Browsing by Author "Gungor, Ibrahim"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1

Örneği Debates in the Context of Asıl and Fer' Theory in Nahiv Science: the Example of Mubteda and Fail
(Sirnak Univ, 2024) Gungor, Ibrahim
One of the issues that nahiv scholars, examining the Arabic language from all aspects, focus on is the issue of asfl and fer' because in all sciences related to the Arabic language, the theory of asfl and fer' has significant importance. Nahiv science comes first among all. The reason for this is that in many basic nahiv (syntax) topics such as 'amel, i'rá b, biná, mu'reb, and mebni, the theory of asfl and fer' takes place efficiently. Thus, it is unanimously accepted that the verb is asfl in terms of 'amel, while the noun is fer'. Because ref' in fail makes 'amel since the verb extremely needs the fail. Therefore, as no verb can be without a fail, every verb makes at least a ref' 'amel. However, the same cannot be said for nouns and letters. On the other hand, some nouns and letters act the same as verbs, and this results from their several resemblances to nouns for this reason, their 'amel is fer'. Likewise, i'rá b is asfl in noun, while it is fer' in verb. The main purpose of i'rá b is to differentiate basic grammatical meanings from each other such as to be fail and mef'll and these meanings solely occur in nouns. So, i'rá b is accepted as asfl in nouns. The fact that some verbs take i'rá b like nouns is a case of fer'. This results from the similarity of the verb to the noun. Because of the importance of i'rá b in the Arabic language, the nahivists classified the nouns into general parts such as merfl'á t, manslbá t, mecrlrá t and tevá bi according to i'rá b. Therefore, the scholars have accepted some of these parts covering the general titles as asfl of the group that they belong to, while others have accepted them as fer'. However, several controversies have emerged among the nahivists about which are asfl and which are fer'. In addition, there is no consensus on the elements that make an element to be accepted as asfl. One of the issues where these conflicts take place is the subject of merfl' names which covers many noun groups such as mubteda, verb, subject, ná ib-I fá il. Because only one or a few of these names are asfl and the others are fer' in terms of merfl''. As a matter of fact, some grammarians accepted the mubtada as the asfl. They showed some important features of the word as evidence, such as the fact that it appears at the beginning of the sentence and that it does not lose its identity even if it is brought after the verb. On the other hand, some grammarians defended the view that the fail (subject) was the real one. The most important arguments they put forward are the reason for this is that the agent of the fail is stronger than the agent of the mubteda and that fail needs more help than the agent of the ref' of mubteda. Because the basic element that separates the fail from meful is the ref' of I'rá b. In fact, the main purpose of i'rab is to separate the elements from each other. In addition to these two basic views, there are also grammarians who say that both the fail and the mubtada are musnadun ilayh, and that there cannot be a main - secondary relationship of asfl and fer' between them, citing the fact that the sentences they are in are different from each other in terms of nature, and therefore both are asfl. These controversies are also reflected in the authors' methods of arranging the topics. For this reason, in the title of merfl', some authors took the mubteda to the beginning, while some others took the fail. Because the elements that are accepted as asfl are handled before the others. Due to its importance asfl and fer' theory in nahiv science, in our study, the controversies that occurred within the framework of the nobility of the mubteda and the fail and the evidence put forward regarding this has been evaluated.