menu Podcast

The tomb of Eve, who is regarded as the grandmother of humanity, is believed to be located in Jeddah, but it's a moot question whether the name of the city is a derivative of the Arabic word for "grandmother". This may be a folk etymology.

thanks poets! who hasn't had an old grandmother and an old house for not been touched?
أحلى best, can I use as per best price, best solution etc. ? or only in this specific best days case ?

@Desmond, that is very interesting analysis, who knows, probably that's the reason behind it.
@Rbandini, you can use the word (أحلى) with your examples except for the price where we use (أرخص) which means (the cheapest) as the best price is the cheapest, as far as you are the buyer anyway.

In 2005 an interesting article about Jeddah was published by John and Susy Pint, who claim that the sepulchre known as Eve’s tomb could be seen from Bab Medina until 1947. According to a legend, Adam and Eve were separated after their expulsion from Paradise. Adam lived in Makkah or Mina, and Eve settled in Jeddah.

There is some reference to Eve's tomb in Zoe Ferraris' book "Totenverse", to be published in English this year under the title "City of Veils" and sequel to "Die letzte Sure/Finding Nouf", two crime stories set in nowadays Jeddah.

Thanks so much, Desmond, for mentioning this article by the Pint's, it is fantastic reading and great insights, where I could make a lot of connections to the books I described in my previous post.
Where in Germany you are located?

In Münster, na7la. What do you make of the “jumla fi'liyya” at the end of the text? Since “al-ayyaam” is a non-human plural noun it is treated as a feminine singular. The verb “terja'” is also in a feminine singular form. But what about the demonstrative plural ﻫﺬﻱ? Why isn’t this ﻫﺬﻩ?

Sorry, I meant "demonstrative adjective", not "demonstrative plural".

A valid point, Desmond. Is هذي simply an alternative for هذه? (the 5th edition of Hans Wehr's Arabic-German dictionary seems to indicate that it is, but no further examples are given). Perhaps Ehab and Mohamed could shed some light on the matter?

Thanks for that very useful piece of information, Karen. I couldn’t find ﻫﺬﻱ in any of the Arabic grammar books which are currently available on the Net.

The word ﻫﺬﻱ is doubly interesting. First, it is a form of ﻫﺬﺍ which to my knowledge has not yet been discussed in any of the podcasts, and which most grammarians apparently ignore. Second, although ﻫﺬﺍ is presented in every grammar as a demonstrative of proximity, it is here used as a demonstrative of distance.

It is particularly instructive to compare the last sentence of “Those were the days” with the first sentence of “What’s that sound”. In both cases ﻫﺬﺍ is used as a demonstrative of distance, but there are two different kinds of distance: (1) distance in time and (2) distance in space. I think a lot of grammar books need to be rewritten to take account of present-day usage.

Incidentally, German grammar books aren’t much better than Arabic grammar books. German grammarians generally ignore the fact that “dieser” is both a demonstrative of proximity and a demonstrative of distance although the Langenscheidt lexicographers point out that “dieser” corresponds to “this” as well as “that”. A further complicating factor is that in many cases an English demonstrative adjective cannot be adequately rendered by “dieser” or “jener”. The title of the podcast “What’s that sound?” is a case in point. If I had to translate that into German I’d say “Was ist denn das für ein Geräusch?” The German and English sentences display divergent structures, and the pronoun “das” takes over the function of the demonstrative adjective “that”.

To summarise it briefly, (هذي) and (هذه) give almost the same meaning. In fact in grammars, linguistics seem to deal with them as one thing. But I would say that (هذي) indicates something further in distance or time comparing to (هذه), it is like half way between (this - هذه) and (that - تلك).

This topic can take far more details, as we promised inshallah we will cover it in our lessons, we just have so much in the plate to cover.

Thanks for this extra information, Ehab. The Arabic language is like a gigantic jigsaw puzzle, and the jigsaw pieces are now beginning to fit into place.

One of the great merits of your podcasts is that they show the Arabic language in all its complexity. Most grammarians tend to present an over-simplified picture of linguistic reality.

this here , that there and that over there , seems to be a way to go for me, taking into consideration that arabic tends to use single words to cover whole phrases of english or german.I wonder if the plurals do the same?

Let’s consider the word order in the final sentence. The optative clause introduced by “yaa layt” consists of two segments: (1) the verb “terja'” and (2) the noun phrase “haadhii al-ayyaam”. The verb has only two syllables, while the noun phrase has four. I suspect that the word order has been dictated by the principle of end weight, which requires that long and heavy elements be placed at the end of the clause.

