4) Types of Words Flashcards
p46 - النسبة بين الألفاظ
Relationships between words
When we compare 2 words with each other, relationship between them is 1 of 2 types
Either التَرَادُف (SYNONYMITY) (from ردف - something which is next to something else; if 2 ride on horse, call it radeef - means being equal). Technical meaning is SYNONIMITY - if 2 words have same meaning, they are al-mutaraadifaan. Must be the SAME meaning - one can replace the other.
M: Mutaraadifa
OR التباين (DISSONANCE) - if 2 words have different meanings, we call them al-mutabaaiyaan!
M: Dissonance = ‘the state where the multiplicity of meaning is equal to the multiplicity of expressions’ - but this is referring to dissonance in terms of the expressions, not the extensions themselves - e.g. I am both human AND rational, but the expressions are disparate.
6 Types of words (LAFDH)
Criterion is RELATIONSHIP between the WORD and the POSTULATED or USAGE MEANING
(and what are the relevant linguistic rules)
6 types
1) Al-lafdh al-MUKHTAS - المُختَص - Monsosemic (just has one meaning), e.g. human being
RULE: Mukhtas - if no counter evidence, must take that meaning from that word
2) Al-lafhdh al-MUSHTARAQ - المُشْتَرك: Polysemic
Word with >1 meaning, e.g. عين = eye / spring / etc.
Muzzafer ENG: One meaning doesn’t have any precedence over another!!!
RULE: Mushtaraq - can’t understand anything from it alone - need Qareena, otherwise no preference between the 2 meanings.
3) Al-lafdh al-MANQOOL -المَنقول
M: Derived
Over time a word adopted a new meaning and lost its original meaning. The new meaning is what is ‘manqool’. e.g. السيارة
RULE: Manqool - If no counter evidence, we take it to indicate the 2nd / more recent meaning. If someone means first meaning, needs to provide Qareena.
4) Al-lafdh al-MURTAJAL - ال مُرتَجَل
M: Developed
Like (3) Manqool, but in (3) there should be a relationship between the 2 meanings (a kind of المُناسبة) - but in (4) no such relationship between them. M says no real similarity between the 2 meanings, and most personal names fall under this category.
e.g. أسد - meant lion, but if father calls his son Asad, doesn’t look at his son as an attribute of courage, but just as a name.
RULE: (4). Murtajal: Has two meanings therefore we can’t prefer one over the other without Qareena - Dr F: but should be like (3) we can take the new meaning,
5) Al-lafdh al-HAQEEQA - الحَقيقَة
M: LITERAL
Used in the meaning for which it is postulated.
M: many meanings, but only one has been intentionally determined for this expression. May be used to refer to other meanings, because of some commonalities between the first meaning and second, but 2nd isn’t used enough for us to say that the word MEANS that thing. 1st is LITERAL (Haqeeqa) and 2nd is METAPHORICAL (Majaaz - [6])
RULE: (5) If no Qareena - take the literal meaning
6) Al-lafdh al-MAJAAZ - المَجاز
M: METAPHORICAL / Figurative
Contrary to (5) - word used for a meaning for which it is not postulated. M: must always be used in a context which makes clear that the meaning intended is figurative and not literal.
RULE: (6) if we have Qareena then we can take as it as (6)
Types of Dissonance (التباين ) (one of the 2 headings of النسبة بين الألفاظ)
a) التماثُل - Tamaathul
SIMILAR
Similarity - but not the same. E.g. Zainab and Fatema - 2 females (hmm). They are call al-mithlain or al-mutamaathilain.
M: SIMILAR EXPRESSIONS: Two meanings have a certain external commonality, and we consider them in terms of their commonality. E.g. Ali and Abbas are two humans (so we look at them in terms of commonality and not their specific differences!).
b) التخالُف - Takhaaluf
DISSIMILAR
Different - E.g. horse and elephant (but also an example for (a) as animals - so it can be seen frm 2 different perspectives). Call them mutakhaalifain.
M: DISSIMILAR EXPRESSIONS: Consider two meanings insofar as they are different from each other. Can be predicated upon same thing at same time, so long as they are merely attribute. For instance the differences between Ali and Abbas in terms of their attributes.
c) التقابل - Taqaabul
OPPOSITES
A kind of takhaaloof between 2 things, which prevents them frm being/living together in same place/time. E.g. Darkness and lightness. Mutually exclusive.
