غَلَطٌ،Wrong,وَهُوَand it isيَكُونُbeفِيinاللُّغَةِthe languageحَقِيقَةًtruthوَمَجَازًا،and metaphor,
It is wrong, and it is in the language truth and metaphor.
فَقَدْfor itاِدَّعَىclaimedبَعْضُهُمْsome of themأَنَّthatهَذَاthisمِنْis fromالمَجَازِ،the metaphor,
For some have claimed that this is a metaphor.
فَإِنَّForالمَجَازَ:the metaphor is:هُوَit isاللَّفْظُthe termالمُسْتَعْمَلُusedفِيinغَيْرِother thanمَاwhatوُضِعَwas placedلَهُfor itأَوَّلًا،initially,
For the metaphor is: it is the term used in other than what it was initially designated for.
وَهُنَاAnd hereلَمْnotيُسْتَعْمَلْusedاللَّفْظُ،the term,بَلْbutرُكِبَcombinedمَعَwithلَفْظٍthe termآخَرَ،another,
And here the term was not used, but combined with another term,
فَصَارَso it becameوَضْعًاa designationآخَرَanotherبِالْإِضَافَةِ.in addition.
so it became another designation in addition.
فَلَوْIfاِسْتُعْمِلَusedمُضَافًاas an additionفِيinمَعْنًى،meaning,ثُمَّthenاِسْتُعْمِلَusedبِتِلْكَwith thatالإِضَافَةِadditionفِيinغَيْرِهِothersكَانَit would beمَجَازًا،a metaphor,
If it were used as an addition in meaning, then used with that addition in others, it would be a metaphor,
بَلْbutإِذَاifكَانَwasبَعْلَبَكْBaalbekوَحَضْرَمَوْتَand Hadhramautوَنَحْوَهُمَاand similar placesمِمَّاof whatيُرَكَّبُis combinedتَرْكِيبٍcombinationمَزْجٍof blendingبَعْدَafterأَنْthatكَانَwasالأَصْلُthe originalفِيْهِin itالإِضَافَةُ،addition,
but if it was in Baalbek and Hadhramaut and similar places, of what is combined with an elaborate blending after the original was addition,
لَاit is notيُقَالُsaidإِنَّهُthat it isمَجَازٌ،a metaphor,فَمَاfor whatلَمْhas notيَنْطِقْbeen articulatedبِهِby itإِلَّاexceptمُضَافًاas an additionأُولَىis more worthy
for it is said that it is not a metaphor, for what has not been articulated by it except as an addition is more worthy.
وَأَمَّاAs forمَنْthose whoفَرَّقُواdifferentiatedبَيْنَbetweenالحَقِيقَةِthe truthوَالْمَجَازِand the metaphor:فَإِنَّforالحَقِيقَةَthe truth:مَاwhatيُفِيدُbenefitsالمَعْنَىthe meaningمُجَرَّدًاabstractedعَنْfromالْقَرَائِنِthe indicationsوَالْمَجَازُand the metaphorمَاwhatلَاdoes notيُفِيدُbenefitذَاكَthatالمَعْنَىmeaningإِلَّاexceptمَعَwithقَرِينَةٍan indicationأوorقَالَsaid:الحَقِيقَةُthe truth:مَاwhatيُفِيدُهُthe term benefitsاللَّفْظُthe expressionالْمُطْلَقُ،the absolute,وَالْمَجَازُand the metaphorمَاwhatلَاdoes notيُفِيدُbenefitإِلَّاexceptمَعَwithالتَّقْيِيدِ،the restriction,
As for those who differentiated between the truth and the metaphor: for the truth is what benefits the meaning abstracted from the indications, and the metaphor is what does not benefit that meaning except with an indication, or said: the truth is what the expression benefits in the absolute, and the metaphor is what does not benefit except with the restriction,
أوorقَالَsaid:الحَقِيقَةُthe truth:هِيَisالمَعْنَىthe meaningالَّذِيwhichيَسْبِقُcomes firstإِلَىtoالذِّهْنِmindعِندَatالإِطْلَاقِ،the utterance,وَالْمَجَازُand the metaphorمَاwhatلَاdoes notيَسْبِقُprecedesإِلَىtoالذِّهْنِ،the mind,أوorقَالَsaid:المَجَازُthe metaphorمَاwhatصَحَّis validنَفْيُهُ،to deny it,وَالحَقِيقَةُand the truthمَاwhatلَاdoes notيَصِحُّvalidatesنَفْيُهَا،to deny it,فَإِنَّهُfor it is said
Or said: the truth is the meaning that comes first to mind upon utterance, and the metaphor is what does not precede to the mind, or said: the metaphor is what is valid to deny, and the truth is what is not valid to deny, for it is said:
مَاwhatتَعْنِيdo you meanبِالتَّجْرِيدِby abstractionعَنْfromالْقَرَائِنِthe indicationsوَالْاقْتِرَانِand the correlationبِالْقَرَائِنِ؟with indications?
What do you mean by abstraction from indications and correlation with indications?
