Indian path · level 2 · al-Mirqāt · Lesson 3 of 25
3
Signification
Utterances and signification
الأَلْفَاظ وَالدَّلَالَة
Arabic text after the print of Deoband after 1336/1917 · translation by The Mantiqi, draft
About this text
al-Mirqāt المِرْقاة
Faḍl-i Imām Khayrābādī (d. 1243 or 1244/1828–29)
Text
Arabic: al-Mirqāt, with al-Shīrkūtī's gloss al-Mirʾāt (gloss not reproduced), checked against the Delhi print of 1286/1869 (Sayyid al-Maṭābiʿ); vowel marks added by The Mantiqi (draft), Kutub Khāna Iʿzāziyya, Deoband after 1336/1917 View the scan
(dalāla) in language is guidance; in technical usage it is a thing's being in such a state that knowing it entails knowing something else. Signification is of two kinds, verbal and non-verbal. Verbal signification is that in which the signifier is an ; non-verbal is that in which the signifier is not an utterance. Each of the two is of three kinds, [which gives six]. The first is verbal conventional signification, like the word “Zayd” signifying the one named by it. The second is verbal natural signification, like the word “uḥ” (with a ḍamma on the hamza and the undotted ḥāʾ without a vowel; some say with a fatḥa) signifying pain in the chest: for nature compels one to produce this sound when pain comes on in the chest. The third is verbal rational signification, like the word “dayz”, heard from behind a wall, signifying the existence of someone who uttered it. The fourth is non-verbal conventional signification, like the four signifiers [writing, gestures, finger-knots and markers] signifying what they signify. The fifth is non-verbal natural signification, like a horse's neighing signifying that it wants water and fodder. The sixth is non-verbal rational signification, like smoke signifying fire. These are six kinds of signification. The investigates only verbal conventional signification, because only through it can be conveyed to others and received from them with ease; unlike the others, for conveying and receiving knowledge through them is not free of difficulty.
You should know that verbal conventional , which is what counts in the discourse of the sciences, is of three kinds. The first is by (muṭābaqa): the signifies the whole of what it was coined for, like “human” signifying “animal” and “rational” together. The second is by (taḍammun): the utterance signifies a part of the meaning for which it was coined, like its signifying “animal” only or “rational” only. The third is signification by (iltizām): the utterance signifies neither what it was coined for nor a part of it, but a meaning outside it that is concomitant (lāzim) with what it was coined for. The concomitant is that to which the mind passes from what [the utterance] was coined for, like “human” signifying “capable of and of the craft of writing”, and like the word “blindness” signifying sight.
by and by do not occur without . This is because the part is not without the whole, nor likewise the concomitant without what it accompanies (malzūm); and what follows does not exist without what it follows. Correspondence, however, may occur without the two, since an may be coined for a meaning that has no part and no concomitant. If you say: we do not grant that there is a meaning that has no concomitant, for every meaning certainly has a concomitant, the least of which is that it is “not other than itself”; we reply: by the concomitant is meant the evident concomitant (al-lāzim al-bayyin), to which the mind passes from what it accompanies. Your “not other than itself” is not one of the evident concomitants, for we often conceive meanings without the meaning of “other” even occurring to us, let alone its being “not other than itself”.
3 questions on what the commentary explains. With 6 out of 10 or more (two stars) the next lesson opens.
Question 1
Someone with a pain in the chest cries “uḥ”. Which of the six kinds of signification is this, according to al-Mirqāt?
The signifier is an , so the is verbal; and nature compels one to produce this sound when pain comes on in the chest, so it is natural. Al-Mirqāt gives exactly this example for verbal natural signification.
Question 2
Why does the logician investigate only verbal conventional signification?
Al-Mirqāt says the investigates only verbal conventional because through it is conveyed and received with ease, while conveying and receiving it through the others is not free of difficulty.
Question 3
Correspondence can occur without implication, because a word may be coined for a meaning with no concomitant. An objector says every meaning has a concomitant, at least “not other than itself”. How does al-Mirqāt reply?
Al-Mirqāt answers that by the concomitant is meant the evident concomitant (al-lāzim al-bayyin), to which the mind passes from what it accompanies, and “not other than itself” is not one of these.