Three Types of Kināyah: Referent, Attribute, and Attribution

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

• What determines the basic threefold division of kināyah?
• What is sought in referent-kināyah?
• If “gathering place of resentments” designates the heart, what is inferred?
• Why are several traits combined in the example of upright stature and broad nails?
• What is intended by attribute-kināyah?
• What distinguishes near from remote attribute-kināyah?
• What mainly distinguishes clear from subtle kināyah?
• What is typically intended by “ṭawīl nijādahu”?
• Why is “ṭawīl al-nijād” not the same as explicitly saying “tall in stature”?
• Why is “broad nape” a subtle allusion to dullness?
• What is the final intended quality of “many ashes”?
• Which intermediate sequence best connects ashes to generosity?
• Why is “many ashes” categorized as remote?
• What does attributional kināyah seek?
• Where is kināyah in “generosity and honour are in a tent…”?
• What is correct about “glory between his garments”?
• What is the first allusive movement in “many ashes in Zayd’s courtyard”?
• What is the second allusive movement in that example?
• If one utterance contains both attribute and attribution kināyah, what follows?
• What operation is also possible in kināyah concerning attribution?
• Why can attributional kināyah exist even if the attribute is named?
• Which distinction best separates attribute- and attribution-kināyah?
• Can the bearer be explicitly named in attributional kināyah?
• What foundational distinction between kināyah and majāz still applies?
• Why should a phrase with many qualities not automatically be classified as referent-kināyah?
• Which pairing is correctly classified?
• If generosity itself—not its attribution to anyone—is intended, what is the class?
• Why is the inference from many ashes not an infallible deduction?
• Which topics are reserved for the next discussion?
• In referent-kināyah the intended meaning is always just a quality.
• “Broad nape” as an allusion to dullness may require convention or reflection.
• “Many ashes” is remote because its literal meaning must be false.
• In “glory between his garments,” the quality can be explicit while its attribution is allusive.
• Two types of kināyah within one expression necessarily create a fourth basic category.
• Attributional kināyah can also deny an attribute of someone.