BREVTY: Brevity
| BREVTY: Brevity | |
|---|---|
| Category | Sentence Construction & Syntactical Stylistics (‘ilm al-ma‘ānī) |
| Subcategory | Textual Additions & Omissions |
| Balagha-Corpus.com | |
| Corpus data | See examples |
| Balaghascore.com | |
| Code | BREVTY |
| BalaghaBase.org | |
| Code | Q264 |
| OpenAlex | |
| ID | W4415329817 |
| Cite this page | |
| 🔗 Live DOI | 10.64393/balagha.Q264 |
| Download PDF | |
| Taxonomy | |
| ARDT | v0.1.0, v0.1.1 |
| Provenance | |
| Sources | 9 |
Definition
Brevity (al-ījāz) is an Arabic rhetorical device where the intended meaning is expressed in speech that is shorter than the words ordinarily used to convey it, while still fulfilling the requirements of that meaning.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]
More precisely, al-Hāshimī (2019) defines Brevity as expressing the intended meaning with speech that is shorter in wording than what is customarily used to convey it, while still adequately indicating that meaning.[2] ʿAkkāwī (1996) notes that multiple classical authorities converge on the essential condition: the reduction in wording must not come at the cost of the meaning's completeness — it must remain adequate (wāfin bi-l-dalāla).[1] Hatim (2010) formulates this as the fulfillment of intended rhetorical aims by employing fewer forms (words, phrases, sentences) than a conventionally postulated median line (mutaʿāraf al-awsāṭ) would require.[5]
Ibn Sinān al-Khafājī, as reported in the classical tradition, frames Brevity from the perspective of purpose: words are merely the means by which meanings are conveyed, and if two paths reach the intended meaning with equal ease, the shorter is preferable.[8]
In scholastic rhetoric, Brevity is regularly discussed under 'ilm al-maʿānī, together with its opposite VERBOS: Verbosity (al-iṭnāb) and the neutral intermediate form al-musāwāt, meaning equivalence of expression and content.[9][2][5]
Linguistic Operations
- Brevity is achieved when the communicator conveys the full intended meaning using fewer words than would ordinarily be required, provided a contextual indicator (qarīna) supplies or implies what is left unexpressed.[1][10][5]
- The classical sources discuss Brevity together with its opposite VERBOS: Verbosity (al-iṭnāb) and the intermediate state "moderation" al-musāwāt, where wording and meaning are held to be equal in measure. Brevity and Verbosity are treated as marked departures from this neutral baseline in opposite directions.[2][3][9][11]
- The reduction in wording operates in two distinct ways, giving rise to the two primary subtypes: by elision of an element from the utterance (Brevity by Elision), or by the compressive density of expression itself without any elision (Brevity by Compression).[1][2][3][4][5][7]
- In Brevity by Elision, a word, phrase, sentence, or more is omitted from the surface structure of the utterance. The omission is legitimate only when a contextual indicator (qarīna) renders the elided element recoverable. Without such an indicator, the omission constitutes mere deficiency (lafā), not Brevity.[10][12][5]
- In Brevity by Compression, no element is elided; instead, the words chosen carry a density of meaning such that they convey multiple or expansive meanings beyond their surface expression, or cannot be replaced by fewer words without loss.[13][2][3][5]
- In both subtypes, the condition of adequacy (al-wafāʾ bi-l-maʿnā) must be met: if the shortened expression fails to convey the full intended meaning, the speech is deficient rather than brief.[1][3][5]
- Brevity is contextually motivated — appropriate only when the conditions of the communicative situation call for it. Hatim (2010) notes that brevity must be both textually sufficient (efficient and meaningful) and contextually necessary (effective and motivated); not every context favours brevity over prolixity.[5]
- Brevity is not always a means to an end but may itself constitute the end: when the communicative conditions allow, choosing the briefer expression is preferred, since the intended meaning is the goal and the wording merely its vehicle; any wording that adequately performs that task in fewer words is therefore preferred.[8]
Recognition
Brevity may be present when:
- The utterance is shorter than the expression ordinarily used to convey the same meaning, yet the full meaning remains accessible to the addressee.[1][2]
- One or more words, phrases, or sentences are absent from the surface structure but recoverable through context — a sign of Brevity by Elision.[10]
- A short expression conveys meanings that would require many more words to enumerate explicitly — a sign of Brevity by Compression.[13][2]
The following diagnostic tests aid identification:
- Restoration test (for Elision): attempt to restore omitted words. If the full meaning becomes explicit after restoration and the restored version is longer, this is consistent with Brevity by Elision. If no restoration is possible or needed, consider Brevity by Compression.
- Replacement test (for Compression): attempt to paraphrase the expression in more words. If the longer paraphrase is equivalent in meaning but no shorter version is possible, this confirms Brevity by Compression.
- Adequacy test: check whether the shortened expression adequately conveys the intended meaning. If meaning is lost or ambiguous without contextual support, the expression may be deficient rather than brief.
Diagnostic Communicative Enhancements
- Conciseness and economy of expression (al-ikhtiṣār).[3]
- Stimulation of the addressee's intellect (ithārat al-dhihn), as the mind is engaged to recover suppressed or implied meaning.[3]
- Conservation of time (tawfīr al-waqt).[3]
- Preservation in the memory: what is brief is more easily memorised and retained.[2]
- Brevity by Elision is compared by the classical critics to magic (al-siḥr) in its effect, since the silence is more striking than speech, and the incomplete utterance impels the mind forward.[10]
- Conveyance of curt power (quwwa) over the addressee: brevity can signal authority and dominance in the communicative relationship.[5]
- Enhancement of subtle and subdued meanings characteristic of imaginative text types, where implicit reference is more effective than explication.[5]
- Brevity may display rhetorical superiority in adversarial exchanges: the classical tradition reports that the Umayyad Caliph ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Nāṣir replied to a lengthy hostile letter from a Fatimid ruler — who had insulted him, his people, and his Umayyad lineage — with two short sentences: you knew us and so insulted us; and if we had known you, we would have insulted you (ʿaraftnā fa-hajūnā, wa-law ʿarafnāka la-hajawnāk) — despite the length of the original hostile letter.[8]
Applying the Recognition Framework
The information on this page can be used to evaluate whether this device is present in a candidate lexical item using the Specific Device Recognition part of the Universal Framework for Identifying Arabic Rhetorical Devices:
Types of Brevity
The classical sources identify two primary subtypes of Brevity, with a third minority subtype recorded separately by ʿAkkāwī (1996).
Type 1: Brevity by Elision (Ījāz al-ḥadhf)
Brevity by Elision is the subtype of Brevity in which one or more words, phrases, sentences, or larger units are omitted from the utterance, provided a contextual indicator makes the elided element recoverable.[10][12][2][3][4] Al-Jāḥiẓ named this type al-ījāz al-maḥdhūf, while Abū ʿUbayda called it mujāz al-mukhtaṣar.[10] Ibn al-Athīr defines it as speech in which what is indicated is present (in meaning) while what bears it (in wording) is absent, more meaning is conveyed than is explicitly stated, and no equivalent substitution is available; this is ranked as the highest level of rhetorical achievement.[10][4]
The condition for valid elision is that there must be a contextual indicator (qarīna) — whether linguistic or situational — which identifies the elided element. Without this condition, the omission is merely deficient speech (lafā), not a rhetorical device.[10][12][4][5]
Hatim (2010) enumerates eight types of contextual signal that can license elision and identify the omitted element:[5]
- Common sense / knowledge of the world — both indicating that an omission is involved and identifying what is omitted with reasonable certainty.
- Common sense + jurisprudence (sharīʿa) — where common sense indicates the omission but the legal or religious framework must determine which of several possible interpretations is intended.
- Common sense + social customs — where societal conventions provide the decisive interpretation of an omission among competing possibilities.
- Convention (ʿurf) — overriding knowledge of the world as the determining criterion when the two conflict.
- Performativeness — omission as a function of the speech itself, where the activity signalled by the utterance does not need to be made explicit.
- Context of situation — typical speech events that point to the omission involved.
- Co-text — the immediate textual environment before or after the omission that supplies the missing element.