How would the optative clause be structured if we were to reduce the number of syllables in the noun clause from four to two? Let’s suppose we want to say: “If only my mother would come back!” ﺃﻣﻲ (my mother) has exactly the same number of syllables as the verb (“terja'”). I suppose a native speaker of Arabic would now find a “jumla fi'liyya” and a “jumla ismia” equally acceptable. Could we say “yaa layt ummi terja'” instead of “yaa layt terja' ummi”?

The previous lesson you use 'atamanna' for i wish
and 'yaa layt' for this lesson. It is the same meaning? or i can use either one.

Yeah, I have the same question as Sharby: What's the difference between the two?

"Atamana" introduces a statement (cf. "Brothers or sisters"), while "yaa layt" introduces an exclamation. "Atamana" means "I wish", and "yaa layt" means "if only" (cf. Lat. "utinam" / "vellem").

I might add that "yaa layt" is much more emotional than "atamana". It corresponds exactly to the Spanish interjection "ojalá" when "ojalá" introduces an optative clause.

hey desmond , your comparison with ojalà is very usefull for me to grasp the true content of the "yaa layt" - thanks (i did work in madrid for a while so my spanish is ok )

Salut Plop! "Ya layt" correspond exactement à la tournure francaise "si seulement". Ex.: Si seulement ils pouvaient revenir!

I’m surprised that nobody has commented on the use of the present tense in the optative clause introduced by “yaa layt”. The verb ﺘﺮﺟﻊ is in the present tense although the clause clearly refers to the future. In such cases we have no choice but to employ the present conditional tense in English: “If only those days would come back!” Cf. the following example from J. M. Barrie, Peter Pan: “If only something would make a sound” he cried.

Hi Desmond, et al., interesting insights. Since I'm often not familiar with your terminology (like "optative") I'm not sure I understand them but I certainly like reading them. As a native English speaker, I want to note that at least colloquially here in the states, the use of "I wish," standing alone, is often used to mean "if only." We were (probably, since I do not actually remember) taught in school to use something more proper, like "I wish it were otherwise," in the subjunctive. See http://dictionary1.classic.reference.com/help/faq/language/g60.html . However, "I wish" is often used as a single response.

Interestingly (to me), I sat near someone the other day in a plane, who, speaking loudly, clearly responded simply "Ya layt" (nothing further said in sentence) to a party in a telephone conversation.

Whether or not anything I add here is relevant to your observations, I don't know. But I enjoy reading them.

Charles

Dear Charles,

I’m pleased to learn that you enjoy reading my comments. Technical terms are part of my tool-kit and I have to use them in order to be precise. “Optative” comes from the Latin verb “optare”, which means (among other things) “to wish”. An optative clause is a clause which expresses a wish or a desire. The sentence “I wish he were here” consists of an introductory main clause (“I wish”) and an optative clause (“he were here”). Are there any other technical terms you would like me to explain?

“I wish he were here” isn’t more correct than “I wish he was here”, but it’s much more formal. “Were” is, as you say, a subjunctive form, and “was” is the corresponding indicative form.

Both “were” and “was” can be used in “if” clauses. We can say “If I were in London” or “If I was in London”. Both forms are grammatically correct, but “were” has an unmistakable literary flavour.

Your Arabic and English examples illustrate a universal linguistic phenomenon known as ellipsis (the omission of parts of a sentence). The elliptical use of “I wish” is probably more common in American than in British English, but “if only + OPTATIVE CLAUSE” is used on both sides of the Atlantic. There is a good example in Upton Sinclair’s novel “The Jungle”: “Ah, if only he could have foreseen it – but then, he would have foreseen it, if he had not been a fool!”

The use of the interjection “ah” before “if only” is reminiscent of the use of “ya” in “ya layt”. The same phenomenon can be observed in French, as in the following example from J. Verne’s “L’île mystérieuse”: “Ah! si l’un d’eux n’avait pas manqué à ce repas!” This construction is used twice in “L’île mystérieuse” and twice in Flaubert’s famous novel “Madame Bovary”.

Perhaps I ought to add another note on the translation problems posed by “atamanna” and “natamanna”. We have one example in “Brothers or Sisters”, one example in the “Alhambra” video transcript and two examples in “A wish”. In “Brothers and Sisters” and “A wish” “atamanna” can be rendered as “I wish”, in the Alhambra transcript, however, we have to use another verb. Mohamed says: natamanna an tushaarekunaa. Unlike the other sentences we have just mentioned, this is an invitation. As a result, “we wish” would sound awkward in English. We have to use “hope” or “like” instead of “wish”: We hope you’ll join us. / We’d like you to join us.

