VERBOS: Verbosity

الإطناب

VERBOS: Verbosity
Category	Sentence Construction & Syntactical Stylistics (‘ilm al-ma‘ānī)
Subcategory	Textual Additions & Omissions
Balagha-Corpus.com
Corpus data	See examples
Balaghascore.com
Code	VERBOS
BalaghaBase.org
Code	Q265
OpenAlex
ID	W4415329817
Cite this page
🔗 DOI	10.64393/balagha.Q265
	Download PDF
Taxonomy
ARDT	v0.1.0, v0.1.1

Definition

Verbosity (al-iṭnāb) is an Arabic rhetorical device where the wording of an utterance exceeds what is ordinarily required to convey the intended meaning, provided the additional wording serves a designated rhetorical purpose.

More precisely, al-Hāshimī (2019) defines Verbosity as the performance of the intended meaning by more than one expression, such that the wording is in excess of the meaning. Al-Qazwīnī, as cited by ʿAkkāwī (1996), formulates it as the original meaning being performed with a word in excess of it, where that excess serves a purpose. Ibn al-Athīr's formulation, adopted by ʿAtīq (2006) as the most reliable single definition, is that Verbosity is the addition of wording to meaning for a purpose (ziyādat al-lafẓ ʿalā l-maʿnā li-fāʾida). The qualifying condition — that the addition must serve a purpose — distinguishes Verbosity from padding (al-ḥashw) and long-windedness (al-taṭwīl), which are additions without rhetorical justification.

In scholastic rhetoric, Verbosity is regularly discussed under ʿilm al-maʿānī, together with its opposite BREVTY: Brevity (al-ījāz) and the neutral intermediate form al-musāwāt, meaning equivalence of expression and content — where the wording is equal to the meaning, neither more nor less.

Mechanism

From the sources

• Verbosity is achieved when the communicator adds wording beyond the meaning, and the addition serves a rhetorical purpose or benefit such as clarification, emphasis, or persuasion.
• The classical sources discuss Verbosity together with its opposite BREVTY: Brevity (al-ījāz) and with Moderation (al-musāwāt), where the wording is equal to the meaning, neither exceeding it nor falling short of it.
• The rhetorical tradition carefully distinguishes Verbosity from superficially similar but non-rhetorical expansions. Padding (al-ḥashw) is wording that corrupts the meaning; long-windedness (al-taṭwīl) is wording that adds nothing and serves no purpose. Verbosity is distinguished from these forms because its additional wording serves a recognised rhetorical purpose or benefit.
• The sources identify several recognised forms of Verbosity, including clarification after obscurity, specification after generality, generalisation after specification, repetition, parenthetical insertion, protective qualification, tail-end reinforcement, supplementation, ending reinforcement, and embellishment.
• Verbosity is contextually motivated — appropriate only when the communicative situation calls for it. Al-Jāḥiẓ, as reported by ʿAtīq (2006), held that both Brevity and Verbosity are needed across all types of discourse, and that the appropriate mode depends entirely on the context: to use Verbosity where Brevity is required, or Brevity where Verbosity is required, is a rhetorical error. Hatim (2010) similarly notes that Verbosity must be both textually sufficient and contextually necessary — effective and motivated — to be rhetorical rather than merely excessive. The Funūn (pp. 453–509) specifies that Verbosity is particularly appropriate in: reconciliation between warring parties, eulogy and praise, condemnation, congratulation, public address on matters of general concern, public instruction and exhortation, and official correspondence from rulers to their subjects.

Recognition

From the sources

Verbosity may be present when:

• The wording exceeds the meaning and the additional wording serves a rhetorical purpose or benefit.
• A specific item is mentioned after a general category that already includes it.
• A general category is mentioned after a specific item already included within it.
• A word, phrase, or sentence is repeated for a purpose such as emphasis, warning, or renewing attention.
• A clause is inserted between two connected parts of speech while serving a separate rhetorical purpose.
• A qualification is added to prevent a possible misunderstanding of the intended meaning.

Encyclopedia Interpretation

The following diagnostic tests aid identification:

• Reduction test: attempt to remove the additional wording. If the core meaning survives the removal intact and the shorter version is equivalent, the additional wording is potentially Verbosity. Then assess whether the removed portion served a rhetorical purpose — if so, its removal is a loss, confirming Verbosity; if not, the addition was padding.
• Purpose test: for each element of additional wording, identify the rhetorical function it serves (clarification, emphasis, persuasion, warning, etc.). If a specific function can be assigned, the addition qualifies as Verbosity. If no function is identifiable, the addition is not rhetorical Verbosity.
• Positioning test: identify where in the utterance the additional wording appears — before, after, or within the core statement — and how it relates to it. Different positions correspond to different subtypes of Verbosity as classified in the sources.

