عنوان مقاله [English]
Among the primitive issues in the rhetorical works of Arabic and Persian is the defining metaphor. It seems a plurality of definitions have led some to think that it is not a common point among them or that the definition of metaphor is tangled; while reviewing definitions in the rhetorical works of Arabic and Persian suggests shared components between them. On the other hand, it should be considered in the overtime and intellectual and cultural conditions as steps of evolution in metaphor. In other words, expanding of rhetorical studies, intellectual and cultural structures have provided different backgrounds to understand metaphor that would be understood differently in other contexts and conditions. If we categorize the definitions of metaphor based on the outstanding and shared elements, in addition to explaining the common elements, also we will show the steps of the evolution of metaphor.
In the present study, meanwhile, analyzing the definitions of metaphor in the rhetorical works of Arabic and Persian, based on the outstanding elements, they have been classified into seven groups:
1. Renaming something instead of using its common name, or replacement.
2. A meaning outside the original or lexical meaning.
3. Metonymy + Similarity.
4. Specific phrase and purpose.
5. Exaggeration in simile or linkage of similarity.
5.1. Definitions based on similarities.
5.2. Definitions based on both sides of simile.
6. Metaphor and analogy.
The main components of these seven categories are:
1. Renaming something instead of using its common name or replacement.
2. Use of the word in the non-meaning of the word.
3. Metonymy + Similarity.
4. The use of a word in the non-meaning+ special purpose.
5.1. Use the word in the meaning + similarity + metonymy.
5.2. Vehicle or tenor.
6. Use of the word in the non-meaning of the word.
7. A word in the non-meaning + linkage of similarity (Which is the same as metonymy and simile) + a symbol that blocks the meaning of the subject.
If we put together the main elements, we shall see the metaphor definitions are very close to each other:
If we assume that number 2 is an expression of number 1, we shall see that numbers 1, 2, and 6 are quite like each other. It is also a part of the numbers 4, 5-1, and 7 repetitions of the same component of the former numbers. Number 5.1 is the result of a combination of numbers 3 and 2 and number 7 is a combination of number 2 (which are repeated in 1 and 6), 3, and 5 plus a new element called the linkage. In fact, number 7 is a compilation of all the previous numbers along with the new component, linkage.
According the results, not only the definitions of metaphor in the Arabic and Persian rhetorical tradition are not distressed and disturbed, but also many seeming definitions have repeatedly benefited from each other’s elements. In other words, many of these definitions are repetition of the words of their predecessors and sometimes along with this repetition, a new element has been added to the earlier definitions.