The semiotic-semantic system of simile: discursive and perceptual-phenomenological aspects

Document Type : مقالات علمی پژوهشی

Author
Farhad Mohammadi
Assistant Professor of Kurdish Language and Literature, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran
10.48311/LRR.16.6.7
Abstract
The process of simile formation is based on the simultaneous operation of two paradigms: selection and combination; The selection of phenomena and their combination with the aim of conceptualizing and producing meaning. Each of the components of the simile, in both axes of selection and combination, functions as a network in a meaningful and meaningful relationship. Therefore, the relationship of simile structures creates a specific semantic system in which each of the structures is considered a sign and plays a specific semantic role. The issue of this research is to examine the signifying system of simile and explain the process of its elements being signified in order to determine how a discourse system emerges in the form of simile and the process of producing meaning in it. For this purpose, it is shown through an analytical-descriptive method how the poet, in the role of subject, interacts with the topic (= tenor) as an object in a specific situation, and the result of this interaction is a mental perception that is determined by the vehicle (= image). The results of the research indicate that from a semiotic-semantic perspective, simile has a semiotic system, and this system is associated with discursive, phenomenological-perceptual aspects, and the dynamic flow of meaning.
1. Introduction
In addition to its structural and artistic dimensions, simile is also very important from a cognitive and ideological perspective and finding the meaning of its main elements helps to understand the poet's intellectual and mental structure. All conceptual information that can be obtained from a simile indicates the existence of a cognitive dimension of the simile and that what is expressed in the simile has cognitive value; Because the poet uses simile as one of the conceptual schemas and linguistic possibilities in order to express her/his perceptions and thoughts in an objective and tangible form. What makes poets' similes different is their ideological dimension and semantic system. The issue of the present study is to analyze and explain that simile is semantic system whose perceptual and phenomenal aspects place the flow of meaning in a discursive space and give it a discursive aspect.
Research Questions
This research seeks to answer these two main questions:
What aspects does simile have from a semiotic-semantic perspective?
What is the status of the flow of meaning in simile?
 
2. Literature Review
Studies related to the review of this topic can be divided into two categories: 1- The work that has been done on similes; 2- Materials related to the field of semiotics. Regarding the first group, it should be said that simile, as one of the most common expressive and illustrative tools, has been the subject of discussion among rhetoricians since the very beginning of rhetorical discussions and has an extensive history. As it has been discussed in all books on rhetoric, and researchers have mostly expressed common points about it. Shafiei Kadkani (2001) has examined the development of simile in detail and with a critical approach, which is considered a significant source for familiarizing oneself with the history of simile studies and discussions. For theoretical research on semiotics in Persian literature, we can refer to the books Semiotics of literature: theories and practices of literary Discourse Analysis (2016) and Semiotics of Discourse Analysis (2006) by Shairi.
 
