Abstract:
روایت، مجموعۀ پیوسته‌‌ای از گفته‌‌هاست که گفتمان را به‌‌وجود می‌‌آورد. براساس الگوی لوینسون (2015)، ارجاع مشارکین یکی از مؤلفه‌‌های ضروری در تحلیل گفتمان روایی است. مشارکین موجود در ساختار روایت ممکن است مشارکین اصلی انسان و غیرانسان و نیز مشارکین فرعی انسان و فرعی غیرانسان، مانند حیوانات باشند. هر زبانی با توجه به ویژگی‌های خاص خود از ابزارهای ارجاعی خاصی همچون مرجع‌دار صفر، گروه اسمی کامل و ضمایر برای اشاره به مشارکین دخیل در گفتمان روایی بهره می‌گیرد. پژوهش حاضر براساس الگوی لوینسون، چگونگی بازنمایی و فراوانی بهکارگیری انواع مشارکین و روش‌های ارجاع به آن‌ها را در تعدادی از حکایت‌های کلیله و دمنه بررسی و تحلیل می‌‌کند. در این پژوهش، 8 باب از کتاب کلیله و دمنه مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. در هر باب، کاربرد انواع مشارکین و ابزارهای ارجاعی مربوط در دو بافت فاعلی و غیرفاعلی شناسایی و توصیف و با استفاده از آزمون خی‌‌دو تحلیل شدند. یافته‌‌های پژوهش نشان داد در باب‌‌های مورد بررسی از کلیله و دمنه برای ارجاع به مشارکین موجود در روایت اعم از مشارکین اصلی و فرعی، انسان و غیرانسان از ابزارهای ارجاعی مختلفی همچون مرجع‌دار صفر، گروه اسمی و ضمایر استفاده شده است؛ علاوه‌‌براین، نتایج حاکی از آن بود که تفاوت معناداری در بهکارگیری انواع مشارکین و ابزارهای ارجاعی موردنظر وجود داشت؛ به‌علاوه، مرجع‌دار صفر دارای بیشترین کاربرد و ضمیر و گروه اسمی به‌ترتیب در جایگاه بعدی قرار گرفتند.
AbstractNarrative is a collection of interconnected utterances that create a discourse. According to Levinsohn (2015) one of the essential components of narrative discourse analysis is participant reference. Participants in a narrative may be human and non-human major participants, also human and non-human minor participants such as animals. Languages use different reference devices such as: zero anaphora, noun pronouns and phrases which refer to participants in narrative discourse. This research attempts to describe and examine different ways of participant reference, methods of introducing major and minor participants in some stories of Kelileh and Demneh based on Levinsohn (2015) model. The data examined in this study consists of eight chapters which include twenty stories. In each story, this reference devices were examined in subject and non-subject context and analyzed with SPSS software and Chi-squer test. The results indicated that the examined stories of Kelile and Demne used different reference devices such as: zero anaphora, pronouns and noun phrases which refer to major and minor participants in narrative discourse. Furthermore, the results showed that the reference devices and types of participants had a meaningful relationship. Also, among participant reference devices; zero anaphora had the highest use, noun phrases and pronouns were at the next range. IntroductionAs far as the approach of narrative discourse analysis is concerned, Levinsohn (2015) is among the linguists who has presented narrative discourse components in narrative studies. On Levinsohn’s opinion, discourse is a connected series of utterances and narrative is a series of connected events in the form of either spoken or written. Sometimes, the sequence of the occurrence of events is important because it indicates the temporal and spatial distance of each event which, in turn, is a signal of cohesion in a text. Consequently, he deals with the explanation of essential components of the narrative discourse analysis that may exist in a text. According to Levinsohn’s (2015) model, the narrative discourse components comprise the number of speakers in a text, text genre, text style and text register, being oral or written text, cohesion, coherence, participant reference, thematic grouping, discontinuities, text charting, the main concept of reference, reference strategies, the methodology for analyzing reference patterns and types of speech reporting. So, one of the narrative discourse components is participant reference which refers to types of the participant (major, VIP (very important), minor, human, and animal) and the ways of giving reference to each participant. As Levinsohn (2015) states, languages typically have a fairly extensive range of forms of giving reference to participants in a story which extend from complete ellipsis (in the form of zero anaphora) to an implicit reference conveyed only by the inflection of the verb, to two or more sets of independent pronouns, to a full noun phrase. In