Abstract:
یکی از شاخصههای مهم در بررسی میزان ادبیّت متون، واژهگزینی در محور جانشینی و ترکیب واژهها در محور همنشینی است. آنچه این گزینش و ترکیب را به ارزش هنری تبدیل میکند، کاربرد هنرمندانة آنها متناسب با بافت متن است. اگرچه شاید استخراج و تحلیل همة عناصر و تمایزات ادبی متون دشوار باشد، اما میتوان بسیاری از آنها را برشمرد و تبیین نمود. از این رهگذر، قیدهای زمان، حالت و تشبیه و کارکردهای آنها بهعنوان یکی از عناصر متون حماسی در گشتاسپنامة دقیقی و بخش پادشاهی گشتاسپ در شاهنامه مقایسه و با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی بررسی شد. یافتههای تحقیق نشان میدهد که فردوسی بیش از دقیقی در برجستهسازی ارزشهای ادبی قید به خصوص آمیزش قیدها با صور خیال اهتمام ورزیده و از این رو، اهتمام فردوسی و کمتوجهی دقیقی به آمیزش قیدها با صور خیال، تفاوت عمدة دو شاعر در کاربرد قید است. از همین رهگذر، قید زمان در شاهنامه بیش از گشتاسپنامه با صور خیال و فضاسازی مرتبط است و به سبب ارزش سبکیاش، میتوان آن را «قید تصویری» نامید که علاوه بر ارزش ادبی، ارزش فکری نیز دارد. واژهها در ساختمان قید زمان در گشتاسپنامه به اندازة شاهنامه، رنگ و لحن حماسی ندارند. قید حالت در شاهنامه یکی از شگردهای توصیف رفتار، حالات روحی و حرکات رزمی قهرمانان، خلق ایجاز و موسیقی است. یکی از تمایزات قید تشبیه در شاهنامه، «بِهگزین» کردنِ قیدها، به خصوص ادات تشبیه است. مشبهبهها و ادات تشبیه در شاهنامه نسبت به گشتاسپنامه، لحن و رنگ حماسی بیشتری دارند و تنوّع آنها در شاهنامه دال بر قدرت تخیّل و تعالی فکر فردوسی است.
Abstract One of the major characteristics in examining the literary level of texts is the lexicon/vocabulary in the paradagmatic axis and combination of words in the syntagmatic axis. What turns such a selection and word combination into a work of art is the artistic usage of it in a suitable context. Although the extraction and analysis of all the elements and literary distinction of texts could be difficult, we can list and discuss many of them. In this way, adverbs of time, manner, and metaphor and their use in the elements of epic texts in Daghighi’s Gashtasp Nameh and in the Gashtasp’s Kingdom chapter in Shah Nameh were examined through a descriptive-analytical approach. Findings of the study showed that Ferdowsi has a wider knowledge and is more skillful than Daghighi in the epical use of adverbs. Adverbs of time used in Shahnameh deals more with depiction and the creation of settings than Gashtasp Nameh; due to its style values we can call it the ‘pictorial adverb’ which can be thought of as having both intellectual value and literary value. Lexicons used in Gashtasp Nameh can never reach those of Shah Nameh as far as the epical tone is concerned. Adverb of manner in Shahnameh is one of the techniques used to describe the behavior, spiritual status, and abilities of the warriors and helps to create brevity and music. One of the distinctions of simile adverbs in the Shahnameh is the selection of the adverbs, especially simile tools. The quasi-simile and simile tools in Shahnameh have more epic tone than in Gashtasp Nameh and their variety in the Shahnameh indicates the power of Ferdowsi's imagination and transcendence. Introduction Bitter events in the history of literature are the unfinished works of writers and poets for any possible reason. Some have, however, been fortunate enough since others came to finish what they had started, as Ferdowsi and Vesal Shirazi did with Goshtasb Nameh and Farhad-o- Shirin, respectively. But, each of the two has reached some success which requires separate research to be done on various linguistic and literary features. Before Ferdowsi, it was Daghighi who initiated the composition of Shahnameh, but after writing about one thousand verses, he was killed. Ferdowsi who set to compose the story of Goshtasb's access to the throne included those verses as they were, though he referred to Daghighi’s versification deficiencies. Zabihollah Safa, while approving Ferdowsi's claim, believes that Daghighi “fell short in reaching his perfection when composing Goshtasb Nameh” (2000, p. 167). By emphasizing this hypothesis that adverb can affect the coherence of the horizontal axis elements of