Kināyah sebagai Mekanisme Argumentatif dalam Juz 28 Al-Qur’an: Pemetaan Bentuk dan Fungsi Retoris

Wafiq Azizah Moilo; Sriwahyuningsih R. Saleh; Cutri A. Tjalau; Berti Arsyad

Kināyah sebagai Mekanisme Argumentatif dalam Juz 28 Al-Qur’an: Pemetaan Bentuk dan Fungsi Retoris

Wafiq Azizah Moilo, Sriwahyuningsih R. Saleh, Cutri A. Tjalau, Berti Arsyad

Abstract

Kināyah merupakan perangkat penting dalam balāghah Arab ketika bentuk yang terucap mengarahkan pembaca kepada makna yang dimaksud melalui penandaan tidak langsung. Penelitian ini memetakan bentuk dan fungsi retoris kināyah dalam Juz 28 Al-Qur’an dengan memadukan interpretasi retoris kualitatif, pengodean korpus deskriptif, dan analisis permutasi eksploratif. Dataset mencakup 32 ekspresi berkode dalam 31 konteks ayat unik pada sembilan surah. Ditemukan empat bentuk: kināyah sifat dekat (7), kināyah sifat jauh (10), kināyah tentang maushūf atau referen terdeskripsi (7), dan kināyah nisbah atau relasional (8). Rekonstruksi pada tingkat item menghasilkan 54 penetapan fungsi retoris, terutama penegasan/penguatan (21), perendahan (15), dan pengagungan (9). Sebanyak 22 ekspresi memuat dua fungsi. Multifungsionalitas tertinggi terdapat pada kināyah sifat jauh (90,0%) dan kināyah maushūf (85,7%); uji permutasi eksploratif menunjukkan asosiasi antara jenis kināyah dan multifungsionalitas (p≈0,034), sedangkan distribusi jenis antarsurah tidak menunjukkan asosiasi meyakinkan (p≈0,882). Temuan menegaskan bahwa kināyah bekerja sebagai kompresi argumentatif yang menyatukan inferensi, evaluasi, penegasan, dan pengarahan etis.

Keywords

kināyah, retorika Al-Qur’an, balāghah, Juz 28, fungsi retoris

Full Text:

PDF

References

Abdul-Raof, H. (2006). Arabic rhetoric: A pragmatic analysis. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203965399

Abuisaac, S. R. S., Sapar, A. A., & Wolf, H. V. (2020). Rhetorics of ironic discourse of the Qur'an. QURANICA: International Journal of Quranic Research, 12(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.22452/quranica.vol12no1.1

Al Aqad, M. H., Sapar, A. A., Hussin, M., Mohd Mokhtar, R. A., & Mohad, A. H. (2019). The English translation of Arabic puns in the Holy Quran. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 48(3), 243–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2019.1609568

Al Farisi, M. Z. (2020). The impact of using foreignization and domestication on the translation accuracy of the Quranic metaphor (Kinayah) verses. Scientific Journal of King Faisal University: Humanities and Management Sciences, 21(1), 319–332. https://doi.org/10.37575/h/rel/1966

Al Zahrawi, R. T., Syed Abdullah, S. N., Brahimi, T., Abdullah, M. A. R., & Mustapha, N. F. (2024). Bibliometric analysis of Arabic rhetoric in the translation and transcreation of literary texts. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 11(1), Article 2428483. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2024.2428483

Al-Ali, A., El-Sharif, A., & Alzyoud, M. S. (2016). The functions and linguistic analysis of metaphor in the Holy Qur’an. European Scientific Journal, 12(14), 164–174. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n14p164

Al-Bāqillānī. (n.d.). I‘jāz al-Qur’ān. Beirut: Dār al-Ma‘rifah.

Al-Jurjānī, ‘Abd al-Qāhir. (1991). Asrār al-balāghah (M. Shākir, Ed.). Cairo: Maktabat al-Khānjī.

Al-Khatib, M. A. (2012). Politeness in the Holy Quran: A sociolinguistic and pragmatic perspective. Intercultural Pragmatics, 9(4), 479–509. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2012-0027

Al-Qazwīnī, Jalāl al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn ‘Abd al-Raḥmān. (1993). Al-Īḍāḥ fī ‘ulūm al-balāghah (M. ‘Abd al-Mun‘im Khafājī, Ed.). Beirut: Dār al-Jīl.

Al-Sakkākī, Yūsuf ibn Abī Bakr. (1987). Miftāḥ al-‘ulūm (N. Zarzūr, Ed.). Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah.

