دانشگاه گیلان نقد و نظریه ادبی 2476-7387 11 1 2026 06 22 Tracing Cultural Semiology and Semiotic Sphere in the Focal Signs of Yadgar-e Zariran and Kar-Namag-e Ardashir-e Papagan: A Lotmanian Reading خوانش نشانه‌های کانونی یادگار زریران و کارنامه اردشیر بابکان از دیدگاه نشانه‌شناسی فرهنگی و نظریه سپهر نشانه‌ای یوری لوتمان 5 28 9647 10.22124/naqd.2026.32733.2788 FA سید علی علوی دانش‌آموخته دکتری ادبیات حماسی، دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری، سبزوار، ایران مهیار علوی مقدم دانشیار زبان و ادبیات فارسی دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری،سبزوار،ایران. حسن دلبری دانشیار زبان و ادبیات فارسی،‌ دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری، سبزوار، ایران زهرا جمشیدی دانشیار زبان و ادبیات فارسی،‌ دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری، سبزوار، ایران Journal Article 2026 01 03 Informed by cultural semiology and Yuri Lotman’s semiotic sphere theory, the present study examines the focal signs in two fundamental texts of ancient Iran, Yadgar-e Zariran and Kar-Namag-e Ardashir-e Papagan. The “focal sign” is the meaning-generating centre and organizing force of the semiotic sphere of the text; it is a sign around which a system of values, norms, and cultural codes is formed, all of which, in turn, define the boundaries of the cultural “self” and “other.” The central questions of this research are: how do focal signs in these two texts function in relation to the concepts of “centre,” “boundary,” and “translation”? and what their function is in organizing the semantic structure and determining the identity boundaries of Iranian culture. This descriptive-analytical research aims to identify and explain the function of focal signs in the representation of Iranian culture and to understand the mechanism of demarcation between other cultural spheres. The findings show that in Yadgar-e Zariran, the focal sign of “stability against distorted reading of religion” is located at the border of the semiotic sphere and meaning is produced through confrontation and recoding; however, in Kar-Namag-e Ardashir-e Papagan, the focal sign of “cosmic order and legitimacy of power” is located at the center of the semiotic sphere and meaning is transferred and institutionalised from the centre to the periphery. This comparative analysis shows that the Iranian cultural sphere moves from a defensive and reactive state to an organizing and reproducing state. Extended Abstract 1. Introduction Yuri Lotman is a Russian philologist, semiotician, and founder of the Tartu-Moscow school of cultural semiotics. Influenced by linguistics, structuralism, and poststructuralism, his theories on culture include key concepts such as text, culture, language, patterning system, and semiotic sphere. This theory aims to describe and explain the mechanisms and the process of signification within culture. His “semiosphere” theory, as one of the most fundamental theories in cultural semiotics, views culture not as a static set of signs, but as a dynamic network of semantic relations, interactions, and intercultural translations. Yadgar-e Zariran and Kar-Namag-e Ardashir-e Papagan are not mere reflections of historical events or religious teachings; they are the manifestation of a system of meaning and cultural organization in which Iranian identity is redefined as a reaction to the religious, political, and cultural “other.” 2. Methodology Informed by Lotman’s theories, this descriptive-analytical research provides a comparative reading of Yadgar-e Zariran and Kar-Namag-e Ardashir-e Papagan. 3. Theoretical Framework Emerged in the final decades of the 20th century in the Tartu-Moscow School and with the works of Yuri Lotman and his colleagues, Cultural semiotics views culture as a system of signs; a system through which meaning is produced, coded, stored, and reproduced. In this regard, every culture functions as a macrotext that has its own internal structure, semiotic logic, translation rules, and boundaries. Lotman’s “semiosphere” theory, as one of the most fundamental theories in cultural semiotics, views culture not as a static set of signs, but as a dynamic network of semantic relations, interactions, and intercultural translations. In every culture, signs are either in a “central” or “core” position. These valuable signs are repeatedly reproduced in cultural texts and have an identifying, cohesive, and defensive function. 