مهما كان الملمس، ينقش صديقي نقشا.

مهما means whatever or no matter what. It introduces a concessive or conditional idea.

So مهما كان الملمس means something like:

• whatever the texture may be
• no matter what the texture is like

It sets up the idea that the action in the second clause happens regardless of the texture.

In Arabic, especially after words like مهما, a past-tense form can be used for a general, non-past, or hypothetical meaning.

So كان here does not mean that the texture was in the past. It is part of a common idiomatic structure. In English, you would still usually translate it with a present idea such as is or may be.

Yes. مهما يكن الملمس is also possible.

The difference is roughly this:

• مهما كان الملمس: very common and idiomatic
• مهما يكن الملمس: more explicitly conditional and often a bit more formal or literary

Why يكن? Because it is the jussive form of يكون, which is what you expect after a conditional word like مهما.

In learner-friendly terms, الملمس is the noun linked to كان in the expression مهما كان الملمس.

That is why it is in the nominative: الملمسُ if fully vowelled.

So you can think of it as the noun in the phrase whatever the texture is. The الـ makes it definite: the texture.

Yes, that is a very reasonable question.

Arabic often allows a compressed structure like:

• مهما كان السبب
• مهما كان الشكل
• مهما كان الملمس

These mean:

• whatever the reason may be
• whatever the shape may be
• whatever the texture may be

English often wants an extra idea such as is like, but Arabic can leave that understood from context.

Because MSA often uses verb-first word order in verbal sentences.

So:

• ينقش صديقي
• صديقي ينقش

are both possible, but the first is very normal in formal Arabic.

In this sentence, the subject is singular masculine, so the verb form does not create any special agreement issue either way.

Because صديقي has ياء المتكلم attached, the -ي meaning my.

When a noun is attached to -ي, the normal case ending is not clearly pronounced as a separate final vowel. Grammarians say the case is estimated or hidden.

So:

• جاء صديقي = my friend came
• رأيت صديقي = I saw my friend
• مررت بصديقي = I passed by my friend

The written form صديقي stays the same, and the sentence tells you its role. Here it is the subject of ينقش.

Because نقشًا is the verbal noun of the same root ن-ق-ش.

This is a common Arabic pattern called المفعول المطلق. It uses a verbal noun after its own verb to do things like:

• emphasize the action
• describe the manner or type of the action

So ينقش نقشًا is not random repetition. It is a regular grammatical structure.

In English, a word-for-word translation may sound repetitive, but in Arabic it is perfectly normal.

Because المفعول المطلق is accusative.

That is why the word ends in -an when fully vowelled: نقشًا.

The spelling with tanwīn fatḥ plus an extra ا is standard for many indefinite accusative nouns.

It is grammatically fine, but it sounds a bit more like a practice sentence or a stylized sentence than everyday speech.

The part ينقش نقشًا especially highlights the grammar and the root repetition. In more natural prose, Arabic often uses a more specific object or a fuller context. But as an example of structure and morphology, it works well.