- Grammatical explanation — disambiguation of the omitted element through the rules of grammar.
The elision may operate at several levels. ʿAtīq (2006) enumerates the following types on the basis of what is elided:[4]
- A letter (ḥarf) — e.g. elision of the negation particle lā from a conditional, recoverable from context.
- An addition (muḍāf) — e.g. Q12:82 was'al al-qaryata (ask the town), where the word people is elided.
- A described noun (mawṣūf) — where the noun qualified by an adjective is omitted and the adjective stands in its place.
- An adjective (ṣifa) — where the qualifying attribute is elided, recoverable from the preceding context or external indicator.
- A conditional clause or its answer (sharṭ aw jawāb) — including the answer of a لو-conditional, which is frequently elided in Quranic and poetic usage.
- A word, sentence, or more — including the elision of multiple sentences, as in narratives where intervening events are omitted and recoverable from the sequence of the account.
A third independent classification, drawn from the classical tradition, organises the signals that license elision by the type of evidence that points to the omitted element. Five categories are identified:[8]
- Indication of the situation (dalālat al-ḥāl) — the external communicative situation itself signals that an omission is present and identifies what is omitted. This may license multiple simultaneous elisions within a single utterance, as in Q51:24–25, where the angels' greeting, its return, and the angels' sense of unfamiliarity are all recoverable from the situational context alone.
- Indication of the co-text (dalālat al-maqāl) — the immediately preceding or following speech identifies the omitted element, as in Q16:30, where the elided verb of saying is recoverable from the question that precedes it.
- Indication of reason (dalālat al-ʿaql) — the omitted element is recoverable by rational inference. This operates in three modes: (a) by reason alone, as in Q75:26 where the elided subject (the soul) is inferred directly; (b) by reason together with religious law (al-sharʿ), where the law determines which of several rationally possible interpretations is intended, as in Q5:3, where reason signals an elision but the law specifies whether it concerns eating, using, or riding; and (c) by reason together with custom (al-ʿurf), where social convention resolves the ambiguity, as in Q12:32, where custom indicates the implied act.
- Indication of habit (dalālat al-ʿāda) — established social or communal habits identify the omitted element, as in Q3:166–167, where the omitted verb is recoverable because the addressees were known by habit to be warriors familiar with battle.
- Grammatical indication (dalālat al-ṣināʿa al-naḥawiyya) — the rules of Arabic grammar establish what must be supplied, as in Q12:85 (*tallāhi taftaʾu tadhkuru Yūsuf*), where grammarians supply the elided negation particle lā to restore the full syntactic structure.
- Source Example
وَسْئَلِ الْقَرْيَةَ
Ask the town. (Q12:82)
- Explanation
- The full implied meaning is "ask the people of the town." The word people (ahl) is elided; the context supplies the recovery. This is the standard example of Brevity by Elision in the sources.[9][2][3][5][7]
- Source Example
هَلْ أَتَاكَ حَدِيثُ ضَيْفِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ الْمُكْرَمِينَ . إِذْ دَخَلُوا عَلَيْهِ فَقَالُوا سَلَامًا قَالَ سَلَامٌ قَوْمٌ مُّنكَرُونَ
Has the story of Abraham's honoured guests reached you? When they entered upon him and said: Peace, he said: Peace — a people unknown. (Q51:24–25)
- Explanation
- Cited as an example of Brevity by Elision licensed by dalālat al-ḥāl: the situational context licenses multiple simultaneous elisions across the passage. In the first phrase, we greet you with peace is elided; in the second, upon you be peace is elided; and in the third, you are a people unknown is elided. The situation of a guest visit makes all three recoverable without explicit statement.[8]