addition, he maintains that, in many cultures, the easiest narratives to obtain are traditional folktales such as animal stories; they can be very valuable for text analysis. As he believes, animals are symbolic of humans in folktales stories. They behave and talk like humans. In this regard, the translation of Kelileh and Demneh is one of the examples of animal’s stories in Persian literature in which allegorical stories are narrated from the language of animals appearing in a social link. Therefore, recognizing narrative discourse characteristics of this book will be very effective in its analyzing and understanding. Thus, this research is going to identify, study and describe types of participants and the use of different discourse devices employed to refer to the participants in eight chapters of Kelileh and Demneh stories based on levinsohn’s (2015) model as well as to answer the following questions:The major research question:Can we study and describe types of participant reference components in some stories of Kelileh and Demneh based on Levinsohn’s (2015) model?The minor research questions:1-1- How are types of participant reference components proposed in Levinsohn’s (2015) model represented in some stories of Kelileh and Demneh?1-2- What kind of relationship is there between the usage frequency of types of participants in some stories of Kelileh and Demneh?1-3- What kind of relationship is there between the usage frequency of types of giving reference ways to participants in some stories of Kelileh and Demneh?1.1. Detailed Research MethodThe method of doing this research has been library research. In this regard, first, the related theses, articles and books were studied to describe the theoretical concepts of the research, as well as all the previous research having commonalities whit the present research either in the use of Levinsohn’s (2015) model or in the analysis of Kelileh and Demneh text were reviewed. In this research, eight out of total number of fifteen chapters of Kelileh and Demneh including “Borzoye-y-e Tabib”, “Shir va Gav”,” Bazjoste kar Demneh”, “Kabootar-e motavvagheh” Boom va Gharab”,” Moosh va Gorbeh”, “Shir va Ebne Avi” and “Ebne Malek va Ashab” were selected. Then different types of participant reference used in these chapters were identified and examined. The data analysis method is descriptive-qualitative because the purpose is to describe and compare the usage frequency of types of participants and the ways of referring to each participant. The results were analyzed by using SPSS software which is a statistical package for social sciences. In this analysis, Chi-Square test was used. DiscussionAs above-mentioned, according to Levinsohn (2015), participant reference is one of the discourse components in the structure of a narrative which includes types of the participant and the ways of giving reference to the participants. As to the latter, in each language, there is a range of referential forms of participants in a story. These reference giving devices maybe noun phrases, pronouns or zero anaphora. Based on the data gathered, it was recognized that types of the participant were realized in the form of major, minor, human, and animal participants. In addition, it was specified that zero anaphora had the highest frequency in relation to the way of giving reference to participants where a personal ending refers to a participant that is the agent of the verb in narrative structure. In other words, the participant is syntactically and semantically present but without a phonetic representation. The use of zero anaphora or null subject pronouns in Persian language is one of its grammatical features which causes it to be regarded as a pro-drop language. Also, the use of pronouns and noun phrases were in the next ranges. That is to say, pronouns such as “man (I)”, “to (you)”, “u (she or he)” or noun phrases such as “Demneh” and “Shanzabe” were used to refer to participants in the story.As a result, this study indicated that the types of participant reference components represented in the stories of Kelileh and Demneh under investigation were in agreement with those presented in Levinsohn’s (2015) model. So, the answer to the question (1-1) is positive. In addition, the analysis and description of different types of participants and also different types of