The Possibility of Unspoken/Implied Vaz‘: Can the Signifier and Signified in Language be the Same Thing? An Evaluation in the Context of Tashkubrîzâdah Ahmed Efendi’s Nuzhat al-alhâz fî adem wad‘ al-alfâz li al-alfâz

Name: The Possibility of Unspoken/Implied Vaz‘: Can the Signifier and Signified in Language be the Same Thing? An Evaluation in the Context of Tashkubrîzâdah Ahmed Efendi’s Nuzhat al-alhâz fî adem wad‘ al-alfâz li al-alfâz
Author: Abdullah Yıldırım

Title	The Possibility of Unspoken/Implied Vaz‘: Can the Signifier and Signified in Language be the Same Thing? An Evaluation in the Context of Tashkubrîzâdah Ahmed Efendi’s Nuzhat al-alhâz fî adem wad‘ al-alfâz li al-alfâz
Author	Abdullah Yıldırım
Type	Book
Language	Arabic
Digital	Yes
Manuscript	No
Library:	Royal Danish Library
Library Asset ID	EISSN: 2717-6967, DOI: 10.26650/iuitd.2021.959127
Record ID	cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_e535900eae4541f9be66c52923223413
Library Location	DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
Notes	Tashkubrîzâdah, in his risalah called “Nuzhat al-alhâz fî adem wad‘ al-alfâz li al-alfâz”, examined an issue that was previously discussed between al-Taftazani (d. 792/1390) and Sayyid Sharif (d. 816/1413) whether “wad‘” is in question when the words do not convey a specific meaning and refer directly to themselves. al-Taftazani defends the idea that all the words that are established to show a certain meaning in language are also established for themselves. However, unlike the phenomenon of wad‘ in the known sense, this does not contain any intention to signify any meaning and takes place in the tacit of the former. Contrary to this view, Sayyid Sharif argues that in cases where the words refer directly to themselves -intentionally or unintentionally- there cannot be any mention of the phenomenon of wad‘. Ali Kuşçu conversely, adopted al-Taftazani’s approach and based this view on some of its results and also made some criticisms of Sayyid Sharif. Contrarily Tashkubrîzâdah, adopted the view put forward by Sayyid Sharif and successfully answered Kuşçu’s criticisms. The author briefly summarizes Sayyid Sharif’s statements and then provides justifications for them. He builds the narrative in this section based on three different types of provision (al-hukm). Subsequently, the author lists his objections to Kuşçu’s explanations in ten points and discusses each objection. Although the discussion of unspoken/implied wad‘ is not one of the main issues of the discipline, it is important in terms of clearly revealing the nature and conceptual content of the phenomenon of wad‘. Furthermore, as Nuzhat al-alhâz constitutes one of the remarkable examples of the risalah tradition in Ottoman intellectual life, it is important to understand it. In interpreting the Nuzhat al-alhâz, this article examines the historical origins of the debate, comperatively analyzes the views of the parties and expatiates on the development of the issue by following the subject.
Görüntüle	İslam tetkikleri dergisi, 2021-10, Vol.11 (2), p.603-638

View in source Royal Danish Library Royal Danish Library - Ottoman library catalog search

Royal Danish Library

The Possibility of Unspoken/Implied Vaz‘: Can the Signifier and Signified in Language be the Same Thing? An Evaluation in the Context of Tashkubrîzâdah Ahmed Efendi’s Nuzhat al-alhâz fî adem wad‘ al-alfâz li al-alfâz

Author Abdullah Yıldırım

Type Book

Language Arabic

Digital Yes

Manuscript No

Library Royal Danish Library

Library Asset ID EISSN: 2717-6967, DOI: 10.26650/iuitd.2021.959127

Record ID cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_e535900eae4541f9be66c52923223413

Library Location DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals

Notes Tashkubrîzâdah, in his risalah called “Nuzhat al-alhâz fî adem wad‘ al-alfâz li al-alfâz”, examined an issue that was previously discussed between al-Taftazani (d. 792/1390) and Sayyid Sharif (d. 816/1413) whether “wad‘” is in question when the words do not convey a specific meaning and refer directly to themselves. al-Taftazani defends the idea that all the words that are established to show a certain meaning in language are also established for themselves. However, unlike the phenomenon of wad‘ in the known sense, this does not contain any intention to signify any meaning and takes place in the tacit of the former. Contrary to this view, Sayyid Sharif argues that in cases where the words refer directly to themselves -intentionally or unintentionally- there cannot be any mention of the phenomenon of wad‘. Ali Kuşçu conversely, adopted al-Taftazani’s approach and based this view on some of its results and also made some criticisms of Sayyid Sharif. Contrarily Tashkubrîzâdah, adopted the view put forward by Sayyid Sharif and successfully answered Kuşçu’s criticisms. The author briefly summarizes Sayyid Sharif’s statements and then provides justifications for them. He builds the narrative in this section based on three different types of provision (al-hukm). Subsequently, the author lists his objections to Kuşçu’s explanations in ten points and discusses each objection. Although the discussion of unspoken/implied wad‘ is not one of the main issues of the discipline, it is important in terms of clearly revealing the nature and conceptual content of the phenomenon of wad‘. Furthermore, as Nuzhat al-alhâz constitutes one of the remarkable examples of the risalah tradition in Ottoman intellectual life, it is important to understand it. In interpreting the Nuzhat al-alhâz, this article examines the historical origins of the debate, comperatively analyzes the views of the parties and expatiates on the development of the issue by following the subject.

Görüntüle İslam tetkikleri dergisi, 2021-10, Vol.11 (2), p.603-638