التَّوْكِيْد
وَنَوْعٌ يُسَمَّى “تَوْكِيْد”، مِثْلُ: “نَفْسُهُ” وَ”عَيْنُهُ” مِنْ “جَاءَ الأَمِيْرُ نَفْسُهُ أَوْ عَيْنُهُ”، وَ”كُلُّ” أَوْ “جَمِيْعُ” مِنْ “سَارَ الْجَيْشُ كُلُّهُ أَوْ جَمِيْعُهُ” |
A type which is called “تَوْكِيْد” (corroboration / intensification), like: “نَفْسُهُ” and “عَيْنُهُ” in: “جَاءَ الأَمِيْرُ نَفْسُهُ أَوْ عَيْنُهُ” (The Commander himself came) and “كُلُّ” and “جَمِيْعُ” in “سَارَ الْجَيْشُ كُلُّهُ أَوْ جَمِيْعُهُ” (The army the whole of it / all of it traveled). |
Explanation:
If someone tells you that he had spoken with the Sultan, it is customary for him to say: “خَاطَبْتُ السُّلْطَانَ نَفْسَهُ” (I spoke with the Sultan himself) and if he tells you that he had spoken to just any ordinary person, then he will say: “خَاطَبْتُ فُلاَناً” (I spoke with such-and-such a person) without stating the word “نَفْسَهُ” after the person’s name. The reason for this (i.e. the use of “نَفْسُهُ” in the case of the Sultan but not so in the case of an ordinary person) is that speaking with the Sultan is regarded as a big matter as far as the speaker is concerned, for it might be that you mistakenly think that he had spoken with the Sultan’s servant or his scribe, for example. He therefore states the word “السُّلْطَان” meaning thereby exactly just that and in order to dispel this mistaken and erroneous thought from the mind of the listener, he adds the word “نَفْسَهُ” in order to convey thereby that he had spoken with Sultan himself and not one of his subordinates. It is for this reason that this word is called “تَوْكِيْد” (corroboration / intensification).
The التَّوْكِيْد follows what is before it in the latter’s الإِعْرَاب . Thus, the word “نَفْس” :
- in the previous example is مَنْصُوْب due to it following the word “السُّلْطَانَ” which is مَنْصُوْب as a مَفْعُوْل بِهِ ,
- in “حَضَرَ السُّلْطَانُ نَفْسُهُ” (The Sultan himself was present) مَرْفُوْع because what is before it is مَرْفُوْع as a فَاعِل and
- in “دَخَلْتُ مَنْزِلَةَ السُّلْطَانِ نَفْسِهِ” (I entered the residence of the Sultan himself) مَجْرُوْر because what is before it is مَجْرُوْر as a مُضَاف إِلَيْهِ .
Similar to the word “النَّفْس” with respect to what was discussed is the word “الْعَيْن” like: “خَاطَبْتُ السُّلْطَانَ عَيْنَهُ” (I spoke with the Sultan himself), and so on and so forth.
Corroboration can also be by means of the word “كُلّ” and “جَمِيْع” after a general (or collective) noun, like:
- “سَارَ الْجَيْشُ كُلُّهُ أَوْ جَمِيْعُهُ” (The army, the whole of it or all of it, travelled),
- “رَأَيْتُ الْجَيْشَ كُلَّهُ أَوْ جَمِيْعَهُ” (I saw the army, the whole of it or all of it) and
- “سَلَّمْتُ عَلَى الْجَيْشِ كُلِّهِ أَوْ جَمِيْعِهِ” (I greeted the army, the whole of it or all of it).
Thus, the word “كُلّ” or “جَمِيْع” follows what is before it in the latter’s الإِعْرَاب and is called “تَوْكِيْد” since perhaps it might be mistakenly and erroneously thought that what is meant by “الْجَيْش” (army) is “most of the army” (and not all of it) if it is not followed by the word “كُلّ” or “جَمِيْع” .