this generally comes down to personal preference.  Looking at the example opinions you quoted, I don't see anything in there about _correctness_.  I have already expressed that I'm not a huge fan of these structures in terms of elegance or euphony, so I don't necessarily disagree with the opinions you quoted.
_correct suggestions_: Grammatically correct, do not violate any grammatical rules, and express the intended meaning.  As I've said, the meaning is indisputably correct (I don't see anything to the contrary in the quotes you shared).  As for the grammar, see #59 for my proposed إعراب of these structures.  Do you have any objections?
_go-to suggestions_: "Go-to" is neither positive nor negative.  It simply means that these are "easy" solutions that people often fall back on (maybe because they can't come up with something more elegant, or can't be bothered to try).  This notably happens in translations and subtitles (see #61). 
Do you disagree with any of the above?


Matat said:


> I find غرفة نومي, قرة قدمي, جواز سفري - irrespective of their correctness or not - to be more correct and idiomatic uses in MSA.


 I'm sorry, but what is your basis for your claim that they are more idiomatic?  You didn't even know the other structures were used, so how can you presume to be able to make a comparison in terms of idiomaticity?

Also, what do you mean by "more correct"?  In MSA, something is either correct or incorrect; correctness is not gradient.  Other things, like elegance and idiomaticity, are.


Matat said:


> I think it's fair to say that even if an idaafah example was used, their opinions would have been no different.


 No, I don't think that's a safe assumption at all.  Speaking for myself, I would never, or almost never, use خاصتي or الخاصة بي with a single noun, whereas with an إضافة, I'm still very unlikely to use them, but the likelihood is higher.  Let's say that with single nouns, the likelihood is 1%, whereas for إضافة structures, the likelihood is at least 10%.  That's a significant difference.


----------



## Matat

Elroy, I'm going to have to ask you to excuse me because I can't continue this conversation. I've invested way more time into this than I expected to and I'm way too busy to continue discussing it.


----------



## Mahaodeh

Ghabi said:


> لأنني أستحي أن أصفع امرأة
> تحمل في حقيبة يدها البيضاء
> أحلى أيام حياتي
> 
> اشربي فنجان قهوتك
> واستمعي بهدوء إلى كلماتي



I agree with Cherine in that they don't sound stilted at all. But I also agree with elroy in that they do sound like: the bag of your hand and the cup of your coffee. However, like 'the room of my sleep', they work albeit not saying exactly what the English version would say. 



elroy said:


> I wouldn't say فنجان قهوتك. Not only is that not idiomatic in Palestinian Arabic, but it could be confusing, because we often use قهوتك to mean القهوة اللي إنت بتعمليها.



قهوتك doesn't always mean 'the coffee that you make', it can sometimes mean 'the coffee that you have with you now'. Sometimes it even means 'the coffee that you brought', it all depends on context. I agree that we don't really use اشرب قهوتك much but this particular case is closer to رأس مالك because frankly, I'm much more likely to say اشرب قهوتك than اشرب فنجانك - the latter sounds off and if I used it the person I say it to will probably comment that 'he can't drink cups!'



cherine said:


> As for the handbag, it's very common and natural to say شنطة إيدك shanTet iidek.



Most of the time in PA we just say شنتّك, but I think I have heard شنتت إيدك a couple of times. I think that elroy has a point about the effect of dialect.



elroy said:


> but I feel like in MSA, the _structure_ has to be either correct or incorrect, regardless of the specific phrase in question.



I don't fully agree, it has to make semantic sense as well as be grammatically correct, so context makes a difference. I think we agreed that you can say رأس مالي because it's semantically correct, but you can't say كرة قدمي because it's semantically incorrect. Grammatically, both are correct.

The issue we have with غرفة نومي, the subject of this discussion, is that it falls within the gray area: it's not semantically incorrect, but it's not really what the person saying it means. In my opinion, this is the problem: the person saying it _means_ one thing, but is _saying_ another and not realising it. What further complicates matters is that a decent percentage (possibly most) of those hearing it would understand what he means, not what he says!


----------



## elroy

Matat said:


> Elroy, I'm going to have to ask you to excuse me because I can't continue this conversation. I've invested way more time into this than I expected to and I'm way too busy to continue discussing it.


 إذنك معك.  


Mahaodeh said:


> قهوتك doesn't always mean 'the coffee that you make'


 I never said it did.   My point was that فنجان قهوتك _could be confusing_ because the predominant meaning of قهوتك is "the coffee that you make." 

I agree that اشرب فنجانك is unlikely (but not impossible).  I'm comfortable with either اشرب قهوتك or اشرب فنجانك القهوة - although, again, in many cases we would just say اشرب القهوة and the meaning would be clear from context.  In any case, we definitely do _*not*_ say اشرب فنجان قهوتك. 


Mahaodeh said:


> I think I have heard شنتت إيدك a couple of times.


 Are you sure this was Palestinian?  To me, it sounds almost as bad as كرة قدمك!  (By the way, for me "handbag" is جزدان, but I know some people do use شنتة.)

