Female honey bee? Arabic word?

[Whatsthepoint]

What is happening here is whatisthepoint is sticking with counter view rather than both arguments presented him, to which he is entitled.. at this point akhi, I wouldn't work myself up about it!
you know what you know, and that is all that matters..

I have considered your and kay's arguments and replied to them.

 

[جوري]

hence I stated you are entitled to the one that makes most sense to you!

I am off for som cawffeeeee

cheers

 

[Whatsthepoint]

hence I stated you are entitled to the one that makes most sense to you!

I am off for som cawffeeeee

cheers

Ok then.

 

[Faye]

I have read in the medina university book 1 that teaches the arabic language course, that "there are rational and irrational nouns, they are also called intelligent and non intelligent...........in singular there is no difference between these two groups. in plural however, there is a very important difference. Plurals or rational NOUNS are treated as plural ..... plurals of irrational NOUNs are treated as femanine singular" [lesson 16]

Butuniha Is plural because it is a noun, do you not understand? The verbs are not nouns nor pronouns.

can somone please verify.

It is not the stomach that produces the honey alone, it is the internal organs.

Nice, now we have that rule on somebody's authority other than mine.

But you didn't understand it perfectly. By being treated as feminine singular, it means that the verbs, adjectives and pronouns belonging to that verb will be feminine singular. The debate is on whether the bees are plural or not, not on whether the bellies are plural; everybody agrees that bellies are plural.

We have a non-intelligent noun in the beginning of this Ayat, an-Nahl (the Bee/s), which is an Ism ul-Jins and can be meant to refer to both singular and plural. Let's assume for the moment that it is referring to plural.

Now the verbs referring to that noun, (osluki, ittakhithi and kulee) as well as the pronoun referring to it, (ha, in butooniha) are all singular feminine form. Which, if you return to the rule, should be the case in the plural of a non-intelligent noun.

Now lets consider the other possibility, that an-Nahl refers to a singular male. In this case the verbs should be (osluk, ittakhith and kul) and the pronoun should be (hi, in butoonihi). As this is not the case, we can dismiss this possibility.

Final case is if you assume a not mentioned noun (an-Nahlah=feminine bee) in the text. Then the verbs would be (osluki, ittakhithi and kulee) and the pronoun would be (ha, in butooniha), as is found in the text. However this would create the problem of 3+ bellies per feminine bee. Also, while having non-mentioned nouns in the text is possible, and used, it is not the best syntax.

 

[kay106]

Nice, now we have that rule on somebody's authority other than mine.

But you didn't understand it perfectly. By being treated as feminine singular, it means that the verbs, adjectives and pronouns belonging to that verb will be feminine singular. The debate is on whether the bees are plural or not, not on whether the bellies are plural; everybody agrees that bellies are plural.

We have a non-intelligent noun in the beginning of this Ayat, an-Nahl (the Bee/s), which is an Ism ul-Jins and can be meant to refer to both singular and plural. Let's assume for the moment that it is referring to plural.

Now the verbs referring to that noun, (osluki, ittakhithi and kulee) as well as the pronoun referring to it, (ha, in butooniha) are all singular feminine form. Which, if you return to the rule, should be the case in the plural of a non-intelligent noun.

Now lets consider the other possibility, that an-Nahl refers to a singular male. In this case the verbs should be (osluk, ittakhith and kul) and the pronoun should be (hi, in butoonihi). As this is not the case, we can dismiss this possibility.

Final case is if you assume a not mentioned noun (an-Nahlah=feminine bee) in the text. Then the verbs would be (osluki, ittakhithi and kulee) and the pronoun would be (ha, in butooniha), as is found in the text. However this would create the problem of 3+ bellies per feminine bee. Also, while having non-mentioned nouns in the text is possible, and used, it is not the best syntax.

if you read almost all translations bee in translated as bee. and buuniha is translated as their bellies.

anyway which ever way bee is translated, whether it is bees or bee, How does it affect that the work is carried out by the female bee, the command is clearly given to a female. example if we say can you boys please eat, or can you please eat, the command or verb is still the same.


"Their bellies" simply means the collective effort to produce the honey. there is not just a single honey bee, there are many an they collectively produce the diverse colours of honey.We know why it is translated as their bellies, not becuase of the verbs, but because it is a irrational noun. you can see this rule more clearly on this site http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_016/MB1_L16_section_001.htm.

I think what you dont understand that a verb and a noun is different.

verbs are commands or actions, "eat", "follow", "build" are all commands. and they are in femanine and its clear with the previous contexes provided.
are you saying the verbs affects whether the bee is plural or not? you are not making any sense.

