نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترای زبان وادبیات فارسی دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان

2 دانشیار زبان و ادبیات فارسی دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان (نویسنده مسئول)

3 دانشیار زبان و ادبیات فارسی دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان

10.22111/jllr.2021.36744.2857

چکیده

ارزیابی سطوح گوناگون گفتمان، امکان دستیابی به برداشتی جدید از آن را فراهم می‌نماید و تعاملات زبان با ساختارهای ایدئولوژیک را کشف می‌کند. تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی این امکان را فراهم می‌آورد که دو عامل ایدئولوژی و قدرت که در فرایند ارتباط زبانی تأثیر مهمی در روساخت و ژرف‌ساخت زبان دارند مورد بررسی قرار گیرد. تئون ون‌دایک (Teun van Dijk)، ازجمله نظریه‌پردازان این حوزه، تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی را به‌مثابة ابزاری نیرومند برای تحلیل‌های اجتماعی می‌داند. الگوی پیشنهادی وی معیار مناسبی جهت تحلیل شعر اجتماعی-سیاسی است که غالبا برپایة برجسته‌سازی نکات مثبتِ «خود» و حاشیه‌رانی نکات منفیِ «دیگری» بنا شده‌است. محمد زُهری (1926-1995م) ازجمله شعرای نوگرای منتسب به شعر اجتماعی-سیاسی است که نظام دوقطبی برجسته‌سازی و حاشیه‌رانی، نقش اساسی در شکل‌بندی گفتمان شعر وی دارد. پژوهش حاضر با تکیه بر روش توصیفی-تحلیلی به این نتیجه رسید که نظام گفتمانی در ژرف‌ساخت شعر زُهری، بیشتر برپایة برجسته‌سازی نکات مثبت خود و برجسته‌سازی نکات منفی دیگری بنا شده‌است که این برجسته‌سازی‌ها با روساخت‌هایی که شامل معناسازی، ساختار گزاره‌ای، دستور زبان و استدلال است تقویت می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Discourse Analysis of Mohammad Zohari Poetry Levels Based on Teun van Dijk's Model

نویسندگان [English]

  • Abdolla Arab yosef Abadi 1
  • abdolali oveisi 2
  • Abbas Nikbakht 3

1 PhD student in Persian language and literature, Sistan and Baluchestan University

2 Associate Professor of Persian Language and Literature, Sistan and Baluchestan University

3 Associate Professor of Persian Language and Literature, Sistan and Baluchestan University

چکیده [English]

 
 