- Source Example
وَقِيلَ لِلَّذِينَ اتَّقَوْا مَاذَا أَنزَلَ رَبُّكُمْ ۚ قَالُوا خَيْرًا
And it is said to those who are mindful of God: What has your Lord revealed? They say: Good. (Q16:30)
- Explanation
- An example of Brevity by Elision licensed by dalālat al-maqāl: the reply good (khayran) elides the verb; the full form is He has revealed good. The elided verb is identified by the question immediately preceding it, which supplies the governing verb revealed as the co-textual signal.[8]
- Source Example
كَلَّا إِذَا بَلَغَتِ التَّرَاقِيَ
No indeed, when it reaches the collarbones. (Q75:26)
- Explanation
- An example of Brevity by Elision licensed by dalālat al-ʿaql in its first mode — reason alone. The subject of reaches (balaghat) is elided; reason supplies it directly as the soul (al-rūḥ). No law or custom is required; the rational inference alone is sufficient to identify the omitted element.[8]
- Source Example
حُرِّمَتْ عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَيْتَةُ
Forbidden to you is carrion. (Q5:3)
- Explanation
- An example of Brevity by Elision licensed by dalālat al-ʿaql in its second mode — reason together with religious law. Reason signals that an elision is present: forbidden must refer to some specific act involving carrion, but the word itself does not say what — eating, using, selling, or riding. The law (al-sharʿ) is required to determine which of these is intended, and specifies that eating is the primary prohibition.[8]
- Source Example
قَالَتْ فَذَٰلِكُنَّ الَّذِي لُمْتُنَّنِي فِيهِ
She said: This is he for whom you blamed me. (Q12:32)
- Explanation
- An example of Brevity by Elision licensed by dalālat al-ʿaql in its third mode — reason together with custom. The wife of al-ʿAzīz elides what she actually did; she says only for whom you blamed me, without stating the act itself. Reason indicates that something is omitted, but it is social custom (al-ʿurf) — the conventions governing what is spoken and unspoken in such a situation — that identifies the implied act as her pursuit of Joseph.[8]
- Source Example
وَمَا أَصَابَكُم يَوْمَ الْتَقَى الْجَمْعَانِ فَبِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ وَلِيَعْلَمَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ . وَلِيَعْلَمَ الَّذِينَ نَافَقُوا ۚ وَقِيلَ لَهُمْ تَعَالَوْا قَاتِلُوا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ أَوِ ادْفَعُوا
And what befell you on the day the two armies met was by God's leave, and that He might know the believers; and that He might know those who were hypocrites — and it was said to them: Come, fight in the way of God, or defend. (Q3:166–167)
- Explanation
- An example of Brevity by Elision licensed by dalālat al-ʿāda: the reply of the hypocrites to the command to fight is elided entirely — the text moves from the command to the next event without recording their refusal. The omission is recoverable because the established habit and known character of the hypocrites, who were recognised as avoiding battle, supplies what they must have said: we would not know how to fight.[8]
- Source Example
تَاللَّهِ تَفْتَأُ تَذْكُرُ يُوسُفَ
By God, you will not cease to remember Joseph. (Q12:85)
- Explanation
- An example of Brevity by Elision licensed by grammatical indication (dalālat al-ṣināʿa al-naḥawiyya): the negation particle lā is elided before taftaʾu; its full form is lā taftaʾu. The grammatical rule that fatiya in this construction requires a negation establishes the elision beyond doubt, making the recovered meaning: you will not cease.[8]
- Constructed Example
قُلْتُ: مَنْ فَازَ؟ قَالَ: زَيْدٌ.
I said: Who won? He said: Zayd.
