عجز، مضمونی انسجام‌‌بخش در غزل بیدل

Abstract
The issue of cohesion in the Persian Ghazal has always been important to the researchers. This subject has raised a lot of controversies regarding the Indian style and the Ghazals of Bidel; and it was stated that there is connectedness in those poems. this study using descriptive-analytical methods and ways to study the coherence of texts and a look to the theory of Halliday and Hassan, has studied coherence in Biddle's sonnet in the mirror of the first sonnet of his divan and has answered the question Why and how the sentence was issued about connectedness in Bidel's sonnet? The results show that cohesion and coherence in the Ghazal of Bidel is implicit in a shadow of genuine figures of speech, special language, ambiguity, and intricacy in his poetry. to prove the integrity of Bidel’s poetry, it is necessary to reflect on its grammatical features specially pronouns references, accuracy in word collocations and poetic compositions, repetitions, synonyms, antonyms, as well as minor and major links between poetic segments particularly words and compositions. each of Bidel’s Ghazals can be summarized into the least sentences; and genuine artistic pleasure can be experienced by discovering the intellectual and semantic harmony in his poetry.
 

Introduction

After Hafiz sonnet, which has always been the subject of controversy, the Indian style sonnet is more labeled for the lack of cohesion than any other styles, and the Indian branch more charged in this respect (Shafiee Kadkani, 2004, 125) Bidel, however, considers cohesion in his works and emphasizes this feature in expressing the distinction between prose and poetry: “Bidel views poetry as a bud and prose as flower; with this in mind, he intends to convey the cohesion of the poetry and the dispersion of prose. It seems that this point is not true about Bidel’s poetry and his sonnet and they lack cohesion. But a precise look at Bidel’s poems indicate that, contrary to popular opinion, Bidel's poetry is highly cohesive and, indeed, his poem is like a bud. (Kardgar, 2017: 66) But what makes it difficult to grasp the cohesion of his poetry, besides its tendency to be complex, is the inadequacies of the language.

Research methodology

The present paper in the field of Bidel research is a fundamental research and in a descriptive-analytical way, using ways to study the coherence of texts and content analysis and the theory of Halliday coherence and Hasan have been answered to one of the basic ambiguities about Bidel's sonnet, and in the form of the first sonnet of his divan, which, according to the author, is the summary of his sonnet; It examines the coherence of Bidel's sonnets.
Through the cohesive devices that Hasan tabulates (Halliday, Hasan, 2014, 197), reference (implicit and implied) from the grammatical cohesion and repetition, semantic, contrast, and partial and total components of the lexical cohesion are used to examine Bidel's sonnet cohesion in the present study. These devices organize non-structural cohesion. Unfortunately, this theory, regardless of its performance and without any pathology has been the focus of numerous articles that only lead to the division and filling of predefined tables. Of course, providing link between these tables themselves is more difficult than finding cohesion in the most sophisticated context. Hence, this article does not adhere to this theory, but it is partially organized based on it.

Discussion

The first thing that needs to be noted is that, the Indian style sonnets appear in two different styles and contexts. Unfortunately, ignoring this dichotomy has given rise to opinions that are unacceptable. That is to say, in the Indian style sonnet in the Iranian branch, the majority of the audience are from the common people and the majority of the speakers are from peasants. In such a climate, it is natural that the single verse be the desired format, and multi-verses sonnets also induce different voices to the audience. But in the Indian branch, considering that Persian is not the dominant spoken language of the Indian people and the audience of such poems are often noble classes, it is natural that the sonnets cannot be adapted to the taste of lower-class audience. The audience from noble class prefers semantic cohesion, the development of thought and cohesive thinking in a sonnet over the diversity of themes and ideas
The first sonnet of the Bidel’s Divan, which is in fact the praise of his Divan, has twelve verses. The theme of this sonnet is the emphasis on the concept of entreaty. That is, Bidel seeks the way to reach the beloved in entreaty and refraction of the lover. This concept plays a central role in Bidel's mystical poetry. In this sonnet, Biddle arranges the coherence and continuity of the sonnet in the shadow of adherence to coherent themes about inability. Cohesion in introducing the audience and why inability, Coherence in explaining the ways of inability, coherence in introducing examples of inability, coherence in describing the manifestations of inability in human behavior are the most important of these issues.
The point that conceals such a cohesion and distracts the audience of Bidel's poetry is the pure poetic imagery and their presence in an unknown language. Such a sonnet requires an active audience to encounter it patiently and enjoy its intellectual monotony. Indeed, despite all these overt and covert indications, it could be perceived that Bidel's sonnet is cohesive. Undoubtedly, the answer is in Bidel's language; it might be due to the lack of understanding. The audience cannot deliberate and the poetry alone is the refuge of his failures.

