The Problem of Conceptualization in Rhetoric: A case of Ittisâl, Mülâyim and Cihet-i câmia

Dublin Core


The Problem of Conceptualization in Rhetoric: A case of Ittisâl, Mülâyim and Cihet-i câmia


Özkan, Abdurrahman
Orak, Kadriye Yılmaz
Üzüm, Melike


Today, there are some difficulties in understanding the old rhetoric (belâgat) books by modern people. Today, although the basic rhetoric terms are known by the majority, the supporting terms used in the old rhetoric books to define these terms are not known by everyone. For us, that is the reason for our classical rhetoric not to be understood sufficiently. Indeed, there have been many attempts to define the rhetoric terms since 20th century, but as the supporting terms, used (that should be used) in defining these terms, were not clearly defined, yet all those studies fill the void, as they are not systematic, they are useless in teaching them. In this study, we will focus on three terms, used in the definitons of the rhetoric terms in the old rhetoric books but not known properly today, and we will try to explain these terms in relation with their usage in rhetoric books. Among the three terms we will deal with; (ittisâl, mülâyim) is related with beyân (figure of speech) and cihet-i câmia with meânî (word order). Ittisâl is a term used in the explanation of the teşbih (simile) in the beyan chapter of the rhetoric books. It means a set of intersection to be based on the metaphor, created by the components through which the müşebbeh (likened) and müşebbehün-bih (likened-to) in create meaning. For example, "Ali is a lion." In this teşbih sentence, ittisâl is made up of courage, which exists between the components of meaning of the two elements (likened and likened-to) and based on the this teşbih. Mülâyim is the term used in the definition of istiâre in the beyân chapter of the rhetorical books. In a broader sense, istiâre is the word, used with the istiâre word and by which the metaphor is understood (İstiare is a kind of allegory). It also indicates the feature of the metaphor belonging to one of the two elements of the sentence. Cihet-i câmia, a term related with vasıl and fasıl (conjuction and disjunction) topics of meânî, is used to describe the connection of sentences or common elements in the connected sentences and it means the partnership between the semantic elements of to-be conected elements. We suppose that the seeds and the principles of the meaning unit (anlam birimciği-séme), one of the most basic branches of the modern semantic, can be said to exist in our classical rhetorical books or at least in ittisâl, mülâyim and cihet-i câmia by looking the descriptions below. As we also suggest, it is quite apparent that; not only the study of the basic terms but also the study of the terms used in their definitions will contribute a lot to the understanding of our rhetoric.


Conference or Workshop Item





Document Viewer