Arabic Literature

Abstract The discourse of literary texts can be viewed from a variety of perspectives and all the dimensions of their various levels can be evaluated. Discourse analysis provides an opportunity for a deep understanding of the text. It helps highlight the author’s discourse and linguistic interactions with ideological structures. The parodies of Jerir and Akhtal are among the texts of Arabic literature based on foregrounding and backgrounsing. These two poets use specific discursive tools in most of their parodies, seeking to foreground their own identity and to background the identity of their rival. This paper discusses some principles of critical discourse analysis, such as the explicit socio-political stance of discourse analysts, and focuses on the dominance of the elite and institutions as they are enacted, legitimated, or reproduced by text and speech. One of the crucial elements of this analysis of the relations between power and discourse is the patterns of access to (public) discourse for different social groups. This article argues that in order to be able to relate power and discourse in an explicit way, we need the “cognitive interface” of models, knowledge, attitudes, ideologies and other social representations of the social mind, which also relate the individual and the social, and the micro- and the macro-levels of social structure. This argument is illustrated with an analysis of parliamentary debates about ethnic affairs. The article attempts to refer to the “ideological square” of van Dijk in order to check out the discursive levels of two parodies by Akhtal and Jerir. The results demonstrate that highlighting negative aspects of the other is of a very high frequency in both texts (66 percent in Jerir’s and 71 percent in Akhtal’s). The difference is that Jerir has been more successful in the use of discursive levels of meaning, formal structures, and grammar.

Abstract The symbols linked to the world of dreams and consciousness are considered the psychological issues which are functioned in the plot of modern novel. Then, modern novel is a kind of interior monologue by the characters who are expressing non coherent ideas from their past and present which is called stream of consciousness. This is a narrative device that attempts to give the written equivalent of the character's thought processes, either in a loose interior monologue or in connection to his or her actions. This writing is usually regarded as a special form of interior monologue and is characterized by associative leaps in thought and lack of some or all punctuation. The stream of consciousness and interior monologue are distinguished from dramatic monologue and soliloquy, where the speaker is addressing an audience or a third person, which are chiefly used in novel. in stream of consciousness, also known as interior monologue; which is a narrative mode or device that depicts the multitudinous thoughts and feelings which pass through the mind. the novel “Mᾱ tabaqqᾱ lakum” (what is remained for you) by Qassᾱn Kanfᾱni and “Shᾱzdeh Ehtejᾱb” (Prince Ehtejᾱb) by Hooshang Golshiri are narrated by of stream of consciousness and this technic is seen in the prementioned novels in the influencing of concerns and activeness of tension in the dreams and the psychological damaged in the characters of story. Qnfani in this novel deals with the issue of occupation of Palestine while Golshiri presents a person (Shazdeh Ehtejab) who is at the verge of dying. The two novels had the common points in plot, so the characters in both, are concerned to their own interior world to such an extent that the dispersed ideas of the character are dominat on the narration. This research at first, aimes to put light on the style of stream of consciousness in the two novels and clarify how the authors could make themselves free from the criterias of the common plot. The second aim of research is comparing the contents and mental actions of narration. The result indicates that the function of stream of consciousness in the both novel is same in general. But in details there are some differences like the time of the novel Shazde Ehtejab is during one night and the addressed ones, during the novel, become aware of the past of the main character by following the dispersed narration presented. and the content time is intertwined with the mental time. Bothe novelist doesn't present themselves directly in the novel and characterization but take a neutral positon in actions of story, so the characters have the main role in narrating of story and the main narrator is free in telling the actions of novel without accepting any intervention from outside of novel.