- Explanation
- The full answer would be "Zayd won." The verb and subject complement are elided; the question provides the contextual indicator that makes the elision recoverable. This illustrates Brevity by Elision at the sentence level.[3]
Type 2: Brevity by Compression (Ījāz al-qaṣr)
Brevity by Compression is the subtype of Brevity in which no element is elided from the utterance, but the expression is so dense with meaning that it conveys far more than its surface words would suggest, or cannot be expressed in fewer words without loss.[13][2][3][5] Al-Jāḥiẓ's definition captures this: speech in which few words indicate multiple adequate meanings, and which cannot be replaced by a shorter expression.[13]
Ibn al-Athīr identifies two variants within this subtype: (a) expression whose words can carry multiple meanings simultaneously, so that the same utterance encompasses many referents; and (b) expression which conveys a single meaning but cannot be rendered more concisely — such that it is impossible to find a shorter wording for the same meaning.[13] The second is rarer and regarded as the highest form of this subtype.[13]
- Source Example
وَلَكُمْ فِي الْقِصَاصِ حَيَاةٌ
In retribution there is life for you. (Q2:179)
- Explanation
- A brief expression whose meaning cannot be reduced further. It conveys that the law of retribution — by deterring would-be killers — preserves life. Al-Hāshimī (2019) notes that the word life encapsulates this entire argument in a form that cannot be shortened and whose wording cannot be replaced by fewer words without loss.[2][3] Van Gelder (1998) uses the same verse as the standard example of Brevity by Compression (brevity by "pregnant expression").[9] ʿAtīq (2006) also cites this verse as the primary example of Brevity by Compression and analyses three ways in which it surpasses the Arabic expression al-qatl anfā lil-qatl (killing deters killing): it contains fewer words, it is non-repetitive, and it does not restrict the deterrent effect to retaliatory killing only.[4] Hatim (2010) likewise uses the same verse as his illustration of Intensive Brevity (إيجاز القصر), describing it as carrying so much meaning as to capture an entire system of justice.[5]
Al-Brūqūfī, as reported in the classical tradition, enumerates seven respects in which this verse surpasses the Arab expression al-qatl anfā li-l-qatl (killing deters killing): first, it is shorter in letter-count (ten letters versus fourteen); second, it does not explicitly state the causal mechanism by which retribution preserves life, but compresses the relationship into an identity — retribution is life — leaving the deterrent logic to be inferred, which is more powerful than spelling it out; third, the indefinite form ḥayāt carries a sense of magnification that a definite noun would lack; fourth, its scope is not restricted to retaliatory killing but encompasses all deterrence; fifth, it is free from the repetition of al-qatl twice; sixth, it dispenses with a hidden comparandum implied in anfā; and seventh, the preposition fī makes retribution the very vessel and source of life, rather than merely its cause.[8]
- Source Example
أُولَٰئِكَ لَهُمُ الْأَمْنُ
Those shall have security. (Q6:82)
- Explanation
- Cited by al-Hāshimī (2019) and ʿAkkāwī (1996) as an example of the first variant of Brevity by Compression: an expression whose few words encompass multiple meanings — security in this life, in the next life, and from every fear — all contained under the single word security (al-amn).[13][3]
- Source Example
أَلَا لَهُ الْخَلْقُ وَالْأَمْرُ
Is it not His the creation and the command? (Q7:54)
- Explanation
- Cited as an example of Brevity by Compression: the two words creation and command compress the entirety of existence and authority — all that is created and all that governs it — into a single brief clause. Nothing of what falls under either word can be excluded, and no shorter expression is available that preserves the scope of the meaning.[8]
- Constructed Example
الصَّدَقَةُ تَطْفَئُ الْخَطِيئَةَ.
Charity extinguishes sin.
- Explanation
- A compressed expression in which the metaphor of extinguishing contains the idea of erasure, cleansing, and relief from consequences — all in four words, none of which can be omitted without altering the meaning. This illustrates Brevity by Compression as an expression that conveys more than its surface words state.
