The Subject of Predication: Pronouns of Affair, Iltifāt and Departure from Expected Expression

1. Pronouns of affair and story

The preceding lesson completed preposing and the scope of negation. This section examines a pronoun that does not merely resume an ordinary previously named person. A pronoun of affair (ḍamīr al-shaʾn) or story (ḍamīr al-qiṣṣah) points forward to the significance of a following clause.

«هو زيد عالم»
The matter is this: Zayd is learned.

Here «هو» does not simply mean “he” referring to a man already mentioned. It anticipates the whole explanatory clause «زيد عالم». A feminine form «هي» may serve the comparable rhetorical structure.

The hearer encounters a general indication and expects clarification. That brief delay makes the final clause more prominent and prepares the mind for an important assertion.

2. Anticipation followed by explanation

A pronoun of affair works in two linked stages. First comes a broad, unexplained indication; then a full clause resolves it. This arrangement produces anticipation, not just an extra syllable.

Ordinary reference: «جاء زيد وهو مسرور» — Zayd came, and he was happy; «هو» refers back to Zayd.
Affair construction: «هو الحق ظاهر» — The situation is that truth is manifest; «هو» introduces the full following assertion.

The second sentence is an explanatory illustration rather than a quotation from the page. The surface word is alike, but its grammatical reference and rhetorical function differ. In the affair construction, the following clause supplies what the initial pronoun left unexpressed.

3. Demonstratives as devices of emphasis

A demonstrative normally identifies something indicated by the speaker. In ʿilm al-maʿānī, however, we must ask why «هذا» or «ذلك» is selected instead of an ordinary pronoun. Pointing language can foreground an unusually important referent.

«هذا الذي ترك الأوهام حائرة»
This is the one who leaves imagination bewildered.

The poetic line uses «هذا» to single out the subject of praise and heighten the exceptional claim about him. The rhetorical effect is not limited to physically pointing a finger; the referent can be presented vividly to the listener’s mind.

A demonstrative thus need not be reduced to literal physical proximity or distance. Its effect depends on context, evaluative tone, and the intended distinction.

4. Demonstratives used for honor or mockery

A demonstrative can honor its referent, but the same form can also convey ridicule or irony. The difference is not encoded in «هذا» alone; it is determined by surrounding words and the speaker’s stance.

«هذا الذي ترك الأوهام حائرة وصير العالم النحرير زنديقا»
This is the one who confounded imagination and threw even the most accomplished scholar into bewilderment.

The expression first isolates its subject, then adds an extraordinary description. In another setting, demonstratively pointing out an obvious fact to a negligent hearer might mock the hearer’s failure to notice it.

The rule is contextual: honor, disparagement, and sarcasm depend on the predication, the audience, and the communicative situation.

5. Pointing language beyond direct perception

Sometimes the referent cannot be physically observed, yet a demonstrative still appears. It can be rhetorically effective when context, description, or familiarity makes an otherwise intangible matter seem present before the mind.

«تعالت كي أشجى وما بك علة ... تريدين قتلي قد ظفرت بذلك»
You affect the air of suffering although no illness afflicts you; you seek to kill me, and in that you have succeeded.

«ذلك» points to the already expressed aim. Compared with a plain anaphoric pronoun, demonstrative wording can give the intended matter greater vividness and prominence.

The important question is how the expression presents the referent to the hearer, not merely which noun it could replace.

6. A pronoun of affair strengthens presentation

The text illustrates the emphatic presentation of a significant assertion with the opening of Sūrat al-Ikhlāṣ.

«قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ ۝ اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ»
Say: the matter is that Allah is One; Allah is the Self-Sufficient. (Qurʾān 112:1–2)

Rhetoricians discuss «هو» here as a possible pronoun of affair. It introduces a weighty assertion and helps the following declaration settle firmly in the hearer’s attention. The doctrinal content is divine oneness and self-sufficiency; the pronoun’s arrangement serves that content rhetorically.

This is an interpretation of a particular construction, not a rule that every instance of «هو» has the same status.

