نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار گروه زبان و ادبیات فارسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد ایذه، ایران

چکیده

امیرخسرو دهلوی یکی از شاعران تأثیرگذار زبان و ادب پارسی است که با بهره‌مندی از نبوغ و دانش فراوان، نماینده‌ای قابل، برای زبان و فرهنگ پارسی در سرزمین هندوستان بوده است، آثار گوناگون او آگنده از شگردهای هنری و ادبیِ ظریف و ارزشمندی است که شناخت آن‌ها برای درکِ درستِ گذشتۀ ادبی زبان فارسی اهمیت بسیار دارد. او که خود از پیشگامان قابل ‌اعتماد در نقد ادبی و علوم بلاغی بوده است، فنون ادبی را به‌خوبی در سخن به کار گرفته است. "ایهام" ازجمله بارزترینِ فنونِ تأثیرگذار در آثار اوست که با تداعی معانی دور و نزدیک، مخاطب را در دریافت چندمعنا از ‌کلام، کمک می‌کند. یکی از آثار ارزشمند و کمتر شناخته‌شدۀ او "مثنوی نه‌سپهر" است که آن را در سال 718 (ه.ق) سروده است. بسیاری از ابیات این اثر، از ظرافت ایهامی هنرمندانه‌ای برخوردار است و مخاطب آشنا، با دقّت در ساختار ایهامی آن، متوجّه شبکۀ گسترده‌ای از واژگان چندمعنایی می‌شود، در این مقاله با بهره گیری از روش توصیفی – تحلیلی کوشش شده است تا به این پرسش پاسخ داده شود که مهم ترین گونه‌های ایهام در " مثنوی نه‌سپهر" امیرخسرو دهلوی کدامند؟

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Different Types of Ambiguity in Amir Khosrow Dehlavi’s Noh Sepehr

نویسنده [English]

  • Omidvar AliMahmoudi

Assistant Professor, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Izeh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Izeh, Iran

چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Amir Khosrow Dehlavi is an influential poet in the history of Persian language and literature, who has emerged as a capable representative of the Persian language and culture in the land of India. His various works are filled with delicate, valuable artistic and literary techniques, identification of which is of great importance for a correct understanding of the literary background of Persian. As a dependable pioneer in literary criticism and rhetoric, he has employed literary techniques properly in speech. Ambiguity is one of the most prominent effective techniques in his works, which helps the addressee to perceive more than one meaning from the discourse through implication of close and distant senses. One of his valuable, lesser-known works is his masnavi (‘a poetic form’) Noh Sepehr (‘nine skies’), composed in 718 AH. Many of the verses in this work contain artistic delicacies in terms of ambiguity, where the familiar addressee recognizes a wide network of polysemous words by paying close attention to the ambiguous structures. In this descriptive-analytical research, an attempt was made to answer the question of what is included in the most important types of ambiguity in Amir Khosrow Dehlavi’s Noh Sepehr.
Keywords: Ambiguity, Different Types of Ambiguity, Noh Sepehr, Amir Khosrow Dehlavi.
 
 

Introduction

Īhām (A literary device in which an author uses a word, or an arrangement of words with two meanings, making the sentence ambiguous) is an important literary device in the construction of effective prose and poetry. One of the richest and lesser-known works of Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī, an Indian famous poet of Persian, is his "Masnavi Noh Sepehr", many verses of which have a delicate artistic Īhām elegance. Given the importance of this literary device, it is important to know what types of it are used in Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī'a Masnavi Noh Sepehr, how this poet develops the overt and covert aspects of his message through it, and what is the relationship of Īhāmi words in the creation and development of meaning.
Since Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī is the greatest poet using Nezami's style and his poetry is in between Sa'di's and Hafiz's poetry, it is important to know the hidden aspects of his works. For this reason, research on Īhām and its various types in "Masnavi Noh Sepehr" helps reveal the hidden layers of his beautiful and influential poetry. This study attempts to investigate different types of Īhām in this work and show which type of the mentioned literary device is used the most in it.

Methodology

This study analyzes the content of Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī'a Masnavi Noh Sepehr by collecting information through the desk- or documentary-based technique and a descriptive-analytical method.

Discussion

Definition of Īhām: The use of a word at least in two meanings" (Shamisa, 2003: 132).
Tanasob (Relational) Īhām: Only one of the two meanings of a word is conveyed by the word itself, but the hidden meaning has a relation to the word or words used in the immediate context of the word (but not in the meaning of the word itself (Ibid: 135)




Kick the pole so that people get lost like a ball in the sea (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 431)

The direct (apparent) meaning of "kicking the polo" is "playing music", but it has relational Īhām with "ball" in its implied (hidden) meaning (playing the polo).

