Register to read the introduction…
269-74]; Näsif [14, p. 21]; Ibn Qutaybah [15, p. 10]; Ibn Färis [16, pp. 177-8]; Al-Jubouri [12, pp. 99-117]; Koch [17]; and Tytler [18]. According to Al-Mulla [19, p. 232] quoted from Al-Maydani, pp. 99-108 on Ibn Qayyim, pp. 159-167: “Ibn Qayyim identifies three types of Repetition in the Qur’an: Repetition with similarity of meaning e.g. Q74:19-20. Repetition with difference of meaning e.g. Q3:7. Repetition of meaning with different wording e.g. Q55:68.” (2) Ibn Qutaybah [15, p. 183]; and Abu Hiläl [20, p. 193]. (3) Abu Hiläl [20, p. 193]; the poet is not named. This line is also found in Al-Murtada, ’Amäli al-Murtada (1954), Vol. 1, p. 84. ‘ﻧﺖ ﻭﻛﹶﻢ ’ﻛﹶﺎis, however, missing from this line in Ibn Qutaybah [15, p. 183], and Ibn Färis [16, p. 177].
٢٢ “(4)ﺎ؟ﺃﻳ …show more content…
In this äyah, the reason Prophet Joseph repeated the verb was not to persuade his listeners, but to emphasize that, what he saw, was true. This example shows recourse to a feature of the language when concrete proof cannot be provided. The proof of the veracity of what Prophet Joseph ‘saw’ lay, not in his linguistic presentation of simply saying it again and again (as claimed by Johnstone [29, p. 155]), but in the physical coming true of his claim - his dream - near the end of the narrative. There is no doubt in the mind of the Arabic-speaking reader of the Qur’an that the repetitive nature of Prophet Joseph’s language is verbally precursive to, and predictive of, an actual event fated to occur by the virtue of God’s divine will. This is not, as Johnstone [29] would have us believe, mere linguistic form in order to persuade or convince, devoid of logical proof. The Prophet’s convictions, emphasized by repetition, serve as testimony to his faith, and to his submission (Islam) to his God. His visions cited by repeated words, confirm his prophethood. The repetition here is no mere rhetorical device -- it serves, instead, to confirm the Divine Hand behind the Prophet’s visions and what subsequently occurred. The rational argumentation for the actuality and the veracity of the events is implicit, rather than explicit -- and is vested in the repetition. Translating this implicit …show more content…
In many contexts, however, ﻈ ﻢ ﺟ ﹶ ﹶ ﺬ ﹺﻥ both ‘ ﻴ ﺟﻞ ﻋ ’ﻫ ﹶﺍ ﺍﻟand ‘ ﻴ ﻞ ﻟﻌ ’ﺇ ﱠ ﻫ ﹶﺍ ﺍﻟﺮwould have to be translated as ‘This man is great’ ﻈ ﻢ ﹸ ﺬ ﺮ ﻈ ﻢ ﺟ ﹶ ﹶ ﺬ
٢٢ “(4)ﺎ؟ﺃﻳ …show more content…
In this äyah, the reason Prophet Joseph repeated the verb was not to persuade his listeners, but to emphasize that, what he saw, was true. This example shows recourse to a feature of the language when concrete proof cannot be provided. The proof of the veracity of what Prophet Joseph ‘saw’ lay, not in his linguistic presentation of simply saying it again and again (as claimed by Johnstone [29, p. 155]), but in the physical coming true of his claim - his dream - near the end of the narrative. There is no doubt in the mind of the Arabic-speaking reader of the Qur’an that the repetitive nature of Prophet Joseph’s language is verbally precursive to, and predictive of, an actual event fated to occur by the virtue of God’s divine will. This is not, as Johnstone [29] would have us believe, mere linguistic form in order to persuade or convince, devoid of logical proof. The Prophet’s convictions, emphasized by repetition, serve as testimony to his faith, and to his submission (Islam) to his God. His visions cited by repeated words, confirm his prophethood. The repetition here is no mere rhetorical device -- it serves, instead, to confirm the Divine Hand behind the Prophet’s visions and what subsequently occurred. The rational argumentation for the actuality and the veracity of the events is implicit, rather than explicit -- and is vested in the repetition. Translating this implicit …show more content…
In many contexts, however, ﻈ ﻢ ﺟ ﹶ ﹶ ﺬ ﹺﻥ both ‘ ﻴ ﺟﻞ ﻋ ’ﻫ ﹶﺍ ﺍﻟand ‘ ﻴ ﻞ ﻟﻌ ’ﺇ ﱠ ﻫ ﹶﺍ ﺍﻟﺮwould have to be translated as ‘This man is great’ ﻈ ﻢ ﹸ ﺬ ﺮ ﻈ ﻢ ﺟ ﹶ ﹶ ﺬ