A Comparative study of the Structural Interpretation and Formalist Critique

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

• Morteza Arab ¹
• Zahra Asadi Khanuki ²
• Hamid Sabahi ¹

¹ Assistant Professor, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman

² MA, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman

10.22067/jquran.2021.67244.0

Abstract

Discussion about the interpretation and poetics methods is one of the interesting subjects in the academic literary studies in the contemporary period and many schools have emerged in this field. Formalism is one of the first schools of literary criticism in the present time. It maintains that the meaning of a text is discovered through knowing its form and purpose. Similarly, some of the interpretive studies on the Holy Quran are about the ways of its reading and interpretation and in this regard, several methods have been introduced by Islamic commentators. Structural Interpretation is one of these approaches that has received considerable attention in the field of Quranic studies in the current decade. According to this method, the meaning of surah is dependent on its purpose, and by analyzing the structure of the surah, its purpose and meaning can be discovered. Since the scientific study of a theory includes its comparison with other scientific views, it is necessary to compare this method with other criticism schools such as formalism. So, in the present study, the principles of the structural interpretation and its practical approach were compared with the formalist critique and their similarities, and differences were represented.

Keywords

• structural interpretation
• Formalism
• comparative study
• principles
• method

Main Subjects

• Quran and Hadith Studies

---

References

فیلیپ، الکساندر، کارلفرید فرولیش، تاریخ تفسیر کتاب مقدس، ترجمه حامد فیاضی، دوفصلنامۀ هفت آسمان، شماره ٣۴، ١٣٨۶ش.

بستانی، محمود، التفسیر البنائی للقرآن الکریم، مجمع البحوث الإسلامیة، مشهد، ١٣٨٠.

حوی، سعید، الاساس فی تفسیر القرآن، دار السلام، قاهره، ١۴١٢ق.

خامه‌گر، محمد، اصول و قواعد کشف استدلالی غرض سوره‌های قرآن، پژوهشگاه علوم و فرهنگ اسلامى، قم، ١٣٩۶ش.

فرامرز قراملکی، احد، روش‌شناسی مطالعات دینى، دانشگاه علوم رضوی، مشهد، ١٣٨٨ش.

محمدپور، احمد، روش در روش، جامعه شناسان، تهران، ١٣٨٩ش.

Bressler, Charles, Literary Criticism, Indiana, Indiana Wesleyan University, 2011.

Eikhenbaum,Boris Mikhailovich, The theory of the “Formal Method”, https://letras.cabaladada.org/, 1926.

Erlich, Victor, - Russian Formalism- History and Doctrine, Paris/New York, Mouton, 1980.

Guerin, Wilfred, Labor, Earle, Morgan, Lee , … ,A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2011.

Habib, M.A.R, Literary Criticism- from Plato to Present, Oxford, Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.

Herman, David, Manfred, Jahn, Marie-Laure, Ryan, Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory-Routledge, 2005.

Irena Makaryk, Encyclopedia of Contemporary Literary Theory_ Approaches, Scholars, Terms, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1993.

Lobner, Sebastian, Understanding Semantics, London, Routledge, 2013.

Scholes, Robert, structuralism in literature, An Introduction, New Haven/London, Yale University Press, 1974.

Schmid, Wolf, Narratology_An Introduction, (Trans) Alexander Starritt, Berlin/New York , De Gruyter, 2010.

Shklovsky, Viktor, Berlina, Alexandra,  A Reader, Bloomsbury Academic, 2016.

Shklovsky, Victor, Theory of Prose, (Trans) Benjamin Sher, Dalkey Archive Press, 1990.

Shklovsky, Victor, (1917), ‘Art as Technique’ , https://warwick.ac.uk/.

http://www.vajehyab.com