 

[Faye]

I think what you dont understand that a verb and a noun is different.

verbs are commands or actions, "eat", "follow", "build" are all commands. and they are in femanine and its clear with the previous contexes provided.
are you saying the verbs affects whether the bee is plural or not? you are not making any sense.

Each verb form or conjugation in Arabic has an attached pronoun referring to the doer of the verb, which causes the change in forms. A typical verb in Arabic is translated as 'He did' (Fa2ala), or 'She did' (fa3alat), and so on. The pronoun within the verb changes to denote who the doer is.

In case of 'osluk-ee', 'kul-ee' and 'ittakhith-ee', the ee at the end is the pronoun, referring to the person being ordered and is singular feminine in form. Feminine singular pronouns are used for plural non-intelligent nouns, in this case, bees. From Madina Arabic site:

We can compare this to the plural of Irrational Nouns. We can see below that despite the nouns being plural, the pronouns that relate to these nouns are singular feminine - this does not change the plural word itself, only how the plural is treated and includes adjectives - i.e. an adjective following an irrational noun will be feminine singular

 

[Faye]

So is it female bees or not?

NOT!

Also nahli, on the start of the verse is that masculine or femanine?

It is singular masculine in form. It can refer to genderless plural as well.

 

[kay106]

Each verb form or conjugation in Arabic has an attached pronoun referring to the doer of the verb, which causes the change in forms. A typical verb in Arabic is translated as 'He did' (Fa2ala), or 'She did' (fa3alat), and so on. The pronoun within the verb changes to denote who the doer is.

In case of 'osluk-ee', 'kul-ee' and 'ittakhith-ee', the ee at the end is the pronoun, referring to the person being ordered and is singular feminine in form. Feminine singular pronouns are used for plural non-intelligent nouns, in this case, bees. From Madina Arabic site:

How comes almost in all translations bees are translated as singluar then, also when look at plural non intelligent nouns, say for example hiya, this will mean theirs, this is seen in the example on:

http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_016/MB1_L16_section_001.htm

but in the case of oslukee, it still means eat not eats. faslukee it still means follow, attakhize means build, i still dont understand how this could used to make the word nahl into plural. i thought the world nahl, at the bigging was plural already. and how can ee, or ya be a pronoun, when it has no meaning to it? it is clear to me that yaa is used to convert a verb/command into femanine, but i cant understand how it could be a pronoun? because it does not mean he or she, it is just a letter yaa?

 

[Faye]

How comes almost in all translations bees are translated as singluar

An-Nahl is Ism ul-Jins, singular in form, plural in meaning. The closest approximation to that in English is as seen in this sentence:
"Man is a talking animal." The word 'man' is singular in form and can be used as singular in meaning as in this sentence :"A man walked into the room", but in the first sentence refers to the species as a whole, and not any individual member of it.
The translators, used the word Bee, (capitalized, if I remember right) to try to give the meaning of the species, as seen in the sentence, "Man is a talking animal."

then, also when look at plural non intelligent nouns, say for example hiya, this will mean theirs, this is seen in the example on:

http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_016/MB1_L16_section_001.htm

Hiya (she, they) is a pronoun, not a noun. In Arabic, it is called a 'Zameer'. It is not a noun itself, but stands in place of another known noun to give its meaning.

but in the case of oslukee, it still means eat not eats. faslukee it still means follow, attakhize means build, i still dont understand how this could used to make the word nahl into plural. i thought the world nahl, at the bigging was plural already. and how can ee, or ya be a pronoun, when it has no meaning to it? it is clear to me that yaa is used to convert a verb/command into femanine, but i cant understand how it could be a pronoun? because it does not mean he or she, it is just a letter yaa?

In Engish, an order given does not indicate who you are ordering to do it. The order is: build, or eat. It doesn't say: Eat, you (male), or build, you (group), or stand, you (two females). In Arabic, the order is always accompanied by a pronoun referring to the person being ordered.

 

[kay106]

An-Nahl is Ism ul-Jins, singular in form, plural in meaning. The closest approximation to that in English is as seen in this sentence:
"Man is a talking animal." The word 'man' is singular in form and can be used as singular in meaning as in this sentence :"A man walked into the room", but in the first sentence refers to the species as a whole, and not any individual member of it.
The translators, used the word Bee, (capitalized, if I remember right) to try to give the meaning of the species, as seen in the sentence, "Man is a talking animal."


Hiya (she, they) is a pronoun, not a noun. In Arabic, it is called a 'Zameer'. It is not a noun itself, but stands in place of another known noun to give its meaning.



