EVLETTR: Evasive Letterplay

    From The Encyclopedia of Arabic Rhetoric

    المواربة
    EVLETTR: Evasive Letterplay
    CategoryLinguistic Embellishments
    (‘ilm al-badī‘)
    SubcategoryIndirectness & Ambiguity
      
    Balaghascore.com
    CodeCA-8
      
    BalaghaBase.org
    CodeQ78
      
    OpenAlex
    IDW4415372146
      
    Cite this page
    🔗 DOI10.64393/balagha.Q78
     Download PDF
      
    Taxonomy
    ARDTv0.1.0, v0.1.1

    Definition

    Evasive Letterplay (al-mawāraba) is an Arabic rhetorical device where the communicator frames their speech such that its wording can be interpreted differently through a consonantal distortion (taḥrīf), a change in pointing (taṣḥīf), or a similar modification, in order to escape censure or accountability.[1][2]

    Mechanism

    • The communicator produces an utterance that contains an element susceptible to a small formal change - such as a change in pointing (taṣḥīf), a consonantal distortion (taḥrīf), or a similar modification - that yields a different meaning.[1]
    • This formal susceptibility creates two possible readings of the utterance, one objectionable and one innocuous.[1]
    • If challenged, the speaker can claim the innocuous reading was intended, thus avoiding accountability.[1]

    Recognition

    Evasive Letterplay may be present when:

    • An utterance contains a word (or words) susceptible to a small formal change — such as altered pointing or a consonantal shift — that produces a substantially different meaning.[1][2]
    • The original reading is open to objection, while the altered reading is innocuous or complimentary.[1]
    • The speaker may resort to the alternative reading if challenged, as illustrated in the cited example.[1]

    Diagnostic Rhetorical Effects

    Evasive Letterplay:

    • Allows the speaker to escape censure or accountability (li-yaslama min al-muʾākhadha) by claiming the innocuous alternative reading was intended.[1]

    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:

    • Use the Definition, Mechanism, and Recognition sections of this page in Step 1.
    • Apply the substitution test in Step 2.
    • Consider contextual indicators in Step 3.
    • Use the Diagnostic Rhetorical Effects section of this page in Step 4.

    Examples

    Source Example

    لقد ضاعَ شِعْرِي على بابِكُم
    كَمَا ضَاعَ عِقْدٌ على خَالِصَه

    My poetry was lost at your doorstep,
    Just as a necklace was lost on Khāliṣa.

    Explanation
    Abū Nuwās composed these lines, using ḍāʿa (was lost). When Caliph al-Rashīd objected, Abū Nuwās claimed he had said ḍāʾa (shone), a reading achievable through a minimal change in pointing. Both ḍāʿa shiʿrī (my poetry was lost) and ḍāʿa ʿiqd (a necklace was lost) could thus be reread as ḍāʾa shiʿrī (my poetry shone) and ḍāʾa ʿiqd (a necklace shone), yielding an entirely different and innocuous meaning.[1]
    Constructed Example

    كَتَبَ الصَّحَفِيُّ: «إنَّ هذا المسؤولَ أَكَلَ أَمْوَالَ الشَّعْبِ»

    The journalist wrote: "This official devoured the people's funds."

    Explanation
    The journalist used akala (devoured/embezzled). When called to account, he claimed he had written akkala (fed/provided for), meaning the official had spent the funds on the people's welfare. Since the two forms share an identical unpointed skeleton (أكل), the distinction rests entirely on a tashdid — a diacritical mark — making the escape reading formally available through a minimal change in pointing.
    Constructed Example

    قالَ الخَطِيبُ: «إنَّ هذا الوَزِيرَ يَخُونُ وَطَنَهُ وَأَهْلَهُ»

    The orator said: "This minister betrays his homeland and his people."

    Explanation
    The orator used yakhūnu (betrays). When challenged, he claimed he had said yakūnu (is/will be), completing the sentence as "this minister will be a sword for his homeland and his people." The two forms differ by a single dot on the first root letter (خ → ك), a minimal consonantal shift that constitutes taḥrīf, and which — in rapid speech or unvocalised writing — renders the escape reading formally plausible.

    References

    1. a b c d e f g h i Ḥafnī Nāṣif, Muḥammad Diyāb, Sultan Muḥammad and Muṣṭafā Ṭammām, Durūs al-Balāgha (Beirut: Dār Ibn Ḥazm, 2012), 121, ISBN 9786144162798.
    2. a b Basil Hatim, Arabic Rhetoric: The Pragmatics of Deviation from Linguistic Norms, LINCOM Studies in Communication 04 (Munich: Lincom Europa, 2010), 183, ISBN 9783929075731.



    Page history

    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)?