مفهوم‌سازی فرهنگی عروسی و سوگ و بازنمایی آن برپایۀ دستور انتقال نقش در فیلم یک حبه قند

نوع مقاله : علمی-پژوهشی

نویسندگان
راحله گندمکار 1
پژند سلیمانی 2
1 دانشیار دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی ، تهران، ایران(نویسندۀ مسئول)
2 دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، دانشکدۀ ادبیات و زبانهای خارجی
10.30465/ls.2025.50338.2198
چکیده
در این پژوهش صورتهای مختلف و نقشهای انتقال معنی که برای مفهوم‌سازی فرهنگی عروسی و سوگ به کار گرفته می‌شوند مورد بررسی قرار می‌گیرند. در هر کدام از این مراسم، مفهوم‌سازی‌های فرهنگی در صورت‏های مختلف معنی بازنمایی می‌شوند.هدف این پژوهش یافتن صورتهایی است که از طریق آنها مفهوم‌سازی فرهنگی بیش از همه به‌کار گرفته می‌شود. «دستور انتقال نقش» به ما امکان بررسی نقش هر کدام از صورت‏های به کار گرفته شده را می‌دهد. فیلم یک حبه قند که هم مراسم سوگ و هم مراسم عروسی را به نمایش می‌گذارد، برای این پژوهش انتخاب شده است. هر کدام از این معانی فرهنگی از طریق «صورت»ها یا وجوه مختلفی اعم از متن، تصویر، فضا، شیء، بدن، صدا و گفتار به ما انتقال می‌یابند. مفاهیم فرهنگی، استعاره‌ها و طرحواره‌های فرهنگی بیشتر از طریق گفتار، بدن و شیء بازنمایی می‌شوند. نتیجه‌گیری به ما نشان می‌دهد که بازنمایی فرهنگی بیشتر از طریق گفتار منتقل می‌شود و بعد از آن از طریق بدن، تصویر و شیء. بررسی حوزۀ مبدا و مقصد در استعاره‌های فرهنگی در دو حوزۀ مختلف عینی و انتزاعی در تحلیل‌های چندوجهی نشان داد که تنها اگر مخاطب به طرح‌واره‌های بافت و رویه‎‌ای فرهنگی آشنا باشد می‌تواند این بازنمایی فرهنگی را دریابد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
چندوجه‌نمایی
دستور انتقال نقش
طرحوارۀ فرهنگی
مفهوم‌سازی فرهنگی عروسی و سوگ
زبان‌شناسی فرهنگی

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Cultural conceptualization of wedding and mourning based on Transpositional Grammar in an Iranian drama film A Cube of Sugar

نویسندگان English

Raheleh Gandomkar 1
Pajand Soleymani 2
1 Associate professor of Linguistics at Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran Corresponding Author
2 Allame Tabatabee Uni, literature and foreign languages faculty
چکیده English

