Mechanics of Sociolinguistic Variation and Pragma-stylistic Inclination in the Qur'anic Discourse
International Journal of Language and Linguistics
Volume 8, Issue 4, July 2020, Pages: 141-151
Received: Mar. 22, 2020;
Accepted: Jun. 19, 2020;
Published: Jul. 4, 2020
Views 75 Downloads 35
Sami Al-Heeh, Department of Applied English, Palestine Ahliya University, Bethlehem, Palestine
Ghufran Ahmad, Department of English, Hajjah University, Dokhnah, Yemen
Follow on us
This paper explores the extent to which the Qur'anic discourse helps realize social variation from both a pragmatic and stylistic perspective. It theorizes that individuals coming from different functional and dysfunctional families often show a good degree of dissimilarities in their responses and behaviors. Thus, the paper aims to check whether these individual differences are reflected in the Noble Qur'an or not. It is also intended to examine mechanics of linguistic variability in the holy Script of Islam to mirror the various individual proclivities and tendencies. Data collection has been carried out through a concordance process in which certain key words in context (KWIC) related to kinship, such as brother, father, mother and clan, and family-resemblance categories, such as Jews, Christians, believers and Sabians, are listed in a corpus. The study applies a critical discourse analysis (CDA) approach to the data collected. Therefore, it builds on Van Dijk's (1998) model of critical analysis at the syntactic, semantic and schematic levels. It has been found that the Qur'anic discourse mirrors variation among individuals from a stylistic, pragmatic and socio-pragmatic perspectives. Mechanics of linguistic variation in performance has included mainly shifting language styles and functions, re-ordering the relevant arguments in harmony with the context under discussion, qualifying speech to tell the truth and (accordingly) to address norms of polite address, and selecting certain figures of speech that help ideas to flow easily and beautifully.
Pragma-stylistics, Socio-linguistic Variation, Semantics, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), Arabic Syntax, The Qur'anic Discourse
To cite this article
Mechanics of Sociolinguistic Variation and Pragma-stylistic Inclination in the Qur'anic Discourse, International Journal of Language and Linguistics.
Vol. 8, No. 4,
2020, pp. 141-151.
Copyright © 2020 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. the MIT Press.
Wales, K. (2014). A dictionary of stylistics. Routledge, P. 399.
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Pragmatics. In International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences: Vol. 17 (pp. 11948-11954). Pergamon.
Kearns, K. (2000). Semantics. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Hickey, L. (Ed.). (2014). The Pragmatics of Style (RLE Linguistics B: Grammar). Routledge, p. 577.
Black, E. (2005). Pragmatic stylistics. Edinburgh University Press.
Dunn, M., Greenhill, S. J., Levinson, S. C., & Gray, R. D. (2011). Evolved structure of language shows lineage-specific trends in word-order universals. Nature, 473 (7345), 79.
Ning, C. (1993). The overt syntax of relativization and topicalization (Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Irvine).
Geluykens, R., & Limberg, H. (2012). Gender variation, indirectness, and preference organization in threat responses. Rice Working Papers in Linguistics, 3.
Schmitt, N. (editor: 2002) An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. London: Hodder Education (pp. 74-91).
Plomin, R., & Daniels, D. (2011). Why are children in the same family so different from one another? International journal of epidemiology, 40 (3), 563-582.
Vince, G. (2018). Evolution explains why we act differently online. Available at: www.bbc.com/future/story/20180403. [Accessed on 1/12/ 2018].
Fairclough, N. (2010). Language and power. Pearson Education.
Bloor, M., & Bloor, T. (2013). The practice of critical discourse analysis: An introduction. Routledge.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Sage.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. Psychology Press.
Rivkin, J. (2017). Literary theory: an anthology. John Wiley & Sons (p. 511).
Robinson, P., & Ellis, N. C. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. Routledge.
Kennedy, G. A. (2006). On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse.
Holmes, J., & Wilson, N. (2017). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Routledge.