Refining the Jāmiʿ and the Conditions of Elegant Coordination

1. The issue arising from the three kinds of jāmiʿ

After the threefold division of rational, estimative and imaginative links, a problem arises: identity, correlation and opposition are all in some sense intelligible relations. Why should they be assigned to different cognitive faculties?

The analysis distinguishes two operations: the presence of representations in the mind, and the apprehension of a particular relation between them. The existence of images alone does not prove that every relation linking them is apprehended in the same way.

2. Mental images versus the meanings connecting them

«وكذا التقارن في الخيال ليس من الصور التي تجتمع في الخيال»
Likewise, association in imagination is not itself one of the images gathered there.

Recollecting images of a pen and inkpot is one thing; recognizing their prior association is another. The latter is a relation or meaning rather than an additional sensory picture.

Consequently, the mere simultaneous presence of two representations cannot by itself settle whether their connection is similarity, contrast or remembered proximity.

3. The objection from black and white

Black and white are perceived as colours. Yet the assertion that they are opposed is a relation, not merely a colour-image. The objection therefore asks: if opposition is intelligible, why classify this illustration under an estimative link?

We must distinguish the universal relation of contrariety studied by logic from the immediate contrast evoked by particular black and white objects in a listener's mind. The same terms can be analysed at different levels; the taxonomic question is about which connection motivates the utterance.

4. Particular opposition and universal contrariety

As a universal proposition, black and white can be considered contrary qualities under specified conditions. In a speech situation, however, mentioning a white garment immediately after a black one may evoke an individual contrast without formal reasoning.

The taxonomy of jāmiʿ therefore does not permanently label objects. It distinguishes how a relevant link becomes mentally salient in the discourse. A pair of objects can exhibit more than one analyzable relation.

5. Similarity, correlation and opposition as relations

«فلا تفاوت بين التماثل والتضايف والتضاد وشبهها»
In this respect there is no essential difference between similarity, correlation, opposition and similar relations.

The objection notes that each is an apprehended relation: similarity involves a shared feature, correlation mutually referential notions, and contrariety a kind of incompatibility.

The useful distinction is therefore not between a 'meaning' and a 'non-meaning', but between an intellectually judged general relation and the particular contrasting or remembered connection elicited in an audience.

6. Why the word jāmiʿ permits several analyses

The general function of a jāmiʿ is to make two distinct judgments fit a common discourse. A rational link makes a conceptual relation clear; an estimative link may bring a particular contrast immediately to mind; an imaginative link recalls images associated before.

It is not enough to say that the objects are 'somehow related.' Analysis must show why the particular relation in this context makes coordination intelligible to the audience.

7. Imaginative linkage as prior co-occurrence of images

«ثم إن الجامع الخيالي هو تقارن الصور في الخيال»
The imaginative link is the association of images within imagination.

The relevant association is already available before the conjunctive expression: one remembered image makes another readily present. It need not rest on the external similarity of the things; it may rest on their repeated mental co-occurrence.

Nevertheless, noticing that co-occurrence is itself recognition of a relation. The distinction between representations and the meaning of their association must therefore be preserved.

8. When sharing a referent does not settle coordination

Even when two clauses speak about the same individual or display lexical similarity, the case for waṣl is not automatically complete. The second clause might be emphasis, explanation or an answer to an implied question, for which faṣl remains preferable.

Alongside a shared relation we must consider independent predications and the absence of an obstacle to conjunction. Identity of reference alone cannot override the earlier principles of separation.

9. Two readings of unity in conception

The formula “unity in conception” may suggest a common conceived feature, while “unity in conceiving the two” may be misread as demanding that the complete meanings of both clauses coincide.

Total identity of two independent assertions would leave little room for an additional coordinated judgment. A more useful rhetorical test identifies the conceptual aspect shared by the clauses without treating their entire contents as synonymous.

10. Opposition between acts of conception and their objects

It is essential to identify the terms of an opposition. Two objects conceived may be contraries while the two acts of conceiving them are not contrary acts. Thinking about black and thinking about white are distinct operations; blackness and whiteness are the contrasting qualities.

The terms image, conception, conceived object and relation must therefore not be substituted indiscriminately. Confusing them changes the force of the objection to the traditional classification.

11. The link can concern more than a single constituent

A relation between clauses is not confined to a repeated word. The subjects may be associated, the predicates may be related, or the two whole judgments may be put into a meaningful comparison.

زَيْدٌ عَالِمٌ وَعَمْرٌو حَكِيمٌ
Zayd is learned, and ʿAmr is wise.

These are distinct assertions. If the context compares their attributes, coordination can be rhetorically fitting; syntactic parallelism alone does not make conjunction obligatory.

12. Why isolated adjectives cannot prove the whole rule

«خَفِيٌّ ضَيِّقٌ وَخَافِي ضَيِّقٌ»
Hidden and narrow; and one concealed is narrow.

A pair of associated descriptors can illustrate a relation, but it does not automatically prove the rhetorical validity of joining two full clauses. Coordination of attributes, coordination of predicates and coordination of independent statements occur at different grammatical levels.

The relevant objection must therefore be assessed at the level to which the proposed jāmiʿ actually applies.

13. A unifying link is necessary, not always sufficient

The presence of a jāmiʿ supports the possibility of conjunction, but the clauses must also express distinct intended judgments. If the second only substitutes for the first, the relation may be extremely close while faṣl remains appropriate.

Similarly, wāw can create an unintended scope under a preceding quotation, negation, command or condition. We must distinguish grammatical or rhetorical permissibility from the further elegance of a particular coordinated form.

