Mukhtasar al-Ma'ani by al-Taftazani, Vol. 1 (مختصر المعاني) — Page 515

Line-by-line translation · المعاني

الْفَصْلُ وَالْوَصْلُ ثُمَّ تَزْعُمُ أَنَّكَ لَمْ تَسْتَأْنِفْ كَلَامًا وَلَمْ تَبْتَدِئْ لِلسُّرْعَةِ إِثْبَاتًا، وَعَلَى هَذَا فَالْأَصْلُ وَالْقِيَاسُ وَهَذَا الزَّعْمُ بَاطِلٌ عَطْفُ تَفْسِيرٍ أَنْ لَا يَجِيءَ الْجُمْلَةُ الِاسْمِيَّةُ إِلَّا مَعَ الْوَاوِ، وَأَمَّا مَا جَاءَ بِدُونِهِ فَسَبِيلُهُ سَبِيلُ الشَّيْءِ الْخَارِجِ حَالًا الشَّيْخُ عَبْدُ الْقَاهِرِ عَنْ قِيَاسِهِ وَأَصْلِهِ بِضَرْبٍ مِنَ التَّأْوِيلِ وَنَوْعٍ مِنَ التَّشْبِيهِ، هَذَا كَلَامُهُ فِي "دَلَائِلِ الْإِعْجَازِ"، وَهُوَ مُشْعِرٌ بِوُجُوبِ الْوَاوِ فِي نَحْوِ: جَاءَنِي زَيْدٌ وَزَيْدٌ يُسْرِعُ أَوْ مُسْرِعٌ وَجَاءَنِي زَيْدٌ وَعَمْرٌو يُسْرِعُ أَوْ مُسْرِعٌ أَمَامَهُ بِالطَّرِيقِ الْأُولَى، ثُمَّ قَالَ الشَّيْخُ: وَإِنْ جُعِلَ نَحْوُ: "عَلَى كَتِفِهِ سَيْفٌ" ثُمَّ تَزْعُمُ بِالنَّصْبِ عَطْفٌ عَلَى "تَقُولُ"، وَقَوْلُهُ: "وَلَمْ تَبْتَدِئْ إِلَخ" عَطْفُ تَفْسِيرٍ، أَيْ وَهَذَا الزَّعْمُ بَاطِلٌ لَا يَصْدُرُ عَنِ الْعُقَلَاءِ؛ لِأَنَّ الِاسْتِئْنَافَ ظَاهِرٌ فِيهِ وَالْحَاصِلُ أَنَّهُ لَوْ لَمْ يُعْتَبَرِ الِاسْتِئْنَافُ فِي إِعَادَةِ الِاسْمِ الصَّرِيحِ لَصَحَّ عَدَمُ اعْتِبَارِ الِاسْتِئْنَافِ فِي مِثْلِ: "جَاءَنِي زَيْدٌ وَعَمْرٌو يُسْرِعُ أَمَامَهُ"؛ لِأَنَّهُ بِمَنْزِلَتِهِ لَكِنَّ عَدَمَ اعْتِبَارِ الِاسْتِئْنَافِ فِي ذَلِكَ بَاطِلٌ؛ لِئَلَّا يَلْزَمَ عَلَى عَدَمِ الِاعْتِبَارِ تَرْكُ الْمُبْتَدَأِ بِمَضِيعَةٍ.

