عناصر زبانیِ سبک ساز در سووشونِ سیمین دانشور
آرشیو
چکیده
در این مقاله رمان سووشون سیمین دانشور بر اساس مؤلفه های ده گانه لسلی جفریز تحلیل شده است تا انعکاس ایدئولوژی نویسنده در زبان بررسی شود. این مؤلفه ها که بر پایه تحلیل های فرهنگی و جامعه شناختی طراحی شده اند، امکان مطالعه دقیق تر متن را فراهم می کنند. یافته ها نشان می دهد که مؤلفه های جفریز شامل نامیدن، توصیف، بازنمایی کنش ها، رخدادها و وضعیت ها، تقابل ها، ترادف ها، فرضیه سازی و بازنمایی زمان و مکان برای انتقال ایدئولوژی هایی چون "مقاومت" و "عشق به وطن" به کار رفته اند. تقابل ها با بسامد ۵۹/۲۳ درصد، بیشترین سهم را داشته و بیانگر تنش فراوان میان شخصیت ها و حتی مفاهیم انتزاعی مانند سنت و مدرنیته است. فرضیه سازی با ۸۷/۸ درصد، نشان دهنده تمایل نویسنده به بیان غیرمستقیم ایدئولوژی ها و جامعه آرمانی خود است تا کمتر در معرض اتهام قرار گیرد. در مقابل، اولویت بندی با کمترین بسامد ۵۷/۱ درصد، نشان دهنده آن است که نویسنده تمایلی به تحمیل دیدگاه یا ترتیب خاصی از مفاهیم بر خواننده ندارد و فضایی فراهم کرده است تا مخاطب خود بتواند درباره اهمیت و ترتیب موضوعات تأمل کند.A Study of the Linguistic Elements of Style in Simin Daneshvar’s Suvashun
In this study, a comparative analysis of Simin Daneshvar’s novel Suvashun was conducted based on Leslie Jeffries’ ten stylistic components, to examine the influence of the author’s ideology on language. Rooted in cultural and sociological frameworks, these components facilitate more in-depth analysis of the text. The findings indicate that Jeffries’ components—including naming, describing, representing actions/events/states, equating and contrasting, exemplifying and enumerating, prioritizing, implying and assuming, negation, hypothesizing, and representing time and space— have been used as linguistic tools for conveying ideologies such as “resistance” and “love for the homeland.” Among these, contrasting has the highest frequency (23.59%), reflecting significant tension among characters and even abstract concepts such as tradition and modernity. Hypothesizing, with a frequency of 8.87%, indicates the author’s tendency to indirectly convey ideologies and an ideal society to avoid being accused. Conversely, prioritizing has the lowest frequency (1.57%), suggesting that the author does not wish to impose a specific conceptual hierarchy on the reader but instead creates space for the audience to reflect on the importance and influence of topics.
Introduction
Modern literary analysis has moved beyond traditional methods, requiring the examination of cultural, social, political, and historical contexts. This approach uncovers deeper meanings in literary works and enriches the reading experience. Critical stylistics, rooted in critical discourse analysis, investigates social and cultural structures embedded in texts through concepts such as discourse, ideology, and power. Theorists such as Roger Fowler and Paul Simpson emphasize the connection between language and the writer’s worldview, arguing that language reflects social attitudes and meanings. Leslie Jeffries, in his book, Critical Stylistics (2010), systematizes this connection through ten analytical tools. This method, by analyzing the impact of ideology on language, uncovers implicit ideologies and social meanings, creating a foundation for more in-depth literary research.
Materials and Methods:
This descriptive-analytical study examines the relationship between the author’s linguistic choices, his worldview, and the socio-political context influencing the narrative. Through a critical stylistic approach, the research demonstrates how linguistic elements reflect ideologies and power structures within society. The study examines themes such as the tension between tradition and modernity, the role of women, and the socio-political dynamics of the Pahlavi era. Additionally, it shows how historical and cultural transformations have influenced the author’s language and narration.
Discussion and Analysis
Naming and Describing: In Suvashun, the author emphasizes specific identities and key events more through names (70 instances) than descriptions (44 instances). However, descriptions add depth to the complexity of characters and situations, enriching the narrative by balancing identity clarity with the layered meanings of the story.
Representing Actions/Events/States: The frequency of actions (26 instances), states (15 instances), and events (7 instances) suggests that the author focuses more on the actions and reactions than on major events. States, though less frequent, highlight the emotional and psychological conditions of characters, thus emphasizing human relationships and internal responses to social events.
Equating and Contrasting: Contrasting, with 226 occurrences, is the most prevalent stylistic element, playing a fundamental role in shaping social and cultural concepts. These oppositions include tradition vs. modernity and men vs. women, among other social dichotomies. Additionally, equating (63 instances), categorized into semantic and conversational types, enhances semantic richness and represents the everyday language and social interactions of the characters.
Exemplifying and Enumerating: Daneshvar employs 79 instances of “exemplification” and 55 instances of “enumeration” to depict society during wartime. Concrete examples reveal social realities, while abstract examples reflect internal emotions. Additionally, enumerating serves as a tool for critiquing socio-political issues, and exemplification conveys deeper meanings.
Prioritizing: Prioritizing is achieved through two techniques: “fronting “and “cleft sentences”. Fronting emphasizes key messages, while cleft sentences highlight specific details, enhancing narrative impact.
Implying and Assuming: An analysis of implicature in Suvashun identifies 41 instances, predominantly related to social, cultural, political, and anti-colonial themes.
Negation: Negation (47 instances), expressed through negative verbs and pronouns (e.g., nobody, nothing), underscores themes of oppression and injustice. This structure functions both grammatically and as a literary device to convey suffering and invite reflection on social issues.
Hypothesizing: Suvashun, uses 85 instances of hypothesizing and tools like modality, speech acts, and conditional structures to critique social issues and reflect the aspirations of society. These techniques emphasize ethical commitments, hope, and internal tensions.
Representing Others’ Speech and Thought: The novel contains 73 instances of speech representation, predominantly in direct form, and 27 instances of thought representation, mainly direct. While direct speech fosters an immediate connection with characters, direct thought representation may suggest an imposition of the author’s interpretations onto the text.
Representing Time, Space, and Society: Suvashun features 46 instances of time representation, 19 of space, and 20 of society. Locations symbolize identity and power, time is presented non-linearly to reinforce historical identity, and social and class inequalities resulting from Alien Presence are vividly depicted.
Conclusion
Suvashun is a multilayered and realistic novel that portrays the social, political, and cultural complexities of its time. By focusing on both internal and external conflicts of characters and society, the novel critiques socio-political conditions and reveals the author’s perspective on societal challenges on contemporary challenges. A key feature of this novel is its portrayal of social issues from a female perspective, which adds unique dimensions to the narrative. Time and space play central roles as symbols of power, domination, and transformation. The occupying military forces and religious sites symbolize identity, resistance, and control, shaping the characters’ destinies. The precise naming of characters and their psychological descriptions make the novel a valuable source for sociological analysis. The process of hypothesizing allows the author to compare realities with the ideals pursued by characters, thereby reflecting social concerns, political issues, and aspirations for a just society. Through hypothesizing, Daneshvar critiques the socio-political conditions of her time while depicting her characters’ hopes for a more equitable future. Suvashun ultimately serves as a socio-political critique of wartime conditions during World War II.
تبلیغات