1-Introduction
Discourse analysis is a reaction to a more traditional form of linguistics that focuses on the components and the structures of a sentence and does not involve the analysis of the language used. "Unlike formal linguistics, discourse analysis tends to translate the concept of structure from the sentence level, ie grammatical relations such as subject, institution, object to the text level longer." (Mills, 1393: 144; quoted by: Mirahmadi and Ardakani, 1396: 32). Discourse analysis has several approaches that can be divided into four main approaches: historical discourse analysis, political discourse analysis, discourse psychology and critical discourse analysis. These approaches differ in five main points that by examining these approaches, the approach of critical discourse analysis can be understood among other types of discourse analysis: 1. Discourse actions 2. Power 3. Ideology 4. Subject 5. History. Among discourse theorists, what is emphasized in the present study is Theon Wendyck's model. Wendijk introduced critical discourse analysis from the field of linguistics to the world of politics and society and used it as a powerful tool for social analysis (Van Dijk, 1993: 11). By presenting Ideological Square 2 in the analysis of linguistic system of the text as well as elaborating the different levels of discourse, he introduces his model as follows: (Van Dijk, 2006: 121) and analyzed the minds and behavior of individual and social agents. He interprets these four features of discourse as ideological squares and interprets them at different levels such as "meaning, construction of propositions, formal constructions, sentence syntax, forms of discourse, reasoning, rhetoric, action and reaction" (Kasaei and Rahimian, 2014: 133) Categorizes.
2-Research methodology
Researchers in this article collect their information using library methods and base their analysis on the qualitative analysis of the sublingual and intellectual layers of Zohari poetry, and finally present the results in a descriptive-analytical manner. The method of data analysis in this research is that after collecting data, the information was classified and the text specifications were expressed in the body of the research. Then, based on the studied subject, variables and indicators of the research, the text of Zohri poems was divided into components such as paragraphs, sentences and phrases . Finally, linguistic tools macro as well as micro-linguistic analyzes were used to analyze the highlights and margins of the lyrics. Also, to answer the research questions, the researchers decided to rely on the descriptive-analytical method to separate the micro and macro structures of Zohari poems. To do this, the text was divided into two layers, superstructure and infrastructure, with horizontal and vertical sections in the poems. Depth is used to separate the textual layers of the poem from each other and to express the highlights and margins. Superstructure is also used to separate the characteristics of a layer and the relationship between several characteristics in the height of the lyrics as well as the use of different levels of discourse. Therefore, with horizontal and vertical sections of Zohari poetry, the reason for producing the text is described in relation to sociological, historical and social factors. And then that, the analysis advances from the level of lyrics description to lyrics interpretation and "in terms of the scope of research, the scope of analysis expands to the macro level, which are society, history and ideology" (Aghagolzadeh, 2007: 18).
3-Discussion
To analyze the discourse of Zohari poetry, it is not enough to stress only the overt signs and relations of words and sentences; Rather, one must pay attention to discovering the underlying relationships of overt sentences. Therefore, two types of construction can be considered for each sentence: "One is the depth construction, which in fact determines the semantic and logical relations of the sentence components, and the other is the superstructure, which shows the external and overt form of sentences" (Bateni, 1987: 114). In the definition of superstructure, it can be said that "the superstructure of overt and tangible sentence forms is based on the linguistic preference of speakers, which can be decomposable into syntactic parts and units" (Meshkood al-Dini, 1366: 22). Deep construction is also "an abstract and hypothetical combination on which the meaning and composition of sentences are based before they become superstructure" (Al-Khouli, 1981: 24). Therefore, if discourse analysis can describe linguistic facts and can justify the relationship between sentences, it must pay attention to discovering the underlying relationships of overt sentences (Mushkood al-Dini, 1366: 23). Regarding the construction of a text, one should refer to Van Dijk definition of critical discourse analysis. He thus connects the three concepts of discourse, cognition and community. Discourse refers to a communicative event that includes "spoken interactions, written text, body movements and images" (Abaina, 2013: 183) By constructing Zohari poetry, we reach different levels of its discourse. By understanding each of these levels and their vertical relationship to each other, it is possible to determine whether Zohri was aware of the applied-linguistic and social-applied aspects. Therefore, the higher the poet's understanding of the correct use of emphatic and marginal discourse tools, the better he can transmit the positivity and the negativity of his characteristics to the audience, as a result, the audience can better identify with the discourse system of his poems. The superstructure of Zohari poetry includes the discourse levels of "meaning, propositional structure, grammar, forms of discourse and reasoning" (Kasaei and Rahimian, 2014: 133), each of which is mentioned below with examples of the poet's poems.
4-Conclusion
In the light of superstructure of Zohari poetry, it should be said that semantics is the main and central core of his poems; Because the main goal of the poet is to produce the ideology of the Tudeh Party. This ideology, with the help of meaning, is evident everywhere in the discourse. To make sense of the discourse of his poems, the poet uses the tools of implicit allusion, metamorphosis, detail and creation of distance. In this way, the generality of words and expressions that have been used in some way to stress his identity and marginalize others identity, is discussed to create a gap between the two identities. With the help of this cognitive tool, the poet expects the audience to refer to his background knowledge, to understand him and to connect the implicit references of his poems with its discourse system. The poet uses the technique of metamorphosis in such a way that each word and interpretation has the ability to replace another word; But it has a distinguishable feature from the synonymous words. Therefore, both words are placed next to each other in the axis of companionship in order to realize the main ideology of discourse, which is to highlight its positive points (F +) and negative points (F-). Zohri is aware of the fact that the farther away the grammar of his poems and the structure of their propositions are from the ordinary structures, the more the reader can absorb the depth of his poems and help him to identify with the work. The poet realizes this important point by using various constraints of space, mood, quality, doubt and question, and by repeating these structures many times, he increases the artistic value of his poems and challenges the reader's mind to receive this coherence. Therefore, coherence at the level of propositional structures and grammar of Zohari poems as well as the connection between its construction and superstructure, causes the discourse of this work to find common ground and have a unified and purposeful discourse design.
5-References

