نقد بلاغی؛ چیستی و روش ها (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
بلاغت یکی از دانش های مورد توجه شاعران، نویسندگان و کاتبان ایرانی و عرب بوده و برای تبیین مفهوم آن از گذشته تا عصر حاضر مقالات و کتاب های متعددی نوشته شده است. همچنین از بلاغت برای تحلیل متن استفاده کرده اند. در پژوهش حاضر با نگاه به آثار بلاغی و پژوهش های انجام شده درباره آن سعی بر این است که نقد بلاغی به عنوان یکی از گونه های مهم در نقد ادبی تبیین شود. دانش بلاغت (سنتی و مدرن) یکی از مهم ترین ابزارها برای تولید معنا و تأثیرگذاری بر مخاطب است که با بهره گیری از آن در نقد بلاغی می توان به معنای نهفته در متن نزدیک شد و حتی کلیت یک اثر را نسبت به شرایط فرهنگی و اجتماعی روزگارش سنجید. در این پژوهش پس از بازتعریف نقد بلاغی، به دو روش این نقد که دربرگیرنده نقد توصیفی، نقد کاربردی تحلیلی است، پرداخته شده است. برای تبیین بهتر مطالب برای هر گونه نقد بلاغی چند نمونه معرفی شده است.Rhetorical Criticism: Definition and Methods
Extended Abstract Rhetorical criticism, as an approach to literary criticism, gained attention as knowledge on rhetoric expanded and books and research pieces on rhetoric were authored. However, there has never been a precise definition and a clear methodology for this approach of criticism. Previous attempts at defining rhetorical criticism have provided merely the general principles of rhetoric, while rhetorical criticism is a practical approach to literary criticism that, instead of using literary theories that are external to the text, focuses on the literary devices and figures of speech used in the text itself (e.g. meter, prosody, and aesthetic features). Rhetorical criticism, as an approach to literary criticism, does not have a long history in Iran, and it was only during the mid-Qajar period that, following the development of literary criticism in Iran, rhetoric was also taken to serve as a useful tool for text analysis. Having examined the related research pieces written on this subject, the present study attempts to provide a definition for rhetorical criticism and elucidate the methods of rhetorical criticism for text analysis. The present study is historical-analytical. Accordingly, in the first place, historical information on rhetorical studies and its background is collected. Then, based on the collected information, rhetorical criticism is defined. The definition of poetry criticism offered in some books on the stylistics of poetry is not unlike its definition in rhetorical criticism. In his book on poetry criticism, Truthful Poetry, Unmasked Poetry , Abdolhossein Zarrinkoob (1923-1999) maintains that “the poet himself” critiques his poetry “when he is weighing and assessing words and meanings in his poem, when he reviews and edits his work, when he talks about his method or his purpose and taste” (Zarrinkoob 1977, p. 9). In fact, poetry criticism is considered a method similar to rhetorical criticism where the poet seeks to explain his method and edit his work. Considering the existing books on rhetoric and the points raised so far, it can be stated that there is no clear definition for rhetorical criticism, and the existing definitions usually repeat only the same common explanations about what rhetoric is, that is, a discourse that appeals to the audience and is appropriate to its time and place (Ahani, 1959, p. 12; Rajaie, 1974, p. 21; Tajlil, 1991, p. 1; Homaie, 1994, p. 88; Shamisa, 1995, p. 45). In some studies, certain definitions have been provided for rhetorical criticism that are worthy of consideration. In the first instance, rhetorical criticism is defined as “a [a type of] criticism that is produced by examining the literary devices and imagery, or, in other words, devices that exist in our rhetoric” (Soleimani and Mehravaran, 2019, p. 169). In another definition, rhetorical criticism is regarded as a type of criticism that examines the impact of words on the audience (Arab Baferani, 2011, p. 146). From another perspective, rhetorical criticism is taken to be “an inquiry into how rhetorical elements are utilized in poetry and literature. […] The rhetorical approach was in fact an exploration of how rhetorical devices (eloquence, stylistics, and semantics) were implemented in literary discourse” (Mohebbati, 2011, 463-4). Considering the related studies on rhetorical criticism, it should be stated that the purpose of rhetorical criticism is to study how the knowledge of rhetoric is used in order to create meaning, establish themes, and influence the audience. It should also be noted that rhetorical criticism includes not only the traditional rhetoric, but also new rhetoric, and focuses on philosophical issues as well. Based on the definition of rhetorical criticism, two methods can be considered for this type of criticism. The first method is descriptive criticism which deals only with the surface structure of the work and does not go beyond an analysis of the frequency of literary devices. The second method is applied-analytic criticism in which the relationship between a text's rhetorical features and its structure and how it impacts the audience are examined. In this method of criticism, the process of influencing the audience and how rhetoric takes shape in the author’s mind are examined. Having examined the previous studies, the researchers came to this understanding that the topic of rhetorical criticism has somehow been neglected and considered to be self-evident (i.e. not requiring explanation) and its definition has usually been tied to rhetoric. It thus became clear for the researchers that insufficient care has been so far put into defining this type of literary criticism and the approach needs to be redefined on the basis of interdisciplinary studies. Accordingly, rhetorical criticism can be defined as the way rhetoric is used in order to create meaning in the text and shape the imagination of the audience. Such a definition of rhetoric encompasses both traditional rhetoric (prosody, rhyme, stylistics, eloquence, and semantics), and the new rhetoric (aesthetics, imagery, etc.).
تبلیغات