Maha, I think your observation about the dynamics of what's going on here is absolutely spot-on.  We have clear-cut cases that are definitely out (كرة قدمي) and other cases that are less clear-cut because you could technically force a semantic interpretation that works, but it's not really what the speaker is trying to say.  These cases fall along a continuum in terms of how fluid and natural they sound, and there are perceptual differences depending on native dialect.


----------



## Mahaodeh

elroy said:


> Are you sure this was Palestinian?


No, not really. I do recall hearing it a couple of times, but I can't remember where or when, for all I know it could have been an Egyptian TV show!



elroy said:


> By the way, for me "handbag" is جزدان


Yes, a lot of my extended family also use it, but for me it complicates things with my mum because in Iraqi Arabic جزدان is a purse or wallet - the little one where you put your money, ID, and credit cards. Incidentally, جنطة إيد (Iraqi version) is not used at all, when someone wants to specify they say الجنطة اللي بإيدي it's the suitcase that has the iDaafa جنطة سفر.


----------



## momai

I really find it strange that you people have a hard time dealing with the Idaafe construction. I also find using خاصة generally very clumsy in translations, especially when the original text doesn't use the word _own. _
As for MSA, I myself use ياء الملكية always at the end of such constructions, unless it sounds really horrible as is the case with كرة القدم where you have to find somehow some other solutions depending on the context.
In Syrian  :
my glass of water كاستي المي 
my football طابتي القدم 
my poetry book كتابي الشعر
my bedroom غرفتي النوم or غرفة نومي
my passport جوازي السفر or جواز سفري
my glass of apple juice كاسة عصيري التفاح
and of course you could always use the powerful tool تبع or alike as in all other dialects.


----------



## elroy

Ah, so it’s not just Palestinian! 

But we don’t say طابتي القدم.  We say كرة قدم or فُطبُل for the sport, and only فُطبُل for the ball.  (We don’t say طابة قدم for anything.). And “my glass of apple juice” is كاسة عصير التفاح تبعتي; there’s no way to avoid تبع with that one!


----------



## Ghabi

momai said:


> I also find using خاصة generally very clumsy in translations, especially when the original text doesn't use the word _own. _


How do you find it in a technical context? As in:

إذا كنت ترغب في مسح جميع ملفات تعريف الارتباط الخاصة بك ...


----------



## elroy

To me, it sounds just fine in that context.


----------



## Abu Talha

In an attempt to avoid the disliked الخاصة بك does this sound passable
إذا كنت ترغب في مسح جميع ملفاتك ذات تعريف الارتباط


----------



## elroy

No, unfortunately not. 

It’s not disliked by me in that sentence.


----------



## Abu Talha

Thanks elroy


----------



## elroy

As a general rule of thumb, ذات is used when the meaning is "having."

Here, the meaning is not "files _having_ تعريف الارتباط."


----------



## Qureshpor

I asked about "my bedroom" from our local Imam who studied the Qur'an and Classical Arabic for many years. He agreed (as @elroy has said) that غرفة نومي is indeed ambiguous and could mean "The room for my sleep". He felt the best equivalent for "my bedroom" would be: غرفتي للنومِ

Now this could imply "My room is for sleeping" but in the appropriate context it would mean "my room for sleeping".


----------



## elroy

Qureshpor said:


> He felt the best equivalent for "my bedroom" would be: غرفتي للنومِ


 As with many of the other suggestions given so far, this will not work in many (maybe even most) contexts.  For example, ذهبت إلى غرفتي للنوم would not work for "I went to my bedroom" (it would mean "I went to my room to sleep").


----------



## Qureshpor

^ Thank you @elroy. Back to the drawing board, it seems! Have we managed to get some sort of final consensus? I wonder what Sibawayh would have come up with for "my passport, my football, my passport, my cup of water" and the like?


----------



## Ihsiin

He would have come up with a convoluted construction and then a passing Bedouin would have told him that he was quite wrong


----------



## elroy

Qureshpor said:


> Have we managed to get some sort of final consensus?


 I don't know about a _consensus_, but my personal conclusion (at least for the time being) continues to be that 





elroy said:


> there is no one-size-fits-all solution, much as we would all like there to be!


----------



## elroy

I just translated

_Looking for her lipstick, she fished in her bag.   _​
as

بحثت في حقيبتها وهي تحاول إيجاد أحمر الشفاه الذي كانت قد أضاعته.​
What do people think of my solution?


----------



## Abbe

elroy said:


> I just translated
> 
> _Looking for her lipstick, she fished in her bag.   _​
> as
> 
> بحثت في حقيبتها وهي تحاول إيجاد أحمر الشفاه الذي كانت قد أضاعته.​
> What do people think of my solution?



I think it's good and generally speaking I think that the pronoun can be removed and replaced with the alif and laam. So instead of using complex structures like many examples in this thread it might be better to drop the pronoun and use the definite form. 
Context is generally enough to show that the pronoun is intended even if it's not mentioned.