7. Repetition with a changed syntactic function

Repeating a significant expression is not automatically redundant. Its second occurrence can reinforce a claim when each occurrence attaches to a distinct part of the report.

«وَبِالْحَقِّ أَنْزَلْنَاهُ وَبِالْحَقِّ نَزَلَ»
We sent it down with truth, and with truth it descended. (Qurʾān 17:105)

The first «بالحق» qualifies the act of sending down; the second qualifies the event of descent. The repeated phrase therefore strengthens two related assertions rather than mechanically repeating one.

Good rhetorical repetition serves meaning, confirmation, or organization. Mere frequency, without such a function, does not by itself improve expression.

8. Replacing a pronoun with an explicit noun

Once a noun is established, an ordinary pronoun might be sufficient. Yet a speaker may return to an explicit noun (iẓhār) for emphasis, clarity, or the qualities associated with the named referent.

«فَإِذَا عَزَمْتَ فَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ»
When you have resolved upon a course, put your trust in Allah. (Qurʾān 3:159)

The explicit divine name foregrounds the one in whom trust is placed. Its associations with sovereignty, knowledge, and power can make the imperative more compelling than an unelaborated reference.

The analytical task is not to prefer nouns over pronouns in general but to explain why an explicit name has been selected where pronominal reference might otherwise be expected.

9. Defining iltifāt as a change of perspective

Iltifāt is commonly the rhetorical shift, within connected discourse, between the perspectives of first person, second person, and third person, while the underlying referent or topic remains related.

First person: speech from “I” or “we.”
Second person: direct address using “you.”
Third person: reference to “he,” “she,” or “they.”

A change after a sustained pattern can renew attention. Depending on the setting, it may signal immediacy, honor, admonition, or heightened engagement.

Not every grammatical change of person is iltifāt. The relevant discourse relation must remain sufficiently continuous and the shift must carry a rhetorical function.

10. The six directions of shifting person

There are three broad grammatical perspectives: first, second, and third person. A directed shift from one to a different perspective therefore has six possible routes.

FromTo
First personSecond person
First personThird person
Second personFirst person
Second personThird person
Third personFirst person
Third personSecond person

This table identifies the theoretical transitions. It does not imply that every transition is equally apt in any given context; rhetorical appropriateness depends on what the change accomplishes.

11. From direct address to third person

«حَتَّىٰ إِذَا كُنْتُمْ فِي الْفُلْكِ وَجَرَيْنَ بِهِمْ»
Until, when you are aboard the ships and they sail with them. (Qurʾān 10:22)

«كنتم» addresses the hearers directly, while «بهم» speaks of the same voyagers in the third person. This is the familiar example of second-person to third-person iltifāt.

Maintaining “you” in both places would produce a more uniform address. The shift can instead put the seafaring scene at a narrative distance, as if the event were being shown from another vantage point.

The persons remain related, but the rhetorical camera has changed. That relation—not a random change of grammar—is the point.

12. From third person to first person

«وَاللَّهُ الَّذِي أَرْسَلَ الرِّيَاحَ فَتُثِيرُ سَحَابًا فَسُقْنَاهُ»
Allah is the One who sends the winds, so they stir clouds, and We drive them onward. (Qurʾān 35:9)

The sentence begins with Allah mentioned in the third person, then «فسقناه» uses a first-person plural verbal form. The same divine activity remains in view, yet the mode of reporting changes.

The shift can lend a new immediacy to the narration of power and agency: the One first described is now represented through the direct “We” of majestic speech.

This plural is the Qurʾānic style of grandeur; it does not suggest a plurality of deities.

13. From narration to direct worshipful address

«مَالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ ۝ إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ»
Master of the Day of Judgment; You alone we worship, and You alone we ask for help. (Qurʾān 1:4–5)

The earlier statements describe Allah in the third person. «إياك» turns directly to Him in address. The change marks a movement from praise and description to immediate supplication and worship.

