بررسی برجستهسازی زبانی در نفثةالمصدور از دیدگاه جفری لیچ | ||
| پژوهش های دستوری و بلاغی | ||
| دوره 15، شماره 27، تیر 1404، صفحه 205-225 اصل مقاله (1.58 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: دستوری-بلاغی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22091/jls.2025.12624.1683 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| علی حسن نژاد* 1؛ ابراهیم اقبالی2 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکتری زبان و ادبیات فارسی، دانشکده ادبیات فارسی و زبان های خارجی دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران. | ||
| 2دانشیار زبان و ادبیات فارسی، دانشکده ادبیات فارسی و زبان های خارجی دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| نفثةالمصدور از جمله آثار ارزشمند زبان و ادبیات فارسی است که در میان متون منثور از اهمیت ویژهای برخوردار است؛ یکی از دلایل اهمیت نفثةالمصدور، ویژگیهای زبانی آن است که باعث شده این اثر، افزون بر جنبههای تاریخی، از نظر مسائل زبانی نیز اهمیت ویژهای داشته باشد. با مطالعۀ کتاب نفثةالمصدور از این منظر، به ویژگیهای زبانی و عوامل برجسته-ساز مختلفی برخورد میکنیم که در ایجاد و تقویت زبان ادبی این کتاب نقش بهسزایی ایفا کرده و زبانی برجسته پدید آوردهاند. منظور از برجستهسازی، برهم زدن قواعد مرسوم زبان است که به آشناییزدایی منجر میشود و یکی از عوامل ایجاد متن ادبی به شمار میرود. زبانشناسان دو عامل قاعدهکاهی( straw base) و قاعدهافزایی (Adding rules) را علت اصلی برجستهسازی زبان میدانند. در پژوهش حاضر، نویسندگان کوشیدهاند که با تکیه بر نظریۀ جفری لیچ، برجستگیهای زبانی نفثةالمصدور را در هفت حوزۀ واژگانی، نحوی، سبکی، معنایی، زمانی، آوایی و گویشی مورد بررسی قرار دهند. یافتههای این پژوهش نشان میدهند که هنجارگریزیهای معنایی در گستردهترین شکل ممکن، شامل استفاده از انواع صنایع ادبی و صور خیال، استفاده از ساختهای کهن، تصویرپردازی، کاربرد شواهد قرآنی و ادبی و به کارگیری انواع توازن، باعث برجستهسازی زبانی در نفثةالمصدور شده و نثر این اثر را به شعر نزدیک کرده است. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| متن ادبی؛ برجستهسازی؛ قادهکاهی؛ قاعدهافزایی؛ نفثةالمصدور | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| A study of linguistic highlighting in Naftas al-Masdur from the perspective of Jeffrey Leach | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| ali hassannezhad1؛ Ebrahim Eghbali2 | ||
| 1PhD student in Persian Language and Literature, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran. | ||
| 2Associate Professor of Persian Language and Literature, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| This study investigates rhetorical-syntactic research within Persian literary texts, with a particular focus on identifying, categorizing, and analyzing grammatical and rhetorical features that contribute to stylistic richness and aesthetic effect. The research examines how specific grammatical structures and rhetorical devices function together to produce meaning, rhythm, and emphasis in classical and modern Persian literature. Building on the traditions of Arabic rhetoric (balāghah) and Persian stylistics, the study integrates theoretical insights from both classical poetics and modern linguistic approaches. The primary aim is to establish a framework that not only documents existing rhetorical-syntactic patterns but also interprets their literary and communicative significance.Drawing on an extensive corpus of selected Persian texts from different literary periods, the analysis reveals that Persian authors have historically employed a variety of syntactic strategies—such as parallelism, inversion, ellipsis, and syntactic repetition—in coordination with rhetorical figures like metaphor, simile, antithesis, and hyperbole. The findings indicate that these combined devices serve both aesthetic and pragmatic functions: they reinforce thematic unity, enhance emotional appeal, and structure the reader’s interpretive process. This dual role underlines the interdependence between grammar and rhetoric in shaping literary style.The study further shows that many rhetorical-syntactic features in Persian literature correspond to universal stylistic principles found in other literary traditions, but are also deeply embedded in the cultural and linguistic characteristics of Persian. By highlighting these patterns, the research contributes to a better understanding of Persian stylistics, offering methodological tools for literary criticism, stylistic analysis, and pedagogy in Persian language and literature. Introduction Persian literature, enriched by centuries of poetic and prose traditions, displays a complex interplay between rhetorical artistry and grammatical construction. Historically, Persian stylistic studies have been rooted in classical balāghah frameworks, which emphasize eloquence, metaphor, and rhetorical ornamentation. However, these studies often treated grammar and rhetoric as separate domains, overlooking the ways in which syntactic structures themselves could carry rhetorical weight. The present study addresses this gap by investigating how rhetorical