Search published articles
Showing 21 results for Horri
Volume 1, Issue 2 (Summer 2008)
Abstract
This paper examines the Quranic stories in a narratological approach.First the problem of the research is explained and the hypothesis is raised that there is no relationship between the Quranic stories and narratology.The paper then reviews the literary on the litrary approaches to the Quran and the Holy Book.Then the genealogy of the words related to Quranic stories is given.In the next part,the components of narratology i.e. story and text levels are described and then some Quranic stories are studied in a narratological approach,using these components.Finally,more than 10 findings are proposed as the results and the paper concludes that there is a positive relationship between the Quranic stories and narratology.
Volume 1, Issue 4 (winter 2008)
Abstract
This paper examines two modes of fantastic genre, i.e uncanny and marvelous, with regard to the stories of Tanookhi's the Relief after the Grief. We will start by a discussion of Todorov's work on the 'fantastic'. In doing so, the etymology of the keywords and the review of literature are also given. Then, it is referred to Todorovian structural approach to 'the fantastic'. Due to this approach, it is told that in the fantastic stories of the book (sometimes titled as "keraamaat" genre), the reader has to experience the world described as a possible or impossible world full of fear and strange: depending on the readers to explain the occurrence of strange events naturally or supernaturally, the stories may undergo the category of uncanny or marvelous, respectfully. Finally, as conclusion and new results, it is said that in the Relief after the Grief: 1) the focus is on one central character as the center for all events 2) events of the stories are seen through the focal point of this character as the main narrator- focalizer and 3) The reader’s point of view should be that of the central character and the events should be focalized through his eyes.
Volume 2, Issue 2 ((Articles in Persian) 2011)
Abstract
This paper examines incongruity as one of the linguistic mechanisms of texts bearing humor. The main question is that what works these texts seems humorous. Humor has been studied from three different, but related, approaches: psychological, literarily and linguistic. The paper takes as two main factors generating humor. First, the problem, the question and the literature review are mentioned. Then it refers to inconguity from structural and functional levels with regard to some humorous texts in Zakani's Resale-e- Delgosha. On the structural level, it refers to words play (homonymy, homophony, homography, paronymy) and the kind of punning andits in Persian rhetoric. On the functional level, it refers to ambiguity/amphilboly and their functions. The results showed that incongruity in the form punning as well as ambiguity/amphilboly paves the way to make texts seem humorous.
Volume 2, Issue 4 (, (Articles in Persian) 2011)
Abstract
This paper examines the Quranic Iltifāt in the light of the structure of discourse information (SDI). The question is that how can Iltifat be justified through SDI? Firstly, it is referred to the literature review as well as the definition, categories and the kinds of Iltifat. Secondly SDI, topicalization, topic maintenance and point of view/focalization are analyzed. It seems that, through SDI, God turns the message into a new way (Iltifat) and gives it in a new package. This then results in the reader's empathy, which may change through the shift of point of view, hence, a change in Iltifat. Finally, the main findings read as follows: 1) in Iltifat, the reader receives information/ Quranic message in a new package via SDI, 2) Iltifat can be justified through topicalization and topic maintenance, 3) Iltifat is the innovatory use of language rather than a grammatical error, and 4) Iltifat and its kinds underscore the here and now of the Quranic oral discourse as well as the active role of the reader as the God's present audience.
Volume 2, Issue 7 (Fall 2009)
Abstract
This paper examines the correlation among different aspects of speech and thought representation with a focus on free indirect discourse. The paper first examines Genette’s views regarding speech and thought representation and then focuses on the analysis of various types of speech and thought ranging from the most mimetic to the most autodiegetic. I will then focus on the free indirect discourse and try to shed light on it by resorting to the theories of Bally, Toolan and Machill. Our analysis demonstrates the fact that the linguistic features of FID can represent the thoughts and ideas of characters and narrators of story in a special way while they also bring about a kind of discourse replete with irony and ambiguity.
Volume 2, Issue 8 (winter 2009)
Abstract
Volume 4, Issue 13 (Spring 2011)
Abstract
Volume 4, Issue 14 (Summer 2011)
Abstract
Volume 4, Issue 15 (Fall 2011)
Abstract
This paper examines the tradition of writing ‘adjā’ibnāmeh as the fantastic writing. The question is how we can/not regard ‘adjā’ib (marvels) as fantastic. First, we refer to the literature of both ‘adjā’ib and the fantastic. Then, the etymology as well as the religious and socio-historical origins of both words is examined. It is concluded that the fantastic has a root in fancy and mental hallucination while ‘adjā’ib has its roots in reality, originating from observer’s exact observation. Then, Todorovian structural approach to ‘adjā’ib is counterbalanced, showing that some tales of ‘Adjā’ib-e hend conform with the five kinds of the marvelous fantastic in Todorov's diagram. In sum, it can be claimed that ‘adjā’ib conforms only to certain aspects of fantastic writing.
Volume 6, Issue 11 (Spring & Summer 2019)
Abstract
Through descriptive-analytic method, and based upon the common patterns of translating the Proper Names (PNs), this paper investigates the translation resistance and, or the challenges the translators are exposed to, while translating some Glorious Divine Names, GDNs. Generally, GDNs is placed under the domain of PNs, about which some strategic models have been presented in translation studies (TS). This paper takes the Leppihalme's and Baker's models as its approaching method. Hence, it is followed by the detailed discussion of translations of the 11 GDNs taken from Sura Al-Hashr (59:23-24) as rendered by the nine well-known English translators. Having used different Qur'anic exegetical sources, the typical meanings of GDNs are extracted and compared side by side to answer this question that how and by which strategies the translators have rendered these GDNs. Finally, it deems that the nine translators have not been able to convey the colorful Qur'anic meanings of DNs. Prefereably, they have less employed the contextual and intertextual relations than the semantic strategies of translation, transliteration, literal translation, replacement, and substitution included, in translating these GDNs. In sum, the Glorious Divine Names show resistant to translation from Arabic into English.
