Analyzing Discourse Processes in Shams Surah: A Sign-Semantics Reading (based on Tensive Model)

Articles in Press

Document Type : مقالات علمی پژوهشی

Author
H. Nazemian
Department of Arabic language and literature, Kharazmi University
Abstract
The sign-semantics approach, which brings together structuralist semiotics and narrative discourse analysis, addresses sensory and perceptual factors in the process of meaning production. This approach has evolved out of a series of developments in semiotics in the twentieth century such as Peirce’s philosophical semiotics, Saussure’s linguistic semiotics, Greimas’ discursive semiotics, and phenomenology. It provides a precise framework from which to analyze the process of meaning production. According, it can be used to analyze scriptures, particularly the holy Quran. In current Quranic studies, unlike the past, a holistic approach which considers this holy book as a coherent and integrated whole wherein there is an organic connection between verses and chapters is utilized by scholars. This study, drawing on pot-Greimasian sign-semantics semiotics (tensive model) as practiced in Iran by Hamidreza Shairi, analyzes the process of meaning production in Shams Surah. The study finds that the process of meaning production is based on “intensite” and “extensite” patterns.

Keywords

Subjects

The Holy Quran
Ahmadlou ,Z & Khalifa Shoushtari, M,E. (2021). Function s of Rhetoric in Conveying the Concept of Self-Purification in Surah Ash-Shams. Literary Qura’nic Researches. 9(2). 1-20. [In Persia]
Ahmadi,B. (2001). The text structure and textual interpretation. Tehran. Markaz Publishing. [In Persian]
AL-Shari. A. (2004). The Strategies of Discourse. Beirut. Dar Al-kotob AL-Jadid.[In Arabic]
Bint Al-Shati, A. (1971). Miracle of Eloquence in the Holy Quran. Cairo. [In Arabic]
Dastranj, F; Zolfaghari,M. (2020). An Analysis of the Structure of Surah Ash-Shams Based on John Searle's Speech Act Theory. Literary Qura’nic Researches. 71-94. [In Persian]
Fallah,E; Shafi' Pour,S. (2018). Critical Discourse Analysis of Sura "Shams" Based on the Model of Fairclough‌. Journal of Qur’anic interpretation and language. 7(1). 29-42. [In Persian]
Fotoohi.M. (2007) A Critical Look on the Theoretical Principles and Methods of Traditional Rhetoric. 3. 9-37. [In Persian]
Fontanille,J.(2006). The Semiotics of Discourse. Heidi Bostic(trans). New York. Peter Lang Publishing.
Ghaeminia,A. (2010). Biology of the Text. Tehran: Institute of Islamic Culture and Thought. [In Persian]
Gherati,M. (2009). Tafsire Noor. Tehran. [In Persian]
Juneghani, M.A. (2007). A Survey of the Theoretical Frameworks of Discourse Engagement and Disengagement. Journal of Narrative Studies.1. 1-25 [In Persian]
Khorasani,F. (2010). Investigation of the structure of the Siavash story on Base of Greimas’s Narrative Semantic. Thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Science. Tarbiat Modares University. [In Persian]
Matouri,A. (2016). A Research on Stylistics of the Surah Ash-Shams. Horizon of Islamic Civilizations. 18 (2). 73-88. [In Arabic]
Makaryk, I,R. (2006). Encyclopedia of Contemporary Literary Theory. Translated by Mohajer,M & and Nabavi,M. [In Persian]
Mir,M & Abd Al-Raof.H.(2017).Studding Quran as a literary work. Mustansir Mir & Abdul-Raof,Hussein. Gathered and translated to Persian by Horri,A. Tehran. Niloofar.[In Persian]
Nasiri,R; Amiri, M. (2018). Semiotic Analysis of the Tensive Model in the Story of the Be'atat (Resurrection) of Moses (AS) in Surah al-Taha. Language Related Research. 9 (4). 33-59. [in Persian]
Paktchi,A & Shairi,H.R & Rahnama,H. (2015).Tensive Semiotics of Discourse in Surat Al-Qāriah; A New Approach in Semiotics of the Qurānic Discourse. Language Related Research. 4(25). 39-68. [In Persian]
Qutb,S.(2003).Fi Zilal Al Quran. Beirut. Dar Al-Shorough. [In Arabic]
Sadat Mostadavim, S.H; Shairi & Rahnama,H. (2013). Tensive Semiotics of "Kiramat" (dignity) in the Quranic Discourse. Journal of Our’anic interpretation and language. 1 (2). 24-42. [In Persian]
Safavi, Kourosh. (2015). Introduction to Semiotics of literature. Tehran: Elmi publishing.[In Persian]
Shairi,H.R. (2002). Basics of Modern Semantics. Tehran. Samt. [In Persian]
Shairi. H.R. Wafaei.T.(2010). A way to fluid Semantics. Tehran. Elmi va Farhangi. [In Persian]
Shairi.H.R. (2005). An Examination of the Basic Role of Perception in Meaning Production. Human Sciences. 45-46. 115-130. [In Persian]
Shairi.H.R. (2005) Study the Tensive Process of Literary discourse. Foreign Language Research. 25. 178-204.[In Persian]
Shairi. H.R. (2006). Semiotic Analysis of Discourse. Tehran:Samt. [In Persian]
Shairi. H.R. (2007). Study the types of Discourse systems from the semiotic perspectives. Collection of articles of Allameh Tabatabaie University. 219. 106-119. [In Persian]
Shairi.H.R. (2007). The Dialogue Between Semiology and Phenomenology as a Strategy for Analyzing the Literary and Artistic Discourses. Adab Pazhuhi. 3. 61-81. [In Persian]
Shairi. H.R. (2016). Semiotics of Literature. Tehran. Tarbiat Modares University Press. [In Persian]
Sharifi.H.R; Najmoddin,F.(2014). The Discourse Semiotics Analysis of Sura al-Rahman (based on Fontanille Tension Model). Journal of Qur’anic interpretation and language. 3 (1). 47-72. [In Persian]
Shafiei Kadkani, M.A.(2012). Resurrection of the words. Tehran. Sokhan. [In Persian]
Shiarzi,M. (1992). Tafsier Nemmoneh. Tehran. Dar Alkotob Eslamiyah. [In Persian]
Sojoodi,F. (2004). Applied Linguistics. Tehran: Qesseh Publishing. [In Persian]
Tabassom, Z. (2022). study the rhetoric points in Sura Shams. Arabic Language studies. (6) 35-48. [In Persian]
Tabatabaie.M.H.(1995). Al-Mizan. Traslated to Persian by Mouasavi. M,B. Qum. [In Persian]
Language Related Research

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 13 July 2025