The Concept of Syntactic Dependencies and its Impact on Understanding the Meanings of the Holy Quran in

Background. Quranic exegetes have endeavored to find appropriate mechanisms that can help unravel the mysteries of Allah's book and interpret Quranic verses correctly. Method. Rarely do we find a scholar who has a unique approach that provides unprecedented creativity in their interpretations. One of these exceptional scholars is Imam Muhammad Al-Tahir bin Ashur, the author of the tafsir "Tahrir wa Tanwir". Results. In it, we find an unprecedented mechanism among rhetorical tools, known as the "Syntactic Dependency" mechanism. Through this mechanism, Ibn Ashur is able to derive new hidden meanings, elevating the status of his tafsir to a pioneering position among Islamic tafsir works. This study presents examples of the hidden meanings he unearthed by using the "Syntactic Dependency" mechanism. Conclusion . Hence, their books have diversified and multiplied as these mechanisms have evolved


INTRODUCTION
When delving into the interpretation of Ibn Ashur, one discovers hidden meanings within the interpretation of the Quranic verses that are not found in any other commentary (Luo dkk., 2019).This can be attributed to Ibn Ashur's significant focus on deriving intricate meanings and implications that were concealed from many other interpreters (Bai dkk., 2021).He described his approach by saying, "I have taken care to clarify the meanings of words in the Arabic language with precision and verification, going beyond what lexicons have provided (De Marneffe & Nivre, 2019), and the reader may find in it the realization of his intention and may extract benefits and nuances according to his readiness (Ackerman, 2019).I have made an effort to uncover nuances of Quranic meanings and its miracles that interpretations have overlooked.
The innovative understanding that Ibn Ashur brought to Quranic verses with hidden meanings is rooted in his extensive knowledge (Guo dkk., 2021).He was a scholar who embraced various fields of knowledge, including RJL | Vol. 2 | No. 1 | 2024 metaphorical potential combined with reality, introducing matters and elaborating on them for contextual relevance (Radoglou Grammatikis dkk., 2019), enhancing the understanding of meanings (Distefano dkk., 2019), reconciling the Quranic meaning with certain sciences related to legislative objectives, countering objections from those who claim inconsistency with the Quran's intent, not to oppose God's intention in the verse but to expand its scope.
And what is meant by "separation" in semiotics is: "It is a comprehensive concept that encompasses the distinctive part of a species, distinguishing it from other participatory species within the same category."Therefore, emphasis indicating negation or uncertainty of the addressee, discourse implication, indicative reference, etc., are all constituent parts of the essence of the term "Syntactic Dependencies (Nazmi dkk., 2019)."Thus, they have become types or subdivisions falling under the term "Syntactic Dependencies," which in turn falls under the distant category of rhetoric .Additionally, from Ibn Ashur's definition of the term "Syntactic Dependencies," it seems that the individuals or subdivisions comprising the scope of the term are recognized among the scholars of rhetoric as scattered components within the field of rhetoric, not grouped under a specific rhetorical term as in Ibn Ashur's case.As known among scholars, any field of knowledge embodies its concepts in its specific terminology.This is the innovation that Ibn Ashur displayed with the term "Syntactic Dependencies."