Volume 6, Issue 20 (6-2018)
Abstract
This paper examines the Iranian humorous folktales through two patterns: the role defining function, and the function generating role, taken mostly from some structural-based approaches and models to narrative, Bremond’s (1970) model, among others. The criticism raised against the traditional model such as AT (1928/1961) is that, being mostly based on the Type-Index and Motif-Index, they cannot reflect the different aspects of the humorous folktales in general, and Iranian folktales, in particular, and it is necessary to call for the other more structurally-based models such as those proposed by narrative grammarians like Bremond, who, following Propp’s (1928) Morphology of Russian Folktales, has placed more emphasis on such concepts as the role defining function as well as the function generating role. Having taken the conceptual-empirical framework as its methodology, this paper tries, through redefining such concepts as an anecdote, joke, and tale as well as reviewing AT classification, to apply the role defining function as well as the function generating role on the Iranian humorous folktales with a narrowed focus on the Iranian numskull folktales. In this sense, a humorous folktale will be defined as an independent narrative unit in which a person or a group of people takes the role of a numskull through the functions they perform. In fact, their role defines their function, and their function generates their role.
Volume 7, Issue 3 (7-2018)
Abstract
Three types of composts (T1, T2, and T3) composed of variable percents of bovine, ovine, fowl manures, green waste and olive pomace were used in this study. Composts were effective in controlling Fusarium oxysporum and Fusarium solani associated with peach decline. In vitro evaluation of four doses of the three composts extracts against mycelium growth of F. solani and F. oxysporum showed that the compost extracts have a significant effect on mycelial growth. The highest inhibition percent was obtained with 10% dose for the three compost extracts, with values more than 48.8% and 50% of F. solani and F. oxysporum, respectively. However, the filtration of the tea composts revealed to be ineffective against the hyphal reduction for both pathogens. The in- vivo experiments exhibited the efficacy of these composts in reducing the seedlings root rot. In fact, T1, T2 and T3 reduced the root rot and browning of plants inoculated with F. solani by 50.19% and plants inoculated with F. oxysporum by 41.86%, 46.45% and 48.3%, respectively. Furthermore, these composts seemed to improve the sanitary state of peach seedlings inoculated with F. oxysporum. However, the improvement of sanitary state of peach inoculated with F. solani was just noted in case of the composts T1 and T2. The treatment of peach seedlings with these improved plant growth by increasing height and root weight of seedlings inoculated with F. oxysporum. However, none of these composts was able to stimulate growth of plants inoculated with F. solani. Root weight of plants inoculated with F. solani was negatively correlated with bovine manure in the compost, positively with fowl (r = 0.69) and sheep manure content (r = 0.69). Besides, a significant negative correlation among sanitary state index of plants inoculated with F. oxysporum in the case of olive pomace (r = -0.92) and the polyphenols content (r = -0.74) of compost was found.
Volume 8, Issue 3 (Summer 2022)
Abstract
Backgrounds: The aim of this study was to evaluate genotypes and phenotypes of antibiotic resistance in Escherichia coli (E. coli) strains isolated from poultry farms in Isfahan province, Iran.
Materials & Methods: In this study, 50 E. coli strains isolated from pericarditis and perihepatitis lesions of broilers in Isfahan (central Iran) were selected. After microbiological and biochemical tests and confirmation of bacterial colonies, the colonies were purified. The pure colonies were cultured on Müeller-Hinton culture medium and then subjected to antibiotic susceptibility testing. In the next step, DNA was extracted from the purified bacteria, and the qnrA and sul1 genes were amplified with specific primers.
Findings: The results showed that 85% of E. coli isolates were resistant to at least two antibiotics, and 6% of E. coli strains were resistant to all 13 antibiotics used in this study. E. coli isolates showed the highest resistance to enrofloxacin (70%) and the lowest resistance to gentamicin (6%). Examination of resistance genes showed that about 54% of enrofloxacin-resistant E. coli strains contained the qnrA gene, and 48% of sulfonamide-resistant E. coli strains contained the sul1 gene.
Conclusion: In this study, some resistant strains lacked the resistance genes studied, indicating the importance of other resistance genes in inducing resistance against sulfonamides and fluoroquinolones. Also, the lack of resistance in some strains harboring qnrA and sul1 genes indicates the importance of gene expression in mediating resistance, and that the presence of resistance genes alone is not sufficient to induce antibiotic resistance in E. coli strains.
Volume 9, Issue 2 (No. 2 (Tome 44), (Articles in Persian) 2018)
Abstract
Aim:
This paper tries to apply Raskin’s (1985) script-based semantic theory to regional anecdotes in Zakani’s (1999) Risala-ye Delgosha (Joyous Treaties).
Theoretical Framework
In his theory, Raskin tries to examine the mechanisms of both generating as well as receiving by the audiences those verbally expressed humor he calls a joke-carrying-text. In this sense, a text is humors if three of the following conditions are satisfied: 1) The text has at least two different scripts; 2) The two scripts are compatible with each other; 3) The two scripts are opposite. A text is non-bona fide/humorous if these conditions are followed; bona- fide/non-humorous, if not followed.
