Questions and Interrogatives in Arabic (al-Istifhām)

Questions and Interrogatives in Arabic (al-Istifhām) describes the ordinary linguistic system of Arabic interrogative constructions: their particles and nouns, the kinds of information they request, and the principal distinctions governing their use.

For the rhetorical device in which an interrogative construction is used for a purpose other than genuinely seeking unknown information, see INTEROG: The Rhetorical Interrogative. That article treats the rhetorical mechanism and purposes of interrogative expression in Arabic rhetoric.

Overview

From the sources

In its ordinary sense, al-istifhām is the seeking of knowledge or understanding about something not previously known to the questioner. Nasif and Funūn similarly describe it as the seeking of understanding (ṭalab al-fahm).

Ghani describes the Interrogative as a form of directive construction (inshāʾ ṭalabī) whose ordinary purpose is the seeking of understanding or inquiry in order to know something unknown to the questioner.

Some rhetoricians distinguish al-istifhām from al-istikhbār. Nasif and Funūn record this distinction but state that it has no material consequence for the study of rhetoric.

This ordinary information-seeking use provides the linguistic baseline from which rhetorical interrogation departs. For that rhetorical use, see INTEROG: The Rhetorical Interrogative.

Interrogative tools

From the sources

Arabic interrogation is expressed through a set of interrogative particles and nouns.

Nasif and Funūn enumerate eleven tools:

• al-hamza (أ)
• hal
• man
• mā
• matā
• ayyān
• ayna
• annā
• kayf
• kam
• ayy

The source inventories are not completely uniform. Jawāhir and Ghani give shorter opening lists: both omit ayyān, while Jawāhir's initial enumeration also omits man, although man is subsequently treated in its own discussion.

The two principal interrogative particles are hamza and hal. The remaining tools are interrogative nouns.

Taṣawwur and taṣdīq

From the sources

The sources distinguish two principal kinds of information sought through interrogation: taṣawwur and taṣdīq.

Taṣawwur

Taṣawwur is the apprehension or identification of a single item (mufrad). The underlying relation is already known, but the questioner seeks to identify the particular item to which it applies.

Constructed Example

أَعَلِيٌّ مُسَافِرٌ أَمْ خَالِدٌ؟

Is ʿAlī travelling, or Khālid?

Explanation

Here the questioner assumes that one of the two is travelling and seeks only to identify which one. The answer therefore specifies the relevant individual rather than answering simply with "yes" or "no".

Taṣdīq

Taṣdīq concerns whether a complete relation or predication obtains or does not obtain. The questioner does not know whether the proposition itself is true and seeks confirmation or denial.

Constructed Example

أَسَافَرَ عَلِيٌّ؟

Did ʿAlī travel?

Explanation

The question concerns whether the relation "ʿAlī travelled" occurred at all and is therefore answered with an affirmative or negative response.

The hamza

From the sources

The interrogative hamza may be used for either taṣawwur or taṣdīq. Both hamza and hal are particles with no independent lexical meaning of their own; the object of inquiry is accordingly whatever immediately follows them.

Hamza for taṣawwur

When hamza requests taṣawwur, the item being asked about follows the hamza. The sources describe this item as the masʾūl ʿanhu.

It may be:

• the musnad ilayh;
• the musnad;
• an object (mafʿūl);
• a circumstantial qualifier (ḥāl); or
• an adverbial expression (ẓarf).

The item normally has a counterpart or alternative (muʿādil) introduced by am ("or").

Constructed Example

أَأَنْتَ فَعَلْتَ هَذَا أَمْ يُوسُفُ؟

Was it you who did this, or Yūsuf?

Explanation

The question presupposes that the act occurred and seeks to identify the person responsible.

Hamza for taṣdīq

When hamza requests taṣdīq, the question concerns whether the relation itself holds. Such a question is answered affirmatively or negatively.

A connected alternative introduced by am is not used with this form of hamza. If am occurs in such a construction, the sources treat it as disconnected (munqaṭiʿa), with a sense comparable to bal ("rather").

Hal

From the sources

hal is restricted to taṣdīq: it asks whether a relation obtains or does not obtain.

Constructed Example

هَلْ حَافَظَ الْمِصْرِيُّونَ عَلَى مَجْدِ أَسْلَافِهِمْ؟

Have the Egyptians preserved the glory of their forebears?

Explanation

The question asks whether the proposition is true and therefore seeks confirmation or denial.

Because hal asks for the ruling itself, it is not combined with a connected am that asks the hearer to select between alternatives. The sources explain that connected am presupposes knowledge of the underlying ruling, whereas hal presupposes that this ruling is what remains unknown.

Simple and compound hal

Jawāhir distinguishes two uses of hal.