Diagnostic Rhetorical Effects

From the sources

• Clarification of meaning and its reinforcement in the addressee's mind: Verbosity prevents ambiguity, resolves obscurity, and fixes the meaning through elaboration.
• Persuasion and emotional engagement: the sources associate Verbosity with contexts such as public address, reconciliation, exhortation, praise, blame, and situations where elaboration helps move or affect the addressee.
• Expression of respect, honour, or care for the addressee: certain forms of addition — particularly protective qualification and parenthetical elaboration — signal attentiveness to the addressee's interpretive position.
• Contextual appropriateness: Hatim (2010) presents motivated redundancy as effective only when the additional wording is required by context and contributes to the communicative purpose, rather than being gratuitous.
• Emphasis and affirmation: repetition and tail-end reinforcement drive a meaning more deeply into the addressee's mind, guarding against forgetfulness and ensuring retention of what is important.
• Warning (al-tanwīh): specifying a particular item after a general category draws attention to its exceptional importance within that category.
• Making concepts more comprehensible by repetition, so that they are reinforced for those who are slow to understand and confirmed for those who have already grasped them.

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.

Types of Verbosity

The classical sources identify a range of subtypes of Verbosity. The subtypes below are those attested across the primary sources reviewed.

Type 1: Clarification after Obscurity (al-īḍāḥ baʿda l-ibhām)

From the sources

Clarification after Obscurity is the subtype of Verbosity in which the communicator first states a meaning in obscure or general terms, then restates or expands it in clear and explicit terms, so that the meaning is conveyed twice — once vaguely, and once plainly — producing a stronger impression than either alone would achieve.

The rhetorical function is the reinforcement of meaning in the addressee's mind: the initial obscurity draws attention to what follows, and the later clarification strengthens the impact of the meaning.

Source Example

وَقَضَيْنَا إِلَيْهِ ذَٰلِكَ الْأَمْرَ أَنَّ دَابِرَ هَٰؤُلَاءِ مَقْطُوعٌ مُّصْبِحِينَ

And We conveyed to him that decree: that the last remnants of those people would be wiped out in the morning. (Q15:66)

Explanation

The pronoun dhālika l-amr (that decree) is cataphoric and forward-pointing: it creates an initial obscurity, placing the addressee in a state of anticipation, which the subsequent clause then resolves and clarifies. Hatim (2010) cites this verse as an example of Clarification after Obscurity, noting that the cataphoric reference not only clarifies but also accentuates and magnifies what is mentioned last.

Constructed Example

فعلتُ أمرًا عظيمًا: تركتُ وظيفتي وسافرتُ إلى بلدٍ لا أعرفه.

I did something momentous: I left my job and travelled to a country I did not know.

Explanation

The opening phrase I did something momentous states the meaning in general and obscure terms; the following clause provides the specific clarification. The listener's attention is drawn forward by the obscurity and then satisfied by the explanation, reinforcing the impact of the disclosure.

Type 2: Specification after Generality (dhikr al-khāṣṣ baʿda l-ʿāmm)

From the sources

Specification after Generality is the subtype of Verbosity in which a specific item is named or described after a general category that already includes it, so that the specific item receives additional attention beyond what the general mention alone would afford. The rhetorical aim is the highlighting of the particular item's importance within its class by singling it out after the general category.

Source Example

حَافِظُوا عَلَى الصَّلَوَاتِ وَالصَّلَاةِ الْوُسْطَىٰ

Guard the prayers, and the middle prayer. (Q2:238)

Explanation

The middle prayer (ʿAṣr) is already contained within the general category the prayers, yet it is singled out by name. ʿAtīq (2006) and al-Hāshimī (2019) both cite this verse: the specification directs special attention to the middle prayer's particular excellence, causing it to be treated as though it were of a different order from the others, so that its special merit is not subsumed within the general.

Constructed Example

أكرمتُ الضيوفَ جميعًا، وأكرمتُ بالأخصِّ والدَيكَ.

I honoured all the guests, and I honoured your parents in particular.

Explanation

The parents are included within all the guests but are named separately to draw attention to their special status. The addition performs the rhetorical function of warning and honour — signalling that the particular item deserves recognition beyond what the general mention grants it.