Conclusion

Bidel's sonnet, in contrast to popular opinion, is a cohesive sonnet, but understanding and receiving this cohesion according to Bidel's poetic style requires deliberation of the audience. Deliberation on the references of the pronouns, on the combinations of his poetry, precision in semantics and even syntax of the words of his poetry, passing through the intricate and contemplative imagination of his sonnet, paying attention to the role of row in discovering the cohesion of his sonnet and above all, avoiding passivity while employing deliberation from audience are beneficial to unravel the cohesion of Bidel's sonnet. Therefore, it can be said that Bidel's sonnet has many signs of cohesion and it is not discrete. The proof of this cohesion comes with several obstacles; however, being familiar with Bidel's poetic style and intellectual mood, one can remove the barriers to understanding this cohesion so that his seemingly non-cohesive sonnets can be heard in a cohesive and unified voice and each sonnet can be summed up in the shortest statement.
 
1. Amiri Firuz Kuhi, K. (1992). Saib and the Indian style, Isfahanian, Safavi, Saib’s Style Denying the
Naming of the Indian Style, By Darya Gasht. 471-478, Tehran: Qatreh.
2. Bidel Dehlavi, A. (2005). Diwan, Edited by Khalili, Tehran: Simaye Danesh.
3. Bidel Dehlavi, A. (2006). Rubaiyyat, edited by Akbar Behdarvand, Tehran: Negah.
4. Bidel, A. (2007). Bidel's songs, literary prose, edited by Akbar Behdarvand, Tehran: Negah.
5. Bidel, M.A. (1965). Complete Works. Vol 4. (Chahar onsor, Roqahat, Nekat) edited by Khal
Mohammad Khasteh and Khalili. Kabul: Depuheni Matbae.
6. Dezfoolian Rad, K. Ali Madadi, M. Talebi, M. (2010). A Sociological Approach to the Lack of
Cohesion in Hindi-Style Sonnet (Examining the Relationship between Hindi-Style Poets’
Worldview and the Sonnet Structure of this Style Based on Lucien Goldmann’s Structure-Orient
175 Inability as a Cohesive Theme in the Ghazal of Bidel
Developmental Theory), journal of Research Allegory in Persian language and literature, L.A.U.
Bushehr Branch, 2(3), 55-78.
7. Fotuhi, M. (2006). The Literary Criticism of Indian style, Tehran: Sokhan.
8. Halliday, M. Hasan, R. (2016). Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a SocialSemiotic Perspective,Translated by Monshizadeh and Ishani. Tehran: Nashr Elmi.
9. Hassan Pour Alashti, H. (2005). New Form, Tehran: Sokhan.
10.Hassanli, K. (2008). A Formalistic Re-reading of a Ghazal of Bidel Dehlavi, Journal of literary
criticism, 1(2), 29-38.
11.Kardgar, Y. (2017). Maktub Entezar, Tehran: Sedaye Moaser.
12.Pour Namdrian, T. Ishani, T. (2010). The Analysis of Cohesion and Coherence in poetry from a
Systematic Functional View Point, Journal of the Faculty of Literature and Humanities, 18(67), 7-
43.
13.Radmard, A. Rahmani, H. (2013). Apostrophe, a stylistic feature in Bidel's sonnets, journal of the
stylistic of Persian poem and prose(Bahar-i adab), 6(19), 225-238.
14.Saadi. (2005). Gulistan, Edited by Qolam-hosayn Yusofi, Tehran: Kharazmi.
15.Sarli, N. Ishani, T. (2006). The theory of cohesion and cohesive harmony and the usage of it in a
minimal story: The Tale of Ladder, journal of language Research, 2(4), 51-77.
16.Shafiei Kadkani, M. (2006). Being a Poet among the Critiques, Tehran: Agah.
17.Shafiei Kadkani, M.R. (2004). The Persian Poetry Periods, Tehran: Sokhan.
18.Shamisa, S. (1994). Stylistics (2), Tehran: Payame Noor University.
19.Shamisa, S. (1994). The Course of the Sonnet in Persian Poetry, Tehran: Ferdows.
20.Shamlu, A. Saremi, M. (2017). The Metaphorical and Structural Analysis of Sonnets of Bidel,
Quarterly of the Literary and Rhetoric Research. 4(15), 57-70.
21.Vali, Sh. (2016). The Survival Treasure, Tehran: Aruan.
22.Yahaqi, M.J. Fallahi, M.H. (2010). The Narrative Cohesion in Saadi and Bidel’s Sonnets, Journal
of the Faculty of Literature and language of Shahid Bahonar University, 27, 327-346.