In Engish, an order given does not indicate who you are ordering to do it. The order is: build, or eat. It doesn't say: Eat, you (male), or build, you (group), or stand, you (two females). In Arabic, the order is always accompanied by a pronoun referring to the person being ordered.

So the al-nahl is plural already, and and the ee is not used to turn it into plural? instead it is there just because an irrational noun precedes it?

also how do i know that the ee or yaa is a pronoun, how can you proove it? do u have a source? yaa (ee) is a arabic letter and it does not mean him or her, instead it converts a command into femanine, meaning that the command is given to a femanine, i still dont understand? please post some reliable site, from medina or else, so i can read up on it.

 

[Faye]

So the al-nahl is plural already, and and the ee is not used to turn it into plural? instead it is there just because an irrational noun precedes it?

also how do i know that the ee or yaa is a pronoun, how can you proove it? do u have a source? yaa (ee) is a arabic letter and it does not mean him or her, instead it converts a command into femanine, meaning that the command is given to a femanine, i still dont understand? please post some reliable site, from medina or else, so i can read up on it.

Yes, the an-Nahl is plural already. The ee is an indication of its pluralhood, but it does not change it into a plural.

I really haven't seen many Arabic grammer sites on the web, and the medina site you posted doesn't cover verbs. Maybe if you provide the sites, I can find the rule on them?

 

[kay106]

Yes, the an-Nahl is plural already. The ee is an indication of its pluralhood, but it does not change it into a plural.

I really haven't seen many Arabic grammer sites on the web, and the medina site you posted doesn't cover verbs. Maybe if you provide the sites, I can find the rule on them?

U know what sis, you could be right, I am sorry for all the trouble, please forgive me for all the aggression. Please forgive me agnostic sister/brother too.

But there are still a LOT of questions, I still believe it refers to femanine bees, firstly when changed to plural, for example hazihe, as seen in medina university, it is changed to plural, doesnt that mean its plural femanine?

http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_016/MB1_L16_section_002.htm

because we know that kitabuhun, is plural femanine?

Also how do we tell a group of females to eat, follow, build, etc? to tell a group of females to eat, is it still kulee?

 

[Faye]

U know what sis, you could be right, I am sorry for all the trouble, please forgive me for all the aggression. Please forgive me agnostic sister/brother too.

When I said forgiven, I mean forgiven. No more apologizing necessary.

But there are still a LOT of questions, I still believe it refers to femanine bees, firstly when changed to plural, for example hazihe, as seen in medina university, it is changed to plural, doesnt that mean its plural femanine?

An irrational noun is usually one which has no specific gender of its own (with the exception of animals), its gender is assigned to it according to the formation of the word. In effect, they are the 'it' words in English, and the gender is there for conjugation purposes only.

An example is book. It has no gender, and you could not give it a gender. Even if everytime you refer to the book, whether you say 'he', or 'she', that changes nothing concerning the book. It's gender still remains neutral (it).

Pluralizing it does not make a difference. What is apparent is that you are referring to a set of books, which are genderless of themselves. Your referring to them as 'she', does not indicate a change in gender, as none is possible.

Animals, according to Arabs are genderless, with the exception of those particular animals they prized (horses and camels). For those they have different name referring to female camel, male camel, male old camel, female old three legged non-milk giving camel Donly joking, but you get the point, right?), and so on.

So they would consider a bee, a genderless 'it', and its plural also genderless 'it', as far as meaning is concerned.

because we know that kitabuhun, is plural femanine?

Are you referring to kitaabun (one book), or kitaabo-hunna (the group of females' book)?

Also how do we tell a group of females to eat, follow, build, etc? to tell a group of females to eat, is it still kulee?

If you are ordering a group of human (rational) females about, you would say, kulna, ittakhathna, oslukna. Examples of this occur in the Quran,

Ayat 32, Surah Ahzaab - Qulna
Ayat 33, Suraj Ahzaab - Qarna, Aqimna, Aatayna, ATi2na.

If you are ordering a group of irrational objects about, like a group of dogs, then you would use singular feminine, like kulee. If you wished to specify that it was a group of dogs, and not one female dog, you would use the vocative particle and say: Ya Jama3at ul-Kilaab, kuli (oh, group of dogs, eat), or simply: ya kilaab, kuli (oh, dogs, eat) before the order. (Vocative particle in madinah arabic, following link)

http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_005/MB1_L5_section_001.htm

If you further wish to specify that the addressed dogs are feminine, you would add: Ya Jama3at ul-Kilaab il-2ontha, kulee (oh, group of female dogs, kulee).

But most people would not go that much trouble for a dog.

