پديد آورندگان :
حسن پور دهنوي ارسلان دانشگاه سيستان و بلوچستان , تاكي گيتي دانشگاه سيستان و بلوچستان , اكبري صاحبعلي دانشگاه فردوسي مشهد
كليدواژه :
قرآن كريم , گفتمان استدلالي , پرگما ديالكتيك , كنش گفتار , مناظرات حضرت ابراهيم (ع)
چكيده فارسي :
نوشتار حاضر تلاش مي كند گفتمان استدلالي مناظرات حضرت ابراهيم (ع) را با نمرود، آزر، ستاره پرستان و بت پرستان در ترجمۀ قرآن بر اساس رويكرد پرگما ديالكتيك بررسي و مقايسه كند. اين رويكرد داراي مراحل چهارگانۀ رويارويي، باب گشايي، استدلالي و نتيجه گيري براي دفاع از يك ديدگاه فكري و متقاعد كردن طرف مقابل است. به منظور بررسي و مقايسۀ مناظرات حضرت ابراهيم (ع) از جهت مراحل چهارگانۀ استدلال و نيز مقايسۀ كنش هاي گفتاري آن ها، آيه هاي مربوط به اين مناظرات از تفسير نمونه( مكارم،1378: 2؛ 1387: 13) و كتاب ريخت شناسي قصه هاي قرآن (حسيني،1383) مشخص شدند. از آيات مزبور 105 كنش گفتار استخراج و به روش توصيفي تحليلي بررسي شد. داده ها نشان مي دهد مراحل استدلال در مناظرات مختلف حضرت ابراهيم (ع) با يكديگر تفاوت دارد. گفت وگو با ستاره پرستان در مرحلۀ رويارويي و باب گشايي از ديگر مناظره ها متمايز است؛ به اين ترتيب كه از يك طرف اختلاف نظر در مرحلۀ رويارويي پنهان است و به تدريج در مرحلۀ باب گشايي و استدلالي آشكار مي شود و از طرف ديگر، ديدگاه در اين گفت وگو داراي قالب منفرد يك طرفه است. علاوه بر اين، آن حضرت از روش «دراماتيك» براي اقناع ستاره پرستان و بت پرستان كمك گرفته است. در مورد كنش گفتارها نيز بسامد كاربرد كنش هاي گفتاري از سوي حضرت ابراهيم(ع) و نيز نوع آن ها در مناظرات مختلف متفاوت است. همچنين، بررسي داده ها نشان مي دهد، چنانچه اين مدل در مراحل چهارگانه بخواهد دربرگيرندۀ همۀ گفتمان هاي استدلالي باشد بايد در مرحلۀ نتيجه گيري، تعديل هايي را در نظر بگيرد.
چكيده لاتين :
The present article aims to investigate and compare the argumentative discourse of Abraham’s debates with Nimrod, Azar, Star-worshipers and Idolaters in the Holy Qur'an. To this end, at first, the Persian translations of Abraham argumentative discussions with the opponents have been identified and then they have been analyzed based on Pragmatic-dialectical approach.This approach is composed of two parts: the dialectical and the pragmatic section. According to this approach, each argumentative dialogue has four stages: confronting, opening, argumentative and concluding features. In fact, the protagonist goes through these stages to defend his standpoint and tries to persuade the antagonist. Considering Abraham’s debates with his opponents on the one hand, and pragma-dialectical approach other hand, two questions have been the focus of attention in this article:1. Are these four stages of pragma-dialectical approach and the ways of persuading the audience different in Abraham’s debates? 2. Are the speech acts used in these debates the same? The related hypotheses are: 1. these four stages of pragma-dialectical approach and the ways of persuading the audience are not different in Abraham debates. 2. The speech acts used in these debates are not the same.
Research methodology is descriptive- analytical. The translations of Abraham’s debates with Nimrod, Azar , Star worshipers and Idolaters in the Holy Qur'an have been extracted from Makarem (1378, 12387) and Husseini (1382) and then have been analyzed and compared. Out of 167 Ayahs that have narrated Abraham‘s story in the Holy Quran, 61 Ayahs show Abraham’s debates. According to these debates, 105 speech acts were studied in terms of argumentative stages (confronting, opening, argumentative and concluding) and also the frequency of speech acts according to Searle (1969) was identified.
The research findings showed that from 105 speech acts in the debates, 86 of them are of Abraham and 19 cases belong to the opponents. In addition, the study showed that the argumentative stages of Abraham debates vary in these debates. Abraham debate with Star worshipers is different from other debates in confronting and opening stages. In this way difference in opinion is hidden in confronting stage and gradually it becomes clear in the opening and argumentative stages. Furthermore, in confronting stage the standpoint is single sided .Convincing the idolaters and Star worshipers, Abraham has made use of a“dramatic method”. In the pragmatic section, frequency and type of speech acts used by Abraham are different in the debates. In addition, the current research showed that this approach should be appropriately modified if it aims to investigate the argumentative discourse of the prophets in the Holy Qur'an.