14. Comparison of the three cognitive accounts

LinkCognitive basisQuestion to test
RationalUniversal or evident conceptual relationDoes unity concern the entire clauses or an aspect?
EstimativeParticular perceived contrastIs this opposition also a universal rational relation?
ImaginativePreviously associated mental imagesIs association itself an image or a meaning?

The objections refine the conditions of jāmiʿ. They are not merely rival terminology; they clarify how a connection actually supports rhetorical coordination.

15. From a valid conjunction to a more elegant one

«ومن محسنات الوصل بعد وجود المصحح تناسب الجملتين في الاسمية أو الفعلية»
Among the refinements of coordination, once it is valid, is correspondence in nominal or verbal form.

The validating condition (muṣaḥḥiḥ) is the basis that makes conjunction appropriate, such as a suitable jāmiʿ and absence of an obstacle. After this comes the further consideration of stylistic harmony: when two reports serve parallel purposes, parallel structure often conveys their relation more naturally.

16. Nominal structure and the idea of stability

A nominal clause begins with a nominal subject and may present an attribute as an established state or standing judgment. When two such descriptions are intended together, matched nominal structures can make the waṣl more balanced.

زَيْدٌ قَائِمٌ وَعَمْرٌو قَاعِدٌ
Zayd is standing, and ʿAmr is sitting.

Both are nominal reports. Yet a nominal sentence does not invariably mean eternal permanence; the contextual claim and predicate determine its actual scope.

17. Verbal structure and renewed occurrence

A verbal clause can foreground the occurrence or renewal of an act. If two distinct events are being related, matching verbal structures may be more effective than an unnecessary switch to nominal predication.

قَامَ زَيْدٌ وَقَعَدَ عَمْرٌو
Zayd stood up, and ʿAmr sat down.

Both reports narrate occurrences in the past tense. Their grammatical correspondence strengthens an already meaningful relation; it is not a substitute for the jāmiʿ.

18. Matching past and present within verbal coordination

«وتناسب الفعليتين في المضي والمضارعة»
Correspondence between two verbal clauses in their past or imperfect forms.

When the intended viewpoint is parallel, past with past or imperfect with imperfect may be stylistically elegant. A deliberate tense difference, however, can be meaningful when one act is completed and another ongoing.

The aim is not mechanical tense matching. It is to express the intended temporal relationship with accuracy and rhetorical fitness.

19. When the intended meaning outweighs formal symmetry

At times one report aims at renewed occurrence and another at established state. Forcing both into the same structure merely for symmetry may weaken the intended distinction.

قَامَ زَيْدٌ وَعَمْرٌو قَائِمٌ
Zayd stood up, and ʿAmr is standing.

The first foregrounds an event; the second a state. A difference of form can therefore be justified by the meaning, provided there is still a suitable link between the independent judgments.

20. Three ways of relating nominal and verbal predications

Intended senseLikely patternRhetorical benefit
Two eventsVerbal + verbalParallel occurrence or renewal
Two statesNominal + nominalParallel established predications
An event and a stateVerbal + nominalMakes different viewpoints clear

These are guidelines, not automatic rules. Parallel form adds elegance when the meanings are parallel; where the meanings differ, preserving that distinction can be more important than surface symmetry.

21. A further refinement: absolute and qualified predicates

Absolute and qualified predication matters when judging a coordinated expression. If one clause contains a condition and another does not, the reader must determine whether the qualification governs one clause or both.

Two unqualified assertions or two similarly conditioned clauses can show clear parallelism. Yet mixed qualification may itself be purposeful. The scope of the condition and the speaker's intended judgment must guide the rhetorical analysis.

22. A Qur’anic example: a hypothetical angel and its consequence

«وَقَالُوا لَوْلَا أُنْزِلَ عَلَيْهِ مَلَكٌ وَلَوْ أَنْزَلْنَا مَلَكًا لَقُضِيَ الْأَمْرُ»
They said: Why was an angel not sent down to him? Had We sent an angel, the matter would have been decided. (Qurʾān 6:8)

Qālū reports the demand, whereas wa-law anzalnā introduces a hypothetical condition with la-quḍiya al-amr as its consequent. The rhetorical issue is the scope of coordination between discourse units; wāw need not be analysed simply as joining the closest individual verbs.

23. A Qur’anic example: neither delay nor anticipation

«فَإِذَا جَاءَ أَجَلُهُمْ لَا يَسْتَأْخِرُونَ سَاعَةً وَلَا يَسْتَقْدِمُونَ»
When their appointed term comes, they can neither delay it for an hour nor advance it. (Qurʾān 7:34)

Idhā jāʾa ajaluhum establishes a temporal conditional setting; lā yastaʾkhirūn conveys its consequence. Analysing wa-lā yastaqdimūn requires attention to how both negations bear upon the appointed term and the scope of the conditional framework.

The intended unity is the impossibility of altering the assigned time, whether by delay or anticipation.

24. The scope of wāw in conditional constructions

In conditional discourse wāw can link larger clauses or complete conditional constructions, not only two neighboring verbs. A conditional antecedent and consequent may form one rhetorical unit, with the coordinated part adding a related and distinct aspect.

The denial of delay and the denial of anticipation complement each other. The second is not redundant: it excludes the opposite temporal alteration. Their complementary function explains why they appear together in the stated context.

25. A complete decision procedure for elegant waṣl

To assess elegant waṣl, proceed in order:
1. Identify the clauses as distinct judgments and examine their declarative or non-declarative function.
2. Find the relevant jāmiʿ and rule out an obstacle to coordination.
3. Once conjunction is justified, examine correspondence in nominal/verbal form, past/imperfect, and qualified/unqualified scope.
4. Do not sacrifice the intended difference of meaning merely to obtain formal parallelism.

This distinguishes valid coordination from a further degree of rhetorical elegance.