Threats Strategies in the Glorious Quran: A Discoursal Approach

Professor: Fawwaz Al-Abed Al-Haq

Lubna Al-Hassan
English Department, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan
1. Introduction
The Glorious Quran is the revelation of Allah which has the highest language style; it is
known by its structures and its meanings. No one can make the same creation. It is revealed in
Arabic and it is considered as the verbal Divine and moral direction for Muslims.
One of the language discourses that Allah uses in the Glorious Quran is the threatening
utterances. This analytical study aims at analyzing the strategies of threatening which occur in
the Glorious Quran. In this study, the researcher displays different meaning of threat, observing
the common basic components among them. People can interpret this speech act according to
particular situations and under certain circumstances, so it can be used through different
expressions and various strategies.
Speech act is an act that someone performs when making an utterance, it is an intent
utterance given according to speech principles and rule. Furthermore, speech act is used every
day communication life.

Layons (1977:730) defines the speech act as an act performed in saying something, he
claims that the speech act is considered as a communicative action, this means that to
communicate is to express a certain attitude, and the type of speech act performed corresponds to
the type of attitude being expressed. For example an apology expresses regret, thus a speech act
does not mean the act of production some spoken utterance, but it refers to something hidden.
Furthermore, uttering a speech act does not only require the language knowledge but it
also requires the appropriate use within a given culture. Speech acts can be direct or indirect.
Direct speech acts are defined as those expressed by the constructions specifically designed for
those acts whereas indirect speech acts are those expressed by other constructions or functions.
Searle (1969) assumes that the speech act is considered as the minimal unit of linguistic
communication. Searle (1969:16) affirms the linguistic nature of speech acts. He says that
talking is performing speech acts under certain circumstances such as making statements,
giving commands, asking questions, making promises and so on. Austin (1962) claims that
uttering specific words leads the speaker to perform particular speech act which in turn is the
objective of the utterance.
Austin (1962:32) differentiates explicit and implicit performatives. He argues that explicit
performatives include some highly significant and unambiguous expressions as: I promise.
Thus, it is an expression which is commonly used in naming the act which the speaker performs.
On the other hand, in implicit performatives acts, it is left uncertain what exactly the speaker
- Lyons, J.
Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press.
means
or(1977).
what Semantics.
kind of act
is performed,
unless
there
are certain circumstances which 2
- Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.

refer to the action performed.

Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

- Austin, J. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Moreover, Austin (1962:92) identifies three distinct levels of action beyond the act of
utterance itself:
1. The locutionary act which is defined as producing a sentence with its sense and reference.
For example: asking or answering questions or making an appointment.
2. The illocutionary act is defined as what a speaker intends by making it as making a
statement, offer, threaten, etc, in uttering a sentence by virtue of the conversational force
associated with it. For example: when are you leaving? this question can vary in its
illocutionary force depending on the context. The previous question can be understood as
May I go with you? or do not think it is late so it is time for you to leave.
3. The perlocutionary act which is defined as bringing the effects on the audience by means
of uttering a sentence. For example: if a jury for person declares innocent in a courtroom in
which an accused person sites, the illocutionary act of declaring a person innocent of a crime
has been undertaken. The perlocutionary act related to that illocution is that, in reasonable
circumstances, the innocent would be convinced that he will be free and will not be in a jail.
Thus, Searle (1979) suggests five ways of using language, so he classifies the illocutionary
act verbs into five categories:
1.

Representatives: telling people how things are. For example: He asserts his competency

in his job.
2. Directives: attempting the speaker to get the hearer do something. For example: Close the
window.

- Austin, J. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.
- Searle, J. (1979). Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

3. Commissives: committing the speaker to doing something, like threatening. For example:
I will kill you.
4. Expressives: expressing the speakers attitude. Like apologizing. For example: I am really
sorry.
5. Declaratives: changing the world via the utterance. In this kind of speech, the speaker has
to have a special institutional role in specific context. For example: I pronounce you the
minister of education.
According to Austin and Searle, threatening acts are considered as commissives.
Wierzbica (1987:187) defines threats as utterance that refers to a future action by the
speaker which is regarded as bad for the addressee, she gives us the following example which
have the act of threat:
- I will do something that will be bad for you if you dont do something.
Barish (1991:13) defines threat as an act where the speaker commits herself/himself to take
action to harm the interests of the hearer. He also argues that threats occur when the speaker
assumes that the hearer has done or might do something which the speaker finds to be strongly
objectional.

- Wierzbicka, Anna (1987). English Speech Act Verbs: A Semantic

Dictionary Sydney: Academic Press.

- Barish, M (1991). Face Threatening Speech Acts :Their Implications for
Speech Act Theory. Ph.D Dissertation , Georgetown University,

In this part, the relationships and differences between semantics and pragmatics are

Washington, D.C.

examined. Both of them have to do with the meaning of language and link language to our life.

Yule (1996:8) defines pragmatics as the study of speaker meaning whereas semantics (Searle
1969:8) is defined as literal meaning.
Both semantics and pragmatics focus on the meaning of linguistic expressions but
pragmatics takes the speaker and the hearer as the focus of attention (Jaszczolt 2002:1). For
example husband might say to his wife it is dark, literally, the speaker means that it is getting
dark and it comes to be evening, but he might likely mean something more such as we can go
shopping tomorrow morning, (because he is watching an exciting football match, and he is not
willing to go to the supermarket with his wife, so he will say it is dark). Thus the expressed
sense by the literal meaning of the sentence lies in the domain of semantics, while that which is
expressed in the speakers utterance meaning lies in the domain of pragmatics.

- Yule, George (1996). " Oxford Introduction to Language ". Oxford

University.

