It is not nothing مقاله

چکیده:

AbstractDue to the connection that Hafez's poetry has established with the minds and languages ​​of Persian speakers since the eighth century, some of the historical constructions of his poetic language have been adapted to the common Persian language today and have been justified and interpreted. The phrase ‘hich kare nist’ that Hafiz has applied in one of his verses has preoccupied the minds of the commentators of his poetry. Whilst they endeavored to solve the seemingly-embedded contradiction in the meaning of this phrase, regrettably, the commentators have not mentioned verifications derived from the texts of ancient poetry and prose; rather, they have conversely tried to adapt it to some specimens from modern Persian. Thus, the present study attempts to problematize the difficulty of this phrase, the function of ‘nothingness’ in the history of Persian language in the axis of connotation, and its different grammatical functions; an issue most grammarians and lexicographers have not dealt with thoroughly. From this vantage, Hafez’s linguistic construction can be justified and explained in light of its application in verse and prose texts. IntroductionThe marvelous influence along with the narration of Hafez’s poetry in the minds and language of the Persians have caused some of his distinctive linguistic constructions and interpretations to be adapted and construed with the common language today. One of such cases in point is the construction of the phrase Hitch Kare Nist (not a good-for-naught) in the following verse:Do not scare us of being served by wine from wisdom’s forbiddance / since that sheriff is not no-account in our province.The present study explores the two diametrically-opposed meanings of the phrase ‘not a good-for-naught’, each of which is confirmed via an analogous from Hafez’s poem. That is, the commentators’ justifications on Hafez’s verse fall into two categories: first, ‘it is Jack of all trades (omnipotent)’, and second, ‘it is master of none (not omnipotent)’ which according to the broad meaning of the verse, only one form is acceptable.Reviewing the related literature reveals that most commentators on Hafez’s poetry have found some justifications for this phrase and over time it has become one of the controversial verses of Hafez’s divan (Qaisari, 2001). A number of the commentators’ views concerning different connotations of this verse were mentioned chronologically. ‘Bring wine that in our province there is a common sense that does not have the merit and merit of work, that is, it is nothing ...’ (Soodi, 1983).Among several cases of the use of ‘nothing’ in Persian poetry and prose texts, the phrase ‘is nothing’ was not seen in any text before Hafez and that is why commentators have not quoted any evidence from ancient texts. ‘Nothing’ means one who is useless, but this meaning is contrary to the general meaning of the verse. Inevitably, nothing and the verse should be read separately and the verse should be interpreted as follows: Do not fear us of the sin of forbidding wine by reason; because in our opinion, the reason is absolutely useless. The rule of the sheriff is not enforceable in the realm of love, and in fact, that sheriff is nothing in our province because that ruler in our province is ‘absolutely useless’ (Heravi, 1988). ‘Do not intimidate by means of the story, that reason is an obstacle and opposition to love and brings it short since in our province, which is the province of love, the shadow of reason has no verbal influence’ (Khorramshahi, 1993). Khorramshahi in the book Ambiguities of Mind and Language, to express the ambiguity of this verse of Hafez has given examples of today’s Persian sentences and added: perhaps this type of negation into negation was used for indicating emphasis. Khorramshahi (2014) then refers to Heravi’s description.The opinions of the most important commentators of Hafez quoted till now encompass two salient domains:A) ‘There is nothing’; viz, it means ‘it’s nothing.’B) ‘Hitch’ that implies ‘Nothing’ is an adverb, and being not a good-for-naught does mean ‘absolutely incompetent’.Materials and MethodsMethodologically, by employing a descriptive procedure, this study first puts some apprehension in the foreground via contextualizing the elaborations of the phrase. What the commentators have neglected to justify this phrase, apparently due to not finding any other evidence in Persian, is its grammatical justification. If, according to them, it should be replaced by ‘absolutely’ instead of ‘nothing’, thus, where does ‘y’ end in ‘nothing’ or ‘work’ and in what place should it be added? According to his interpretation, it is correct and accurate to say: ‘absolutely not beneficial’ which has not been used in eloquent Persian language, in the old and new times.Some of the syntactic functions of ‘Hitch’ can be categorized below:Nothing + noun + y (negativity / unity) + negative verbNothing + noun + negative verbNothing + noun + positive verbNothing as an indicator of definiteness Discussion of Results and ConclusionsIn sum, to explain the syntax of the phrase ‘not a good-for-naught’ employed in Hafez’s poetry and to consider it as the equivalent of omnipotent in today’s language, it is necessary to pay attention to the grammatical construction and function of ‘nothing’ in the syntactic axis of the texts of the prose and the proses of the 8th century and before. Sometimes if ‘none’ is used before a noun, ‘y’ can be added instead. This substitution shows that ‘nothing’ has the meaning of ‘y’ except its constrained meaning. For the first time among the grammarian, Najm al-Ghani Khan Rampuri, the author of Nahj al-Adab, and then Abdul Rahim Homayoun Farrokh have paid much attention to this point. But the commentators of Hafez’s poetry, without paying due attention to the syntactic construction of ‘not a good-for-naught’, have adapted it to the meaning of Hafez's verse without any syntactic justification or accurate evidence.