Al-Sharafi, A. G., & Khader, S. A. (2019). Assessing the quality of the translation of sex-related euphemisms in the Holy Qur’an: A pragmatic study. Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literatures, 11(2), 167–192. DOI not identified on the journal record consulted.

Al-Sowaidi, B., Mohammed, T., & Banda, F. (2021). Translating conceptual Qur’anic metaphor: A cogno-translational approach. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 10(1), 161–173. https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2021-0014

Al-Zamakhsharī, Maḥmūd ibn ‘Umar. (1987). Al-Kashshāf ‘an ḥaqā’iq ghawāmiḍ al-tanzīl wa-‘uyūn al-aqāwīl fī wujūh al-ta’wīl. Beirut: Dār al-Ma‘rifah.

Albarakati, M. (2019). Translated Qurʾān euphemisms: Foreignised or domesticated? Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies, 6(1), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/23306343.2018.1525820

Alruwaili, H. M., Hashem, M. E., Azhuri, K. B. O., & Khafaga, A. (2025). Contextual significations of al-birr and al-qisṭ in the Qur'an: A semiotic approach. World Journal of English Language, 15(7), 203–219. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v15n7p203

Alsemeiri, I. M., & Nordin, M. Z. F. (2023). The intricate nature of Kināyah and its interaction with other English figures of speech. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 23(4), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2023-2304-06

Anis, L., & Fareh, S. (2023). Translating denial rhetorical questions in the Holy Quran: Reiss’ text typology perspective. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies, 23(2), 37–60. https://doi.org/10.33806/ijaes.v23i2.452

Chaer, H., Rasyad, A., Sukri, S., Efendi, M., & Yaqin, L. N. (2025). Metaphorical symbols in Qur'anic discourse: A cognitive-linguistic analysis. Suhuf: International Journal of Islamic Studies, 37(2), 241–253. https://doi.org/10.23917/suhuf.v37i2.12081

Citron, F. M. M., & Goldberg, A. E. (2014). Metaphorical sentences are more emotionally engaging than their literal counterparts. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 26(11), 2585–2595. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00654

Dickins, J. (2005). Two models for metaphor translation. Target, 17(2), 227–273. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.17.2.03dic

Djamdjuri, D. S., Zuriyati, Z., & Attas, S. G. (2022). Metaphor in parable from the Noble Qur’an: A corpus based stylistic approach. Jurnal Studi Al-Qur'an, 18(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.21009/JSQ.018.1.03

Dukes, K., & Habash, N. (2010). Morphological annotation of Quranic Arabic. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’10) (pp. 2530–2536). European Language Resources Association. https://doi.org/10.63317/4b87kwj4mt83

Elmhemıt, H., & Taufiq, M. (2024). Istikhdām al-Majāz al-Mursāl fi al-Balāghah al-‘Arābiyyah: Dirāsah fī Quwwat al-Ma’nā wa al-I’jāz al-Fannī fī al-Qur’ān. OKARA: Jurnal Bahasa dan Sastra, 18(2), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.19105/ojbs.v18i2.12647

Elsayed, R. (2025). Challenges of translating metonymy in the Qur’ân with reference to some selected verses from the Cow and Women chapters. International Journal of Linguistics and Translation Studies, 6(1), 145–166. https://doi.org/10.36892/ijlts.v6i1.556

Faizin, N., Ma’ali, A., Fauzan, M., & Farih, M. (2025). Translation strategies for Arabic stylistic shifts of personal pronouns in Indonesian translation of the Quran. Open Linguistics, 11(1), Article 20250055. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2025-0055

Hammoodi, A. H., & Moindjie, M. A. (2024). Translation of metaphor in the Qur’an: A comparative study of three selected translations. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 13(3), 3745–3760. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v13-i3/22921

Harb, L. (2015). Form, content, and the inimitability of the Qurʾān in ʿAbd al-Qāhir al-Jurjānī’s works. Middle Eastern Literatures, 18(3), 301–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475262X.2016.1199096

Harb, L. (2020). Arabic poetics: Aesthetic experience in classical Arabic literature. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108780483

Hassanein, H. (2023). Less form, more meaning: A case study of al-Iẖtibāk in the Qur’an through the prism of dependency grammar. SAGE Open, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231199921

Hesse, J. (2023). Metaphors, religious language and linguistic expressibility. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 93, 239–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-023-09865-2

Inayatusshalihah. (2018). Metonimia konseptual dalam Al-Quran: Analisis kognitif makna wajh dan yad. Arabiyat: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Arab dan Kebahasaaraban, 5(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.15408/a.v5i1.7008

