تحلیل ساختار روایی داستان «زال و رودابه» بر مبنای الگوی کنشگر گریماس

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترای ادبیات حماسی دانشگاه اصفهان

2 دانشیار زبان و ادبیات فارسی دانشگاه اصفهان

3 استادیار زبان و ادبیات فارسی دانشگاه اصفهان

چکیده

ساختارگرایی ادبی پس از تفسیر محورهای بنیادین هر اثر ادبی، به دنبال ایجاد یک نظریة ادبی عام است و موقعیت درستی از نشانه‌ها، عناصر، محورهای هنری، زبانی و روایت‌شناسی آثار ارائه می‌دهد. ساختارگرایی در داستان بیشتر به عنصر روایت می‌پردازد. در این نوشتار  داستان‌ «زال و رودابه» براساس الگوی کنشگر گریماس، روایت‌شناس فرانسوی، بررسی شده است. او با ارائة الگوی کنشی و پیوند آن با شخصیت و موقعیت، بررسی روایت را آسان کرد و الگوی کارآمدی در تعیین میزان کنش‌مندی و کنش‌پذیری عامل داستانی ارائه داد. هدف این الگو نمایان کردن نقش شخصیت‌ها در پیشبرد جریان داستان و حوادث آن است. در این پژوهش باتکیه‌بر روش کتابخانه‌ای ـ تحلیلی، ساختار داستان بر مبنای تقابل‌های دوگانه، زنجیره‌های روایی و مربع معناشناسی گریماس بررسی شده است. پس از بررسی، این نتیجه به دست آمد که استواری داستان، ساختار آن و پیوستگی اجزای آن منطبق با این الگوست و شش کنشگر گریماس (فاعل، مفعول، فرستنده، یاریگر، بازدارنده، گیرنده) در داستان حضور داشتند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The study of the narrative structure of the story of Zal and Roodabeh based on the acting model of Grimes

نویسندگان [English]

  • mahdieh melaly 1
  • mohammad rezanasresfahani 2
  • zohreh najafi 3
1 Ph.D. student of epic literature, University of Isfahan
2 Associate professor of language and literature in Isfahan University
3 Assistant Professor of Farsi Language and Literature University of Isfahan
چکیده [English]

Extensive Abstract :
 
 
1-      Introduction
Russian formalists were the first to make extensive studies in the field of storytelling and  constructivist rhetoric. One of the most prominent was Vladimir Popp and his famous work "The Morphology of Fairy Tales".In this book, he identified the basic script in the popular Russian stories. Each of these motifs points to character behavior. He believed that the narrative first began with a steady state of affairs, and then came under the influence of actions and forces. Structuralism entered France in the 1950s and 1960s, and the votes of those like Todorov, Grimes, Barrett, Burmon, and so on, had long dominated the circles of thought in the world. French narrative Grimas, by presenting a pattern of engagement and linking it to personality and position, facilitated narrative review. He based on narrative on the basis of the morphology of the story of Vladimir Prop and believed that in each story, there were six actors. His six actors are:1. Transmitter; 2. Receiver; 3. Subject; 4. Object of value; 5. Inhibitor; 6. Contributor (Abbasi, 1393: 68-69). Structure analysis, based on the narrative structureist theory, helps to discover the type of relationship between actors and the meaning of the narrative; in other words, the meaningfulness of the text is proven due to its narrative structure analysis.The main purpose of this paper is to find out the validity of the narrative of Zal and Roudabeh from the perspective of O.G.Grams and to better understand the degree of adaptability of the story to the multiplicity of the theory of action, action, passivity and positioning, language and narration, as well as the importance of the actions of each actor in Advancing the process of the story. It also seeks to show that incidents are the birthstone of actions that are the main cause of these actions as contradictory by the characters themselves. The main contradiction in this story is the racial contradiction (Iranian and Zahakians) that shadows the entire structure of the story and is the main factor in expanding action. Zal acts under the influence of love and tries to overcome all contradictions in the story, and in fact his actions are the circuit of the story. The story has been analyzed in accordance with these six activists and used to represent the dual oppositions (racial contradiction) of the square of the semantics of Gremos as a logical model for denoting the contradiction. The narrative chains and syntactic rules in this story are in accordance with the model and the views of Grimes in this story. The most important research questions: one, what is the meaning of the interaction pattern of Gremos in analyzing the story of Zal and Roudabeh of the status, incident, personality, and square language? And according to the pattern of Germas, is the story of Zal and Roudabeh a coherent and systematic structure?
 
