Persian Lexicography

Elsine-i S̱elās̱e explores the complexities of translation in the Ottoman Empire, examining the intersections of Arabic, Persian, and Turkish (elsine-i s̱elās̱e) that formed the linguistic backbone of Ottoman high culture and literature. The contributors investigate translation practices, cultural exchange, and power relations that shaped the Ottoman intellectual landscape, covering topics such as literary translations, lexicography, and the evolution of Ottoman Turkish as a lingua franca. Focusing on the fifteenth to the nineteenth centuries, the articles reveal the intricate web of linguistic, cultural, and historical forces that influenced translation decisions, authorship, and readership in the Ottoman Empire, shedding new light on the dynamics of cross-cultural communication and knowledge transfer in pre-modern Eurasia.

The first section of the twelfth issue of “Neveštegān” investigates the rare word “šʾwšʾ” as it appears in an early Arabic–Persian lexicon, offering both an explanation and a philological justification. The discussion then proceeds with several supplementary notes, extending a previous analysis of the remnants of the pronoun/adjective im in New Iranian. In addition, the meaning of a particular Fahlavī word and a related verse is clarified. The final section explores possible attestations of the verb pāxtan in early texts.

در بخش نخست شمارۀ ۱۲ «نوشتگان»، لغت نادر «شاوشا» در یکی از فرهنگ‌های کهن عربی-فارسی توضیح داده و توجیه شده‌است. سپس، به نکته‌هایی در تکمیل بازمانده‌های ضمیر / صفت اشارۀ im در ایرانی نو اشاره شده و نیز معنای لغت و بیتی فهلوی روشن شده‌است. بخش پایانی کوششی است برای یافتن شواهدی از فعل «پاختن» در متون قدیم.ه

بیگدلو، میلاد (۱۴۰۴). نوشتگان (۱۲). آینهٔ پژوهش، ۳۶(۱)، ۳۱۱–۳۱۸.ه

Ohne ausdrückliche Genehmigung des Verlages ist es auch nicht gestattet, dieses Buch oder Teile daraus auf fotomechanischem Wege (Fotokopie, Mikrokopie) zu vervielfältigen oder unter Verwendung elektronischer Systeme zu verarbeiten und zu verbreiten.

غلامرضا مستعلی پارسا، سید حمید حسنی
Gholamreza Mastali Parsa, Seyyed Hamid Hassani

نقد و معرفی کتاب: فرهنگ بسامدی فارسی، راتلج، 2017

Review of the book: A Frequency Dictionary of Persian, Routledge, 2017

چکیده: مجموعۀ «فرهنگ‌های بسامدیِ راتلج»، تا به امروز، دست‌کم در پانزده عنوان منتشر شده و جمعاً مشتمل بر چهارده زبان است. این مجموعه، که از سوی انتشارات راتلج (گروه تِیلور و فرانسیس) منتشر شده، به‌ویژه در میان کسانی که در زمینۀ تدوین «فرهنگ‌های بسامدی» و/ یا «زبان‌شناسی پیکره‌ای» پژوهش می‌کنند، معروفیّت جهانی یافته ‌است. هریک از کتاب‌های این مجموعه در قالب فرهنگی بسامدی و برپایۀ پیکره‌های زبانیِ غالباً مستقل تدوین شده ‌است. بیشترِ فرهنگ‌ها هرکدام 5000 مدخلِ اصلی/ سرمدخل/ بن‌واژه دارند و بخش اعظمِ متنِ هر کتاب را فهرستِ این واژه‌ها ــ به‌ترتیبِ بسامد و از پربسامدترین به کم‌بسامدترین واژه ــ تشکیل می‌دهد. مبنای چینشِ واژه‌ها اساساً بسامدِ خام یا بسامدِ مطلق نیست، بلکه شاخص پراکنشِ هریک از واژه‌ها نیز مدّ نظر بوده‌ است. بلافاصله پس از فهرست بسامدی، فهرست الفباییِ واژه‌ها ــ به‌ترتیبِ الفبای زبانِ هر فرهنگ ــ آمده است. فهرست‌های واژگانیِ موضوعی (در جعبه‌های مستقل و در لابه‌لای صفحاتِ بخش اصلیِ اثر، یعنی فهرست بسامدی) و نمایۀ هویّت‌های دستوری/ اجزای سخن/ پاره‌های گفتار نیز بعد از آن قرار گرفته‌اند. پیش از بخش اصلی، یعنی فهرست بسامدیِ مدخل‌ها، عموماً پیش‌گفتاری به‌قلم مارک دِیویس (دبیرِ مجموعه)، سپس مقدّمه‌ای به‌قلم مؤلّفان فرهنگ (به‌علاوۀ منابعِ مقدّمه)، و چند فقرۀ دیگر آمده است.
فرهنگ بسامدی فارسی در سال 2017 م منتشر شد و چاپ دوم آن در 2018 م انتشار یافت. نگارندگان، در مقالۀ حاضر، پس از معرّفی اجمالیِ مجموعه، به معرّفی و نقد این اثر پرداخته‌اند و نشان داده‌اند که اشکالات و معایب آن، هم از نگاه روش‌شناختی و هم ازنظر موردی، چندین‌برابرِ محاسن آن است.


Summary: From the series of “Routledge Frequency Dictionaries”, up to the present time, 15 titles have been published in a total number of 14 languages. The series, published by Routledge Publications (Taylor & Francis Group, London & New York), has gained worldwide fame, especially among those who do research in the certain field(s) of ‘word frequencies’ and/or ‘corpus linguistics’. Each of the monographs in the series has been compiled in the form of a frequency dictionary and commonly based on independent linguistic corpus/ corpora. Most dictionaries have 5,000 main entries/ lemmata each, and the bulk of the text of each book is the list of these words – in order of frequency, from the most frequent to the least frequent words. The basis of word arrangement is not basically the raw or absolute frequency, but the index of dispersion of each word was also considered. Immediately after the frequency list, there is an alphabetical list of words – in alphabetical order of the main language of each dictionary. Thematic vocabulary lists (in independent boxes and amongst the pages of the main part of the book, i.e. the Frequency index), and then “Alphabetical index” and “Part of speech index” come respectively at the end of the book. Here is a review of A Frequency Dictionary of Persian (2017, 2nd impression: 2018), one of the monographs of the series.
In this article we have shown that this dictionary, despite its relatively positive points, has many serious methodological problems and, in this respect, it does not meet the expectations of researchers and experts of the field.