2. Statement
the Problem
- Searle,
J. (1969). of
Speech
Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.
Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

Referring
to Semantics
the relatedand
literature,
the Meaning
researcher
finds that
- Jaszczolt,
K.M. 2002.
Pragmatics:
in Language

little attention has been given to

and Discourse.
London:utterance
Longman.in the Glorious Quran. Moreover, there is no study that has
the study
of threatening

investigated the strategies of the speech act of threatening in the Glorious Quran especially in the
field of pragmatics and discourse analysis. Thus, this study is an attempt to probe the strategies
of threat in the Glorious Quran depending on the structural component and context knowledge.
3. Purpose of the Study

The ultimate goal of this study is to focus on the expressions and strategies which are used
in the Glorious Quran to produce threats. This study considers the Quranic threatening utterance
from a pragmatic perspective. So, this study aims to present, describe and analyze the strategies
of speech act of threatening in the Glorious Quran. Furthermore, it attempts to answer the
following questions:
1. What are the pragmatic functions of threat used in the Glorious Quran?
2. What is the Speakers (Allahs) discourse of the threatening utterance (the intended
meaning carried by the threatening utterance) as exhibited in the Glorious Quran?
3. Are there various forms of threatening utterance in the Glorious Quran?

4. Significance of the Study

The significance of this study stems from the fact that very few studies have attempted to
analyze the speech act of threat in the Glorious Quran. This study contributes to understanding
the intended meaning carried by the Glorious Quran. Moreover, this study focuses on the
creative style in the Quran in general and in threatening utterance in particular.
5. Limitation of the Study
This study has a number of limitations that should be noted. Firstly, the researcher limited
herself to probing the discourse analysis and pragmatic speeches of threatening utterance which

occur in the Glorious Quran. Moreover, the researcher focuses on other related linguistic fields,
like, semantic and syntactic analyses. Secondly, the researcher realizes that it is difficult to
analyze the pragmatic meaning in all chapters of the Glorious Quran and in all verses of threat
because there are so many chapters and so many verses they talk about threat; so the population
of this work is sixty threatening utterances from the Glorious Quran. Finally, this study is
concerned with threatening strategies in the Glorious Quran.
6. Method of the study
The researcher chooses sixty threatening utterance from the Glorious Quran which were
approved by experts in the faculty of Shariiah. She, therefore, discusses and analyzes the
syntactic and semantic structure of each one to conclude the strategies of threatening utterance
which are found in the Glorious Quran.

The exclusive source of data for this study is the Glorious Quran Itself. This study is based
on some interpreters views (which were recommended by professors of Islamic Shariiah, like,
Al-Jayousi and Al-Jamal) especially those related to the language and text analysis including:
Az-zamaxari in al-kaaaf, Alfxr Arrazi in Mafatii Alayb, Ibin Aashor in At-tarir wattanweer,
Al-alosi in Ro Almani and other sources. The English translation was drawn by Ali Yusuf
(1984). After careful consideration of the Quranic threatening utterances, the researcher
categorizes them according to their pragmatic functions. Then, she gives a brief definition of
each function. She analyzes the Quranic threatening utterances taking into account the context

in which the threat occur. Finally, the study ends with conclusions and recommendations based
on the analysis of the given data.
This study reviews the previous studies of the threatening speech act and other related acts.
Moreover, the researcher displays some examples of each speech act which are close to
threatening speech act. The following studies represent some factors which could affect the
speakers choice of certain strategy such as: age, relationship and power.
Traugott et al. (1986:197) denote that conditionals speech acts can be utilized to represent
polite requests, assertions, threats and promises. They also indicate that we must consider
discourse context, the speakers attitude and prior knowledge to account for the speech act
encoded in the conditional.

- Traugott, Alice ter Meulen, Judith Snitzer Reilly, and Charles A. Ferguson, eds. (1986). On Conditionals.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Scudder and Andrews (1995:27) argued that the underlying forms of explicit threats are
implicit ones, and that implicit threats are often ambiguous. For example, a person wishing to
sell a house may use an implicit threat by saying I already have a better offer, which is the
implicit form of the following threat unless you improve your offer, I will not sell the house to
you.
Kellerman and Shea (1996:161) study five kinds of speech acts which are threats, hints,
suggestions, promises, and direct requests. Focusing on the speech act of the threatening, they

conclude that some threats are more polite than others. They also conclude that threatening
speech act was the least polite act of the five speech acts for gaining compliance.
Hatmini (2008) investigates the pragmatic function of commissive verbs in the Bukhori.
Hatmini aims at describing forms of implied meaning of commissive utterance. The study finds
that there are four types of commissive utterance which are: interrogative, imperative,
exclamation and declaration. Moreover, the study finds six implied meaning of commissive
utterance which are: offering, swearing, threatening, warning, volunteering and
promising.

- Scudder, J, and Andrews, P. (1995). "A Comparison of Two Alternativ Models

of Powerful Speech: The impact of Power and Gender upon the Use of
Threats." Education Research Complete, 12:25-33.
- Kellermann, K and Shea, B. (1996). "Threats, Suggestions, Hints, and
Promises: Gaining Compliance Efficiently and Politely".
Communication Quarterly, 44:145-165.
- Hatmini, (2008). A Pragmatic Analysis oh Commissive Utterances in
English Translation of Prophetic Tradition Related by Bukhori . B.A
Bachelor, University of Surakarta.

Al Masaeed (2009) deals with the pragmatic functions of the conditionals in the Holly
Quran. This study shows that the conditionals in the Holy Quran can convey the following
pragmatic functions: Challenging, rebuking, threatening, encouraging, investigating for
the truth, frightening, prohibition, comforting, giving instructions, reminding,
ridiculing, making in a promise, wishing, regret, expressing impossibility.
Al hamdeh (2009) conducts a study on the pragmatic functions of imperative in Jordanian
Arabic. Al hamdeh has analyzed these functions depending on the situational and linguistic

context; the intended meaning is unfolded only through the context in which the imperative
utterance is used. However, according to speech situation, this study came up with twenty
pragmatic functions of the imperative in Jordanian Arabic, namely: exhortation requesting,
insulting, showing hospitality, disciplining, learning a lesson, rebuking, threatening,
giving instructions, drawing attention, invocating, offering alternatives, humiliating,
advising,

commanding

,permitting,

invitation,

suggesting,

prohibiting

and

challenging.
Al Shboul (2010) discusses the strategies of threat in Jordanian Arabic and American
English. Al Shboul finds the following types of threat: tell authority, committing harm,
introducing options, warning and promise of vague consequence.
- Al Masaeed. (2009). The Pragmatic of the Conditionals in the Holly Quran.

