Applying the Tensive Model to Ferdowsi's Rustam and Sohrab and Its Translation by Arnold
محورهای موضوعی : نشریه زبان و ترجمهshiva olfat 1 , Kourosh Akef 2
1 - MA in Translation Studies, Department of Foreign Languages, Islamic Azad University,
Central Tehran Branch, Iran
2 - Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Iran
کلید واژه: Intensity, Semiotics, Extent, literary criticism, The tensive model,
چکیده مقاله :
The purpose of this study is to look into post-Greimasian semiotics and investigate how this tensive model can be applied to Rustam and Sohrab in Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh and its translation by Arnold. The tensive model, considering the two dimensions of intensity and extent, investigates meaning formation and production. Accordingly, this research intends to analyze the semiotic patterns in the two poems and see whether Arnold’s translation follows the same pattern as the source text. There are four elementary plus canonical models defined for the tensive model. Since in Arnold’s version of Rustam and Sohrab, some parts of the source text do not exist (although the main topic is followed), only those common parts in meaning were selected and the tensive model was applied to the discourses. Arnold followed the Greek style in his poems that considered mostly the impression derived from the poem and regarded the whole poem and not the isolated parts. In Rustam and Sohrab, Arnold shows this Greek style remarkably. The results of this study demonstrate that the discourses in the two poems mostly follow the tensive model which shows more affection, sensation, emotion, and tension. Furthermore, Arnold’s translation follow the same semiotic patterns as Ferdowsi’s Rustam and Sohrab in most cases.
Arnold, M. (2015). Sohrab and Rustum. London: Forgotten Books &c Ltd.
Bassnett, S., & Lefevere, A. (1998). Constructing Cultures: Essays on Literary Translation. Great Britain: Cromwell Press.
Bell, R. T. (1991). Translation and Translating. London and New York: Longman.
Bostic, H. (2006). The Semiotics of Discourse. New York: Peterlang Publishing , Inc.
Bressler, C. E. (2012). Literary Criticism. New York & San Franscisco: Longman.
Eco, U. (1976). A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomberg and London: Indiana University Press.
Gorlee, D. L. (1994). Semiotics and The Problem of Translation. Amsterdam and Atlanta, GA: Rodopi B.V.
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1997). The Translator as Communicator. London and New York: Routledge.
Hebert, L. (2011). Tools for Text and Image Analysis- An Introduction to Applied semiotics. Quebec.
Hermans, T. (2014). The Manipulation of Literature. Oxon & New York: Routledge.
Martin, B., & Ringham, F. (2006). Key Terms in Semiotics. New York: Continuum.
Martin, B., & Ringham, F. (2006). Key Terms in Semiotics. New York: Continuum.
Sheridan, A. (1988). Michel Foucault ; Politics, Philosophy , culture. New York & London: Routledge, chanpman & Hall, Inc.
Tamimdari, A. (2009). Effect of Ferdowsi's Shahnameh on Western Epic Works. Persian Language and Literature, 65-68.
کزازی, م. (1386). تند بادی از کنج.تبریز: آیدین.
کزازی, م. (1391). دفتر دانایی و داد.تهران: معین.
کزازی, م. ج. (1381). نامه باستان. تهران: سمت.