functions are embedded within grammatical structures, thus contributing to literary meaning and aesthetic effect. By focusing on the syntactic dimension of rhetoric—here referred to as "rhetorical-syntactic research"—this work proposes that grammar is not merely a vehicle for meaning but a formative element of literary style. This integrated approach draws on both classical theory (e.g., ma‘ānī, bayān, and badī‘) and modern linguistic-stylistic models, including functional grammar, foregrounding theory, and discourse analysis. It thereby bridges the methodological gap between traditional rhetoric and contemporary linguistic criticism. Materials & Methods The study employs a qualitative textual analysis of selected Persian literary works across historical periods, ranging from classical poets such as Sa‘di, Hafez, and Khaghani to modern prose stylists. The corpus was chosen to reflect both diversity in genre and representativeness of stylistic richness. The methodology involved Textual Selection – Choosing excerpts known for their rhetorical and syntactic density. Rhetorical Identification – Classifying rhetorical devices (metaphor, simile, antithesis, parallelism, etc.). Syntactic Analysis – Examining sentence structure, word order, and grammatical cohesion. Functional Interpretation – Linking grammatical structures with rhetorical effects, considering thematic and pragmatic contexts. Comparative Analysis – Cross-referencing findings with both classical rhetoric manuals and modern stylistic frameworks. Analytical tools included Halliday’s functional grammar for clause analysis, Leech’s foregrounding theory for identifying deviation and parallelism, and classical Persian rhetorical taxonomies for historical grounding. Research findings The results reveal that Persian literary texts often use syntactic patterns not merely for clarity or grammaticality but as rhetorical strategies to foreground meaning, rhythm, and thematic motifs. Key findings include: Parallelism & Repetition: Repetition of syntactic patterns (especially at the clause level) reinforces rhythm and thematic unity. This device is frequent in both poetry and prose, enhancing memorability and oral performance. Inversion (Taqdīm wa Ta’khīr): Deviations from the canonical word order create emphasis and highlight key thematic elements, aligning with the concept of ikhtisās in classical rhetoric. Ellipsis & Omission: Intentional omission of grammatical elements creates interpretive gaps, inviting reader engagement and inference. This is often paired with metaphor to intensify meaning. Coordination of Figurative & Syntactic Devices: For example, metaphors often occur in parallel syntactic structures, making them more striking and easier to process. Foregrounding through Deviation: Both syntactic deviation (unusual word order, rare constructions) and semantic deviation (unexpected imagery) function to draw attention to key passages. The study also notes that many such rhetorical-syntactic features serve pragmatic functions, such as persuasion, emotional appeal, and thematic framing. Discussion of Results & Conclusion The integration of rhetorical devices and grammatical structures is a defining characteristic of Persian literary style. Classical rhetoric provided a conceptual framework for identifying and categorizing rhetorical figures, but often overlooked the syntactic mechanisms through which these effects were achieved. Modern stylistics, on the other hand, recognizes syntax as a key component of literary form but rarely grounds its analysis in the cultural and historical specificity of Persian poetics. This research bridges these perspectives by demonstrating that: Syntax in Persian literature is not neutral; it is deliberately manipulated for rhetorical effect. Many rhetorical-syntactic patterns have deep cultural roots in Persian poetics, yet they align with universal stylistic strategies. Understanding these patterns enriches both literary criticism and language pedagogy, as it equips scholars and students to appreciate how form and meaning are intertwined. The findings suggest that further studies could apply corpus-based methods to quantify the distribution of rhetorical-syntactic patterns in larger Persian text collections. Such work could also compare Persian stylistics with other literary traditions to explore cross-cultural rhetorical universals. In conclusion, this study reaffirms that grammar and rhetoric in Persian literature are interdependent dimensions of stylistic artistry. Recognizing their interplay allows for more nuanced literary analysis, deeper appreciation of Persian cultural heritage, and more effective teaching of Persian as a literary language. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Literary text, highlighting, reduction of the base, increase of the base, nephthah al-masdour | ||
| مراجع | ||
منابعاحمدی، بابک. (1385). ساختار و تأویل متن. تهران: مرکز.
