The Emphasizing Metonymy and Its Relation Whit Ambiguity of Text

• Main Authors: Amir Saleh Masoomi, Mohammad Khaqani Isfahani
• Format: Article
• Language: fas
• Published: University of Isfahan 2016-05-01
• Series: Literary Arts
• Subjects: keywords: rhetorics; Metonymy; true meaning; emphasis of metonymy; Ambiguity
• Online Access: http://liar.ui.ac.ir/article_20551_22d41c1642651f6f4bfcd85505730acb.pdf
• ISSN: 2008-8027; 2322-3448

  Abstract   In this paper, the use of two different linguistic tools in Arabic language, i.e. Metonymy and Emphasis combined in form of " Emphasizing Metonymy " has been studied . Metonymy, in the tradition of Arabic linguistics, is defined as "the use of a word in the meaning other than the prime meaning for which the word was coined". Using the metonymy has certain requirements; one of them is the existence of sign or marker ( اÙÙرÛÙÚ ) in the text. The function of the sign is to inform reader of word's new use in the meaning other than the prime meaning. In the other words , its function is to prevent understanding the true meaning from the word used in the metonymic meaning. The sign conceptually is related to metonymic meaning and incompatible with true meaning ; so, if the reader wants to consider concept of sign and true meaning of word beside each other, he certainly faces conceptual tension . Thus, he has no way but interpreting the word in its metonymic meaning and here, he finds the metonymic use of the word out.   The Muslim linguists have introduced two general types of sign: "verbal sign" and "contextual sign" ( اÙÙرÛÙ٠اÙÙÙظÛÙ ÙاÙÙرÛÙ٠اÙمÙامÛÙ ). The verbal sign is the one seen among the words used in the text and the contextual sign is the one gained from the context. Of these tow, the fist one has more power to determine metonymic meaning, so that if the reader doesn't find it in the text, he can interpret the word in its true meaning. But, in the other hand, due to the extensive and abundant use of metonymy in Arabic, especially in the literary texts, it could be expected to find the metonymic words almost in all sentences, even though there is no verbal sign. In fact, this is because it's likely to be found the contextual sign for metonymic meaning in the text. Since the contextual signs, in contrary to verbal signs, are not seen in the text, it becomes hard for reader to recognize metonymic meaning from true meaning and he continuously faces the possibility existence of metonymic words without any verbal sign.   The emphasis, as well as metonymy, is one of the important Linguistic tools in Arabic which has different uses. To strengthen the word's true meaning and to prevent understanding the metonymic meaning, are the most important aims of using the emphasis. Sometimes, the reader may feel that some word has been used in metonymic meaning and this is because he thinks that there is a contextual sign in the text. So, to prevent such perception by readers, the speaker (i.e. creator of the text) uses emphasis to show that his intention of using the word is its true meaning, not metonymic.   The emphasis conceptually is related to true meaning and incompatible with metonymic meaning. So, if the reader finds some word accompanied with emphasis, he has no choice but interpreting the word in its true meaning. Otherwise, the text faces conceptual tension.   By this explanation, the presentation of "Emphasizing Metonymy" seems essentially illogical and meaningless. Because, in one hand the requirement of making use of the metonymy is to set the sign in the sentence for preventing understanding true meaning of the word, and guiding the readers to the metonymic meaning; and in the other hand, the using of emphasis prevents the perception of metonymic meaning and guides the readers to true meaning of the word. So, synchronic use of these two linguistic tools practically leads to paradox and contradiction .   