2-      Research methodology      
In this essay, all books on structuralism, narrative, and structuralist theories were first
studied and analyzed. Then, through descriptive-analytic method, the story was
analyzed based on the action model.
 
    Discussion-3
In the story of Zal and Roudabeh, according to the model of Grisma, six actors in the
first position are:
Zal = subject
Roudabeh Joiner = value object
Ssam and astronomers = Donors
Rudeba's description of the Nominees =transmitter
Zal = Receiver
Second position
Roudabeh= subject
Zal Joiner = value object
Worshipers, Mediators woman And Sindoodkht = Donors
The description of Zal from Mehrab language= Sender
Raudadeh =receiver
Grimas describes the narrative as the transfer of a value or an object from one
contributing to another. He also divides a narration of a narrative or a narrative syntax
into three propositions: The narrative propositions in the story of Zal and Roodabeh
(first position) are as follows: 1. Zal is powerful and famous and wise (descriptive
proposition); 2. Zahal, hearing the characteristics of Roodabeh, falls in love, restlessness and
restlessness (face, reference to action); 3. Zal, with the help of his father, astronomers, and with the wisdom of Sindoodkht, eventually reached his goal (transitions, actions). In the second position are:1. Roudbeh is very beautiful and his face is sharper and beautiful than the sun; 2. When he talks about his parents in the heart of Zal, he calmly distances himself from him (a parable, a point of disturbance); 3. Finally, with the help of his mother, It arrives (Transparent statement, action is taken). In the context of texture, Grimas poses a semantics square, which is the place of the abstract andfundamental concepts of narration. This square is based on the relation of the subject. In terms of semantics, the two words are contradictory with each other.
Semantic categories, which are the same as "semantic squares", come out of the elementary element. In this story, the first problem with Zal and Roudabe reaches each other is the issue of race and marriage with an alien. And in fact, the Iranian and the anteriority of the two opposing poles form this square, then, according to the semantics square, this breach of conflict must not be said and violated. Grimas examines the structure of the plot of narratives based on their special role. The entire plot structure of this story results from three sequences or chains:
1. Executive Chain: Zal endures many sufferings to achieve its goal; 2. Covenant Chain: Zal and Roodabeh pledge with each other to remain loyal to each other; 3. Distinctive chain: In this chain of movement, the movement is from the negative to the positive, and eventually both of them reach their main goal.
 
-4  Conclusion
Grimas' action model, which was influenced by Prop, is applicable to almost all literary types, and this reflects the degree of flexibility of his model and his more structurally-oriented structure than other narratives. According to the research, the importance of the theory of Grimes and the possibility of its review and adaptation to the story of Zal and Roodabeh can be mentioned. Grimes categorizes the characters based on what they are doing. In this story, every six actors play a role. The goal of Grimes is to use the semantic analysis of sentence making, to achieve the universal grammar of narration and to compare and compare the different narratives. The remarkable point in this story is its duality and that some characters could appear in the face of different actors. In the first part of the story, Zal was in the role of the actor of the "agent" and "Joiner Roudbah" as "value object / object". But in the other part of Rudab's story, he acted as a "agent" and reached the Zal "value object / object". In the study of this story, it became apparent how the actors can achieve their goals according to the situation in the structure of the story.What was important in the narrative of this story was the action of the storytellers according to the situation in which theywere located. After being aware of the girl's love, Sindoodkht is very afraid of Mehrab, but for the sake of welfare and family security, she is ready to go alone to the powerful of world, Saam. What matters about Sindh is that Ferdowsi has well pointed out to her trivial role in this story. They include: 1. Management: Introducing Ferdowsi as a manager, also a crisis manager; 2. Confidence building: both Sam and Mehrab and ... trust him in solving problems; 3. Establishing peace:
He He preferred the peace talks to the war; he well pointed out. Mehrab Kaboli, who is a deterrent, is ready to take his wife and child to get rid of this problem when hears this news because of his position in the country and his country. Zal stands firmly in front of him when the news of his father's fight to Kabul province is heard. All of these actions depend on the location of the people they are in.
 