Similar translation problems arise in other languages such as Russian and German. I know a Russian lady who overuses the German verb “wünschen” which, like “tamanna”, means “wish”. When she asks “Wünschest du noch eine Kartoffel?” Germans invariably smile because the question sounds very funny. If you want to say “Would you like another potato?” you have to use another verb in German: “Möchtest du noch eine Kartoffel?”

Finally, I’d like to add three brief comments on Eve:

1) In Arabic Eve is called ﺤﻮﺍﺀ (hawaa').

2) She is never mentioned by name in the Qur’an, but she appears together with Adam in Arabic videos on YouTube.

3) In German Eve is Eva, and Eva is quite a common name in German-speaking countries. The Arabic equivalent of Eva is إﻴﻓﺎ.

Desmond - thanks for the commentary. Restricting my observations to English as a native speaker - I found your commentary on usage of "were" and "was" here provocative.

I'll quote usage notes from American Heritage Dictionary: "Were, as a past subjunctive form, occurs principally in clauses expressing conditions that are clearly hypothetical or contrary to fact, as in 'if I were you.' . . . . Typical examples are: 'I wish that it were completed. It is only rumor, but suppose that it were fact. If the situation were more favorable, we could begin. He spoke as though everything were settled.' The singular indicative 'was' often appears in such sentences, especially in speech. However, in the four examples cited, only were is acceptable on a formal level, according to substantial majorities of the Usage Panel. . . ."

I would go beyond the "formal" label and suggest that the use of "was" in such sentences, informally, appears to brand an American speaker as uneducated. Only a small proportion of university graduates, I think, would use "was" here.

Of course, as American Heritage also states, when the clause "expresses a mere condition that is neither purely hypothetical nor contrary to fact," the use of "was" is the correct choice. American Heritage provides these examples: "He said that if Smith was elected, he would resign. I peered out to see whether the way was clear. They sent an inspector to see whether the charge was true. He inquired whether I was satisfied with the outcome."

Dear Charles,

My comments on the use of the subjunctive in English were not intended to be provocative. I was merely stating facts.

The subjunctive is more widely used in American than in British English. This tallies with the severity of your value judgement.

In British English the substitution of “was” for “were” in hypothetical conditional clauses simply entails a transition from a formal to an informal register. It is considered perfectly normal in conversational British English and would not brand the speaker as uneducated or low-class.

I can think of only one case in which the substitution of “was” for “were” would be unacceptable in a hypothetical conditional clause. Consider the following invented example: “Were he to criticise the President openly he would risk expulsion from the party.” Here the auxiliary verb (“were”) has been fronted. If we were to substitute “was” for “were” the sentence would sound very odd. If I found it in an exam script I would mark it wrong.

However, when a hypothetical conditional clause is introduced by “if”, both “was” and “were” are correct. The only difference between these two verb forms is that “were” is more formal. This is in substance what the “American Heritage Dictionary” says, and it concords with the information provided in other reference works such as Fowler’s “Dictionary of Modern English Usage” (s.v. Subjunctives), Quirk’s “Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language” and the more recent “Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English”. The authors of these works never stigmatise the use of “was” in hypothetical conditional clauses introduced by “if”.

There are quite a lot of conditional clauses in the Arabicpod texts. It would be useful to bring this material together, classify the sentences, set up rules and compare Arabic with English conditional clauses.

Very interesting Desmond. Thank you for the follow-up. I'll continue to watch for areas where I be able to offer some useful perspective here.

The popularity of using an ellipsis in colloquial American English can cause much confusion for those of us from this side of the Atlantic! On a meditation course in the US, I encountered the phrase, 'Silence through lunch' on the next day's timetable, which I interpreted as silence during lunch, only later, the following day, discovering it meant 'up to' as well as during. This phrase is used quite widely, eg for sales in shops over there, although 'thru' (yuck!) is often used for through.

An elderly man (who had taught EFL in the ME and N Africa) once told me a story of how he tried to help a foreigner buy a trench coat in Carnaby St, London. Whilst looking, the American shop assistant kept saying, 'It's gotta be sold' which caused some confusion until my acquaintance realised he meant, 'It must have been sold already'!

In the southern states of the US, ellipsis is even more extensive and confusing.