1-Introduction Shams Qays Razi's book entitled Al-Mo'jam fi Ma'ayeer Ash'ar Al-'Ajam (The Dictionary of Criteria for Persian Poems), one of the most important sources of poetics written in the 7 th ('AH'), is about eloquence, prosody, and rhyme. In the chapter on rhyme, the author not only discusses about its rules but also about grammar and linguistic issues, which is one of the oldest discussions about the language itself and its developments. Based on a thematic classification in linguistics, the present paper reviews and analyzes Shams Razi's different views. 2-Theoretical Framework The theoretical foundations of the present paper are modern linguistics and its rules which are compared and contrasted with Qays's views. In his book, Shams sometimes mentions some points which can help us pronounce the words correctly and inform us about some issues related to the history of Persian language. The authors try to find his view about standard language of his own time, his familiarity with some features of old Khorasan's dialects, his way of naming phones and prepositions, accuracy or inaccuracy of some of his views in order to know that there were linguistic views about language in old times but with some differences with modern ones.

مُصرَّحَةُالأَسماء فرهنگی عربی به فارسی است که به‌قلم لطف‌‏اللّه بن ابی‌‏یوسف حلیمی، لغت‌‏شناس عثمانی‌‏تبار قرن نهم هجری، در سرزمین عثمانی تألیف شده‌است. این کتاب، با وجود‌‏ آن‌‏که عموماً فرهنگ دوزبانۀ عربی-فارسی شناخته می‎شود، معادل‌‏های ترکی‌‏ در برخی از مدخل‌‏ها دارد که به‌نظر می‌‏رسد در مطالعات لغت‎شناختی در حوزۀ زبان ترکی کهن به‌‏ویژه ترکی عثمانی شایان توجه باشد. پژوهش حاضر حاصل تحقیق و بررسی معادل‌‏‌‏های ترکی این فرهنگ است که در هشت جنبۀ شیوۀ درج و ترتیب معادل‌‏ها، شمار و تعدّد برابرنهادها، زبان مبدأ لغات ترکی، شیوۀ ترجمه، چندگانگی املایی و تلفّظی، صورت‌‏های مشکول، واژه‌‏های دخیل و بررسی موضوعی واژه‌‏ها ارائه گردیده‌است.ه

Muṣarraḥat al-Asmāʾ is an Arabic-to-Persian dictionary authored by Luṭf-Allāh ibn Abī-Yūsuf Ḥalīmī, an Ottoman lexicographer from the 9th century AH, composed in the Ottoman Empire. Although this work is generally recognized as a bilingual Arabic-Persian dictionary, it includes Turkish equivalents in some entries. These Turkish equivalents seem to be of particular interest in linguistic studies related to Old Turkish, especially Ottoman Turkish. The present research investigates and examines the Turkish equivalents in the dictionary, covering eight aspects: the method of the selection of entries and arrangement of equivalents, the number and variety of equivalents, the source language of Turkish words, the method of translation, orthographic and phonetic variations, diacritised forms, loanwords, and a thematic analysis of the vocabulary.

امینیان، معصومه، و بیگدلو، میلاد (۱۴۰۳). پژوهشی در معادل‌‏های ترکی فرهنگ عربی ‌‏به ‌‏فارسی مُصرَّحَةُالأَسماء. نامهٔ فرهنگستان (آسیای صغیر)، ۲۳(۳) [= ۹۱ پیاپی]، ۵۲-۷۱.ه

Malakout is a postmodern novel, and what is important in the analysis of a postmodern novel is related mostly to the description of certain literary techniques, which are used to emphasize the futility of the old meanings. These works have characteristics that without paying attention to them, one cannot expect a logical evaluation of the work. Some of these postmodern features and techniques which are very important in this novel and will be discussed here are as follows: meta-fiction, intertextuality, fragmentation, black humor, pastiche, temporal distortion, minimalism, and finally grotesque.
نخستین فصل از رمانِ ملکوت اثر بهرام صادقی، با کتیبه‌ای آغاز می‌شود که آیه‌ای است از قرآن: «فَبَشِّر هُم بِعذاب الیم» [آن‌ها را به عذابی دردناک بشارت بده] (انشقاق: 24). می‌دانیم که از واژۀ «بشارت» در زبان عربی برای بیان اخبار شادی‌بخش و خجسته استفاده می‌شود، اما در این آیه از واژۀ «بشارت» برای بیان اخبار دردناک و عذاب‌آور استفاده شده است! در اینجا با آرایه‌ای ادبی سروکار داریم که اصطلاحاً آن را «استعارۀ تَهکّمیه» یا استعارۀ تمسخرآمیز می‌نامند، و رمان ملکوت را می‌توان شکل گسترش‌یافتۀ همین استعاره دانست که تمثیل‌وار و با استفاده از برخی تمهیدات رایج در آثار پسامدرن تکرار و تکرار می‌شود. ما در این مقاله می‌کوشیم تا با استفاده از رویکرد نقدیِ پسامدرنیستی، این رمان را نقد کنیم و به تکنیک‌ها و ویژگی‌های خاص آثار پسامدرن در آن بپردازیم. در اینجا ابتدا رمان ملکوت را معرفی می‌کنیم و خلاصه‌ای از آن را به‌دست می‌دهیم، سپس دربارۀ پسامدرنیسم در آثار ادبی بحث می‌کنیم و تکنیک‌های ادبی آثار پسامدرن (فراداستان، بینامتنیت، ازهم‌گسیختگی، طنز سیاه، تقلید ادبی، اعوجاج زمانی، کمینه‌گرایی، و نیز گروتسک) را معرفی می‌کنیم، و سرانجام در بخش پایانی مقاله از چگونگی استفاده از آن تکنیک‌ها در ملکوت سخن می‌گوییم.