The Benefit of Morphological Constructions Implications:
Scholars vary in their extraction of hidden meanings derived from linguistic constructions, depending on their mastery of the mechanism of morphological constructions implications.This signifies that morphological constructions implications serve as a mechanism for expanding or amplifying meanings.Ibn Ashur pointed to this in his discussion of readings in the sixth introduction of his book At-Tahrir wa Al-Tanwir.He illustrated that there are two types of readings: the first has no relevance to interpretation, meaning it does not involve extracting meanings; this is the science of Tajwid.The second type has a direct connection to interpretation, involving the extraction of meanings (Letsa, 2019); it is the variations in the recitations, as Ibn Ashur stated (Isoaho & Markard, 2020): "I see that readings fall into two categories: one has no relevance to interpretation, while the other is directly related to it from different aspects." He further explained that variations in recitations lead to an increase in meanings.He stated, "It is likely that revelation was revealed in different forms, and the meanings were multiplied."He compared the multiplication of meanings resulting from variations in recitations to the multiplication of meanings derived from morphological constructions implications, stating (Binder & Heupel, 2021), "There is no hindrance to the words of the Quran coming in various forms, intending for readers to find numerous meanings.The presence of these various forms in different recitations is divided into separate interpretations of the same verse.This resembles the concept of implication in Arabic usage, the concept of 'Al-Badi,' and the concept of Mistatibat Al-Tarakib in the science of meanings." Moreover (Edenberg & Hannon, 2021), Ibn Ashur indirectly emphasized the multiplication of meanings resulting from morphological constructions implications in the ninth introduction of his book At-Tahrir wa Al-Tanwir, when discussing linguistic structures that can have multiple meanings.He stated, "Then, if the meanings of a linguistic structure can be understood in two ways, there may be generality and specificity between them (Goodman, 2019).This type does not hesitate to carry the structure on both meanings.It may also involve variations, where the specification of the structure for one meaning contradicts its specification for the other according to the speaker's intention, yet its suitability for both meanings remains valid without intending to carry the audience on both meanings, satisfying what may be intended by the speaker.The generality of carrying on all meanings is analogous to what the scholars of fundamentals have said about carrying the RJL | Vol. 2 | No. 1 | 2024 commonality on its meanings, as a precaution.The second meaning may be generated from the first meaning, and there is no doubt in carrying it because it is one of the implications of morphological constructions (Aedo, 2019).From the perspective of reinforcing Ibn Ashur's view that the purpose of structural extensions is to multiply meanings, this opinion was also highlighted by the author of "At-Tahbir wal-Tanwir" when he discussed the distinction between "irdaf" (the use of the definite article) and "ishara" (the use of demonstratives) (Reid, 2022).He said, "If each word in the category of 'irdaf' points to multiple meanings, what's the difference between 'irdaf' and 'ishara'?I say, the word 'irdaf' encompasses, along with its indication, numerous meanings, which include praise for the praised one and description of the described one.In contrast, the word 'ishara' only indicates a multiplicity of meanings."The author of "At-Tahbir wal-Tanwir" illustrates the multitude of meanings with the term 'irdaf' as demonstrated in the poetry of Imru' al-Qais.He quotes: "And she offers, a piece of musk over her bed, as the morning rises, she does not speak of favor."This verse intends to describe the woman as someone who is well taken care of, with someone to handle her household matters (Shatkin & Soemarwi, 2021).The author expresses this through words that indicate her being blessed, having fine skin, youthfulness, abundance of fortune, and great wealth.He then alters the phrasing of the intended meaning to another form by using the term 'radf' (definite article) when he says, "And she offers, a piece of musk over her bed, as the morning rises, she does not speak of favor... because she does not sleep during the morning except while being attended to, having someone to manage her household affairs.She does not engage in work (Ellenberger & Richardson, 2019).Consequently, she lives in comfort and luxury, neither in hardship nor in labor.Do you not see how he confirms this by saying: 'She does not speak of favor,' indicating that she does not pull her robe tightly around her body when sleeping, like someone who wants to engage in activities among women." The author of "At-Tahbir wal-Tanwir" highlights the multitude of meanings using the term 'irdaf' (definite article), as demonstrated in the verse attributed to Imru' al-Qais: "And she sacrifices the young musk above her bed, signifying her desirability among affluent men (Krzyżanowski, 2020).They are highly drawn to her, possessing the capability, aided by wealth, to indulge in a multitude of women, both free and enslaved.This could be due to her excessive beauty or the fortunate legacy from her grandfather (Fernández Pinto & Hicks, 2019).She belongs to those for whom the finest fragrances are permissible, and the most expensive ones remain at her disposal.She spreads her fragrance on her