Analysis of Tense Interferential of Verbs in Old Narrative Texts

• Main Authors: Mahmood Barati khansari, Hassan Ziyari, Amir Zeighami
• Format: Article
• Language: fas
• Published: University of Isfahan 2014-08-01
• Series: Literary Arts
• Online Access: http://uijs.ui.ac.ir/liar/browse.php?a_code=A-10-30-1&slc_lang=en&sid=1

Abstract One of the admirable methods to compose stories in Persian verse and prose, is the present Tense verbs in the meaning of past tense. This grammatical point has been hidden in the grammarian and stylist's point of view although it has been repeatedly mentioned in the texts and this point has been not mentioned in the grammatical books but some of the investigators and literati have pointed out it in their correction works. We mention their sayings: firstly, Allame Qazvini, doubtfully, mentions the interferential times of the verbs and inconsistencies of the Tenses in the correction of texts of Jahangoshaye – Joveini Book. He writes in the second footnote 2-3, that the verb Mikonam( I do) is in the form of present Tense but its meaning is in the simple past Tense. As it has been observed, in the most old books the form of the verb is in the present tense but its meaning is in simple Tense ( Joveini, 1367, p. 357). Later, Fruzanfar in the correction of grammatical notes of ouhadoddin Kermani's Manaqeb, points to this point and counted it of the Eltefat Literary art ( Fruzanfar, 1347. P. 61) Mohammad Roushan informed this grammatical rule and he writes in the introduction of his book: the application of this kind of verb that is not on the basis of the dependent and independent verbs (Khagushi, 1361, p. 24). Yusofi in his correction on Bidpay Stories points to this grammatical point that it has been hidden of correctors of the book. Ha says that this grammatical point is the prose characteristic of the book. He adds that the characteristic includes in the present stories (Yusofi, 1364, p. 36). Finally, Dr. shfi'ee in his valuable notes on the Mateqol altei their mentions that this style of telling stories – the verb in the present Tense- is less in verse but the verbs in the same meaning and forms were used in old Persian as in the present time but there were inconsistence in the time and the form of the verbs in the past and the grammarians have not explained them. We categorize them in the following: 1-2-2 simple past + present tense in the statements without Vav (and) 2-2-2 - simple past +( subject)+ present tense in the statements with Vav (and) 2-2-3- past participle + present in the statement with Vav (and) 2-2-4- simple past + present tense in the statements with conjunction Vav (and) 2-2-5- liking verb + present tense in the statements without conjunction Vav (and) 2-2-6- past participle + present in the statement without conjunction Vav (and) 2-2-7- Perfect Tense + subject + simple present + in the statements without Vav (and) 3-2- the above examples in the conditional sentences and similar conditional sentences 2-2-8- progressive past + Vav (and) + present Tense 2-2-9- simple past + subject + present perfect in statement with Vav (and) 2-2-10- simile sentences and the like It firstly seems this method to be the literary art of Eltefat which is used in prose texts, as Fruzanfar believed when he says Managhebe Ouhadi Kermani's stylistic characteristics, " the writer narrates a massage through stories which he narrates of third person to first person". He changes third person to first person. This method is named Eltefat in the figures of speech ( badi) ( Fruzanfar, 1347, Introduction, p. 61). Surely, this can not be counted figure of speech ( Elme Badi'). Although, on the basis of Eltefat literary art, the person changes from absent to addressee or vice versa ( Homaee, 1361, p. 293). On the basis of examples, the writer does not want to decorate the speech but it is his method of speech and time circumstances. In addition, the verb times have been changed and the persons are fixed ( from absent to addresses). We can negligently call this grammar point literary art of Eltefat as Homaee counted the conjunct absent verb to addresses in examples such as be khoneh Bordan ( I took him to house), sar charb kardam ( I oiled my head) and muy setordam ( I removed my hair) ( see Homaee, the same), but this method is not correct and we have to see this method stylistically viewpoint of metaphor scientists.  This grammatical rule such as other grammatical structures in Persia language, has been very likely taken of Arabic language. We can see this structure in Holy Quran. To analysis this method, it must be paid attention to high frequency of application at two verbs Didan ( to see) and Goftan ( to speak). On the basis of this method, this grammatical rule is mostly used in quotation sentences such as Didan and Goftan ( to see & to speak).