"لَيْسَ عِنْد جودي بَلوزة."
Translation:Judy does not have a blouse.
It is "laysa" - it is hard to explain why it is masculine here and not feminine (laysat) but you can imagine a dropped out noun which is the subject of the negation by this article. This noun can be estimated or imagined to be وجود (wujúd: existence), which is a masculine noun.
Next time you encounter this kind of problem click on the flag sign instead of the speach bulb to write here and check the "my answer should have been accepted" option, if you have. If you don't have, add it with your own words.
That's the most effective way to improve this site and application, rather than writing here.
It works, just a question of time, sometimes even years, but it works, sometimes I have e-mails "your solution has been accepted" in other languages, so keep up improving Duolingo, everyone! :)
Yes. Laysa is introduced into the nominal sentence to negate it. In Arabic grammar books, Laysa itself is defined as a verb, but a special type of verb called فعل جامد (fi3lun jámid) meaning frozen verb - a verb that does not conjugate to the past or future but simply it is what it is.
Away from grammatical consequences of adding (Laysa), it can be as simple as: Take a positive sentence (e.g. عند جودي بلوزة Judy has a blouse) and then introduce Laysa if you want to make it negative (Judy has NOT a blouse). Arabic is flexible and Laysa can be placed elsewhere but there are corresponding changes in the pronouns that follow but not need to complicate things at this point.
Thank you very much, TJ_Q8. Arabic grammar never ceases to blow my mind. I seem to be living in a perpetual state of excitement. You, Arabic speakers, see things differently, and I feel it's good for my soul to assimilate exotic concepts. I'm also thrilled at some similarities between Arabic and Russian. It's all very mysterious to me. Indoeuropean and Semitic languages are separate families. How to explain the similarities? It's as if either the Slavic people encountered the Semitic people when they were forming their languages, or that the Slavic souls and the Semitic ones just have something in common...
I mean from being a dialect-form, is that usually dialects do lose some features or drop some features for easiness of speech and language usage and probably Russian did use the verb (to be) but then dropped it for present tense. Just a theory, in comparison to other IE languages. The cases system in Russian is quite wide in comparison to Arabic, and the prepositional usage and the fluctuating usage of some of these particles (between dative and accusative depending the verb) is not something common in Arabic. Adding to the genders of words and the relations of such genders with particles, all that is different from Arabic. And while Arabic makes a context about the status of the verb (perfect, imperfect, or continuous), Russian does not work that way; It has 2 verbs for each status. Arabic has specific formulation or conjugation for passivity in various tenses, but in Russian to what I know (I've read briefly about that) makes use of the genitive case and the plural form of the verb sometimes (something we do in dialects here nowadays).
These are some things from the top of my head right now.
and by the way, баклажан (eggplant) is indeed close to Arabic باذنجان but the word itself is probably borrowed by Arabic from Farsi.
Well, as I'm someone learning Russian on Duolingo myself, I do see a bit of similarities but they are not a whole lot really. I also think that Russian spoken today was at some point in time a dialect and then made into an official status (just my guess) - The differences however are quite a lot and nothing in between. Russian did adapt some Arabic words for some objects (probably via Turkish, and they do also adapt some originally Turkish words) but grammar-wise and structure-wise I don't really see much similarities.
If there is something that blows me away in terms of similarities, that would Irish and Arabic, on various levels.
TJ_Q8, what is the significance of Russian having possibility been a dialect at some point? I don't see how that affects what we're discussing. I hardly know any Irish, so I have nothing to contribute there. But I assure you, I have found a number of grammatical similarities between Arabic and Russian, as opposed to other IndoEuropean languages that I either know well or have a smattering of. And I don't mean vocabulary borrowings, eg баклажан , which I suppose is a corruption of باذنجان, сундук from صندوق etc. etc. I'd be interested to know which slight similarities you do see?
to be precise:
Was: كانَ (kána).
Be: يَكونُ (yakúnu).
The past tense is used often for various tenses (habitual for example or past continuous). The present tense is used as a real verb (to be/to exist) and not like in English as an auxiliary or "copula" to connect the subject and the predicate in a sentence.