البديع بين أصالة المعنى وتبعيته

Abstract

The term Budaiya did not mean what comes to minds of late rhetoric scholars who define it as "a science of improving the expression following taking good care of its application in accordance with the requirement and clarity of the significance." However, it meant highlighting the linguistic performance and means of artistic imagination. This is why, a lot of rhetorical styles are found under its umbrella which is not confined to any science.

Having said that, Budaiya means (improvement and euphemism) and its function is confined to beautification only.

However, is this concept acceptable?

There is no doubt that this concept is rejected categorically because when the writer or poet employs certain work, he knows its connotative meanings where he tries to convey his experience to his readers through his word. Besides, the argument is not about Budaiya following the meanings yet it is concerned with the strength of the word in question, its role in language and its relation to rhetoric.

So, we must look at art away from essential and accidental arguments. And as simile and omission have their own values in meanings alliteration and counterpoint have major roles in clarifying the meanings and ways of elaborating on them. And beside the musical rhythm of Budaiya image, it motivates human emotions. Moreover, it can go to the furthest horizons so as to be transport tool of creative vision and view in looking at things and the way of dealing with them, keeping their values at the same time.

Furthermore, literary work is described as a group of words, structures, themes, rhythms and thoughts united to achieve one goal that it is about pleasing the reader and when one of the pillars of literary works is weakened, it is going to be manifested in its thought clearly.