10

MA thesis. Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.

- Al Hamdeh, Mohammad Farhan Saber. (2009). The Pragmatic Functions
of Imperative in Jordanian Arabic. M.A thesis. Yarmouk University,
Irbid, Jordan.
- Al Shboul, Othman. (2010). Threatening Strategies in Jordanian Arabic and American English.
M.A thesis. Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.

Hanafi (1974) claims that the style of threat in the Glorious Quran has two main properties:
1. Threatening verses are mentioned in the Glorious Quran to advise people to come back to
Allah. Also, he thinks that the main purpose of threat in the Glorious Quran is to awaken
minds and to take care about our behaviors. So the goal of these utterances is to awaken
minds, but neither humiliation nor revenge.
2. There are two main groups of threat in the Glorious Quran: the first group which is
addressed to common people and the second one which is addressed to leaders. For

example: Allah threatens common people through their food, their drink, and through
punishing them in Hell, whereas leaders are threatened by humiliating and insulting them
during their life and also on the day of Resurrection.
This study contains 60 utterances from the Glorious Quran which present the threat
meaning. The chosen threatening utterances are divided, according to the addressees, into
four groups which are:
1. The first group refers to Prophets.
2. The second one refers to Muslims and Believers.
3. The third group refers to Hypocrites.
4. The last group refers to Infidels and Disbelievers.

11
." " .(2000) . .

Moreover, the chosen threatening utterances are classified according to their meanings and
their functions; each strategy is also discussed through different examples taken from the
Glorious Quran.
1. Prophets
The Glorious Quran has many threatening utterances which are addressed to the prophets. It
seems that they carry threatening meaning. Referring to Arabic dictionaries, prophets mean that
those humans chosen be Allah and given revelation to deliver to mankind. Each prophet is
directed a message to a different group of people. They are infallible; they dont commit any

errors because of their absolute belief. In this section, the researcher illustrates various strategies
of threatening utterances which are addressed to the prophets, through the following illustrative
examples:

1. "
[95-94 : " ]
*
If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the
Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in
doubt * Nor be of those who reject the signs of Allah, or thou shalt be of those who perish {Yunus: 9495}.

Some Islamic scholars as Az-Zamaxshari (authenticated by AlMahdi: 1997) indicate that

Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) is the addressee of this message, but it is understood that this
message is addressed to infidels because Allah is sure about Muhammads absolute belief.

12
" .(1998) . -

According to Al-Aalosi (1992), the conditional

particle
:
has."the
function
of the
impossibility

of doubting Prophet Mohammad about what Allah.

sent :to
him.Thus,
addressee
is

.1 .the
direct


Prophet Mohammad but the intended addressee is the infidels which are considered as the
indirect ones. This example has the condition " , followed by its response
" . The two clauses are semantically joined by the condition

particle /if. Using negative particle plus a present tense "expresses a prohibitive
meaning. Indirectness (Prof. Fawwaz defines indirectness as a communicative strategy in which
speakers avoid the obvious order to gain interactional advantage over other discourse
participants) is the strategy of the previous threatening utterance.
2. "[213: " ]

So call not on any other god with Allah, or thou wilt be among those under the Penalty [A-u
ara?:213]

Prophet Mohammad is the direct addressee of this utterance, but it is understood that the
intended addressees are the infidels. Using the negative particle plus the present tense
(which is an imperative) expresses a prohibitive meaning. The result of the infidelity is
( the infidels will be under the penalty). Using the imperative structure carries some kind

of advice. The strategies which represent threatening meaning are the indirectness and advising
(means giving counsel to or offering an opinion or suggestion as worth).

13
: ." " .(2001). . : .1 .

3. "[ 105: " ]



We have sent down to thee the Book in truth, that thou mightest judge between men, as guided
by Allah. So be not (used) as an advocate by those who betray their trust [An-nisaa?:105]
Ibin Aashor (1984) says that this message is addressed to Prophet Mohammad but the
intended addresses are the Muslims because defending the infidels is not expected by Prophet
Mohammad. The reason of sending the Glorious Quran to people is to apply the justice and deny
the unfairness among them (this can be applied through Prophet Mohammad)

. Using an imperative with the negative particle expresses the

prohibitive meaning. This threatening utterance has two strategies the first one is indirectness
whereas the second one is warning (referring to Oxford dictionary online: warning means

informing someone in advance of a possible danger, problem or other unpleasant situation).

Muslims are warned not to defend the infidels.
4. ": " ]


[ 46
He said: "O Noah! He is not of thy family: For his conduct is unrighteous. So ask not of me that of
which thou hast no knowledge! I give thee counsel, lest thou act like the ignorant!" [Houd: 46]

This utterance is addressed to Prophet Noah, so the intended (direct) addressee is Prophet
Noah. Prophet Noah may be warned or alerted because he asks for Allahs forgiveness for his
infidel son. To alert is to notify someone about some approach danger.

