Document Type : applied research
Authors
Assistant Professor, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Payame Noor University, Tehran , Iran.
Abstract
Introduction
Interrogative sentences in Hafez’s ghazals are dynamic tools for communicating emotions and rhetorical intent rather than simple inquiries. Due to multiple interpretations, secondary meanings of interrogatives remain a subject of debate. This study moves beyond traditional, static approaches by analyzing Hafez’s interrogatives at the locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary levels, using Speech Act Theory and the framework of cohesion. The research investigates how these speech acts operate within different contexts and their specific roles in the poem’s structure. The central hypothesis posits that Hafez’s questions are functional tools that interact with textual cohesion to achieve rhetorical goals, such as expressing helplessness, criticism, or surrender. By applying modern linguistic frameworks, this study clarifies the semantic mechanisms of these questions, thereby providing a more rigorous method for interpreting rhetorical strategies in classical Persian poetry.
Methodology
This study uses a descriptive-analytical approach to examine interrogatives in Hafez’s ghazals. The method involves extracting and categorizing questions, then analyzing their contextual meanings using Speech Act Theory and the framework of cohesion. Previous research has explored the rhetorical and stylistic aspects of these questions, focusing mainly on classifying secondary meanings or general speech acts. However, this is the first study to analyze Hafez’s interrogatives across three specific levels: locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary. Unlike existing studies that overlook the role of textual cohesion, this research provides a comprehensive analysis of how context generates meaning within the structure of the poem.
Findings
This section discusses the functional role of interrogative structures in Hafez’s poetry. By applying Speech Act Theory and Halliday’s Metafunctions, we demonstrate that these structures are not information-seeking inquiries. Instead, they are strategic tools for managing ambiguity and expressing forbidden or complex rhetorical acts. The research identifies 29 interrogative types. These categorize into four main groups: act-based (protest, rebuke, prohibition), emotive (regret, wonder, confusion), philosophical-interpretive (confirmation, explanation), and communicative (encouragement, request). Analysis of the textual metafunction confirms that Hafez uses these questions to maintain structural cohesion within the ghazal. He transforms static questions into dynamic components of the text.
A critical finding concerns the “multi-layered” interrogatives. Hafez uses these to blend personal lament with social critique. By leaving questions unanswered, he creates an “open text” that allows for multiple interpretations. This linguistic strategy serves as a “safety mechanism” in the political and social climate of his time. The analysis proves that interrogatives are not mere stylistic ornaments. They are essential elements of Hafez’s artistic identity, which allow his poetry to remain relevant and open to new interpretations in modern contexts.
Discussion and Conclusion
This study relies on two theoretical pillars: Speech Act Theory and the Theory of Cohesion and Context. Speech Act Theory (Austin and Searle) explains that interrogatives in Hafez’s poetry are not just grammatical structures; they are actions. We distinguish between locutionary acts (the form), illocutionary acts (the intent), and perlocutionary acts (the effect on the listener). We analyze Hafez’s questions based on their intent—such as directive, expressive, or assertive acts—to reveal hidden meanings like protest or rebuke. This approach links traditional rhetorical concepts with modern linguistic analysis.
The Theory of Cohesion and Context (Halliday and Hasan) helps us understand textual relationships and external influences. We use the concept of “context of situation” (field, mode, tenor) to explain why a specific question in Hafez’s ghazals carries a unique meaning within its social and historical setting. The intersection of these theories leads to the concept of “open texts.” Hafez uses interrogatives to create ambiguity and multi-layered meanings. These questions are not for information-seeking; they are designed to create semantic openness. They force the reader to navigate multiple, contradictory interpretations of a single verse. This flexibility transforms the interrogative from a simple inquiry into a “productive” tool. Here, the question is not an end point but a starting point for infinite interpretations.
This research analyzed 29 types of interrogatives in Hafez’s ghazals using Speech Act Theory and the framework of cohesion. The study demonstrates that these questions are complex tools for communicating secondary meanings, such as protest, regret, and irony, rather than simple inquiries. Our analysis proves that Hafez uses the interrogative structure to manage ambiguity, express emotional contradictions, and create internal tension within the text. The findings confirm that interrogatives play a key role in the structural integrity of the ghazal. They function as dynamic components in the textual fabric, connecting verses and establishing semantic flow. This proves that these questions are not surface-level elements but essential parts of Hafez’s artistic strategy. Hafez’s mastery of these linguistic games gives his poetry philosophical depth and allows for multiple interpretations. Finally, this research validates the use of modern linguistic frameworks in classical Persian poetry and provides a foundation for future studies in rhetorical stylistics.
Keywords
- Hāfiz
- Interrogatives
- Speech Acts
- Cohesion
- Contextual Meaning
- Rhetorical Questions
- Multifaceted Questions
Main Subjects
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1901.03904
)