TY  - JOUR
T1  - رؤيةٌ في تحليل الصّورةُ البلاغيّةُ وأثرِها في المتلقّي
TT  - Vision in analyzing the rhetorical figure and its impact on the hearer
AU  - Alomırat, Suliman
PY  - 2019
DA  - April
Y2  - 2019
DO  - 10.28949/bilimname.466329
JF  - Bilimname
PB  - Erciyes Üniversitesi
WT  - DergiPark
SN  - 1304-1878
SP  - 953
EP  - 970
VL  - 2019
IS  - 37
LA  - ar
AB  - يهدفُ البحثُ إلى تقديم وجهة نظر في الطّريقة التييراها مُثلى لتحليل الصّورة البلاغيّة تحليلًا فنيًّا يتناولُ عمليّةَ إبداعالصّورة من جهة، وأثرَ هذه الصّورة في المتلقّي من جهة أخرى.وقد بدأ البحث بمقدّمة حول إشكاليّة دراسة الصّورةالبلاغيّة، ثم مبحثٍ أوّل بعنوان: أثر الصّورة في الخطاب الأدبيّ، ومبحث ثانٍبعنوان: الصُّورة الموهِمةُ بينَ مُحاكاة العالَم الخارجيّ، ومُحاكاة عالَمالشُّعورِ والوجدان الدّاخليّ، ثمّ خاتمة البحث وتوصياته.
KW  - صورة
KW  - بلاغة
KW  - تحليل
KW  - المتلقّي
KW  - تخييل
N2  - The literary image is a forest of symbols and intertwined artistic relations in an aesthetic style that reflects the vision of the creator and influences the recipient. The poet's imagination, passion, ideas, dictionary, the vision for the causes of the universe, the human being and the society around him are all meshed in the weave of the image; this image may dance with the mind of the recipient and deceive him, and adorn him with various artistic shapes. The science of eloquence studies some of these artistic shapes (metaphor shapes like Tashbeeh, Istia’ra, and Kinnaya). The problem that this research addresses is that if some of the literary critics (poetry, prose, and the Holy Quran) stop at the rhetorical images, they analyze them in a traditional school way, and their analysis of the picture is based on the information found in the later books of the rhetoric scientists like Al-Sakkakkie, Al-Qazwini, and Al-Teftazanni, who categorized their books for educational purposes; In other words, when they see a metaphor in a literature text, for example, they study it in standardized grammatical, as if it was a mathematical equation, and then give it the appropriate name or term according to what came in the terms of rhetoric scientists, yet they ignore the aesthetics added by this metaphor on the text, and do not look at the real artistic value of this metaphor; they forget the impact of the context in which this metaphor is presented, since we know very well that the word itself may change its connotations according to the context in which it comes. This means that the literary image is also influenced by the context and the place in which it comes in. The biggest problem is that they look at the picture in isolation from the surrounding values, ideas, music, imaginations, emotions, and feelings that beats in the heart of the poet or writer. This research seeks to simply say that those types of metaphor shapes (i.e. Tashbeeh, Istia’ra, or Kinnaya) are not an isolated island, but rather is an integral part of the fabric of the literary text in which feelings, emotions, imaginations, visions and ideas have intertwined so much that we get an integrated literary text right before our eyes, so it is not permissible in any case to analyze the rhetorical image truncated from its artistic, intellectual and cultural context; because the literary text is one body, or one organic unit, and the literary image is the heart beating with the life of the literary text, and analysis of the image in isolation from the context is misleading and will not lead to accurate perceptions, and by doing so, this work would be a deflection in the understanding of the nature of literature, and the nature of criticism, which is a factor of strangling and immobilizing the text instead of being a vital factor that helps to promote the creator and the recipient together. On top of that, the study of the artistic image in this approach is a negation of the spirit of the art in general, and the spirit of poetry in particular, because taking the metaphorical image and studying it as two parts, one that’s been deleted and another’s been kept, is a study that empties the literature of its beautiful creative content. The research aims to present a view in the way we see it as clear for the analysis of the rhetorical figure, a technical analysis dealing with the process of the impression created on one hand, and the effect of this figure on the hearer on the other hand. The research began with an introduction on the problematic of studying the rhetorical figure, and then the first topic: The impact of the figure in the literary discourse, and the second topic: The deceptive figure between the simulation of the outside world, and simulation of the world of feeling and inner conscience, and then the conclusion of the research and the recommendations. What we want to emphasize here is that this separatist bilateral view, that cuts the literary image into its primary components, is a narrow and destructive view of the rhetorical form and its unity, because the mind, in its both cases, the case of creativity and perception, does not see the two components while they are working in isolation from each other, i.e. in a state of separation and opposition; and dare I say that those who have taken this route have completely gone in the opposite direction. Because the analysis of the literary image is nothing but a reading among the multiple readings questioning the literary text so that it would reveal some of its hidden meanings; and this disclosure differs according to the cultural and intellectual reference on which each individual recipient is based on.
