| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
Literary critics and linguists have increasingly focused on the interplay between linguistic and literary-narrative elements when analyzing diverse texts. In this context, the present study aims to examine the formation of ideological discourse in The Book of Arda Viraf, an ancient theological work rich in literary and linguistic complexity. Conducted as a descriptive-analytical inquiry with a selected sample, the study centers on different narrative perspectives and their constitutive semantic units. The primary research question asks: How do three distinct planes of perspective—spatial, psychological, and ideological—function within The Book of Arda Viraf to construct and convey its ideological discourse, which reflects a coherent set of values and beliefs? The study employs Roger Fowler’s theoretical framework, supplemented by the ideas of Halliday, Uspensky, and Genette. The analysis is based on the phonetic transcription and transliteration of the original text, alongside Zhaleh Amouzgar’s Persian translation of Philippe Gignoux’s French version. Findings indicate that The Book of Arda Viraf lacks a singular identifiable author and was not composed primarily for literary purposes. Nonetheless, it contains diverse narrative and linguistic elements that contribute significantly to the construction of its dominant ideological discourse throughout the narrative.
Introduction
The growing importance of research on the functions of language in literary creation, criticism, and drama has shifted scholarly focus toward the linguistic potential of various texts—whether fiction, drama, or non-fiction. However, since linguistics began to integrate with literary criticism, significant disagreements have emerged between linguists and literary theorists. At one end of the spectrum, literary critics like David Lodge argue that linguistic tools cannot be effectively applied to literary analysis due to an inherent conflict between science and values. Lodge (1966) maintains that literature engages with values that resist scientific evaluation, whereas modern linguistics is a scientific discipline; therefore, linguistics can never replace literary criticism.
Conversely, linguists such as Roman Jakobson assert that literature is intrinsically connected to the structure of language, and thus, poetics and literature should be regarded as complementary to linguistics (Sebeok, 1960). This division has gradually blurred, influenced by developments in linguistics, the innovative narrative techniques of modernist writers like James Joyce, Virginia Woolf, and William Faulkner, and more recent language-conscious playwrights such as Mac Wellman, Len Jenkin, and Erik Ehn, who employ language in distinctive ways. This convergence has led many literary critics to recognize the relationship between linguistic features—such as grammatical structures and word formation—and the construction of meaning and overall textual characteristics (Barry, 2009).
In this context, Roger Fowler made a significant contribution by drawing on modern linguistic concepts and methods to offer a linguistic reinterpretation of dramatic elements in Aristotle’s Poetics and other literary criticism concepts. Fowler’s work prominently features the concept of discourse, which he examines through linguistic, literary, and dramatic lenses, viewing discourse as an active linguistic force within works of fiction.
Building on Fowler’s theory, the present research investigates how different planes of narrative perspective and semantic units are employed in The Book of Arda Viraf to shape and present the text’s dominant ideological discourse.
Literature Review
Two Persian-language studies have applied Roger Fowler’s theories to literary analysis. In “Text and Discourse Analysis of Ibrahim Golestan’s Cripple Based on Roger Fowler’s Linguistic Theory,” Abdollahian et al. (2018) examined Golestan’s story through Fowler’s concepts of surface structure and linguistic features such as suspense, ambiguity, repetition, oxymoron, pronoun deletion, referentiality, extensive verb use, long sentences, and rhetorical questions. Their analysis ultimately explored the notions of discourse and perspective within Golestan’s narrative. In another study, “Discourse Analysis in Golshiri’s The House of Light Using Roger Fowler’s Theory,” Abdollahian et al. (2020) focused on surface textual features—particularly syntactic disarray—to investigate discourse formation in Golshiri’s story.
Regarding English-language literature, several attempts have been made to advance Fowler’s theories. For example, Mair’s (1985) article “The ‘New Stylistics’: A Success Story or the Story of Successful Self-Deception?” sought to extend Fowler’s methodology alongside those of other linguists such as Louise Pratt. Studies directly related to the present inquiry have examined various conceptual and methodological aspects; for instance, Brunk’s (2001) article “‘En Otras Voces’: Multiple Voices in Sandra Cisneros’ ‘The House on Mango Street’” employed Fowler’s and Uspensky’s theories to analyze narrative perspective and polyphony.
A few studies have also addressed the linguistic–narrative features of The Book of Arda Viraf and the role of discourse in theological texts (e.g., Bazgir et al., 2018; Moghaddam et al., 2017). However, the novelty of the present research lies in its methodological approach, which employs literary–linguistic tools to examine the ideological discourse of The Book of Arda Viraf.
Among ancient Iranian theological texts—such as the Ascension of Zoroaster, Ascension of Vishtaspa, and Ascension of Kartir—The Book of Arda Viraf stands out as the most important and comprehensive, due to its considerable influence and the comparative studies conducted on it. While linguistic–literary elements in ancient Iranian theological texts generally function in a simpler manner compared to modern stories and novels, The Book of Arda Viraf makes extensive use of such elements to engage its audience and shape its dominant ideological discourse.
Methodology
This descriptive–analytical study employs Roger Fowler’s theoretical framework to examine how The Book of Arda Viraf constructs its dominant discourse. The analysis focuses on the use of spatial, psychological, and ideological perspectives, as well as narrative personae and semantic units, in shaping the text’s overarching ideological message.
Conclusion
The research findings reveal that ancient theological texts like The Book of Arda Viraf share similarities with modern fiction and non-fiction in their use of linguistic and semantic elements to construct discourse, often carrying a strong ideological charge. In The Book of Arda Viraf, the dominant ideological discourse unfolds as Viraf (or Wiraz) embarks on a journey to the afterlife, which can also be interpreted symbolically as an inner, spiritual voyage. Throughout this journey, the text shapes and presents its dominant discourse to the reader on multiple narrative levels by employing linguistic–literary elements such as spatializations and their associated semantic units, perspectives, focalizations (both the focalizer and the focalized), the meanings embodied by the personae, and the various functions of language.
Over its 101 chapters, the book engages the reader by delineating norms of good and evil, alongside guidance for adhering to these moral principles. While Wiraz is introduced as a historical figure, he can also be understood symbolically—as can his journey—representing a character who undergoes transformation under the influence of the text’s ideological discourse.
The findings suggest that The Book of Arda Viraf does not rely on complex linguistic or semantic techniques to establish its dominant discourse. Compared to modern texts, the discourse formation here is relatively straightforward. Nonetheless, Fowler’s analytical framework proved effective in examining ancient Iranian theological texts and may also be useful for analyzing more contemporary works of fiction and non-fiction.
In conclusion, most ancient Iranian theological texts, including The Book of Arda Viraf, lack a specific author and were not composed primarily for literary purposes—sometimes resembling prayers or devotional texts. Yet, they still employ particular literary–linguistic techniques to shape and convey their often ideological discourse to readers. These techniques bear resemblance to those found in modern literature, albeit in a simpler form.
|