بررسی چند معنایی فعل «بستن» بر اساس طرحواره های تصویری (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
پژوهش حاضر کوششی است برای تحلیل چندمعنایی فعل «بستن» با بهره گیری از ابزار نظری مطرح در معنی شناسی شناختی. معانی فعل «بستن» به روش کتابخانه ای از فرهنگ های سخن، دهخدا، فرهنگ فارسی صدری افشار، فرهنگ فارسی گفتاری و البته، فرهنگ ریشه شناختی زبان فارسی گردآوری و با هم مقایسه شد. در پژوهش حاضر، از روش تحلیل کیفی برای توصیف معانی و تعیین چگونگی ارتباط معانی یادشده استفاده شده است. به این منظور، ابزار نظریِ طرحواره های تصویری در چارچوب معنی شناسی شناختی و به طور خاص، مدل پیشنهادی جانسون و شرح و بسط آن از سوی ایوانز و گرین و ایوانز به کار گرفته شده است. تحلیل معانی طرحواره ای فعل «بستن» نشان می دهد که از میان 24 معنی، 11 مورد طرحواره نیرو داریم که به طور خاص ایجاد مانع با ماهیتی فیزیکی یا انتزاعی را نشان می دهند و 18 مورد طرحواره پیوند با ماهیت فیزیکی یا انتزاعی در تحقق معنایی فعل «بستن» داریم. در یک مورد نیز، افزون بر طرحواره پیوند، امکان قائل شدن به طرحواره انشعاب وجود داشت. این در حالی است که ملاحظات ریشه شناختی نشان می دهند فعل «بستن» از یک ریشه واحد مشتق شده و به صورت کنونی خود درآمده است و آن، band در فارسی باستان و اوستایی و bandh در سنسکریت بوده است. این امر وجود طرحواره های متفاوت غیرمرتبط را مجاز نمی دارد. علت آن است که باتوجه به زمینه سازی طرحواره های تصویری برای تشکیل معانی به دلیل ماهیت پیش مفهومی آنها، در صورت نبود ارتباط بین عناصر پیش مفهومی، ارتباط میان معانی از دست می رود. در پژوهش حاضر استدلال می شود که طرحواره های متداعی با معانی، ارتباط میان معانی فعل «بستن» را چگونه نشان می دهند.Studying the Polysemy of “bastan” on the Basis of Image Schemas
The present study aims to analyze the verb “bastan” (to close) using cognitive semantics. The meanings of “bastan” have been collected using library method, extracted from dictionaries including Sokhan, Dehkhoda, Sadri Afshar's Persian Dictionary, Persian Spoken Variety, and the Etymological Dictionary of the Persian Language. This data was used for comparative analysis. In this research, a qualitative research method has been used to describe the meanings and to determine if there is a relationship among them using the image schema theory in cognitive semantics, specifically the models proposed by Evans and Greene, Evans and Evans. The analysis of the schematic meanings of the verb “bastan” showed that out of 26 meanings, 11 are force schemas, indicating an obstacle of a physical or nature, and 18 are link(age) schemas, either physical or . In one case, in addition to the mentioned schema, a splitting schema was considered. Etymological considerations show that the verb “bastan” originates from a single root in its current form: -band in ancient Persian, bandh (badhnāti) in Sanskrit, and -band in Avesta. This matter does not allow the existence of two different unrelated schema, because the connection between meanings will be lost. This research argues that associative schemas show the relationship between the various meanings of the polysemic verb “bastan”.Keywords: cognitive semantics, image schema, schema transformation, polysemy, semantic relation.IntroductionPolysemy is a common phenomenon in all languages and the necessity of its existence is to reduce the memory load of the speakers. The undisputed prevalence of this phenomenon in languages has caused an increase in the number of studies on polysemy and word analysis to prove their polysemy in the field of linguistics, in general and in the field of semantics, in particular. Determining the polysemy of a word or the homonymy of several words requires etymological studies and the recognition and analysis of existing meanings, making it a complex decision that cannot be made superficially.Research QuestionsThe present study is a semantic attempt to analyze the verb “bastan” (to close) using the theoretical tool in cognitive semantics. The research data, namely the meanings of “bastan”, have been collected using the library method and extracted from various dictionaries, including Sokhan (2003), Dehkhoda (1966), Sadri Afshar's Persian Dictionary (2009), Spoken Persian Dictionary (2016), and of course the Etymological Dictionary of Persian Language (2016).One of the important points about this article is that the verb “bastan” has not been investigated as a light verb. Although it has been examined in conjunction with certain words such as “lie” and “slander”, the aim was not to analyze compound verbs of Persian which are formed with “bastan” as the verbal particle. Analyzing “bastan” as a heavy verb is expected to facilitate its semantic analysis as a light verb. Limiting the research to its meanings as a light verb would restrict the analysis. It is expected that etymological considerations and the number of schemas associated with the meaning of “bastan” will confirm the polysemy of this verb. If multiple image schemas are associated with its meanings and etymological investigations show that the verb derives from the same root, deciding on the polysemy of “bastan” becomes complex. This research addresses this issue from a cognitive perspective.Literature ReviewSemantic analyses related to this research have been done based on various theoretical frameworks; among them, it is possible to name the semantic analysis of the verb “zadan” (to hit) based on corporal patterns and data from the Persian language corpora of Bijan Khan (Kirimi Dostan & Razani, 2022); the conceptual domain of the verb “shanidan” (to listen) based on the theory of frame semantics and the principles of the framenet (Nayebloui et al., 2021); the semantic expansion of the verb “zadan” based on the theories of conceptual metaphor and metonymy (Bahrami & Sheykhanianpour, 2018); and analyzing the meaning of the verb “goftan” (to say) within the framework of the theory of frame semantics and corpus data (Rahmatinejad et al., 2018). Other studies include the polysemy of the verb “didan” (to see) based on the corpus data and the pattern of Antonano (1999; 2013), Switzer (1990), and Afrashi & Asgari (2016); a diachronic investigation of the semantic dimensions of “gereftan” (to get) from the perspective of componential analysis of meaning and cognitive semantics (Abdolkarimi & Changizi, 2016); and finally, the polysemy of the verb “zadan” based on the concepts raised in cognitive semantics such as image schemas, conceptual metaphor theory and categorization (Kirimi Doustan & Rouhi Baighi, 2015). The similarity of the most recent studies conducted in this field, is their same theoretical basis. The theoretical basis used for data analysis in this research is image schemas, which provide a cognitive foundation. This study shares commonalities with the polysemy study of “zadan” from a cognitive perspective (Kirimi Doustan & Rouhi Baighi, 2015) but differs by using only image schemas and examining different current meanings of “bastan” (to close). Additionally, “bastan” has not been studied as a light verb.MethodologyIn this research a qualitative analysis method has been used to describe the meanings of the verb “bastan” and determine relationships among the meanings using the theoretical tool of image schema in cognitive semantics, specifically the models of Evans & Greene (2006: 187), Evans (2019: 164) and Evans (2019: 236).ResultsThe analysis of the schematic meanings of the verb “bastan” shows that among the 24 meanings, there are 11 cases of the force schema, indicating the creation of a physical or obstacle, and 18 cases of the linkage schema, again either physical or . In one case, there was a possibility of considering a branching schema. Etymological considerations show that the verb “bastan” is derived from one root in its current form, which was “- band” in ancient Persian, “bandh (badhnāti)” in Sanskrit, and “band” in Avestan. This result does not support the existence of two distinct unrelated schemas, as the connection between meanings will be lost. In this research, it is argued that associative schemas show a connection between the meanings of the mentioned verb.In cases where the meaning of “bastan” explicitly brings to mind the scheme of connection, it is not far-fetched and easy to believe in unity; moreover, the linkage scheme itself is also a subset of the unity scheme and a meronymic relationship can be considered between them, because linkage of the constituent parts of a whole is a part/parts of the process of forming a unity. What is debatable, is a relationship that can be considered between creating an obstacle and unity, and it is necessary to form such a relationship for the reasons mentioned above. Based on the explanations presented, it can be concluded that creating an obstacle, in addition to being a subgroup of the force schema, can also be considered a subgroup of the unity schema, and the recurring schema will be the unity schema. It means [unity] is present in various meanings of “bastan”.