bed in the morning, after what has been emitted and has adhered to her body throughout the night.Her hair and complexion are admired." While the author of "At-Tahbir wal-Tanwir" points out the advantage of using the 'irdaf' and 'ishara' to multiply meanings from a specific perspective, Ibn Ashur does the same from a general standpoint.He does this when enumerating the various aspects of 'ishara' as a branch of structural extensions (Sözen, 2019).The absence of mentioning 'irdaf' can be attributed to his approach of representation rather than restriction in listing the components of structural extensions.His evidence for this can be found in his commencement of the analogy of "kaf" (like), as previously mentioned, when he stated: "Because confirmation indicates the denial by the addressed..." The Impact of Subordinate Constructions on Understanding the Meanings of the Noble Quran: Ibn Ashur was able to employ various diverse methods to extract hidden meanings that were not apparent to others, through the use of the term "subordinate constructions (Pérez-Armendáriz, 2021)."These new methods utilized by Ibn Ashur in interpreting clear verses through subordinate constructions are as follows: Introduction that arises from contextual indications during speech: It is known among scholars of rhetoric that an introduction is a type of figurative language, as stated by the author of "Tadhkirat al-Hamduniyyah": "An introduction involves diverting from direct statement to metaphor and indication (Mastanduno, 2019).This occurs in all forms of speech and various purposes..." This diversion is not isolated from the potential structure of fact or metaphor (Raphael dkk., 2019).The introduction that is a subordinate construction in the view of Ibn Ashur refers to an introduction that conveys meaning independently from the fact or metaphor that the structure may imply.It signifies meaning from the context and indications of circumstances.Ibn Ashur states: "Introduction, in terms of metaphorical indication, involves concealing the transition from the meaning to its correlates.Some introductions arise from contextual indications during speech, and perhaps this cannot be described as either a fact, a metaphor, or a metaphorical indication.It belongs to the subordinate constructions and their logical implications (Perrin & Bouisset, 2022)."He also says: "Introduction is when the speaker intends something from his words other than what is indicated by the structure and setting, due to a correlation between the indicated meaning and the intended object.So, it is evident that there must be a correlation between the indicated meaning and the intended object." Ibn Ashur might have come across what Ibn al-Athir mentioned in his book "al-Mathal al-Sair," where rhetoricians criticized the lack of differentiation between metaphor and introduction, considering introduction as a subset of metaphor.Ibn al-Athir states: "Scholars of eloquence have discussed this, and I found that they have confused metaphor with introduction, failing to distinguish between them, and they did not define each of them separately nor set a clear boundary between them.They presented examples of both in prose and poetry, and included one within the other (Syfers dkk., 2022).Some who did this include al-Ghanmi, Ibn Sinnan al-Khafaji, and al-Askari." After Ibn al-Athir refuted the definitions provided by these scholars for metaphor and introduction, he clarified the independence of introduction from metaphor.In his explanation, we find a similarity between his words and those of Ibn Ashur.He says: "As for introduction, it is the wording that indicates something through the path of understanding, not through actual or metaphorical placement.For example, if you say to someone without asking about their relationship: 'I am in need and I have nothing in my hands, I am naked, and the cold has afflicted me,' this and its likes are introductions that are not placed in direct relation to the request.This wording is not placed in direct relation to the request.It only indicates it through the path of understanding... Thus, introduction is named so because the something." Regarding Ibn Ashur's utilization of introduction as a subordinate construction in interpretation, an example is his analysis of the verse in which Allah instructs the Jews of Medina not to be the first to disbelieve in the Noble Quran: "And do not be the first to disbelieve therein..." (Quran, 46:10).However, the disbelievers of the Quraysh were the first to disbelieve before the Jews of Medina.Therefore, the intended contextual meaning from the construction is not applicable.Ibn Ashur explains: "From all this, it becomes clear that the phrase 'And do not be the first to disbelieve therein' does not imply that the negation is limited by a condition that suggests not preventing them from being the second or third disbelievers due to the apparent indication.It is not meant that the first disbeliever is necessarily concomitant with a described characteristic, so that it should be mentioned and the characteristic should not be mentioned." Rather, the intended meaning is one that is understood without the apparent structure, and this is a subordinate construction.Ibn Ashur mentions five meanings derived from this introduction, which are as follows: The primary implication is introduction: It implies that there is evidence that the intention of the prohibition is for them not to be the pioneers of disbelief, i.e., not to lag behind in belief.This is the main interpretation according to al-Kashaf, and it was chosen by al-Baydawi who restricted his explanation to this aspect.
