The Study of Figures of Speech (Simile, Metaphor, Trope, and Metonymy) in Bundahishn

Authors

  • راضیه سهرابی Ph.D. Student in the Philosophy of Education, Shiraz University Iran.
  • ملیحه مصلح Ph.D. Student in the Persian Language and literature, Epic Poetry, Shiraz University, Iran.
  • اکبر صیادکوه Professor, Persian Language and Literature Department, Shiraz University, Iran.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22046/LA.2017.16

Keywords:

Bundahishn, Figures of Speech, Simile, Metaphor, Metonymy.

Abstract

This research aims at the study of figures of speech in Bundahishn. The research paradigm is of the qualitative type, and it is conducted using the content analysis method. The first hand source on which the research has been done is that of translated by Mehrdad Bahar to Contemporary Persian. The results of this research indicate that among the aforementioned figures of speech, simile has the highest frequency. And among different kinds of simile, sensuous simile has the highest frequency. After that comes sensuous-reasonable similes as more frequent which is used for making concepts more abstract.

It seems that simile is one of the most efficient and expressive devices which is used mostly for making educational, philosophical, and abstract concepts pertinent to Creation and other subjects more receivable and concrete. In between, there are some issues which are sensuous, but normally, they are too hard to be understood; however, simile has made them more illuminated. In this work, only one metaphor was found while there is no figures of speech such as metonymy and trope. Maybe, because metaphor, metonymy, and trope make an educational work more difficult and complicated rather than being effective and illuminating. It seems that in this work, the most useful and deliberate style for teaching educational concepts has been used.

Published

2017-08-30

How to Cite

سهرابی ر., مصلح م., & صیادکوه ا. (2017). The Study of Figures of Speech (Simile, Metaphor, Trope, and Metonymy) in Bundahishn. LANGUAGE ART, 2(3), 47–64. https://doi.org/10.22046/LA.2017.16