Critique of the speech acts of interrogative sentences in Salman Savoji's odes

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD Candidate in Persian language and literature, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.

2 Professor of Persian Language and Literature, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Associate Professor of Persian Language and Literature, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.

10.22091/jls.2022.8201.1399

Abstract

The present study has investigated the speech acts in the interrogative sentences in Salman Savoji's poetry in a descriptive-analytical method. The research findings show that there is a coherent link between Salman's language and his thought i.e. the poet uses language appropriate to his audiences’ position and social status. Salman has used the most questions in his expressive acts. First, he seeks to convince the audience and attract their participation and approval. Salman uses these questions to express his views and gain the approval of the person who is eulogized. Second, he seeks to exaggerate, highlight, and emphasize the content of the speech which corresponds to the texture of the ode, the descriptions, exaggerations and imaginative praises of a eulogy. To observe the didactic aspect of his poetry, and also to maintain the high dignity of the eulogized person, Salman, in the persuasive acts, avoids the direct asking of his request. Doing so, he lowers the obligatory and reprimanding connotation of his words resulting in the audience’s lack of willing to oppose him. Expressive acts usually have close and intertwined meanings. This conceptual affinity creates a vast network of intertwined concepts or "conceptual auras." Therefore it becomes possible to engage the audience's feelings in reading the text and strengthen the desired effect by reinforcing the emotional richness of the words. The speaker's words are explicit and unambiguous in commissive acts, so due to the multi-layered nature of literary texts, this act has little place in poetry.

Keywords

References

‘Abdollahi‚ M.A. (2005). Nazariye-ye af’al-e goftari. Majalle-ye Pazhohesh ha-ye falsafi-kalami. No 24. Pp. 91-119.
‘Abdollahiyan‚ H & ‘A.A. Bagheri. (2016). Koneshha-ye goftari-ye panjgane dar she’r-e seda-ye pa-ye ‘ab-e Sepehri. Majalle-ye zaban va adabiyat-e farsi. No. 27. Pp. 241-258.
‘Arab Yosef Abadi‚ F. (2017). Karbordshenasi-ye jomleha-ye porseshi dar ash’ar-e Fereydon Moshiri. Majalle-ye zibayi shenasi-ye adabi. No. 3. Pp. 47-71.
‘Acheoa, J.E. (2017). "Searle’s Speech Act Theory: AIntegrative Appraisal". Department of European Languages. Faculty of Arts. Management and Social Sciences. Federal University. Birnin-kebbi. Nigeria. Vol. 2017. Issue. 1. Pp. 1-13.
‘Ahmadnezhad‚ k. (2003). Ma’ani va bayan. Tehran: Zavvar. ‘Alborzi ‚ P. (2007). Mabani-ye zabanshenasi-ye Matn. Tehran: Amir Kabir.
‘Austin, J.L. (1962). How to do things with words. London: Oxford University Press.
Batooli Arani‚ A. (2001). Nagshha-ye ma’nayi-manzoori-ye jomalate porseshi dar ash’are Mehdi Akhavan Sales va Foroogh Farrokhzad, bar paye-ye koneshha-ye goftari va nazargahha-ye balaghi dar she’r-e farsi. Payanname-ye karshenasi-ye Arshad. Be rahnamayi-ye jalal rahimiyan. Shiraz: Daneshgah-e Shiraz.
Botha, J.E. (1991). "The potential of speech act theoryfor New Testament exegesis: Some basic concepts". University of South Africa. South Africa. Vol. 47. No. 2. Pp. 277-293.
Cutting, j. (2002). Pragmatics and Discourse. London: Routledge.
Ghasemi‚ R. (2008). Ma’ani va bayan-e tatbighi: barresi-ye tatbighi-ye 16 ketab-e jadid-e ‘elme ma’ani. Tehran: Ferdows.
Goli‚ A. (2008). Ma’ani va bayan. Tabriz: Aydin.
Kazzazi‚ M.J. (1991). Zibayishenasi-ye sokhan-e parsi (ma’ani 2). Vol. 2. Tehran: markaz & ketab mad.
Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Meijers, a.w.m. (2007). "Collective Speech Acts". Dordrecht. vol 41. Pp. 93-110.
Miller, S. (2000). "Speech acts and conventions. School of Humanities and Social Sciences". Charles Sturt University. Wagga Wagga. Australia. Elsevier Science. Pp. 155-166.
Moradi firooz‚ Sh. (2013). Tahlil-e balaghi- dastoori-ye porseshha-ye balaghi dar ghazal-e sa’di. Payanname-ye karshenasi-ye Arshad. Be rahnamayi-ye Nasergholi sarli. Tehran: daneshgah kharazmi.
Pahlevannezhad, M & L. Estahbanati. (2008). Barresi-ye Koneshha-ye goftari dar sokhanraniha-ye ro’asa-ye jomhor-e iran va amrica shahrivar 85 sazman melal. Majalle-ye daneshkade-ye adabiyat va ‘oloom-e ensani. No. 208. Pp.1-24.
Parsa‚ A. & D. Mahdavi. (2011). Barresi-ye naghshha-ye ma’nayi manzoori dar Ghazaliyat-e Shams. Majalle-ye zaban va adabiyate farsi. No. 71. Pp. 29-58.
Peregrin, J. (1998). "Linguistics and Philosophy". De Gruyter. vol. 24. No. 2-3. Pp. 1-31.
Rajayi‚ M.K. (1993). Ma’alem ol-balaghe. Shiraz: Entesharat-e Daneshgah-e Shiraz.
Rezanezhad‚ G.H. (1988). Osol-e ‘elm-e balaghat dar zaban-e farsi. Tehran:Alzahra.
Safavi‚ K. (2003). Ma’ni shenasi-ye karbordi. Tehran: Hamshahri.
Safavi‚ K. (2008). Daramadi bar ma’na shenasi. Tehran: soore-ye mehr.
Savoji‚ S. (2010). Kolliyat-e Salman Savoji. moghaddame va tashih-e ‘Abbas’Ali Vafayi. Tehran: Sokhan.
Searle. J.R. (1983). Intentionality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shamisa‚ S. (2004). Ma’ani. Tehran: Mitra.
Shirazi‚ A.A. (1998). Ayi’n-e balaghat; sharh-e mokhtasar olma’ani. Vol. 1. Qom: Daftar-e tablighat-e eslami.
Skinner, Q. (2015). "Conventions and the Understanding of Speech Acts". The Philosophical Quarterly. Oxford University Press. Vol. 20. No. 79. Pp. 118-138.
Streeck, J. (1980). "Speech acts in interaction: Acritique of Searle". University of Berlin. West Germany. Vol. 3. Pp. 133-153.
Yule, G. (1996). Principles Of Progmatics. New York: Longman. Yule, G. (2009). Karbord shenasi-ye zaban. Tarjome-ye Ali Rahimi. Tehran: jangal.
Zarghani, S.M. & E. Akhlaghi. (2012). Tahlil-e zhanr-e Shatah bar asas-e nazariye-ye konesh-e goftar. Majalle-ye adabiyat-e ‘erfani-ye daneshgah-e Alzahra. No. 6. Pp: 61-80.
Zeyf‚ Sh. (2014). Tarikh-e Tatavvor-e ‘oloom-e balaghat. Tarjome-ye Mohammadreza Torki. Tehran: Samt.
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image
Rhetoric and Grammar Studies
Volume 11, Issue 20
February 2022
Pages 317-348

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics