Semantic Network of Preposition “On” in Quranic Discourse Based on Prototype Theory

Author
K. rastgoo
Assistant Professor of Arabic Language and Literature/ University of Quranic Studies, Teacher Training College of the Holy Quran, Mashhad, Iran
Abstract
1- Introduction

Prepositions are amongst the multi-meaning and very flexible words in the language of the Quran with extensive concepts. It is clear that God has bestowed on this attribute to convey his purpose. The application of the prototype theory to the analysis of the focal meaning and the radial meanings of these letters can certainly provide a coherent semantic network for each of them. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to explain the focal meaning of the word "on" as one of the most widely used letters in the Quran with a cognitive approach. This will be achieved after identifying the trajectory and the Landmark which proves the existence of a coherent network of concepts that are linked to the prototype.

2. Questions and hypotheses

The most important questions and hypotheses of this research are:

1. What is the focal meaning and radial meanings of On in Quranic discourse?

2. How the relationship between the focal meaning and the radial meanings of “On” in the form of a meaningful network can be explained?

3. How the contrast between traditional and cognitive look at the Prepositions of the story is explained?

The hypotheses are as follows:

- The focal meaning of “On”, as in traditional sources, is "superiority".

- The focal meaning of "superiority" is the core of the semantic network of the word "On". Other distinct meanings of "On" are connected to the central core with the help of two "compromise and contradictory" clusters.

- The semantic network model in the cognitive perspective has confirmed the multidimensional problem of letters in classical sources, but the example template points out that the radial meanings of a letter must be coherent with a focal meaning. According to this model, existence of a letter instead of another letter is rejected because of its lack of semantic communication.

3. Research Innovation

What distinguishes this study from the views of traditional trainers is that modern linguistics for each of the superscripts considers a central or focal meaning that is called the supreme example, and another meaning that is related to this sense, is in fact its expanded or metaphorical meaning. They create a coherent semantic network for each of these letters. However, in the traditional perspective, there is no coherence between the meanings for a term with its initial meaning.

4- Method

Based on the belief that the prepositions are a rich source in the methodological understanding and interpretation of the Quran, the present study seeks to rely on a descriptive-analytical method regarding the multidimensional theory of these letters by considering the basic elements of this approach such image schema, prototype pattern, trajectory and landmark .The semantic network provides a coherent semantic meaning for this letter in the Quranic verses.

5- Results and Discussion

The Quranic data review points out that the focal meaning of the Jar letter 'On', is 'superiority'. This meaning is the central core of a coherent semantic network, consisting of twelve radial meanings in two semantic clusters (compromise and contradictory) based on the first meaning. It should be noted that, using the cognitive model of the prototype, replacement of On into the Prepositions "men", "fi", "baa" and "laam" in the Quranic discourse was distorted.




Keywords

Subjects

• Azhari, Mohammad Ibn Ahmad, (1991), Tahzib al Loghat. Beirut: Dar ehya al-Torath al- Arabi [In Arabic].
• Fakhr Razari, Muhammad bin Umar, (1999), Mafatih al-Ghib. 3th edition, Beirut, Darolehyateras al-Arabi .[In Arabic].
• Geeraets, D. (2014). Theories of Lexical Semantics. Translated by: Kourosh Safavi, Tehran: Scientific Publishing .[In Persian].
• Goli Malekabadi, Fatemeh, Mohammad Khaqani Isfahan, Reza Shokrani, (2017), “A semantic criticism of the Persian translation of the Arabic Term “Doon” in the Holy Quran, Syntagmatic and Paradigmatic Approach”. Language Related Research. Vol.8, No.1 (Tome 36), March, April & May 2017, Pp.207-230. [In Persian].
• Ibn ajibat al-Hossana & Ahmed ibn-Mohammad, (1998), Al-Bahr al-Madid. Al-Qahirah: The Divine Religion of the Prophet .[In Arabic].
• Ibn ashur, Mohammad-al-Taher ,(1984), Al-Tahrir Va Al-Tanweer. 10th edition, Tunisia: Aldare Tunisia Lelnashr .[In Arabic].
• Ibn doraid, Mohammad bin Hasan, (1988), Complete Language Set. Beirut: Dar al-Elm Lel malayeen. [In Arabic].
• Ibn Hesham Al-Ansari, Jamal Al-Din, (1999), Moghni-Al-Labib. Tehran: Al-Sadeq Institute .[In Arabic].
• Jowhari, Ismail ibn Hammad, (1956), Al-Sehah. Beirut: Dar al-Elm Le lmalayeen .[In Arabic].
• Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson, (2009), Metaphors We live by. Translation in Abdul Majid Jahfa, Talesaniyeh, Al-Mogharb: Dar toobqal Le nashr [In Arabic].
• Langacker, Ronald W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. I. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Langacker, Ronald W. (2007). Congnitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press
• Lee, D. (2001). Cognitive Linguistics. New York, Oxford University Press
• Lieber, R. (2009). Morphology and Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Liu, M.; Zh. Li; F. Kong & J. Liu (2009). “The Prototype Analysis of Ren: A Study on College Students’ Implicit Theories of Ren”. International Journal of Psychological Studies. 1(2). Pp. 41-48
• Makarem Shirazi, N. et. al. (2002). Sample Commentary. 25th edition: Tehran: Dar al ketab Eslami .[In Persian].
• Mehrabikali, Monire (2014). Review and Comparison of the Visual Schemas of Saadi and Hafez Poems.PhD Dissertation. Mazandaran University. [In Persian].
• Mohana, Abdullah Ali, (1992). Lesan al Lesan. Beirut: Dar al-Kotob Al-Alamiyah .[In Arabic].
• Mokhtari, Sh. & H. Rezaei, (2013), “Cognitive analysis of the semantic network of Perposition" With"in Persian”. Linguistic and Dialects Journal of Khorasan. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. No. 9.Pp. 73-94. [In Persian].
• Moradi, Hasan bin Qasim, (1992), Al-Jani-al-Dani fe Horof Almaany. Beirut: Dar al-Kabul Al-Alamiyah .[In Arabic].
• Mostafavi, H. (2008). Al-Tahtiq. 3th edition. Beirut: Dar al-Kabul Al-Alamiyah .[In Arabic].
• Qaeminia, A.R. (2011). The Semantic of the Quran. Tehran: Islamic Culture and Thought Research Institute .[In Persian].
• Ragheb Esefahani, A. (1991). Al Mofradat. Beirut: Dar Al-Ghalam .[In Arabic].
• Safavi, Kourosh, (2008). Semiotics.3th edition, Tehran: Surah Mehr .[In Persian].
• Sharifi, L. (2009).“An approach to Persian multivariate verb”. New Sciences of Cognition. Vol. 11.No. 4. Pp. 1-11. [In Persian].
• Tabatabai, M. H. (1995). Al-Mizan. Translated by: Mohammad Baqer Moussavi hamadani,5th edition, Qom: The Constituent Assembly of the Islamic Revolutionary Tribunal of the Islamic Republic of Iran .[In Arabic].
• Tarafat Ibn abd, A. (2002). Tarafat ibn abd Book. Description of Mahdi Mohammad Nasser-al-Din, 3th edition, Beirut: Dar al-Kotob Al-elmiya.[In Arabic].
• The Holy Quran .[In Arabic].
• Yu, N. (1998). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins B.V.
• Zabidi, Morteza ,(1993), Taj al-Aroos. Beirut: Dar al-Fekr .[In Arabic].
Language Related Research
Volume 9, Issue 1 - Serial Number 43
March and April 2018
Pages 1-29