واژه‌های کلیدی: بهرام صادقی، ملکوت، نقد ادبی، پسامدرنیسم

Objective: In the Astan Quds Razavi Library's manuscript section, a copy of simple Vendidad No. 53388 is available, which was scribed by Rostam, son of Bahram from the Sanjaneh Mobad family in 1115 Yazdgerdi / 1159AH / 1746 AD in the Surat port, India.  This copy inscription is commissioned in memory of a deceased man. This research aims to introduce and identify this copy and answer several questions: What are the codicological features of this manuscript?  This copy belongs to which writing style of Zoroastrian religious texts?  What information does the Pahlavi and Farsi colophons of this copy provide? What are the similarities and differences between this copy and its counterpart, vendidad 26288, known as "Astan Quds vendidad "? What is the meaning of using the two calendar terms "after Yazdgerd" and "Pārsīk" in the colophon and what kind of chronology does it refer to? Why this copy of vendidad is called "simple"? In what ceremonies and rituals were these texts recited? What is the Persian script’s position in this copy?  Where did the cost of inscription come from?
Research Method /Approach: descriptive-case study.Findings and Conclusions: By carefully examining this copy and comparing it with other copies, as well as considering the writing structure, inscription place, the scribe and his family background, it becomes clear that this copy can be classified as an Indian copies. By comparing this copy with the "Astan Quds' Vandidad ", we can see that the writing style of these two belongs to two writing traditions, one of which was developed in India and among Persian scribes, and the other was rooted in its native land and belongs to the Iranian school. Also, this type of religious texts has been used for recitation in Yashtan ritual ceremonies and especially deceased ceremonies. For this reason, some people ordered its inscription for personal use and family heritage or as a memorial to the deceased and paid for it. Also, according to Geldner's categories, this copy is one of the standard versions from spelling accuracy point of view.

The present study examines and reads a few words from the Pahlavi text of the "Draxt ī Āsūrīg", which can be read differently. The Assyrian Tree is a boastful poem between a goat and a palm tree written in Parthian or Parthian Pahlavi, but its oral transmission and writing in Book Pahlavi script allowed Middle Persian words to enter it as well. The Pahlavi script is such that some of its characters can be read in several different ways, and each researcher offers a different theory about the reading of a word. In this research, the new reading of some words as well as the readings of previous researchers have been given and analyzed. This article tries to make a new suggestion about reading a few words. The basis of these suggestions is the existing words in Middle Persian, Parthian and New Persian dictionaries, and the historical grammar of word formation and etymology has also been used in the new reading of words. This research has been done in order to better understand some words and concepts in the text of the Assyrian tree.

The word “ayad/ āyad” is one of the difficult and unknown vocabulary words in the book Tabaqat Al- Soufiye. This verb is used about 300 times in this book and has not been researched before. In this paper, various aspects of this verb have been discussed and analyzed in a descriptive-analytical way through a detailed review of the mentioned book and an overview of some other texts, a careful  study of oral stories from South Khorasan and Razavi provinces and with reference to written dialect sources. Accordingly, “ayad/ āyad”- which is also referred to as “âyad”(was) in some reliable sources, is in the third person singular participle in the book Tabaqat Al- Soufiye; the second person singular and the first person plural of this verb are also used in the works of Khwaja Abdullah Ansari. Some morphological forms of this verb, with different meanings, in some other textbooks, such as: Hidayat al-Mutaʽallemin fi al-Ṭibb, Shirzad va Golshad , Kashf al-Mahjub Ali Hujwiri , Shahnameh  by Ferdowsi , Diwan by Naser Khosrow Ghobadi , Vis and Rāmin ,Masnavi-ye-Ma'navi, Diwan by Jamal al-Din Abd al-Razzaq Esfahani. The present subjunctive of this copula (verb) is also used in some Iranian dialects with the phonetic forms “ayad/ âyad ” and is used in all six persons.
In addition, the verb under study is pronounced ay in some other sentences from the Parthian language (Arsakid Pahlavi) with the same usage.

The lexical difficulties in the Shahnameh extend beyond obsolete words. There are also words that, despite their apparent clarity, have unidentified semantic changes leading to misunderstandings among the editors and commentators, as well as Persian lexicographers. In this article, the authors focus on one of these words in the story of Rostam and Sohrab. They begin by reviewing different readings and interpretations of a verse containing the word in question in the most distinguished editions and commentaries of the text. By examining the various meanings of the verb gaštan (with prepositions ba, bā and sō̆y-i), and the word āward in the Shahnameh, as a key to understanding the verse, they recognize a neglected meaning of the word āγāz, that is "intention, purpose," and support their argument by identifying two other instances in the same text. The authors argue that this āγāz is nothing more than a semantic transformation of the well-known āγāz, and is unrelated to the word āwāz, which seemingly was a rare variety of āγāz, and also appears several times in the Shahnameh in the compound preposition bar āwāz-i, meaning "in pursuit of, after". The semantic change of āγāz took place through the following way: "to begin (to do)" → "to embark upon (to do)" → "to intend to". This unknown meaning of āγāz has not been recorded in any of the modern Persian dictionaries.

The present study examines and reads a few words from the Pahlavi text of the "Draxt ī Āsūrīg", which can be read differently. The Assyrian Tree is a boastful poem between a goat and a palm tree written in Parthian or Parthian Pahlavi, but its oral transmission and writing in Book Pahlavi script allowed Middle Persian words to enter it as well. The Pahlavi script is such that some of its characters can be read in several different ways, and each researcher offers a different theory about the reading of a word. In this research, the new reading of some words as well as the readings of previous researchers have been given and analyzed. This article tries to make a new suggestion about reading a few words. The basis of these suggestions is the existing words in Middle Persian, Parthian and New Persian dictionaries, and the historical grammar of word formation and etymology has also been used in the new reading of words. This research has been done in order to better understand some words and concepts in the text of the Assyrian tree.

This article discusses the critical edition of Dīwān-i Qāʾimīyyāt, which was conducted by Sayyid Jalāl Ḥusaynī Badakhshānī and published by the research center of Mīrāth-i Maktūb. Dīwān-i Qāʾimīyyāt is a newly discovered text from the 7th century AH/the 13th century CE, composed by Ḥasan-i Maḥmūd-i Kātib. This work is an invaluable document that reflects the historical events and social milieu of Ḥasan Ṣabbāḥ’s time. It also provides tremendous insights into Nizārī Ismāʿīlīs’ theories on the Resurrection, the principle of Invitation, the promised savior of apocalyptic times, the hierarchical order in the Creation, and the like. The study of this text is therefore inevitable in the field of Ismāʿīlī Studies. Dīwān-i Qāʾimīyyāt is also a valuable text in terms of linguistic features and literary style. Hence, it is crucial to provide an immaculate edition of this precious text. The first edition of Dīwān-i Qāʾimīyyāt was published in 2011, but it had numerous mistakes and inaccuracies. It was then reviewed and republished in 2016. However, despite the editor’s efforts, the text still requires further improvements that should be realized through the third edition. In this article, we suggest some improvements to refine the edition of this important text. We also discuss some misunderstandings, particularly, the misattribution of certain parts of this work to two unknown poets named Qāʿimī and Ḥazīn.

