Riffaterre 1978,3 et passim; 1997,174.

Ungrammaticalities are “intratextual

anomalies-obscure wordings, phrasings that the context alone will not suffice to
explain” (Riffaterre 1980, 627). Cf. Todorov (1982,30) on the decision to
interpret triggered by “syntagmatic indices based on lack,” the “clearest
example” of which is contradiction. The intratextual anomaly here is the stark
contradiction between khalwat-e nāmūs and majlis faroz. No commentator
problematizes this ungrammaticality, except for “Shādāñ” Bilgrāmī, who notes
that “seclusion and assembly are mutually contradictory” (khalwat awr majlis do
mutażād chīzeñ haiñ) and ponders why “seclusion’s spoken of as assembly-
illumining” (nah m‘alūm khalwat ko majlis faroz kyoñ kahā, Bilgrāmī 1967,180),
but his resolution of this contradiction is philologically incoherent.