الهی، ذبیح الله؛ امیری، فریدون. (1397). «برجستهسازی و هنجارشکنی در قصاید خاقانی». پژوهشنامة اورمزد. شمارة 42. صص: 24ـ7.
اکبری، منوچهر؛ اسماعیلی، زیبا. (1393). «آشناییزدایی و برجستهسازی در مخزن الاسرار نظامی». گردهمایی سراسری انجمن ترویج زبان و ادب فارسی ایران.
ایگلتون، تری. (1383). پیش درآمدی بر نظریۀ ادبی. ترجمۀ عباس مخبر. تهران: مرکز.
برتنس، هانس. (1384). مبانی نظریۀ ادبی. مترجم محمدرضا ابوالقاسمی. تهران: ماهی.
پورنامداریان، تقی. (1389). خانهام ابری است. تهران: مروارید.
حکیمآذر، محمد. (۱۳۹۴). «تحلیل محتوای نفثهالمصدور نسوی». پژوهشنامة ادبیات تعلیمی. شمارة ۲۷. صص: ۱۴۲ـ۱۱۵.
زیدری نسوی، شهاب الدین محمد. (1343). نفثهالمصدور. به تصحیح و توضیح امیرحسین یزدگردی. تهران: اداره کل نگارش وزارت آموزش و پرورش.
شاملو، احمد. (1381). مجموعه آثار. تهران: زمانه.
شامیان، حسن؛ جعفری، سمانه. (۱۳۹۷). «تبیین الگوی کاربرد صناعات بدیعی و بیانی در نفثهالمصدور». زبان و ادب فارسی. شمارة ۲۳۸. صص: ۱۴۴ـ۱۱۹.
شفیعی کدکنی، محمدرضا. (1391). موسیقی شعر. تهران: آگاه.
شمیسا، سیروس. (1380). نقد ادبی. تهران: فردوس.
شکلوفسکی، ویکتور. (1380). هنر به مثابۀ فن؛ از مجموعه مقالات ساختگرایی و پساساحتگرایی و مطالعات ادبی. به کوشش فرزان سجودی. تهران: سورۀ مهر.
صفوی، کوروش. (1383). از زبانشناسی به ادبیات. تهران: سورۀ مهر.
صفوی، کوروش. (1394). آشنایی با زبانشناسی در مطالعات ادب فارسی. تهران: علمی.
طهماسبی، فریدون؛ مظفری، سولماز. (۱۳۹۵). «سبکشناسی نفثهالمصدور زیدری نسوی». فنون ادبی. شمارۀ ۱۴. صص: 173ـ118.
طلایی، مولود؛ فقیهیان، نعیمه و نصراصفهانی، محمدرضا. (1393). «برجستهسازیهای زبانی در داستان کوتاه «شـوق بنفشه» اثـر شهـریار مندنیپور (بر مبنای چهارچوب زبانشناختی دیوید لیچ)». ادبیات پارسی معاصر. شمارة 4. صص: 103ـ85.
علوی مقدم، مهیار. (1377). نظریههای نقد ادبی معاصر (صورتگرایی و ساختارگرایی). تهران: سمت.
قویمی، مهوش. (1383). آوا و القا. تهران: هرمس.
محبوب، فرشته. (1395). «واکاوی ساختاری و زیباشناختی نفثه المصدور». فنون ادبی. شمارة 8. صص: 222ـ207.
مهربان، صدیقه. (۱۳۹۰). «نگاهی تازه به ویژگیهای زبانی و بلاغی نفثهالمصدور». سبکشناسی نظم و نثر فارسی (بهار ادب). شمارة ۱۴. صص: 153ـ143.
منوچهری، احمد بن قوس. (1338). دیوان استاد منوچهری دامغانی. به کوشش دکتر محمد دبیر سیاقی. تهران: کتابفروشی زوار.
موسوی، نعیمه؛ حاجی آقابابایی، محمدرضا. (1398). «برجستهسازی زبانی در تاریخ بیهقی بر اساس نظریۀ جفری لیچ»، جستارهای زبانی. شمارۀ 55. صص: 192ـ163.
Fabb, N. (1997). Linguistics and Literature: Language in the World's Verbal Arts. New York: Blackwell.
Hassan, R. (1969). A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. New York: Longman.
Hassan, R. (1989). Language and Verbal Art. London: Oxford University Press.
Leach, G. (1965). This Bread That I Break. Language and Interpretation, in English Literary Review, 66-75.
Leach, G. (1994). A linguistic guide to English poetry. London: Longman.