This paper deals with the introduction of current Persian phonological rules in a simple generative format.
در این مقاله کوشیده‌ام تا فرایندهای واجی پرکاربرد زبان فارسی را در قالب صورت‌بندی‌های سنتی و رایج
واج‌شناسی زایشی، و در چهارچوب طبقه‌بندی دقیقی در اختیار علاقمندان بگذارم.

Article type: Research Article Persian is a Pro-Drop language and allows omission of subjective pronouns. In the present research the use of such pronouns in spoken and written varieties of standard Persian is compared to each other. The data of spoken Persian is gathered from HamBam Corpus of Contemporary Spoken Persian, interviews of oral history projects (Harvard and Artebox), and the talks of Iranian parliament (Majlis). The data for the written variety is gathered from the Persian Syntactic Dependency Treebank. Using corpus-based methods, the study showed that there is no prominent difference in using pronouns in the two varieties. It also indicated that more than half of the pronouns in the spoken Persian emerged as subject; whereas it is no more than one third in the written variety. This means that while talking, the speaker uses subjective pronouns mostly to underscore the subject. The results of this research might be useful for Persian word order studies, those of teaching Persian to non-Persians, and exploring discourse elements of spoken Persian.

Determining the pronunciation of words-based on the prosodic meter and rhyme-has been a topic of long discussion for Persian literati and lexicographers, and in the modern era, editors of Early Persian literature have also shown great interest in this subject. Recently, Vahid Idgah Torghabei (1399/ 2020) has done a comprehensive study on this subject, titled "Pronunciation in Early Persian Poetry", in which he presents numerous findings on uncommon and dialectic alongside some pronunciation suggestions. In the current study, some of the author's conjectures are criticized and denied based on lexical considerations. Since these considerations emphasize the pronunciation of words, besides criticizing the book, they can be utilized in future similar research in the general sense. Reviewing this evidence reveals some flaws and methodologic weaknesses in this work: First, the authorʼs inadequate mastery over the lexicon of Middle and New Iraninan languages. Second, his tendency towards systematization by the cost of neglecting exceptions which is in contrast with the claim of "Total Inductionˮ and the critique of "Uniforming and generalizing Outlookˮ in the study.

The paper demonstrates that a certain scribe in fourteenth-century Shiraz tried to 'purify' the Shāhnāma from non-Islamic motif by omitting or changing the containing couplets. Then it identifies the scribe as the third generation of a famous Sufi household and explains his endeavour in transcription of the epic by contextualising it in Sufi efforts to make a coherent intra-Islamic relation of the Shāhnāma

The Persian language has undergone changes from the past to the present day, and the lack of recognition and attention to these developments, syntactic and lexical, can cause a wrong understanding of the prose and verse texts of the previous centuries. Two examples of words whose incomplete knowledge has prevented their correct understanding in old texts, is examined in this article. We have examined these two words, "Gustāx" and "Naxust", which are used in both Middle Persian and Dari Persian, to show that these words have undergone semantic changes, and their meanings in modern Persian texts are more or less different from their meanings in Middle Persian texts. First, it is examined these words from an etymological point of view, and then with evidence from Middle Persian texts, such as Menōg Khard, Dēnkard, and Ardēshir Babakan's Karname, and New Persian texts, such as Ferdowsi's Shahnameh, and mentioning the meanings and evidences found in new cultures, such as Dehkhoda's dictionary. It has been mentioned, we have stated their semantic evolution and we have shown that the word "Gustāx" has undergone semantic evolutions from the past until now, and the meaning that poets, writers and speakers have used in recent centuries is the result of an external reaction from the states of a person's inner spirit, as a result, knowing the different meanings and the course of its evolution is a way to better understand the texts. Also, the examination of the word "Naxust" has shown that although the meaning of "beginning" and "beginning" existed in this word, but in some cases the meaning of "then" prevails over the meaning of "beginning".

Keywords: Gustāx; Naxust; semantic transformation; Dēnkard; Ardēshir Babakan's Karname; Ferdowsi's Shahnameh.
زبان پارسی از گذشته تا به امروز تحولاتی داشته است، که عدم شناخت و توجه به این تحولات، نحوی و واژگانی، چه بسا می¬تواند سبب درک نادرستی از متون نظم و نثر سده¬های پیشین شود. دو نمونه از واژه¬هایی که شناخت ناقص آنها مانع از درک صحیح آنها در متون قدیم شده است، در این مقاله بررسی می¬شود. دو واژة «گستاخ» و «نخست» که در پارسی‌میانه و پارسی‌دری به کار رفته‌اند در این مقاله بررسی شده تا تحولات معنایی این واژه‌ها مشخص شود و نشان داده شود که معانی آنها در متون پارسی‌جدید کم و بیش با معانی آنها در متون پارسی‌میانه تفاوت دارد. ابتدا این واژه¬ها را از نظر ریشه¬شناختی بررسی کرده و سپس با ذکر شواهدی از متونِ پارسی‌میانه از جمله مینوی خرد، دینکرد و کارنامة اردشیر بابکان، و متون پارسی‌نو همچون شاهنامة فردوسی و ذکر معانی¬ای که در فرهنگ‌های جدید، چون لغت‌نامة دهخدا برای این دو واژه آمده است، تحول معنایی آنها بررسی خواهد شد. واژة «گستاخ» از گذشته تا کنون دچار تحولات معنایی شده است و مفهومی که در سده¬های اخیر شاعران و نویسندگان و گویشوران از آن بهره جسته¬اند حاصل واکنشی بیرونی از حالاتِ روحیِ درونیِ شخص است، در نتیجه دانستن معانیِ مختلف و سیر تحولات آن در درک بهتر متون راهگشاست. همچنین بررسیِ واژة «نخست» نشان می‌دهد که هرچند معنای «ابتدا» و «آغاز» در این واژه وجود داشته است اما در مواردی معنای «سپس» بر معنای «ابتدا» غالب است.
کلید واژگان: گستاخ؛ نخست؛ تحول معنایی؛ دینکرد؛ اردشیر بابکان؛ شاهنامه فردوسی.