Type 3: Generalisation after Specification (dhikr al-ʿāmm baʿda l-khāṣṣ)

From the sources

Generalisation after Specification is the subtype of Verbosity in which a general statement is made after a specific one that is already subsumed within it, so that the specific item is mentioned twice — once on its own, and once as part of the general class. The rhetorical purpose is to convey special care (ʿināya) for the particular item, by recording it both in its own right and as a member of the general category.

Source Example

رَبِّ اغْفِرْ لِي وَلِوَالِدَيَّ وَلِمَن دَخَلَ بَيْتِيَ مُؤْمِنًا وَلِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ

My Lord, forgive me and my parents and whoever enters my house as a believer, and the believing men and the believing women. (Q71:28)

Explanation

My parents and whoever enters my house as a believer are specific; the believing men and the believing women is the general class that contains them all. ʿAtīq (2006) cites this verse: the specific persons are mentioned first for special care and intimacy, then subsumed within the general prayer for all believers, so that they appear in the supplication both individually and collectively.

Constructed Example

شكرتُ معلِّمي الذي علَّمني القراءةَ، وشكرتُ كلَّ من أسدى إليَّ معروفًا في حياتي.

I thanked my teacher who taught me to read, and I thanked everyone who has done me a kindness in my life.

Explanation

The teacher is named specifically; the subsequent general phrase includes him within a broader class. The specific mention honours him individually; the general mention then situates that honour within a wider expression of gratitude, achieving both particularity and comprehensiveness.

Type 4: Repetition (al-tikrār)

From the sources

Repetition is the subtype of Verbosity in which a word, phrase, or sentence is repeated within the utterance, the repetition being motivated by a rhetorical purpose — such as emphasis, warning, grief, or the renewal of the addressee's attention across a long intervening passage. The repetition may involve form alone, meaning alone, or both form and meaning together.

Unmotivated repetition — that is, repetition which serves no purpose beyond what could be achieved without it — is not regarded as Verbosity but as a rhetorical defect.

Encyclopedia Interpretation

This subtype concerns repetition insofar as it functions as a form of Verbosity — that is, the addition of wording beyond the minimal expression of the meaning for rhetorical benefit. For repetition considered as an independent lexical embellishment based on recurrence of lexical items, see REPET: Repetition.

Source Example

كَلَّا سَوْفَ تَعْلَمُونَ ۝ ثُمَّ كَلَّا سَوْفَ تَعْلَمُونَ

No indeed, you shall know. Then, no indeed, you shall know. (Q102:3–4)

Explanation

ʿAtīq (2006) cites this verse as an example of Repetition for the purpose of affirming a warning: the first instance is a deterrent and a warning to those heedless of the afterlife; the second is a reinforcement of that warning. The particle thumma heightens the severity of the second instance, making the warning more emphatic and more urgent. Hatim (2010) cites the same verse as an example of repetition for emphasis.

Constructed Example

احذر، أقول لك احذر، فإن الطريق وعر.

Take care, I tell you take care, for the road is treacherous.

Explanation

The command take care is repeated with an intervening explanatory frame. The repetition reinforces the warning and signals that the communicator regards the danger as serious enough to require a second, strengthened statement.

Type 5: Parenthesis (al-iʿtirāḍ)

From the sources

Parenthesis is the subtype of Verbosity in which one or more clauses are inserted between two syntactically connected parts of an utterance — between a verb and its object, a subject and its predicate, a conditional and its response, or similar — where the inserted material has no syntactic function in the main clause but serves a distinct rhetorical purpose. Al-Qazwīnī, as cited by ʿAkkāwī (1996), defines it as the interpolation in speech of a sentence or more that, if removed, would leave the rest of the speech grammatically intact.

The rhetorical purposes of Parenthesis include: elevation and glorification of a named entity, prayer or supplication, drawing attention to important matters, expressing sorrow or regret, and adding emphasis or affirmation. The Funūn (pp. 453–509) enumerates further purposes including: exoneration (al-tanzīh), supplication (al-duʿāʾ), notification, matching with antithesis, and amplification through explanation of a strange matter.

Source Example

وَيَجْعَلُونَ لِلَّهِ الْبَنَاتِ سُبْحَانَهُ وَلَهُمْ مَا يَشْتَهُونَ

And they assign daughters to God — Glory be to Him — and for themselves what they desire. (Q16:57)

Explanation

The parenthetical subḥānahu (Glory be to Him) is inserted between the verb and its complement. It has no syntactic role in the main clause but serves the rhetorical purpose of immediate elevation — dissociating God from the false attribution being described — and of expressing the gravity of what is being recounted. ʿAkkāwī (1996) and al-Hāshimī (2019) both cite this verse as a primary example of Parenthesis for the purpose of glorification.