Aghagolzadeh, F. Critical discourse analysis and literature. University of Gilan: Adab Pazhohi, 1(1), 17-27. 2007.
Arab Yusef Abadi, A., & Mirzadeh, T. Critical discourse analysis of Muhammad ibn Abdullah and Mansur Abbasi’s letter based on Laclau and Mouffe theory. Imam Khomeini University: Lisan Mobin, 8(26), 73-101. 2016.
Bateni, M. R. A new look into grammar. Tehran, Iran: Agah. 2007.
Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. & M. Coulthard. Text and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. 2003.
Foucault, Michel. The Order of Discourse: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. London: Tavistock. 1970.
Gee, James Paul. An Introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method, Routledge. 1999.
Green, G. Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum Association. 1996.
Jaworski, Adam & Coupland, Nikolas. The Discourse Reader. Routledge. 1993.
Kasaii, A., & Rahimian, J. Examining the book of Islamic Thought (part 1) from the perspective of critical discourse analysis. University of Shiraz: Andisheh Dini, 14(2), 131-153. 2014.
Lyonz, J. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Vol I. London: Cambridge University Press. 1995.
Mcdowell, D. An introduction to discourse theories (H. Nowzari, Trans). Tehran, Iran: Farhang Gofteman. 2001.
Meshkoddini, M. Persian grammar based on the theory of transformational grammar. Mashhad, Iran: Ferdowsi University. 1987.
Mills, S. Discourse (N. Hassanli, Trans) (2nd Ed). Tehran, Iran: Neshaneh. (Original work published 1997). 2014.
Rastgoo, K., & Farzishoob, F. Investigating synonymy in Quran discourse based on Component Analysis Theory. Allameh Tabataba’i University: Translation Studies in Arabic Language and Literature, 7(16), 11-34. 2017.
Saeb Tabrizi, M. M. A. Poetical works. M. Ghahreman (Ed). Tehran, Iran: Elmi va Farhangi. 1985.
Schiffrin, Diborah,, & others. The handbook of discourse analysis, Blackwell Publisher. 2001.
Soltani, A. A. Discourse analysis as in theory and method. Baqir al-Olum University: Political Science, 7(28), 153-180. 2005.
Van Dijk, T. A. »Ideology and Discourse Analysis«. Journal of Political Ideologies. 11(2). Pp: 115-140. 2006.
Van Dijk, T. A. »Opinions and Ideologies in the Press«. in Approaches to Media Discourse. (ed.) by Bell, A. and Peter Garrett, Oxford: Blackwell. Pp: 21-63. 1993.
Van Dijk, T.A. »Opinions and Ideologies in the Press«. in Approaches to Media Discourse. (ed.) by Bell, A. and Peter Garrett, Oxford: Blackwell, 21-63. 1998.
Van Dijk, T.A. Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis: in Critical Discoursc Analysis, (ed.) M. Toolan, London: Routledge. 2002.
Walker, V. «Codeswitching as a power and solidarity strategy in the foreign language classroom: an analysis of language alternation strategies utilized in a Portuguese-English higher education class». Innervate. Vol 3. PP. 362.363. 2011.
Yarmohammadi, L. Discourse analysis using socio-cognitive/semantic and discourse-based factors with regard to picturing social agents. Shahid Bahonar University: The Journal of Literature and Humanity Department, 8(10), 105-119. 2002.

24.Zohari, M. For every star: Poem collection of Zohdi. Tehran, Iran: Toos. 2001.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • critical discourse analysis
  • Teun van Dijk
  • Emphasis
  • M
  1. آقاگل‌زاده، فردوس. «تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی و ادبیات»، دانشگاه گیلان: ادب‌پژوهی، دورة1، شمارة1، صص 17-27، 1386ش
  2. أزابیط، بنعیسی، «المعنی المضمر فی الخطاب اللغوی العربی: البنیة والقیمة التنجیزیه»، مکناس: جامعه مولای إسماعیل، أطروحه دکتوراه، 1996م.
  3. باطنی، محمدرضا، نگاهی تازه به دستور زبان، چ1، تهران: آگاه، 1386ش.
  4. بنعیش، عبدالعزیز، «التواصل بین القصد والاستقصاد: مقاربة تداولیه لفاعلیتی التدلیل

والتأویل»، فاس: جامعه سیدی محمد بن عبدالله، أطروحه دکتوراه، 2004م.