4 types of Taqaabul
M: Opposition: 2 meanings are antagonistic and can’t be predicated on the same thing from the same perspective of looking at that thing and at same time (e.g. human and not-human, seeing and blind, black and white - can’t be predicated to same thing…)
Author then describes different examples, but this is a mistake, as this is not to do with WORDS - we’re not talking about alfaadh, but mafaahim (concepts)
i) التقابل النقيضين - (Taqaabil an-naqizhain) between EXISTENCE and NON-EXISTENCE of something…(only example of this is existence and non-existence). (wujud vs. adam, or they often call it ijaab (confirmation?) vs. salb (negation))… e.g. Insaan and laa-insaan, etc.
2 CONDITIONS:
i) Those opposites cannot exist together
ii) They cannot be removed together - no middle way, either something exists or doesnt exist…‘impossibility of the middle’
M: CONTRADICTORIES, or the contradiction of negation and affirmation - but he says e.g. black and not-black, human and not-human - its axiomatic that they can’t be predicated on same thing at same time, nor simultaneously denied of the same thing - no middle term between them!
ii) التقابل الَملِكَة و العَدم - (Taqaabul milkah wa ‘adm)’
A TRAIT AND THE NON-EXISTENCE OF A TRAIT IN SOMETHING WHICH HAS THE CAPACITY FOR THAT TRAIT. In something which does NOT have the capacity, you have neither! (so only (i) above holds, not (ii)!)
e.g. Blindness is non-existence of sight, but a particular type of non-existence, table doesn’t have sight, but we can’t say its blind (as it doesn’t have potential).
الملكة - existence of a characteristic in place where there is a potentiality of that characteristic.
العدم - non existence of a characteristic in place where there is a potentiality of that characteristic.
M: The OPPOSITION OF PRIVATION AND POSSESSION
iii) التقابل الضدين - Taqaabul azh-zhidain, BLACK vs. WHITE, RED vs. BLACK = 2 existing things
- Opposite of each other, MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, but POSSIBLE TO HAVE NEITHER.
- BOTH ARE EXISTING PROPERTIES, NON OF THEM IS JUST THE NON-EXISTENCE OF THE OTHER (like in 2).
- CAPACITY IS IGNORED HERE.
Still mutually exclusive M: CONTRARIETY - two reciprocal entities related to a single object, which cannot be simultaneously predicated on the same object and for which the intellection /understanding of one does not depend on the other (unlike in 4 below). They can ONLY be attributes. iv) التقابل المتضايفين Taqaabul mutazhayifain
EXISTENCE OF ONE DEPENDS ON THE OTHER (pre-suppose each other), BUT CAN’T PREDICATE BOTH IN THE SAME EXTENSION FROM THE SAME PERSPECTIVE (e.g. father and son, above and below). M: CAN DENY BOTH IN SOME CASES (e.g. father and son), BUT NOT IN OTHERS (e.g. cause and effect)
One pre-supposes the other - when u talk about father, presuppose he has a son. when u talk about above, presupposes something is below
Types of Opposites (comes under التقابل <- التباين)
i) التقابل النقيضين - (Taqaabil an-naqizhain) between EXISTENCE and NON-EXISTENCE of something…(only example of this is existence and non-existence). (wujud vs. adam, or they often call it ijaab (confirmation?) vs. salb (negation))… e.g. Insaan and laa-insaan, etc.
2 CONDITIONS:
i) Those opposites cannot exist together
ii) They cannot be removed together - no middle way, either something exists or doesnt exist…‘impossibility of the middle’
M: CONTRADICTORIES, or the contradiction of negation and affirmation - but he says e.g. black and not-black, human and not-human - its axiomatic that they can’t be predicated on same thing at same time, nor simultaneously denied of the same thing - no middle term between them!
ii) التقابل الَملِكَة و العَدم - (Taqaabul milkah wa ‘adm)’
A TRAIT AND THE NON-EXISTENCE OF A TRAIT IN SOMETHING WHICH HAS THE CAPACITY FOR THAT TRAIT. In something which does NOT have the capacity, you have neither! (so only (i) above holds, not (ii)!)
e.g. Blindness is non-existence of sight, but a particular type of non-existence, table doesn’t have sight, but we can’t say its blind (as it doesn’t have potential).
الملكة - existence of a characteristic in place where there is a potentiality of that characteristic.
العدم - non existence of a characteristic in place where there is a potentiality of that characteristic.
M: The OPPOSITION OF PRIVATION AND POSSESSION
iii) التقابل الضدين - Taqaabul azh-zhidain, BLACK vs. WHITE, RED vs. BLACK = 2 existing things
- Opposite of each other, MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, but POSSIBLE TO HAVE NEITHER.
- BOTH ARE EXISTING PROPERTIES, NON OF THEM IS JUST THE NON-EXISTENCE OF THE OTHER (like in 2).
- CAPACITY IS IGNORED HERE.
