Fasaha of Discourse: Weak Composition, Word Disharmony and Obscurity

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

• What must fasaha of discourse satisfy?
• Which issue is central to weak composition?
• What is the key objection in “daraba ghulamuhu Zaydan”?
• What is the grammatical role of Zaydan in the original example?
• What distinguishes word disharmony from letter disharmony?
• What defect does “qabr Harb bi-makan qafr” illustrate?
• Why is successive “amdahuhu amdahuhu” discussed?
• Is all repetition incompatible with fasaha?
• What is the defining feature of taʿqid?
• Where does verbal taʿqid arise?
• What is the chief concern of semantic taʿqid?
• Which defect does the Farazdaq example illustrate?
• What kinship relation is expressed by “abu ummihi”?
• Can a grammatical sentence still have taʿqid?
• When can fronting and postponement count as verbal taʿqid?
• What concern arises when using “shedding tears” figuratively?
• Are all metaphors and allusions instances of semantic taʿqid?
• What does tatabuʿ al-idafat mean?
• Which subsidiary topic includes “Hamamata Jarʿa Hawmat al-Jandal isjaʿi”?
• What is “isjaʿi” in the dove verse?
• Where may phonetic difficulty arise despite familiar individual words?
• What is the best method when diagnosing a discourse defect?
• Which pairing is correct?
• How are a sound-pattern defect and semantic taʿqid distinguished?
• Do individually fasih words guarantee fasaha of the whole discourse?
• Weak composition and word disharmony are two names for the same defect.
• The famous grave-line chiefly demonstrates heaviness of the combined expression, not one word’s morphology.
• Verbal taʿqid requires a word absent from the dictionary.
• A well-signaled allusion is not unfasih simply because it is an allusion.
• Every sequence of multiple idafa relations is necessarily incorrect and unintelligible.