verses, description of events, etc, this article deals with the analysis of the functions of the adverb in Daghighi and Ferdowsi's poetry. Material & Methods The method used in this research was descriptive-analytical and the unit of analysis was those verses in which adverbs are used. The verses shared by Daghighi and Ferdowsi that have employed adverbs have been selected and analyzed. In most of the verses, there were more than one adverb and in their variety of forms. In these cases, the number of adverbs were considered under their category and according to their frequency, but it is possible that the verse be analyzed under one category by focusing on its function. The page numbers are given in parentheses. Discussion of Results & Conclusions The adverb is not among the major sentence components in Persian but it is used in most sentences and plays a fundamental role in transmitting the concepts. Daghighi has used adverbs 975 times in 1008 verses and Ferdowsi has used them 519 times in 501 verses. In sum, Ferdowsi has used them on the average 1.03 times in every verse and Daghighi has done it 0.95 times. But, this statistical difference alone should not be considered as Ferdowsi’s superiority; this feature only exists in regard to the artistic functions of adverbs and their functions in situational appropriate contexts in order to gain an inspiring epic language. Next, Ferdowsi and Daghighi’s language differences in terms of their application of some types of adverbs are analyzed. 4.1. Adverbs of Time The frequency and structure of adverbs of time are almost the same in both poets. Ferdowsi’s rate is 48% and Daghighi is 44%. But, when examining their artistic functions, for example those adverbs of time pointing out sunrise and sunset, the real difference between the two shows itself. 1) In Ferdowsi, there is a combination of adverbs of time and figures of speech, whereas Daghighi has employed the latter only once in four verses referring to sunrise and sunset. 2) In Shahnameh, there is more focus on creating ambience with time adverbs, but in Goshtasb Nameh, this does not exist. Here, adverbs of time don’t show any part in preparing the audience for starting the story. In Shahnameh, however, this link is more sustained. 3) Diction in Goshtasb Nameh is lacking in as much epic tone as in Shahnameh, and at times they verge on lyricism, but in the latter each word is employed to render the language some epic character. 4) Time adverb density is different in the two works. Though in some sections of Ferdowsi there is higher frequency of adverbs of time, he has endeavored to employ different adverbs of time in the form of various terms to create some equilibrium, but this feature is absent in Daghighi. 4.2. Adverbs of Manner The frequency of adverb of manner in Goshtasb Nameh is 8% but in Shahnameh it is 5%, but Ferdowsi has adopted various devices to give it a more sublime position. The characteristics and distinctions of this are as follows: 1) Ferdowsi is among the rarest poets who in Khorasani style era have extensively dealt with the internal side of the characters. The most important tool for him here is using adverbs of manner. In this regard, 28% of these adverbs in Goshtasb Story and 11% of them in Goshtasb Nameh describe the moods of the heroes. 2) Ferdowsi is well aware of the impact of long adverbial combinations on the magnificence of language. Thus, he tries to go further than simple, derived, and compound expressions to obtain derived-compound combinations and subordinate adverbial clauses. Thus, 90% of the adverbs of manner are organized after this pattern. The frequency of such adverbs in Daghighi is 74%. 3) Another merit of Ferdowsi’ style is variety. His adverb usage is hardly repetitive and boring. He has adopted different methods in this regard. Daghighi’s use of adverbs also have variety but he has not been as meticulous as Ferdowsi to avoid repetitions. 