giving reference ways in a number of Kelileh and Demneh stories showed that there was a significant relationship between the usage frequency of types of participants. Moreover, there was a significant relationship between the usage frequency of types of giving reference ways to participants. Therefore, due to the frequency, percentage and mean of the usage of different types of participant reference components in the stories under study, the answer to the main question is positive as well. This, in turn, means that we can study and describe types of participant reference components in some stories of Kelileh and Demneh based on Levinsohn’s (2015) model.Therefore, due to the theoretical importance of this research and exploring different types of participants and also the ways of giving reference to each of the participants in a number of Kelileh and Demneh stories following Levinsohn’s (2015) model, the present study can be not only a model to the scientific studies of other Kelileh and Demneh stories, but also an outline for exploration and study of narrative discourse of other related literary works. In addition, the findings of this research show that the reference system of Kelileh and Demneh discloses the three functions or tasks suggested by Dooly and Levinsohn (2001): the semantic, discourse- pragmatic and processing functions, by employing different reference devices. In other words, the use of each participant reference devises or components aims at fulfilling the functions of the language reference system. Studying and recognizing these tasks and the reference devises can lead to a better understanding of the narrative discourse structure of the stories of Kelileh and Demneh. ConclusionIn this research, the participant reference components were examined in the form of types of the participants and the ways of giving reference to the participants in subject and non-subject contexts in eight chapters of Kelileh and Demneh. The data surveyed in this study designated that different types of the participants were identified in Kelileh and Demneh stories, being major and minor participants including humans and animals. Likewise, in order to refer to each of the participants various reference devices such as noun phrases, zero anaphora and pronouns were used to introduce and refer to different types of the participants involved, among which zero anaphora had the highest usage frequency, the pronouns and noun phrases were in the next ranks of the usage. ReferencesAhangar, A. A., Mashhadi, M. A., Mojahedi Rezaeian, S. (2013). Study of Participant Reference in Seven Adventures of Rostam. Research Literature. No.26. pp: 147-176. [In Persian]Ahmadpanah, F. (2009). Discourse contrast in Kelileh and Demneh. M.A. Thesis in Persian Language and Literature (unpublished), Kurdistan University. [In Persian]Barjasteh Delfrooz, B. (2010). Discourse Features in Balochi of Sistan Oral Narratives, Sweden SE- 7512, Uppsala, Sweden.Bremond, C. (1973). Morphology of the French Folktale, Semiotica. Vol. 2. No. 3. pp 257-275.Dooley, R, A., Levinsohn, S, H (2001). Self-Instruction Materials on Narrative Discourse Analysis. SIL InternationalElliott, J. (2005). Using Narrative in Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Sage Publications.Halliday, M. A. K., Hasan, R. (1976), Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Hashemian M. (2013). Typification and Characterization in the Story of Shir va Gav. Roshd Journal of Persian language and literature Teaching. No: 105. pp: 24-25 [In Persian]Jahed Jah, A., Rezaei, L. (2011). The Study of Continuation of Narrative Time in the Stories of Kelileh and Demneh. Boostan Adab Journal of Shiraz University. No. 48. pp: 9-27. [In Persian]Keramati Foomani, S. (2016). The Study of Animals in Kelileh and Demneh Based on Critical View of Norman Fairclough. M.A. Thesis of Persian Language and Literature (unpublished), Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. [In Persian]Khalili Jahantigh, M., Barani. M., Fooladi Y. (2021). Comparing the Structure of Marzban Nameh and Kelileh and Demne. Subcontinent Studies. No. 38. pp: 177-194. [In Persian]Levinsohn, S. H. (2010). Self-Introduction on Narrative Discourse Analysing. A M Annual of Basic Concepts. Dalbs: SIL InternationalLevinsohn, S. H. (2015). Self-Introduction on Narrative Discourse