Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Professor of Linguistics, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman

2 Assistant Professor of English Language and Literature, University of Qom

3 MA. in Linguistics

Abstract

Honorifics are social deixis which serve as signs of respect and politeness for references to certain noun phrases in order to show dignity of addressee(s). The purpose of this study is to compare the use of honorific terms and phrases in the two religions of Islam and Zoroastrianism. The data were collected from written and oral religious texts which were then examined and compared to each other in terms of structures, meanings and pragmatic use. The findings are as follows: In the two religions, honorifics appear both before and after the nominal; however, Islamic honorifics are longer in structures and more various in types, while in Zoroastrian they appear before the head. In both corpora in addition to religious figures, honorific terms were used for the places, objects and phenomena related to religion. In addition to unmarked honorifics, the corpus of the two religions contained marked honorifics which appear with some certain names. Both religions contain prohibited verbal and non-verbal behaviors (taboo) such as silence which can be referred to as a common feature in the two ceremonies. Finally, both religions contain items opposite to the honorifics with the meaning of hatred and disgust. Along with the similarities mentioned above, the significant difference between the two corpora is that the use of honorifics in Islam is motivated by a kind of religious duty known as ‘amity’ and ‘animosity’.

Keywords

Main Subjects

آسموسن، کای بار و مری بویس (1386). دیانت زرتشتی. گردآورنده و مترجم: فریدون وهمن. چاپ دوم. تهران: جامی.
اوستا. ترجمۀ هاشم رضی. تهران: فروهر، 1363.
بویس، مری (1381). زردتشتیان: باورها و آیین دینی آن‌ها. مترجم: عسکر بهرامی. چاپ دوم. تهران: قفنوس.
بهار، مهرداد. (1369). بندهشن/ فرنبغ دادگی. تهران: توس.
پورداوود، ابراهیم. (1347). ادبیات مزدیسنا یشت‏ها. تهران: اساطیر.
___________ (1336). یادداشت‏های گاثا‏ها. تهران: دانشگاه تهران.
___________ (1357). یادداشت ویسپرد. تهران: دانشگاه تهران.
 
فخر روحانی، محمدرضا (1382). کاربردشناسی ادوات تکریم در متون دینی فارسی معاصر. پایان‌نامۀ دکتری، تهران: دانشگاه تهران.
قرآن کریم. (1373). ترجمۀ ناصر مکارم شیرازی. قم: دارالقران الکریم.
میرفخرایی، مهشید (1367). روایات پهلوی (متنی به زبان فارسی میانه). تهران: موسسۀ مطالعات فرهنگی وابسته به وزارت فرهنگ و آموزش عالی.
ناشناخته. (1354). مینوی خرد. ترجمۀ احمد تفضلی. تهران: توس.
نغزگوی کهن، مهرداد (1395). امکانات تکریمی ارجاعی در فارسی نو: زبان فارسی در گذر زمان (مجموعه مقالات). تهران: کتاب بهار.
 
Agha, A. (1993). Grammatical and indexical convention in honorific discourse. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 3, 131-163.
Agha, A.  (1994). Honorification. Annual Review of Anthropology, 23, 277-302.
Agha, A. (1998). Stereotypes and registers of honorific language. Language in Society, 27, 151-193.
 Brown, P. (2015). Politeness and language. In J. D. Write (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed.)(pp. 326-330). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some iniversals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, K. & Miller, J. (2013). Dictionary of linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Irvin, J. (1992). Ideologies of honorific language. Pragmatics, 2(3), 251-262.
Irvin, J. (1995). Honorifics. In J. Verschueren et al. (eds.). Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 1-22). Manual, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Keshavarz, M. H. (1988). Forms of address in Post-revolutionary Iranian Persian: A sociolinguistic analysis. Language in Society, 17(4), 565-575.
Lehman, W. P. (1988). Historical linguistics: An introduction (4th ed.). New York: New York University Press.
Murphi, G.L. (1998). Personal references in English. Language in Society, 17(3), 317-349.
Shibatani, M. (1998). Honorifics. In: J. Mey (Ed.). The concise encyclopedia of pragmatics (pp. 341-350). Amsterdam- Lausanne- New York: Elsevier.
Sifianou, M. (1992). Politeness phenomena in England and Greece: A cross-cultural perspective. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sohn, H. M. (1983). Power and solidarity in Korean language, Korean linguistics, 14(3). 97-122.