The second meaning: The intended target of the introduction is the polytheists, as they are more disbelieving than the Jews.This means, "Do not be among them," and perhaps this is what al-Kashaf meant by saying: "And it is possible that what is intended is 'Do not be like the first disbeliever in it,' meaning from among the polytheists of Mecca.And he does not mean that it is a profound comparison, although his words may give that impression, and he refrained from expanding on it." The third meaning: The intention of "first" is the one who is hasty and impatient.Because being hasty is a characteristic of being first, as Allah says: "So I am the foremost of the worshippers" (Quran,38:24).
The fourth meaning: The "first" is metaphorical for the leader in the matter, as the chief and the standard-bearer are ahead of the people, as Allah says: "He will lead his people on the Day of Resurrection" (Quran,6:94).
The fifth meaning: The first may refer to the initial phase of the second call, which is the call in Medina.For after the Hijrah, there was a new situation for Islam in which its distinctness and independence emerged.
Emotive "Fa" Conveying Causality: Principles of the Different Types of "Fa": There are three fundamental types of "fa": emotive, responsive, and additive.The "fa" that conveys causality is the responsive "fa" that connects the conditional action with its response.The emotive and additive "fa" do not convey a sense of causality.The intended meaning is: "The fundamental types of 'fa' are three: emotive, responsive, and additive.Emotive 'fa' is one of the letters that are used for expression and judgment, and its meaning is to follow up..." However, the emotive "fa" may convey a sense of causality through the construction of subordinate clauses or through metaphorical usage.Ibn Ashur clarifies this, saying: "You should know that the primary meaning of emotive 'fa' is ordering and follow-up, nothing else.This is the meaning that accompanies it in all its usage.Sequentiality is a sign of actuality.As for sequencing, which implies causality, it is an incidental matter.It could be metaphorical or part of subordinate constructions.Don't you see that it is present at times and absent at others?For instance, it is missing in the conjunction of individual words, like 'Zaid came, and Amr,' and in many conjunctions of sentences, such as the verse: 'Surely, you were heedless of this; so We uncovered your sight for you' (Quran, 50:22).Therefore, when the presence of the 'fa' requires evidence, if it doesn't necessitate a relationship, it falls into the category of subordinate constructions based on the context.But if it requires a relationship and doesn't lack it, then it is a metaphor, because most things that occur after something else prompt emotional follow-up.Even if it's not a real occurrence, the emotional context will entail it.So, the exit of the 'fa' from sequentiality isn't a metaphor; on the contrary, the situation is the opposite." While Ibn Ashur sees that the principle of using the emotive "fa" to convey causality arises either from metaphor or from subordinate constructions, he argues that understanding the causality in the emotive "fa" cannot be achieved solely through the rules mentioned by al-Mardawi.He argues that al-Mardawi's previous statement, "usually implies causality," implies resorting to another factor for preference, and this factor is either metaphor or context.In his book "Al-Jann al-Dani," Ibn Ashur indicates a rule for the emotive "fa" conveying causality.He says: "Note: The RJL | Vol. 2 | No. 1 | 2024 linked element with 'fa' can be either a singular word or a sentence, and the singular can be an attribute or not.The categories are three.If it links a non-attributive singular, it does not necessarily imply causality, like: 'Zaid stood up, and Amr.'But if it links a sentence or an attribute, it often signifies causality, like: 'So Moses struck it, and thus settled it' (Quran, 7:160)."There's no contradiction between Ibn Ashur's words and al-Mardawi's intended meaning; in