قد

قَدْ ذ is a noun and a particle: (S, O, Mughnee, K:) and as a noun it is used in two ways. (Mughnee, K.) ― -b2- (I) It is a noun syn. with حَسْبُ; (S, O, Mughnee, K;) generally used indeclinably; (Mughnee, K;) thus accord. to the Basrees; with the د quiescent; (TA;) because resembling قَدْ the particle in respect of the letters composing it, and many other particles in respect of its form, (Mughnee, TA,) such as عَنْ and بَلْ &c.: (TA:) one says, قَدْ زَيْدٍ دِرْهَمٌ [ The sufficiency of Zeyd (i. e. what is sufficient for Zeyd ) is a dirhem ], (Mughnee, K,) with the د quiescent; (Mughnee, * K, * TA;) and قَدِى (S, O) and قَدْنِى (S, O, Mughnee) [both] meaning حَسْبِى [ My sufficiency (i. e. what is sufficient for me )]; (S, O;) the ن in قَدْنِى being inserted in order to preserve the quiescence [of the final letter of the noun] because this is the original characteristic of what they make indeclinable; (Mughnee;) but the insertion of the ن in this case is anomalous, for it is [by rule] only added in verbs, by way of precaution, [to prevent the confusion of the pronominal affix of the verb and that of the noun,] as in ضَرَبَنِى: (S, O:) [see, however, in the next sentence, an explanation of قَدْنِى accord. to which the ن is inserted regularly:] accord. to Yaakoob, using قَدْ in the sense of حَسْبُ, one says, مَا لَكَ عِنْدِى اـِلَّا هٰذَا فَقَدْ i. e. فَقَطْ [ There is nothing for thee with me, or nothing due to thee in my possession, except this, and it is a thing sufficient, or it is enough, فَقَطْ being held to signify properly فَحَسْبُ, but it is commonly used as meaning and no more ]; and he asserts it [i. e. قَدْ] to be a substitute [for قَطْ]: (M:) and it is also used declinably; (Mughnee, K;) thus accord. to the Koofees; (TA;) but this is rare: (Mughnee:) one says قَدُ زَيْدٍ, making it marfooa, (Mughnee, K,) like as one says حَسْبُهُ; and قَدِى without ن [as mentioned above,] like as one says حَسْبِى. (Mughnee.) ― -b3- (2) It is also a verbal noun, syn. with يَكْفِى: one says, قَدْ زَيْدًا دِرْهَمٌ [ A dirhem suffices, or will suffice, Zeyd ], and قَدْنِى دِرْهَمٌ [ A dirhem suffices, or will suffice, me ]; (Mughnee, K;) like as one says يَكْفِى زَيْدًا دِرْهَمٌ, and يَكْفِيْنِى دِرْهَمٌ. (Mughnee, K. *) -A2- As a particle, it is used peculiarly with a verb, (Mughnee, K,) [i. e.] as such it is not preposed to anything except a verb, (S, O,) either a pret. or an aor., (TA,) from which it is not separated unless by an oath, (Mughnee,) such as is perfectly inflected, enunciative, (Mughnee, K,) not an imperative, (TA,) affirmative, and free from anything that would render it mejzoom or man- soob, and from what is termed حَرْف تَنْفِيس [i. e. سَوْفُ and its variants]: and it has six meanings. (Mughnee, K.) ― -b2- (1) It denotes expectation: (M, Mughnee, K:) and when it is with an aor., this is evident; (Mughnee;) one says قَدْ يَقْدَمُ الغَائِبُ, (Mughnee, K,) meaning It is expected that the absent will come: (TA:) and most affirm that it is thus used with a pret.: (Mughnee:) accord. to some, (M,) it is used in reply to the saying لَمَّا يَفْعَلْ [i. e. “ He has not yet done ” such a thing, which implies expectation that he would do it]; (S, M, O;) the reply being, قَدْفَعَلَ [ Already he has done the thing]: (M:) and Kh asserts that it is used in reply to persons expecting information; (S, M, * O, Mughnee;) [for to such] you say, قَدْ مَاتَ فَلَانٌ [ Already such a one has died ]; but if one inform him who does not expect it, he does not say thus, but he says [merely] مَاتَ فُلَانٌ: (S, O:) thus some say قَدْ رَكِبَ الأَمِيرُ [ Already the commander has mounted his horse] to him who expects his mounting: some, however, disallow that قَدْ is used to denote expectation with the pret. because the pret. denotes what is already past; and hence it appears that those who affirm it to be so used mean that the pret. denotes what was expected before the information: (Mughnee: [in which it is added, with some other observations, that, in the opinion of its author, it does not denote expectation even with the aor.; because the saying يَقْدَمُ الغَئِبُ denotes expectation without قَدْ:]) MF says, What we have been orally taught by the sheykhs in ElAndalus is this, that it is a particle denoting the affirmation of truth, or certainty, when it occurs before a pret., and a particle denoting expectation when it occurs before a future. (TA.) ― -b3- (2) It denotes the nearness of the past to the present: (O, Mughnee, K:) so in the saying قَدْ قَامَ زَيْدٌ [ Zeyd has just, or just now, stood; a meaning often intended by saying merely, has stood ]; (Mughnee, K;) for this phrase without قد may mean the near past and the remote past; (Mughnee;) and so in the saying of the muëdhdhin, قَدْ قَامَتِ الصَّلَاةُ [ The time of the rising to prayer has just come, or simply has come ]: (O:) [and, when thus used, it is often immediately preceded by the pret. or aor. of the verb كَانَ; thus you say, كَانَ قَدْ ذَهَبَ He had just, or simply had, gone away; and يَكُونُ قَدْ ذَهَبَ He will, or shall, have just, or simply have gone away: ] and accord. to the Basrees, except Akh, it must be either expressed or understood immediately before a pret. used as a denotative of state; as in [the saying in the Kur ii. 247,] وَمَا لَنَا أَلَّا نُقَاتِلُ فِى سَبِيلِ ا@للّٰهِ وَقَدْ أُخْرِجْنَا مِنْ دِيَارِنَا وَأَبْنَائِنَا [ And what reason have we that we should not fight in the cause of God when we have been expelled from our abodes and our children? ]; and in [the saying in the Kur iv. 92,] أَوْ جَاؤُوكُمْ حَصِرَتْ صُدُورُهُمْ أنْ يُقَاتِلُوكَمْ [ Or who come to you, their bosoms being contracted so that they are incapable of fighting you, or their bosoms shrinking from fighting you ]; but the Koofees and Akh says that this is not required, because of the frequent occurrence of the pret. as a denotative of state without قَدْ, and [because] the primary rule is that there should be no meaning, or making, anything to be [...]