Mokarowsky, J. (1932). Standard Language and Poetic Language. in Garvin, P.
Short, M. (1996). Exploring the Language of poem, Plays and Prose. London and New York: Longman.
ReferencesAhmadi, B. (2006). Structure and Interpretation of Text. Tehran: Markaz. [in Persian]
Akbari, M & Esmaeili, Z. (2014). Defamiliarization and foregrounding in Nezami's Makhzan al-Asrar. National Conference of the Association for the Promotion of Persian Language and Literature of Iran. [in Persian]
Alavi Moghadam, M. (1998). Contemporary Literary Criticism Theories (Formalism and Structuralism). Tehran: SAMT. [in Persian]
Bertens, H. (2005). The Basics of Literary Theory (M.R. Abolghasemi, Trans.). Tehran: Mahi. [in Persian]
Eagleton, T. (2004). An Introduction to Literary Theory (A. Mokhber, Trans.). Tehran: Markaz. [in Persian]
Elahi, Z & Amiri, F. (2018). Foregrounding and deviation in Khaqani's odes. Pazhuheshnameh Ormazd, 42, 7-24. [in Persian]
Fabb, N. (1997). Linguistics and Literature: Language in the World's Verbal Arts. New York: Blackwell.
Foyoumi, M. (2004). Sound and Suggestion. Tehran: Hermes. [in Persian]
Hakim Azar, M. (2015). A content analysis of Nafthat al-Masdur by Nasawi. Research Journal of Didactic Literature (Journal of Persian Language and Literature), 7, 115-142. [in Persian]
Hassan, R. (1969). A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. New York: Longman.
Hassan, R. (1989). Language and Verbal Art. London: Oxford University Press.
Leach, G. (1965). This Bread That I Break. Language and Interpretation, in English Literary Review, 66-75.
Mahboob, F. (2016). A structural and aesthetic analysis of Nafthat al-Masdur. Adabī Techniques, 8, 207-222. [in Persian]
Manuchehri, A. b. Q. (1959). Divan of Master Manuchehri Damghani (M. Dabir Siaghi, Ed.). Tehran: Zavvar Bookshop. [in Persian]
Mehraban, S. (2011). A new look at the linguistic and rhetorical features of Nafthat al-Masdur. Stylistics of Persian Poetry and Prose (Bahar Adab), 4, 143-153. [in Persian]
Mokarowsky, J. (1932). Standard language and poetic language. In Garvin, P.
Mousavi, N & Haji Aghababai, M.R. (2019). Linguistic foregrounding in Tarikh-e Beyhaqi based on Geoffrey Leech’s theory. Linguistic Essays, 55, 163-192. [in Persian]
Pournamdarian, T. (2010). My House is Cloudy. Tehran: Morvarid. [in Persian]
Safavi, K. (2004). From Linguistics to Literature. Tehran: Sore-ye Mehr. [in Persian]
Safavi, K. (2015). An Introduction to Linguistics in Persian Literary Studies. Tehran: Elmi. [in Persian]
Shafiei Kadkani, M.R. (2012). The Music of Poetry. Tehran: Agah. [in Persian]
Shamian, H & Jafari, S. (2018). Explaining the pattern of using rhetorical and figurative devices in Nafthat al-Masdur. Persian Language and Literature, 71, 119–144. [in Persian]
Shamisa, S. (2001). Literary Criticism. Tehran: Ferdows. [in Persian]
Shamlu, A. (2002). Collected Works. Tehran: Zamaneh. [in Persian]
Shklovsky, V. (2001). Art as Technique; from Structuralism and Post-Structuralism and Literary Studies. (F. Sojoudi, Ed.). Tehran: Sore-ye Mehr. [in Persian]
Short, M. (1996). Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays and Prose. London & New York: Longman.
Tahmasbi, F & Mozafari, S. (2016). Stylistic analysis of Nafthat al-Masdur by Zaydari Nasawi. Adabī Techniques, 8, 173-188. [in Persian]
Talaei, M., Faghihian, N & Nasresfahani, M.R. (2014). Linguistic foregrounding in the short story The Violet’s Desire by Shahriar Mandanipour (Based on Geoffrey Leech’slinguistic framework). Contemporary Persian Literature, 4, 85-103. [in Persian]
Zaidari Nasavi, Sh.M. (1964). Nafthat al-Masdur. (A.H. Yazdgerdi, Ed.). Tehran: General Directorate of Writing, Ministry of Education. [in Persian]
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 576 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 33 |
||