Conclusion: Poetic Borrowing, Appropriation of Meanings, and Creative Reworking

Read-only question overview. Answers and scoring remain inside authenticated learner attempts.

• Why is two poets praising courage not by itself theft?
• What are the two principal categories of poetic borrowing?
• What characterizes naskh or intiḥāl?
• What is additionally needed to establish borrowing beyond a familiar simile?
• Which pair describes altering words while preserving the underlying thought?
• What cannot be assumed from replacing words with synonyms?
• What differs most between the two “man rāqaba al-nās” formulations?
• What is chiefly taken in ilmām or salkh?
• What distinguishes jinās from meaning-borrowing?
• Which is a recognized mode of concealed borrowing?
• What is meant by transferring a meaning to another setting?
• What does qalb mean in this discussion?
• What makes a partial borrowing with an addition effective?
• What does tawārud al-khawāṭir allow?
• What can skillful transformation accomplish?
• How should the statement about concealed borrowing being more acceptable be understood?
• What evidence best addresses priority?
• Which three questions should be kept separate?
• What does merely using the same conventional simile fail to prove?
• When can a longer reworking be superior?
• A poet reproduces a distinctive line and claims it as his own. Which term fits?
• Applying an earlier thought to a different person or setting illustrates what?
• What chiefly distinguishes a commonplace from a distinctive image?
• Which set of topics follows this discussion in the source?
• Repeating a familiar simile proves borrowing conclusively.
• Naskh and intiḥāl involve reproduction of the original wording and arrangement.
• Any paraphrase of a borrowed idea becomes an independent invention.
• In this context qalb can produce the contrary meaning of an earlier line.
• Allowing independent convergence means literary dependence is always established.
• Rhetorical merit and historical attribution are separate questions.
• Transferring a thought to a new setting may create additional rhetorical force.
• Adding useless words to part of an earlier thought necessarily improves it.
• Concealed borrowing always consists of word-for-word copying.
• The criteria for a simile as a figure and for a claim of poetic borrowing are different.