Syntactic-narrative Analysis of Houshang Golshiri’s “Portrait of an Innocent: 1”: A Reading of Evidentiality, Modality, and Focus Marking

Golshiri has repeatedly emphasised that the most important aspect of writing a story, for him, is the choice of suitable language—particularly, selecting the appropriate language for the narrator. In a successful narrative, language and narrative elements interact closely to create an effective and coherent experience for the reader. Therefore, identifying the linguistic features of a story is a crucial step in its narratological analysis. This becomes especially important when examining the works of authors like Golshiri, who engage consciously with language and experiment with various linguistic techniques. By analysing the language of his short story, titled “Portrait of an Innocent: 1,” this study aims to answer the following question: To what extent does the language of this story serve its narrative function? Although various researchers have analysed Golshiri’s works, a linguistic analysis has been largely neglected in these studies. This is notable given that Golshiri considered the most practical way to critique a story to be through an examination of the author’s use of language. The most significant narratological element in “Portrait of an Innocent: 1” is the homodiegetic narrator, who is also the focalised character. This study explores how unreliability, narrative breaks, contradictions, and subjective or fictitious interpretations frequently appear in the narrator’s speech, and how language plays a key role in conveying these features. The results show that Golshiri employs three major grammatical categories—evidentiality, modality, and focus marking—throughout the story. Examples of these categories are presented and analysed in the article to demonstrate how they function in constructing an unreliable narrative voice, which signals narrative breaks and shapes the contrastive identity of the narrator.
 
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
Golshiri has repeatedly emphasised that the most important aspect of writing a story, for him, is the choice of suitable language—particularly, an appropriate language for the narrator. In a suitable narrative, language and narrative elements interact closely to create an effective and coherent experience for the reader. Therefore, identifying the linguistic features of a story is a crucial step in alaysing its narratological quality. This becomes especially important when examining the works of authors like Golshiri, who consciously deliberate on language and experiment with various linguistic techniques. By analysing the language of his short story, titled “Portrait of an Innocent: 1,” this study aims to answer the following question: To what extent does the language of this story reveal its narrative function? Although various researchers have analysed Golshiri’s works, no linguistic analysis has ever been conducted. Ironically, Golshiri believed that the most practical way of criticising a story is an examination of the author’s use of language.
2. Methodology
To examine the role of language in the narrative, we have selected a short story from Golshiri’s collection of stories, in which language is used in a seemingly completely natural and automatic manner, and at first glance, no particular linguistic feature stands out. Upon closer examination, however, it becomes clear that the role of linguistic features in constructing the narrative elements in this story is quite prominent. The most important narrative element in the story is the homodiegetic narrator, who is also the focal character of the story. This study explores how unreliability, narrative breaks, contradictions, and subjective or fictitious interpretations frequently appear in the narrator’s speech, and how language plays a key role in conveying these features. In this regard, we have carefully examined the story and extracted and classified the examples of some grammatical features which serve to construct the narrator’s voice. We have conducted this research by employing a descriptive-analytical method.
3. Theoretical Framework
Golshiri considers linguistic techniques to be the most important tool of a storyteller. This study is organized around Golshiri’s theoretical views on the role of language in creating a narrative. He directly addresses the role of language in character development, the construction of the narrator’s voice, the coherence of the narrative, and the creation of style. In accordance with these perspectives, and informed by the linguistic descriptions of the three categories of evidentiality, modality, and focus marking, we have examined the role of these grammatical categories in the construction of the narrator’s voice. We have also drawn on narratological concepts, such as types of narrators (especially the unreliable narrator) and types of focalization (Genette’s perspective).
4. Discussion and Analysis
The present study investigates a number of linguistic features, which serve to create the narrator’s contrasting voice. The narrator of the story is a village schoolteacher who writes letters to his brother. The narrator refers to himself throughout the narrative, uses the first-person pronoun for himself, and, in several instances, inserts his personal views in the story. Although the narrator tries to distance himself from the story and present himself as a neutral narrator, who is simply reporting the events to his brother, the implicit layers of the story convey the opposite to the reader. Since the narrative unfolds in the form of an epistolary story, the writer of the letters (the narrator) narrates all the actions through his mediation, without actually allowing the direct presence of anyone or anything in the story. The reader sees and hears all the actions from the narrator’s point of view. Despite his apparent insistence on an impartial narrative, the narrator constantly distorts and interprets events, blending his own perspective with the events and statements of others, which takes place through specific linguistic devices (evidentiality, modality, and focus marking). These elements create a sense of doubt, contradiction, and ambiguity on the one hand, and uncover the narrator’s inner conflict on the other, all of which help the narrator’s unreliability become apparent throughout the story. Despite the reader’s suspicion regarding the narrator’s unreliability, the narrative unfolds in such a way that the reader, like the narrator, is captured in a whirlpool of rumors, superstitions, and horrifying fabricated events. In addition, despite the narrator’s dominance, intervention, and direct presence, there is no narrative distance, and the illusion of reality reaches its highest level.
5. Conclusion
The results show that Golshiri employs three major grammatical categories—evidentiality, modality, and focus marking—throughout the story. Examples of these categories are presented and analyzed to demonstrate how they function to construct an unreliable narrative voice, signal narrative breaks, and shape the contrastive identity of the narrator.
Bibliography
Aikhenvald, A. Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gennette, G. 1400 [2021]. Goftemān-e Hekāyat. Azin, H (trans.). Tehran: Niloufar. [In Persian].                 [Discours Du Récit]
Golshiri, H. 1388 [2009]. Bāgh dar Bāgh. Tehran: Niloufar. [In Persian].
Golshiri, H.  1399 [2020]. Nimeh-ye Tārik-e Māh. Tehran: Niloufar. [In Persian].
Hall, A. 2004. “The Meaning of But: A Procedural Reanalysis.” UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 16 (1): 199-236.
Palmer, F. R. 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.