الجملة المُعتَرِضَة — Embedded Sentences and Iʿrāb
When a full sentence (jūmlah) appears embedded within another sentence, it functions grammatically like a single word but follows special rules.
Key Rule: All Embedded Sentences Are Nakira
The Foundational Principle
كُلُّ الجُمَل نَكِرَاتٌ — All sentences are (by their nature) indefinite (nakira).
Any jūmlah embedded within another jūmlah is always treated as nakira, regardless of any definite words inside it. This has no exceptions.
The Naʿt/Ḥāl Rule
Since an embedded sentence is always nakira, the word that precedes it determines its grammatical function:
| What precedes the sentence | Function of embedded sentence |
|---|---|
| A nakira (indefinite) noun | Naʿt (adjective) — same definiteness |
| A maʿrifa (definite) noun | Ḥāl (circumstantial clause) — nakira after definite |
As Naʿt — After Nakira
جَاءَ رَجُلٌ يَقُولُ هَذَا — "A man came saying this."
يَقُولُ هَذَا is a jūmlah (nakira) after the nakira noun رَجُلٌ → naʿt.
Iʿrāb: "يَقُولُ هَذَا — jūmlah fiʿliyyah fī maḥalli rafʿin naʿtan li-rajulin"
As Ḥāl — After Maʿrifa
جَاءَ الطِّفلُ يَبكِي — "The child came crying."
يَبكِي is a jūmlah (nakira) after the definite noun الطِّفلُ → ḥāl.
The child came — and the state he was in was: crying.
The Semantic Difference
| Sentence | Emphasis |
|---|---|
| جَاءَ طِفلٌ يَبكِي | Identifies what kind of child came (a crying child) — naʿt |
| جَاءَ الطِّفلُ يَبكِي | Describes the state in which the known child arrived — ḥāl |
Why This Matters for Iʿrāb
When you encounter a sentence embedded in another, you must: 1. Identify whether the preceding noun is nakira or maʿrifa 2. Declare the embedded sentence as: "jūmlah fī maḥalli rafʿin/naṣbin... naʿtan / ḥālan" 3. Note it is always nakira regardless of its internal words
The Bridge Solution — Ism Mawṣūl
Problem: You want to use a sentence as naʿt for a definite noun, but a sentence (nakira) after a maʿrifa becomes ḥāl, not naʿt.
Solution: Insert an ism mawṣūl (الَّذِي / الَّتِي / الَّذِينَ) between the definite noun and the sentence:
❌ جَاءَ الطِّفلُ يَبكِي — ḥāl ✅ جَاءَ الطِّفلُ الَّذِي يَبكِي — naʿt (the child who was crying came)
The ism mawṣūl is definite (it agrees with the noun) and the following clause is its ṣilah — which has no iʿrāb position of its own.
جُملَة لَا مَحَلَّ لَهَا من الإِعرَاب
Some embedded sentences have no iʿrāb position at all: - The ṣilat al-mawṣūl (relative clause) — it defines the ism mawṣūl but cannot substitute for a single word - The ibtidāʾiyyah (opening/starting sentence) — a sentence that begins on its own is not embedded and has no parent iʿrāb position
These are stated as: "jūmlah lā maḥalla lahā min al-iʿrāb"
Session References
- Selections from the Glorious Quran Session 4: Full explanation with examples; naʿt/ḥāl rule derived from the principle that sentences are always nakira; the ism mawṣūl bridge; application to Āyah 7 of al-Fātiḥah.