نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری زبانشناسی همگانی

2 دانشیار دانشگاه تبریز

3 استادیار دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد اهر

چکیده

تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی، پیوندِ میانِ زبان، قدرت و ایدئولوژی را به وسیلة کشف ساختارها یا مؤلفه‌های گفتمان‌مدار نمایان می‌سازد. پژوهش حاضر، با هدفِ کشفِ لایه‌های پنهانیِ معانی تمبرهای پیش و پس از انقلاب در چارچوب تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی به انجام رسیده‌است. تحلیل‌گر این پژوهش با بررسی متن‌های تصویری نوشتاری می‌کوشد تا دریابد چگونه تمبرها زبان را به عنوان فرهنگ بدیهی، طبیعی و اجتناب ناپذیر به تصویر می‌کشند و کارکردهای متفاوت گفتمانی، اجتماعی و فرهنگی آن‌ها را بررسی می‌نماید. بنابراین 78 نمونه (39 تمبر پیش از انقلاب و 39 تمبر پس از انقلاب) از تمبرهای دهة 50 (1360-1350ه.ش) با بهره‌گیری از مؤلفه‌های جامعه‌شناختی-معنایی الگوی ون لیوون به صورت کیفی و کمی تجزیه تحلیل شدند. تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها نشان داد که ایدئولوژی حاکم بر اذهان طراحان، صاحبان اندیشه و حاکمان هر دو دوره با بهره‌گیری از مؤلفه‌های گفتمان‌مدار همچون تشخص‌بخشی، فردارجاعی، مکان‌مداری، ابزارمداری، منفعل‌سازی، کمرنگ‌سازی، پنهان‌سازی و موارد مشابه در متون بازنمایی می‌شوند. با این وجود، تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌های آماری هم درستی این یافته‌ها را تأیید کردند. همچنین مؤلفه‌های گفتمان‌مدار با ایدئولوژی و روابط قدرت در تعامل تنگاتنگ هستند و رابطة دوسویه با هم دارند که با بررسی این ساخت‌ها در متن‌ها و نهادهای اجتماعی قابلِ تبیین است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Fifties Stamps discourse from the Applied Semantics Perspective Based on Van Leeuwen Critical Discourse Analysis Approach

نویسندگان [English]

  • Sedighe Omidi Oskoui 1
  • Mohammad Ali Torabi 2
  • Hanieh Davatgari Asl 3

1 PhD student in linguistics

2 Associate Professor of Tabriz University

3 Assistant Professor Islamic Azad University, Ahar Branch

چکیده [English]