3. Methodology
Selection and combination are two important paradigms in the process of creating a simile, each of which is somehow related to the poet's thoughts, emotions, and mentality. The functioning of these two paradigms is proportionate and in line with the poet's intellectual and emotional sphere. Two concepts or phenomena are selected as topic (= tenor) and vehicle (= image) from among all available possibilities, and through their combination, the poet's perceptions and experiences are expressed. The paradigm of selection is effective in both the topic (= tenor) and vehicle (= image) elements, and discursively and semiotically, the selection of topic (= tenor) is related to the subject-poet's mentality and mental images, and the selection of vehicle (= image) is also for objectifying the image and thought that is imprinted in the poet's mind. Therefore, the choice paradigm represents the perceptual and phenomenal aspects of analogy. There is a processual relationship between composition and the production of meaning. The two main elements in the simile, each considered alone, are devoid of meaning, capable of accepting various definitions and phenomena; But when they are placed on the axis of combination, a new meaning is formed as a result of their intersection (= combination). The convergence of the two paradigms of selection and combination in simile creates perceptual, discursive, and fluid aspects in it. In fact, these two paradigms imply the process of leaving a closed space and entering a dynamic signifying space in simile. Accordingly, the flow of meaning in simile does not have a closed space, but rather an open and fluid space, and signs of absoluteness and indeterminacy enter the interactive system of discourse formation.
4. Results
Considering that every poet has a cognitive system that is the source of the selection and combination of the elements of her/his similes in the production of meaning, finding the signification of meaningful signs in his similes is an approach to her/his cognitive-ideological system and the construction of discourses arising from this system. Each simile has three meaningful signs, by understanding which, on the one hand, we can understand the process of conceptualization and production of meaning in the simile, and on the other hand, we can understand the poet's discourses:
topic (= tenor): In the dimension of selection, it is important from a semiotic-semantic point of view because the poet's mind's attraction to it among countless concepts and phenomena indicates its importance as an object for the poet-subject, meaning that the phenomenon was present in the poet's mind and became internal to her/him. The identification of topic (= tenor) in the axis of combination is also an explanation of its determination through its connection with another phenomenon (= similarity).
vehicle (= image): It is a sign that, by finding its significance in both axes of selection and combination, an understanding of the subject's emotional reaction to the object is obtained, and the process of forming the semantic system present in the simile will be understandable. The vehicle (= image) is a directional and purposeful selection that is in line with the poet's intended thoughts, feelings, and values ​​regarding the simile.
point of resemblance (sense): It is a sign of meaning produced by the presence of the subject with the object in a specific situation. The point of resemblance (sense) shows how two phenomena from two different fields are semantically related, and by analyzing its semiotics, we can understand the central point of the poet's intended discourse.
 

Keywords

Subjects

·      جامی، ن. (1378). هفت اورنگ (جلد دوم). تصحیح و تحقیق ا. افصح‌زاد و ح. احمد تربیت. تهران: مرکز مطالعات ایرانی.
·      جرجانی، ع. (2014). اسرار البلاغه فی علم البیان. تحقیق: م. اسکندرانی و م. مسعود. بیروت: دارالکتاب العربی.
·      حقوقی، م. (1385). شعر زمان ما (2). تهران: نگاه.
·      داودی‌مقدم، ف. (1392). تحلیل نشانه ـ معناشناختی شعر «آرش کمانگیر» و «عقاب»: تحوّل کارکرد تقابلی زبان به فرایند تنشی. جُستارهای زبانی، 1 (پیاپی 13)، 105 ـ 124.
·      سپهری، س. (1389). هشت کتاب. اصفهان: گفتمان اندیشۀ معاصر.
·      سعدی، م. (1394). غزل‌های سعدی. تصحیح و توضیح غ. یوسفی. چاپ دوم. تهران: سخن.
·      شاملو، ا. (1387). مجموعۀ آثار، دفتر یکم: شعرها. چاپ هشتم. تهران: نگاه.
·      شعیری، ح.ر. (1388). از نشانه‌شناسی ساختگرا تا نشانه ـ معناشناسی گفتمانی. نقد ادبی، 8، 33ـ 51.
·      شعیری، ح.ر.  (1385). تجزیه و تحلیل نشانه ـ معناشناختی گفتمان. تهران: سمت.
·      شعیری، ح.ر.  (1395). نشانه ـ معناشناسی ادبیات: نظریه و روش تحلیل گفتمان ادبی. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تربیت مدرّس.
·      شفیعی‌کدکنی، م. (1380). صور خیال در شعر فارسی. چاپ هشتم. تهران: آگه.
·      صفوی، ک. (1394). از زبان‌شناسی به ادبیات: شعر (جلد دوم). چاپ چهارم. تهران: انتشارات سورۀ مهر.
·      طبیبیان، س.ح. (1388). برابرهای علوم بلاغت در فارسی و عربی. تهران: امیرکبیر.
·      عباسی، ع. و یارمند، هـ. (1390). عبور از مربع معنایی به مربع تنشی: بررسی نشانه ـ معناشناختی ماهی سیاه کوچولو. جستارهای زبانی، 3 (پیاپی 7)، 147 ـ 172.
·      فتوحی، م. (1386). بلاغت تصویر. تهران: سخن.
·      فرخزاد، ف. (1382). مجموعه اشعار. چاپ دوم. تهران: انتشارات نگاه.
·      مولوی، ج. (1386). مثنوی معنوی. تصحیح ر.ا. نیکلسون. چاپ چهارم. تهران: هرمس.
·      مولوی، ج. (1378). کلیات شمس. جلد اول. تصحیح و حواشی ب. فروزانفر. چاپ چهارم. تهران: امیرکبیر.
·      نبی‌ئیان، پ.، و شعیری، ح.ر. (1395). تحلیل نشانه ـ معناشناختی فرایند تشخیص در گفتمان ادبی: مطالعۀ مورد پاچه‌خیزک نوشتۀ صادق چوبک. پژوهش‌های زبانی، 1، 57 ـ 76.
 