----------



## elroy

Thanks!

I agree that the definite article is often sufficient (as I said earlier).  As a matter of fact, it would probably be sufficient in this case: she’s looking in her own bag, so it’s a safe assumption that the lipstick is hers. 

(Actually, strictly speaking even my addition of “that she had lost” doesn’t rule out the possibility that it’s someone else’s.  But it’s an unlikely scenario.)


----------



## Abbe

I'm sorry I didn't read all posts and didn't know it had been mentioned earlier. Anyway it's a good solution in this and many other cases.


----------



## cherine

elroy said:


> I just translated
> 
> _Looking for her lipstick, she fished in her bag.   _​
> as
> 
> بحثت في حقيبتها وهي تحاول إيجاد أحمر الشفاه الذي كانت قد أضاعته.​
> What do people think of my solution?


Yes, I think it's natural to drop the pronoun here.
As for the translation itself, I think الذي كانت قد أضاعته is an unnecessary addition, especially that there's nothing in the source that says she's lost it, she's simply looking for it.


----------



## elroy

cherine said:


> there's nothing in the source that says she's lost it, she's simply looking for it.


 Good point!


----------



## Qureshpor

Qureshpor said:


> ^ Thank you @elroy. Back to the drawing board, it seems! Have we managed to get some sort of final consensus? I wonder what Sibawayh would have come up with for "my passport, my football, my passport, my cup of water" and the like?


I have read through the whole of this thread and would like to thank all the participants because for me personally, it has been a very informative experience. Gratitude is especially due to elroy and Matat for having an intellectual but at the same time civilised dialogue. Taking "bedroom: غرفة نوم" as the starting point I propose to sum up this thread and suggest a possible way out. Please forgive me if I have taken undue liberty in my summation.

Broadly speaking there have been four suggestions put forward for "my bed room" and these are:

i) غرفة نومي (currently found in MS I believe)

ii) غرفة النوم خاصتي & غرفة النوم الخاصة بي (elroy’s suggestions – commonly used in MSA)

iii) غرفتي غرفة النوم (Matat’s suggestion – an example of “badal” – found in Classical Arabic)

iv) غرفتي النومية & غرفتي ذات النوم (Abu Talha’s suggestions)

The very reason this debate has come about is that Arabic does not have separate possessive pronouns, like my, our, his, her etc but makes do with suffixes such as -ii (my), -naa (our), -hu (his), -haa (her) and so on. The nearest separate words it has to express possession are lii, la-naa, la-hu and la-haa respectively.

Problems mentioned for each suggestion:

i) The pronominal suffix is attached to the second part of the construct when it should be qualifying the first part.

ii) It is long and it does not convey the desired meaning of pure possession but has the additional meaning of “specification” and perhaps “inelegant”.

iii) It is long and it does not convey the desired meaning of “my bedroom” but instead “my room, the bedroom”.

iv) Possibly may only have limited usage.

Now, as an unbiased observer and a man of little knowledge in Arabic, what would be my choice? Perhaps, a better question might be, "What method do the best writers, the trend setters, of Arabic language employ when they need to add the possessive element to a construct?" Well, one of our friends has quoted a couple of examples from Qabbani for (i). Is he a person who is very particular about the correct pristine usage of the Arabic language? Is Khalil Gibran such a person? I've been told that both Taha Hussain and Naguib Mahfouz employ impeccable Classical Arabic. How do these and other authors of similar pedigree deal with this issue? Whatever method that is commonly put into practice by these people surely must be a style to emulate.

Supposing there is n't anything clear cut in the works of such people. If this is the case, then it is high time to come up with some innovation, such as that shown in the examples shown below, in which MSA
has developed a system whereby a comma to indicate a restrictive clause in English is represented by the letter "و" in Arabic.

هل تعرف من أرسل لي تلغراف تهنئه استلمته اليوم

Do you know who sent me a congratulatory telegraph which I received yesterday?

(non-restrictive clause)

هل تعرف من أرسل لي تلغراف تهنئه واستلمته اليوم

Do you know who sent me a congratulatory telegraph, which I received yesterday?

(restrictive clause)

هل تعرف من أرسل لي تلغراف التهنئة الذي استلمته اليوم

Do you know who sent me the congratulatory telegraph which I received yesterday?

(non-restrictive clause)

هل تعرف من أرسل لي تلغراف التهنئة والذي استلمته اليوم

Do you know who sent me the congratulatory telegraph, which I received yesterday?

(restrictive clause)

So, it seems innovation is taking place and most innovations may have objections raised but when well known authors begin to use them, a trend is set and the rest follow suit.

Now getting to the question in hand. How does option (v) sound to you?              

v) غرفة نوم) لي) where of course (Ghurafat-u naum-in) is simply "bedroom" and "لي" is implying "my".

If we wanted to say "my large (bedroom)", then we would say "غرفة نوم) كبيرة لي)". I am of the opinion that if

 ھذہ آخر سَنة دِراسِيّة لي بالکلیة  is correct, then my suggestion ought to be correct too(?)

