TRUNC: Truncation

    From The Encyclopedia of Arabic Rhetoric

    الاكتفاء
    TRUNC: Truncation
    CategoryLinguistic Embellishments
    (‘ilm al-badī‘)
    SubcategoryIndirectness & Ambiguity
      
    Balagha-Corpus.com
    Corpus dataSee examples
      
    Balaghascore.com
    CodeCA-1
      
    BalaghaBase.org
    CodeQ109
      
    OpenAlex
    IDW4415376777
      
    Cite this page
    🔗 DOI10.64393/balagha.Q109
     Download PDF
      
    Taxonomy
    ARDTv0.1.0, v0.1.1
      
    Provenance
    Sources3

    Definition

    Truncation (al-Iktifāʾ) is an Arabic rhetorical device where the communicator deliberately leaves the end of an utterance — a line of poetry or a passage of prose — incomplete, omitting a final element whose content is nevertheless recoverable from the remaining wording, so that no loss of intelligibility results.[1][2]

    The addressee is left to supply the missing element from what is already indicated by the rest of the utterance and from what is understood in the mind.[3]

    Akkawi transmits a narrower, poetry-specific formulation of this device, attributed to Ibn Ḥijjah al-Ḥamawī and separately corroborated by Germanos Farhat: Truncation occurs when the poet brings a line of poetry whose rhyme-word is connected to an omitted element, the remainder of the line's own wording indicating it, so that the addressee suffices with what is understood in the mind to complete the sense — and if the omitted material is instead spelled out in a following line, this counts as a fault of the poetry.[4] This is a poetry-specific formulation; Cachia explicitly extends the device to both poetry and prose, while Hatim's definition is not restricted to poetry. The broader scope is followed on this page.

    Linguistic Operations

    • Al-Rummānī places this device within Brevity by Ellipsis, distinguishing it from a "matching" type (where wording and meaning correspond exactly, with neither excess nor deficiency) — Truncation being the type where something is omitted because the addressee can do without its mention in that position.[4]
    • The omitted element is connected to the end of the utterance (in poetry, typically the rhyme-word), and its recovery depends on the remaining wording of the utterance pointing to it.[4][2]
    • The utterance retains full intelligibility despite the omission — "there being enough in what is said to identify what is missing."[1]
      • The omission may involve a whole word or part of a word.[2][1]

    In this encyclopedia, the mechanism is described as: an utterance is deliberately cut off at or near its end, with material left unstated; the omitted material is recoverable because the remaining wording and the surrounding context already point to it, so that the omission causes no loss of the intended meaning.

    Recognition

    Truncation may be present when:

    • The end of a line of poetry or a passage of prose is connected to an element that is not stated.[2][1]
    • The remaining wording of the utterance is sufficient on its own to point to the missing element, without loss of intelligibility.[1][4]
    • What is omitted can be recovered by the addressee from what is already understood in the mind.[4][3]

    Diagnostic Pragmatic Effects

    • Truncation-by-part-of-a-word is described as a more difficult path to construct than truncation-by-whole-word, but as producing a sweeter effect ("أحلى موقعاً").[4]
    • The device as a whole is characterised as witty/elegant ("ظريف").[4]

    Types of Truncation

    Type 1: Truncation of a Whole Word

    Omission of an entire word connected to the end of the utterance, recoverable from the remaining wording.[4][2]

    Source Example

    أَقُولُ لِذَاتِ حُسْنٍ قَدْ تَوَارَتْ | مَخَافَةَ كَاشِحٍ فِي الحَيِّ فَاتِنْ
    أَرِينِي وَجْهَكِ الوَضَّاحَ قَالَتْ | أَلَمْ تُؤْمِنْ فَقُلْتُ بَلَى وَلَكِنْ

    I said to the fair one veiling herself, for fear of an envious trouble-maker in the tribe: "Show me your radiant face!" Said she, "Do you not believe?" I answered, "Yes, but..."

    Explanation
    The line ends at "but..." (ولكن); the missing continuation is withheld, while the preceding exchange provides enough information for it to be understood.[2][1]
    Constructed Example

    سَأَلْتُهُ: هَلْ نَجَحْتَ فِي الِامْتِحَانِ؟ فَتَنَهَّدَ وَقَالَ: بَذَلْتُ كُلَّ جُهْدِي، وَلَكِنْ...

