MÜBTEDÂ’NIN NEKRE OLARAK GELDİĞİ DURUMLAR VE KUR’ÂN’DAKİ UYGULAMALARI
Loading...
Date
2019
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Open Access Color
OpenAIRE Downloads
OpenAIRE Views
Abstract
İsim cümlesinin iki temel unsuru bulunmaktadır. Bu unsurlardan
biri mübtedâ diğeri ise haberdir. Dilciler tarafından birbirinden farklı
şekillerde tanımlanmış olan mübtedâ, Sîbeveyhi tarafından “bir ifadenin
üzerine bina edilmesi için kendisiyle başlatılan isim” olarak tarif
edilmiştir. Mübtedâ cümlede müsnedün ileyh konumunda olan bir
unsur olduğu için onun ma‘rife olması gerekir. Çünkü belli olmayan bir
şey hakkında hüküm vermek muhataba herhangi bir fayda
sağlamayacağı gibi bir şey de ifade etmez. Ancak bazı durumlarda
mübtedâ nekre olarak da gelebilir. Nahiv kaynaklarında mütekaddimun
ile müteahhirun olarak ifade edilen nahiv âlimlerinin bu konuya dair
yaklaşımları birbirinden farklı olmuştur. Nitekim mütekaddimun olarak
geçen âlimler, fayda vermesi durumunda mübtedâ’nın nekre olarak
gelebileceğini zikretmiş fakat onun hangi durum ve sebeplerle fayda
vereceği konusunda bazı örnekler dışında herhangi bir bilgi
vermemişlerdir. Kaynaklarda müteahhirun olarak geçinen âlimler ise,
mübtedâ’nın hangi sebeplerle nekre olarak gelebileceği hususuyla ilgili
geniş bilgiler vermişlerdir. Fakat onlar da söz konusu sebeplerin sayısı
hususunda kendi aralarında ihtilaf etmişlerdir. Nitekim onlardan
bazıları, bu sebepleri umum ve husus ile ifade edilen iki ana sebebe
hasrederken, onlardan çoğu ise söz konusu sebepleri belli sayılarla
ifade etmiş ve onları teker teker ele alıp incelemişlerdir. Örneğin İbn
Mâlik bu sebeplerin sayısını altı, İbn Hişâm on, Sabbân on beş, İbn
‘Akil yirmi dört, Ebû Hayyân yirmi yedi, Suyûtî otuz bir, İbnü’n-Nehhâs
otuz iki, el-‘Unnabî ise, kırk iki olarak vermiştir.
Kur’ân’nın muhtelif yerlerinde değişik sebeplerle mübtedâ’nınnekre olarak geçtiği görülmektedir. Ancak nahiv kaynaklarında yer alan söz konusu sebeplerden sadece belli bir kısmının Kur’ân’da geçtiği
müşahede edilmektedir.
The noun clause has two main factors. One of them is subject and the other one is the predicate. The first part in sentence which has been defined in the different ways from each other by the linguists were described as “the noun which is started with itself in order that it is created on a statement” by Sîbeveyhi. As the first part is a factor in the position of a subject in a sentence, it should be definite. Because it does not provide any benefit and state anything for the acceptor to adjudicate on indefinite thing. However, the first part in sentence can come as indefinite in some cases. The scholars of syntax that they are mentioned as predecessor and successor in the syntax sources had the different approaches on this matter. So the scholars who were mentioned as predecessor mentioned that the first part in sentence can be as indefinite if it is beneficial but they did not give any information except some samples about what the situations and reasons it will provide benefit. The scholars who were mentioned as the successor in the sources provided full information about what the reasons first part in sentence can come as indefinite. However, they had conflict among themselves about the number of aforementioned reasons. Some of them devoted those reasons to two main reasons which are stated as general and matter while most of them stated the aforementionedreasons with the certain numbers and theyconsidered and reviewed them one-byone. For example, İbn Mâlik gave the number of thosereasons as six,İbn Hişâm gave as ten, Sabbân gave as fifteen, İbn ‘Akil gave as twenty four, Ebû Hayyân gave as twenty seven, Suyûtî gave as thirty one, İbnü’nNehhâs gave as thirty two, and el-‘Unnabî gave as fourty two. It is seen that the first part in sentence is indefinite due to the various reasons in some parts of The Koran. However, it is observed that a certain part of aforementioned reasons in the syntax reasons is seen in The Koran
The noun clause has two main factors. One of them is subject and the other one is the predicate. The first part in sentence which has been defined in the different ways from each other by the linguists were described as “the noun which is started with itself in order that it is created on a statement” by Sîbeveyhi. As the first part is a factor in the position of a subject in a sentence, it should be definite. Because it does not provide any benefit and state anything for the acceptor to adjudicate on indefinite thing. However, the first part in sentence can come as indefinite in some cases. The scholars of syntax that they are mentioned as predecessor and successor in the syntax sources had the different approaches on this matter. So the scholars who were mentioned as predecessor mentioned that the first part in sentence can be as indefinite if it is beneficial but they did not give any information except some samples about what the situations and reasons it will provide benefit. The scholars who were mentioned as the successor in the sources provided full information about what the reasons first part in sentence can come as indefinite. However, they had conflict among themselves about the number of aforementioned reasons. Some of them devoted those reasons to two main reasons which are stated as general and matter while most of them stated the aforementionedreasons with the certain numbers and theyconsidered and reviewed them one-byone. For example, İbn Mâlik gave the number of thosereasons as six,İbn Hişâm gave as ten, Sabbân gave as fifteen, İbn ‘Akil gave as twenty four, Ebû Hayyân gave as twenty seven, Suyûtî gave as thirty one, İbnü’nNehhâs gave as thirty two, and el-‘Unnabî gave as fourty two. It is seen that the first part in sentence is indefinite due to the various reasons in some parts of The Koran. However, it is observed that a certain part of aforementioned reasons in the syntax reasons is seen in The Koran
Description
ORCID
Keywords
Mübtedâ, Nekre, Kur’ân-ı Kerim, sebep, caiz., Subject, Indefinite, Syntax, Koran, reason.
Turkish CoHE Thesis Center URL
Fields of Science
Citation
WoS Q
Scopus Q
Source
Turkish Studies
Volume
14
Issue
4
Start Page
2089
End Page
2108