Analysing. A Manual of Basic Concepts. Dalbs: SIL International.Meshkat-o- Dini, M. (2005). Persian Grammar, the Lexical Categories and Merge. Samt Press. [In Persian]Mohseni Poor Kalhori, Z. B. (2014). A Stylistic Study of Verbal Expressions in Kelileh and Demneh Based on Speech acts and Their Role in Creating a Technical Style. M.A. Thesis in Persian Language and Literature (unpublished). Tehran Azad University. [In Persian]Monshi, N. (2012). Translation: Kelileh and Demneh. Correction. M. Minovie Tehrani. Tehran, Amir Kabir Press. [In Persian]Parsa, S. A. Salavati, L. (2010). Morphology of the Stories of Kelileh and Demneh. Journal of Poetry Research of Shiraz University, Vol. 2. No.4. pp: 47-77. [In Persian].Propp, V. (1989). Morphology of Folktale. Trans. F. Badrei. Tehran: Toos. [In Persian].Ricoeur, P. (1988) Time and Narrative, Vol. 3. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Roberts, J. R., Barjasteh Delafrooz, B., Jahani, C. (2009). A Study of Persian Discourse Structure. Uppsala: Uppsala University PressSafaei Sangari, A., Ahmad Panah, F. (2020). Critical Analysis of Narrative Discourse in Arabic Kelileh and Demneh. Journal of Arabic language and literature. Vol. 11. No. 1. pp: 89-120. [In Persian]Shaghaghi, V. (2011). An introduction to Morphology. Tehran. Samt. [In Persian]Smith, C. S. (2003). Modes of Discourse: The Local Structure of Texts (Vol. 103). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Soofi, Z. (2011). The Study of Some Discourse Components in Some Sistani Narratives Based on Dooly and Levinsohn’s (2001) Model. M.A. Thesis in Linguistics (unpublished). University of Sistan and Baluchestan. [In Persian]Taghavi, M., Behnam, M. (2012). The Difference Between the Narrator and the Storyteller in the Story of “Shir va Gav” of Kelileh and Demneh and the Tales of Bidpai. Journal of literary Essays. No. 4. pp: 67-83. [In Persian]Tamim Dari, A., Abbasi, S. (2014). The Structuralist Study of “Shir va Gav” of Kelileh and Demneh Based on Claude Bermon’s Model. Journal of Literary Textual Research. No. 59. pp: 43-59. [In Persian]Tannen, D. (1980). A Comparative Analysis of Oral Narrative Strategies: Athenian Greek and American English. In W.L. Chafe (ed.), The Pear Stories. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. pp. 51–87.Toolan, M. (1998). Narrative: A Critical Linguistic Introduction, London and New York: Routledge.Van Leeuwen, T. A. (2008). Critical Discourse Analysis, In Schiffirine, D. Tanen, F. Hamilton,T. H.E. [eds] Handbook of Discourse, London: Routledge.Yaghoobi Janbe Soraeei, P. (2011). Narrative Structure of Kelileh and Demneh Discourse Analysis of Ray and Barhaman Interaction. Journal of literature studies. [In Persian]
Machine summary:
يافته هاي پژوهش نشان داد در باب هاي مورد بررسي از کليله و دمنه براي ارجاع به مشارکين موجود در روايت اعم از مشـارکين اصـلي و فرعـي، انسـان و غيرانسـان از ابزارهـاي ارجاعي مختلفي همچون مرجع دار صفر، گروه اسمي و ضماير استفاده شده اسـت ؛ علاوه بـراين ، نتـايج حـاکي از آن بـود کـه تفاوت معناداري در به کارگيري انواع مشارکين و ابزارهاي ارجاعي مـوردنظر وجـود داشـت ؛ بـه علاوه ، مرجـع دار صـفر داراي بيشترين کاربرد و ضمير و گروه اسمي به ترتيب در جايگاه بعدي قرار گرفتند.
اين مؤلفه ها براساس الگوي لوينسـون (٢٠١٥) عبارت انـد از: تعداد سخنگويان در يک متن ، ژانر متن (Text genre) يا نوع محتـواي مـتن ، سـبک و سـياق (Style and register)، شفاهي يا نوشتاريبودن متن ، انسـجام (Coherence)، ارجـاع مشـارکين (Participant reference)، گروه بنـدي معنـايي (Thematic grouping)، گسستگيهاي معنايي (Thematic discontinuities)، جدول بندي مـتن (Text charting)، مفهــوم اصــلي ارجــاع ، راهبردهــاي ارجــاع (Reference strategies) و روش شناســي تحليــل الگوهــاي ارجــاعي (Methodology for analyzing reference patterns)؛ بنابراين ، ارجاع مشـارکين کـه يکـي از مؤلفـه هاي گفتمـاني است ، نحوة ارجاع به انواع مشارکين (اصلي، ويژه ، فرعي، جاندار، بيجان ، انسان و حيوان ) را ازطريق ابزارهـايي خـاص درون متن روايي مشخص ميکند.
براين اساس ، اين پژوهش درصدد است تا انواع مشـارکين و بـه کارگيري ابزارهـاي گفتمـاني مختلـف را بـراي ارجـاع بـه مشارکين در تعدادي از داستان هاي کليله و دمنه براساس الگوي لوينسون (٢٠١٥)، ازجمله مرجـع دار صـفر (تصـريف فعلـي) همچون شناسه هاي فعلي ( ـ م ، - ي، ـ د / ø، - يم ، - يد، ـ ند)، ضماير منفصـل ماننـد ضـماير شخصـي (مـن ، تو/شـما، او/ ايشان ، ما، شما، آن ها) و درنهايت ، به کارگيري گروه اسمي کامل را بررسي و توصيف کند.
(
, 
, 
)