14
. : ." " .(2000) . . :

This example has two components: declarative ( representing an alert

with some kind of advice) plus imperative negative particle ( representing request). This
declarative statement represents the seriousness of the probable
consequence. Alerting and advising are some of threatening strategies which are directly used to
warn the addressee about certain consequences.
2. Muslims
The researcher discusses the second addressees who are the Muslims. The word Muslim
means that a person who engages in the act of submission, acceptance or surrender. Therefore, a
Muslim is a person who submits to the will of Allah, or a follower of Islam. It is noticed that the

strategies of threat which are addressed to Muslims differ from those which are addressed to the
Prophets; these strategies are clarified according to the following examples:


[209:" ]
" .1
If ye backslide after the clear (Signs) have come to you, then know that Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise
[Al-Baqara: 209]

Az-Zamaxshari (authenticated by AlMahdi: 1997) indicates that Muslims are warned

because of violating Allahs orders and following Satan. Thus, this message is directly addressed
to Muslims. Verb means to be away from the right way (i.e. Allahs order). The first part
of the conditional clause represents the possibility of following Satan by the Muslims

. The consequence of their doing is shown by the following declarative
.

statement
15
" .(1998) . meaning
such
: ."
that

Some of Allahs attributes carry threatening
as
"

means
" .
. : .1 .

nobody and nothing can prevent Allah to do anything. means that Allah rewards the
obedient Muslim and punishes the infidel. Thus, using Allahs attribute, at the end of the
previous utterance, is more rhetorical than mentioning any kind of punishment. Moreover, not
mentioning the penalty will scare and frighten the addressee. Thus, Warning (referring to Oxford
dictionary online: warning means informing someone in advance of a possible danger, problem
or other unpleasant situation) and frightening (referring to the same source, frightening means
deterring someone or something from involvement or action by making them afraid) are the
strategies which represent the threat in this example. The researcher displays various examples
which have the warning and frightening strategies of threatening utterances.

[10: " ]

" .2
Those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, eat up a Fire into their own bodies: They will soon be
enduring a Blazing Fire! [An-Nisaa:10]

This example indicates that anyone (Muslim) who eats up the orphans money will be
punished in life and Hell (Az-Zamaxshari, authenticated by AlMahdi: 1997). Muslims (the
addressees) are explicitly threatened by determining their punishment because of their doing.
Their punishment in the life can be concluded through using the present tense
, whereas
their punishment in Hell can be noticed by using the future tense . The Muslims are
threatened to be punished to be hurt because of their doing.
16
" .(1998) . : ."
. : .1 .

So, committing harm (Benoit: 1983. P311 defines committing harm as threatening the speaker to
physically hurt the addressee or complete an action that perceives as undesirable) functions as a
strategy of threat.

" .3



[275: " ]

Those who devour usury will not stand except as stand one whom the Evil one by his touch Hath driven
to madness. That is because they say: "Trade is like usury," but Allah hath permitted trade and forbidden
usury. Those who after receiving direction from their Lord, desist, shall be pardoned for the past; their
case is for Allah (to judge); but those who repeat (The offence) are companions of the Fire: They will
abide therein (for ever) [Al-Baqara:275]

This message is addressed to a group of Muslims who deal with usury because of their own
benefit whereas they know that it is forbidden and not acceptable by Allah. Thus, they are
threatened because they violate Allahs order and deal with usury instead of the commerce or
- Benoit, P. (1983). "The Use of Threats in Children's Discourse". Language

17

trade.&Because
of their doing, they will become mad (this is their punishment in the life)
Speech, 26:305-329
- Barish, M (1991). Face Threatening Speech Acts :Their Implications for
Speech Act Theory. Ph.D Dissertation , Georgetown University,
Washington, D.C.

 . At the end of the utterance, the addressees are given two choices,

and they have to choose one of them: a good thing is ( who dealt with
usury in the past and left it when knowing that it is forbidden), or a bad thing which is "

( " dealing with usury whereas they know that it is forbidden). If they choose the
bad choice, they deserve to be in Hell forever "
" . In this example,
offering alternative (Barish: 1991 says that the addressee is given two options which are
undesirable to him, s/he has to choose the good choice to avoid the bad consequence) is
considered as a strategy of threat.

[29: " " ].4

Make not thy hand tied (like a niggard's) to thy neck, nor stretch it forth to its utmost reach, so that thou
become blameworthy and destitute [Al-Israa:29]

This message is addressed to Muslims; according to Ibin Aashor (1984) this message
indicates that if the Muslims are stingy, they will be blamed by people . And if they are
waster, they will be poor . Using the negative particle with a present tense expresses a
prohibitive meaning. this declarative statement represents the consequence
(which will occur in the future) of being stingy or waster. The prohibitive structure is used to
give an advice for something will happen in the future if they are stingy and waster. So, it is
intended that if they are not stingy and waster, they will not become blamed and poor. Thus,
threatening strategy of this example is advising (offering suggestion about the best course of
action to someone. In this previous example, moderation is the best suggestion but it is not
explicitly mentioned).


* *
" * .5
[6-1: " ]
* *
Woe to those that deal in fraud*Those who, when they have to receive by measure from men, exact full
measure*But when they have to give by measure or weight to men, give less than due*Do they not think
that they will be called to account?* On a Mighty Day*A Day when (all) mankind will stand before the
Lord of the Worlds? [Al-Mutaffifin:1-6]

This message is addressed to a group of Muslims who deal in fraud ". Their
ultimate goal is how to increase their own benefit (money) even if they violated Allahs order.

18
of
. :
."
" .(2000) .
Thus, they are threatened to be punished because
their
greed
(Az-Zamaxshari,
authenticated
. :

by AlMahdi: 1997). This example begins by using the word " which denotes their grievous
penalty.
This utterance mentions two characteristics of those who deal in fraud, the first one is

( when they want sell their own things, they sell them expensively).

The second one is "( " when they buy anything from people, they
buy it cheaply). Using with the negative particle indicates the rebuking meaning.
They are rebuked because they do not think that will be punished (because they cheat and
steal people) in the judgment day. Rebuking (Oxford dictionary online defines rebuking
as expressing sharp disapproval or criticism of someone because of their behaviors or
action) functions as the strategy of threat in this example.
3. Hypocrites

The researcher examines the third type of addressee which is hypocrites. In Arabic
dictionaries, the hypocrite means that a person who pretends to have virtues, moral, or
religious beliefs that s/he does not actually possess. In the Glorious Quran, the hypocrite
means that a person who pretends to be Muslim but s/he hides the hatred and doesnt
believe in Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and Islam. Thus, the researcher concludes
various strategies of threat from the following examples which are addressed to the
hypocrites:
19
" .(1998) . : ."
. : .1 .