Critical discourse analysis is a new branch of discourse analysis that addresses the cause and justification of contents and, in other words, the disclosure of information. Critical discourse analysis reveals the relationship among language, power and ideology through discovering discursive structures or features. Analyzing the discursive features of texts (stamps), the author intends to link them to the methods of representation of actors to reach hidden messages in texts and show that the methods of representation of actors are different, depending on stamp producers’ attitudes, and that stamps are directional. Text production, including image, seems to be a discourse, a social act. The effective use of language means that ideological constructions are indirectly presented to listeners through language. To realize this, language and discourse should include levels and layers. Language and discourse include ideology and the relations of power and domination at lower levels, and include discourse structures and events at higher levels. The present research aims to discover the hidden layers of stamp meanings within the framework of critical discourse analysis. Analyzing visual and written texts, the author explores how stamps portray language as evident, natural and inevitable culture and examine its different discourse, social and cultural functions. According to Fairclough (1989), critical discourse analysis represents communications kept hidden from the eyes of people in society. In critical discourse analysis, there is a tendency towards image analysis, as if images are linguistic texts. Van Leeuwen (1996) tried to create a theory and method to analyze multi-modal texts, which use different semiotic systems like language, image, or voice. Using elements, symbols and images, the discourse system of stamps is able to reproduce cultural and national identities in line with governments’ political, cultural, and social beliefs, and stamps use both visual and written layers to represent historical memory for one’s audiences. In fact, a stamp is a record of an event or presence that always persists over time and introduces a trace of represented memory of history. In the research, utilizing the Van Leeuwen pattern and analyzing stamps of the 50’s, the author intends to show that the writing style and ideology of text (stamp) designers and producers are represented within the discursive structures, and both interact closely.   
The main research questions include:
•           How the discourse system of stamps can represent national identity process based on cultural and historical elements?
•           What is the relationship between structural and visual elements and hidden power?
The research methodology is from structure to content, which is reached by half a look at social semiotic image analysis from the point view of Kress and Van Leeuwen. In the research, for the analysis Van Leeuwen’s socio-semantic pattern is used. This pattern utilizes two main mechanisms, which are exclusion and inclusion, to represent social actors in a socio-semantic approach favorable by Van Leeuwen. In the research, purposive sampling was used. Therefore, 78 samples (39 stamps before the Revolution and 39 stamps after the Revolution) from stamps of the 50’s were analyzed by Van Leeuwen’s socio-semantic features qualitatively and quantitatively. It should be noted that the results obtained are generalized within the seventy-eight selected stamps, but not in general population, because giving a definitive answer to the research questions requires a very large sample and further research. In order to further clarify the first question, we checked the selected stamps of the 50s comparatively, based on the Van Leeuwen pattern from a socio-semantic perspective (according to discursive features), and found that the choice of images used in the stamps greatly depends on the rule based on which stamps had been published and are tools of transferring information from one generation to another. This is because using elements, symbols and images, the discourse system of stamps is capable of reproducing cultural and national identities in line with the political, cultural and social beliefs of governments. The majority of political, social, and cultural thoughts hidden in the heart of images are transferred through suppression and backgrounding features to their audience. Discourse features can be linguistic or socio-semantic, but by examining the images and the results obtained, it can be said that all the socio-semantic features do not necessarily have formal linguistic representations. An important point on socio-semantic features is that efficiency of socio-semantic features should be more in representing different discourse layers and in revealing the hidden meaning of the text.
With regard to the second question, it can be said that the relationship between structural and visual elements in the stamp with power discourse varies according to statemen’s state functions, and the ideology governing the minds of the statesmen is reflected in the texts (stamps) by using specific discursive features, such as personalization, passivation, backgrounding, suppression, and other Van Leeuwen’s discursive features. In fact, there is a bilateral relationship between the discursive features and ideology. For this purpose, looking at the total findings from the statistical analyses, it has been found that some discursive features, such as backgrounding, suppression, collectivation, utterance autonomization, indetermination, passivation, differentiation and instrumentalization, have a higher frequency in the texts; while some socio-semantic features, such as individualization, functionalization, activation, association, personalization, nomination, indentification and spatialization, have a lower frequency. The motivation for the present research is to raise awareness and strengthen critical thinking, since one can consider critical discourse analysis as one of the most useful tools to examine texts in order to track the ideologies dominated on them. Van Leeuwen’s pattern of social actors is an effective pattern to do research in this area. In the authors’ view, such research can be used in the following organizations and institutions: The Organization for Educational Research and Planning of the Ministry of Education, International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Deputy for Information and News Unit of IRIB, Deputy for Research of Universities (by holding conferences) (Disclosure: Raising university academic degree and rank, print and publication of educational book; Suppression: Income for university), Iranian Psychological Association, etc.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • critical discourse analysis
  • power
  • ideology
  • Socio-semantic features
  • Van Leeuwen’s pattern

آقاگل زاده، فردوس. (1383). روش‌شناسی تحقیق در تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی. مجموعه مقاله‌های ششمین کنفرانس زبان شناسی. به کوشش ابراهیم کاظمی. تهران: دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی. صص 1-10
آقاگل زاده، فردوس. (1385). تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی. تهران: انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی.
پهلوان نژاد، محمدرضا، رحمان صحراگرد و محمدهادی فلاحی (1388). «شیوه‌های بازنمایی کارگزاران اجتماعی در نشریات دوره مشروطه از منظر گفتمان‌شناسی انتقادی با عنایت به مؤلفه‌های گفتمان‌مدار جامعه شناختی- معنایی». زبان‌شناسی و گویش‌های خراسان. دوره 1. شماره 1. صص 73-51.
حیدری تبریزی، حسین و آیت الله رزم جو (1384). «شیوه‌های تصویرسازی کارگزاران اجتماعی در گفتمان فارسی: تحلیل توجیهی گفتمان با عنایت به مولفه‌های جامعه‌شناختی-معنایی». نشریه دانشکدة ادبیات و علوم انسانی دانشگاه تبریز. دوره 48. شماره 195. صص 1-34.
دواتگرزاده، گلناز. (1387). بازنمایی کارگزاران اجتماعی در کتب Interchange: تحلیل انتقادی گفتمان با عنایت به مؤلفه‌های جامعه شناختی-معنایی. پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه شیراز.
سلطانی، علی اصغر. (1384). قدرت، گفتمان و زبان. تهران: نشر نی.
شعیری، حمیدرضا. (1391). نشانه-معناشناسی دیداری: نظریه و تحلیل گفتمان هنری. چ 1. تهران: انتشارات سخن.
شعیری، حمیدرضا. (1395). نشانه-معناشناسی ادبیات، نظریه و روش تحلیل گفتمان ادبی. تهران: دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
شعیری، حمیدرضا و پانته آ نبی ئیان. (1396). تحلیل روایی فرایند تشخیص در چارچوب نشانه- معناشناسی گفتمانی: مطالعة موردی «دسته گل» اثر چوبک. زبان‌پژوهی. دوره 9. شماره 25. صص 58-25.
کلانتریان، ندا. (1391). توصیف و تحلیل زبان‌شناختی گفت و گوهای هسته ای ایران بین دو جناح اصلاح طلب و اصول گرا: دیدگاه تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی. پایان نامة کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
مرکز آموزش شرکت پست جمهوری اسلامی ایران‌. (1382). جهان تمبر. چ 1. تهران: سپهر افروز.
نعمتی، آزاده. (1397). «میزان رازگونگی متون خبری فارسی و انگلیسی: بررسی موردی انتخابات 2016 ریاست جمهوری امریکا». زبان پژوهی. دوره 10. شماره 28. صص 8-8.
نوین فرح بخش، فریدون. (1393). راهنمای تمبرهای ایران (قاجار- پهلوی- جمهوری اسلامی ایران). چ 13. تهران: فرح بخش.
یارمحمدی، لطف الله و لیدا سیف (1383). بازنمایی کارگزاران اجتماعی در مناقشات فلسطین و اسرائیل از طریق ساختارهای گفتمان‌مدار جامعه‌شناختی-معنایی. مجموعه مقاله‌های ششمین کنفرانس زبان شناسی. به کوشش ابراهیم کاظمی. تهران: مجله دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی. صص 334-421.


