The Establishment of Ash’ari Discourse against ReasonـOriented Discourses According to Access Factor

Document Type : scientific-research

Authors

1 Professor of Linguistics at Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

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

3 Ph.D. Candidate of Persian Language and Literature Kharazmi University, Tehran. Iran.

Abstract

This paper has investigated the establishing process of Ash’ari discourse against reasonـoriented discourses (determinately NasirKhosrow’s Diwan and Khayyam’s Rubiyat) based on a new interpretation of access factor _the unequal distribution of discourses’ linguistic productions in society. Accordingly, by influence on people’s mental cognition, access proportion of discourses’ texts plays a basic role in establishing or undermining them. From this perspective, the research focuses on exploring social relations to affect texts access of aforesaid discourses. The sort of analysis is also the macro one and different to micro analysis in linguistic descriptions. The theoretical framework is a multiperspectival method combining of social practice level in Fairclough’s approach and process of foregroundingـback grounding in Laucla & Mouffe’s theory. Findings show that, by imposing and enforcing constraints on discourses _respectively to foregrounding Ash’ari discourse and back grounding reasonـoriented discourses_ powerـholders kept the access of these discourses’ texts unbalanced. It means at discursive imposition level they enable Ash’ari discourses’ texts to extensively access by planning soft organization like group formation and foundation of Nizamiyyah institutes and at discursive constraints level they prevent reasonـoriented discourses and texts associated with them to access in society by hardware activities like suppression and elimination. NasirKhosrow’s Diwan and Khayyam’s Rubiyat were two of these texts that discursive constraints were seriously enforced on them also because of their opposition to dominant ideology _NasirKhosrow’s Diwan for including concepts like propagation of Ismaili doctrine, strong repudiation of Sunnism and giving harsh vituperation to all contributor of contesting group from upper to lower echelon and Khayyam’s Rubiyat by challenging the society’s common sense about definite religious propositions and expressing ironic sarcasm against mullahs and the clergy. It’s also noteworthy that through software organization of Nizamiyyah institutes access to authority and credibility positions for these contesting discourses’ actor was unequally, in favour of Ash’ari discourses, distributed. This strategy was considerably facilitating the possibility of Ash’ari discourse imposition. These mechanisms ultimately led to establishing Ash’ari discourse.

Keywords

References

Aghagolzadeh, F. (2012), “Discription and Explanation of Ideological Linguistic Structures”, Languge Related Research, Pp. 1-19. [In Persian].
Aalipour, K. & M. Kazzazi (2017), “The Explanation of Foregrounding, Backgrounding & Antagonism Causes in Khayyam’s Rubaiyat based on Critical Discourse Analysis”, Half-Yearly Persian Language and Literature, Pp. 171-185. [In Persian].
Bosworth, C. (1999), The Ghaznavides, Translated by Hasan Anousheh. Tehran, Amirkabir. [In Persian].
Browne, E. (1982), A Literary History of Persia. Translated by Fathollah Mojtabaei, Tehran, Morvarid. [In Persian].
Craig, E. (2006), A Reviw on History of Islamic Philosophy: Concept of Philosophy in Islam, Translated by Mammoud Zarei Baleshti, Tehran, Amirkabir. [In Persian].
Dargahi, M. (2004), “Nasir Khosrow, the Father of Religious Intellectualism”, Nameh-e Parsi, Pp. 115-128. [In Persian].
Dehghani, M. (2018), Nasir Khosrow. Tehran, Nashr-e Ney. [In Persian].
Durant, W. (1994), The Story of Civilization, Translated by Aboutaleb Saremi & et al., Tehran, Elmi & Farhangi Publishing. [In Persian].
Fairclough, N. (1989), Language and Power, London, Longman.
____________ (1993), Discourse and Social Changes, London, Polity.
ـــــــــــــــــــــــ (1995), Critical Dircourse Analysis, London, Longman.
ـــــــــــــــــــــــــ (2003), Analyzing Discourse; Textual Analysis for Social Research, Routlege, Talor Francis Group.
Hoseini, A. (2003), Zobdat al-Tawarik: The Story of Rulers and Sultans of Seljuk. Translated by RamezanAli Rouhollahi, Tehran, Eil Shahsavan Baghdadi. [In Persian].
Jorgenson, M & Philips, L. (2010), Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method, Translated by Hadi Galili, Tehran, Nashr-e Ney. [In Persian].
Kasaee, N. (1995), Nizamiyyah Institutes and Its Scientific and Social Effects, Tehran, Tehran University. [In Persian].
Khayyam Neishabouri, O. (1999), Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, Revised by Mohammad Ali Foroughi & Ghasem Ghani, Tehran, Nahid. [In Persian].
Kraemer, J. (1996), Humanism in Renaissance of Islam: The Cultural Revival During the Buyid Age, Translsted by Mohammad Saeed Hanaee Kashani, Tehran, Academic Publishing Center. [In Persian].
Nafisi, S. (1934), “Nizamiyyah School of Baghdad”, Mehr. Pp.117-127. [In Persian].
Nasir Khosrow, Abu Moein (1988). Diwan, Revised by Mojtaba Minavi, Tehran, The World of Book. [In Persian].
Onsori Balkhi, Abolghasem Hasan (1984), Onsori Balkhi’s Diwan, Revised by Seyyed Mohamad Dabirsiaghi, Tehran, Sanaee’s Library. [In Persian].
Safa, Z. (1984), The History of Litreture in Iran, Tehran, Amir kabir. [In Persian].
Shafiei Kadkani, M. (2010), The Poor Salesman of Elixir, Tehran, Sokhan. [In Persian].
Soltani, A. (2005), Power, Discourse & Language (The Mechanism of Exercise of Power in Republic Islamic of Iran). Tehran, Nashr-e Ney [In Persian].
Tabari, E. (2016), The Social Movements in Iran, Revised by Azizollah Alizadeh, Tehran, Ferdows. [In Persian].
Zarinkoub, A. (1964). With Caravan of Silk, Tehran, Ariya. [In Persian].

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 09 April 2020
  • Revise Date: 12 July 2020
  • Accept Date: 11 July 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics