بررسی و نقد پذیرش و اعمال اندیشه‌های دوسوسور در نقد ادبی فارسی

Ferdinand de Saussure’s seminal ideas have exerted a significant influence on Persian literary criticism. This study aims to trace, evaluate, and critically examine the initiation, reception, and application of Saussurian theories within Persian critical discourse. To this end, all major books and articles published since the 1960s that present his concepts are systematically identified and reviewed. Approximately thirty representative studies that explicitly applied his framework are then analysed to assess their approaches, strengths, and limitations. The findings indicate that Saussure’s ideas first appeared in Persian scholarship in the 1960s through both original writings and translations. From the 2000s onward, with a broader understanding of his theoretical foundations, researchers increasingly engaged with his ideas across various fields, most notably through the concept of binary opposition. While these studies have advanced structuralist approaches in Persian criticism, they also exhibit recurring limitations, including the citation of theoretical discussions unrelated to the research topic, indifference toward existing scholarship, inconsistency between theory and text, excessive focus on the origins of oppositions rather than their functional dynamics, translation deficiencies, theoretical imposition, and identity reduction. Each of these issues is analysed and discussed in detail within the article.
 
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
By founding modern linguistics, Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) laid the foundation of Structuralism. Structuralism is an approach that seeks meaning not in individual elements but in the relationships among these elements. This important perspective led to a broad methodological transcendence in literary theory and criticism, which, in turn, influenced thinkers such as Jakobsen, Lévi-Strauss, Barthes, Foucault, and Todoroff. Although efforts have been made to understand and convey the foundations of Saussure’s theory in Persian language and literature, the basic principles of his thought have not been properly understood and explained, leading to superficial understandings of his theory and its related concepts. Influenced by traditional Persian literary criticism, Iranian researchers have often formed hasty and superficial confrontations with such views. Adopting a critical and pathological approach, the present article outlines the emergence and application of de Saussure’s ideas in Persian criticism and highlights their advantages and disadvantages, all of which, in turn, provide the basis for a more accurate understanding of de Saussure’s theory.
2. Methodology
Adopting a descriptive-analytical approach, the present study examines Saussure’s emergence and role in Persian literary criticism. Through a systematic review of library resources and scientific databases, all works related to Saussure’s ideas from the 1960s to the present have been collected and classified. Then, about thirty articles related to the Persian language and literature are selected, evaluated, and examined. Lastly, the most frequent shortcomings in the application of his theory in Persian texts are identified and explained.
3. Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework of this research is organized around a thorough understanding of de Saussure’s principles and theories. Saussure considers language as a system of signs and analyses meaning in the oppositions and structural relations of signs, highlighting his notion of opposition. In fact, from his point of view, language is a system of oppositions in which each element has a specific value that opposes other elements and values. In this system, there are two types of relationship: one between signs that are distinct and can be substituted for each other, and those between adjacent signs.
4. Discussion and Analysis
From the 1960s, Saussurian notions, such as lang and parole, the semiotic system, and simultaneity and temporality, were introduced to Persian language and literature. The 1970s to 1990s witnessed the translation of independent books and the publication of articles that elaborated on Saussure’s ideas. Since the 2000s, translations and practical research, especially in the fields of dual opposition and semiotics, have expanded, grounding Saussure’s theories in Persian language and literature. In the 2010s and 2020s, Saussure’s linguistic theories have been compared with Western theorists and Persian thinkers. Of note here is how Saussure’s linguistic theories have been applied to Persian literary criticism. A systematic review shows that “binary opposition” has been the most frequent Saussurian theory in Persian language and literature. Many early articles in Persian criticism focused only on identifying and tracing oppositions and ignored their role in the formation of meaning, which, in turn, reduced their analysis to traditional or biographical interpretations. Other studies were also inconsistent with Saussure’s principles due to the imposition of theory on the text, the incompatibility of text and theory, and the incorrect translation of concepts. Furthermore, too much theoretical depth, while exemplary, confuses the reader. A systematic review of successful examples shows that when there is a balance between text and theory, a more profound understanding becomes feasible.
5. Conclusion
Although Saussurian readings of works in Persian language and literature have facilitated the understanding of the relationship between theory and text, disadvantages such as raising irrelevant theoretical issues, ignoring the literary qualities of a text, limitations that translation may pose, equating Western concepts with traditional rhetorical perspectives, lack of adherence to theory, and the incompatibility of text and theory are frequently observed. Nevertheless, after sixty years of effort, it can now be said that the necessary groundwork has been provided for a deeper understanding of Saussure’s principles and their correct application in Persian literary criticism.
Bibliography
Bertens, J. W. 1394 [2015]. Mabāni-e Nazariyeh-e Adabi. Mohammadreza, A (trans.). Tehran: Mahi. [In Persian].               [Literary Theory]
Bouissac, P. 1395 [2016]. Saussure: Rāhnamāei baraye Sargashtegān. MohammadAmin, Sh (trans.). Tehran: Yek Fekr. [In Persian].        [Saussure: A Guide for the Perplexed]
Culler, J. 1380 [2001]. Ferdinand de Saussure. Kourosh, S (trans.). Tehran: Hermes. [In Persian].
Eagleton, T. 1399 [2020]. Pish-Darāmdi bar Nazariyeh-e Adabi. Abbas, M (trans.). Tehran: Markaz. [In Persian].        [Literary Theory]
Hawkes, T. 1394 [2015]. Sākht-Garāei va Neshāneh-Shenāsi. Mojtaba, P (trans.). Mashhad: Taraneh. [In Persian].        [Structuralism and Semiotics]
Najafi, A. 1358 [1979]. Mabāni-e Zabān-Shenāsi va Kārbord-e ān dar Naqd-e Fārsi. Tehran: Daneshgah-e Azad Islami. [In Persian].
Safavi, K. 1400 [2021]. Āshnāei ba Nazariyeh-hā-e Naqd-e Adabi. Tehran: Elmi. [In Persian].
Samareh, Y. 1393 [2014]. Āvashenāsi-e Zabān-e Fārsi. Tehran: Daneshgahi. [In Persian].
Scholes, R. 1379 [2000]. Darāmadi bar Sākhtār-garāei dar Adabiyāt. Farzaneh, T (trans.). Tehran: Agah. [In Persian].     [Structuralism in Literature]