Question:
Is there any meaningful compatibility between SSTH and Zakani's regional anecdotes?
Hypothesis:
Zakani's regional anecdotes are in compatible with the conditions as proposed by Raskin (1985).
Methodology:
As for the corpus, 16 regional anecdotes and or Qazvini-related anecdotes were chosen out of the total 256 anecdotes of the whole version edited by Mahjoob (1999). Then the five anecdotes were discussed in detail, and the rest was generally taken into consideration. Having followed Propp (1928) and Bremond (1973), the Qazvini's behaviors were mapped onto the three functions resulting in a model to show that the Qazvini's foolish action defines his role as the fool and his role as the fool generates his foolish action.
Findings and Results:
Some results show that the regional humor get high frequency in the book thereby they emphasis on the Qazvin's functions. Totally, the application of the SSTH shows that all the kinds of humor are in compatible with the conditions as proposed by Raskin (1985).
Volume 9, Issue 18 (Fall & Winter 2023)
Abstract
This article assesses the quality of rhetorical imagery translation of verses 35-40 of Surah An-Nur in selected Persian and English translations using Julian House's approach. The rhetorical imagery of light and darkness is a crucial image related to the concepts of good and evil, with diverse interpretations presented in interpretive books. House's model examines the user and application aspects of the original text to create functional equivalence. The user aspect pertains to language, dialect, time, and domain of function, while the application aspect relates to media and audience. The selection of translations was based on popularity and acceptance among readers and scholars. Results show that all translators have faithfully recreated the rhetorical imagery of this surah in the target language, while adhering to the form and structure of the target language. They have provided a literal translation of these images aligned with the religious goals of the verses. Overall, translators have presented an overt translation of these images, with no significant deviation from the original Quranic text. Translators have translated these images based on the linguistic characteristics of the target culture. Combining approaches may be more effective in evaluating the quality of Persian and English translations of the Quran.
Volume 9, Issue 42 (12-2021)
Abstract
Introduction
Research background
Numerous articles, dissertations, and books have reviewed the history and background of humour in Iran, and several books have been translated. Horri (2008; 2011; 2018) has studied some issues related to the field of humour. However, the level of generating humor in humorous texts, including fictional and non-fictional jokes, has been studied less.
Goals, questions, and assumption
First, laughter and its manifestations have usually been presented in three forms: situation-oriented, word-oriented, or a combination of both. Second, the narrative can be divided into two categories, serious and non-serious. Non-serious narratives are divided into humorous, nonsensical, and absurd narratives. However, generating humor in some humorous texts is not known. Also, the boundary between fictional and non-fictional texts is not clear. In other words, it is not possible to make a distinction between the non-fictional and fictional jokes. In fact, what are the criteria for recognizing a non-fictional joke from a fictional joke? How can the amount of generating humor and jokes of fictional jokes be determined from non-fictional? Is the amount of narrative the same in different types of humorous fictional and non-fictional texts? Is the structure of non-fictional jokes the same as or different from the structure of fictional texts?
Discussion
In Persian, “Fokahiyat” is synonymous with the English word "humour" and it is a narrow saying that expands the mind, corresponding to the types of jokes, funny short stories, jokes, and verbal jokes. A joke has also been defined as a kind of linguistic expression that sometimes finds a narrative form and sometimes retains its expressive form and appears non-fictional. The former is referred to as a fictional or narrative joke and the latter as a non-fictional joke. Of course, the boundary between the two types of jokes is not very clear, raising problems. Attardo (1994) uses the terms "artificial joke" and "conversational joke" to distinguish between these two types of jokes. A non-fictional joke is a joke that does not necessarily tell a story; rather, it expresses a state and typically consists of four stages: set-up; paradox; denouement, and release. Morin (1966) believes in the same structure or three narrative elements: normalization, interlocking, and dis-junction. Oring (1989) uses the word "story" instead of "narrative." In humourous texts, it seems that we are dealing with a more extended narrative, not with the punch-line, but with some jab-lines, which do not necessarily end at the end of the text and are scattered throughout the text. Hence, what distinguishes a short joke from a humorous narrative or a funny anecdote is the change from punch-line to jab-line. Examining different humourous samples, it can be concluded that it is the punch-line than the jab-line that separates a narrative joke from a humorous narrative. Juhi’s anecdotes that have been rewritten in different books in different ways, on the one hand, provide a clear picture of the difference between a narrative joke and a humorous anecdote, and on the other hand, are examples of the transition from the artificial jokes to the conversational jokes or vice versa. Having analyzed more than 50 Juhi’s anecdotes, it was revealed that different versions and sources of similar anecdotes do not provide a solid reason for the transition from an artificial joke to a conversational joke, but as the narratives are delayed and sometimes replaced by the narrators, the level of generating humor in these anecdotes change from short anecdotes to humorous narratives or versified versions.
Results and conclusion
The results of the present research can be concluded as:
Research background
Numerous articles, dissertations, and books have reviewed the history and background of humour in Iran, and several books have been translated. Horri (2008; 2011; 2018) has studied some issues related to the field of humour. However, the level of generating humor in humorous texts, including fictional and non-fictional jokes, has been studied less.
Goals, questions, and assumption
First, laughter and its manifestations have usually been presented in three forms: situation-oriented, word-oriented, or a combination of both. Second, the narrative can be divided into two categories, serious and non-serious. Non-serious narratives are divided into humorous, nonsensical, and absurd narratives. However, generating humor in some humorous texts is not known. Also, the boundary between fictional and non-fictional texts is not clear. In other words, it is not possible to make a distinction between the non-fictional and fictional jokes. In fact, what are the criteria for recognizing a non-fictional joke from a fictional joke? How can the amount of generating humor and jokes of fictional jokes be determined from non-fictional? Is the amount of narrative the same in different types of humorous fictional and non-fictional texts? Is the structure of non-fictional jokes the same as or different from the structure of fictional texts?
Discussion
In Persian, “Fokahiyat” is synonymous with the English word "humour" and it is a narrow saying that expands the mind, corresponding to the types of jokes, funny short stories, jokes, and verbal jokes. A joke has also been defined as a kind of linguistic expression that sometimes finds a narrative form and sometimes retains its expressive form and appears non-fictional. The former is referred to as a fictional or narrative joke and the latter as a non-fictional joke. Of course, the boundary between the two types of jokes is not very clear, raising problems. Attardo (1994) uses the terms "artificial joke" and "conversational joke" to distinguish between these two types of jokes. A non-fictional joke is a joke that does not necessarily tell a story; rather, it expresses a state and typically consists of four stages: set-up; paradox; denouement, and release. Morin (1966) believes in the same structure or three narrative elements: normalization, interlocking, and dis-junction. Oring (1989) uses the word "story" instead of "narrative." In humourous texts, it seems that we are dealing with a more extended narrative, not with the punch-line, but with some jab-lines, which do not necessarily end at the end of the text and are scattered throughout the text. Hence, what distinguishes a short joke from a humorous narrative or a funny anecdote is the change from punch-line to jab-line. Examining different humourous samples, it can be concluded that it is the punch-line than the jab-line that separates a narrative joke from a humorous narrative. Juhi’s anecdotes that have been rewritten in different books in different ways, on the one hand, provide a clear picture of the difference between a narrative joke and a humorous anecdote, and on the other hand, are examples of the transition from the artificial jokes to the conversational jokes or vice versa. Having analyzed more than 50 Juhi’s anecdotes, it was revealed that different versions and sources of similar anecdotes do not provide a solid reason for the transition from an artificial joke to a conversational joke, but as the narratives are delayed and sometimes replaced by the narrators, the level of generating humor in these anecdotes change from short anecdotes to humorous narratives or versified versions.
Results and conclusion
The results of the present research can be concluded as:
- An artificial joke is recognizable from a conversational joke.
- The narrative joke usually has a narrator, but the non-fictional joke has no narrator.
- A narrative joke is usually pre-fabricated, but an oral narrative is made here and now.
- The artificial joke is not context-oriented, but the oral narration is mainly context-oriented.
- The punch-line is one of the most important factors distinguishing a joke from a humourous narrative.
- A more extended humourous narrative does not have one punch-line but several punch-lines or jab-lines.
- Non-fictional and fictional jokes usually follow the three-part pattern of set-up, paradox, and release.
- Sometimes, a short narrative joke becomes an extended one due to the scattering of the punch-line.
- Juhi’s anecdotes can be examined from various aspects, including distinction between fictional and non-fictional jokes.
References
Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. Mouton de Gruyter.
Horri A. (2011). Linguistic mechanisms of humor: Pun and/or ambiguity. Language Related Research (Comparative language and literature research), 2(6), 19-40.
Horri A. (2018). An application of script-based semantic theory to Zakani’s Risala-ye Delgosha's regional anecdotes. Language Related Research (Comparative language and Literature Research), 9(2), 63-78.
Horri, A. (2009). About humour: New approaches to humour and humorology (in Farsi). Hozeh-ye Honari Pub.
Oring, E. (1989). Between jokes and tales: On the nature of punch lines. Humor, 2-4, 349-364.
Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. Mouton de Gruyter.
Horri A. (2011). Linguistic mechanisms of humor: Pun and/or ambiguity. Language Related Research (Comparative language and literature research), 2(6), 19-40.
Horri A. (2018). An application of script-based semantic theory to Zakani’s Risala-ye Delgosha's regional anecdotes. Language Related Research (Comparative language and Literature Research), 9(2), 63-78.
Horri, A. (2009). About humour: New approaches to humour and humorology (in Farsi). Hozeh-ye Honari Pub.
Oring, E. (1989). Between jokes and tales: On the nature of punch lines. Humor, 2-4, 349-364.
Volume 11, Issue 1 (Spring 2023)
Abstract
This article examines the connection of national literature with the concept of world literature. From Goethe's point of view, national literature is the opposite of the literature that he calls "world literature". But are national literatures in general and other literatures "against", "opposite", or "contrary" to the view of "world literature" or "next to" and “complementary" to world literature? It is obvious that world literature owes its life, maturity and development to national literature, if a work does not first enter the domain of national literature of a country, it is less likely that it can become the domain of world literary works. Of course, there is no direct connection between national literature and world literature, that is, there is no requirement that the work must be national in order to be included in the cycle of world literature. However, being national means achieving the necessary indicators and qualities at the national level, may provide the ground for the national effect to enter the national and international level. In fact, the richness of world literature may depend on the richness of national literature and vice versa. However, if there is no mention of national literature, there will be less news about world literature. This article tries to examine the relationship between national and world literature from a theoretical perspective.
Volume 12, Issue 47 (Fall 2019)
Abstract
This paper discusses the prominent position of Arnold's cultural adaptation of the compelling story of Rustam & Sohrab in Shahnameh in the Victorian literary poly-system in England. According to the poly-system theory as proposed by Even-Zohar, the translated literature can typically have primary /central and/or peripheral/marginal positions in the target culture, depending on whether the target culture is young, weak, or in crisis. Meantime, the faithful translation of Shahnameh seems to occupy the peripheral position in English translation, but Arnold’s adaptation has typically exceeded the adaptive effect and obtained the proper position in the literary poly-system of the Victorian. This paper aims to peruse how Arnold's cultural adaptation of Shahnameh’s passionate story has marked a primary position in the English literary poly- system of the Victorian era. To this aim, Firstly, Arnold's position as an interpreter/adaptor is sketched out. Then, having compared Arnold’s adaptation with the primary sources to which Arnold has typically had access to become familiar with the Persian native story, mention is reasonably made of the marked differences between the two Persian and English literary poetics under the umbrella of poly-system theory as proposed by Even-Zohar. Due to the innovative way (s) Arnold has uniquely adapted, recreated, and re-written the native story with specific regard to the peculiar features of the literary tradition of the Western poetics, it seems that the local story of Shahnameh has found the prime position in the Western literary poetics of the Victorian.
Volume 12, Issue 56 (May-june 2024)
Abstract
This article explores the semiotic approach, as a post-structuralist method, for analyzing folktales, with a specific focus on the story of "Haji Luva'as." In contrast to the structuralist approach, which primarily examines fixed and variable elements, as well as the thirty-one functions and seven spheres of action, the semiotic approach, particularly rooted in Greimas-2, delves deeper by considering the underlying meanings and concepts. This approach illustrates how the semiotic square becomes evident in the narrative syntax on the surface level. Subsequently, these deep and surface structures are realized in discourse syntax, contributing to the development of discursive meaning. Greimas-2 aims to construct discursive meaning through semiotic analysis while acknowledging the limitations of structuralist semiotics, viewing them as "meaning deficiencies." This article seeks to provide an analytical and explanatory response to the question of what unique characteristics the semiotic approach brings to the examination of folktales and how it differs from a purely descriptive and structuralist approach.
Volume 17, Issue 67 (10-2024)
Abstract
This qualitative article employs an analytical-explanatory approach and is based on library resources to examine the relationship between World Literature, Global Literature, and Cosmopolitan Literature through the lens of Comparative Literature. The study aims to clarify the distinctions and connections between these three concepts to better understand the position of Iranian literature within Global Literature. Several questions are raised: “Are World Literature and Global Literature synonymous, or are they distinct?” “How do they relate to Cosmopolitan Literature?” “What connections do they share with Comparative Literature?” Some scholars consider World Literature and Global Literature interchangeable. Others view World Literature as comprising outstanding works from local literature that have achieved recognition either through translation or in their original language at transnational and international levels. The findings reveal that World Literature is retrospective, focusing on canonical historical works, while Global Literature is contemporary and a product of modern globalization processes. Additionally, the concept of Cosmopolitan Literature, which emphasizes a sense of global belonging and cultural interactions, closely aligns with these two. Comparative Literature serves as a framework for analyzing these relationships and strengthening the connection between Persian literature and global currents.
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
The expansion of globalization processes and the resulting economic and cultural transformations have given rise to several concepts in the fields of literature and culture. Among these is the notion of World Literature, which has been the subject of considerable debate since its inception. It has also sparked fundamental questions, particularly in the context of globalization studies: “Are World Literature and Global Literature synonymous, or are they distinct?” “How do they relate to Cosmopolitan Literature?” “What is the relationship between these latter forms and local or regional literature?” Despite numerous studies on these concepts, significant gaps remain in understanding the relationships among them and their connections to Comparative Literature. Using an analytical-explanatory approach, this article seeks to address these gaps and provide a basis for answering three central questions:
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
The expansion of globalization processes and the resulting economic and cultural transformations have given rise to several concepts in the fields of literature and culture. Among these is the notion of World Literature, which has been the subject of considerable debate since its inception. It has also sparked fundamental questions, particularly in the context of globalization studies: “Are World Literature and Global Literature synonymous, or are they distinct?” “How do they relate to Cosmopolitan Literature?” “What is the relationship between these latter forms and local or regional literature?” Despite numerous studies on these concepts, significant gaps remain in understanding the relationships among them and their connections to Comparative Literature. Using an analytical-explanatory approach, this article seeks to address these gaps and provide a basis for answering three central questions:
- Are World Literature and Global Literature synonymous, or do they differ?
- What is the relationship between these concepts and Cosmopolitan Literature?
- What role does Comparative Literature play in analyzing and explaining these concepts?
Clarifying these relationships may help shed light on the position of Persian literature within Global Literature and contribute to the development of comparative studies in Iran.
The study of the relationship between World Literature, Global Literature, and Cosmopolitan Literature has given rise to diverse perspectives within Comparative Literature. Goethe introduced the concept of World Literature, emphasizing cross-cultural interactions and the elevation of exemplary national works as a starting point for understanding these concepts. Building on this foundation, Marx and Engels offered a critical perspective, viewing World Literature as a product of bourgeois society, emerging from the processes of economic globalization. This view highlights the material and economic dimensions of literature’s circulation and reception on a global scale.
