Arabic Literature

Abstract Halliday's functional theory is one of the important theories in the systematic vision. According to Halliday, meaning is divided into three sections, each of which complements the other. Halliday expressed it as the three functions of language: the experiential function, the communicative function, and the textual function. In the experiential function, we express our experiences in relation to external reality, and language becomes a mirror of life. The experiential function is one of the functions that represent to us the miniature and tested experiential model of external reality. But does the author have a role in stating his intention in relation to this reality? The important thing in Halliday's approach is the issue of choosing between different meanings; that is, in his use of language, he believes in the importance of the linguistic possibilities that language itself provides, and they go back to the author/writer who chooses a meaning instead of a meaning from among the unlimited and multiple possibilities of language according to the text he writes. As Halliday sees it, the possibility of language is the possibility of meaning. Therefore, this study seeks to analyze the six operations of the experiential function in Surat Al-Anfal and to clarify the author's position and role in choosing their type, because the meaning and content of the text are involved in choosing the type of the six operations. (i.e. material, mental, relational, behavioral, verbal, and existential). The question posed in this study is: What are the most and least employed operations and their effectiveness in clarifying the author's intention in Surat Al-Anfal? The research method in this descriptive analytical article is to analyze Surat Al-Anfal according to Halliday's experimental function and apply its six operations to the surah to reveal its relationship with the author's intention and his role in choosing the operations and their meanings. The study concluded that the material operation contains the highest percentage of employment compared to the rest of the operations; as the number of repetitions reached 40 percent compared to the rest of the operations in this surah, and this shows the material mentality of the pre-Islamic society that accepts tangible reality more than abstract reality. As for the contemporary addressee, employing this operation here makes it easier for him to conjure up the war image and represent the historical reality, even if a time has passed that exceeds 1400 years, so life emerges before him and the image is drawn for him with its terrain and he witnesses the revival of the Battle of Badr with its material features and it lives again and again in his mind.

Abstract In the contemporary era, many efforts have been made to update the knowledge of rhetoric. Therefore, the two terms "modern rhetoric" and "rhetoric modernization" are two of the most comprehensive terms among contemporary Arab scholars, which have occupied a significant part of contemporary rhetorical discourse from the late nineteenth century to the present day. Rhetoric modernization refers to a series of efforts that re-examine some or all of the issues of traditional rhetoric and make suggestions for its improvement. For the first time, Sheikh Muhammad Abduh from Al-Azhar called for updating the sources of rhetoric, and al-Jabr al-Zumt in his writings called for rhetoric modernization. The discourse of rhetoric modernization has always been challenged by the discourse of traditional rhetoric, and the beginning of rhetoric modernization has been accompanied by a critique of theoretical foundations, methodological issues, and the analytical approach of traditional rhetoric. From the beginning of the call to modernize rhetoric to the present day, criticism of traditional rhetoric has increased; therefore, reading the works done in the field of modern rhetoric, we encounter a significant amount of criticism that requires independent scientific research to provide a basis for avoiding excesses in judging and evaluating the rhetorical achievements of predecessors. This research has tried to examine and critique the criticisms of traditional rhetoric through a descriptive-analytical method and has achieved the following results by examining and criticizing the critical views of rhetoric modernization experts: The greatest criticism of contemporary scholars is the influence of rhetoric on Greek philosophical thought and the evaluation of texts. In a sense, their most important weaknesses are summarized in the incorrect comparison of traditional Islamic rhetoric with traditional Greek rhetoric, which have different socio-historical contexts, as well as incorrect comparison of rhetoric with contemporary critical schools that have different approaches and practical functions.
 

Abstract The study of the narrative structure of texts has had a significant influence on literary criticism. This influence has even spread to the analysis of Quranic stories so that these stories have become an arena for the application of the methods of narrative criticism. By examining the articles that have studied the stories of the Quran through these theories, we encounter a large number of works that have employed various methods in their analysis. This study, in order to investigate how narratology is used in the critique of Quranic stories, analyzes the articles written in this field. We do not merely introduce these works, but, with an analytical method, examine different critical approaches in the papers published in scientific-research journals. We have covered the articles published from the last quarter of the twentieth century to the present in Iran, Iraq, and Algeria. We argue that the different approaches of researchers in the study of Quranic stories can be examined in several main areas. Some of these studies have analyzed Quranic stories in a mechanical way by inserting the text into a predetermined framework, so that the analytical part is but a reflection of the theory. A number of researches have made some changes in their method of critique so as to bring a coordination between the text and the theories. And only a few researches have prioritized the text in their attempts at bringing this harmony between the selected theory and the story, and thus, without merlely following the theories, have obtained reliable and novel results. Meanwhile, in a number of studies, we do not see anything but brief references to some methods of narrative criticism, so that the analytical part of these articles is only a personal interpretation of the text without relying on a clear theory in the research.

Abstract Abstract
One of the most prominent features of the self, regarding the innate dimension and identity, is manifested through the negotiation and encounter with the other as an effective and opposing element. Cultural and civilized encounter and relationship with the other, firstly depend on the nature of the self, its problems with the other, and on the problems of the society in which it lives. Therefore, the other is reflected and manifested through establishing communication with the self. This communication might be demonstrated in various forms, for instance, a positive and friendly interaction, negotiation and dialogue, or dialectic. Whatever this communication is, it results in leading the self to the manifestation and interpretation of itself.  The poems of Ezzeddin al-Manªsserah are the vast realm of the manifestation and emergence of the self and the other and the interaction and dialectic between them. The reason for this feature of his poems is that he is rejected by his country at a young age and lived in another country for a long time where he had close relationship and interaction with the other and has portrayed various types of the other in his works. In this study, after reading Ezzeddin
al-Manªsserah’s poems in the area of resistance literature and through emphasizing on imageological concepts and applying descriptive-analytical method, the image of the self and the other in al-Manªsserah’s works were investigated. The results demonstrated that Ezzeddin al-Manªsserah has depicted the self in three different types, including individual, group, and human, in most of his resistance poems. Particularly, the individual type of the self is manifested more than the other types in his poems. Moreover, he has portrayed the other in two types, namely the stranger and opponent other and the fellow other which is merely in disagreement with the self about beliefs. However, it is important to note that the other has not been depicted vividly and independently in his poems and cannot be addressed.