However, some of the Muslim linguistics like Abul Fath Othman ibn jinni (1002 A.D.) has permitted such a use and even mentioned examples of it. This has made some questions: Doesn't synchronic use of emphasis and metonymy lead to ambiguity of text or cause that the speaker deliberately confuses the reader? What shall we say, if we find such a linguistic phenomenon in a holy scripture like the Quran? What is the position of this combined tool in Arabic language?   Such questions prompted us to study the validity of this linguistic phenomenon by using of descriptive-analytical method and explain its effect on perception of reader. On the basis of data of this article, the emphasizing metonymy in contrary to its illogical appearance could be an acceptable phenomenon in the tradition of Arabic language.   References   1. Holy Quran , Fuladvand, Mohammad Mahdi & Payande, Abul Qasem (trans.).   2. Abouhayan, Mohamed ibn Youssef (1998). Irteshaf az-Zarab min Lisan al-Arab. Osman Mohammed Rajab and Ramadan Abdaltwab (Emend.). Cairo: Khanji library.   3. ------------------------------------------ (2001).Tafsir al- Bahr al-Mohit. Adel Ahmed Abdol-Mowjood and Ali Mohamed Moawad (Emend.). Beirut: House of scientific books.   4. Astrabadi, Radhi ad-Din Muhammad ibn al-Hasan (1996). Sharh ar-Razi al-Kafyah. Yusuf Hassan Omar (Emend.). Benghazi: University Publications of Garyounes.   5. Azhari, Muhammad bin Ahmad (2001). Tahzib al- loghah. Mohamed Awad terrifying (Emend.). Beirut: House of Revival of Islamic Heritage.   6. Farazdak, Bin Hammam Ghalib (1987). Diwan of Farazdaq. Ali Faour (Emend.). Beirut: House of scientific books.   7. Ibn Abi al-Esba, Abdul Azim ibn al-vahid (1963). Tahrir al-Tahbir fi sana'at al-sher va al-nathr va bayan ejaz alquran. Hafni Mohammad Sharaf (Emend.). Cairo: grope of Revival of Islamic Heritage .   8. Ibn Ashur, Muhammad Tahir (1997). Al-Tahrir va al- Tahbir. Tunisia: Dar Sahnoun for publication and distribution.   9. Ibn Jenni, Abul Fath Othman ibn Jenni (1952). Al-Khasa'es. Mohammad Ali al-Najar (Emend.). Beirut: Book World.   10. Jmaha, Muhammad ibn Salaam (n.d.). Tabaghat al-Fohul al-sho'ara. Mahmoud Mohamed Shaker (Emend.). Jiddah: Dar al-madani.   11. Khatib Qazwini, Muhammad ibn Abd or-Rahman (n.d.). Al-Talkhis fi Olum al-Balaghah. Abdulrahman Albrkoqa (explain). Egypt: Arab Thought House.   12. ------------------------------------------ (1998). Al-Izah fi Olum al-Balaghah. Beirut: House of Revival of science.   13. Matouq, Hussein (2005). Al-Insaf fi Masael al-Khilaf. Kuwait: library of Irfan.   14. Qutaiba son, Abdullah ibn Muslim, (2007). Ta'wil Mushkel al-Quran. Ibrahim Shams al-Din (Emend.). Beirut: House of scientific books.   15. Sabban, Mohammed ibn Ali (1997). Hashyat al-Sabban ala Sharh al-Oshmuni. Beirut: house of scientific books.   16. Sakkaki, Yusuf bin Mohammed (2000). Meftah al-Olum. Abdul Hamid Hindawi (Emend.). Beirut: House of scientific books.   17. Shahristani, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Karim (1983). Al-Milal va al-Nihal. Seyed Mohammed Kilani (Emend.). Beirut: House of knowledge.   18. Suyooti, Abdulrahman ibn Ibepkr (n.d.). Hamaâ al-Hawame' fi Sharh Jam'e al-jame. Abdul Hameed Hindawi (Emend.). Egypt: Tafiqiah Library.   19. Taftazani, Masoud ibn Omar (2005). Al-Motawal, Sharh Talkhis al-Miftah. Ahmad Azv Enayah (Emend.). Beirut: House of Revival of Islamic Heritage.   20. Zahabi, Mohammed ibn Ahmad (1985). Siar A'alam al-Nubala. A group of investigators under the supervision of Shoaib Arnaout. Beirut: Al-Resalah Institute.   21. --------------------------------------- (2000). Al-Bahr al-Muhit fi Osul al-Fiqh. Mohamed Mohamed Tamer (Emend.). Beirut: House of scientific books.   Zrkashi, Mohammed ibn Bahadur (1957). Al-Borhan fi Olum al-Quaran. Abolfazl Mohammad Ibrahim (Emend.). Cairo: House of revival of Arabic books.