>
Fa   |   Ar   |   En
   رده بندی نشانه شناختی «سوژه های تخیلی» در داستانهای کودک: از منظر نظریۀ آمیختگی مفهومی  
   
نویسنده زنجانبر امیر حسین ,کریمی دوستان غلامحسین
منبع زبان پژوهي - 1399 - دوره : 12 - شماره : 37 - صفحه:177 -195
چکیده    لیکاف، استعاره های مفهومی را نگاشتی بینِ دو حوزه می داند. فوکونیه و ترنر، الگوی شبک ه ایِ آمیختگی مفهومی را جایگزینِ الگوی دوحوزه ایِ استعارۀ مفهومی، نمودند. به باور آن‌ها این الگو، نخست، علاوه بر جنبه های استعاریِ درک آنی، جنبه های غیر استعاری را هم می‌تواند تبیین کند. دوم اینکه، مشتمل بر دو حوزۀ درون‌داد و نگاشتِ بین آن‌ها و همچنین فضای فراگیر و فضای آمیخته است. فضای آمیخته، فضایی است که از آمیزش ذهنیِ دو یا چند فضای درون‌داد پدید می آید. فضای فراگیر، میانجیِ ارتباطِ فضاهای درون‌داد با فضای آمیخته است. به سببِ ماهیتِ تخیلیِ فضای آمیخته، از رویکرد نظریۀ آمیختگی برای بررسی شخصیت های خیالی داستان های فانتزی، بهره گرفته شده‌است. منظور از سوژه، کنش‌گر یا کنش‌پذیری است که به عنوان قهرمان یا یکی از شخصیت‌های اصلی، در پیش بردِ پی‌رنگِ داستان، نقش آفرینی می کند. هدف پژوهش پیشِ رو، رده بندی سوژه های تخیلی بر پایه دسته بندی نشانه‌شناختیِ پرس است. پِرس، انواع نشانه را، از منظر نوعِ رابطه اش با ابژه، به سه گونه نمادین، شمایلی، نمایه ای گروه‌بندی کرده‌است. در همین راستا، این پژوهش با بهره‌گیری از روش تحلیلی توصیفی بر آن است تا علاوه بر درآمیختنِ دو نظریۀ نشانه‌شناسی و آمیختگی مفهومی، چگونگی شکل گیری سوژه‌های تخیلی در داستان‌های کودک را از جنبه شناختی مورد بررسی قرار دهد. این پژوهش، برای نخستین بار از نشانه‌شناسی برای بررسی فضاهای آمیخته و رده بندی سوژه‌های فانتزی بهره می‌گیرد. از دستاوردهای کاربردی پژوهش، ایده بخشی به نویسندگان برای سوژه آفرینی و آسان‌سازیِ آموزشِ شگردهای فانتزی‌نویسی برای کارگاه های نویسندگی خلاق است. در سطح نظری، نیز ضمن دسته بندیِ شناختیِ سوژه‌های تخیلی، تمهیدات نوینی را در اختیار نقد تطبیقی قرار می دهد.
کلیدواژه فضای آمیخته، نشانه شناسی، پِرس، فوکونیه، معنی شناسی شناختی، نقد داستان کودک، سوژه های تخیلی
آدرس دانشگاه تهران, گروه زبان شناسی, ایران, دانشگاه تهران, گروه زبان شناسی, ایران
پست الکترونیکی gh5karimi@ut.ac.ir
 
   Semiotic Categorization of Fantastic Subject in Child Story: based on Conceptual Blending Theory  
   