دیوان اشعار منوچهری دامغانی، سرایندة سدة پنجم هجری، تاکنون چندین بار تصحیح شده است، اما مشکلات این دیوان همچنان برجاست؛ مشکلاتی که بیشتر متأثر از نبودِ دستنویسی معتبر و اصیل از دیوان این شاعر است. سبک ویژه و خاص شاعر در سرودن اشعار و نیز تازی‌گرایی او، چه در لفظ و چه در معنا، یافتن صورت اصیل ابیات را در همین دستنویس‌های بسیار متأخر و اغلب نامعتبر دشوارتر کرده است. نگارنده در مقالة پیش رو کوشیده است با کمک گرفتن از نسخی که از اصالت و اعتبار نسبی برخوردارند و تا حد زیادی از امروزی شدن و گشتگی‌ها و تصحیف‌ها در امان مانده‌اند، پیشنهادهایی دربارة چندین بیت از دیوان به دست دهد. در هر مورد، ضبط تمام چاپ‌های موجود از دیوان منوچهری بررسی و نقد شده است.

Aghraz Al-Seyasah Fi A'araz Al-Reyasah, authored by Zahiry Samarghandy has become one of the excellent and outstanding old prose texts, because of containing technical, political, social, philosophical, didactic, and ethical teachings and addressing governance practices. These practical and miscellaneous teachings have led to frequent transcriptions and insertion of significant distortions and falsifications into the text of the mentioned book. Jaafar Sheảr by having in hand four manuscripts of Aghraz Al-Seyasah but without benefitting all of them (specially Meshkảt᾿s transcript) has corrected and printed it in many cases mentioned the manuscript᾿s differences. Furthermore, negligence in trusteeship towards manuscripts, especially the base manuscript, hastiness in correction, and the weakness and indifference in typesetting have inserted some other distortions, falsifications, and errors in the aforesaid book. This study has tried to countercheck the printed copy of Aghraz Al-Seyasah with the base and Meshkảt᾿s manuscript, and then by comparing some phrases of it with the other works of Zahiry Samarghandy (Sandbadnameh and Ghorrat-al-Alfaz wa Nozhat-al-Alhaz) and writer᾿s stylistic norms analyze and correct some distortions falsifications and errors in the printed text of Aghraz Al-Seyasah.

From a long time ago until now, with referencing to the common narrations and the three verses attributed to Ferdowsi, Shahnameh has been famous for having sixty thousand or nearly sixty thousand verses; while the number of verses in the oldest manuscripts, as well as valid printed texts, does not exceed fifty thousand verses. The present research seeks to answer the questions such as where, when, and by whom these numbers became popular and how many verses the manuscripts and the famous printed texts have, by separating the fictional sections. This research consists of four parts: 1. Reviewing and criticizing verses related to Ferdowsi about Shahnameh's verse number. 2. Reviewing various reports on the Shahname's verse number (Including the quintet introductions of Shahnameh, biographies, historical, literary, geographic, and Rijali (narrator evaluation) resources, and various views of contemporary researchers). 3. Recounting and presenting the exact number of Shahnameh's verses by fictional parts, based on printed copies of Turner Macan, Julius von Mohl, Berookhim, Dabirsiaghi, Moscow, Kazzazi, Jeyhooni, and Khaleghi. 4. A discussion about semantic significations of the number "Sixty" and "Sixty thousand". The authors assert that the number "Sixty thousand" was not versified by Ferdowsi. But this number was used by the Shahnameh enthusiasts in the late of his life, or a brief time after his passing, with the meaning of "plurality", "perfection", and "approximation" in describing the number of Shahnameh's verses. Based on the famous narrations, at least starting from the sixth century, verses have been versified about the sixty thousand verses of Shahnameh and are annexed to Shahnameh.

The tradition of bilingual lexicography in the Indian subcontinent is more than two centuries old and goes back to as far as 1772 (Hadley). This article examines the development of bilingual lexicography in the Indian subcontinent with special reference to English-Hindustani or -Urdu dictionary development. It further explores some issues specific to this field and tries to suggest some solutions. First of all it describes the historical perspective of linguistic work in the subcontinent and then discusses issues relating to English-Urdu bilingual lexicography in particular.

The first part of this article discusses the etymology and meaning of the name of the hero Rostam. The second part is concerned with the term  zin-e palang , which is used in the  Shahnama  to refer to the saddle of Rostam's horse Rakhsh. The authors argue that this usage is due to the re-interpretation of a phrase which originally referred to Rostam's leopard-skin garment and contained an archaic word  zin  "skin" rather than  zin  "saddle".

ملّا پریشان از شاعران نامی گُورانی‌سَرای است که متأسفانه پیرامون احوال و آثار وی اطلاعات چندانی به‌جای نمانده است. نگارنده در این پژوهش با رویکردی توصیفی-تحلیلی، کوشیده است با توجّه به نسخه‌های خطی دیوان شاعر و اطلاعات مندرج در سَرنویس و ترقیمۀ نسخه‌ها و نیز با عنایت به زبان شعری و محتوای سروده‌های وی، نکاتی تازه پیرامون دقایق زندگانی او به دست دهد. آنچه مسلّم است او به «لَکی» تکلّم می‌کرده، امّا چهارچوب سروده‌هایش، به‌ویژه در گزینش افعال، بر زبان معیار ادبی «گورانی» استوار است؛ هرچند واژه‌های لَکی، کُردی کرماشانی، عربی و فارسی بر پیچیدگی زبان شعری وی افزوده است. ملّا پریشان برخلاف نوشته‌های محقّقان پیشین، پیرو حروفیه نبوده، بلکه از حروف ابجد و علم تأویل، هم‌چون دیگر علمای شیعۀ امامیه، سود جسته است. میان اندیشه‌های ملّا و شیخ رجب بُرسی پیوندهای قابل‌توجّهی در ولایت علی (ع) و تأویل حروف مشهود است؛ دیگر این‌که با بررسی نسخه‌های خطی، روشن شد که بسیاری از اشعاری که تاکنون به وی نسبت داده‌اند، ازآنِ مَلِک حسین‌خان کُلیایی - شاعر گورانی‌سَرای قرن سیزدهم هجری- است.