CR  - أبو تمّام، ديوان أبي تمَّام بشرح الخطيب التِّبريزيّ، تحقيق أ. محمد عبدُه عزَّام. القاهرة، دار المعارف، 1951م
CR  - الإسكندريّ، ابن الـمُنَيِّر، الانتصاف فيما تضمّنه الكشّاف من الاعتزال. بيروت، دار الفكر، 2006م
CR  - الجُرجانيّ، عبد القاهر، أسرار البلاغة، تحقيق محمود شاكر. السّعودية - جدّة، مطبعة المدنيّ، 1991م
CR  - دي لويس، سيسل، الصّورة الشّعرية؛ ترجمة أحمد نصيف الجنابي. الكويت، مؤسسة الخليج، 1984م
CR  - روميّة، وَهَب، شعرنا القديم والنّقد الجديد. الكويت، سلسلة عالم المعرفة، 1996م
CR  - الزّمخشريّ، الكشّاف عن حقائق التّأويل وعيون التَّنزيل في وجوه التأويل. بيروت، دار الفكر، 2006م
CR  - عبد الرّحمن، نصرت، الصّورة الفنّيّة في الشّعر الجاهليّ في ضوء النّقد الحديث. عمّان، مكتبة الأقصى، 1982م
CR  - عُصفور، جابر، الصُّورة الفنيّة في التُّراث النّقديّ والبلاغيّ. بيروت، المركز الثّقافيّ العربيّ، 1992م
CR  - العميرات، ياصدمان، بلاغة التّشبيه في التّعبير عن مقاصد القرآن الكريم، مجلة إيكو الأكاديميّة، 64، 2015م
CR  - القرطاجَنّيّ، حازم، مِنهاج البُلَغاء وسِـراج الأُدباء، تحقيق محمد الحبيب ابن الخوجَة. بيروت، دار الغرب الإسلاميّ، 1981م
CR  - المتنبّي، أبو الطّيّب، ديوان المتنبي بشرح أبي البقاء العُكْبَريّ، تحقيق مصطفى السّقّا. بيروت، دار المعرفة، بلا تاريخ
CR  - اليافي، نعيم، مقدّمة لدراسة الصّورة الفنيّة، دمشق، منشورات وزارة الثّقافة، 1982م
CR  - Ebû Temmâm, Dîvânu Ebî Temmâm bi-Şerhi’l-Hatîb et-Tebrîzî, thk. Muhammed Abduh Azzâm. Kahire, Dâru’l-Ma'ârif, 1951.
CR  - El-İskenderî, İbnü’l-Muneyyir, el-İntisâf fî Mâ Tedammenehu’l-Keşşâf Mine’l-İ’tizâl. Beyrut Dâru’l-Fikr, 2006.
CR  - Cürcânî, Abdülkâhir, Esrâru’l-Belâga, thk. Mahmûd Şâkir. Suudî Arabistan, Cidde, Matba’atu’l-Medenî, 1991.
CR  - Day-Lewis, Cecil, es-Sûratu’ş-Şi’riyye, Trc. Ahmed Nasîf el-Cenâbî. Kuveyt, Muessesetu’l-Halîc, 1984.
CR  - Rûmiyye, Veheb, Şi’runa’l-Kadîm Ve’n-Nakdu’l-Cedîd, Kuveyt, Silsiletu ‘Âlemi’l-Ma’rife, 1996.
CR  - Ez-Zemahşerî, El-Keşşâf, Beyrut, Dâru’l-Fikr, 2006.
CR  - Abdurrahmân, Nasrat, Es-Sûratu’l-Fenniyye fi’ş-Şi’ri’l-Câhiliyyi fî Dav’i’n-Nakdi’l-Hadîs, Amman, Mektebetu’l-Aksâ, 1982.
CR  - ‘Usfûr, Câbir, Es-Sûratu’l-Fenniyye fi’t-Turâsi’n-Nakdiyyi ve’l-Belâgî, Beyrut, El-Merkezu’s-Sekâfîyyi’l-‘Arabî, 1992.
CR  - El-‘Umeyrât, Yasdıman, Belâgatu’t-Teşbîh fi’t-Ta’bîr ‘an Makâsıdi’l-Kur’âni’l-Kerîm, Ekev Akademi Dergisi, 64, 2015.
CR  - El-Kurtâcennî, Hâzim, Minhâcu’l-Bulagâ’ ve Sirâcu’l-Udebâ’, thk. Muhammed el-Habîb İbnu’l-Hûca, Beyrut, Dâru’l-Garbi’l-İslâmî, 1981.
CR  - El-Mutenebbî, Ebu’t-Tayyib, Dîvânu’l-Mutenebbî bi-Şerhi Ebi’l-Bekâ’ El-‘Ukberî, thk. Mustafâ es-Sekkâ. Beyrut, Dâru’l-Ma’rife, tarih yok.
CR  - El-Yâfî, Naîm, Mukaddime li-Dirâseti’s-Sûrati’l-Fenniyye, Dimaşk, Menşûrât Vizârati’s-Sekâfe, 1982.
UR  - https://doi.org/10.28949/bilimname.466329
L1  - https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/704810
ER  -