Mojarradeh (Abstracted) Īhām: This type of Īhām occurs when none of the relations of the direct (apparent) and implied (hidden) meanings of a term with Īhām is used in the text.


All went in the river without playing, all were simple and got in khat (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 39)

The direct (apparent) meaning of the Persian term "khat" is "writing", and its implied meaning is the hair (line) of face, and none of the relations of the direct and implied meanings of that term has appeared in the text.

Movashaheh Īhām: The use of [appropriate] terms in both intended and unintended meanings (Anousheh, 2002: 183).


Your zagh sat on the branch, I rudely made it fly (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 301)

The direct (apparent) meaning of "zagh" is "bow", and its implied meaning is "magpie", and the poet has simultaneously used the phrase "making fly" for its apparent meaning and the phrase "sitting on the branch" for its implied meaning.

Morasheheh (Parvardeh) Īhām: The use of the features of the direct (apparent) meaning of a word in a text (Sadeghian, 1999: 111).


As it is good for special and common people, they get mast (drunken) with that zogh modam (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 44)

One of the meanings of "zogh" is joy and exuberance, making it related to being drunken (apparent meaning) and with "modam" (with the implied meaning of wine).

Mobayyeneh Īhām: The use of the features of an implied meaning of a term (Sadeghian, 2008: 111).


Crows from the avaz (singing) of zagh, hurry toward a bone party (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 103)

The direct (apparent) meaning of "zagh" is a bow and its implied meaning in music has Tanasob Īhām with "avaz", which is a relation of the implied meaning.

Tabador (Associative) Īhām: A word associates another word (almost) homophonous or homomorphous with it (Shamisa, 2003: 141).


A king with no sea in his heart, no water comes to the kaf of his sa'el (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 237)

Water, sea, and kaf, collocated with sa'el (beggar), associate the beach.

Khaneshi Īhām (with two readings): A word is used in a context in such a way that it can be given two readings with correct meanings due to its structure (Rastgou, 2000: 99).


When this lyricist sings, it gives eyes abr-e no/ruzi (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 399)

abr-e noruzi (spring cloud); abr-e no ruzi (giving a new cloud)

Tazad (contrast) Īhām: This type of Īhām occurs when the hidden meaning contrasts with the meaning of a word or words in a text (Shamisa; 2002: 138).


All went in the shat without playing, all were sadeh and got in khat (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 39)

The direct (apparent) meaning of "shat" is "a large river" and its implied meaning is "difficulty" which contrasts with the word "sadeh" meaning easy.

Tarjomeh (Translation) Īhām: The use of two words with Īhām in such a way that only one of the two meanings is intended. That unintended meaning is a translation in the two words are translations of each other (Ghanipour Malekshah and Rezazadeh Babi, 2013: 50)


Whatever the savad of the dark night, was whitened by God's pen of creation (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 203)

"Savad" in its implied meaning of blackness has Tarjomeh Īhām with dark.

Taradof (Syn onymous) Īhām: This type of Īhām occurs when a word, in a sense other than the intended meaning, is synonymous with another word in the same context (Rastgou, 2000: 79).


The first sun, of the views of mehr, has given much light from high in the sky (Amīr Khusrow Dehlavī', 1950: 53)

"Mehr" has the direct (apparent) meaning of kindness and the implied (hidden) meaning of the light of sky, and has Taradof Īhām with the sun in its latter sense.

Conclusion


This study found 103 uses of Īhām in 51 verses with Īhām structure and categorized a total of 103 types of this literary

device.

Of the 15 (fifteen) types of Īhām identified in these verses, Mobayyeneh and Mohayyah types of Īhām had the highest and lowest frequencies with 28 repetitions and only 1 repetition, respectively. Tanasob, Movahesheh, Tabador, Mojarradeh, Khaneshi, Taradof, Morasheheh, Tazad, Tarjomeh, Samaei and Estekhdam types of Īhām had the next ranks with 13, 12, 11, 7, 7, 7, 5, 4, 4, 2 and 2 frequencies, respectively.
The high frequency of Mobayyeneh Īhām indicates the complexity of the poet's mind and his mastery over the creation of complex types of Īhām, since the hidden meaning is conveyed in this type of Īhām, which is indeed the most difficult type of it.