4) Shahnameh also benefits from the existence of musicality in the poems. This represents the poet’s idiosyncratic style. The poet has created alliterations and assonances in 75% of his adverbs of manner, whereas in Daghighi, this rate is 11%. 5) There is still another characteristic in Ferdowsi’s usage of adverbs of manner (i.e. their contribution to visualization with the help of similes). In Daqiqi’s style, this does not happen at all. 4.3. Simile Adverbs Ferdowsi has used 31 different similes that comprise 6% of the whole adverbs, but Daghighi has used 67 that constitute 7% of the whole. The functions and variety of these similes in Ferdowsi’s work are, however, more elevated than in Daqiqi’s: 1) One characteristic of an inspiring language is the best selection of words, the fact that could be seen at its best in Ferdowsi’s choice of ‘comparators’. 2) The variety of tools as components of similes is remarkable in Ferdowsi. He has used 31 similes in his story of Goshtasb, having 26 types of tools. This variety proves the poet’s power of imagination that can discover similarities between the elements of the two objects of comparison in its epic form. Repeated tools in Shahnameh make 17% of the whole, and in Goshtasb Namneh are 39%. Thee repetitions could be considered as the poet’s failure or inexactness in creating visualization and innovations. 3) The third distinction in Ferdowsi is the selection of special words as tools. The majority of Ferdowsi’s tools have epic color and are suitable for a war. This way, 61% of Ferdowsi’s and 41% of Goshtasb Nameh’s tools are of this kind. Ferdowsi has actually benefitted from the potentials of adverbs for consolidating his language, but Daghighi, probably due to his inability to do this, has shown inadequate qualities in this regard. Adverbs of time in Shahnameh are linked to figures of speech and the creation of ambience more than in Goshtasb Nameh, and have become his stylistic feature. This is less apparent in Goshtasb Nameh. Daghighi’s reference to different resources and his abstaining from artistic interference has led to a reduction in description in his poetry, but Ferdowsi’s active and artistic presence in developing stories has brought him a unique status in language. Daghighi has used adverbs of manner more than Ferdowsi for 2%, but has not managed to benefit from their functions as much as Ferdowsi. The functions of similes in Goshtasb Nameh lack the artistic distinctions of Shahnameh. One of these distinctions is the optimal selection of adverbs, especially ‘comparators’ in Shahnameh. ‘Tools’ and ‘comparators’ in Shahnameh have more epic color than in Goshtasb Nameh.
Machine summary:
در این پژوهش برای تشخیص قید، از روشهای دستوری استفاده شده است؛ مثلاً نخست اینکه قید از عناصر اصلی جمله نبوده و حذفشدنی است؛ چنانکه در نمونة زیر حذف قیدهای «بیاراسته و ازجایخویش» که دربارة آمادهشدن و حرکت گشتاسپ است، خللی در جمله ایجاد نمیکند: بیاراسته آمد از جای خویش خشاش یلش را فرستاد پیش (فردوسی، 1379، ج 6: 85) همین شیوه دربارة قید مختص «هرگز» در بیت زیر نیز مصداق دارد: سوی رزم ارجاسپ لشکر کشید سپاهی که هرگز چنان کس ندید (همان: 86) دوم اینکه بسیای از قیدها را میتوان با توجه به نشانههای موجود در ساختمان آنها و نوع ارتباطشان با فعل تشخیص داد.
ساختار قید زمان نیز در کلام هر دو شاعر کمابیش یکسان است؛ بدینگونه که فردوسی 48 درصد و دقیقی 44 درصد از جملههای قیدی استفاده کردهاند؛ اما هنگامیکه کاربرد هنری این قیدها بررسی میشود و برای نمونه، قیدهای زمانی که طلوع و غروب خورشید را به تصویر میکشد، تجزیه و تحلیل میشود، تفاوت دو شاعر آشکار خواهد شد.
در هر سه موردی که او از قید زمان در قالب جمله (جملههای قیدی) استفاده کرده و طلوع یا غروب خورشید را نشان داده است، نوعی از صور خیال وجود دارد و شاید بتوان گفت یکی از دلایل عمدة کاربرد جملههای قیدی در شاهنامه، توجه به جنبههای زیباییشناختی و با انگیزة زیباییآفرینی در سخن است؛ مثل قید زمان در بیتهای زیر که در آن استعاره و تشبیه بهطور همزمان دیده میشود: چو خورشید زرین سپر برگرفت شــب تیره زو دست بر سر گرفت بینداخت پیراهن مشــک رنــگ چو یاقوت شد مهر چهرش به رنگ ز کوه انــدر آمـــد سپـــاه بـزرگ جهــانگـــیر اســـفنــدیار سـترگ (فردوسی، 1379، ج 6: 159) 2) تمایز دومْ برجستگی فضاسازی با قیدهای زمان در شاهنامه و کمتوجهی به آن در گشتاسپنامه است.