关于语言起源的古典伊斯兰话语:文化记忆与正统的捍卫

Kader Pub Date : 2022-06-19 DOI:10.1163/156852711X562335
M. Shah
{"title":"关于语言起源的古典伊斯兰话语:文化记忆与正统的捍卫","authors":"M. Shah","doi":"10.1163/156852711X562335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Classical Islamic scholarship developed two principal theses on the subject of the origin of language (aṣl al-lugha). The first of these theses, commonly referred to as tawqīf, accentuated the pre-eminent role that divine agency played in the imposition of language; axiomatic within this perspective is the view that words (lafẓ pl. alfāẓ) have been assigned their meanings (maʿnā pl. maʿānī) primordially by God. Presented as something of an antithesis to this position, the second doctrine, labeled iṣṭilāḥ, predicates that language was established and evolved via a process of common convention and agreement: words together with their meanings were assigned by human beings, although both the doctrines of tawqīf and iṣṭilāḥ posit that the actual relationship between words and their assigned meanings remains entirely arbitrary, rejecting any sort of natural link between the two. Although later Islamic scholarship accepted that both theses were plausible, within the course of the 9th/10th centuries opinions on the subject were ostensibly polarized between orthodox and arch-rationalist camps with the former endorsing tawqīf and the latter iṣṭilāḥ. In the quest to achieve a conceptual defense of traditional arguments for tawqīf it was necessary for orthodox theologians to create a connective structure, as articulated through reference to remembrance, continuation, and identity, which enabled them to anchor the construct of tawqīf in a formalized way to the scriptural exegesis and emblems of orthodoxy associated with the pious ancestors. That this was successfully accomplished through references to the past would seem to confirm the role which cultural memory played in the defense of what was deemed an orthodox belief.","PeriodicalId":17877,"journal":{"name":"Kader","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Classical Islamic Discourse on the Origins of Language: Cultural Memory and the Defense of Orthodoxy\",\"authors\":\"M. Shah\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/156852711X562335\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Classical Islamic scholarship developed two principal theses on the subject of the origin of language (aṣl al-lugha). The first of these theses, commonly referred to as tawqīf, accentuated the pre-eminent role that divine agency played in the imposition of language; axiomatic within this perspective is the view that words (lafẓ pl. alfāẓ) have been assigned their meanings (maʿnā pl. maʿānī) primordially by God. Presented as something of an antithesis to this position, the second doctrine, labeled iṣṭilāḥ, predicates that language was established and evolved via a process of common convention and agreement: words together with their meanings were assigned by human beings, although both the doctrines of tawqīf and iṣṭilāḥ posit that the actual relationship between words and their assigned meanings remains entirely arbitrary, rejecting any sort of natural link between the two. Although later Islamic scholarship accepted that both theses were plausible, within the course of the 9th/10th centuries opinions on the subject were ostensibly polarized between orthodox and arch-rationalist camps with the former endorsing tawqīf and the latter iṣṭilāḥ. In the quest to achieve a conceptual defense of traditional arguments for tawqīf it was necessary for orthodox theologians to create a connective structure, as articulated through reference to remembrance, continuation, and identity, which enabled them to anchor the construct of tawqīf in a formalized way to the scriptural exegesis and emblems of orthodoxy associated with the pious ancestors. That this was successfully accomplished through references to the past would seem to confirm the role which cultural memory played in the defense of what was deemed an orthodox belief.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kader\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kader\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/156852711X562335\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kader","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/156852711X562335","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

古典伊斯兰学者就语言的起源问题提出了两个主要论点(aṣl al-lugha)。这些论点中的第一个,通常被称为tawqf,强调了神的力量在强加语言方面所起的卓越作用;在这个观点中,不言自明的观点是,词语(lafypll . alfāẓ)最初是由上帝赋予它们的意义(ma ā najl . ma ā ānī)的。与这个观点相对立的是,第二种学说,标签为iṣṭilāḥ,断言语言是通过共同约定和协议的过程建立和发展起来的:单词和它们的意义都是由人类赋予的,尽管tawq.f和iṣṭilāḥ两种学说都假定单词和它们被赋予的意义之间的实际关系完全是任意的,拒绝两者之间的任何自然联系。虽然后来的伊斯兰学者接受了这两个论点都是可信的,但在9 /10世纪的过程中,关于这个问题的观点表面上在正统和主要理性主义阵营之间两极分化,前者支持tawqurf,后者支持iṣṭilāḥ。为了在概念上为传统的tawqk . f论点辩护,正统神学家有必要创建一个连接结构,通过对记忆、延续和身份的参考来表达,这使他们能够以一种形式化的方式将tawqk . f的结构锚定在与虔诚祖先相关的圣经注释和正统象征上。这是通过参考过去成功完成的,这似乎证实了文化记忆在捍卫被认为是正统信仰方面所起的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Classical Islamic Discourse on the Origins of Language: Cultural Memory and the Defense of Orthodoxy
Classical Islamic scholarship developed two principal theses on the subject of the origin of language (aṣl al-lugha). The first of these theses, commonly referred to as tawqīf, accentuated the pre-eminent role that divine agency played in the imposition of language; axiomatic within this perspective is the view that words (lafẓ pl. alfāẓ) have been assigned their meanings (maʿnā pl. maʿānī) primordially by God. Presented as something of an antithesis to this position, the second doctrine, labeled iṣṭilāḥ, predicates that language was established and evolved via a process of common convention and agreement: words together with their meanings were assigned by human beings, although both the doctrines of tawqīf and iṣṭilāḥ posit that the actual relationship between words and their assigned meanings remains entirely arbitrary, rejecting any sort of natural link between the two. Although later Islamic scholarship accepted that both theses were plausible, within the course of the 9th/10th centuries opinions on the subject were ostensibly polarized between orthodox and arch-rationalist camps with the former endorsing tawqīf and the latter iṣṭilāḥ. In the quest to achieve a conceptual defense of traditional arguments for tawqīf it was necessary for orthodox theologians to create a connective structure, as articulated through reference to remembrance, continuation, and identity, which enabled them to anchor the construct of tawqīf in a formalized way to the scriptural exegesis and emblems of orthodoxy associated with the pious ancestors. That this was successfully accomplished through references to the past would seem to confirm the role which cultural memory played in the defense of what was deemed an orthodox belief.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
God, Logic and Lies: Intra-Ḥanafī Polemics on Divine Omnipotence in Colonial India The Transformation of Radjʿa Doctrine of Shiʿa: A Case Study on the Nusayrīs, the Druzes and the Bābī-Bahāīs Muhammed Cân Yûsuf el-Karabâğî’nin Zorunlu Varlık Konusunda Bir Risâlesi: Tahkik ve Değerlendirme The Place And Importance of Dalāʾil al-nubuwwa In The Context of The Defense of Prophethood Özbekistan'da Bilimsel Ateizm Gelişiminin Retrospektif Analizi (XX. Yüzyılın 30'larında)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1