fact, they agree that comprehending causality in the emotive "fa" can only be achieved through metaphor or context.Al-Mardawi's previous statement, "usually implies causality," can be understood to imply reliance on another factor for emphasis, and that factor is either metaphor or context.In line with this, Ibn Ashur refers to Al-Zamakhshari's interpretation of the verse: "And We shaded you with clouds, and sent down to you manna and quails: 'Eat of the good things We have provided for you.'They did not wrong Us, but they wronged themselves" (Quran, 2:57).Al-Zamakhshari valued a verbal clause connected by the emotive "fa" that conveys causality, and he interpreted it as: "Eat of the good things We have provided for you, so they wronged and did not wrong us, but they wronged themselves."Ibn Ashur clarifies al-Zamakhshari's interpretation, attributing the emotional causal emotive "fa" to the verbal clause based on the context.He states: "And his statement, 'So they wronged,' is an to what al-Kashaf deemed appropriate, meaning 'So they wronged.'Its attribution by its expositors to the object of "We" and their attachment of the passive participle to apposition the pronoun of Majesty is an attested negation of the wrong that is specifically related to this object.This negation, in the rhetorical context, implies that there is another wrongdoing related to something other than this object.For if there was no actual wrongdoing, one would generally negate by saying, 'And they did not wrong.'The meaning isn't as he thought it to be.It was indeed in al-Kashaf's interpretation a suppressed verb linked by the emotive 'fa,' because in the conjunction of sentences, the 'fa' often signifies causality through order and follow-up.So, the linked sentence becomes causative for the sentence that it is linked to.It's like the occurrence of their wrongdoing after they disbelieved in the blessing, following the cause with the effect without paying heed to that blessing, to the extent that it's as if they made the wrongdoing a reward for the blessing..." Distinction between two rulings based on analogy and context in justifying the continuity of the implications of structures: It is known regarding analogy that attaching the ruling of the subsidiary (branch) to the ruling of the main (original) due to a shared reason between them.This implies that analogy is a factor for establishing a shared ruling, not a factor for distinguishing between rulings.As for analogy that is a factor for distinguishing between rulings, it is that analogy which the term "implications of structures" allows, along with contextual indications.An example of this is found in Ibn Ashur's explanation of the ten prohibitions during the pilgrimage (Ihram) in Hajj, which only the act of stoning (Ramy) can absolve the pilgrim from.He continued that Ibn Ashur stated that the ruling of prohibiting head shaving (halq) was mentioned continuously, while the other prohibitions were not explicitly stated as continuously prohibited.The text that supports this distinction is the verse: "And do not shave your heads until the sacrificial animal has reached its place of slaughter."Since head shaving is one of the ten prohibitions and its ruling of prohibition was continuously stated, the analogy and context allow us to deduce the continuous prohibition of the other prohibitions.This establishes the distinction between the two rulings through analogy and context.Without the guidance of analogy and contextual indications as facilitated by the implications of structures, we would not understand from the verse the implied allowance of the other prohibitions that were not mentioned.This is what Ibn Ashur referred to when he said: "'And do not shave your heads,' the verse is an explanation of the ongoing state of Ihram until the sacrifice is performed, and the specific prohibition of head shaving is mentioned as a preamble to His saying: 'But if any of you is ill or has an ailment of the head.'"This demonstrates the utilization of analogy and context in comprehending the implications.