ملّا پریشان از شاعران نامی گُورانیسَرای است که متأسفانه پیرامون
احوال و آثار وی اطلاعات چندانی بهجای نمانده است. نگارنده در این
پژوهش با رویکردی توصیفی-تحلیلی، کوشیده است با توجّه به
نسخههای خطی دیوان شاعر و اطلاعات مندرج در سَرنویس و ترقیمۀ
نسخهها و نیز با عنایت به زبان شعری و محتوای سرودههای وی، نکاتی
تازه پیرامون دقایق زندگانی او به دست دهد. آنچه مسلّم است او به
تکلّم میکرده، امّا چهارچوب سرودههایش، بهویژه در گزینش » لَکی «
استوار است؛ هرچند واژههای لَکی، » گورانی « افعال، بر زبان معیار ادبی
کُردی کرماشانی، عربی و فارسی بر پیچیدگی زبان شعری وی افزوده
است. ملّا پریشان برخلاف نوشتههای محقّقان پیشین، پیرو حروفیه
نبوده، بلکه از حروف ابجد و علم تأویل، همچون دیگر علمای شیعۀ
امامیه، سود جسته است. میان اندیشههای ملّا و شیخ رجب بُرسی
پیوندهای قابلتوجّهی در ولایت علی )ع( و تأویل حروف مشهود است؛
دیگر اینکه با بررسی نسخههای خطی، روشن شد که بسیاری از اشعاری
که تاکنون به وی نسبت دادهاند، ازآنِ مَلِک حسینخان کُلیایی - شاعر
گورانیسَرای قرن سیزدهم هجری- است

Shahnameh is one of the most detailed works of the first centuries of the officialization and spread of Dari Persian after Islam. This precious treasure contains authentic and reliable evidence of the Persian language elements of this period and contains many keys in solving the unknown issues of the mother of Dari Persian language, i.e. Middle Persian. Conversely, due to the antiquity of its language, there are points in this work that cannot be known except through the knowledge of Middle Persian and other Middle and Old Iranian Languages. In this article, three words "šād", "may" and "pašēmān šudan" are discussed in Shahnameh and using the internal evidence of this work as well as some evidence of other Persian texts as well as evidence from ancient languages, different meanings for the first two words and a lesser-known construction for a specific structure of the third one is presented in Dari Persian. The suggested meaning for "šād" is "rich and wealthy". The word "may" is considered to be the original Persian form of "maγāk" and "pašēmān šudan" is considered as an impersonal verb.

In India, Urdu ghazals are published in Dēvanāgarī, transliterated from Perso-Arabic nastaliq script. This paper studies the accuracy of these transliterations, by comparing 152 poems (2734 lines) from seven poets, including Jaipur-based Urdu poet Parsā Kaūsarī Jaipūri (1922-1999) whose hitherto unknown Urdu manuscript containing his Collected Poems is introduced and described. Word-byword comparison detected that in 113 out of 2734 lines the original and transliterated texts slightly differed. As the Hindi and Urdu languages are almost identical in their vocabulary and grammar, rewriting an Urdu nastaliq text in to Dēvanāgarī is a special case of domestication , that is a strategy of making the target text closely conform to the pronunciation, orthography and grammar of the Hindi language. For the lay reader such "Urduin-Dēvanāgarī" reproductions of the Urdu ghazals are useful, satisfactory and preserve their esthetic value, but to avoid loss of information from the source text, it is recommended that definitive, scientific editions of Urdu ghazals should always be published in both scripts en face, with the rare Urdu words explained in footnotes.

یادداشت‌های ادبی و تاریخی (10) ابوالفضل خطیبی:
65. خداوندگارِ شرافت و دانش؛ 66.  شکسپیرِ شاعر؛ 67. سام¬نامه سرودۀ خواجوی کرمانی نیست، واقعاً نیست؛ 68. اسطوره، افسانه و داستان؛ 69. شیرِ شمشیر به کف؛ 70. کمندافگنی رستم و گیو؛ 71. چرخِ مهر؟ 72. دل بردن از شیر؛ 73. بر آرزو رفتن؛ 74. دلِ مرد را مرده بُد؛ 75. سبک باش! 76. به دیده همی نعل باید سپرد.
بخارا، شمارۀ 144، تابستان 1400، ص300-321.

Methodologically, vocabulary instruction has faced significant ups and downs during the history of language education; sometimes integrated with the other elements of language network, other times tackled as a separate component. Among many variables supposedly affecting vocabulary achievement, the role of teaching word history, as a schemata-building strategy, in developing reading comprehension has received the least, if not any, attention. This study was an attempt, in fact, to explore the possibility of an integration of word history and reading comprehension ability of a group (No=100) of Iranian intermediate EFL learners. To conduct the study, 60/100 participants, identified as homogeneous members based on the Comprehensive English Language Test (CELT), were randomly divided them into two groups; an experimental and a control group. They were exposed to a teacher-made pretest and a post-test to check the participants' knowledge of word history and reading comprehension abi...

مکیلع ملاس اب امش يراکمه زا ساپس نمض ،مارتحا اب ۀمانهامود یملع یشهوژپ یم راضحتسا هب ینابز ياهراتسج ؛دناسر اب هجوت رظن هب نارواد مرتحم و میمصت ياضعا ییاهن یه ئ ت هیریرحت ،هلجم لاقم ۀ كرتشم ناونع اب امش » هرکیپ یسررب روتسد ساسا رب یسراف نابز رد يرایتخا و يرابجا ممتم داینب رکاگنلا یتخانش « هرامش زا یکی رد و دش هتفریذپ یتآ ياه ۀمانهامود دیسر دهاوخ پاچ هب ینابز ياهراتسج . 3 / /ز ج 21362 06 / 09 / 1397 -

Abstract
Saint Joseph's manuscript is one of the most authoritative manuscripts of Shahnameh, to which researchers have paid special attention. Some scholars have evaluated a small part of it and tried to show its link with other manuscripts. However, no statistical analysis has been provided on the similarities and differences between this manuscript and the authentic versions of Shahnameh. The relationship of the mentioned manuscript with other manuscripts could be found by classifying it into a specific group of manuscripts. Accordingly, the following questions arise: which manuscripts of Shahnameh are related to this manuscript and to what extent are its importance and validity shown by them? To answer these questions in this research, some statistics were carried out on the similarities of the mentioned manuscript with the authentic manuscripts of Shahnameh. The results showed that this manuscript was close to the version of London (675 AH) from introduction to the kingdom of Lohrasp, but there was no close bond between the two from the reign of Lohrasp to the end of Shahnameh. Saint Joseph's manuscript was mostly related to those of Leningrad (733 AH) and Paris (844 AH), all of which could be classified into one group. This illustrated the possibility that they had been copied from the same original manuscript.

