جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « تغییر معنایی » در نشریات گروه « ادبیات و زبان ها »

Many Arabic words, upon entering the Persian language, have been transferred with the preservation of sound and script but have acquired completely different meanings, to the extent that in Persian, either the intended Quranic meaning is not understood at all, or the meaning is abrogated and not intuitive. These words can pave the way for misconceptions; in translating such words, the Persian interpretation of these words may subconsciously come to the minds of some translators and steer them away from the Arabic meaning. This deviation can be referred to as "Persianization" in translation. The present study, using reliable lexical sources of Persian and Arabic languages with a descriptive and critical approach, the semantic differences of the words "Tafāwut, Ḥājat, Ihlāk, Imdād, and Ṣāḥib/Aṣḥāb" in Arabic and Persian have been explained, followed by the examination of the performance of 41 Persian translators of the Holy Quran. The research findings indicate that the issue of Persianization has a widespread prevalence among Persian-speaking translators to the extent that no translator can be identified who has made fewer mistakes in this regard.

The linguistic variety spoken by the prisoners and the words and expressions used by them in their conversations has attracted a lot of attention. This variety is sometimes so different from the one used outside the prison walls that it is almost unfathomable for those who have never been exposed to it. This variety is idiosyncratic in terms of phonology, morphology, and semantics. The study of prison language and its relevant words and expressions is of great significance from sociolinguistic, psycholinguistic, cognitive linguistic, and criminology points of views. Due to significance and the paucity of domestic linguistic studies on the prison language, this study, within the framework of sociolinguistics, made an attempt to bring the semantic features into considerations and delve into the semantic changes of related words and expressions in the prison language with respects to the four variables of gender, age, education, and social status and respond to the following two research questions: First, What are the main semantic changes of words and expressions in the language of prison? Second, what are the relationships between semantic changes and the four variables of gender, age, education, and social status? In order to collect the data, observation and interviews were utilized. The data included 615 and 496 idioms and expressions used by male and female prisoners respectively (total expressions amounted to 1111). The number of all interviewees was 70, consisting of 20 females from Rey Prison and 50 males from four prisons of Raja’ee Shahr, Ghezelhesar, Fashafooye, and Tehran. The results showed that four semantic processes of metaphor, Irony, metonymy, and semantic degradation accounted for the main sources of semantic changes of words and expressions in the language of prison. Regarding the effects of the four variables of gender, age, education, and social status on these semantic processes, it was concluded that gender did not bring about any significant change in the speech of male and female prisoners, though it was effective on the frequency of use of those semantic processes. Some expressions were specific only to men and some were female specific. Out of the other three variables (age, education, and social status), the two variables of education and social status had the most effects on the use of semantic changes among the prisoners. The effect of age is more than that of social status and education and is less than that of gender. In sum, it can be concluded that as education and social status increase, the use of words and expressions in the language of prison decreases. In contrast, as education and social status decrease, the prisoners are more influenced by the language of prison and they use more semantic processes in their speech.

Semantic broadening is one of the important processes of semantic change that has long been studied by experts and especially by historical-philological semanticists. In this process, which occurs over time, the meaning of a word broadens from time period A to time period B and thus, in addition to its previous meaning, the word includes a new concept. Semantic broadening over time leads to a multitude of meanings. A word is used to refer to a new unit of language in terms of its similarity to a new concept, and based on the Prototype theory. As such, in addition to its original meaning, it is also applied in a new sense. This "similarity" has, in many cases, led to confusion between semantic broadening and metaphor, and a group of words that has undergone semantic broadening is considered as metaphors. The present research, in addition to explaining semantic broadening, examines the difference of this process with metaphor, and, in particular, by emphasizing Persian verbs, tries to show that many of the constructs considered as metaphor, are, in fact, instances of semantic broadening that, as a result of this process, have gained multiple meanings. Relying on examples, in particular, examples of Persian verbs, this paper attempted to emphasize the distinction between semantic broadening and metaphor, and to show that, by tradition, in our metaphor, one tends to separate the tenor from the simile and apply it on other contexts. However, in the case of semantic broadening, the tenor is by no means used in different contexts. Words are semantically broadened over time and their semantic scope expands, which is a process quite different from metaphor. As such, the results of this study indicate the subtle distinction that exists between semantic broadening and the process of metaphor, which is often neglected. In metaphor, the "tenor" is derived from the simile, and is used in other sentences instead of the "vehicle"; in a way that the "tenor" adopts the semantic behavior of the “vehicle”. However, in semantic broadening, an independent process occurs, and what emerges as the process of semantic broadening is the semantic expansion of other units of the simile.

This article is an attempt to give pragmatic criteria for the recognition of the polysemy and homonymy.The difference between polysemy words and the homonymy ones, is one of the common issues in books and some articles of semantics, but the criteria that linguists have put forward in this regard is not unpopular when tested.The manner in which this paper proposes to re-examine the causes of polysemy in words.By providing examples of poetry Dehkhoda’s dictionary, we emphasized the conjugal relations of words and tissues of the language, in which the term is contained. therefore, it is possible to use the same criteria in the separation of the polysemy and homonymy.However, some of the meanings that the authors of the Dehkhoda’s dictionary have brought can be a source of doubt, but a lot of evidence is useful. We did not refer to the texts because of the choice of the dictionary

The relationship between semantics and phonology is generally denied (Archangeli & Pulleyblank, 1994: 5, 433). That is, semantic and phonological changes usually apply independently. Phonological processes of Persian which convert a phonemic representation to its phonetic representation mostly do not involve any meaning changes. However, there are few idiosyncratic words in Persian whose phonetic representations which are used in the colloquial style differ in meaning from their phonemic representations.Various types of semantic changes including extensionand restriction of meaning or both, in addition to pragmatic changes occur in these words. In some cases the meaning changes accompany a change in spelling too. This research addresses phonology-semantics interaction using “lexical-access constraints” (Boersma, 2001), in optimality theory as the sole theory to make the analysis of phonology-semantics interaction to some extent possible. Furthermore, some of these interactions occur to save energy and to make less muscular effort. This is usually discussed in functional rather than formal approaches. Following Kirchner (1989) this research integrates functionalism and formalism in optimality theory to deal with this issue.