Contextual indication for conciseness: In the realm of elaborate discourse about a matter, speakers often employ conciseness, and within this context, the speaker may discuss a subject that provides a comparative understanding in relation to what is mentioned in the discourse.Ibn Ashur provided an example of this in his commentary on the verse: "And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned."The verse clearly prohibits consuming an animal sacrificed without mentioning Allah's name, and the prohibition of consuming carrion is deduced from the context of the wording, as Ibn Ashur explained.He mentioned that the verse specifies the permissibility of what has Allah's name mentioned and the prohibition of what lacks it.This implies that carrion is also prohibited based on contextual deduction.Ibn Ashur stated: "And it is known from this that the prohibition of eating carrion and the like is also derived, as it has not been explicitly mentioned.This is because mentioning Allah's name or someone else's name only happens when an animal is being slaughtered.As is known, the prohibition of consuming carrion is deduced from the context and logical deduction, which is derived through the intellect and not metaphorically.Thus, it is understood that the verse is not concerned with the ruling of forgetting to mention the name during slaughter, which is a separate issue with its own evidences.The Quranic legislation does not address rare circumstances." Considering the context of the discourse: When elaborating on a matter in detail, a speaker may use context to imply a topic.In this context, the speaker implies a subject that is compared to what is mentioned in the discourse.Ibn Ashur exemplified this in his commentary on the verse about the disarray of the polytheists' beliefs: "Indeed, Allah holds the heavens and the earth, lest they cease.And if they should cease, no one could hold them [in place] after Him."This implies that the disarray of the beliefs of the polytheists could cause the heavens and the earth to tremble, but Allah's will keeps them in place due to His wisdom.Ibn Ashur explained: "When mentioning the heavens' stability after discussing the polytheists' claims and exposing their delusion, it implies that what they call to, in its disgracefulness, has the potential to shake the heavens and make the earth collapse, except that Allah wills for them to remain due to His wisdom.This is similar to the verse: 'You have come with a great falsehood that is about to make the heavens burst, and the earth split asunder, and the mountains crumble to pieces.'"This implication is derived from the context of the discourse, and it functions as a threatening implication.
Indicating the Intended Meaning: Indicating the intended meaning is achieved by linking two linguistic structures within the same context.Linking the second structure to the first structure leads to a meaning that is intended by itself, even if this meaning is not explicitly stated.This concept of reaching the intended meaning through indication was discussed by Al-Yusi when talking about the term "blocking the means."He stated that "blocking the means" is the entry point to something, and if that thing is good, then it deserves to be opened up, but if it is harmful, then it deserves to be blocked.The realization of this concept is that what is the cause leading to another cause is an ordinary indication or a comprehensive ordinary indication, or more common, or conditional.If someone seeks to attain the former, they are also seeking the latter as a consequence.Indicating can be either mental only, as in hypothetical statements, or external only, as in agreements, or both mental and external, which is the most common.When considering mere linking, even partially, the mental aspect is generally more extensive.
Ibn Ashur employed this indication to deduce new meanings.An example is his commentary on the verse: "The revelation of the Book is from Allah, the Exalted in Might, the Knowing, who forgives sins and accepts repentance, severe in punishment."The apparent meaning of these verses acknowledges that the sender of the Book is the Exalted in Might and the Knowing, and He is characterized by forgiving sins and accepting repentance, while also being severe in punishment for those who persist in disobedience.However, when you link the structure "The revelation of the Book is from Allah, the Exalted in Might, the Knowing" to the structure "severe in punishment," it leads you to the meaning of a warning for those who deny this revelation.Ibn Ashur mentioned: "'Severe in punishment' indicates a clear warning against denying the Quran, as its placement after 'The revelation of the Book is from Allah' implies that the purpose of this speech is conveyed through the implication facilitated by the implications of structures." It's important to note that there is an intended meaning that can be reached through this indication, but this indication is not a direct implication of the structures.In this type of indication, the meaning is not reached through linking between the structures, but rather from the second structure directly after laying the groundwork for its meaning from the first structure.An example is the verse describing the story of the owners of the garden: "But we have been deprived."When they intended to keep the produce of their garden away from the poor, they themselves were deprived of all the fruits, as Allah destroyed their garden at night.The greatest deprivation was exclusively designated for them since depriving the poor of the fruits would not have any impact on their deprivation.The indication leading to the shortened implication could be inferred from the mention of the pronoun "we."However, the reality is not as such because the pronoun "we" could have been understood as being implicit and placed in the past participle "deprived," as it cannot be understood unless it carries its antecedent.However, in this case, the speaker -Allah -made the pronoun explicit, referring to them, in order to express that the one who intends to deprive others unjustly will ultimately face deprivation himself.It's not meant that the one whose right was taken away is the one deprived.This is a technique in rhetoric and communication.Sometimes, what is desired may be introduced, followed by what increases its acceptance among listeners.Sometimes, they may introduce what increases acceptance before the intended thing, as in this case.