Still mutually exclusive M: CONTRARIETY - two reciprocal entities related to a single object, which cannot be simultaneously predicated on the same object and for which the intellection /understanding of one does not depend on the other (unlike in 4 below). They can ONLY be attributes.
iv) التقابل المتضايفين Taqaabul mutazhayifain
EXISTENCE OF ONE DEPENDS ON THE OTHER (pre-suppose each other), BUT CAN’T PREDICATE BOTH IN THE SAME EXTENSION FROM THE SAME PERSPECTIVE (e.g. father and son, above and below). M: CAN DENY BOTH IN SOME CASES (e.g. father and son), BUT NOT IN OTHERS (e.g. cause and effect)
One pre-supposes the other - when u talk about father, presuppose he has a son. when u talk about above, presupposes something is below
Al-Mufrad wa Al-Murakkab - المُفرَد و المركب Another type of difference between words.
Mufrad is a kind of word which part of it does not indicate a part of the meaning.
M: “An expression whose subdivisions do not indicate upon a similar subdivision of meaning”
Murakkab - where individual parts refer to part of meaning - e.g. Muhammad Rasul-Allah
M: “An expression whose subdivisions do indicate upon a similar subdivision of meaning”.
Mufrad - details
Mufrad is a kind of word which part of it does not indicate a part of the meaning.
M: “An expression whose subdivisions do not indicate upon a similar subdivision of meaning”
i) Word with one letter (e.g. ب - harf J, or f’il amr)
ii) E.g. Hussain - many letters, but one meaning of them combined. No indvidual meaning! Could be > 1 word…e.g. Abd-Ullah - this is Mufrad as a NAME, but Murakkab if u a describing someone as bieng the slave of God.
3 types
1) Ism - noun
M: Singlular expression which indicates on independent meaning in itself, but doesn’t have any particular shape or form that indicates upon a COMPLETE, temporal relationship (maybe incomplete like active/passive participles and nouns of time and place).
2) Kalima الكَلِمَة = verb - in grammar they call it f’il
M: ‘A singular expression, which in its substantive meaning signifies an independent meaning, but whose form indicates upon a complete temporal relationship between this meaning and the subject’ (i.e. excludes nouns which are derived from verbs).
3) al-adaat - الأداة - Preposition (what we call harf in grammar?)
M: Indicates upon relationship between 2 terms, such as ‘in’. This relationship is never an independent in and of itself; it does not exist outside of the two terms (e.g. ‘on’). Defined as a ‘singular expression which indicates upon a non-independent meaning’
M: According to most LOGICIANs, this includes weak verbs such as the verb ‘to be’ etc; this is because they don’t indicate on an existence outside of themselves, but rather only on a temporal relationship! Hence need another component to indicate on what occured! GRAMMARIANS disagree - most consider them verbs, whereas some logicians consider them ‘kalimah’ of existence.
Murakkab details
Murakkab - where individual parts refer to part of meaning - e.g. Muhammad Rasul-Allah
M: “An expression whose subdivisions do indicate upon a similar subdivision of meaning”.
2 types
1) Taam - same as in grammar. COMPLETE and NOT WAITING for more info.
M: A statement for which it is PROPER TO BE SILENT after it is said
Jumla-KHABARIYA - INFORMATIVE SENTENCE / reportive - to describe/explain.
Using al-jumla al khabriya is a kind of speech act (a title for a theory about different types of act we can do with language - all types of talking are a speech act as long as it is intentional - not in sleep etc).
Most of logic is to do with Jumla al-Taam al-Khabariyya (as thats what’s used for correct definition & argument)
M: RELATING THE REALITY (predictive expression / proposition / statement).
e.g. Weather is good today
Can use in 2 ways - to inform or create. E.g. may say i buy this sometimes, or can say “i buy this frm you”.
Maybe either TRUE or FALSE!
In arabic some sentences are used to CREATE = Jumla al-INSHAA’IYA e.g. creating a relationship of marriage - one type of speech act which creates a relationship that doesn’t exist independently of language.
M: UNVEILING THE REALITY - expression itself creates the relationship, based on intention of the speaker! The meanings underlying the statements have no external reality outside of the expression themselves! Cannot be according to reality or not - their beings created by the expression itself. So define as “a complete compound statement which cannot be described as true or fasle”
e.g. you are now man and wife
M: Command/ Prohibition/ Question/ Vocative statement/ Statement of Surprise/ Statement of Desire / Statement of Covenant or contract / Statement of Effectuation (e.g. divorce)
Can’t be described as TRUE or FALSE
(e.g. Do it!)
2) Naaqis - same as in grammar.
M: A statement for which it is NOT proper to be silent after it is said