 
Abstract
This study explores the cultural conceptualization and representation of wedding and mourning ceremonies in Iranian society through the lens of Transpositional Grammar and multimodal discourse analysis. Using the Iranian drama film A Cube of Sugar as the primary data source, the research investigates how cultural meanings are conveyed across various semiotic modes—speech, body, image, object, text, sound, and space. The analysis reveals that speech is the dominant mode for transmitting cultural representations, followed by body language, visual imagery, and material objects. The study also examines cultural metaphors by identifying source and target domains in both concrete and abstract forms, emphasizing the role of audience familiarity with cultural schemas in interpreting these representations.
Introduction
Cultural conceptualizations are deeply embedded in the linguistic and semiotic practices of human societies. In Iranian culture, ceremonies such as weddings and funerals serve as rich sites for the expression of cultural values, beliefs, and norms. This paper aims to analyze how these ceremonies are represented in visual and verbal media, focusing on the film A Cube of Sugar, which juxtaposes both events within a single narrative. The theoretical framework combines cultural linguistics—particularly schemas, categories, and metaphors—with Transpositional Grammar to examine how meaning is transferred across modes and functions.
Materials & Methods
The primary material for analysis is the Iranian film A Cube of Sugar, selected for its simultaneous portrayal of wedding and mourning rituals. The methodology integrates multimodal discourse analysis with Transpositional Grammar, which categorizes meaning-making into five semantic functions: reference, agency, structure, context, and interest. Each scene is dissected to identify the dominant modes of representation and the transposition of meaning across these modes. The study also draws on previous research in cultural linguistics and multimodal theory to contextualize its findings.
Discussion & Results
Findings indicate that cultural meanings are most frequently conveyed through speech, followed by body movements, visual imagery, and objects. Text and sound play a lesser role in this specific film. The analysis shows that cultural metaphors often rely on concrete source domains to express abstract cultural concepts. For instance, spatial arrangements and bodily gestures in mourning scenes evoke collective grief, while wedding scenes use speech and music to symbolize joy and continuity. The effectiveness of these representations depends on the audience’s familiarity with Iranian cultural schemas, which mediate interpretation and emotional resonance.
Conclusion
This research demonstrates that Transpositional Grammar provides a robust framework for analyzing cultural representation in multimodal texts. In A Cube of Sugar, the interplay of speech, body, image, and object forms a layered narrative that reflects Iranian cultural conceptualizations of celebration and loss. The study underscores the importance of cultural schemas in decoding multimodal messages and suggests that future research should further explore the role of audience knowledge in shaping meaning across different cultural contexts.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Multimodality, Transpositional Grammar, Cultural Schema, Cultural Conceptualization, Wedding and Mourning, Iranian Cinema, Discourse Analysis
حسینی، مریم و دیگران (1395). تحلیل  نشانه‌شناسی اجتماعی فیلم آژانس شیشه‌ای، فصلنامۀ علمی- پژوهشی زبان‌پژوهی دانشگاه الزهرا، بهار. ش18.صص 61-84.
نوبخت، م. (1400). بررسی نقش طرحوارۀ فرهنگی و طرح‏وارۀ زبانی بر درک خوانداری و شنیداری زبان‌آموزان زبان انگلیسی. روان­شناسی فرهنگی, 5(2).
سلیمانی کریم­آباد، پژند و گندمکار، راحله. (1401). بررسی چندوجه‌نمایی در اثر نمایشی در چارچوب دیدگاه «دستور انتقالی»: مطالعه موردی فیلم رهایی. زبان و زبان‌شناسی, 18(36), 111-139. doi: 10.30465/lsi.2023.45495.1684
سلیمانی کریم­آباد، پژند و گندمکار، راحله. (1403). تأثیر سیاق در شکل‌گیری طرحواره‌های فرهنگی زبان شخصیت‌های داستان فارسی شکر است. (e9940). زبان و زبان‌شناسی, 20(39), e9940 doi: 10.30465/lsi.2025.48498.1745
References:
Strandell, Jacob (2017) “The Cultural Schema: Towards Conceptual Compatibility in Culture- Cognition Interaction” in Culture-Cognition Interaction: Bridging Cognitive Science and Cultural Sociology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Copenhagen.
Mousa, M. O., & Ali, B. F. (2022). The Role of Cultural Schemata in Learning English Language Skills. In Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research (Vol. 1, Issue 1).
Sharifian, F., Chalak, A., & Dehkordi, Z. (2019). The Persian Cultural Schema: Compliment Response Strategies on Social Networking SitesAmong Persian EFL Learners. The Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances, Online First.
Hunzaker, M. B. F., & Valentino, L. (2019). Mapping Cultural Schemas: From Theory to Method. In American Sociological Review (Vol. 84, Issue 5, pp. 950–981). SAGE Publications.
Sharifian, F., & Jamarani, M. (2011). Cultural schemas in intercultural communication: A study of the Persian cultural schema of sharmandegi ‘being ashamed.’ In Intercultural Pragmatics (Vol. 8, Issue 2). Walter de Gruyter GmbH.
Vaisey, Stephen. 2009. “Motivation and Justification: A Dual-Process Model of Culture in Action.” American Journal of Sociology 114, no. 6: 1675-1715.
D’Andrade, R. G. (1995). The development of cognitive anthropology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139166645