Introduction
In 2005, Mousavi found a copy of Ferdowsi's Shahnameh in the library known as Bibliothèque Orientale (Oriental Library) in Saint Joseph University in Beirut, which was later called Saint Joseph's manuscript of Shahnameh. In the meantime, Mousavi and Khaleghi Motlagh wrote some articles to introduce and evaluate this manuscript and then prepared a facsimile edition for researchers with Afshar, Omidsalar, and Motalebi Kashani’s efforts. The importance of this manuscript was to the extent that Khaleghi Motlagh abandoned the other manuscripts at some instances in the 2nd edition of Shahnameh and picked only Saint Joseph’s manuscript as the accurate record of the original text. Even today, many scholars refer to this manuscript for making corrections to the verses of Shahnameh, some parts of which present the most accurate corrections of some of its verses.
Nonetheless, its date of writing was unknown since some pages of Saint Joseph’s manuscript were not found. According to the evidence like the handwriting style used by the scribe, it could be estimated that it was probably written in the late 7th and early 8th centuries AH.
Khaleghi Motlagh first evaluated this manuscript based on the photos of 22 pages of it (638 verses from the end of the reign of Zahhak to the beginning of the reign of Fereydun and 426 verses from the reign of Alexander). Then, according to the photos of 494 pages, he presented a more accurate analysis as he mentioned in the introduction of his facsimile edition of this book. He wrote that he had carefully read 336 pages from the beginning to the end of his third edition of the book and 60 pages related to the end of "The Kingdom of Khosrow I (Anushirvan)" as well as all the parts relevant to "Kingdom of Hormizd IV" throughout Saint Joseph’s manuscript. Finally, in an article, in addition to the previous content, he assessed the ancient combinations, Arabic words, dialect words, and some omissions and additions to this manuscript.
However, despite all the efforts that have been made to introduce and evaluate this manuscript, the relationship between this manuscript and the authentic versions of Shahnameh has not been thoroughly researched yet, especially those used by Khaleghi Motlagh to illustrate the similarities and differences between this manuscript and other manuscripts and show its validity of correcting Shahnameh, apart from specifying the lineage of Saint Joseph’s manuscript.

Materials & Methods
In the evaluation of Saint Joseph's manuscript, Khaleghi Motlagh found no close relationship between this manuscript and those of Florence (614 AH) and London (675 AH). Following its re-evaluation, he concluded that there was even no tight relationship between this manuscript and the other versions of Shahnameh. This manuscript was closer to those of London (675 AH) and Cairo (741 AH).

The same view was stated by Aydenlou in his article entitled "Notes from Saint Joseph's Shahnameh". Nevertheless, an argument arose here stating that the scholars had extended the validity of one part to the whole text and assumed the same validity in all the stories without a thorough evaluation of all parts of Saint Joseph's manuscript. It is while Khaleghi Motlagh in his first article on the evaluation of "Kingdom of Zahhak and Fereydun" and "Kingdom of Alexander"pointed out that no same validity of the manuscripts of Shahnameh had to be assumed throughout the book. Therefore, according to the conclusions of these two stories, Saint Joseph's manuscripts covering all parts of Shahnameh could not be considered to have the same validity. For instance, comparing Saint Joseph's manuscript with that of London (675 AH) in his review of the story of Alexander through 426 verses, Khaleghi Motlagh concluded that both were matched in 190 verses (nearly half of the content). Consequently, according to the drastic similarities between Saint Joseph's manuscript and London (675 AH) manuscript from Alexander's story until the end of Shahnameh, scholars had not reached the conclusion that they were matched in the second half of Shahnameh. Therefore, the present study was focused on the comparison between Saint Joseph's manuscript and all the manuscripts used by Khaleghi Motlagh and attempted to find their relationships.

Discussion of Results
In the first half of Shahnameh (from introduction to the end of the Great War of Kay-Khosrow), the scribe of Saint Joseph's manuscript had used a reference manuscript containing only half of Shahnameh such as the version of Florence (614 AH) and that manuscript was close to those of London (675 AH), Cairo (741 AH), and London (891 AH). Moreover, "Manouchehr Kingdom", "Nozar Kingdom", "Kay-Qobad Kingdom", "Siavakhsh Story", "Kay-Khosrow Widening", "Twelve Faces", and "The Great War of Kay-Khosrow" with 52, 56, 50, 54, 57, 47, and 42% similarities with Saint Joseph's manuscript based on the Istanbul version (731 AH) were respectively accounted for in the first half, while the manuscripts of Leningrad (733 AH), Cairo (796 AH), Leiden (840 AH), Paris (844 AH), Oxford (852 AH), and Berlin (894 AH) were regarded as its subsets in the second half. The reason for such similarities was that the manuscript of Istanbul (731 AH) had some identical parts with those of London (675 AH), Cairo (741 AH), Vatican (848 AH), and London (891 AH) in the first half, but was different from those of Leningrad (733 AH), Leningrad (849 AH), Paris (844 AH), and Leiden (840 AH). Thus, in the first half, Saint Joseph's manuscript was not to be classified in the second group of Khaleghi Motlagh’s classification, including the manuscripts of Istanbul (731 AH), Leningrad (733 AH), Cairo (796 AH), Leiden (840 AH), Paris (844 AH), Oxford (852 AH), and Berlin (894 AH), particularly the group of Shirazi manuscripts of Shahnameh.
In the second part of Saint Joseph's manuscript from the reign of Lohrasp until the end of the reign of Yazdegerd III, the scribe was found to be transcribed from a source, which was probably the original transcript of Shirazi manuscripts, including the main group of manuscripts of Istanbul (731 AH), Leningrad (733 AH), and Ghavam Al-Din Hassan Wazir (741) and subgroup manuscripts of Paris (844 AH), Cairo (796 AH), and Leningrad (849 AH).