"1 .


[61: " ]

Among them are men who molest the Prophet and say, "He is (all) ear." Say, "He listens to what is best
for you: he believes in Allah, has faith in the Believers, and is a Mercy to those of you who believe." But
those who molest the Messenger will have a grievous penalty [At-Tawba: 61]

Molesting Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) " is considered as one of the

Hypocrites characteristics. The Hypocrites molest Prophet Muhammad and say that he believes
all what being said by them (even if they are wrong) " , but they do not think that he
knows their laying and hypocrisy and listens to what is the best .Moreover, Muslims
are warned not to believe or trust the Hypocrites because they are liars (Ibin Aashor: 1984).
Prophet Mohammad does not believe and trust the Hypocrites but he trusts Muslims
. The pronoun " "refers to the Hypocrites. This utterance is finished by offering two

choices of the Hypocrites: the first one is when they become believers Allah will forgive them
and Prophet Mohammad will trust them (this is the acceptable choice followed by its good
20
. : ." " .(2000) . . :

consequence). This choice encourages them to be believers and encourage them not to molest the
Prophet), but when they continue molesting Prophet Mohammad, they will be punished in this
life and in the Hereafter (if they choose unacceptable choice they will have a bad consequence
which is the punishment). The hypocrites destiny is displayed by using a declarative structure.
Thus, the strategies of threat in this example are offering alternative and encouraging the
Hypocrites to be believers to avoid punishment. Oxford dictionary online defines the word
encouraging as persuading someone to do or continue to do something by giving support).

2. "[63: " ]
Know they not that for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, is the Fire of Hell?- wherein they
shall dwell. That is the supreme disgrace [At-Tawba:63]
" will be punished
Hypocrites who violate Allahs order and His Prophet "

in Hell forever "( " Ibin-Aashor: 1984). This utterance begins by a rebuking
question " because if they do not know the destiny of violating Allah and His Prophet,
they are considered as infidels and deserve grievous penalty. " "means the humiliation.
Hypocrites are explicitly threatened to be punished and humiliated in Hell forever. In this
example, rebuking and humiliation (referring to the Oxford dictionary online, humiliation means
making someone feel shamed and foolish by injuring their dignity and pride) function as
strategies of threat.

" .3

*


*



[66-64: " ]



The Hypocrites are afraid lest a Sura should be sent down about them, showing them what is (really
passing) in their hearts. Say: "Mock ye! But verily Allah will bring to light all that ye fear (should be
revealed)* If thou dost question them, they declare (with emphasis): "We were only talking idly and in
play." Say: "Was it at Allah, and His Signs, and His Messenger, that ye were mocking? *Make ye no
excuses: ye have rejected Faith after ye had accepted it. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others
amongst you, for that they are in sin [At-Tawba:64-66]

This utterance denotes the Hypocrites mocking Prophet Mohammad and Islam, Allah
knows their unacceptable behaviors and also tells His Prophet about their doing. Allah will not
accept their apology and will punish them because of their ridicule (Ibin Aashor: 1984).

21
. : ." " .(2000) . . :

The imperative structure " carries threatening sense. Moreover, if they are asked about

what they talk "
(" this answer
" , they answer that we only talk in play "

represents their lying and their hypocrisy), but the real answer is "( they always
mock or sarcasm about Prophet Mohammad and Muslims). Using the particle ( which is used
at the beginning of a question) in the following
expresses a
rebuking meaning (they are rebuked because they mock Allah and His Prophet). Using the
negative particle with a present tense "carries despairing meaning (their apology will
not be accepted at all because of their mocking and their infidelity). At the end of this utterance,
the Hypocrites are given two choices: the first one is that if they truly repent, Allah will forgive
them
( the good choice leads to good consequence). If they do not, they will
be considered as the infidels and punished forever
( the bad choice

leads to bad consequence). Thus, the strategies of threat in this example are rebuking, despairing
(Oxford dictionary online defines it as the complete loss or absence of hope) and offering
alternative.

4."[68: " ]

Allah hath promised the Hypocrites men and women, and the rejecters, of Faith, the fire of Hell: Therein
shall they dwell: Sufficient is it for them: for them is the curse of Allah, and an enduring punishment,
[At-Tawba:68]

Ibin Ashor (1984) indicates that Hypocrites (men and women) are threatened to be
punished in Hell for ever. " means that they will be punished because of their
they will be out of Allahs mercy. "
inappropriate doing (Hell is what they deserve). " "

their punishment will not be finished and will not be stopped. In general, verb
/promise is used to tell bad or good news in the future.
22

But in this context, the verb promise is used to tell bad news and bad consequences (Ibin
. : ." " .(2000) . -

Aashor: 1984). Mentioning infidels, in the same context, with Hypocrites indicates that
. :

Hypocrites are in bad situation like the rejecters, so they will have the same destiny which is
punishing them in Hell. Promising of bad consequence is represented through a declarative
structure. Thus, promising of bad consequence (means a declaration or assurance that one will do
bad thing or that a particular thing will happen) is considered as a strategy of threat.

5. "

[79: " ]
Those who slander such of the believers as give themselves freely to (deeds of) charity, as well as such
as can find nothing to give except the fruits of their labour,- and throw ridicule on them,- Allah will throw
back their ridicule on them: and they shall have a grievous penalty [At-Tawba:79]

This utterance mentions another characteristic of Hypocrites. They ridicule poor Muslims
charity because they cannot give a lot. Thus, they are threatened to be punished in the Hereafter
23
. : ." " .(2000) . . :

because of their irony (Ibin Aashor: 1984). Using a present tense, in this example, /
indicates that Hypocrites ridiculing poor Muslims is considered as their habits, so they always
do that. Because of their doing, they will be despised in this life and then punished in the
Hereafter . In this example, despising (means feeling contempt or a deep
repugnance) functions as a strategy of threat.