I am translating this as "This is my last academic year in the faculty". Perhaps it ought to be:

"This is the last academic year in the faculty for me".

Nevertheless, I hope you get my gist.


----------



## Qureshpor

Would anyone be kind enough to let me know if غرفة نوم لي would be acceptable correct Arabic for "my bedroom" as suggested in my previous post or not?


----------



## Ghabi

غرفة نوم لي would mean "a bedroom for me" or "a bedroom of mine" (but it's difficult to imagine a context in which the latter would be actually used, whether in English or in Arabic).

For "my bedroom", you can certainly see غرفة نومي in, say, a contemporary novel.

أخر سنة has a different structure than غرفة نوم. The former is definite, the latter indefinite.


----------



## Qureshpor

Thank you.

I appreciate 2aaxiru sanat-in is definite in meaning but in terms of its construction, it has an indefinite structure.

In غرفة نوم لي, could n't لي be interpreted as "of me" (= my) rather than "for me". "li" is used in this meaning, as you no doubt will be aware, as in:

غزو العراق للکویت Iraq's invasion of Kuwait


----------



## Ghabi

As said above, غرفة نوم is indefinite, so غرفة نوم لي cannot mean "my bedroom". I don't know why you mention غزو العراق للكويت, which is not relevant to the present discussion.


----------



## Qureshpor

I shall make an attempt to explain my line of thought. I know that my knowledge in Arabic is next to nothing while a great many people in this forum, like your good self, have great insight and expertise in Arabic. Nevertheless, I am merely putting forward my view which may well be wrong.

Sticking to غرفة نوم (a bedroom) and having read other friends' views on coming up with "my bedroom", we seem to have the following issues.

i) We can't add the suffix ي to the مضاف (and we really want to add it to the "room") because this would break the construct rules.

ii) If we add ي to مضاف الیہ, the meaning achieved is nonsense since the end result is "room of my sleep" as oppose to "my room of sleep".

iii) As a consequence of above issues, we need to come up with a word which is equivalent to "my". @elroy has suggested two options which other friends suggest may be a wee bit too long.

[If I remember rightly, there has also been the issue whether the word "my" should be added to an indefinite form (a bedroom) or definite form (the bedroom). I personally don't see any reason why we cannot add "my" to both. " a bedroom"/ "the bedroom" > "my bedroom" (definite)]

Now, the reason for bringing in غزو العراق للكويت. I was merely trying to cite an example where "li" has the meaning "*of*".

Clive Holes, in his book which has already been mentioned by @Abu Talha, states..

"The use of the preposition "li", whose original sense is benefactive, in structures of this kind (qatlu-hu li_rrajuli -- his killing *of *the man) seems to have become common in media Arabic...".

On page 208, he goes onto say...

"In media MSA, "li" seems in fact to function very much like the English "of", even in contexts where there is no discernible possessive relationship between the noun that it links....".

"li" therefore has meanings of "to", "for" and "*of*" and I am suggesting that "لي" which is attached to the whole compound can mean "*my*" as opposed to "of mine" or "to me".

 غرفة نوم لي my bedroom

لي غرفة نوم I have a bedroom

I hope what I have said is clear now. I would very much appreciate your and other friends' views for this suggestion, which I tried to introduce in my # 106.

PS: If you are saying we need to have غرفة النوم لي to imply "my bedroom)


----------



## Ghabi

In a phrase like غزو العراق للكويت, the لـ, which is only optional, is not used for possession. It's known as اللام لتقوية العامل. It's not a modern innovation. The two options, with لـ or without لـ, exist side by side in contemporary Arabic. The quotes you quote don't make sense to me, and I don't think they're relevant to this thread.

I've already given my opinion on غرفة نوم لي. I stand by what I said. You can wait for other opinions.


----------



## Qureshpor

^ Thank you for your response. I won't say anymore in response to you as I have said whatever I needed to say. If anyone else decides to make a comment, all well and good. Otherwise, no worries.


----------



## Ghabi

Perhaps I haven't phrased my replies clearly. I will try again:

- لـ can be used to show possession, but it's used only under specific circumstances:
-- when the phrase is indefinite, i.e. صديق لي "a friend of mine" vs صديقي "my friend";
-- when you want to avoid a clumsy iDaafa structure that involves several nouns and adjectives (cf. this thread);

- "My bedroom" doesn't belong to either of the above cases;

- This thread is about possession;

- The لـ in the phrase غزو العراق للكويت is not used to show possession. Your quotes don't seem to suggest that لـ is used to show possession in this type of phrase. But I haven't read them in context so I can't judge. "Of" has many functions in English, just as لـ has many in Arabic; they can't be compared mechanically;

- لي غرفة نوم "I have a bedroom" is of course correct, but interpreting غرفة نوم لي as "my bedroom" is not.

I apologize if I misunderstand you, or you're already familiar with all these.


----------



## Qureshpor

^ Thank you for above and my following questions are merely as a learning exercise for me, not challenging you in any shape or form.