Constructed Example

قال أبي — رحمه الله — إن الصبر مفتاح الفرج.

My father — may God have mercy on him — said that patience is the key to relief.

Explanation

The parenthetical supplication may God have mercy on him is inserted between the subject and the verb of speaking. It serves the rhetorical purpose of honouring the named person and expressing the communicator's care for him, without disrupting the grammatical integrity of the surrounding sentence.

Type 6: Protective Qualification (al-iḥtirās)

From the sources

Protective Qualification is the subtype of Verbosity in which the communicator, upon saying something that might be misread or might expose them to reproach, adds a qualification within the utterance that forestalls the misreading and preemptively addresses the potential objection. The qualification may appear in the middle of the utterance or at its end. It is also referred to as al-takmīl in some sources.

The Funūn (pp. 453–509) defines Protective Qualification as bringing in speech something that conveys the opposite of what is intended, preempting it with what dispels that understanding (an yuʾtā fī kalām yūhimu khilāf al-maqṣūd bi-mā yadfaʿuh).

Source Example

فَسَقَى لَهُمَا ثُمَّ تَوَلَّىٰ إِلَى الظِّلِّ فَقَالَ رَبِّ إِنِّي لِمَا أَنزَلْتَ إِلَيَّ مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَقِيرٌ

So he watered for them, then withdrew to the shade and said: My Lord, I am in need of whatever good You might send down to me. (Q28:24)

Explanation

Moses says I am in need of whatever good You might send down to me rather than simply I am in need. The phrase whatever good is a protective qualification: without it, the statement might be read as a mere petition for worldly provision, or as a complaint. The qualification directs the supplication toward anything God deems good, and preempts the misreading that Moses was asking for something specific or worldly. ʿAtīq (2006) and al-Hāshimī (2019) both cite this verse as an example of Protective Qualification.

Constructed Example

أنتَ كريمٌ — إن أعطيتَ — وشجاعٌ — إن قاتلتَ — فلا تُضيِّع هذه الخصال.

You are generous — when you give — and brave — when you fight — so do not waste these qualities.

Explanation

The insertions when you give and when you fight are protective qualifications: without them, the statement of praise might appear unconditional and absolute. The qualifications restrict the claim to the situations in which it holds, forestalling any objection that the praise is exaggerated.

Type 7: Tail-end Reinforcement (al-tadh-yīl)

From the sources

Tail-end Reinforcement is the subtype of Verbosity in which a sentence is followed by another sentence whose meaning encompasses the first and reinforces it, so that the second sentence confirms and strengthens the meaning of the first. The reinforcing sentence falls into two types: one that is fully autonomous in meaning (jār majrā l-mathal), such that it can stand and be understood independently of what precedes it; and one that is not autonomous and can only be understood with reference to what precedes it.

Source Example

وَقُلْ جَاءَ الْحَقُّ وَزَهَقَ الْبَاطِلُ ۚ إِنَّ الْبَاطِلَ كَانَ زَهُوقًا

And say: Truth has come, and falsehood has perished; indeed falsehood is ever bound to perish. (Q17:81)

Explanation

The second sentence — indeed falsehood is ever bound to perish — is a tail-end reinforcement of the first. ʿAkkāwī (1996) and al-Hāshimī (2019) both cite this verse: the second clause reinforces the first by subsuming it within a general truth about the nature of falsehood. The reinforcing sentence is fully autonomous: it can be understood independently, and in fact functions proverbially. This is accordingly the first type of Tail-end Reinforcement, of the kind that runs the course of a proverb (jār majrā l-mathal).

Constructed Example

إن الظلمَ لا يدوم؛ فكلُّ ظالمٍ إلى زوال.

Injustice does not last; for every oppressor comes to an end.

Explanation

The second sentence — for every oppressor comes to an end — reinforces the first by encompassing its meaning within a broader general truth. The second sentence is fully autonomous: it could be extracted from this context and used proverbially, illustrating the first type of Tail-end Reinforcement.