6. "

[82-81: * " ]
Those who were left behind (in the Tabuk expedition) rejoiced in their inaction behind the back of the
Messenger of Allah. they hated to strive and fight, with their goods and their persons, in the cause of
Allah. they said, "Go not forth in the heat." Say, "The fire of Hell is fiercer in heat." If only they could
understand! *Let them laugh a little: much will they weep: a recompense for the (evil) that they do [AtTawba:81-82]

This utterance mentions that the hypocrites like themselves and their money. Because
they are afraid of loss one of them; they dislike fighting with the Muslims and giving money for
preparing the Muslims fighter "
" . Moreover, they dislike
fighting because its too hot "" . They are explicitly threatened to be punished in
Hell forever (Az-Zamaxshari, authenticated by AlMahdi: 1997). This utterance shows the
hypocrites characteristics and their destiny by using a declarative structure. it is
intended that Hell will be hotter, but they are reminded that they will be punished in Hell, so they
will think about their destiny. The future tense is used to represent the hypocrites destiny

 . Hypocrites were happy because they did not fight with

the Muslims, but they will regret ( " " this expression carries the regretting meaning, so
they will be sorry when they are punished) about their unacceptable doing when they punished in
Hell forever. In this example, reminding (cause someone to think of something because of a
resemblance) and regretting (feeling of sadness, repentance or disappointment over an
occurrence or something that one has done or failed to do) function as strategies of threat.
24
" .(1998) . : ."
. : .1 .

7. "
*
[139-138:" ]

To the Hypocrites give the glad tidings that there is for them (but) a grievous penalty;- * Yea, to those
who take for friends unbelievers rather than believers: is it honour they seek among them? Nay,- all
honour is with Allah [An-Nisaa:138:139]

The Hypocrites are threatened to be punished in this life and in the Hereafter, because they
take infidels as their allies rather than Muslims (Az-Zamaxshari, authenticated by AlMahdi:
1997). Using the verb with " represents ironical or cynical meaning, because the
previous verb used just to tell good and blessed news. The pronoun " refers to Hypocrites.
Using ( which occurs in a question as a wh-word) with a present tense expresses a
rebuking meaning. Thus, ridiculing (the subjection of someone or something to mockery and
derision) and rebuking are the strategies of threat in this example

8. "[16: " ]


These are they who have bartered Guidance for error: But their traffic is profitless, and they have lost
true direction [Al-Baqara:16]

The hypocrites prefer the infidelity and the hypocrisy instead of Islam and being honest
. So, they will lose everything and will be out of the right way
( Az-Zamaxshari, authenticated by AlMahdi: 1997). The pronouns /

refer to the hypocrites. means that the hypocrites prefer the infidelity,

they are as someone who buy unacceptable thing instead of the acceptable one. As a result of this
doing, they will lose everything . The hypocrites are implicitly threatened by
losing everything and being out of the right way . In this example, losing is
considered as a strategy of threat.
25
" .(1998) . : ."

. : .1 .

9. "[4 : " ]
They are the enemies; so beware of them. The curse of Allah be on them! How are they deluded (away
from the Truth)! [Al-Munafiqun:4]

Hypocrites are described as the enemies " because it seems that they like Muslims
whereas they hide hatred. Thus, Prophet Mohammad is warned to be careful when he deals with
Hypocrites "( Az-Zamaxshari, authenticated by AlMahdi: 1997). This utterance indicates
Hypocrites and their destiny by using a declarative structure . " this expression is used
to represent that the Hypocrites are threatened to be perished whenever they go. an adverb
which denotes the place. So, in this example, perishing functions as a strategy of threat.

4. Infidels

In this section, the researcher investigates the last type of addressee which is the infidels.
According to Wikipedia, an infidel is one who has no religious beliefs, or who doubts or reject
the central tenets of a particular religion especially in reference to Islam or Christianity. In
Arabic, the infidel is known as kafir which is translated as disbeliever. In Islamic sense, the
term infidel/kafir refers to a person does not believe in the one of Allah. The infidels have many
unacceptable behaviors as not believing in Allah, molesting Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and
the Muslims, dealing with the usury and other ones. Thus, they deserve various kinds of
punishment in this life and in the Hereafter. The researcher displays the strategies of threatening
utterance which are addressed to the infidels, through the following illustrative examples:
26
" .(1998) . : ."

1. "
:

.1.

.
[6:" ]

They ask thee to hasten on the evil in preference to the good: Yet have come to pass, before them,
(many) exemplary punishments! But verily thy Lord is full of forgiveness for mankind for their wrongdoing, and verily thy Lord is (also) strict in punishment [Ar-Rad:6]

Infidels do not believe that there is Judgment day and Resurrection day. Thus, they want to
see their penalty immediately (they say the previous saying as a kind of irony)
". They do not learn a lesson from what happened with previous nations

"

. So, they will be forgiven if they repent "

. But if they

continue being infidels, they will be punished in this life and in the Hereafter " .
This utterance wonders about the infidels deeds whereas they are explicitly threatened to be
punished in the life and in the Hereafter. In this example, taking a lesson of wisdom, wondering
and offering alternative are considered as strategies of threat.





" .2

[72: " ]


They do blaspheme who say: "(Allah) is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel!
worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the
garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help [Al-mada:72]

The Christians are threatened to be punished because they say that Prophet Issa is their god
whereas he warns them that their saying will lead them to the

infidelity and to Hell. He says that all people have only one God/Allah, so all people have to
( Ibin
obey and worship Him as he does

Aashor:1984). Prophet Issa told them that he is not their god, he is just their Prophet who is sent
to convey them Allahs messages. Anyone who says there is another god with Allah will be
considered as an infidel.
27

, will be forever in Hell , no

Thus, Allah will forbid him Heaven

. : ." " .(2000) .

.
:
one can help him or stop his penalty . They are threatened
to be
punished in

this life and in the Hereafter by using a declarative structure. Using the future tense (which
displays their destiny in the Hereafter) carries intimidation or frightening meaning. Moreover,
the addressees are explicitly threatened to hurt them psychologically (because they always
frighten their destiny in this life) and physically in the Hereafter. In this example, intimidation
and committing harm function as strategies of threat.

