The Three Kinds of Conventional Verbal Indication

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

• How many kinds of conventional verbal indication does this lesson teach?
• A word indicates its full assigned meaning. Which kind is it?
• A word indicates a constituent of its assigned meaning. Which kind?
• A word indicates a distinct necessary implication of its assigned meaning. What is this?
• What full meaning is assigned to “human” in the source?
• Human → rational animal is which indication?
• Human → animal alone is which kind?
• Human → rational alone is which kind?
• How does the book classify human → capacity for knowledge?
• What does natiq mean in the source’s logical example?
• When human indicates animal, what was the whole concept?
• What does “part” primarily mean in tadammun here?
• If “human” reminds someone of a watch, what does that fact alone establish?
• What does capacity for knowledge mean?
• What distinguishes mutabaqah from tadammun?
• What distinguishes tadammun from iltizam?
• Why is smoke → fire not one of today’s three verbal-conventional types?
• What must be fixed before classifying the three types?
• If “square” indicates its entire geometric definition, which kind is it?
• If four right angles are selected as a constituent of a defined square, what relation is illustrated?
• If equal diagonals are proved to follow from the definition of a square, which relation does that illustrate?
• Why is human → animal not mutabaqah?
• Why is human → capacity for knowledge not classified as tadammun in the text?
• When “human” is used for all three relations, what differs?
• Which justification is sound for tadammun?
• What kind of reason supports iltizam?
• A learner says human → animal is tadammun because animal is included in the definition. Assess this.
• Which relation does the textbook use as its example of iltizam?
• If the target meaning is not included as a component of the assigned concept, what about tadammun?
• Which order best classifies conventional verbal indication?
• Which statement about an implication versus a constituent is correct?
• In mutabaqah, the word indicates its entire assigned meaning.
• Tadammun is indication of a subset of the word’s letters.
• In the textbook, human indicating rational is tadammun.
• The book treats capacity for knowledge as the same constituent as animal.
• Mere co-occurrence of two things is enough to prove iltizam.
• A single word can illustrate all three relations depending on the indicated meaning.
• Human → rational animal is tadammun because the target has two words.
• The book’s central example is human; square is a supplemental teaching example.
• Smoke indicating fire is verbal-conventional merely because the two are related.
• Identifying the full assigned meaning helps distinguish tadammun from iltizam.