الحقيقة و المجاز في متشابة القرآن و المختلف فيه لابن شهرأشوب (588ه)‎

Abstract EN

According to use, utterance is divided into actual and trope.

Actual use of an utterance is the use which is based on the placement relationship between the utterance and its meaning.

The meaning resulting from this placement is called the actual use.

On the other hand, the trope use is based on the use of the utterance in another meaning for which it is not originally placed, but is taken from what is demonstrated in the meaning, as the demonstration of braveness in the utterance 'lion' and the demonstration of 'abundance' in the utterance 'sea'.

So, we say 'Zaid is a lion', for his braveness and 'Zaid is a sea' for the abundance of his knowledge.

Rhetoricians have said that trope is a type of exaggeration.

As trope is the use of the utterance in a meaning that is not originally meant for it, there should be a literal, contextual, or rational clue, to avoid speech ambiguity.

It is rightly stated that the significance of the actual and the figurative of utterances would not be evident in other than structure, because the significance of the individual utterance signifies nothing other than the actual meaning for which it is placed.

So if we say 'lion', we mean nothing other than that known beast, but when we say 'Zaid is a lion' then the significance of the word 'lion' in this structure is taken from what is demonstrated in that meaning, which is 'force' or 'braveness' in this use.

There is no problem in the correcting of the ascribing, from the point of view of the linguistic crafting, but there is such a thing