Criticising Of Ibn Khaldun’ Ideas On 

Relationship Between Word And Meaning

 Ibn Khaldun claims that "Poetry and prose work with words, and not with ideas. The ideas are secondary to the (words). The (words) are basic." ( Ibn Khaldun 782) He shows three proof for it. First one is that meanings are the same, but words are different. We need to learn how to use words. The second one is that the mind does not need to be trained. The last one is that memorising allows people to "taste" eloquence. I will evaluate these three claims by giving a couple of example from some books and ideas.

Firstly, many scholars such as Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani*1 -language scholar- and Said Nursi*2 disagree with Ibn Khaldun on the point of the relationship between words and ideas". Roughly, Ibn Khaldun exemplifies that although water (meaning) is the same, bowls (words)are different, the important one is bowl because bowls should be appropriate for water ( Ibn Khaldun 782). On the other hand, al-Jurjani gives the example of that If you order words in a wrong way, the sentence does not carry any proper meaning, even if the words are same with regular sentence's, so what the base is meaning and ideas, The words are secondary to the ideas (Cürcani, Esraru'l-Belagat 32). As an example, this situation is valid for even rhyme that is supposed exactly as a facility of words. However, beauty or appropriateness of usage rhyme comes from an idea. For instance, at the Echo and Narcissus's part of Metamorphoses written by Ovid, rhyme usage is very appropriate for meaning, because Echo can not talk except "echo" what she hears (Ovid 91). That is why, it is a kind of reflection. In that case, rhyme like a reflection of words and letters. As if narration's form is shaped by narration and the story itself. There are many rhymes in the part of Echo, but I just give one example:

"Why do you flee from me?" And the reply

repeats the final sounds of his outcry.

That answer snares him; he persists, calls out:

"Let's meet." And with the happiest reply

that ever was to leave her lips, she cries:

"Let's meet”…(Ovid 92)

The repetition of "reply" and the same rhyme with "outcry" shows a sample service of words to ideas.

In addition to Metamorphoses' sample, if we assume that words are basic rather than ideas, We would empty words from reality, because ideas are related to reality. That is why, words as a carrier of meaning, also related to reality. I mean, they should be real or represent reality. Otherwise, the value of words will decrease. When I say reality what I mean is a kind of that: For example, Dante's Inferno is a product of imagination. It does not exist in the outside world. It exists and is real on imagination. On the other hand, Attar's The Conference Of  The Birds exist in the outside world, but how does it? It represents the organs of the human soul such as mind, heart, imagination, spirit etc.*3, so ıt happens already. Each human soul's organs try to reach the aim of itself. Let's say that the story is fed by reality, and it represents reality in a different way. However, Inferno is fed by only imaginations. Therefore, what makes words/story beautiful is being based on reality. In other words, meaning and ideas make words tasteful- which is a term on eloquence used by Ibn Khaldun- and beautiful. 

Secondly, Ibn Khaldun believed that no need to train the mind, what need to train is a composition of speech to express ideas (Ibn Khaldun 782). However, contemplate needs to be trained by logic. As we see, Ibn Khaldun separate mind a speech sharply. On the other hand, Sirafi -language scholar- claims that logic and grammar (or an eloquence) is the same or very similar (Durusoy, Ali & Güler, Aliye, 22). Nursi says that poetry on meaning is amplified with logic (Nursi 72). That is why, eloquence is roughly logic of speech. It requires training as much as the mind does. For example, Kalila and Dimna, which is a fabl, tells a story about harmful of envy, greed and structure of government. It gives moral advice by telling a story way. However, in eloquence, advice should be appropriate for people. In that case, people look at events in a logical way compared to the past. That is why, If you warn or advice people, should consider that point, so telling a story without based on any reality energise only imagination of people, yet people are behaving based on their mind at the present world. While we are advising people about morality what we need to do is that "fallaciousness" of bad habits or moral fallaciousness fixate on people's mind. Making a story of "bad results of bad actions" up is not enough. Briefly, there is no sharp gap between speech and mind in the area of logic. That is why, both ideas and speeches need to be trained.

Thirdly, Ibn Khaldun uses memorising to prove that words are basic. According to him, a person who wants to gain "taste" and the capability of good speech should memorise poetries. Memories the "words" cause taste and capability of good speech, so words are basic (Ibn Khaldun 782). Although I accept that one of the most prominent factors for taste is memorising, memorising is not only about words as people think, because when we memorise something, automatically, we also memorise meaning and ideas together with words. If a person memorises the words by cutting context and sentence order, it is clear that the person can not gain taste even if the words are the same. This reasoning similar to Ibn Khaldun's argument about comparing memorising and studying grammar. Ibn Khaldun states that grammar scholars supposed that we teach taste and eloquence to students, but it is wrong. Students learn taste because of busing words and poetry, not because of learning grammar rules (Ibn Khaldun 762). Similarly, I claim that memorising does not include only words, it is also include meaning, so what cause gaining taste and eloquence is memorising, also, meaning.

To sum up, although Ibn Khaldun is an important scholar in the many areas for me, Ibn Khaldun’s ideas about the relationship between words and meanings are incorrect. Meaning is more fundamental for a sentence and to gain the ability of eloquence in three way; bond of form and meaning, memorise words and sentence order and to need to be trained. I am finishing my work with a couple of words of al-Jurjani in Dala’il al-i’jaz translated by me, although it is a little bit harsh criticism in general: “Know that, people are obsessive with words that are anything more than phantasy. They keep telling “words” and “words”, they do not know something like meaning. They form the habit of that. This is an illness. They do not listen to our explanations ( Cürcani 416).”

*1 Cürcani, Abdulkahir. Delalü’l-İcaz. Türkiye Yazma Eserler Kurumu:2015, pp. 462.

*2 Nursi, Said. Muhakemat. Rnk Neşriyat: 2015, pp. 71.

*3 I am just giving an example. Some people say that birds represent the organs of the human soul. If we accept that It is true, we can claim what ı say. If we do not accept that It is wrong, we should find another example which should be true.

Bibliyography

—Ibn Khaldun, Abd Ar Rahman bin Muhammed. The Muqaddimah. Translated by Franz Rozenthal. Princeton University Press: 2020 / 

--Ibn Haldun Tercüme-i Mukaddime Ahmet Cevdet Paşa

—Durusoy, Ali & Güler, Aliye. “Vâv’ın hikâyesi: Dilbilimciler ile Mantıkçılar Arasındaki Tartışmaların Mantık ve Dilbilimin Gelişimine Etkisi.” Yakın Doğu Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Güz 2015. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/445972

—Cürcani, Abdulkahir. Delalü’l-İcaz. Türkiye Yazma Eserler Kurumu: 2015.

—Cürcani, Abdulkahir. Esraru’l Belagat. Litera Yayıncılık: 2018.

—Nursi, Said. Muhakemat. Rnk Neşriyat: 2015.

—Ovid, Metamorphoses. Translated by Allen Mandelbaum. A Harvest Book, Harcourt Brace & Company. https://www.sjsu.edu/people/cynthia.rostankowski/courses/HUM119AF13/s2/Ovid-Reading.pdf

—Attar, Farid Ud-din, The Conference Of The Birds. Translated by Charles Stanley Nott. Shambala Publications:1971/ 

— Alighieri, Dante. The Divine Comedy. Translated by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. 

— Bidpa’i. Kalila and Dimna. Translated by Wyndham Jptatchbull. Oxford: W. Baxter for J. Parker: 1819 / 

—Bulut, Ali. Belagat Terimleri Sözlüğü. Marmara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Vakfı Yayınları: 2015.