Language and Life

Document Type : علمی وپزوهشی

Authors

Abstract

This paper explores the relation of language and life in contemporary Iranian society. Our theoretical perspective concerning life and language is based on later Wittgenstein and early Heidegger philosophical debates. After introducing the roots of the philosophical and sociological equivalent in contemporary sociologists the provided conceptual framework has been assessed. Accordingly, Foucauldian discourse and its sociological version by Laclau & Mouffe have been set for this research. After determining of theoretical boundaries, Discourse Analysis is accepted as research method. Research data has collected by semi-structured interview with doctors and merchants. The results from the analysis of language games and discursive practices of interviewees, introduce three discursive formations; scientific discourse, civil discourse and religious discourse. The Comparison of the interviews clarify that language games and discursive practices of every formation, produce distinctive discursive constellation which make social agent life meaningful. Relying on theoretical debates, social existence and life order in contemporary Iranian society can be understood from the perspective of language. Linguistic perspective raise a new understanding of social relations that classic ideas were unable to explain. This paper argues that language is a window to understand the complexities of contemporary Iranian society, and is able to advance sociological theory.

Keywords

References

  1. دریفوس، هیوبرت و رابینو، پل. (١٣٨٢). میشل فوکو؛ فراسوی ساختگرایی و هرمنوتیک. ترجمه‌ی حسین بشیریه. تهران: نشر نی.
  2. ویتگنشتاین، لودویک. (1386). رساله‌ی منطقی- فلسفی. ترجمه‌ی میرشمس‌الدین ادیب‌سلطانی. تهران: امیرکبیر.
  3. ویتگنشتاین، لودویک. (١٣٨٠). پژوهش‌های فلسفی. ترجمه‌ی فریدون فاطمی. تهران: مرکز.
  4. هابرماس، یورگن. (١٣٨٤). نظریه کنش ارتباطی. ترجمه‌ی کمال پولادی. تهران: روزنامه ایران.

کتاب‌نامه‌ی لاتین

  1. Austin, J. L.(1962). How to Do Things with Words.The William James Lectures delivered at Harvard University in 1955. Oxford: London.
  2. Finlayson, J.G (2005) Habermas; A Very Short Introduction. London: Oxford University Press.
  3. Foucault, M. (2002). The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge.
  4. Giddens, A. (1993). New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociology. 2Ed. Stanford University Press: Stanford.
  5. Giddens, A. (1979) Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis. London: Macmillan.
  6. Giddens, A. (1984). Constitution of Society. London: Polity Press.
  7. Heidegger, M. (1982). On the Way to Language. Trans by Peter D. Hertz. New York: Perennial Library.
  8. Jorgensen, M & Phillips, L. (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. London: Sage.
  9. Laclau, E & Mouffe, Ch. (2001). Hegemonyand Socialist Strategy: Towards a RadicalDemocraticPolitics. 2ed. London: Verso.

10. Mulhall, S. (2005). Heidegger and Being and Time. London: Routledge.

Pleasants, N. (1999). Wittgenstein and the idea of a Critical Social Theory. London: Routledge.

11. Rorty, R. (1991). Essays on Heidegger and Others. Philosophical Papers Volume 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sociological Review
Volume 20, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
September 2013
Pages 163-187

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics