---

Although Ghazals of Hafez have been researched on in different poetic and linguistic approaches, there is always a new finding when diving in this endless ocean. In this paper discourse of signature verses (Takhallus) of Hafez are analyzed using one of the most authorized and referred theories today but ignored for some times that of Bakhtin. The Russian philosopher who claims that the author is not the only speaker but along with “other voices” in an active interaction take part in the creation of the truth. Considering this view point, it was found  that in spite of the fact that in most verses Hafez addresses himself, there is no “one” speaker. In other words he takes different varieties of viewpoints. In this way he sometimes agrees with Hafez, sometimes praises him, sometimes takes care of him, and still in other cases he opposes him, blames him, disagrees with him, or even outrages against him. Hafez is not alone, there are other voices in different layers of the discourse in a dialogic interaction. What makes this signature verses distinct is that here Hafez explicitly says that “I is an other”, “I must become the other of myself”, “I am my other self”. In this research, characteristics of polyphonic discourse are proposed as practical Models in three patterns for structural polyphony and three patterns for content or viewpoint polyphony with all the related sub-patterns.  

---

One of the main characteristics of the story in data direction is Speaker/writer method which is known as “viewpoint “. Data direction is the perspective to an object or person to become efficient by perusing a specific purpose. In semantics school of Paris based on Jacques fontanill theorem point views consists of four classes. The purpose of this research is to investigate a variety of viewpoints in the short story "peace" written by Majid Gheissari and its main issue is to answer the question “what is the application of each viewpoint for the recognition of characters, time and place in the enunciate which is done by taking notes and content analysis based on Jacques fontanill theorem. In this research we have presented how the enunciator has used all four viewpoints for identification and selecting view point according to the enunciator purpose is related to the Impact on enunciated.

---

The concept of narration, with a background as long as the human’s history, has already provided a suitable area for critics’ analysis and assumptions about tales, stories and other types and forms of narration in the form of Narrative Science.
In this paper we are going to analyze and compare the application of narrative view and focus in two short stories of “To Whom I Say Hell?” by Simin Daneshvar and “Zane-Ziadi ” by Jalal Al Ahmad via investigating the structure of the language at the first place on the basis of linguistic features and narrative viewpoints.
Accordingly, the current study tries to answer the following questions:

How the applied language in the above mentioned works can be affective in forming the role of the narrator and finally, the focus?
Have these traits and features been leading us to the same type of narrator and focus features in order to clarify the typology of the story?
Have the narrative discourse and prevailing viewpoint and the resulting context in both stories led us to the same hidden author?

But in this respect, linguistic and narrative mechanisms of both stories alongside the different types of writers based on their gender and engagement pave the way to better compare both stories according to their viewpoint. To this end, and according to linguistic and narrative patterns, the following results were obtained in two levels of parts of speech and syntax of discourse. Contrary to “Zane Ziadi”, “To whom I say hello?” benefits from present tense verbs, the lack of negative modality at the level of parts of speech, first person protagonist viewpoint, internal focalization and discontinuous discourse procedure which make Daneshvar’s discourse more successful in internal focalization at the level of discourse syntax, while in “To whom I say hello?” , the use of past and perfect tense verbs , negative modality with high frequency , rhetorical questions and heavy sentences with logical chain of argument make the distance between both stories. Here, it is easily possible to hear the voice of Ale- Ahmad behind the voice of woman’s narrator which seems negative and external in comparison with writer’s internal focalization. Hence, the presence of two internal and external narrators, has led to the emergence of hidden author and dominant discourse in this story.

---

In this project, the statement of bulk poetry has been studies based on structural, goal-oriented, and cognitive aspects.
In regard to structural aspect, this statement, via blending two literary and referential roles of language, has become further apart from the ultimate goal behind the presentation of the statement.
Role-wise, this statement has neglected one of the two main elements shaping the text; being its coherence, obstructing the conveyance of meaning to readers’ mindset.
Cognitive-wise, the said statement has violated the gestalt principles, which shape conceptual metaphors, obstructing the formation of logic, as the basis of criticism.
Ultimately, the article’s authors discussed and studied the considered text in the presence of literary and ordinary metaphors and/or absence of metaphors

---

Today, narrative is one of the most common concepts, not only in literature, but also in non-literary fields such as psychology, social sciences and philosophy, uo tp the point that the concept of " narrative turn" has emerged. This paper is amied at studying the most important approaches addressing narrative, because it is not only important for literary and narrative studies, but at the same time can reveal the deep connections between literature and other disciplines. Obviously, to do this, only only literary references should be consulted, but also other important ideas, especially in philosophy and psychology, should be taken into consideration. In this manner, narrative can be used as a basis for interdisciplinary studies. For this purpose, desk study method has been used study two major approaches towards narrative, i.e. definition-centered and descriptive approacheds. For definition-centered appraoch, the major components and consistuents of narrative have been inferred by comparing such definitions and their contradictions have been brought into surface. In the next section, using a descriptive approach, the nature of narrative and its relationship with culture (social dimension) and understanding and life (individual dimension) will be examined. This will be done by reviewing the ideas of both narratologists and philosophers. The results of theis study indicate that narrative is a widespread phenomenon that is not only important in the field of literature, but also plays a very important role in the culture, understanding, identity and ethics.

---

This study tries to show that how viewpoint functions in discourse. As it will be clarified, it is highly related to the intention of the speaker/writer, and as a result, the orientation (s)he adopts in the discourse. Deictic markers function as discourse markers to fix and anchor time, place, agent, and other discursive elements. In this way, the viewpoint adopted by the enunciator/utterer is determined. Different types of viewpoint, then, are introduced and exemplified. Its relation with perspective is also examined.

---

Perspective is one of the factors involved in the diversification of schema. The viewpoint from which one looks at a scene somehow affects the process of semantic representation of that scene. Every sentence has its special schema drawn upon the scene in question, and adopting different points of view towards the same event will result in the speakers’ choosing different linguistic structures to express the event. Therefore, perspective is one of the most salient structure-formation processes that has received much attention from cognitive linguists. Cognitivists interested in linguistic impacts of perspective, following Langacker (), have laid their study on the assumption that the relative status and the angle of vision influence what language is used in describing certain situations. However, the question in this regard is whether or not the two parameters meet the adequacy required both for describing and for explaining different scenes linguistically. The answer seems to be that the specific perspective taken by the speaker is itself very much based on some further elements as animacy, dynamicity, size, and speaker. Present article is therefore written in order to question the problem of perspective, and the elements that are likely to bear upon its linguistic representation in Persian. Furthermore, it will also be taken into question if, according to what cognitive linguists argue for, there is such a universal cognitional framework common to all the human beings. For this purpose, a body of Persian written and spoken data, gathered from narrative dialogues and everyday talks, is to be examined inductively. Although this is an unprecedented study on some fundamental cognitive-semantic issues, the results would pretty hopefully apply in much more detailed semantic analyses of sentence perspective as well.