Grammaticalization is a process through which a lexical item changes into a grammatical morpheme. Semantic changes of a free morpheme along with the categorical and phonological changes result in structural function in the syntax of a language, and the former lexical items are used to express abstract grammatical concepts such as tense, aspect, and mood. In all languages, body part words as a part of lexical sources are very frequent, and have a vast semantic network. The role of these free lexical items in the process of grammaticalization has been documented by various researchers, and it has been shown that some of the body part words have been changed into adposition by moving through the continuum of grammaticalization and after a change in their core meaning. This research tries to investigate the body part word "face" and the pattern of changes in this free lexical item in Persian language system within the framework of the grammaticalization process. To do so, the different simple, derived and derived compound forms of "face" in Anvari Allegory Dictionary(1383) and FarsNet have been studied to answer the following questions: 1)what is the continuum of the changes in body part word "face" in the process of grammaticalization, and 2) what are the semantic, morphosyntactic, and categorical outcomes of grammaticalization of this word? The results show that this word has undergone the grammaticalization process like other body part words and even progressed more. This word not only refers to "face" (core meaning), it has also undergone semantic generalization and hierarchical pejoration, and participated in new structures and functions. The ending point of changes of this face is its function as compound subordinate conjunction in conditional forms and contrastive expressions. This word has gone so beyond its core meaning as subordinate conjunction that no sign of the former core meaning as body part word "face" is available.

In this paper we investigated the semantic change of the word “dowlat” in the history of Persian prose from the 4th century (Hijri) until now. Though seemingly the meaning of this word has not changed dramatically, but it has been used with 21 different meanings in the Persian texts we investigated. We made an attempt to explain the semantic change of Dowlat using the prototype theory, Geeraerts’ (1997) approach. The prototype theory explains the meaning changes of the word well, in terms of three of four prototype hypotheses. We found that some senses play central role in the process of meaning change and meaning changes take place in the margins of clusters, in relation to central senses; some senses are peripheral and more impermanent; and some senses root simultaneously from more than one conceptual cluster (hypothesis 2). We found some evidence which show that modulation in the boundaries could cause one sense to occur twice in the history of the word in question, and each time independent from the other one; that is to say semantic polygenesis (hypothesis 3). Finally we learnt that encyclopedic information has a significant role in conceptual development of the words (hypothesis 4).

All languages change over the years, semantic changes are the most common type of these changes. In studies on semantic changes, there are three different categories: semantic changes varieties, reasons for the semantic change, and mechanisms of semantic change. Metonymy and metaphor are two main mechanisms.in this paper, the question before is whether these mechanisms could explain semantic changes of some words from the Tarix-e Beyhaqi book. The results of this study show that most of the changes would be described by metonymy and historical evidences can also be used to prove this claim.

Over time, the words change meaning. According to linguistic studies, the most important types of this semantic change are: semantic generalization, semantic appropriation, metaphor and semantic degradation or promotion. This rule also applies to the vocabulary of Arabic; and some of the terms used in the Quran have undergone a semantic transformation. Unfortunately, a number of contemporary Persian translators have neglected this and translated some of the terms in the common and contemporary meaning. This function can seriously damage the Quranic concepts. Since the main religious teachings of the Muslims are taken from the Quran, the slightest error should not occur in the transfer of Quranic concepts to another language.Since some Quran translators have failed to do so in some cases, we have reviewed the errors found in some translations.With the search method in the sources of the vocabulary and the interpretation of the old period, and contemporary dictionaries, we will show the semantic change brought to some Quranic words.Twelve words that have undergone a semantic change have been investigated in 29 Persian translations of the Quran and it has been concluded that some translators mistakenly translated those words into contemporary sense.

Persian and Arabic have had long-lasting religious and cultural symbiosis. Due to their speakers’ similar cultural conditions and geographical proximity, the two languages have lived a long time near each other, have grown together and enriched each other. The authors of this article studied the word formation processes in the two languages and showed the capabilities and limitations of each of these two languages in dynamicity and productivity. The study has scrutinized derivation, compounding and semantic change in words as three main common mechanisms of word formation in the two languages. The results show that although compared to Arabic, fewer texts have been written in Persian and the language has had a passive stance to Arabic, the well-developed derivational and compound structure Persian has served the productivity of the language during the last century and a wide range of new words have found their way to the vocabulary of the mass reservoir of Persian vocabulary. In contrast, the templatic nature of derivation in Arabic, peculiar to the language, brings about certain constraints in the production of compound words that are part of the lexicon of every living language.

Semantic shifting which is one of the most important semantic processes forming the meaning of some linguistic structures was first introduced by Safavi (1379). The meaning of different structures such as proverbs, are made by semantic shifting which takes place on the syntagmatic axis, but is shown on the paradigmatic axis. The corpus used in this study consists of 10 Persian proverbs which are derived from some old stories. On the basis of this study, the validity of semantic shifting is proved. It is interesting to find out that there are some unconscious Persian speakers who cause some semantic changes in proverbs without paying attention to the stories from which they are derived.