Discursive Structures

Through uncovering the underlying elements of language, this research aims to reveal the hidden layers of meaning in press texts in the framework of a critical discourse analysis. Having used socio-semantic features of Van Leeuwen's model (1996), this paper has studied, qualitatively, 40 issues of four Iranian Persian publications for a period of two months, from July 22 to September 21, 2011. These publications were 'E'temad', 'Sharq', Resalat' and Keyhan. The analyses included recognizing discursive structures in the texts, determining the linguistic realizations of structures, and explaining along with uncovering the hidden layers of meaning and the ideology behind the texts. The research results out of the data analysis indicate that the ideology dominating the minds of writers and groups is reflected in the texts using discursive features as exclusion, activation, passivation, personalization and impersonalization. Exclusion has been the most frequently used feature in 'E'temad and 'Sharq', whereas activation has had the highest frequency of occurrences in 'Resalat' and 'Keyhan'. The discursive structures take place using linguistic instruments like pre-modifiers, active vs. passive structures, coordination and circumstantials, in the texts. Besides, the relationship between discursive structures and ideology is dialectal, which can be determined by studying these structures in the texts and social institutions.

The present study focuses on the evaluation and critical reviewing of equivalence translation process and output. The choices of equivalents were examined by Fairclough’s model (2011) of critical discourse analysis. According to this model, interpretation and explanation of socio – cultural, socio – historical and situational context as macrostructures which examine everything about texts are complementary pairs for descriptive analysis which examine everything in texts as microstructures. To clarify the discussion, translated texts (Meta texts) are analyzed and compared with their source texts (Proto text). The results indicated that in order to find a framework for equivalence; there is a significant need for discursive features which are partly critical and partly descriptive (semantic) as units for translation criticism. These discursive components in translation process have been coined in this study as “CRISEME”.