Emphasizing the Pronoun and Placing It First for Added Conciseness: Conciseness in the realm of rhetoric can be divided into two categories: real conciseness and additional conciseness.Real conciseness involves limiting something according to its actual scope, not extending it to something else, like saying "There is no god but Allah."Additional conciseness involves specifying something according to an additional characteristic or relation to something else specific, not to everything else, like saying "No friend except a traveler."In this case, you're specifying the shortening of the travel for a particular person, like Mahmoud for example, without implying that there's no traveler other than him.Here, there's another form of additional conciseness from the implications of structures.Its approach is different from the previously mentioned additional conciseness.
This form involves emphasizing the pronoun and placing it first to achieve specialization, which leads to additional conciseness.An example is the verse narrating the story of the owners of the garden: "Rather, we have been deprived."When they expressed their intention to deprive the poor of the surplus of their fruits, they themselves were deprived of all the fruits as Allah, the Exalted and Mighty, destroyed their garden at night.The greatest form of deprivation was exclusively attributed to them since depriving the poor wouldn't have any impact on their deprivation.It might appear from the verse that the specialization leading to the concise implication arises from the mention of the pronoun "we."However, this isn't the case.The pronoun "we" could have been implied and placed at the end within the verbal noun "deprived," as it can't be understood except after hearing its antecedent.But here, the speaker -Allah, the Exalted -explicitly mentioned the pronoun, referring to them, to convey that the one who intends to unjustly deprive others will ultimately be deprived due to their injustice, not that the one whose right was taken away is the one deprived.This is how Ibn Ashur explained it: "'Rather, we have been deprived' and the statement indicates this either by presenting the pronoun explicitly, even though it should have been implicit and placed within the verbal noun 'deprived,' since it can't be understood without carrying its antecedent.However, when the pronoun is emphasized and presented, 8 -Deriving Meanings through the Indication of Particles: Ibn Ashur pointed out that particles can convey hidden meanings beyond their grammatical structures.He considered this as one of the implications of linguistic structures.He illustrated this through a discussion between Az-Zamakhshari and Abu Hayyan regarding the interpretation of the verse: "The bedouins say, 'We have believed.'Say, 'You have not [yet] believed; but say [instead], 'We have submitted,' and faith has not yet entered your hearts." Az-Zamakhshari believed that the particle "lam" in "lam tu'minu" (you have not believed) refers to negation in terms of the time of speaking and informing.Then, whatever is negated in that context will actually occur afterward.Thus, the meaning of the verse is that the negation of faith is connected to the time of speaking and informing, and later on, they will truly believe, and faith will enter their hearts.Az-Zamakhshari stated: "And there is an expectation in 'lam' indicating that they will believe later." However, Abu Hayyan disagreed with Az-Zamakhshari's claim that "lam" does not indicate expectation.Perhaps, Abu Hayyan believed that particles only indicate meanings within the structure and do not contribute to deriving meanings through their indication alone, as Az-Zamakhshari understood.However, Ibn Ashur supported Az-Zamakhshari's view and believed that the indication of the particle alone can indeed lead to deducing new meanings.His evidence for this lies in the fact that this concept is derived from the implications of linguistic structures.Ibn Ashur stated: "When this particle 'lam' is an associate of 'lam,' it indicates that the negation is connected to the time of speaking.This difference between 'lam' and 'lam' is a sign of the continuous negation to the time of the speaker.It often indicates that the negated thing is expected to occur.In Al-Kashaf, 'And there is an