Recalling divine mercy, lordship, and sovereignty prepares the worshipper for humility and closeness. The advanced object «إياك» also conveys exclusivity: worship and seeking help are directed to Allah alone.

Here iltifāt and fronting for restriction are distinct, complementary rhetorical features.

14. From addressing another to speaking as oneself

«طحا بك قلب في الحسان طروب ... بعيد الشباب عصر حان مشيب ... تكلفني ليلى وقد شط وليها ... وعادت عواد بيننا وخطوب»
Your heart is led away in its passion for beautiful women, though youth has passed and old age approaches; the poet then says of himself that Laylā places demands on me despite distance and obstacles between us.

The opening «بك» addresses a “you,” while «تكلفني» turns to the poet’s own experience (“me”). The poem therefore supplies the sequence needed to see the perspective change rather than merely an isolated first-person phrase.

Nevertheless, a changed pronoun or verbal ending is not sufficient on its own. A student must establish that the same referent or directed communication is being recast, rather than two independent subjects simply being introduced.

This distinction prevents grammatical pattern-spotting from displacing actual rhetorical interpretation.

15. A context-specific purpose beyond the general benefit

«إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ»
You alone we worship. (Qurʾān 1:5)

Simply labeling the verse as attention-renewing overlooks its particular rhetorical purpose. Recalling divine attributes prepares the servant for praise, and direct address then presents a moment of worship and dependence before God.

The shift of person, the sequence of divine descriptions, and the preposing of the object all contribute. Each feature has its own function, but together they reinforce the declaration of servitude.

A rhetorical explanation therefore needs two levels: the general function of the device and the distinctive effect achieved in this precise passage.

16. Al-Sakkākī and the boundaries of iltifāt

The chapter notes a difference of scope between the familiar later definition of iltifāt and the analytical treatment associated with al-Sakkākī. The better-known definition centers on shifts among first, second, and third person; the broader discussion attends to certain meaningful departures from the expected form of expression.

This is best approached as a difference in technical scope, not an automatic contradiction about the grammar of every example. One treatment draws a narrower terminological boundary; the other examines additional forms of rhetorical redirection.

For reliable analysis, state which use of the term is intended before classifying an unusual passage. The underlying rhetorical purpose is more important than applying a single label without qualification.

17. Answering the deeper question rather than the stated one

A rhetorically apt reply need not always reproduce the literal focus of the hearer’s question. A speaker may detect a mistaken assumption and supply what the hearer more urgently needs to know.

This is often explained as uslūb al-ḥakīm, the wise redirection of an inquiry. Someone preoccupied with an incidental detail may need clarification of a governing principle or practical consequence instead.

The technique is not evasiveness for its own sake. A well-judged redirection serves a genuine communicative need, correcting the question’s priorities while remaining intelligible to the intended audience.

18. The lunar crescents and the more useful answer

«يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْأَهِلَّةِ قُلْ هِيَ مَوَاقِيتُ لِلنَّاسِ وَالْحَجِّ»
They ask you about the new moons. Say: they are markers of time for people and for pilgrimage. (Qurʾān 2:189)

The rhetorical discussion contrasts curiosity about the moon’s changing appearance with the practical function the answer highlights. Rather than dwelling on the physical description, it points to the significance of lunar reckoning for life and worship.

The hearer receives guidance more directly related to human needs. The reply is therefore an example of shifting attention to what is especially beneficial.

This does not demean legitimate astronomical inquiry; it describes the communicative priority emphasized in this verse.

19. What to give and whom to benefit

«يَسْأَلُونَكَ مَاذَا يُنْفِقُونَ قُلْ مَا أَنْفَقْتُمْ مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَلِلْوَالِدَيْنِ وَالْأَقْرَبِينَ وَالْيَتَامَىٰ وَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ»
They ask what they should spend. Say: whatever good you spend is for parents, relatives, orphans, the needy, and the traveler. (Qurʾān 2:215)

The apparent inquiry asks what should be given. The answer directs attention to whom the spending should benefit. Knowing that wealth may be spent is incomplete without regard to suitable recipients.