Type 8: Supplementation (al-tatmīm)

From the sources

Supplementation is the subtype of Verbosity in which the communicator adds a filler element (faḍla) — that is, a grammatically non-essential element — to the utterance, where that element completes and enhances the meaning without introducing an entirely new meaning. The added element is not a principal structural component of the sentence (such as subject or predicate) but a supplement that adds a rhetorical nuance of beauty or precision.

The Funūn (pp. 453–509) distinguishes Supplementation from Protective Qualification (al-iḥtirās) by noting that Protective Qualification is used when the wording might suggest something contrary to the intended meaning, whereas Supplementation adds an extra rhetorical point that improves or completes the expression without being required for the basic sense.

Source Example

وَيُطْعِمُونَ الطَّعَامَ عَلَىٰ حُبِّهِ

And they give food despite their love of it. (Q76:8)

Explanation

The phrase ʿalā ḥubbih (despite their love of it) is the supplement. The core meaning — that they give food — is complete without it. The supplement adds the nuance that the act of giving is the more virtuous because they desire the food themselves, heightening the praise. The Funūn (pp. 453–509) cites this verse as a primary example of Supplementation.

Constructed Example

أعطى الفقيرَ مالَه على شُحِّه.

He gave the poor man his money despite his own miserliness.

Explanation

The phrase despite his own miserliness is a supplement: the act of giving is already stated, and its meaning is complete without this addition. The supplement heightens the praise by noting the inner resistance overcome, adding a nuance of virtue that the bare statement of giving would not convey.

Type 9: Ending Reinforcement (al-īghāl)

From the sources

Ending Reinforcement is the subtype of Verbosity in which the communicator ends the utterance — typically a verse — with wording that comes after the meaning has already been completed, but adds a further rhetorical point or purpose beyond the completed sense.

The Funūn (pp. 453–509) defines Ending Reinforcement as the conclusion of a verse with wording that completes what the communicator intends and conveys the meaning, yet the communicator brings it for an additional purpose and rhetorical point (li-nukte wa-gharaḍ), not merely to complete the rhyme. It explicitly states that if the added element serves only to complete the rhyme without adding meaning, it does not constitute Ending Reinforcement.

ʿAkkāwī (1996) traces the earliest naming of this subtype to Qudāma ibn Jaʿfar.

Source Example

وإنَّ صخرًا لتَأتَمُّ الهُداةُ به ۝ كأنَّهُ عَلَمٌ في رأسِهِ نارُ

And Ṣakhr is indeed a guide by whom leaders are guided — as though he were a landmark with fire upon his head.

Explanation

The verse by al-Khansāʾ is cited by ʿAkkāwī (1996) and the Funūn (pp. 453–509). The simile as though he were a landmark would complete the meaning; but the communicator adds with fire upon his head, which goes further: a landmark is visible by day, but fire makes it visible by night as well, adding the nuance that the guide is of use at all times. This addition is the Ending Reinforcement — it goes beyond the complete meaning and adds a further rhetorical point.

Constructed Example

هو نجمٌ يهتدي به السائرون، لا يغيبُ عن ناظريهم.

He is a star by which travellers find their way — one that never sets from their sight.

Explanation

The simile a star by which travellers find their way is already complete in meaning; the addition one that never sets from their sight goes beyond it, adding the nuance of constancy and perpetual availability. This additional element constitutes the Ending Reinforcement: it is not needed to complete the sense but adds a further rhetorical point.

Type 10: Embellishment (al-tawshīʿ)

From the sources

Embellishment is the subtype of Verbosity in which the communicator concludes the utterance — typically a verse — with a dual expression that is then explained by two coordinated elements.

The Funūn (pp. 453–509) defines Embellishment as concluding speech with a dual expression that explains it (an yuʾtā fī ākhir al-kalām bi-muthannā mufassar bi-ithnayn), and connects this to the lexical sense of the word: to embellish or adorn by interlacing, as cotton is adorned by gathering and interweaving its strands.

Source Example

أُمسي وأُصبحُ من تَذكاركُمْ وَصِبًا ۝ يَرثي لِيَ المشفِقانِ: الأهلُ والولدُ

I spend my evenings and mornings pining at the thought of you — and two who care for me lament my state: my family and my children.

Explanation

The dual two who care for me is followed by its two-part explanation: my family and my children. ʿAkkāwī (1996) cites this verse as an example of Embellishment: the dual conclusion is explained by its two coordinated components, which together complete and ornament the meaning.

Constructed Example

يسعدني في حياتي أمران: الصحةُ والعلم.

Two things make me happy in this life: health and knowledge.