It seems that لي can be added to an indefinite entity as in your example صديق لي . 

i) Would you agree غرفة نوم (a bedroom) is indefinite? 

ii) If you agree that غرفة نوم is indefinite, then can لي be added to غرفة نوم as in غرفة نوم لي? You say, it can but it does not mean "my bedroom". You are implying لي does not mean "my" here.

iii) Can لي ever mean "my" in any context? If yes, then surely this (and of course other possessives like لنا، لہ، لھم، لھا، لھن، لک، لکم لکن etc) can be added to غرفة نوم (and similar structures), as an innovation, if it has n't been done before? To my mind, this would be a neat solution to the problem.


----------



## cherine

Qureshpor said:


> It seems that لي can be added to an indefinite entity as in your example صديق لي .


Yes it can be added, but it wouldn't mean "my friend" but more like "a friend of mine".


> iii) Can لي ever mean "my" in any context? If yes, then surely this (and of course other possessives like لنا، لہ، لھم، لھا، لھن، لک، لکم لکن etc) can be added to غرفة نوم (and similar structures), as an innovation, if it has n't been done before? To my mind, this would be a neat solution to the problem.


No, لي cannot mean "my", it means "for me". You can say غرفة نوم لي in limited contexts, like going to a hotel and saying أريد غرفة نوم لي وغرفة نوم لصديقي, and this would not mean that it would be your bedroom; just a room _for_ you.

If you're looking for a neat solution, there's the word that's become commonly used in the past years: خاصتي and الخاصة به which you can add after any word to indicate المِلْكِيّة. Like غرفة النوم خاصتي or غرفة النوم الخاصة بي. Not everyone is a fan of this word (I'm not crazy about it either) but it's a handy solution that's becoming more and more commonly used and accepted.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

Salut,

1- Il y a quelques temps j'avais vu cet exemple : "الموسيقى المُفَضَّلة لَدَيَّ my favourite music".

2- We have "the summer holidays ---> عطلة الصيف" and to say "*your summer holidays*", I proposed (in another forum) to use an adjective:

The summer holidays : العُطْلةُ الصَّيْفيّةُ
---> *Your* summer holidays : عُطْلَتُكَ الصَّيْفيّةُ

*What do you think* ?

3- Dans le dictionnaire Larousse j'avais trouvé ces exemples :

Passeport جَوازُ سَفَرٍ
Présenter *son *passeport قَدَّمَ جَوازَ سَفَرِهِ
Faire renouveler *son* passeport جَدَّدَ جَوازَ سَفَرِهِ
*Mon *passeport a expiré انْقَضَتْ مُدّةُ صلاَحيّةِ جوازِ سَفَري


----------



## Abu Talha

cherine said:


> Yes it can be added, but it wouldn't mean "my friend" but more like "a friend of mine.
> 
> Noلي cannot mean "my", it means "for me". You can say غرفة نوم لي in limited contexts, like going to a hotel and saying أريد غرفة نوم لي وغرفة نوم لصديقي, and this would not mean that it would be your bedroom; just a room _for_ you.


But I suppose you could use it like صديق لي to mean "a bedroom of mine" (which I know is unusual in its meaning)?

For example:
بتُّ الليلة في غرفة يوم لي.
صاحَبني يومئذ صديق لي.


----------



## Qureshpor

cherine said:


> Yes it can be added, but it wouldn't mean "my friend" but more like "a friend of mine".
> 
> No, لي cannot mean "my", it means "for me". You can say غرفة نوم لي in limited contexts, like going to a hotel and saying أريد غرفة نوم لي وغرفة نوم لصديقي, and this would not mean that it would be your bedroom; just a room _for_ you.
> 
> If you're looking for a neat solution, there's the word that's become commonly used in the past years: خاصتي and الخاصة به which you can add after any word to indicate المِلْكِيّة. Like غرفة النوم خاصتي or غرفة النوم الخاصة بي. Not everyone is a fan of this word (I'm not crazy about it either) but it's a handy solution that's becoming more and more commonly used and accepted.


Thank you. I understand what you are trying to convey.

i) أريد غرفة نوم *لي* وغرفة نوم لصديقي  I want a bedroom *for me* and a bedroom for my friend.

Here, you would agree that more idiomatic request would be:

أريد غرفة *لي* وغرفة لصديقي

ii) استلمت الیوم خطاباً من *صدیق لي*  I received a letter from *a friend of mine*.

So *لي *means *for me *and *of mine*.

‎هذا القلم *لي* This pen is *mine* (Sentence and translation from the net)

But this could mean, "This pen is *for me*" and in the right context

‎*هذا القلم* *لي *جمیل۔*  This pen of mine* is beautiful.

What about the following sentence?

هذا *قلم لي* This is *a pen (which is) for me*. / This is *a pen of mine*. / This is *my pen*.

The only issue is that when one says, "This is a pen of mine.", it of course implies I have other pens too. But when one says, "This is my pen.", it does not necessarily mean this is the only pen that I have. It can still imply I have other pens. So, I would contest that "This is a pen of mine" and "This is my pen" mean essentially the same.