إنIfعُنِيَis meantبِذَلِكَby thatالْقَرَائِنُthe indicationsاللَّفْظِيَّةُthe verbalمِثْلَlikeكَوْنِthe beingالِاسْمِthe nounيُسْتَعْمَلُis usedمُقَرُونًاcoupledبِالْإِضَافَةِwith additionفِيinأَوْorلَامِthe definite articleالتَّعْرِيفِ،of definition,
If it is meant by that the verbal indications, like the noun being used coupled with addition in or with the definite article,
وَيُقَيَّدُand restrictedبِكَوْنِهِby beingفَاعِلًاan active subjectوَمَفْعُولًاand an objectوَمُبْتَدَأًand subjectوَخَبَرًا،and predicate,
and is restricted by being an active subject and an object and a subject and predicate,
فَلَاthere is notيُوجَدُfoundقَطُّeverالْكَلَامُthe speechالْمُؤَلَّفُcomposedاسْمٌnounإِلَّاexceptمُقَيَّدًا.restricted.
there is never a composed speech as a noun except restricted.
وَكَذَٰلِكَLikewiseالفِعْلُ،the verb,إنifعُنِيَis meantبِتَقْيِيدِهِby restricting itأَنَّهُthat itلَاnotبِدُونِهِbe withoutفَاعِلٌa subjectوَقَدْandيُقَيَّدُmight be restrictedبِالْمَفْعُولِby the objectمَعَهُwith itوَظَرْفِيِّand circumstancesالزَّمَانِof timeوَالْمَكَانِ،and place,
Likewise the verb, if it is meant by restricting it that it cannot be without a subject and it might be restricted by the object with it and the circumstantial expressions of time and place,
وَالمَفْعُولُand the objectلَهُfor itوَمَعَهُ،and with it,وَالحَالُand stateفَالْفِعْلُso the verbلَاdoes notيُسْتَعْمَلُusedقَطُّeverإِلَّاexceptمُقَيَّدًا،restricted,
and the object with it, and the state, so the verb does not get used ever except restricted,
وَأَمَّاAs forالحَرْفُthe particleفَأَبْلَغُ،is more evident,فَإِنَّforالحَرْفَthe particleأَتَىcameبِهِwith itلِمَعْنًىfor a meaningفِيinغَيْرِهِ .others.
As for the particle, it is more evident, for the particle came with it for a meaning in others.
فَفِيSo inالْجُمَلَةِthe sentenceلَاthere is notيُوجَدُfoundقَطُّeverفِيinكَلَامٍthe speechتَامٍّfullاسْمٌa nounوَلَاnorفِعْلٌa verbوَلَاnorحَرْفٌa particleإِلَّاexceptمُقَيَّدًاrestricted.
So in a complete speech, there is never found a noun nor a verb nor a particle except restricted.
فَإِنَّForكَانَتِif it wasالْقَرِينَةُthe indicationمِمَّاof whatيَمْنَعُpreventsالإِطْلَاقَthe utteranceعَنْfromكُلِّeveryقَيْدٍ،restriction,فَلَيْسَthen it is notفِيinالْكَلَامِthe speechالَّذِيwhichيَتَكَلَّمُis spokenبِهِby itجَمِيعُallالنَّاسِpeopleلَفْظٌa termمُطْلَقٌabsoluteعَنْfromكُلِّeveryقَيْدٍ،restriction,
For if the indication prevents the utterance from every restriction, then in the speech that is spoken by all people there is never an absolute term free from every restriction,
سَوَاءٌwhetherكَانَتْit wasالْجُمَلَةُthe sentenceاسْمِيَّةًnominalأَوْorفِعْلِيَّةً،verb.
whether it was a nominal or verb sentence,
وَلِهَذَاand for this reasonكَانَwasاللَّفْظُthe termالكَلَامُthe speechوَالْكَلِمَةُand the wordفِيinلُغَةِthe languageالْعَرَبِ،of the Arabs,بَلْratherوَفِيand inلُغَةِthe languageغَيْرِهِمof othersلَاnotتُسْتَعْمَلُusedإِلَّاexceptفِيinالْمُقَيَّدِ،the restricted,
And for this reason, the term speech and word in the language of the Arabs, and in the language of others is not used except in the restricted,
وَهُوَand it isالْجُمَلَةُthe sentenceالتَّامَّةُcompleteاسْمِيَّةًnominalكَانَتْor it wasأَوْorفِعْلِيَّةً،verb,أَوْorنِدَائِيَّةً،vocative,إنifقِيلَ:it was said:إنَّهَاthat it isقِسْمٌa sectionثَالِثٌ.third.
And it is a complete sentence whether it was nominal or verb, or vocative, if it is said: that it is a third section.
فَأَمَّاAs forمُجَرَّدُthe mereالِاسْمِnounأَوْorالْفِعْلِthe verbأَوْorالْحَرْفِthe particleالَّذِيwhichجَاءَcameلِمَعْنًىfor a meaningلَمْnotيَكُنْbeبِاسْمٍa nounوَلَاnorفِعْلٍa verbهَذَاthisلَاnotيُسَمَّىis calledفِيinكَلَامِthe speechالْعَرَبِof the Arabsقَطُّeverكَلِمَةً،a word,وَإِنَّمَاbutتَسْمِيَةًthe designationهَذَاthisكَلِمَةً،as a word,اصْطِلَاحٌ نَّحْوِيٌّa grammatical term
As for the mere noun or verb or particle which came for a meaning that is not a noun or a verb, this is never called a word in the speech of the Arabs, but the designation of this is called a word, a grammatical term.