Authors Zanjanbar Amir Hossein ,Karimi Dostan Gholamhossein
Abstract    With the replacement of the conceptual blended network model instead of the twoheaded model of conceptual metaphor, Fauconnier and Turner (1994) argue that, in addition to explaining the metaphorical aspects of immediate understanding, this model is capable of explaining non metaphorical aspects. The network pattern, besides the two domains of the input and mapping, also includes the public space and fusing space. The mixed space emanates from the mental mixing of two or more input spaces. Given that the blended space is fantastic, the choice of the theory of fusion approach is appropriate for imaginary characters in fantasy subject. On the other hand, according to Pierce’s (1931,1958) classification, the sign is of three kinds: symbolic, iconic, and index. Based on this division, the research is ahead in the categorization of fancy story subjects. In this regard, this research aims to answer four questions about the fantasy stories of the children: what is the difference between the subject of intermingling and coincidence? What is the difference between the definitions in the intersemiotic and insemiotic? According to Pierce’s semiotic categories, what classes do insemiotic intercourse subjects ranked? What are the mechanisms of the inputs of mixed space for subject creation, while meaning creation? This research uses semiotics for the first time, to study of mixed spaces as well as to classify fancy story subjects. The frequent use of imaginary characters in the child stories, and the lack of interdisciplinary research in this field, reveals the need for research in order to eliminate gaps. In this study, Subject refers to an actor or actionable character that, as the protagonist or one of the main characters, plays a role in advancing the plot. This study classifies mixed subjects from three perspectives, including time sequence, metaphor, and semiotics. In terms of time sequence, it is of two types: In time (chronic) mixed subjects, the central element of intro domains are the time sequence relation to each other, like a subject that has undergone a transformation. In the story of ’Ugly Duckling’ (Andersent,1999),   the semantic center of the first intro is an ugly duckling, and the semantic center of the second intro is a graceful swan. The second intro space (the mental space associated with the swan) is formed in the time sequence of the first intro space (the mental space associated with the duckling).In case of Synchronous subject matter, the central element of the two intro domains is that they have no time sequence in relation to each other. In ChimneyHead Mom (Mazarei, 2013), the image drawn in the book from the subject of the story, consists of a combination of two intro spaces, one in which the semantic center is mother, and in the other, the semantic center is Chimney. These two semantic centers are two completely independent conceptual categories, which have been combined since the beginning of the story, and have no relation of time sequence to each other.  In terms of metaphor, two types were discovered.  One is metaphorbased mixed subject in which two spaces or intro domains can be based on two domains of origin and destination, from a conceptual metaphor. In Chimney Head Mom (Mazarei,2013), the subject is based on the conceptual metaphor of the highest degree of anger (intro first), the highest degree of fire (intro second), (Kuchsh,2014, p:197). Because in the mixed space, every time Mom gets angry, Her Chimney head smokes, and the plot is based on this smoking in anger feature. The other is metaphorindependent mixed subject. In Lonely Black Line (Honarkar,2015), the subject image of a line is shown, the lower half of which is a set of black lines, and the upper half of which is the body of a boy. That is, the subject is the product of a fusion space, whose intro, in the role of origin and destination, is by no means a conceptual metaphor.  In terms of semiotics, it is of two types, including intrastitial mixed subject and interstitial mixed subject. In the former, two independent signifiers, as two intro spaces, can be combined, and from the combination of these two intros, an independent sign emerges, which is a mixed subject. These two independent signs can belong to one sign system, or to two different sign systems (for example, one belongs to the verbal sign system and the other to the nonverbal system). In interstitial mixed subject, on the other hand, by combining both aspects of the three aspects of representation, interpretation, subject, as intro spaces, a mixed space is obtained, called the intertextual interconnected space. The main goal of the research is to mark the classification of semiotics of intrasymbolic fusion. This research shows that the intrasymbolic mixed subject is of three types: symbolic, iconic, and indexed. In all three cases, at first, the semantic center of one of the intros is representation, and the semantic center of the other intro is interpretation. Second, representation and interpretation in the subjects of symbolic fusion, iconic fusion, and indexed fusion are, respectively, aspects of the symbolic, iconic or index sign. The position of the object is determined in becoming iconic or symbolic or indexing the sign not in blending. For example, in iconic blending, the object does not have a direct role, because in any of the data, it does not enter directly but indirectly. This happens as it embodies interpretation; it plays a role through the presence of interpretation within the data of the mixed space intro.
Keywords
 
 

Copyright 2023
Islamic World Science Citation Center
All Rights Reserved