Adam hit the boy and girl's dog.

ِ ‫ب ْال َولَ ِد َو ْالبِ ْن‬

‫ت‬ َ ‫ب آ َد ُم َك ْل‬
َ ‫ض َر‬
َ

Yesterday, when we saw this sentence it was "Adam hit the boy's dog." Today I added "and girl". In
Arabic grammar, we would say that the owner is actually just "boy". Later on, we added "girl", so
she's not actually an owner. The owner is the first word, namely "boy". But then why is "girl" in
green? Because she "borrowed" the color of "boy". Why? Because the word "and" connected "girl"
to "boy", and because of this connection the word "girl" got the same color as "boy".

So, if I asked you to explain the colors, you would say:

"Adam" is blue because it's the doer of the verb, "hit".

"hit" is the verb, and verbs don't get a color.

"dog" is red because it's the receiver of the verb.

"boy" is green because it's the owner.

"girl" is green because it's a borrower. It is borrowing from "boy". And the word "and" is allowing
"girl" to borrow from "boy" because it's connecting the two. You should not say that both "boy" and
"girl" are owners. Only the first one is the owner. The second one is connected to the first one and is
therefore borrowing its color.

"and" is a connecter, and connectors don't get a color.

Ayesha and Zayd saw the mosque of the neighborhood.

In this sentence "Zayd" is not a doer. Only "Ayesha" is. Why then is "Zayd" blue? Because the
word "and" connects it to "Ayesha", and, once connected, it borrows "Ayesha"'s color.

Why do I insist on saying that the only doer in this sentence is "Ayesha"? Why don’t I simply say
that both "Ayesha" and "Zayd" are doers and that's why they're both blue? Good question. The
answer is that if we called both of them doers, we would have a problem in Arabic. The problem
would be that we would not know whether the verb, "saw", would be feminine (because of
"Ayesha") or masculine (because of "Zayd"). The verb should, of course, be feminine, because its
doer is only "Ayesha". Therefore, it makes more sense to say "Zayd" is not a doer but a borrower
(from "Ayesha"). That's why it's blue: because it borrowed its color from Ayesha. What enabled this
borrowing was the connecter, "and". (If this paragraph doesn’t make sense to you, don’t worry; you
will not be tested on it. It’s just there for your information. If you find it confusing, just skip it.)

I ate Sana and Aamir's sandwich.

In this sentence there is only one owner, and that's "Sana". "Aamir" is just a borrower, and it
borrowed its color from "Sana". What enabled this borrowing was the connecter, "and".

Noor saw Khalid's dog and cat.

In this sentence only "dog" is the receiver of the verb. "cat" is just a borrower, and it borrowed its
color from "dog". What enabled this borrowing was the connecter, "and".
You and I drank Khalid's tea.

Adam found the school and mosque.

Zayn's brother wrote a letter and a book.

Muhammad and Amr drank the coffee and tea.

"and" is a connecter, but there are other connectors too. For example, "or".

I will eat a sandwich or burger.

Aamir or Zayn ate your taco and burrito.

My brother and sister love me.

Your cat or dog ate your homework.

He is speaking Spanish or Portuguese.

My parents like my friend's father and mother.

My friend and his father met my parents.

Ibrahim studied the lesson and the book.

Aamenah did not attend the professor's lecture or sermon.

Ahmad and Ali entered the school's building.

Taha or Ali ate your food and drank your beverage.