4. Discussion and Analysis In Lotman’s cultural semiotics, focal signs are those at the centre of a culture’s semiotic sphere. These signs have the highest semantic, identity, and functional value in organizing and producing meaning. Focal signs both direct cultural discourse and serve as a “semantic entity” in the confrontational system of self/other. Focal signs are linked to concepts such as identity, national culture, legitimacy, power, religion, social order, and cultural history. Culture has a semiotic sphere, that is, a totality in which meaning is produced, redistributed, and transformed. 5. Conclusion Drawing upon Lotman’s semiotic sphere theory, the present study showed that the narrative and semiotic structure of Iranian texts is not only a reflection of the religious and mythical worldview but also has a fundamental function in the reproduction, translation, and consolidation of Iranian culture. Yadgar-e Zariran and Kar-Namag-e Ardashir-e Papagan represent two successive stages in the internalisation of meaning in the Iranian cultural sphere: first, the stage of defending meaning against foreign reading, and second, the stage of its internal reproduction and legislation. in Yadgar-e Zariran, the focal sign of “stability against distorted reading of religion” is located at the border of the semiotic sphere and the meaning is produced through confrontation and recoding; however, in Kar-Namag-e Ardashir-e Papagan, the focal sign of “cosmic order and legitimacy of power” is located at the center of the semiotic sphere and the meaning is transferred and institutionalised from the centre to the periphery. This comparative analysis shows that the Iranian cultural sphere moves from a defensive and reactive state to an organizing and reproducing state. Bibliography Lotman, Y. 1396 [2017]. Neshāneh-shenāsi-e Farhangi. Farnaz, K (trans.). Tehran: Elm. [In Persian]. (Cultural Semiotics) Pakatchi, A. 1398 [2019]. Darāmadi bar Tarjomeh-e Beyna-neshāneh-ei. Tehran: Samt. [In Persian]. Posner, R. 1390 [2011]. Ahdāf-e Asli-e Neshāneh-shenāsi-e Farhangi. Shahnaz, Sh (trans.). Tehran: Elm. [In Persian]. (Cultural Semiotics) Sarfaraz, H. 1393 [2014]. Neshāneh-shenāsi-e Farhang, Honar, va Ertebātāt. Tehran: Imam Sadegh. [In Persian]. Shahbazi, R. 1393 [2014]. Neshāneh-shenāsi-e Farhangi-e Tārikh-e Adabiyāt va Teātr-e Irān. Tehran: Elm. [In Persian]. Sojoodi, F. 1396 [2017]. Neshāneh-shenāsi-e Farhangi. Tehran: Elm. [In Persian]. پژوهش حاضر باتکیه بر مبانی نشانه‌شناسی فرهنگی و نظریۀ سپهر نشانه‌ای یوری لوتمان، به خوانش و تحلیل نشانه‌های کانونی در دو متن بنیادینِ ایران باستان، یادگار زریران و کارنامۀ اردشیر بابکان، می‌پردازد. «نشانۀ کانونی» به‌منزلة مرکز معنا‌زا و نیروی سازمان‌دهندۀ سپهر نشانه‌ایِ متن تلقی می‌شود؛ نشانه‌ای که پیرامون آن، نظامی از ارزش‌ها، هنجارها و رمزگان فرهنگی شکل می‌گیرد و حدود «خود» و «دیگریِ» فرهنگی را مشخص می‌سازد. مسئلۀ این پژوهش آن است که نشانه‌های کانونی در این دو متن چگونه در نسبت با مفاهیم «مرکز»، «مرز» و «ترجمه» عمل می‌کنند و چه نقشی در سازمان‌دهی ساختار معنایی و تعیین حدود هویّتی فرهنگ ایرانی دارند؟ شناسایی و تبیین کارکرد نشانه‌های کانونی در بازنمایی فرهنگ ایرانی و درک سازوکار مرزگذاری میان سپهرهای دیگریِ فرهنگی هدف این پژوهش است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که در یادگار زریران، نشانة کانونیِ «پایداری دربرابر خوانش تحریف‌شدۀ دین» در مرز سپهر نشانه‌ای قرار دارد و معنا ازطریق مواجهه و بازرمزگذاری تولید می‌شود، درحالی‌که در کارنامۀ اردشیر بابکان، نشانۀ کانونیِ «نظم کیهانی و مشروعیت قدرت» در مرکز سپهر نشانه‌ای قرار دارد و معنا از مرکز به پیرامون منتقل و نهادینه می‌شود. این تحلیل تطبیقی نشان می‌دهد که سپهر فرهنگی ایرانی از وضعیت دفاعی و واکنشی به وضعیت سازمان‌دهنده و بازتولیدکننده حرکت می‌کند. روش تحقیق توصیفی‌ـ‌تحلیلی و مبتنی بر خوانش تطبیقی در چارچوب نظریۀ یوری لوتمان است.

https://naqd.guilan.ac.ir/article_9647_62a31896f150ccb29cbfbfe3cf7e4086.pdf