Critique of periphrasis and Their Types in Persian Rhetorical Texts

Periphrasis is one of the most important topics in semantics to the extent that some rhetoricians have considered the understanding of semantics to depend on its correct understanding. This importance requires that the books of meanings contain precise definitions and divisions of periphrasis in order to provide the reader with a clear theoretical framework for understanding the concept and its examples; But this is not the case in practice, and rhetoricians have not acted as expected in defining the boundaries and instances of periphrasis. Accordingly, it is necessary to re-read and analyze the definitions and divisions of periphrasis in old and new rhetorical books. In the present article, an attempt has been made to examine and show the strengths and weaknesses of these definitions and divisions by analytical-critical reading of old and new rhetorical texts. Analysis of the data of this study shows that old and new rhetoricians agree on the definition of periphrasis, which is to express a small meaning with many words; However, due to the relative nature of the concept of quantity in speech, some restrictions on "appropriateness to the conventional speech of the middle class" and "the necessity of position" have also been added to the definition of periphrasis;But with fruitless divisions and terminologies, they have not defined the instances of adjectives as clearly and precisely as they should; Some have encountered all kinds of overlapping definitions and commonalities in the sample, and as a result, judgments about their goodness and ugliness have led to conflict. It even seems that sometimes the author of rhetorical texts has been hesitant to know the meaning of a word.