Simple hal (هل البسيطة)

This asks about the existence or non-existence of a thing in itself.

Source Example

هَلِ الْعَنْقَاءُ مَوْجُودَةٌ؟

Does the phoenix exist?

Explanation

The question asks about the bare existence of the phoenix, with no other object involved.

Compound hal (هل المركبة)

This asks whether something exists for, belongs to, or is predicated of another thing.

Source Example

هَلِ الْمِرِّيخُ مَسْكُونٌ؟

Is Mars inhabited?

Explanation

Existence (habitation) is here predicated of an already-identified referent (Mars), rather than the referent's own existence being in question.

In the first example, existence itself is at issue. In the second, habitation is predicated of an already identified referent.

Other restrictions on hal

Jawāhir records several restrictions governing ordinary use of hal.

• It does not normally enter upon a negated clause.
• It does not normally introduce a present-tense verb when that verb is intended specifically with present-time reference; hal tends to orient a following imperfect verb towards the future, in this respect functioning like sa- and sawfa.
• It does not enter directly upon inna.
• It does not directly precede a conditional construction.
• It does not precede a coordinating particle; rather, the coordinating particle precedes hal.
• It does not enter directly upon a noun (rather than a verb) without altering the sense expected of it.

Jawāhir contrasts this with hamza, which may occur in constructions in which hal does not.

Interrogative nouns

From the sources

The interrogative nouns differ according to the kind of information sought.

• mā

  Used in questioning about non-rational referents. Jawāhir distinguishes uses asking for clarification of a name, the reality or essence of the named thing, or its quality.

• man

  Used to identify rational beings or persons.

• matā

  Used to ask about time, whether past or future.

• ayyān

  Nasif and Funūn include ayyān among the interrogative tools and describe it as asking about future time, particularly in contexts involving matters of gravity or magnitude.

• kayf

  Used to ask about state, manner, or condition.

• ayna

  Used to ask about place.

• annā

  May carry meanings corresponding to kayf ("how"), min ayna ("from where"), or matā ("when"), according to context.

• kam

  Used to ask for the determination of an unspecified number.

• ayy

  Used to distinguish one member among alternatives sharing some common property. Its precise domain depends on the expression to which it is annexed and may therefore concern a person, time, place, state, number, or another category.

From ordinary interrogation to rhetorical use

From the sources

The material above describes interrogation in its ordinary information-seeking function. Arabic rhetorical sources also devote extensive attention to cases in which the interrogative wording remains present but the utterance no longer functions as a genuine request for unknown information.

Ghani distinguishes genuine or "true" interrogation (istifhām ḥaqīqī) from interrogative constructions used for rhetorical purposes. In genuine interrogation, the speaker asks about something unknown and expects an answer; Ghani states that this literal use has no rhetorical value in itself.

The rhetorical use arises when the interrogative expression departs from this ordinary information-seeking meaning and conveys another purpose understood from contextual indications.

Nasif similarly explains that an utterance may retain interrogative form while conveying declarative meaning.

Source Example

أَلَمْ نَشْرَحْ لَكَ صَدْرَكَ

Did We not expand your breast for you?

Explanation

An interrogative construction whose intended meaning affirms that the act occurred, with the interrogative form serving a rhetorical purpose. (Q. 94:1)

The rhetorical sources record numerous such purposes, including affirmation, denial, rebuke, command, prohibition, astonishment, threat, glorification, belittling, wishing, and others.

For the mechanism, recognition criteria, rhetorical purposes, and examples of these non-literal uses, see the main rhetorical-device article: INTEROG: The Rhetorical Interrogative.

Relationship to rhetoric

Encyclopedia Interpretation

This page is intended as a linguistic reference for the ordinary system upon which rhetorical interrogation operates. It does not catalogue the rhetorical purposes of interrogative expression.

The rhetorical distinction can therefore be summarised as follows:

• Ordinary interrogation: the communicator genuinely seeks information or understanding not already known.
• Rhetorical interrogation: the interrogative form is retained, but another meaning or purpose is intended and understood from context.

For the second of these, see INTEROG: The Rhetorical Interrogative.

See also

• INTEROG: The Rhetorical Interrogative — the main Encyclopedia article on the rhetorical use of interrogative constructions.

Notes

• The sources do not give a completely uniform inventory of interrogative tools. Nasif and Funūn enumerate eleven, while Jawāhir and Ghani give shorter opening inventories. These differences are preserved here rather than harmonised.
• Encyclopedia Interpretation
  The distinctions between taṣawwur and taṣdīq, and between simple and compound hal, describe the ordinary operation of interrogative constructions. They are therefore treated on this reference page rather than as subtypes of the rhetorical device INTEROG: The Rhetorical Interrogative.