This is a redirection that supplies immediately useful moral and practical guidance. It does not reduce all the verse’s legal or exegetical dimensions to this one rhetorical observation.

20. A future event expressed with past-tense form

The past tense normally marks an earlier event. Rhetorically, it may depict a future occurrence whose realization is presented as so certain that it is as though already accomplished.

«وَيَوْمَ يُنْفَخُ فِي الصُّورِ فَفَزِعَ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَنْ فِي الْأَرْضِ»
On the day the trumpet is blown, those in the heavens and the earth will be seized with terror. (Qurʾān 27:87)

«يُنفَخ» evokes the future blowing, while «فزع» has a past-tense form although the terror belongs to that future event. The contrast makes its realization vivid and certain.

This is not an alteration of morphological rules. Context supplies a future reference for a past-tense form, and rhetoric explains the communicative effect.

21. Participles used for future certainty

Future events may also be presented through active or passive participles. These nominal forms can depict an assured future occurrence as a settled description rather than a merely anticipated action.

«وَإِنَّ الدِّينَ لَوَاقِعٌ»
Judgment will certainly take place. (Qurʾān 51:6)

«ذَٰلِكَ يَوْمٌ مَجْمُوعٌ لَهُ النَّاسُ»
That is a day for which people will be gathered. (Qurʾān 11:103)

«واقع» is an active participle and «مجموع» a passive participle. Both describe events associated with the future in terms that stress their assured realization.

Keep morphology and rhetoric distinct: the word pattern identifies the form, while the context explains its force of certainty.

22. Qalb: inversion of the expected relation

Qalb (inversion) occurs when related elements are put in an order or relation opposite to the ordinarily expected one. Rhetorically, the reversal may sometimes be tolerable because it produces a subtle appropriateness or emphatic effect; not every reversal is good style.

«عَرَضْتُ النَّاقَةَ عَلَى الْحَوْضِ»
I brought the she-camel before the watering trough.

The intended event is getting the animal to the water. The construction may present the conventional relation from an unexpected direction, which the source discusses under qalb.

Qalb differs from simple fronting or postponement: ordinary word-order changes may leave the semantic relations intact, while qalb also reverses the expected presentation of those relations.

23. A subtle semantic rationale for inversion

Classical rhetoricians did not agree about every instance of qalb. The discussion highlights that an inversion can be intelligible when it rests on a subtle conceptual relation.

Two related objects may be presented from the opposite relational standpoint without the intended scene becoming unrecognizable. Where that reciprocal viewpoint carries a perceivable meaning, the inversion may be more than a mistake.

An arbitrary reversal, by contrast, may mislead the hearer and add no genuine expressive value. Unusual syntax is not automatically eloquent.

A sound analysis asks: What relation was normally expected? What has been reversed? What meaningful effect follows?

24. Hyperbolic inversion in the description of a landscape

«ومهمة مغبرة أرجاؤه ... كان لون أرضه سماؤه»
And a vast dusty wilderness, its reaches veiled in grit, whose earth’s color was as though its sky.

The line brings the color of the earth and sky so close that the earth seems to define the sky’s appearance. Ordinarily a landscape might be likened to the sky; the reversed direction intensifies the vision of dust engulfing both.

The rhetorical work lies in hyperbole, not in verbal novelty for its own sake. The audience imagines a scene where the ordinary visual distinction between ground and horizon is almost lost.

This illustrates how inversion can be justified by a clear contextual effect.

25. The reversed direction of a comparison

«كما طينت بالفدن السياعا»
As though the great buildings had been plastered with clay.

The poetic expression illustrates a comparison framed from an unexpected direction. By changing which object is treated as the apparent standard, the speaker alters the hearer’s picture of the scene.

Simile and qalb (inversion) are not synonyms. Simile shows a shared quality between two things; inversion changes the expected direction in which their relation is expressed. Both can operate in one passage.

The source closes this discussion by noting the importance of subtle appropriateness in assessing inversion. The next separate topic is the states of the predicate (aḥwāl al-musnad).