Of Relating the Linguistic Description to an Interpretation of a Literary Work (Poetry)

Document Type: Research Paper


Islamic Azad University (South Tehran Branch)


This article attempts to see, through the structural significances of poetic language, the nature of the split between linguistic description and literary interpretation. Rhythm is the most prominent means of relating form to content in poetic language. The first account of this prominence is seen through identifying its position in the two prosodic forms of metrical and non-metrical poetry. Foregrounding has been seen as a significant feature in literary creation. FollowingBradford(1997) the analysis undertakes three stages of analysis as ‘discovery procedures’, ‘naturalization’, and ‘judgment’ (renamed in our work as ‘remarks’). The first level examines the degree of the tension between the two patterns. In the second level, i.e. naturalization, the analysis goes on turning the peculiar language of the poem into that of the ordinary, which means making sense of a text. This translation of the poetic language has been shown to be considerably rooted in elements of form in the classical verse, and of content in modern free verse. The intervening type has thus been judged to exist somewhere between the two. The third level, namely ‘remarks’ evaluates the degree of the poet’s success in managing the tension between the two patterns. 

Abercrombie, L. (1932). Poetry: Its music and meaning, London:Methuen.

Attridge, D. (1995). Poetic rhythm,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press.

Bradford, R. (1997). Stylistics,London: Routledge. 

Crombie, W. (1987). Free verse and prose style,London: Longman.

Fabb, N. (2002). Language and literary structure: the linguistic analysis of form        in verse and narrative,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fowler, R. (ed.) (1966). Essays on style and language,  London: Routledge and

       Kegan Paul.

Gargesh, R. (1990). Linguistic perspective of literary style, Delhi:University of         Delhi Publication Division.

Jakobson, R. (1960). “Linguistics and poetics”, in T. A. Sebeok (ed.) (1960), pp.        350-77.  References from reprint in Lodge 1988.  

Koelb, C. (1984). “Toward a glossematic theory of meter”, Language and Style 17(3), pp. 165-84.

 Rabi, A. (2007). The structure of rhythm in Persian classical and modern poetry.Dept. ofLinguistics,India:UniversityofDelhi. Ph.D thesis.

Safavi, K. (2001). ʔaz zabānšenāsi be ʔadabiyāt  (from linguistics to literature), Vol. I. Tehran: Howze-ye Honari .

Sāʔeb Tabrizi, A. (1954). Kolliyāt-e Sāʔeb-e Tabrizi, (ed.) K. Amiri Firuzkuhi, Tehran: Nil.                                                                               

Sepehri, S. (1978). Hašt ketāb (eight books), Tehran: Tahuri.

Shāmlu, A. (1971). ʔĀidā dar ʔāyine (Aida in mirror),Tehran: Nil.