  1. بوقره، نعمان، لسانیات الخطاب: مباحث فی التأسیس والإجراء، ط1، بیروت: دار الکتب العلمیه، 2012م.
  2. تلاوی، محمد نجیب، تجدید الخطاب النقدی، ط1، القاهره: الدار الثقافیة للنشر، 2009م.
  3. الجزر، هنی محمد، «القضیه الحملیه الأرسطیه وموقف المنطق الرمزی منها: فریجه نموذجاً»، جامعه دمشق: العلوم الإنسانیه، السنه30، العدد4، صص 421-461، 2014م.
  4. راستگو، کبری؛ فرضی‌شوب، فرشته، «بررسی هم‌معنایی در گفتمان قرآنی برپایة نظریة تحلیل مؤلفه‌ای»، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی: پژوهش‌های ترجمه در زبان و ادبیات عربی، دورة7، شمارة16، صص 11-34، 1396ش.
  5. روبنز، روبرت هنری، موجز تاریخ علم اللغه فی الغرب، ترجمه: أحمد عوض، ط1، الکویت: عالم المعرفه، 1997م.
  6. زهری، محمد، برای هر ستاره: مجموعه اشعار زُهری، چ1، تهران: توس، 1381ش.
  7. سلطانی، علی اصغر، «تحلیل گفتمان به مثابة نظریه و روش»، دانشگاه باقر العلوم: علوم سیاسی، دورة7، شمارة28، صص 153-180، 1384ش.
  8. صائب تبریزی، میرزا محمد علی، دیوان، تحقیق: محمد قهرمان، چ1، تهران: علمی و فرهنگی، 1364ش.
  9. عباینه، یحیی، «الأسس الفلسفیه لتحلیل الخطاب»، جامعه مؤته: سلسلة العلوم الانسانیه والاجتماعیه، السنه31، العدد3، صص 172-200، 2013م.
  10. عرب یوسف‌آبادی، عبدالباسط؛ میرزاده، طاهره، «تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی نامة محمد بن عبدالله و منصور عباسی بر اساس الگوی لاکلاوموف»، دانشگاه امام خمینی: لسان مبین، دورة8، شمارة26، صص 73-101، 1395ش.
  11. عشیر، عبدالسلام، عندما نتواصل نغیّر: مقاربه تداولیه معرفیه لآلیات التواصل والحجاج، ط1، المغرب: إفریقیا الشرق، 2006م.
  12. العموش، خُلود، گفتمان قرآن: بررسی زبان‌شناختی پیوند متن و بافت قرآن، ترجمه: سیدی، حسین، چ1، تهران: سخن، 1388ش.
  13. کسایی، علیرضا؛ رحیمیان، جلال، «بررسی کتاب اندیشة اسلامی 1 از دید تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی»، دانشگاه شیراز: اندیشة دینی، دورة14، شمارة2، صص 131-153، 1393ش.
  14. مزوز، دلیله، «المبنی للمجهول بین اختزال البنیة و استرسال المعنى»، جامعه محمد خیضر:

مجله کلیه الآداب والعلوم الإنسانیه والاجتماعیه، السنه3، العدد5، صص 163-189، 2009م.

  1. مشکوه الدینی، مهدی، دستور زبان فارسی بر پایة نظریة گشتاری، چ1، مشهد: دانشگاه فردوسی، 1366ش.
  2. مک‌دائل، دایان، مقدمه‌ای بر نظریه‌های گفتمان، ترجمه: نوذری، حسینعلی، تهران: فرهنگ گفتمان، 1380ش.
  3. میلز، سارا، گفتمان، ترجمه: نرگس حسنلی، چ2، تهران: نشانه، 1393ش.
  4. یارمحمدی، لطف‌الله، «تحلیل گفتمان با استفاده از مؤلفه‌های جامعه‌شناختی-معنایی گفتمان‌مدار با عنایت به تصویرسازی کارگزاران اجتماعی»، دانشگاه شهید باهنر: نشریة دانشکدة ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دورة8، شمارة10، 105-119، 1381ش.
  5. Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. & M. Coulthard. Text and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. 2003.
  6. Foucault, Michel. The Order of Discourse: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. London: Tavistock. 1970.
  7. Gee, James Paul. An Introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method, Routledge. 1999.
  8. Green, G. Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum Association. 1996.
  9. Jaworski, Adam & Coupland, Nikolas. The Discourse Reader. Routledge. 1993.
  10. Lyonz, J. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Vol I. London: Cambridge University Press. 1995.
  11. Schiffrin, Diborah,, & others. The handbook of discourse analysis, Blackwell Publisher. 2001.
  12. Van Dijk, T. A. »Ideology and Discourse Analysis«. Journal of Political Ideologies. 11(2). Pp: 115-140. 2006.
  13. Van Dijk, T. A. »Opinions and Ideologies in the Press«. in Approaches to Media Discourse. (ed.) by Bell, A. and Peter Garrett, Oxford: Blackwell. Pp: 21-63. 1993.
  14. Van Dijk, T.A. »Opinions and Ideologies in the Press«. in Approaches to Media Discourse. (ed.) by Bell, A. and Peter Garrett, Oxford: Blackwell, 21-63. 1998.
  15. Van Dijk, T.A. Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis: in Critical Discoursc Analysis, (ed.) M. Toolan, London: Routledge. 2002.
  16. Walker, V. «Codeswitching as a power and solidarity strategy in the foreign language classroom: an analysis of language alternation strategies utilized in a Portuguese-English higher education class». Innervate. Vol 3. PP. 362.363. 2011.