expectation in 'lam' indicating that they will believe later.'This is an implication derived from the implications of linguistic structures, and it is a subtlety of the Arabic language.Abu Hayyan disagreed with Az-Zamakhshari, but Az-Zamakhshari's taste is an authority that Abu Hayyan cannot surpass." Utilizing Verbal Emphasis for Two Different Meanings: Verbal emphasis can be achieved through repetition, which can be divided into two types: repetition of both wording and meaning, and repetition of meaning without wording.Ibn Athir mentioned this division in his book "Al-Mathal Al-Sa'ir."He explained that each type of repetition can be further divided into useful repetition and non-useful repetition.He stated: "Each of these types can be useful or non-useful."He described useful verbal repetition as emphasizing and strengthening the command.This is done to indicate the importance of the matter being repeated.Then, he divided useful verbal repetition into two types: one that indicates two different purposes and another that indicates a single purpose.He explained: "The first case is when the verbal and semantic repetition indicates two different purposes...The second case is when the verbal and semantic repetition indicates a single purpose..." The first case refers to verbal emphasis that leads to two different meanings.The second case is what Ibn Ashur considered one of the implications of linguistic structures and utilized in deriving profound meanings.An example of this is the interpretation of the verse from Surah At-Takathur: "No!You are going to know.
Then, no!You are going to know."Ibn Ashur believed that the second phrase is a verbal emphasis of the first phrase.Additionally, both phrases carry the sense of warning and threat, but these warnings are not directed at the same state.The warning and threat in the first phrase are directed at the state of the grave, while the warning and threat in the second phrase are directed at the state of resurrection.Ibn Ashur explained: "So, the phrase 'No!You are going to know' is a verbal emphasis of the phrase 'No!You are going to know.'According to Ibn Abbas, 'No!You are going to know' refers to the punishment in the grave, and 'Then, no!You are going to know' refers to the resurrection.Thus, each phrase is intended to threaten a specific aspect.This is one of the implications of linguistic structures, and it relies on interpreting the intention through the indications of specifying the recipients of each verb 'you will know.'The repetition of the phrases does not necessarily entail this in the original speech.The significance of the repetition is established in all cases.

CONCLUSION
The creativity in the speech of Allah is in deducing these hidden meanings.This is what is meant by the statement of the Prophet ‫:ﷺ‬ "It is the one that does not mislead by desires, does not confuse by tongues, is not satiated by scholars, and does not exhaust through elaboration." The use of the term "implications of linguistic structures" in deriving meanings, especially from the Qur'an, should be done by individuals who have a solid foundation in both the science of language and Islamic jurisprudence.This is because the term "implications of linguistic structures" is not subject to specific grammatical rules; rather, it follows the indications of the wording or context, provided that the derived meaning does not contradict the usage and purpose of the Qur'an.This makes deriving meanings from the implications of linguistic structures a serious matter, as it could lead to meanings not implied by the wording or context.In such cases, scholars of Islamic jurisprudence have a saying: "Whoever attributes a verse or a hadith with an interpretation not implied, without evidence, is a disbeliever." Therefore, accepting any meaning other than the apparent meaning should only be done by scholars who are thorough and meticulous, as stated by Al-Nabigha Al-Ghalawi: "The ultimate reference in interpretation leads to affirming through verification."
He said: "And Az-Zamakhshari says that 'lam' in 'lam tu'minu' does not indicate expectation, but I don't know from which perspective 'lam' can be understood as occurring afterward.'Lam' negates what is connected to the time of informing, and it doesn't indicate what was mentioned."