A comparative explanation of the nahiv topics that Fadil Salih as-Samarrai refers to in his work an-Nahwu'l-arabi ahkam and meani in his work Me'ani'n-nahv

In order for the science of Nahiv, especially the I'rab, to be fully understood, most of the scholars have copyrighted various works. One of these scholars is Fadil Salih as-Samerrai. Samarrai has made efforts to provide new views and contributions to the science of nahiv, but has also made efforts to make the views of many scholars more clearly understandable. First of all, he gave place to the opinions of the past scholars, and then he mentioned his own opinion with his proofs. When the two works that constitute our position are examined, it will be obvious how much importance Samerrai attaches to the relationship between Decalogue and meaning. Samarrai, one of the main sources of our topic, in his four-volume work Me'ani'n-Nahw, he researched how even the slightest changes in the Arabic Decrees caused an effect on the meaning, usually used verses from the Holy Quran as evidence, drew attention to the differences in meaning between verses that are similar to each other in words, mentioned the most controversial nahiv issues from place to place, expressed his own opinions, sometimes mentioned new opinions that he had reached. in his work an-Nahwul-arabi ahkam and meani, he approached nahiv issues with a more superficial style compared to the work of Ma'ani'n-Nahw, usually used verses and poems as a consultation, and added translations of them with simpler words under the title "المعنى". In both works, if there are verbal or invasive recipes related to the subject to be explained first, they have been included, and if the details related to the subject need to be mentioned in the form of substances, it has been tried to explain by going to the materialization method. The author has often used the same word and the same examples in both of his works when explaining the subject. So much so that we can see that a subject explained in the work of Ma'ani'n-nahw is included in the work of An-nahwu'l-arabi ahkam and meani exactly the same by using the same word and the same examples. Samarrai did not mention even a single footnote in his work An-nahwul-arabi ahkam and meani, and he did not even mention the names and numbers of the Verses mentioned in the work immediately after the Verses and gave them as footnotes. On the other hand, Ma'ani'n-nahw is very rich in footnotes. The mention of the names and page numbers of the works used constitutes a large part of the footnote. A topic mentioned in an-nahwu'l-arabi ahkam and meani may have been mentioned under different headings and explained in different aspects according to an-nahwu'l-arabi ahkam and meani in the work of Ma'ani'n-nahv. In a sense, an-Nahwu'l-arabi ahkam and meani, which we can call the summary of the work of Me'ani'n-Nahw, which he wrote in four volumes, referred to the work of Me'ani'n-Nahw in a total of 282 places in his work, directing those who want to study the subject in more detail to his more voluminous work, Me'ani'n-Nahw. In our study, the first volume of the work an-nahwu'l-arabi ahkam and meani will be dealt with only and the 152 reference places in the first volume will be examined. Keywords: Arabic Language, Nahiv, Samarrai, Me'ani'n-Nahw, An-Nahwu'l-arabi.