Supplementary Practice 10: Rhetoric of Claim, Evidence, Objection and Reply

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

• What is the rhetorical function of “fī jumlatihi” in the opening claim?
• If the listener asks “How was this proved?” after an emphatic claim, what should follow?
• What chiefly distinguishes “Is the report sound?” from “How is its soundness established?”
• What relation does fāʾ foreground in “rājaʿnā ... fa-wajadnā”?
• Why does the accusative object “al-sijillāti” take kasrah?
• What is the syntactic role of “muttafiqatan” in “wajadnā al-arqāma muttafiqatan”?
• Which overstatement does “baʿḍ” prevent in the objection about wording?
• Which grammatical analysis of “lākinna baʿḍa al-ʿibārāti mukhtalifun” is correct?
• When the objection concerns expression, what does “innamā al-khilāfu fī al-ṣiyāgha” restrict?
• What primarily licenses the fāʾ in “ammā al-natījatu fa-wāḥidatun”?
• What is wrong with inferring that “the difference is only in wording” excludes all possible mistakes?
• What most strongly supports an istiʾnāf reading in “The report is sound. We reviewed the records”?
• How do “Verification is necessary” and “for verification is necessary” differ after a prohibition on hasty judgment?
• Compared with fa-tabayyana, what does thumma tabayyana highlight?
• Why is treating the later clause in “The figures agreed, but the expressions differed” as a ḥāl clause weak?
• When is the second clause in “The results emerged. Agreement among figures emerged” closer to substitution?
• How should “yaḥmilu al-wathāʾiqa” be analyzed after “dakhala al-bāḥithu”?
• What syntactic difference does “huwa” create in “dakhala al-bāḥithu wa-huwa yaḥmilu ...”?
• What supports a circumstantial reading of “wa-huwa muṭmaʾinnun” after the researcher entered?
• Why can “not in every detail” function as iḥtirās after “the report is sound overall”?
• Why can “Yesterday” be expanded as “We reviewed them yesterday” in this exchange?
• When does “Time is a trust” illustrate ījāz al-qaṣr rather than ellipsis?
• What is achieved by specifying the agreement of copies after “We have clear evidence”?
• Which function identifies the added phrase in “I praised the work, not every contributor”?
• When may “bi-ʿibāratin mūjazatin” function as tatmīm after praise of the work?
• What supports a tadhyīl reading of “Evidence is the basis of judgment” after rejecting an unsupported claim?
• Which two features may coexist in the closing “fa-l-inṣāfu aṣlu al-baḥth”?
• If the objection becomes “The figures differ,” why is “The disagreement is only in wording” inadequate?
• What does choosing “We will review the figures again before judging” accomplish in the revised dispute?
• How should a passage containing inna, innamā, lākinna and fāʾ be analyzed?