درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Interpersonal metadiscourse is considered as a significant mean of smoothing communication between the speaker/writer and listener/reader. The present study intends to explore the concept and type of interpersonal metadiscourse markers employed by Donald Trump’s campaign speeches as a persuasive strategy. Descriptive qualitative research design is used in the present study. Dafouz’s (2008) classification of interpersonal metadiscourse markers was employed to analyze the gathered data. The results revealed that Trump made use of all categories of interpersonal metadiscourse markers namely hedges, certainty markers, attributors, attitude markers, and commentaries, in his campaign speeches. The frequency of attitude markers and commentaries was more than other types of metadiscourse markers in Trump’s campaign speech, which demonstrates that he attempted to persuade the public to vote for him through making an emotional link.

The present research seeks to investigate Shahram Rahimian’s Dr. Noon Loves His Wife More Than Mussadiq [1] based on the literary historiographical theory of Hayden White. The central argument of this analysis is to demonstrate how Rahimian represents the history of Iran’s 1953 coup in his novel through mentioning an Iranian historical figure, Dr. Mussadiq, and his relationship with other members of the political party. The history of Iran’s coup and especially that of Dr. Mussadiq have been an interesting subject for most of the historians and writers. Rahimian in his novel impressively addresses the historical facts of the period and endeavors to focus on the realities and at the same time to create a new version of the events by fictionalizing the way he presents his characters. He attempts to convey to the readers that it is possible to have different versions of the apparent historical facts. This novel provides corresponding peculiarities with the postmodern approach of historiography that is presented by Hayden White particularly in his remarkable work, Metahistory (1973). White contends that there could be different versions of historical facts and it is the task of the historian and the writer of historical fiction to interpret the realities and to make his/her own version of the past. Employing White’s significant concept of emplotment, the study explores the way Rahimian depicts the Iranian socio-political and cultural scene of the early 1950s in his novel from a historical perspective. <br clear="all" /> [1]     All translations from Persian to English have been made by the present author.

Le personnage fait partie des principaux composants de tout produit littéraire et s’introduit donc dans le domaine des théories et recherches littéraires. La sémiotique analysant la formation du sens, considère le personnage comme un signe motivé dont le signifiant est composé de plusieurs caractéristiques physiologiques et psychologiques, y compris le nom propre. Mahmoud Dowlatâbâdi est un écrivain réaliste iranien dont certaines particularités littéraires comme la construction du personnage, sont comparables aux grands réalistes tels que Balzac. En plus, malgré un langage poétique et une prose emphatique, le silence chez lui, dispose d'un statut remarquable. La plupart des personnages dowlatâbâdiens sont silencieux, voire muets, de par l’impossibilité à parler, le refus de la communication, la souffrance, la panique, etc. Basée sur les principes de la sémiotique du personnage, cette recherche vise à étudier le silence chez les personnages de Solouk, le roman dowlatâbâdien. Pour ce faire, on est obligé de recourir aux principes de la sémiotique tensive, ainsi qu'aux théories considérant le personnage comme un signe. Cette étude montrera donc comment le personnage/signe contribue à la formation du silence/signe chez Dowlatâbâdi. En conséquence, on verra comment le silence dowlatâbâdien se lie aux affects dysphoriques et aux sèmes divers, et dans les profondeurs du parcours génératif, à l'isotopie fondamentale de la vie/mort.