3. "[116: " ]

Allah forgiveth not (The sin of) joining other gods with Him; but He forgiveth whom He pleaseth other
sins than this: one who joins other gods with Allah, Hath strayed far, far away (from the right) [AnNisaa:116]

The polytheists, who believe in being more than one god, are threatened to be punished in
this life and in the Hereafter. Believing in polytheism is considered as the greatest sin which has
( Ibin Aashor: 1984). The particle " emphasizes
never ever forgiven " "

that polytheism is unforgivable error. Moreover, other errors are forgivable except the polytheism
" . This utterance is finished by mentioning the polytheist destiny "

. So, the addresses are warned not to be polytheist. " this expression is used

metaphorically, because being polytheist will lead anyone to be far from the right way. Using the
previous expression is considered as a kind of exaggeration (to persuade the reader that
polytheism is one of the greatest sins which lead to the punishments in the life and in the
Hereafter). In this example, warning and exaggerating function as strategies of threat.

28
. : ." " .(2000) . . :

4. " * * * * *

[7-1: * " ]
The mutual rivalry for piling up (the good things of this world) diverts you (from the more serious
things)*Until ye visit the graves *But nay, ye soon shall know (the reality) * Again, ye soon shall know!
Nay, were ye to know with certainty of mind, (ye would beware!) * Ye shall certainly see Hell-Fire! !
[At-Takathur:1-7]

This utterance is addressed generally to all people. but, it is addressed particularly to

infidels who care about their money and kids in this life rather than in the Hereafter (Az
Zamaxshari, authenticated by AlMahdi: 1997). "
this expression describes infidels

doing (they are interest in this life rather than in the Hereafter), and it carries rebuking meaning.
means when they die. Using the verb denotes that being them in the
graves is temporary (such as a visit). deterrence particle with""

carries

intimidation meaning. Using the particle ( particle of oath) with a present tense""
denotes threatening meaning. " " this expression emphasizes the meaning of

threat (infidels will see the place (Hell) where they will be punished). In this example, rebuking,
intimidating and swearing are considered as strategies of threat.
5. "[5-1: * * * * " ]
Concerning what are they disputing? *Concerning the Great News, *About which they cannot agree.
*Verily, they shall soon (come to) know! *Verily, verily they shall soon (come to) know! [An-Naba:1-5]

The infidels ask ironically about the Resurrection day "" * , so this
utterance is sent to deter their irony and to tell them that they will be punished in this life and in
the Hereafter (Az-Zamaxshari, authenticated by AlMahdi: 1997). This utterance begins by using
( which consists of the preposition particle " plus the wh-question ".
29
" .(1998) . : ."
. : .1 .

" " this is considered as a wondering question (wonder about their irony and infidelity).

" "it is a deterrence particle which is used to deter the infidels irony about the Resurrection
day. Using the letter " "with a present verb ""denotes that they will be definitely
punished soon. " " this repeated expression emphasizes their punishment. So, they are
implicitly threatened, there are no details about how they will be punished. This will frighten and
hurt them psychologically. In this example, wondering and repetition are the strategies of threat.
" * * * * * .6
[50-43: * " ]
*
Verily the tree of Zaqqum *Will be the food of the Sinful,- *Like molten brass; it will boil in their
insides * Like the boiling of scalding water *(A voice will cry: "Seize ye him and drag him into the midst
of the Blazing Fire! * Then pour over his head the Penalty of Boiling Water, *Taste thou (this)! Truly
wast thou mighty, full of honour! *Truly this is what ye used to doubt! [Ad-Dukhan:43-50]

Infidels are threatened to be punished in various kind of punishments because they do not
believe in Allah. In this utterance, they are threatened to be punished through their food (Ibin
Aashor: 1984). In the Hereafter, infidels will eat from the tree of Zaqqum , which
is made from Hell. The tree of Zaqqum is the food of those who commits great errors (the
infidel) . When they eat from the tree of Zaqqum, it will boil in their bowels (because
it is made from the fire) * . They will be dragged to be thrown in
Hell " . "" this image is used to
intimidate and frighten every one of infidel. In this example, the verb "expresses insulting
meaning. "
" this expression is used to express ridiculing meaning. It is meant
the opposite which is they are insulted and humiliated (Ibin Aashor: 1984).
30

Infidels are explicitly threatened to be punished and hurt physically and psychologically.
. : ." " .(2000) . -

Also they are threatened to be punished by using declarative structure. In.

this :
example,
committing harm, insulting and ridiculing are considered as the strategies of threat.
7. Discussion
The present study agrees with Targautt, et al. (1986) who concluded that threatening
meaning can be occurred through conditional when it occurs in threatening context.
This research disagrees with Scudder and Andrews (1995) who argued that implicit threats
are often ambiguous. In this study, explicit and implicit threats are easily understood. Moreover,
the implicit one is considered as more effective psychologically than the explicit one, because it
makes the addresses concerned about the speakers threatening.

In this work, committing harm (as a strategy of threat) is frequently used among a particular
group of people who are Hypocrites and Infidels. Whereas in Benoits study, committing harm is
commonly used among children (males and females).
The present study disagrees with Kellerman and shea (1996) who
concludes that some threats are more polite than other. In this study, all
kinds of threats are polite even if the addresses are infidels or hypocrites.
- Traugott, Alice ter Meulen, Judith Snitzer Reilly, and Charles A. Ferguson, eds. (1986).

31

On Conditionals. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

- Scudder, J, and Andrews, P. (1995). "A Comparison of Two Alternative
Models of Powerful Speech: The impact of Power and Gender upon the Use of Threats.
" Education Research Complete, 12:25-33.
- Kellermann, K and Shea, B. (1996). "Threats, Suggestions, Hints, and

This
studyGaining
agrees Compliance
with Al hamdeh
(2009)
who finds that imperative can carry threatening
Promises:
Efficiently
and Politely".
Quarterly,
44:145-165.
meaningCommunication
depending on
the situational
and linguistic context. Furthermore, both studies conclude

that there are many types of threatening utterances such as: interrogative, imperative, declarative
and prohibitive.
This study agrees with Al -Shbouls study (2010) who finds that threats can be implicit and
explicit. And disagrees with him because he says that the strategies of threat, in his study, are
considered culture specific, so he investigates threatening utterances depending on Jordanian and
American culture whereas threatening utterance in the Glorious Quran is addressed to all people
and do not concern with specific culture or specific nation.

- Al Hamdeh, Mohammad Farhan Saber. (2009). The Pragmatic Functions

of Imperative in Jordanian Arabic. M.A thesis. Yarmouk University,
Irbid, Jordan.
- Al Shboul, Othman. (2010). Threatening Strategies in Jordanian Arabic and American English.
M.A thesis. Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.

8. Conclusion
This study analyzes the speech act of threat in the Glorious Quran. The researcher collected
60 threatening utterance from the Glorious Quran. Those examples are divided into four groups
according to the addressees which are: Prophets, Muslims, Hypocrites and Infidels. The collected
data had many semantic, syntactic formulas and linguistic forms, which were classified into
twenty four strategies. The current study comes up with the following findings:
1. Indirectness, as a strategy of threat, is frequently used in the threatening utterances which are
addressed to Prophets, they are direct addressees but not the intended ones because they are
infallible and Allah is sure about their absolute belief. So, Prophets are the direct addressees,
whereas the intended addressees are Muslims, Hypocrites or infidels. Threatening meaning
which is carried by indirect discourse is more rhetorical than direct one.

32

2. The most frequent threatening strategies for Muslims are warning and frightening. Both
strategies inform the addresses in advance that there is a possible danger or problem, so they
have to deter themselves not to do something unacceptable or inappropriate.
3. Offering alternative and committing harm (as threatening strategies) are commonly used in the
Quranic utterances which are addressed to Hypocrites. Offering alternative strategy denotes that
Hypocrites have good chance if they choose the appropriate choice. Committing harm indicates
that Hypocrites choose inappropriate choice, so they deserve grievous penalties.
4. Threatening strategies which are commonly used in the Quranic utterance which is addressed
to Infidels are: committing harm, rebuking, intimidation and humiliation. Infidels are explicitly
threatened to be hurt physically and psychologically because of their unacceptable behaviors.
5. Hypocrites and Infidels share some unacceptable morals and behaviors such as not believing

33

in Allah, His prophets and the Glorious Quran, molesting Prophets, following Satan, lying,
dealing with usury and etc. Furthermore, they share some strategies which are concluded from
threatening utterance like: committing harm, rebuking, humiliating, ridiculing, perishing and
offering alternative.
6. Threats have two types: explicit and implicit, both types are used in the Glorious Quran.
Explicit threats are commonly used in the Glorious Quran, especially with Hypocrites and
Infidels.
9. Recommendations
Having studied the pragmatic function of threatening in the Glorious Quran, the researcher
recommends the following for further research:

1. A study which investigates the speech act of threat in Sunnah, and analyzes its semantic and
syntactic structure, then compare the results with the speech act of threat in the Glorious Quran.
2. A study which investigates the speech act of threatening and the other related speech acts like:
ordering, advising, insulting in the Glorious Quran.
3. A study which investigates and analyzes the phonological and morphological structure of the
speech act of threatening and the other related speech acts like: ordering, advising, insulting..
in the Glorious Quran.
4. A study which investigates and analyzes the metaphorical images carries by threatening
utterance in the Glorious Quran.

34

5. A study which investigates the psychological effect, of the addresses, of the speech act of
threatening and other related speech acts in the Glorious Quran.
6. A study which investigates the educational effect of the speech of threat, in the Glorious
Quran, in the educational and social institutions such as: school and family.

35

English References

- Austin, J. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.
- Barish, M (1991). Face Threatening Speech Acts :Their Implications for
Speech Act Theory. Ph.D Dissertation , Georgetown University,
Washington, D.C.

- Benoit, P. (1983). "The Use of Threats in Children's

Discourse". Language
& Speech, 26:305-329.
- Al Hamdeh, Mohammad Farhan Saber. (2009). The Pragmatic Functions
of Imperative in Jordanian Arabic. M.A thesis. Yarmouk University,
Irbid, Jordan.
- Hatmini, (2008). A Pragmatic Analysis oh Commissive Utterances in

English Translation of Prophetic Tradition Related by Bukhori . B.A

Bachelor, University of Surakarta.
- Kellermann, K and Shea, B. (1996). "Threats, Suggestions, Hints, and
Promises: Gaining Compliance Efficiently and Politely".
Communication Quarterly, 44:145-165.
- Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Al Masaeed. (2009). The Pragmatic of the Conditionals in the Holly Quran. MA
thesis. Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
- Scudder, J, and Andrews, P. (1995). "A Comparison of Two Alternative
Models of Powerful Speech: The impact of Power and Gender upon the Use of
Threats." Education Research Complete, 12:25-33.
- Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.
Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
- Searle, J. (1979). Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
- Searle, J. (1980). Speech Act Theory and Pragmatics. Dordrecht: Reidel.Siderits, M.
Johannsen,W. and Fadden,T. (1985). "Gender, Role, and Power: Content Analysis
of Speech." Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9:439-450.
- Al Shboul, Othman. (2010). Threatening Strategies in Jordanian Arabic and
American English. M.A thesis. Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
- Traugott, Alice ter Meulen, Judith Snitzer Reilly, and Charles A. Ferguson, eds. (1986).
On Conditionals. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Wierzbicka, Anna (1987). English Speech Act Verbs: A Semantic
Dictionary Sydney: Academic Press.
- Yule, George (1996). " Oxford Introduction to Language ". Oxford
University.

Arabic References
. " .(2001). " . : . .1 :.

" .(2000) . " . . : :.

" .(2000) . " . .

 " .(1998) . " . :

. .1 :.