Based on this logic, in the right context, غرفة نوم لي can mean "my bedroom", e.g

ھذا *غرفة نوم لي* و ذلک غرفة نوم لاخی This is *my bedroom* and that is my brother's.

*غرفة نوم لي* اصغر من*غرفة نوم له* *My bedroom* is smaller than *his bedroom*.

If this is all nonsense, then I'll call it a day!


----------



## Ghabi

Qureshpor said:


> So, I would contest that "This is a pen of mine" and "This is my pen" mean essentially the same.


When my brother takes my pen without asking me, I yell, "Hey, this is my pen!" You don't say "Hey, this is a pen of mine". They're not interchangeable.


----------



## Ihsiin

I feel like the arguments in this thread are repeating themselves.



Qureshpor said:


> i) أريد غرفة نوم *لي* وغرفة نوم لصديقي  I want a bedroom *for me* and a bedroom for my friend.
> 
> Here, you would agree that more idiomatic request would be:
> 
> أريد غرفة *لي* وغرفة لصديقي



Indeed, and the more idiomatic usage for "my bedroom" would be غرفتي, as has been said already in previous posts.



> هذا القلم *لي* This pen is *mine* (Sentence and translation from the net)
> 
> But this could mean, "This pen is *for me*" and in the right context
> 
> ‎*هذا القلم* *لي *جمیل۔* This pen of mine* is beautiful.



I think قلمي هذا would be more correct for “this pen of mine.”


----------



## Ibn Nacer

Ihsiin said:


> Indeed, and the more idiomatic usage for "my bedroom" would be غرفتي, as has been said already in previous posts.


غرفتي without the word نوم ? For example if you say "حقيبي" how to know if this "حقيبة" is حَقيبةُ ظَهْرٍ or  حَقيبةُ يَدٍ  or  حَقيبةُ رياضةٍ or  حَقيبةُ سَفَرٍ... ?



elroy said:


> Yes, clearly that is what is going on.
> 
> The question is, is this valid in MSA?  What would the إعراب be?
> 
> Can we say
> 
> جواز سفري
> جواز: مضاف
> سفر: مضاف إليه
> *والمضاف والمضاف إليه في محل رفع/نصب/جر مضاف*
> الياء: مضاف إليه
> 
> ?
> 
> That's the only thing that would make sense to me.  The مضاف can't just be سفر, because the meaning is not "the permit of my travel."


Yes for me the  literal meaning of "جواز سفري" is "the permit of the travel of mine" (the permit of my travel) in french : "le permis de voyage à moi.

It is an annexation with three terms, in reality  I think it's as if there were two nested annexations (جواز السفر + سفري), the second term is common to both annexations (it is both "mudhaaf" and "mudhaf ilayh").

It's like :

باب بيت زيد - The door of the house of zaid - "باب البيت +  بيت زيد"

زوجة ملك المغرب - The wife of the king of Morocco - "زوجة الملك + ملك المغرب"

In these examples we can use an annexation with three terms... I think it possible to translate the structure "*x of y of z*" by using an annexation (with three terms) if semantically we have: "x of *y*" + "*y *of z" ---> y refers to x and z refers to y.

But sometimes we have semantically: "*x* of y" + "*x* of z" ---> y and z refers to x. I think that in this case we can not use an annexation (with three terms), it seems that the solution is to use a preposition : I found this example:

بَطَلُ الْيَمَنِ لِلْمُلَاكَمَةِ عَامِلُ نَظَافَةٍ - Le champion de boxe du Yémen est un éboueur (I do not know how to translate literally "بَطَلُ الْيَمَنِ لِلْمُلَاكَمَةِ" into English maybe "The champion of boxing of Yemen" ?)

Here I think we use the preposition al-lâm (and not an annexation with three terms like بَطَلُ مُلَاكَمَةِ الْيَمَنِ) because we have semantically this " بَطَلُ الْيَمَنِ + بَطَلُ الْمُلَاكَمَةِ " and not this "طَلُ المُلَاكَمَةِ + مُلَاكَمَةِ الْيَمَنِ".

َ

Other example :

لَاعِبَ الْمُنْتَخَبِ الْوَطَنِيِّ لِلْيَمَنِ --- Joueur de l'équipe nationale du Yémen.

----> *So I have a question: Is it possible to say* :

كرتي للقدم  - جوازي للسف - فنجاني من القهوة  - غرفتي للنوم

Thank you and sorry if my message is not clear, I'm not comfortable in English ...




PS : However I remind you that I quoted these examples taken from the dictionaries "Larousse" :

Passeport جَوازُ سَفَرٍ
Présenter *son *passeport قَدَّمَ جَوازَ سَفَرِهِ
Faire renouveler *son* passeport جَدَّدَ جَوازَ سَفَرِهِ
*Mon *passeport a expiré انْقَضَتْ مُدّةُ صلاَحيّةِ جوازِ سَفَري


----------



## cherine

Ibn Nacer said:


> غرفتي without the word نوم ? For example if you say "حقيبي" how to know if this "حقيبة" is حَقيبةُ ظَهْرٍ or  حَقيبةُ يَدٍ  or  حَقيبةُ رياضةٍ or  حَقيبةُ سَفَرٍ... ?