More modern studies suggest that Cosmopolitan Literature, by fostering a sense of global belonging and cross-cultural interactions, serves as a bridge between national and Global Literature. It connects localized literary traditions to broader global frameworks, emphasizing shared human values and cultural exchange. Despite this background, significant gaps remain in analyzing the connections among these concepts through the lens of Comparative Literature. This article seeks to address these gaps, offering insights into their interrelations and providing a framework for further understanding.
2. Literature Review
Regarding the relationship between the concept of World Literature and other related notions, particularly Global Literature and Cosmopolitan Literature, several Persian-language studies, in addition to the theoretical sources analyzed in this article, have explored these relationships. Horri (2021) examined the Eastern origins of World Literature from Goethe’s perspective, arguing that "from Goethe’s point of view, World Literature is neither a collection of national literature nor a compendium of global masterpieces; rather, it is a dynamic process of interaction among nations aimed at dismantling the walls of national prejudices that hinder peaceful coexistence” (p. 229). In another study, Horri (2023) explored the interdependence of national and Global Literature, demonstrating that "the richness of World Literature may depend on the richness of national literature, and vice versa; without national literature, there would be little presence of World Literature” (pp. 34-35). Building on these insights, this article seeks to analyze the relationship between World Literature, Global Literature, and Cosmopolitan Literature, offering a comparative and theoretical perspective to clarify their intersections and distinctions
3. Discussion and Analysis
One of the key challenges in translating the term Globalization into Persian arises from the lexical similarities between terms like "world" (as in World Literature) and "global" (as in Global Literature), and their equivalents in Persian, which do not have precise distinctions. Furthermore, translators have not consistently rendered these English terms into Persian, leading to discrepancies in interpretation and application. The discourse on World Literature and its relationship with other forms, such as Global Literature and Cosmopolitan Literature, can be divided into two broad chronological and historiographical categories: 1) Early and Foundational Perspectives and 2) Contemporary and Critical Perspectives. Two influential early views on World Literature stem from Goethe and Marx and Engels. Goethe envisioned World Literature as a means of cultural exchange, fostering dialogue and understanding among nations. Marx and Engels, however, emphasized the commodification of literature within the framework of global capitalism. For them, literature became a bourgeois product circulating within the global economy and subject to the dynamics of production, consumption, and exchange. While Goethe’s focus was more cultural, Marx and Engels placed a greater emphasis on the universal aspects of literature as a product of bourgeois society, linking it closely to the concept of globalization. This commodification of literature, as described by Marx and Engels, underscores its connection to the broader socio-economic processes of globalization.
Since the early 2000s, discussions about World Literature and its relationship with other literary forms, such as Global Literature and Cosmopolitan Literature, have adopted a more theoretical and critical orientation. Bugomil (2001) argued that Global Literature is primarily aimed at a general, global audience, while World Literature is more likely to be critically received by a specialized readership (p. 5). In other words, Global Literature enjoys widespread acceptance, while World Literature invites selective and critical engagement. Damrosch (2000) contended that the broad acceptance of World Literature does not inherently conflict with its alignment with critical readerships. While Global Literature often appeals to contemporary sensibilities, World Literature tends to engage with the past, fostering interpretative and intertextual connections across texts. Bugomil succinctly encapsulates this distinction: Global Literature is present-oriented, while World Literature is past-oriented. Ian Baucom (2001) provides a more nuanced categorization of Global Literature, distinguishing between its function as a project and as a method. As a project, Global Literature involves reconfiguring literary studies to focus on what is termed Global Literature. As a method, it involves extending global approaches to specific methods for studying what is broadly defined as literature (p. 162). This distinction highlights the dual role of Global Literature as both a framework for rethinking literary studies and a methodology for expanding the scope of literary analysis.
In summary, Global Literature is future-oriented, with an emphasis on contemporary relevance and universality, while World Literature remains past-oriented, seeking to preserve and reinterpret literary traditions across cultures. The commodification and globalization of literature have shaped these distinctions, allowing for the simultaneous coexistence of broad accessibility and critical engagement. This analytical framework sets the stage for exploring the interrelations among these concepts, their implications for understanding literature, and their role in shaping both national and global literary discourses.
The relationship between Global Literature and World Literature remains a subject of significant debate. While Bugomil (2001) argues that Global Literature cannot be equated with World Literature due to differences in scope and audience, Hillis-Miller (2011) takes a more integrative stance. He suggests that Global Literature can replace World Literature and proposes the term “New World Literature” instead of the traditional concept of World Literature. Eric Hayot (2013) examines the relationship between World Literature and globalization from two perspectives: method and subject matter. Hayot argues that World Literature cannot be easily equated with globalization, as the latter adopts a scientific-social and positivist approach, primarily concerned with economic and political transformations. This framework, he notes, is largely disconnected from the aesthetic and interpretative dimensions of literature (p. 223). Hayot highlights that literary studies are often shaped by an aesthetic perspective, emphasizing close reading techniques and poetic devices. These studies view literature as a medium for imaginative escape and playful resistance against the commodification and transactional nature of global markets (Hayot, 2013).