References
·       Abbasi, A., & Yarmand, H. (2011). Transition from the Semantic Square to Tension Square in the Case Study of “Mahi Siahe Kocholo”. Language Related Research, 2(3), 147–172. [In Persian].
·       Davoudi Moghdam, F. (2013). The Semiotics Analysis of “Arash Kamangir” and “Oghab” Poems: The Transformation of Mutual of Language Function to Tensional Process. Language Related Research, 4(1), 105–124. [In Persian].
·       Farrokhzad, F. (2003). A collection of poems (2nd ed.). Negah. [In Persian].
·       Fotoohi, M. (2007). Image Rhetoric. Sokhan. [In Persian].
·       Hoqouqi, M. (2006). Poetry of our time (2). Negah. [In Persian].
·       Jami, N. (1999). Seven Thrones (Vol. 2). (A. Afsahzad & H. Ahmad Tarbiyat, Eds.). Center for Iranian Studies. [In Persian].
·       Jurjani, ‘A. (2014). Secrets of eloquence in the science of rhetoric. (M. Eskandarani & M. mas‘ood, Eds.). Dar Al-Kitab Al-Arabi. [In Persian].
·       Mowlawi, J. (1999). Divan-e Shams (Vol. 1). (B. Forouzanfar, Ed.). Amir Kabir. [In Persian].
·       Mowlawi, J. (2007). Spiritual Mathnavi (4th ed.). (R. A. Nicholson, Ed.). Hermes. [In Persian].
·       Nabian, P., & Shairi, H. R. (2016). Discursive –semiotics Criticism of Personification as a Process in Literary Discourse: A Case Study of “the Mouse” by Choobak. Language Research, 7(1), 57–76. [In Persian].
·       Saadi, M. (2015). Saadi's Sonnets (2nd ed.). (Gh. Yousefi, Ed.). Sokhan. [In Persian].
·       Safawi, K. (2015). From Linguistics to Literature: Poetry (Vol. 2, 4th ed.). Publication of sooremehr. [In Persian].
·       Sepehri, S. (2010). Eight books. Gofteman Andishe Moaser Publication. [In Persian].
·       Shafiei Kadkani, M. R. (2001). Imaginary in Persian Poetry (8th ed.). Agah. [In Persian].
·       Shairi, H. R. (2009). Passing from a predetermined relationship of signifier and signified to a processional discursive meaning. Literary Criticism, 2(8), 33–52. [In Persian].
·       Shairi, H. R. (2006). Semiotic Analysis of Discourse. SAMT. [In Persian].
·       Shairi, H. R. (2016). Semiotics of literature: theories and practices of literary Discourse Analysis. Publication of Tarbiat Modares University. [In Persian].
·       Shamlou, A. (2008). Collection of Works, Volume 1: Poems (8th ed.). Negah. [In Persian].
·       Tabibiyan, S. H. (2009). Equivalents of rhetoric in Persian and Arabic. Amirkabir. [In Persian].
Language Related Research
Volume 16, Issue 6 - Serial Number 90
January and February 2026
Pages 211-239