Yes, we usually just say غرفتي and only need to specify when there's need to. The same for the cases/bags...

Again, at the risk of repeating what has been said for the I don't know how many times: there are a couple of ways to express this, none will be found in Classical writing or grammar books, but are commonly used in moder usage:
حقيبة ظهري، حقيبة سفري، حقيبتي الرياضية
حقيبة الظهر خاصتي/الخاصة بي، حقيبة السفر خاصتي/الخاصة بي، الحقيبة الرياضية خاصتي/الخاصة بي
And the same works of course for the bedroom غرفة النوم خاصتي/الخاصة بي



> Yes for me the  literal meaning of "جواز سفري" is "the permit of the travel of mine" (the permit of my travel) in french : "le permis de voyage à moi.


Non, c'est plutôt: le permis de mon voyage.
But again, it is used جواز سفري، جواز سفرك، جواز سفره.... and if you don't like this usage you can go for جواز السفر الخاص بي / جواز السفر خاصتي


> It is an annexation with three terms, in reality  I think it's as if there were two nested annexations (جواز السفر + سفري), the second term is common to both annexations (it is both "mudhaaf" and "mudhaf ilayh").
> 
> It's like :
> 
> باب بيت زيد - The door of the house of zaid - "باب البيت +  بيت زيد"
> 
> زوجة ملك المغرب - The wife of the king of Morocco - "زوجة الملك + ملك المغرب"
> 
> In these examples we can use an annexation with three terms... I think it possible to translate the structure "*x of y of z*" by using an annexation (with three terms) if semantically we have: "x of *y*" + "*y *of z" ---> y refers to x and z refers to y.



I'm not sure I follow, but I think I can point to a big difference between these examples and seemingly similar the structure you suggested before: here x, y and z are different words and the annexation flows naturally, while saying something like جواز السفر سفري or جواز السفر جوازي... doesn't sound natural at all.


> But sometimes we have semantically: "*x* of y" + "*x* of z" ---> y and z refers to x. I think that in this case we can not use an annexation (with three terms), it seems that the solution is to use a preposition : I found this example:
> 
> بَطَلُ الْيَمَنِ لِلْمُلَاكَمَةِ عَامِلُ نَظَافَةٍ - Le champion de boxe du Yémen est un éboueur (I do not know how to translate literally "بَطَلُ الْيَمَنِ لِلْمُلَاكَمَةِ" into English maybe "The champion of boxing of Yemen" ?)
> 
> Here I think we use the preposition al-lâm (and not an annexation with three terms like بَطَلُ مُلَاكَمَةِ الْيَمَنِ) because we have semantically this " بَطَلُ الْيَمَنِ + بَطَلُ الْمُلَاكَمَةِ " and not this "طَلُ مُلَاكَمَةِ  + مُلَاكَمَةِ الْيَمَنِ".
> 
> 
> Other example :
> لَاعِبَ الْمُنْتَخَبِ الْوَطَنِيِّ لِلْيَمَنِ --- Joueur de l'équipe nationale du Yémen.


Again different set of words and the annexation flows naturally. And actually the phrase بطل اليمن للملاكمة is also commonly expressed بطل اليمن *في* الملاكمة and the other sentence لاعب المنتخب الوطني اليمني (the اليمني is the adjective for المنتخب not اللاعب).



> ----> *So I have a question: Is it possible to say* :
> 
> كرتي للقدم  - جوازي للسف - فنجاني من القهوة  - غرفتي للنوم


I still find them strange (and I believe I'm not the only one; you can check previous posts of other native speakers who felt the same about this).
If you give us a few sentence, we may suggest more natural wording. But here are a few examples:
هذه كرتي - كرة القدم هذه خاصتي/ملكي - هذه كرة القدم التي اشتريتها بمالي/التي أهداها أبي لي
الفنجان الذي أشرب فيه القهوة - فنجان القهوة الذي أشرب منه كل يوم - فنجان القهوة الذي أفضله
غرفتي التي أنام فيها - غرفة النوم التي اخترتها لنفسي عندما اشترينا هذا البيت

And, again, all these can have a خاصتي / الخاص(ة) بي if you still prefer a literal translation of my/mon.



> PS : However I remind you that I quoted these examples taken from the dictionaries "Larousse" :
> Passeport جَوازُ سَفَرٍ
> Présenter *son *passeport قَدَّمَ جَوازَ سَفَرِهِ
> Faire renouveler *son* passeport جَدَّدَ جَوازَ سَفَرِهِ
> *Mon *passeport a expiré انْقَضَتْ مُدّةُ صلاَحيّةِ جوازِ سَفَري


Exactly. Adding the pronoun to the word سفر is very common, even if some speakers -native and foreign- don't like it and prefer using other structures.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

Merci Cherine,



cherine said:


> I'm not sure I follow, but I think I can point to a big difference between these examples and seemingly similar the structure you suggested before: here x, y and z are different words and the annexation flows naturally, while saying something like جواز السفر سفري or جواز السفر جوازي... doesn't sound natural at all.