The connection between World Literature and cosmopolitanism emerges when World Literature—or more specifically, Global Literature—is seen as a product of globalization, which is inherently shaped by external, economic, and global forces. In a globalized world, McLuhan’s metaphor of the “global village” (1994, p. 8) suggests that its inhabitants become global citizens, fostering a sense of cosmopolitanism. From this perspective, literature functions as a means of expressing and reinforcing this sense of global belonging and cultural interconnectedness. Domínguez (2013) delves deeper into the link between World Literature and cosmopolitanism, defining cosmopolitanism as the starting point of a movement toward a “hybrid perspective.” He posits that literature is initially localized (e.g., “European literature”) but gradually transforms into “Global Literature” when it reaches a broader, universal audience (p. 337). Beecroft discusses the connection between cosmopolitanism and what he terms “literature-world” or “literary ecology.” This approach emphasizes the interplay between localized literary traditions and global literary networks, offering a framework to understand how regional and Global Literature coexist and influence one another.
These perspectives collectively illustrate the intricate relationships among World Literature, Global Literature, and cosmopolitanism. While globalization serves as a material and economic backdrop for the emergence of Global Literature, cosmopolitanism emphasizes the ideological and cultural dimensions of global literary exchange. The works of Hayot, Domínguez, and Beecroft highlight the evolving roles of literature as both a product of its local environment and a participant in global literary discourse.
4. Findings, Conclusions, and Future Studies
This study sought to define and analyze key terms, particularly the four concepts of World Literature, Global Literature, Cosmopolitan Literature, and Comparative Literature, and to examine their distinguishing characteristics. The findings demonstrate that World Literature, along with national, non-national, and local literature, is incorporated into the ongoing and dynamic process of globalization through translation. This globalization process is a tangible and practical phenomenon, emerging from the era of new technologies and heavily influenced by global economic structures. In this framework, globalization transforms the world into a small village—a global village—where its inhabitants, representing citizens from all five continents, perceive this village as their homeland, fostering a sense of belonging. This global sense of attachment is described as cosmopolitanism, reflecting the worldview of global citizens in a tightly interconnected world. In summary, many theorists regard World Literature as the outcome of cultural interactions and mutual understanding, with Comparative Literature serving as a tool for better comprehending these interactions. Simultaneously, perspectives on Global Literature are primarily influenced by economic and globalization-driven dynamics, emphasizing broader accessibility and appeal. In contrast, Cosmopolitan Literature emerges as a result of global interactions and the acceptance of multiculturalism, aligning closely with the ideals of global citizenship.
Expanding upon these findings, this study highlights their relevance to Persian literature, emphasizing its significant potential in the global literary arena. By analyzing the concepts of World Literature, Global Literature, and Cosmopolitan Literature, the study demonstrates that Persian literature—enriched by its cultural depth and historical interactions—possesses immense capacity to engage a global audience.
The study of the relationship between World Literature, Global Literature, and Cosmopolitan Literature has given rise to diverse perspectives within Comparative Literature. Goethe introduced the concept of World Literature, emphasizing cross-cultural interactions and the elevation of exemplary national works as a starting point for understanding these concepts. Building on this foundation, Marx and Engels offered a critical perspective, viewing World Literature as a product of bourgeois society, emerging from the processes of economic globalization. This view highlights the material and economic dimensions of literature’s circulation and reception on a global scale.
More modern studies suggest that Cosmopolitan Literature, by fostering a sense of global belonging and cross-cultural interactions, serves as a bridge between national and Global Literature. It connects localized literary traditions to broader global frameworks, emphasizing shared human values and cultural exchange. Despite this background, significant gaps remain in analyzing the connections among these concepts through the lens of Comparative Literature. This article seeks to address these gaps, offering insights into their interrelations and providing a framework for further understanding.
2. Literature Review
Regarding the relationship between the concept of World Literature and other related notions, particularly Global Literature and Cosmopolitan Literature, several Persian-language studies, in addition to the theoretical sources analyzed in this article, have explored these relationships. Horri (2021) examined the Eastern origins of World Literature from Goethe’s perspective, arguing that "from Goethe’s point of view, World Literature is neither a collection of national literature nor a compendium of global masterpieces; rather, it is a dynamic process of interaction among nations aimed at dismantling the walls of national prejudices that hinder peaceful coexistence” (p. 229). In another study, Horri (2023) explored the interdependence of national and Global Literature, demonstrating that "the richness of World Literature may depend on the richness of national literature, and vice versa; without national literature, there would be little presence of World Literature” (pp. 34-35). Building on these insights, this article seeks to analyze the relationship between World Literature, Global Literature, and Cosmopolitan Literature, offering a comparative and theoretical perspective to clarify their intersections and distinctions
3. Discussion and Analysis
One of the key challenges in translating the term Globalization into Persian arises from the lexical similarities between terms like "world" (as in World Literature) and "global" (as in Global Literature), and their equivalents in Persian, which do not have precise distinctions. Furthermore, translators have not consistently rendered these English terms into Persian, leading to discrepancies in interpretation and application. The discourse on World Literature and its relationship with other forms, such as Global Literature and Cosmopolitan Literature, can be divided into two broad chronological and historiographical categories: 1) Early and Foundational Perspectives and 2) Contemporary and Critical Perspectives. Two influential early views on World Literature stem from Goethe and Marx and Engels. Goethe envisioned World Literature as a means of cultural exchange, fostering dialogue and understanding among nations. Marx and Engels, however, emphasized the commodification of literature within the framework of global capitalism. For them, literature became a bourgeois product circulating within the global economy and subject to the dynamics of production, consumption, and exchange. While Goethe’s focus was more cultural, Marx and Engels placed a greater emphasis on the universal aspects of literature as a product of bourgeois society, linking it closely to the concept of globalization. This commodification of literature, as described by Marx and Engels, underscores its connection to the broader socio-economic processes of globalization.