Explanation

The dual two things is explained by its two coordinated parts: health and knowledge. The concluding dual with its two-part explanation constitutes the Embellishment, completing and adorning the utterance.

Different From

• BREVTY: Brevity (al-ījāz) — the opposite of Verbosity: speech in which the wording is shorter than what is ordinarily required to convey the meaning, provided the full meaning is still adequately conveyed. Where Verbosity expands expression relative to meaning, Brevity contracts 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.
• Padding (al-ḥashw) — wording added without a rhetorical purpose, or wording whose presence does not contribute a recognised benefit. This differs from Verbosity because Verbosity requires the added wording to serve a purpose or benefit.
• Long-windedness (al-taṭwīl) — wording that prolongs the utterance without adding a recognised rhetorical benefit. The sources distinguish it from Verbosity on the basis that Verbosity adds wording for a purpose (li-fāʾida), whereas Long-windedness does not.

Notes

Historical

• Verbosity is among the earliest topics discussed in Arabic literary criticism. ʿAtīq (2006) reports that al-Jāḥiẓ, writing in the third Hijri century, addressed Verbosity extensively and held that its opposite, Brevity, was not inherently superior: both are required across all types of discourse, and each has its proper place. The Funūn (pp. 453–509) similarly reports that the term al-ījāz was known from the pre-Islamic period, and that al-Jāḥiẓ was the first to write extensively on it, followed by Ibn Qutayba, al-Rummānī, al-Bāqillānī, Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī, and Ibn Sinān al-Khafājī.
• The term al-iṭnāb, as ʿAtīq (2006) traces it, is derived from the verb aṭnaba, said of a river when it overflows its banks, of the wind when it raises great dust, and of animals when they follow one another in procession. The name thus carries the sense of fullness, excess, and continuation beyond an ordinary limit.
• Van Gelder (1998) notes that Verbosity is discussed in scholastic rhetoric under ʿilm al-maʿānī together with Brevity and Moderation, and that lip-service to Brevity as the ideal is paid in the prefaces of many prose works — though the sources also recognise that some contexts require prolixity.
• The Prophet Muḥammad's speech was cited by the classical tradition as exhibiting the highest form of Brevity; yet the sources equally report instances of motivated Verbosity in prophetic speech, particularly in the Hadith, where the same teaching is repeated with variation across multiple occasions for the purposes of reinforcement and universal address.

Technical

• The term al-iṭnāb, translated here as Verbosity, is rendered as "verbosity" by Abdul-Raof (2006), who analyses it within a modern pragmatic framework, and as "redundancy" by Hatim (2010), who uses a communication-science frame. 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 communicative register or text type.
• The qualifying condition — that the addition must serve a rhetorical purpose (li-fāʾida) — is the critical distinguishing condition between Verbosity and padding (al-ḥashw) or long-windedness (al-taṭwīl).
• The subtype al-basṭ (elaboration by expansion) is discussed by ʿAkkāwī (1996) as a named form of Verbosity, defined as presenting the content of a book, speech, or poem to encompass all its intended meanings without omission. It is distinguished from the other subtypes by its scope — applying to a full compositional unit rather than a localised passage — and is presented in the source as one of the more demanding forms of Verbosity requiring mastery of many branches of meaning, prose, and verse. As this subtype is not attested across the majority of the sources reviewed, it is noted here rather than included in the main Types section.
• Regarding the status of Moderation (al-musāwāt) as a third independent category: the majority of classical authorities, following al-Sakkākī and al-Qazwīnī, treat المساواة as a valid intermediate category between Brevity and Verbosity. However, the Funūn (pp. 453–509) reports that Ibn al-Athīr and a group of scholars denied that any intermediary exists between Brevity and Verbosity, arguing instead that what is called Moderation is either Brevity (in that its wording is equal to its meaning) or Verbosity (in that its wording exceeds its meaning relative to a possible shorter expression). The debate is described by the Funūn as one of naming rather than substance.
• Hatim (2010) distinguishes between Verbosity (al-iṭnāb) and Moderation (al-musāwāt) in relation to al-Sakkākī's and al-Qazwīnī's frameworks: al-Sakkākī proposed the notion of a conventional median line (mutaʿāraf al-awsāṭ) as the yardstick by which both Verbosity and Brevity are measured; al-Qazwīnī took issue with this notion and proposed instead that textual appropriateness — determined by intentionality and acceptability — is the true criterion, so that Moderation is not a fixed line but a contextually realised communicative equilibrium.

See also

• BREVTY: Brevity.

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)?