No it's not what I wanted to explain, when I wrote "جواز السفر + سفري" it was not to say "جواز السفر سفري or جواز السفر جوازي"...

- I wanted to explain that I think an annexation with three terms (like "جواز سفري") is in reality as if we had two nested annexations (سفري and جواز السفر), the second term سفر in "جواز سفري" is common to both annexations (it is both "mudhaaf" and "mudhaf ilayh") and the word سفر is the complement of جواز  and the pronom ي is the complement of سفر...

- I wanted to explain that I think it possible to translate the structure "*x of y of z*" by using an annexation (with three terms) if semantically we have two nested annexations : "x of *y*" and "*y *of z" ---> the second term *y* in "*x of y of z*" must be semantically the complement of  *x*  and *z* must be semantically the complement of *y* (the second term *y* is common to both annexations, it is both "mudhaaf" and "mudhaf ilayh").

- However in the structure "*x of y of z*" if semantically the second term *y* and the third term *z* are both complements of the term *x* then I think it is not possible to use an annexation with three terms, in this case a preposition can be used.

I cited two examples of this :

1- بَطَلُ الْيَمَنِ لِلْمُلَاكَمَةِ عَامِلُ نَظَافَةٍ - Le champion *de* boxe *du* Yémen est un éboueur (I do not know how to translate literally "بَطَلُ الْيَمَنِ لِلْمُلَاكَمَةِ" into English maybe "The champion *of* boxing *of* Yemen" ?)

2- لَاعِبَ الْمُنْتَخَبِ الْوَطَنِيِّ لِلْيَمَنِ --- Joueur de l'équipe nationale du Yémen (Player *of* the national team *of* Yemen ???)

We have the structure "*x of y of z*" in which semantically the second term *y* (الْمُنْتَخَب - المُلَاكَمَة) and the third term *z* (الْيَمَنِ) are both complements of the term *x* (لَاعِب - بَطَل).

In this case we can not use an annexation with three terms (as for example بَطَلُ مُلَاكَمَةِ الْيَمَنِ)---> the meaning of بَطَلُ مُلَاكَمَةِ الْيَمَنِ and بَطَلُ الْيَمَنِ لِلْمُلَاكَمَةِ is different.



cherine said:


> ...and the other sentence لاعب المنتخب الوطني اليمني (the اليمني is the adjective for المنتخب not اللاعب).


It's not اليمني but لِلْيَمَنِ...


----------



## cherine

Désolée, mais tous ces x, y et z m'on bien confondue. Je préfère ne pas répondre pour ne pas créer plus de malentendu. Je pense que je n'ai plus rien à ajouter à tout ce fil après les différentes alternatives que j'ai présentées dans mon dernier post #123.


Ibn Nacer said:


> It's not اليمني but لِلْيَمَنِ...


Please read my sentence carefully:


cherine said:


> Again different set of words and the annexation flows naturally. And actually the phrase بطل اليمن للملاكمة is also commonly expressed as بطل اليمن *في* الملاكمة and the other sentence as لاعب المنتخب الوطني اليمني (the اليمني is the adjective for المنتخب not اللاعب).


Sorry if I forgot those 2 "as". I hope what I wanted to say is clearer now.


----------



## Ghabi

Qureshpor said:


> Perhaps, a better question might be, "What method do the best writers, the trend setters, of Arabic language employ when they need to add the possessive element to a construct?" Well, one of our friends has quoted a couple of examples from Qabbani for (i). Is he a person who is very particular about the correct pristine usage of the Arabic language? Is Khalil Gibran such a person? I've been told that both Taha Hussain and Naguib Mahfouz employ impeccable Classical Arabic. How do these and other authors of similar pedigree deal with this issue?


It's super late, but I think I can add an example from Taha Hussein's autobiography (الأيام) (الجزء الأول - الفصل التاسع عشر):


> ثم يمضي الفتى في وصف بيت الشيخ و*حجرة استقباله* و*دار كتبه*


If others encounter similar structures in old books, I hope they can post here!


----------



## Qureshpor

Ghabi said:


> It's super late, but I think I can add an example from Taha Hussein's autobiography (الأيام) (الجزء الأول - الفصل التاسع عشر):
> 
> If others encounter similar structures in old books, I hope they can post here!


Thank you Ghabi for persevering with my request. So, the conclusion that one can draw is that that possessive suffix is added to the muDaaf ilaih even by the best writers. The other conclusion that I would arrive at is that the two words together are to be taken as a compound noun, as I've suggested in one of my earlier posts (#70). I know @elroy then queried about the إعراب  (#72) and perhaps for such compounds we have to sacrifice the إعراب.


----------

