Özet:

A critical approach in considerance with the cause comprehension of linguists has been discussed in this study. The phenomenon deduction (t‘alil) and the cause comprehension of linguists has been assessed concordantly in a chronologic order from al-Khalil b. Ahmad till Suyûtî. It has been observed that they have intitled the causes - which have been used to provide justification for the nahvî pedestals- with various names, and that they have classişfied them. It’s also been observed that although their classification, and their approach to the deduction (t‘alil) were different, each causal explanation which was made with the aim to determine the background aphorism was subjective. Linguists generally quite demand to make causal explanations for the nahvî pedestals in their works, either with the influence of philosophy and logic. They weren’t contented with solely the determination of the cause of a pedestal, they’ve also speculated on the cause of the cause, and the cause of the cause of the cause. However, the speculations resulted in the substantially increase of the volume of the nahiv ( syntax) works, and caused both the comprehension that nahiv is a difficult discipline, and the digress of the matter in hand. Hence, İbn Cinnî has remarked some extremities of linguists regarding causal explanations; Zejjâjî has expressed with the wise man metaphore he has used while explaining cause, that the causal explanations of linguists are nothing more than gloss (tevil). The most marginal opinion about the matter belongs to İbn Medâ, who has critisized the linguists not only about cause, but in general about their approach to syntax ( nahiv), and argued that the syntax wasn’t comprehended by them and that it was goofed up.

Anahtar Kelimeler: