The Researcher is interested in speech ofIbnozzaki in Jerusalem after liberated by Saladin, so the researcher achieved the speechfrom the sources and revealed the differences between them, then he studied it in the hope of access to their Semantic and efiects on the recipients; in view of the modern stylistic derived from the Linguistic and rhetoric; revealing stylistic levels from Phonetics, Morphology, Syntactic, depiction, and the Semantic, with benefit from other Literary Criticism curriculums and theoretical statements.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Researcher is interested in speech ofIbnozzaki in Jerusalem after liberated by Saladin, so the researcher achieved the speechfrom the sources and revealed the differences between them, then he studied it in the hope of access to their Semantic and efiects on the recipients; in view of the modern stylistic derived from the Linguistic and rhetoric; revealing stylistic levels from Phonetics, Morphology, Syntactic, depiction, and the Semantic, with benefit from other Literary Criticism curriculums and theoretical statements.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The Researcher is interested in speech ofIbnozzaki in Jerusalem after liberated by Saladin, so the researcher achieved the speechfrom the sources and revealed the differences between them, then he studied it in the hope of access to their Semantic and efiects on the recipients; in view of the modern stylistic derived from the Linguistic and rhetoric; revealing stylistic levels from Phonetics, Morphology, Syntactic, depiction, and the Semantic, with benefit from other Literary Criticism curriculums and theoretical statements.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The Researcher is interested in speech ofIbnozzaki in Jerusalem after liberated by Saladin, so the researcher achieved the speechfrom the sources and revealed the differences between them, then he studied it in the hope of access to their Semantic and efiects on the recipients; in view of the modern stylistic derived from the Linguistic and rhetoric; revealing stylistic levels from Phonetics, Morphology, Syntactic, depiction, and the Semantic, with benefit from other Literary Criticism curriculums and theoretical statements.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters
Abstract
The Researcher is interested in speech ofIbnozzaki in Jerusalem after liberated by Saladin, so the researcher achieved the speechfrom the sources and revealed the differences between them, then he studied it in the hope of access to their Semantic and efiects on the recipients; in view of the modern stylistic derived from the Linguistic and rhetoric; revealing stylistic levels from Phonetics, Morphology, Syntactic, depiction, and the Semantic, with benefit from other Literary Criticism curriculums and theoretical statements.
Özet
Bu araştırma; Selahaddin 'in Beyt-ill Makdisifethetmesinden sonra İbni Zeki 'nin oradairad ettiği hutbesini ele almaktadır. Hutbenin kaynakları araştırılacak, aralarındaki farklılıkları ortaya çıkarılacaktır. Ayrıca dil, belagat ve modern uslup yaklaşımları ışığında okuyucular üzerindeki etkisi incelenecektir. Edebi eleştiri teorilerinden faydalanılacaktır.
🔖
Cite This Article
ABDELDAİM, K. F. A. (2016). Read in the Liberation Speech of Jerusalem. EKEV Akademi Dergisi, Sayı: 68, 181–242. https://ajindex.com/articles/153990
İbrahim Enis, Delaletü’l—Elfaz, el—Anglo el—Mısriyye, Kahire, 2004. İbn Ebi Şeybe, el-Musannafu fi’l—Ehadis ve’l—A’sar, Thk: Kemal Yusuf el—Hut, Mektebetu’r— Rüşd, Riyad, 1409. İbnü’l—Esir, el Meselü’s—Sair Edebi’l—Kâtibi ve Şair, Thk: Muhammed Muhiddin Abdul— hamid, el—Mektebetu’l—Asriyye, Beyrut, 1990. İbnu’l—Esir Mecduddin, el—Bedi’u İlmi’l—Arabi, Thk: Fethi Ahmed Ali Eddin ve Salih Hüseyin el—Abid, Camiatü’l-Ümmü’l-Kurra, 1421. İbn Aybek ed—Devadari, Kenzu’d—Durar ve Camiü’l—Gurar, Thk: Said Abdulfettah Aşur, C.7, Kahire, 1972. İbn Temim el—Makdisi, Musirü’l—Garam ila Ziyareti’l—Kudüs ve’ş—Şam, Thk: Ahmet el— Hutaymi, Daru’l—Cil, Beyrut, 1994. İbn Cevzi, el—Müntazimü Tarihi’l-Umemi ve’l-Muluk, Thk: Muhammed Abdulkadir Ata, Darü’l—Kutubi’l—İlmiyyi, Beyrut, 1992.
İbn Hibban, Sahih İbn Hibban bi Tertib İbni Balaban, Thk: Şuayb el— Arnavut, Muesesetü’r— Risale, Beyrut 1993. İbn Hibban, el-İhsanu Takribi Sahihi İbni Hibban, Thk: Şuayb el— Arnavut, Muasesetü’r— Risale, Beyrut 1988.
İbn Hallikan, Vefayatü’l-Ayan, Thk: İhsan Abbas, Daru’s— Sadır, Beyrut,1994.
İbn Şedded, En—Nevadiri’s—Sultaniyye, Thk: Cemaluddin eş-Şeyyal, el-Hanci, Kahire, 1994.
İbn Adim, Zubtedü’l—Hal Tarihi Halep, Thk: Halil el Mansur, Daru’l—Kütubi’l—İlmiyye, Beyrut, 1996
İbn Akil, Şerhu İbn-i Akil, Thk: Muhammed Muhyiddin, Daru’t—Turas, Kahire, 1980.
İbn Kadi Şehbe, Tabakatu’ş—Şaiiiyye, Thk: Hafız Han, Alemü’l—Kutub, Beyrut, 1407. İbn Kesir, el—Bidaye Ve’n—Nihaye, Thk: Abdullah et—Türki, Daru’l— Hicr, Mısır, 1997. İbn Mace, es—Sünen Thk: Şuayb el—Amavut, Daru’r- Risaleti’l—Alemiyye, 2009.
İbn Manzur, Lisanu’l—Arab, Thk: Abdullah Ali, Darü’l—Maarif, Kahire. İbn Manzur, Lisanu’l-Arab, Daru’s— Sadır, Beyrut. İbn Hişam, Muğni’l-Lebib, Thk: Abdullatif el-Hatib, es—Silsiletü’t—Türasi, Kahire, 2000. İbn Ebi Bekir el-Bezzar, el Müsned, Thk: Adil İbnu Said, Mektebetü’l—Ulumu’l—Kahire, Medine-i Münevvere, 2009. Ebu Davud Süleyman bin Eş’as es—Sicistani, es—Sünen, Thk: Şuayb Arnavut, Daru’r— Risaleti’l-Alemiyye, 2009. Ebu Davud Süleyman bin Davud et—Tayalisi, el—Müsned, Thk: Muhammed bin Abdulmahsun et—Türki, Daru Hicr, Mısır, 1999. Ebu Şame el—Makdisi, Uyunu’r— Ravzateyn, Thk: İbrahim Ezeybek, Müessetü’r—Risâle, Beyrut, 1997. Ebu Şame el—Makdisi, Kitabu Ravzateyn, Talik: İbrahim Şemsuddin, Darü’l— Kütubu’l— İlmiyye, Beyrut. Ebu Ya’la el—Mevsıli, el—Müsned, Thk: Hüseyin Esed, Daru’l—Memun Li’t—Turas