Different From
- VERBOS: Verbosity (al-iṭnāb) — the opposite of Brevity: speech in which the wording exceeds the meaning, provided the addition serves a rhetorical purpose. Where Brevity reduces expression relative to meaning, Verbosity expands it. Both are discussed together in the classical sources as the two poles of discourse length, with al-musāwāt, moderation, as the neutral middle term.[9][2][3]
- ELLIPS: Ellipsis (al-ḥadhf) — Brevity by Elision and Ellipsis both involve omission recoverable through contextual indication. However, Brevity by Elision is discussed primarily in relation to concision and reduction of wording (al-ikhtiṣār), whereas Ellipsis is treated under the chapter of mention and omission (al-dhikr wa-al-ḥadhf) in relation to the motives and conditions governing omission itself (dawāʿī al-ḥadhf). Brevity also includes Brevity by Compression, which involves dense expression without omission and therefore falls outside Ellipsis.[10][4][5]
Notes
Historical
- Brevity was highly esteemed as a stylistic virtue in classical Arabic literary criticism, in prose as well as poetry, though the classical critics recognised that some contexts called for prolixity instead. Van Gelder (1998) notes that lip-service to the ideal is often paid in the prefaces of prose works.[9]
- ʿAtīq (2006) traces the development of the concept of Brevity historically: the pre-Islamic Arabs valued it primarily as a practical means of preserving literature orally in a largely illiterate society, since memory cannot retain everything. In early Islam the concept changed little, as conditions remained similar. It was in the third Hijri century under al-Jāḥiẓ that Brevity began to be theorised as an intrinsic rhetorical ideal — defined as gathering many meanings under few words — beyond its earlier instrumental role.[4]
- ʿAkkāwī (1996) records that Brevity was regarded as a distinctive characteristic of the Arabic language not shared by other languages, noted by al-Bīrūnī and praised by multiple oriental scholars.[1]
- The Prophet Muḥammad was described as possessing jawāmiʿ al-kalim, meaning speech that gathers many meanings in few words — cited in the classical sources as the supreme model of Brevity by Compression.[2][3]
- Al-Jāḥiẓ praised Brevity in his treatise on rhetoric, writing that Brevity among the Arabs took precedence over prolixity, and that the best expression is what says the most in the fewest words.[1]
- A further argument advanced in the classical tradition holds that Arabic is inherently a language of brevity by its very structure: the verb system embeds subject and object within a single word, so that a complete transitive clause such as I gave you (aʿṭaytuka) is expressed in four morphemes — verb, agent, tense-marker, and object — compressed into a single word-form of four phonemes, a degree of compression presented in the source as characteristic of Arabic structure. This structural argument positions Arabic brevity not merely as a stylistic preference but as a feature of the language's grammatical architecture.[8]
Technical
- The term al-ījāz, translated here as Brevity, is rendered as "succinctness" by Abdul-Raof (2006), who analyses it within a modern pragmatic framework.[6] The classical balagha tradition uses the term strictly to denote the relationship between the length of expression and the quantity of meaning conveyed, without reference to text type or communicative register.
- The condition al-wafāʾ bi-l-maʿnā, rendered here as "adequacy of meaning" or "fulfilling the requirements of meaning," is the critical distinguishing condition between Brevity and mere deficiency (al-iqhlāl).[1][3]
- The sources reviewed classify Brevity by Elision from several complementary perspectives. ʿAtīq (2006) classifies elision by the structural category of the omitted element (letter, addition, described noun, adjective, conditional, sentence); Hatim (2010) classifies elision by the type of contextual signal that licenses and recovers the omission (knowledge of the world, convention, co-text, grammar, etc.); and the material reported in [8] organises elision signals by the epistemological nature of the evidence pointing to the omitted element (situation, co-text, reason, habit, grammar). The classifications overlap in substance but approach the phenomenon from different angles.[8][4][5]
- The term ījāz al-taqdīr is inconsistently used in the rhetorical tradition. ʿAkkāwī (1996), citing Ibn Mālik, records it as a third subtype of Brevity distinct from both Brevity by Elision and Brevity by Compression. It refers to expressions whose wording remains brief while encompassing broad or richly implied meanings that could be elaborated further if desired.[14] However, ʿAtīq (2006), drawing on Ibn al-Athīr's al-Mathal al-Sāʾir, uses the same term for what is effectively al-musāwāt, the neutral middle state in which wording and meaning correspond in measure.[4] The other major sources reviewed do not recognise it as a separate subtype of Brevity. In this encyclopedia, the primary subtype structure therefore follows the minimum shared classification attested across the sources: Brevity by Elision and Brevity by Compression.
- Al-Maraghī reports that the disagreement among scholars over whether al-musāwāt constitutes a third independent category between Brevity and Verbosity is terminological rather than substantive: those who accept it as a middle category (following al-Sakkākī) define it as expression from ordinary speakers that is neither brief nor prolix by the standard of the rhetorically trained; those who deny it (following Ibn al-Athīr) classify such expression under Brevity or Verbosity respectively. Al-Maraghī concludes, citing ʿUlūm al-Balāgha, that the disagreement is over the name, not the thing named (al-khilāf fī l-ism lā fī l-musammā).[8]
References
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i Inʿām Fawwāl ʿAkkāwī, Al-Muʿjam al-Mufaṣṣal fī ʿUlūm al-Balāgha: Al-Badīʿ wa-al-Bayān wa-al-Maʿānī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1996), 242-244.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Aḥmad al-Hāshimī, Jawāhir al-Balāgha fī al-Maʿānī wa-al-Bayān wa-al-Badīʿ (Windsor: Hindāwī Foundation, 2019), 223–240, ISBN 9781527316386.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Ayman Amin Abd Al-Ghani, Al-Kāfī fī al-Balāgha: Al-Bayān, wa al-Badiʿ wa al-Maʿānī (Cairo: Dār al-Tawfīqiyya lil-Turāth, 2011), 381-397.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Atīq, ʿIlm al-Maʿānī (Cairo: Dār al-Āfāq al-ʿArabiyya, 2006), 133-157, ISBN 9773440764.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Basil Hatim, Arabic Rhetoric: The Pragmatics of Deviation from Linguistic Norms, LINCOM Studies in Communication 04 (Munich: Lincom Europa, 2010), 198-231, ISBN 9783929075731.
- ↑ a b Hussein Abdul-Raof, Arabic Rhetoric: A Pragmatic Analysis (Oxford: Routledge, 2006), 188-192, ISBN 9780415386098. DOI: 10.4324/9780203965399
- ↑ a b c Pierre Cachia, The Arch Rhetorician: Or The Schemer’s Skimmer: A Handbook of Late Arabic Badīʻ Drawn from ʻAbd al-Ghanī an-Nābulsī’s Nafaḥāt al-Azhār ʻala Nasamāt al-Asḥār, Studies in Arabic Language and Literature 3 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1998), pp. 52-53; §81, ISBN 9783447040327.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Faḍl Ḥasan ʿAbbās, Al-Balāgha: Funūnuhā wa-Afnānuhā - ʿIlm al-Maʿānī (Irbid: Dār al-Furqān lil-Nashr wa-al-Tawzīʿ, 1997), 453-457.
- ↑ a b c d e f G.J.H. van Gelder, ‘Ījāz’, in Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature, ed. Julie Scott Meisami and Paul Starkey (London: Routledge, 1998), 390, ISBN 0415068088.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h i Inʿām Fawwāl ʿAkkāwī, Al-Muʿjam al-Mufaṣṣal fī ʿUlūm al-Balāgha: Al-Badīʿ wa-al-Bayān wa-al-Maʿānī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1996), 245.
- ↑ Pierre Cachia, The Arch Rhetorician: Or The Schemer’s Skimmer: A Handbook of Late Arabic Badīʻ Drawn from ʻAbd al-Ghanī an-Nābulsī’s Nafaḥāt al-Azhār ʻala Nasamāt al-Asḥār, Studies in Arabic Language and Literature 3 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1998), pp. 53; §82, ISBN 9783447040327.
- ↑ a b c Inʿām Fawwāl ʿAkkāwī, Al-Muʿjam al-Mufaṣṣal fī ʿUlūm al-Balāgha: Al-Badīʿ wa-al-Bayān wa-al-Maʿānī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1996), 245-246.
- ↑ a b c d e f g Inʿām Fawwāl ʿAkkāwī, Al-Muʿjam al-Mufaṣṣal fī ʿUlūm al-Balāgha: Al-Badīʿ wa-al-Bayān wa-al-Maʿānī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1996), 246-247.
- ↑ Inʿām Fawwāl ʿAkkāwī, Al-Muʿjam al-Mufaṣṣal fī ʿUlūm al-Balāgha: Al-Badīʿ wa-al-Bayān wa-al-Maʿānī (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1996), 244-245.
Page History
- 2026-02-04 - Page created by splitting A-13: Brevity, Verbosity and Moderation into BREVTY: Brevity and VERBOS: Verbosity
due to their distinct rhetorical mechanisms, to improve analytical granularity.
- 2025-11-20 - Page incorporated into the Arabic Rhetorical Device Taxonomy (v0.1.1).
You are viewing the live version of this page. Would you like to view the version included in the Arabic Rhetorical Device Taxonomy (v0.1.1)?