Conclusions
According to the mentioned analysis and evaluation of Saint Joseph's manuscript, there seems to be a possibility that this manuscript was copied from two sources with two different origins. The relative similarity of the first part of Saint Joseph's manuscript with those of the manuscript of London (675 AH) (from introduction to the reign of Lohrasp) revealed that this part was copied from an authentic manuscript. Although Saint Joseph's manuscript could not be considered as a close manuscript to that of London (675 AH), they could be classified in the same group with different origins, along with the manuscripts of Florence (614 AH), Cairo (741 AH), Vatican (848 AH), and London (891 AH). In the meantime, some manuscripts, such as those of Berlin (894 AH), Istanbul (731 AH), and Istanbul (903 AH), had similar parts in the first half with the group of manuscripts of Florence (614 AH), London (675 AH), Saint Joseph, Cairo (741 AH), Vatican (848 AH), and London (891 AH). Hence, they could not be regarded to be different in origin. In the second half (from the kingdom of Lohrasp to the end of the rein of Yazdegerd III), Saint Joseph's manuscript belonged to another origin, which included the manuscripts of Istanbul (731 AH), Leningrad (733 AH), Cairo (796 AH), Leningrad (849 AH), Paris (844 AH), and Berlin (894 AH), among which the versions of Leningrad (733 AH) and Paris (844 AH) were closely related to Saint Joseph's manuscript. According to these similarities in this part, Saint Joseph's manuscript could be directly or indirectly considered of the same source as the manuscripts of Leningrad (733 AH) and Paris (844 AH). On the other hand, according to the scribing of the manuscripts of Istanbul (731 AH) and Leningrad (733 AH), as well as Haji Ghavam’s Shirazi version of Shahnameh (741 AH), and their similarities with Saint Joseph's manuscript, there is a possibilyt that Saint-Joseph's manuscript was not written in Shiraz.
Overall, considering the origins and relationships of the two parts of Saint Joseph's manuscript, it could be concluded that this manuscript was more valid in the first than in the second part. As such, it has to be taken into account when correcting Shahnameh.

This article focuses on the Miftāḥ al-Fużalāʾ (Key of the Learned) of Muhammad ibn Muhammad Daʾud Shadiyabadi (ca. 1490). The Miftāḥ is an illustrated dictionary made in the central Indian sultanate of Malwa, based in Mandu. Although the Miftāḥ’s only illustrated copy (British Library Or 3299) contains quadruple the number of illustrations as Mandu’s famed Niʿmatnāmah (Book of Delights) and is a unicum within the arts of the Islamicate and South Asian book, it has received minimal scholarly attention. The definitions in this manuscript encompass nearly every facet of Indo-Islamicate art history. The Miftāḥ provides a vocabulary for subjects including textiles, metalwork, jewelry, arms and armor, architecture, and musical instruments. The information transmitted by the Miftāḥ is not limited to the Persian, Hindavi, Turki, and Arabic language of the text, but also includes the visual knowledge depicted in paintings. Through an analysis of this manuscript as a whole, this study proposes that the Miftāḥ’s manuscript was an object of instruction for younger members of society and utilizes wonder as a didactic tool.

Botteh motif or Paisley Pattern is of great status in the Islamic art. This motif in a variety of different types is used in Islamic artworks such as textiles, carpets, stucco, etc. During recent centuries, the variety of this motif has persuaded scholars to do research on the origin of it.  None of these are comprehensive, and they cannot be attributed to all the motifs called Botteh; therefore, various new hypotheses have already been raised about the origins of this motif. They are always looking for the cause of this dispersion of opinions and trying to justify these various ideas.
In this paper, by asking three questions, the quiddity of this motif and the cause of the dispersion of ideas about its origin are investigated.
1. What is the reason for the dispersion and incompleteness of the ideas about the origin of the Botteh motif?
2. If the reasons for the dispersion of ideas are motifs that are similar in appearance but have different meanings and origins, then what are the properties of a Botteh motif that distinguish it from other motifs?
3. What are the historical, cultural and artistic evidences that confirm the cypress tree as the origin of this motif?
The main hypothesis of the paper is that a group of motifs with different origins is imagined alike due to similarity in form. Then all of them were named “Botteh” which is the most known motif among these types of motifs.
The second hypothesis is as follows: The origin of the Botteh motif is a kind of conifer, but it cannot be a cypress.
In order to answer the research questions and to test the validity of the hypotheses, firstly the most important opinions of the researchers of the field of Islamic art studies on Botteh motifs were briefly reviewed. And then they were classified in three groups of plants, animals, and other ideas to better enable us to analyze them.‏ In the following, the meaning of the name of this motif was studied in Lexicons. By comparison of the results of these two sections and image examples called Botteh, it is inferred that several types of motifs with various origins are imagined to be the same due to the similarity of the apparent form.
In the second part, the idea of the cypress, as one of the most important opinions about the origin of the Botteh motif, is criticized.
The most important outcome of this research is getting to the point that several types‏ of motifs with different origins are considered to be the same because of their evident formal similarities.‏
The second result of this research is suggestion of some distinctive properties for the Botteh motif. Some of them are as follows: The first property is the conical shape of the motif. The second property, according to the meaning of the name of this motif, is the separation of tree motifs from non-tree motifs; with the help of components and details such as stems, branches, trunks, etc. or other indications that allude to the motif of the tree.
In this paper it is shown that there was no mention of the sanctity of the cypress in the old Zoroastrian scriptures until the eighteenth century. Ferdowsi's Shahnameh is the oldest book in which it was recorded. On the other hand, the precise examination of Persepolis petroglyphs shows that these trees are not of the Cupressaceae family, and it seems that they belonged to the Pinaceae family, such as the Pinus, Abies, etc.‏ The third point, according to Parham, is regarding religious rigors in drawing of the cypress tree. Among the artworks of the Islamic era in Iran, plant motifs and various trees, including cypress, have been replicated very often. Even since the third century AH, animal and human motifs have also been used in many examples of Islamic arts.
The method of research is historical-analytical and it is conducted using library resources and the internet.