 

[kay106]

Batn (belly)
batni (my belly)
batnoho (his belly)
batanak (your belly)
batnaha(her belly)
bootoniunna( plural feminine) to thinking females
(bootoniha( plural feminine) to nonthinking (it)
bootonihim ( masculine but to me can be used for both male and females) like in the verse of ants idkholuo rather than idkhouli

It has been a while since I did grammar so you are free to take all this with a grain of salt..

peace

I think we can all agree on that, bootoniha is plural femanine. Agree?

 

[Faye]

I think we can all agree on that, bootoniha is plural femanine. Agree?

An irrational noun is usually one which has no specific gender of its own (with the exception of animals), its gender is assigned to it according to the formation of the word. In effect, they are the 'it' words in English, and the gender is there for conjugation purposes only.

An example is book. It has no gender, and you could not give it a gender. Even if everytime you refer to the book, whether you say 'he', or 'she', that changes nothing concerning the book. It's gender still remains neutral (it).

Pluralizing it does not make a difference. What is apparent is that you are referring to a set of books, which are genderless of themselves. Your referring to them as 'she', does not indicate a change in gender, as none is possible.

Animals, according to Arabs are genderless, with the exception of those particular animals they prized (horses and camels). For those they have different name referring to female camel, male camel, male old camel, female old three legged non-milk giving camel Donly joking, but you get the point, right?), and so on.

So is true about bellies. While the bellies may belong to a male/female, single or group, the bellies do not intrinsically change gender.

As to their ownership, it is indicated by the pronoun, ha at the end of butooni-ha. As in the medinah site:
http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_010/MB1_L10_section_001.htm

While they have not specified ha occurring for irrational nouns in this place, they have in the chapter on irrational nouns.
http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_016/MB1_L16_section_002.htm

So, for all these reasons, I do not agree that butooniha is plural feminine. Butoon is a plural irrational noun, and is conjugated as singular feminine. ha is a singular feminine pronoun, for a plural irrational noun.

Are you referring to kitaabun (one book), or kitaabo-hunna (the group of females' book)?

You didn't reply to this.

 

[kay106]

So is true about bellies. While the bellies may belong to a male/female, single or group, the bellies do not intrinsically change gender.

As to their ownership, it is indicated by the pronoun, ha at the end of butooni-ha. As in the medinah site:
http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_010/MB1_L10_section_001.htm

While they have not specified ha occurring for irrational nouns in this place, they have in the chapter on irrational nouns.
http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_016/MB1_L16_section_002.htm

So, for all these reasons, I do not agree that butooniha is plural feminine. Butoon is a plural irrational noun, and is conjugated as singular feminine. ha is a singular feminine pronoun, for a plural irrational noun.



You didn't reply to this.

In ma'riful Qura, page 371 for verse 16:66, and other translations, http://en.quran.nu/, butunihi (their bellies) is translated as plural, and this is masculine.

so in the case of butuniha, are you sure it is translated as plural becuase it is an irrational noun or because the word nahl is plural?

According to ma'ariful Quran, page 375, hone bee is distict entity among human life particularly in terms of intelligence and management. So are you sure this is one of those nouns treated as non-intelligent?

kitaabo-hunna i was refering to.

 

[Faye]

In ma'riful Qura, page 371 for verse 16:66, and other translations, http://en.quran.nu/, butunihi (their bellies) is translated as plural, and this is masculine.

so in the case of butuniha, are you sure it is translated as plural becuase it is an irrational noun or because the word nahl is plural?

According to ma'ariful Quran, page 375, hone bee is distict entity among human life particularly in terms of intelligence and management. So are you sure this is one of those nouns treated as non-intelligent?

kitaabo-hunna i was refering to.

The pronoun in: (butunihi: their bellies) reverts back to: (al-an3am: cattle). Since the word al-an3am is plural in the feminine gender, it required that the word used for it should have been: (butuni-ha), as it appears in Siirah Al-Mu'minin: (We provide you, out of what there is in their bellies - 23:21).
Al-Qurtubi explains this by saying that consideration has been made of the meaning of the plural in Surah Al-Mu'miniin where the pronoun
has been used in the feminine gender. And, in Surah Al-Nahl, the pronoun has been used in the masculine gender in consideration of the plural word as such. Examples of this usage abound in Arabic where a singular pronoun is made to revert to a plural word.

The explanation of why it is so is given right after it. In butooni-ha, while the word ha refers to an apparently singular male word, the singular feminine pronoun is used because its meaning is plural. In botooni-hi, the word hi refers to an apparently singular male word to, and in this case, the singular male pronoun hi is used according to appearances and not meaning. And, as both occur in the Quran, both are correct, though one is used more often than the other.