References
1) Alavimoghadam, M., Pourshahram, S. (2008). Application of Germas's actor model in critique and analysis of Nader Ebrahimi story characters, theosophical literary, 2nd year, Issue 8, 95-116, Isfahan University.
2) Abasi, A., (2014). Applied Narratology, Tehran: Shahid Beheshti publication.
3) Afrapoli, A, & et.al. (2018) comparison of Narratology in two lyric poems and Nezami literary work. Lyric literary research journal of Sistan-Baluchestan University, 16th year, Issue 30, 205-244.
4) Ahmadi, B. (1991). Structure and interpretation of text, Tehran: center publication.      
5) Alen, A. Savena, J. (2007).Text semiotic and theatre performance, translated by Zeinlou, D. Tehran: Mehr publication.
6) Beraheni, R. (1983). Storytelling, Tehran:Nou publication.
7) Bremond, claud. (1970), Morphology of the French folktale,  semiotica2:247- 276
8) Bart, R., Todorf, T., Prince, J. (2015).overview of literature, translated by Rahnama, H. Tehran: Hermes publication.
9) Biniyaz, F. (2015). Overview of storytelling and narrative, Tehran: Afraz publication.
10) Bretnes, H. (2008). Foundations of literary theory. Translated by Aboulghasemi, M. Tehran: Mahi publication.
11) Escoul, R. (2000). Overview of structuralism in literature, translated by Taheri, Tehran: Agahpublication.
12) Escoul, R. (2014). Story principles, translated by Taheri, F. Tehran: center publication.
13) Ferdowsi, A. (2014). Shahnameh, 1st part, by Khaleghi Motlagh, J. Tehran: Center of IslamicEncyclopedia.
14) ferara, Fernando (1974), Theory and Model for the Structural Analysis of Fiction, NewLitterary History, 5:2, pp:245-268
15) Griemas A.J., proter, Catherin (1977). Elements of a Narrative Grammar, Diacritics, Vol7, No 1
 
16) Hamidian, S. (2008). Overview of Ferdowsi's thought and art, Tehran: Nahid publication.
17) Harland, R. (2009). Historical overview of literary theory from Plato to Barth, transalted by Masoumi, A., Salami, N., Emami, Gh., Jourkesh, Sh. , Tehran: Cheshmeh.
 
18) Kaler, J. (2009).  Constructive rhetoric, translated by Safavi, K. Tehran: Minavi Kheradpublication.
 
19) Khorasani, F. Gholamhosseinzadeh, GH. (2012). The study of narrative structure of Three stories from Beihaghi history based on Grimes's model of act, journal of research, 13th year, Issue25, 265-292, Yazd University.
20) Kuyaji Kuruji, J. (2009). The foundations of Irans Nyth and Epic, report and edit by Doustkhah, J. 3th edition, Tehran: Agah publication.
 
21) Mahmoudi, A.A., Ghasemi, S., (2014). Matching of Bouf kour and Al Ella tales based on Germas Theory, comparative literary theory, 8th year, Issue 31, 73-92, Kerman University.
 
22) Mekarik, E.(2005). Contemporary literary theory encyclopedia, translated by Mohajer, M. & Nabavi, M. Tehran: Agah publication.
 
23) Nourayie, E., Ertebat, M.(2013). Morphology of “Rum & Sita” and “Zal & Rudabeh” tales, 1st year, Issue 3, 135-146, Kermanshah University.
 
24) Perap, V. (1989).the morphology of fairy tales, translated by Bedareye, Tehran: Tous publication.
25) Rimoun-Kenan, SH. (2008). Storytelling: contemporary rhetoric, translated by Hori, A. Tehran: Niloufar publication.
26) Sarami, GH. (1994). from the color of flower to pain of bur, Science and Cultural publication.
27) Sajoudi, F.(2015). Structuralism and post structuralism and studies. Tehran: surah publication.
28) Sajoudi, F.(2012). Narratology encyclopedia, Tehran: Elm publication.
29) Shaeiri, H. (2012). The foundation of modern Semantics, Tehran: samt publication.
30) Selden, R., Viyouson, P. (2005). Contemporary literary theory guide, translated by Mokhaber, A. Tehran: Tarhe nou publication.
31) Terins, J. (2012). Narratology of form and function of narration, translated by Shahba, M. Tehran: Minavi Kherad publication

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Zal
  • Roodabeh
  • Narrative
  • Action
  • Grimas