Since the early 2000s, discussions about World Literature and its relationship with other literary forms, such as Global Literature and Cosmopolitan Literature, have adopted a more theoretical and critical orientation. Bugomil (2001) argued that Global Literature is primarily aimed at a general, global audience, while World Literature is more likely to be critically received by a specialized readership (p. 5). In other words, Global Literature enjoys widespread acceptance, while World Literature invites selective and critical engagement. Damrosch (2000) contended that the broad acceptance of World Literature does not inherently conflict with its alignment with critical readerships. While Global Literature often appeals to contemporary sensibilities, World Literature tends to engage with the past, fostering interpretative and intertextual connections across texts. Bugomil succinctly encapsulates this distinction: Global Literature is present-oriented, while World Literature is past-oriented. Ian Baucom (2001) provides a more nuanced categorization of Global Literature, distinguishing between its function as a project and as a method. As a project, Global Literature involves reconfiguring literary studies to focus on what is termed Global Literature. As a method, it involves extending global approaches to specific methods for studying what is broadly defined as literature (p. 162). This distinction highlights the dual role of Global Literature as both a framework for rethinking literary studies and a methodology for expanding the scope of literary analysis.
In summary, Global Literature is future-oriented, with an emphasis on contemporary relevance and universality, while World Literature remains past-oriented, seeking to preserve and reinterpret literary traditions across cultures. The commodification and globalization of literature have shaped these distinctions, allowing for the simultaneous coexistence of broad accessibility and critical engagement. This analytical framework sets the stage for exploring the interrelations among these concepts, their implications for understanding literature, and their role in shaping both national and global literary discourses.
The relationship between Global Literature and World Literature remains a subject of significant debate. While Bugomil (2001) argues that Global Literature cannot be equated with World Literature due to differences in scope and audience, Hillis-Miller (2011) takes a more integrative stance. He suggests that Global Literature can replace World Literature and proposes the term “New World Literature” instead of the traditional concept of World Literature. Eric Hayot (2013) examines the relationship between World Literature and globalization from two perspectives: method and subject matter. Hayot argues that World Literature cannot be easily equated with globalization, as the latter adopts a scientific-social and positivist approach, primarily concerned with economic and political transformations. This framework, he notes, is largely disconnected from the aesthetic and interpretative dimensions of literature (p. 223). Hayot highlights that literary studies are often shaped by an aesthetic perspective, emphasizing close reading techniques and poetic devices. These studies view literature as a medium for imaginative escape and playful resistance against the commodification and transactional nature of global markets (Hayot, 2013).
The connection between World Literature and cosmopolitanism emerges when World Literature—or more specifically, Global Literature—is seen as a product of globalization, which is inherently shaped by external, economic, and global forces. In a globalized world, McLuhan’s metaphor of the “global village” (1994, p. 8) suggests that its inhabitants become global citizens, fostering a sense of cosmopolitanism. From this perspective, literature functions as a means of expressing and reinforcing this sense of global belonging and cultural interconnectedness. Domínguez (2013) delves deeper into the link between World Literature and cosmopolitanism, defining cosmopolitanism as the starting point of a movement toward a “hybrid perspective.” He posits that literature is initially localized (e.g., “European literature”) but gradually transforms into “Global Literature” when it reaches a broader, universal audience (p. 337). Beecroft discusses the connection between cosmopolitanism and what he terms “literature-world” or “literary ecology.” This approach emphasizes the interplay between localized literary traditions and global literary networks, offering a framework to understand how regional and Global Literature coexist and influence one another.
These perspectives collectively illustrate the intricate relationships among World Literature, Global Literature, and cosmopolitanism. While globalization serves as a material and economic backdrop for the emergence of Global Literature, cosmopolitanism emphasizes the ideological and cultural dimensions of global literary exchange. The works of Hayot, Domínguez, and Beecroft highlight the evolving roles of literature as both a product of its local environment and a participant in global literary discourse.
4. Findings, Conclusions, and Future Studies
This study sought to define and analyze key terms, particularly the four concepts of World Literature, Global Literature, Cosmopolitan Literature, and Comparative Literature, and to examine their distinguishing characteristics. The findings demonstrate that World Literature, along with national, non-national, and local literature, is incorporated into the ongoing and dynamic process of globalization through translation. This globalization process is a tangible and practical phenomenon, emerging from the era of new technologies and heavily influenced by global economic structures. In this framework, globalization transforms the world into a small village—a global village—where its inhabitants, representing citizens from all five continents, perceive this village as their homeland, fostering a sense of belonging. This global sense of attachment is described as cosmopolitanism, reflecting the worldview of global citizens in a tightly interconnected world. In summary, many theorists regard World Literature as the outcome of cultural interactions and mutual understanding, with Comparative Literature serving as a tool for better comprehending these interactions. Simultaneously, perspectives on Global Literature are primarily influenced by economic and globalization-driven dynamics, emphasizing broader accessibility and appeal. In contrast, Cosmopolitan Literature emerges as a result of global interactions and the acceptance of multiculturalism, aligning closely with the ideals of global citizenship.
Expanding upon these findings, this study highlights their relevance to Persian literature, emphasizing its significant potential in the global literary arena. By analyzing the concepts of World Literature, Global Literature, and Cosmopolitan Literature, the study demonstrates that Persian literature—enriched by its cultural depth and historical interactions—possesses immense capacity to engage a global audience.