Cook, G. (1994). Discourse and literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sharifian, F. (2001). Schema-based processing in Australian speakers of Aboriginal English. Language and Intercultural Communication, 1(2), 120–134. doi: 10.1080/14708470108668068
Strauss, Claudia and Naomi Quinn. 1998. A Cognitive Theory of Cultural Meaning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Frank, R. M. (2008). The language-organism-species analogy: A complex adaptive systems approach to shifting perspectives on ‘language’. In R. M. Frank, R. Dirven, T. Ziemke, & E. Bernárdez (Eds.), Body, language and mind: Vol. 2. Sociocultural situatedness (pp. 215–262). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110199116.2.215
Malcolm, I. G. (2017). Terms of adoption: Cultural conceptual factors underlying the adoption of English for Aboriginal communication. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), Advances in Cultural Linguistics (pp. 625–659). Singapore: Springer Nature. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_28
Mbiti, John S. 2015. African Religions and Philosophy. 2nd ed. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
House, J., & Rehbein, J. (Eds.). (2004). Multilingual communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Taylor, S. E., & Crocker, J. (1981). Schematic bases of social information processing. In E. T. Higgins, C. A. Hermann, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Social cognition. The Ontario Symposium on Personality and Social Psychology: Vol. 1 (pp. 89–134). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Silzer, Sheryl Takagi. 2011. Building Multicultural Teams: Applying Biblical Truth to Cultural Differences. Pasadena: William Carey International University Press.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemas: The building blocks of cognition. In R. Spiro, B. Bruce, &
W. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 33–58). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Silzer, Sheryl Takagi. 2011. Building Multicultural Teams: Applying Biblical Truth to Cultural Differences. Pasadena: William Carey International University Press.
Nishida, Hiroko. Cultural Schema Theory. 2005. In Theorizing about Intercultural Communication, edited William B. Gudyhunst, 401-18. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Okpara, Mzee Lasana (Hord, Fred Lee) and Jonathan Scott Lee, eds. 2016. I Am Because We Are: Readings in Africana Philosophy. Amhurst, MA: Massachusetts University Press.
Nishida, Hiroko. Cultural Schema Theory. 2005. In Theorizing about Intercultural Communication, edited William B. Gudyhunst, 401-18. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Okpara, Mzee Lasana (Hord, Fred Lee) and Jonathan Scott Lee, eds. 2016. I Am Because We Are: Readings in Africana Philosophy. Amhurst, MA: Massachusetts University Press.
Gelman, Rohel. 2000. “Domain Specificity and Variability in Cognitive Development.” Child Development 71, no. 4: 854-956.
Gelman, Susan A. 2010. “Modules, Theories, or Islands of Expertise? Domain Specificity in Socialization.” Child Development 81, no. 3 (May/June): 715-19.
Di Maggio, Paul. 1997. “Culture and Cognition.” Annual Review of Sociology 32, no. 1: 263-87.
Azkiyah, I., Hidayat, D. N., Alek, A., & Dewi, R. S. (2021). A Multimodal discourse Analysis of                                   Disneyplus Hotstar Indonesia TV Advertisment. In JELLT (Journal of English Language and Language Teaching) (Vol. 5, Issue 1, pp. 14–24). Direktorat Pascasarjana Pendidikan, Universitas Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa.
Bakhtin, M.M. 1919–24 [1990], Art and Answerability, translated by V. Liapunov, Austin: University of Texas Press, p. 23.
Bo, X. (2018). Multimodal Discourse Analysis of the Movie Argo. In English Language Teaching (Vol. 11, Issue 4, p. 132). Canadian Center of Science and Education.
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2020). Making sense: Reference, Agency, and structure in grammar of Multimodal Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Forceville, C., & Urios- Aparisi E., (Eds.). (2009). Multimodal metaphor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.    (Presents the first ventures into multimodality in CMT.)
Halliday, M.A.K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. London: Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2006). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold/ Beijing. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Jewitt, C. (Ed.). (2014). The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. (Showcases a wide range of social semiotics and SFL- oriented studies in multimodality.)
Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2020). Adding Sense: Context and Interest in a Grammar of Multimodal Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse. London: Arnold
Man, S., & Li, Z. (2022). Multimodal Discourse Analysis of Interactive Environment of film discourse                         based on Deep Learning. Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 2022, 1–10.
Schiller, Herbert I. 1971, Mass Communications and American Empire, Boston, MA: Beacon, Press, pp. 54, 149.
Van Leeuwen, T. (1999). Speech, music, sound. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Wen, Zu., & Taylor, John.R. (2021). The Routledge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (1st Edition): Routledge.
زبان‌شناخت
دوره 16، شماره 1
شهریور 1404

  • تاریخ دریافت 05 آبان 1403
  • تاریخ بازنگری 23 اسفند 1404
  • تاریخ پذیرش 15 فروردین 1404