It should be clear that attaching a plural pronoun to the end of a noun does not make the noun plural.


I'm going to be mostly offline for the next couple of weeks as I have exams and may take a while to reply. Maybe you could continue this discussion with somebody at medinah arabic forum?

 

[kay106]

When I said forgiven, I mean forgiven. No more apologizing necessary.



An irrational noun is usually one which has no specific gender of its own (with the exception of animals), its gender is assigned to it according to the formation of the word. In effect, they are the 'it' words in English, and the gender is there for conjugation purposes only.

An example is book. It has no gender, and you could not give it a gender. Even if everytime you refer to the book, whether you say 'he', or 'she', that changes nothing concerning the book. It's gender still remains neutral (it).

Pluralizing it does not make a difference. What is apparent is that you are referring to a set of books, which are genderless of themselves. Your referring to them as 'she', does not indicate a change in gender, as none is possible.

Animals, according to Arabs are genderless, with the exception of those particular animals they prized (horses and camels). For those they have different name referring to female camel, male camel, male old camel, female old three legged non-milk giving camel Donly joking, but you get the point, right?), and so on.

So they would consider a bee, a genderless 'it', and its plural also genderless 'it', as far as meaning is concerned.



Are you referring to kitaabun (one book), or kitaabo-hunna (the group of females' book)?



If you are ordering a group of human (rational) females about, you would say, kulna, ittakhathna, oslukna. Examples of this occur in the Quran,

Ayat 32, Surah Ahzaab - Qulna
Ayat 33, Suraj Ahzaab - Qarna, Aqimna, Aatayna, ATi2na.

If you are ordering a group of irrational objects about, like a group of dogs, then you would use singular feminine, like kulee. If you wished to specify that it was a group of dogs, and not one female dog, you would use the vocative particle and say: Ya Jama3at ul-Kilaab, kuli (oh, group of dogs, eat), or simply: ya kilaab, kuli (oh, dogs, eat) before the order. (Vocative particle in madinah arabic, following link)

http://www.madinaharabic.com/Arabic_Language_Course/Lessons/MB1_Lesson_005/MB1_L5_section_001.htm

If you further wish to specify that the addressed dogs are feminine, you would add: Ya Jama3at ul-Kilaab il-2ontha, kulee (oh, group of female dogs, kulee).

But most people would not go that much trouble for a dog.

from what your are saying that kulee, faslukee, could be used to indicate that the noun is plural where the noun (bees) is plural already, or it could be a command to a female,

i dont think it is a coincidence that the femanine gender is used 4 times!

Like you have mentioned your self, butuniha is plural femanine, no one can argue over that, kulee, faslukee, attakhizee, is a command give to the female bees, this is clear upon observation.

 

[Faye]

from what your are saying that kulee, faslukee, could be used to indicate that the noun is plural where the noun (bees) is plural already, or it could be a command to a female,

Do you agree that it could be a command to a non-intelligent group of bees?

i dont think it is a coincidence that the femanine gender is used 4 times!

If it is used once in one place, it has to be used all the time that way in that place. If fifty verbs came after that, they would all have to be conjugated the same way. The number of occurrances does not make a difference.

Like you have mentioned your self, butuniha is plural femanine, no one can argue over that, kulee, faslukee, attakhizee, is a command give to the female bees, this is clear upon observation.

I don't recall mentioning that butuniha is plural feminine. I have said it is plural, conjugated as feminine. Quote me correctly next time.

What do you been by clear upon observation? It is clear upon observation to me that it is a command given to plural genderless bees. Since there is no way we can change each others observation, I suggest we drop this particular point in the arguement.

 

[kay106]

Do you agree that it could be a command to a non-intelligent group of bees?


If it is used once in one place, it has to be used all the time that way in that place. If fifty verbs came after that, they would all have to be conjugated the same way. The number of occurrances does not make a difference.



I don't recall mentioning that butuniha is plural feminine. I have said it is plural, conjugated as feminine. Quote me correctly next time.

What do you been by clear upon observation? It is clear upon observation to me that it is a command given to plural genderless bees. Since there is no way we can change each others observation, I suggest we drop this particular point in the arguement.

thanks for all you help, may Allah reward you. I am really sorry for all the trouble.

My point was that instead of femanine verbs, other verbs could also be used, as seen as in the case of Surah Naml, but this time everything is just perfect. Also I am pretty sure that buttunihun is plural femanine for thinking objects, and butuniha is plural femanine for non thinking. Again correct gender is congugated in the arabic, the point i made about the observation is that we observe the bees, the worker bees we have come to know thats its female, by actually studying the bee, this verse is just perfect! ALAhamdullilah.