Kashgary, A. D. (2011). The paradox of translating the untranslatable: Equivalence vs. non-equivalence in translating from Arabic into English. Journal of King Saud University – Languages and Translation, 23(1), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksult.2010.03.001

Khan, S., & Ali, R. (2019). A cognitive-semantic approach to the interpretation of death metaphor themes in the Quran. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 4(2), 219–246. https://doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol4iss2pp219-246

Khan, S., & Ali, R. (2020). Argument is war metaphor in the Qur’ān. Journal of Islamic Thought and Civilization, 10(1), 66–86. https://doi.org/10.32350/jitc.101.04

Khan, S., & Ali, R. (2021). Dichotomy of language & thought in the interpretation of metaphor in the Quran. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 6(1), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol6iss1pp95-117

Kouloughli, D. E. (2002). L'influence mu‘tazilite sur la naissance et le développement de la rhétorique arabe. Arabic Sciences and Philosophy, 12(2), 217–239. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0957423902002114

Maxwell, J. A. (2010). Using numbers in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 475–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410364740

Metwally, A. A., & Elgemei, D. M. (2022a). A proposed collocational marker for the computational identification of metaphor: The case of metaphor in the Ever-Glorious Qur’ān. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.32996/jeltal.2022.4.2.7

Metwally, A. A., & Elgemei, D. M. (2022b). A corpus-based grammatical investigation towards a computational identification of metaphor. IJELTAL: Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.21093/ijeltal.v6i2.1100

Mohd Ismath, N. H., & Abd Aziz, A. H. (2025). A relevance theory approach to the pragmatic interpretation of Surah Al-Mulk. QURANICA: International Journal of Quranic Research, 17(2), 216–236. https://doi.org/10.22452/quranica.vol17no2.35

Muwafi, D. W., & Fareh, S. (2025). Euphemisms for same-gender relations in the Holy Quran and their English translations. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies, 25(2), 473–496. https://doi.org/10.33806/ijaes.v25i2.807

Nordin, M. Z. F. (2015). ‘Ilm al-Tafsir and critical discourse analysis: A methodological comparison. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 15(1), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.17576/GEMA-2015-1501-08

Nurbayan, Y. (2019). Metaphors in the Quran and its translation accuracy in Indonesian. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(3), 710–715. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v8i3.15550

Nurfauzia, Z. K., Al Farisi, M. Z., & Maulani, H. (2024). Modulation technique in clarifying the implicature of Qur’anic Kināyah verses. RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa, 10(2), 647–656. https://doi.org/10.22225/jr.10.2.2024.647-656

Olimat, S. N. (2018). Developing a model for translating euphemism in the Qur’an: An intratextual- and contextual-based approach. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(6), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.6p.101

O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220

Phipson, B., & Smyth, G. K. (2010). Permutation P-values should never be zero: Calculating exact P-values when permutations are randomly drawn. Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, 9(1), Article 39. https://doi.org/10.2202/1544-6115.1585

Roberts, K., Dowell, A., & Nie, J.-B. (2019). Attempting rigour and replicability in thematic analysis of qualitative research data: A case study of codebook development. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19, Article 66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0707-y

Sardaraz, K., Rashid, R. A., & Nusrat, A. (2022). The semantics of the preposition “alā” in the Quran: A conceptual metaphor perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 788582. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.788582

Tantowi, Y. A., Syihabuddin, Sudana, D., & Emam Dawood, M. M. (2025). Bridging classical Arabic rhetoric and cognitive linguistics: A systematic review of Kinayah and Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Ta’lim al-‘Arabiyyah, 9(2), 269–287. https://doi.org/10.15575/jta.v9i2.52061

Teama, A. al-R. M. (2018). Pragmatic dimension of conversation in the Holy Qur'an: A cognitive argument approach. QURANICA: International Journal of Quranic Research, 10(1), 89–128. https://doi.org/10.22452/quranica.vol10no1.7

Thibodeau, P. H., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLOS ONE, 6(2), e16782. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782

Wansbrough, J. (1968). Arabic rhetoric and Qur'anic exegesis. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 31(3), 469–485. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X00125510

Yaşar, H. R. (2022). Kavramsal Metafor Kuramı’nın Kur’ân çalışmalarına dahil edilmesi: Eleştirel literatür değerlendirmesi. Cumhuriyet İlahiyat Dergisi, 26(2), 561–581. https://doi.org/10.18505/cuid.1080841