References
Aghagolzadeh, F. (2004). Methodology in critical discourse analysis (CAD). In E. Kazemi (Ed.), proceedings the sixth conference on linguistics (pp. 1-10). Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai University [In Persian].
Aghagolzadeh, F. (2006). Critical discourse analysis. Tehran: Scientific-Research Co.
Amal-Saleh, E. (2004). The representation of social actors in the EFL text books in Iran. (Unpublished PhD dissertation), Shiraz university, Shiraz, Iran [In Persian].
Davatgarzadeh, G. (2008). The representation of social actors in Interchange series: a critical discourse analysis with respect to the socio-semantic features (Master’s thesis), Shiraz University. Shiraz, Iran [In Persian].
Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London: Longman.
Fard, F. (2003). A comparative study of children’s stories and adults short stories within the framework of CDA (Unpublished Master’s thesis), Shiraz university, Shiraz, Iran [In Persian].
Heiddari Tabrizi, H., Razmju, SA. (2005). The representation of social actors in the Persian discourse: discourse analysis based on the socio-semantic elements. Journal of Faculty of Letters and Humanities Tabriz, 48(195), 1-34. [In Persian]
Hodge, R., & Kress, G. (1988). Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Jorgenson, M., & Phillips, L. (2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: SAGE.
Kalantarian, N. (2012). Linguistic description and analysis of Iran nuclear talks between reformists and fundamentalists: critical discourse analysis (Master’s thesis). Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian]
Kress, G. (1985). Linguistic processes in sociocultural practice. Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Nemati, A. (2018). Mystification rate in Persian and English news articles: a case study of the US presidential election in 2016. Zabanpazhuhi, 10(28), 8-8.
Novin Farahbakhsh, F. (2014). The stamps of Iran (Qajar, Pahlavi, Islamic Republic of Iran). (13nd ed.). Tehran: Farahbakhsh [In Persian].
Pahlavannezhad, M., Sahragard, R., & Fallahi, M. (2009). The representation of social actors in the periodical of the constitutional revolution from the perspective of critical discourse with regard to the components of sociological-semantic discourse. Journal of Linguistics & Khorasan Dialects, 1(1), 51-73 [In Persian].
Shairi, H. (2012). Visual semiotics: theories and analysis of art discourse. Tehran: Sokhan [In Persian].
Shairi, H. (2016). Semiosemantic in Literature: theory and practical discourse analysis. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University [In Persian].
Shairi, H. & Nabian, P. (2017). Discursive-semiotics criticism of personification as a process in literary discourse: a case study of “a bunch of flowers” by Choobak. Zabanpazhuhi, 9(25), 25-58 [In Persian].
Soltani, A. (2005). Power, discourse and Language. Tehran: Ney [In Persian].
Training post office of the Islamic Republic of Iran (2003). Stamp World. (1nd ed.). Tehran: SepehrAfroz. [In Persian]
Van Leeuwen, T. (1993). Genre and field in CDA. Discourse and Society, 4(2), 193-224.
Van Leeuwen, T. (1995). Representing social action. Discourse and Society, 6(1), 81-106.
Van leeuwen, T. (1996). The representation of social actors. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard, & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices: Readings in CDA (pp. 32-70). London: Routelge.
Van Leeuwen, T. (2005 & 1998). Introducing social semiotics. Routledge: London & New York.
Van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and practice: new tools for critical discourse analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wodak, R. (2006). Mediation between discourse and society: Assessing cognitive approaches in CDA. Discourse and Society, 8(1), 179-190.
Yar-Mohammadi, L. & Saif, L. (2004). Representation of social agents in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict through community-based cognitive-semantic structures of discourse. In E. Kazemi (Ed.), proceedings the sixth conference on linguistics (pp. 334-421). Tehran: Allameh Tabataba’i University [In Persian].