References


The holy Quran, Translated by Mehdi Elahi Ghomshei, Qom: Selsele Publications, 2006.
Ali Mahmoudi, Omidvar, Naqd va Nazar pirâmune Do Beyt az Masnaviye Noh Sepehre Amir Xosrow Dehlavi (‘A Critique of and Comments on Two Verses from Amir Khosrow Dehlavi’s Noh Sepehr’), Islamic Azad University of Shahrekord, Scientific-Research Journal of Literary Criticism and Stylistics Research, Issue 13, pp. 107-125, Fall 2016.
Anushe, Hasan, Yek Qesse Biš Nist (‘Nothing but a Story’), Tehran: Scientific Press Institute, 2002.
Dehkhoda, Ali Akbar, Loqatnâme (‘The Lexicon’), Tehran: Lexicon Institute, 1994.
Dehlavi, Amir Khosrow, Noh Sepehr (‘Nine Skies’), Textually criticized by Mohammad Vahid Mirza, Kolkata, India: 1950.
Ghanipur Malekshah and Rezazade Babi, Barrasi va Moqâyeseye Ihâm va Gunehâye Ân dar Aš’âre Xâqâni va Hâfez (‘An Investigation and Comparison of Ambiguity and Its Types in Khaqani’s and Hafez’s Poetry’), Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Tehran University, Journal of Literary Criticism and Rhetoric, Volume 9, Issue 9, pp. 37-56, Spring and Summer 2013.
Hafez, Shams al-Din Muhammad, Hafez’s Divan, Textually Criticized by Ghazvini and Ghani, Sixth Printing, Tehran: Asatir, 1998.
Kazzazi, Mir Jalaleddin, Badi’, Zibâšenâsiye Soxane Pârsi (‘Rhetoric: Aesthetics of Persian Speech’), Tehran: Mad, 2006.
Ranjbar, Ahmad, Badi’ (‘Rhetoric’), Tehran: Asatir, 2006.
Rastgu, Seyyed Mohammad Ihâm dar Še’re Fârsi (‘Ambiguity in Persian Poetry’), Tehran: Soroush, 2000.
Sadeghiyan, Mohammad Ali, Zivare Soxan dar Badi’e Fârsi (‘Ornament of Speech in Persian Rhetoric’), Yazd: Yazd University, 2000.
Setayeshgar, Mehdi, Vâženâmeye Musiqiye Irân Zamin (‘Iranian Music Lexicon’), Tehran: Ettela’at, 2002.
Shamisa, Sirus, Negâhi Tâze be Badi’ (‘A New Look at Rhetoric’), Tehran: Ferdows, 2003.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Keywords: Ambiguity
  • Different Types of Ambiguity
  • Noh Sepehr
  • Amir Khosrow Dehlavi
  1. قرآن کریم، ترجمۀ مهدی الهی قمشه‌ای، قم: سلسله، 1385.
  2. انوشه، حسن، یک قصه بیش نیست، تهران: مؤسسۀ مطبوعات علمی، 1381.
  3. حافظ، شمس‌الدین محمد، دیوان حافظ، تصحیح قزوینی- غنی، چاپ ششم، تهران: اساطیر، 1377.
  4. دهخدا، علی‌اکبر، لغت‌نامه، تهران: سازمان لغت‌نامه، 1373.
  5. دهلوی، امیرخسرو، مثنوی نهسپهر، تصحیح و تعلیقات محمد وحید میرزا، کلکتۀ هند، 1950 م.
  6. راستگو، سید محمد، ایهام در شعر فارسی، تهران: سروش، 1379.

7. رنجبر، احمد، بدیع، تهران: اساطیر، 1385.

  1. ستایشگر، مهدی، واژه‌نامۀ موسیقی ایران‌‌زمین، تهران: اطلاعات، 1381.

9. شمیسا، سیروس، نگاهی تازه به بدیع، تهران: فردوس، 1381.

10. صادقیان، محمدعلی، زیور سخن در بدیع فارسی، یزد: دانشگاه یزد، 1379.

  1. عالی محمودی، امیدوار، نقد و نظر پیرامون دو بیت از مثنوی نه‌سپهر امیرخسرو دهلوی، مجلۀ علمی پژوهشی پژوهش‌های نقد ادبی و سبک‌شناسی، دورۀ 7، شمارۀ 25، صص 125-107، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد شهرکرد: پاییز 1395.
  2. غنی‌پور ملکشاه، احمد؛ رضازاده بابی، سیده سودابه، بررسی و مقایسۀ ایهام و گونه‌های آن در اشعار خاقانی و حافظ، پژوهشنامۀ نقد ادبی و بلاغت، دورۀ 9، شمارۀ 9، صص 37-56، دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی دانشگاه تهران: بهار و تابستان 1392.

13. کزازی، میرجلال‌الدین، بدیع، زیباشناسی سخن پارسی، تهران: کتاب ماد، 1385.