Separation and Connection: Then you claim that you did not resume speech and did not initiate [it] to establish speed, and based on this, the principle, the analogy, and this claim—which is an explanatory conjunction—is that the nominal sentence should not come except with the 'waw' (and); as for what came without it, its path is the path of that which is an exception, as Sheikh Abd al-Qahir [states] regarding its analogy and principle, by way of interpretation and a type of analogy. This is his statement in 'Dala'il al-I'jaz', and it implies the necessity of the 'waw' in examples like: 'Zayd came to me, and Zayd is hurrying or a hurrier,' and 'Zayd came to me, and Amr is hurrying or a hurrier in front of him' by the first method. Then the Sheikh said: 'And if an example like: "On his shoulder is a sword" is made...' Then 'taz'umu' (you claim) in the accusative case is a conjunction to 'taqulu' (you say), and his saying: 'wa lam tabtadi' ilakh' (and you did not initiate, etc.) is an explanatory conjunction, meaning: this claim is invalid and does not proceed from the rational; because the resumption is apparent in it. The conclusion is that if the resumption were not considered in the repetition of the explicit noun, it would be valid not to consider the resumption in an example like: 'Zayd came to me, and Amr is hurrying in front of him'; because it is in its position, but the non-consideration of the resumption in that is invalid; so that it does not follow from the non-consideration that the subject is left in a state of neglect.

فَالْأَصْلُ إِلَخ [أَيْ عَلَى التَّوْجِيهِ الْمُشَارِ لَهُ بِقَوْلِهِ: لِأَنَّ الْجُمْلَةَ إِلَخ] قَالَ الشَّيْخُ: إِنَّ الْقِيَاسَ وَالْأَصْلَ: أَنْ لَا تَجِيءَ جُمْلَةُ مُبْتَدَأٍ وَخَبَرٍ حَالًا إِلَّا مَعَ الْوَاوِ، وَأَمَّا الَّذِي جَاءَ بِدُونِهَا سَبِيلُهَا سَبِيلُ يخرج عَنْ أَصْلِهِ وَقِيَاسِهِ، وَالظَّاهِرُ فِيهِ بِضَرْبٍ مِنَ التَّأْوِيلِ، وَنَوْعٍ مِنَ التَّشْبِيهِ فَقَوْلُهُمْ كَلَّمْتُهُ فُوهُ إِلَى فِيَّ، إِنَّمَا حَسُنَ بِغَيْرِ الْوَاوِ مِنْ أَجْلِ أَنَّ الْمَعْنَى كَلَّمْتُهُ مُشَافَهَةً لَهُ وَلَيْسَ الْحَمْلُ عَلَى الْمَعْنَى وَتَنْزِيلُ الشَّيْءِ مَنْزِلَةَ غَيْرِهِ بِعَزِيزٍ فِي كَلَامِهِمْ.

So the principle, etc. [meaning according to the orientation indicated by his saying: 'because the sentence, etc.'] The Sheikh said: The analogy and the principle are that a subject-predicate sentence should not come as a circumstantial qualifier (hal) except with the 'waw'. As for that which came without it, its path is the path of that which departs from its principle and analogy, and what is apparent in it is by way of interpretation and a type of analogy. Thus, their saying: 'I spoke to him, his mouth to my mouth,' was only made good without the 'waw' because the meaning is 'I spoke to him face-to-face,' and interpreting based on meaning and placing one thing in the position of another is not rare in their speech.

التَّأْوِيلُ أَيْ بِالْمُفْرَدِ، وَهُوَ مُتَعَلِّقٌ بِقَوْلِهِ: "الْخَارِجُ عَنْ قِيَاسِهِ، وَذَلِكَ كَمَا فِي قَوْلِكَ كَلَّمْتُهُ فُوهُ إِلَى فِيَّ، فَتَرْكُ الْوَاوِ فِي هَذِهِ الْجُمْلَةِ لِتَأَوُّلِهَا بِالْمُفْرَدِ وَهُوَ مُشَافَهَةً.

Interpretation: Meaning by a single word, and it is related to his saying: 'that which departs from its analogy,' and that is as in your saying: 'I spoke to him, his mouth to my mouth,' so the omission of the 'waw' in this sentence is due to its interpretation as a single word, which is 'face-to-face'.

…5 more translated lines, 27 more verbs and 68 more nouns on this page — subscribe to study every page.

Vocabulary · المفردات (30 verbs · 71 nouns)

• زَعَمَ — to claim
• اسْتَأْنَفَ — to start a sentence
• ابْتَدَأَ — to begin
• فَصْلٌ — separation
• وَصْلٌ — connection
• كَلَامٌ — speech