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

İsim	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
Yazar	Abdullah Yıldırım
Tür	Kitap
Dil	Arapça
Dijital	Evet
Yazma	Hayır
Kütüphane:	Danimarka Kraliyet Kütüphanesi
Demirbaş Numarası	EISSN: 2717-6967, DOI: 10.26650/iuitd.2021.959127
Kayıt Numarası	cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_e535900eae4541f9be66c52923223413
Lokasyon	DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
Notlar	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

Kaynağa git Danimarka Kraliyet Kütüphanesi Royal Danish Library

Aramaya Dön

Danimarka Kraliyet Kütüphanesi

Kaynağa git

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

Yazar Abdullah Yıldırım

Tür Kitap

Dil Arapça

Dijital Evet

Yazma Hayır

Kütüphane Danimarka Kraliyet Kütüphanesi

Demirbaş Numarası EISSN: 2717-6967, DOI: 10.26650/iuitd.2021.959127

Kayıt Numarası cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_e535900eae4541f9be66c52923223413

Lokasyon DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals

Notlar 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