    I asked him: "Did you pass the exam?" He sighed and said: "I gave it everything I had, but..."

    Explanation
    The sentence is deliberately left unfinished at "but..."; the sigh and the description of effort already given make the missing continuation (that he did not pass) recoverable without being stated.

    Type 2: Truncation of Part of a Word

    Omission of part of a word connected to the end of the utterance, recoverable from the remaining wording.[4][2]
    Source Example

    مَنْ عَاذِرٌ فِي عَاذِلٍ يَلُومُ فِي حُبِّي رَشَا | إِذَا طَلَبْتُ وَصْلَهُ قَالَ كَفَى بِالدَّمْعِ شَا [أَيْ شَاهِداً]

    Who will excuse a reprover who censures me for loving a fawn? Whenever I plead for union, he answers, "Tears suffice as wit..." [i.e., witness].

    Explanation
    Only the first syllable of شاهد ("witness") is given, as شا, forced by the rhyme; the remaining letters are recoverable from context.[2][1]
    Constructed Example

    خَرَجَتْ مُسْرِعَةً وَهِيَ تَقُولُ: إِنَّهُ حَبـ...! ثُمَّ انْخَنَقَ صَوْتُهَا بِالبُكَاءِ.

    She rushed out saying: "He is my belov—!" Then her voice caught with tears.

    Explanation
    The word حبيبي ("my beloved") is cut short after its first syllable; the emotional context supplies the missing remainder without it needing to be said.

    Different From

    • PUN: Pun (التورية) — Cachia notes that a truncated passage may, in itself, also carry a double meaning that happens to combine with the Truncation, but explicitly states that this is "not a condition of the type" — i.e., Truncation and Double Meanings are independent devices that may co-occur but are not equivalent.[2]

    Notes

    Historical

    • Al-Suyūṭī and Ibn Rashīq are both cited by Akkawi in connection with a differently-scoped use of the term "الاكتفاء", in which one of two necessarily paired/linked things joined by a coordinating wāw suffices for the other — e.g. ﴿سَرَابِيلَ تَقِيكُمُ الْحَرَّ﴾ ("garments that protect you from heat"), where protection from cold is understood though unstated. This is a structurally distinct phenomenon (reciprocal implication between two paired items, rather than the omission of a final element of an utterance) and is not treated as a subtype of Truncation on this page.[4]
    • Ibn Jinnī, in a work he titles "al-Taʿāqub bi-l-Īḥāʾ," and Ibn Fāris, in "Fiqh al-Lugha" (where he terms it "al-Qabḍ"), are cited by ʿAkkāwī in connection with sufficing for an entire word by using a letter from its beginning. ʿAkkāwī reports a Qur'anic instance discussed in this connection and a hadith example, "كَفَى بِالسَّيْفِ شَا," in which شَاهِد ("witness") is represented by its initial portion.[4]

    These usages are recorded here as part of the historical range of the term and are not separately classified as subtypes of Truncation.

    Technical

    • Two English translational labels are attested for this device in the consulted sources: Cachia's "Truncation" and Hatim's "Sufficiency." "Truncation" (Cachia) is used as the page's English name.[1][3]
    • Scope note: ʿAkkāwī's quoted definition via al-Ḥamawī, and the similar definition she records from Germanos Farhat, formulate Truncation specifically with reference to poetry and the rhyme-word. Cachia explicitly defines the device as applying to either a line of poetry or a passage of prose, while Hatim's definition is not restricted to poetry. This page therefore does not treat poetry as a constitutive condition of the device.[4][2][1][3]

    References

    1. ↑ a b c d e f g h i 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. 54-55, ISBN 9783447040327. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "cachia-en-84" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "cachia-en-84" defined multiple times with different content
    2. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j 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. 156-161; §84, ISBN 9783447040327.
    3. ↑ a b c d Basil Hatim, Arabic Rhetoric: The Pragmatics of Deviation from Linguistic Norms, LINCOM Studies in Communication 04 (Munich: Lincom Europa, 2010), 182, ISBN 9783929075731.
    4. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l 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), 202-204. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "akkawi" defined multiple times with different content



    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)?
    Retrieved from "https://al-balagha.com/index.php?title=TRUNC:_Truncation&oldid=10268"