نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 پژهشگر زبانکده ملی، تهران، ایران.
2 گروه زبان انگلیسی و زبانشناسی، دانشکدة ادبیات و علومانسانی، دانشگاه رازی، کرمانشاه، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Introduction
In contemporary Iran, linguistic prescriptivism has emerged as a dominant approach in language policy and social interactions. This perspective views language as a set of fixed and immutable rules that must be protected against the natural changes and dynamism inherent to language. This study focuses on three main areas lexical purism, mandatory orthography, and script reform to analyze the discourse of prescriptivism. Lexical purism seeks to purge foreign loanwords from the language and replace them with “pure Persian” equivalents. Mandatory orthography emphasizes the imposition of rigid spelling rules, often restricting linguistic creativity. Script reform, meanwhile, has implications beyond the linguistic sphere, encompassing cultural and historical effects. Employing the theoretical frameworks of “language hygiene” (Cameron, 2012) and “linguistic superstition” (Pinker, 2014), this research demonstrates that prescriptivist discourse is not merely a linguistic phenomenon but also reflects cultural and ideological dominance in contemporary Iranian society.
Materials & Methods
This qualitative study is designed within the frameworks of critical discourse analysis and sociolinguistics. Data were collected from three main sources: the official rulings of the Academy of Persian Language and Literature as the authority on standard language, editorial guidelines from scientific journals, and user interactions on the social media platform Telegram. The data span from 2016 to 2025 and were analyzed using qualitative content analysis alongside descriptive statistics. Prior research indicates that most Iranian studies on prescriptivism have not adopted a descriptive lens and have largely served to reinforce norm-centric approaches. The works of Cameron (2012) and Pinker (2014) were particularly inspirational, revealing that language rules often originate from social and political ideologies. This study aims to critique extreme and inflexible approaches in language policies while emphasizing the status of language as a dynamic and social phenomenon. It seeks to demonstrate that prescriptivism in contemporary Iran not only imposes linguistic restrictions but also functions as a tool for reproducing power structures and marginalizing non-standard varieties of Persian.
Results & Discussion
Findings indicate that in contemporary Iran, three principal domains of linguistic prescriptivism are prominently observed. In the area of lexical purism, the Academy of Persian Language and Literature, as an official institution, endeavors to eliminate and replace loanwords with “pure Persian” equivalents. This policy, motivated by nationalist aims and the preservation of “linguistic purity,” faces significant challenges because borrowing is a global linguistic phenomenon and a sign of language vitality and enrichment. Regarding mandatory orthography, scientific journals and some editors enforce rigid rules, homogenizing writing styles and suppressing the linguistic creativity of authors and researchers. Editorial guidelines demonstrate a strict approach that labels any deviation from the standard language as “error,” leading to the elimination of individual stylistic variations. Contrary to descriptive linguistics recommendations, these prescriptions reproduce a symbolic and ideological order rather than reflecting linguistic realities. Script reform, as the third focus, encompasses broader dimensions and is often intertwined with religious, political, and cultural factors. Although seemingly technical, script reform carries deep cultural and historical consequences because script acts as a bridge between generations, and any abrupt changes risk causing identity ruptures. Analysis of social media user interactions reveals that prescriptive and purist attitudes are vigorously upheld even in informal settings. This shows that prescriptivism is not confined to official and academic domains but permeates multiple layers of society. Ultimately, discourse analysis of the data reveals that linguistic prescriptivism in contemporary Iran extends beyond a mere linguistic concern, contributing to the reproduction of symbolic power, consolidation of monolingual ideology, and erasure of linguistic diversity.
Conclusion
This study demonstrates that the discourse of linguistic prescriptivism in contemporary Iran, focusing on three main domains, functions as a tool for consolidating power and establishing symbolic order. Lexical purism, mandatory orthography, and script reform each operates under different motivations but ultimately aim to standardize language and eliminate linguistic diversity. The data analysis results indicate that prescriptivism is not simply a linguistic issue but also reflects broader social and cultural layers, serving as a crucial instrument for reproducing power structures. By critiquing these approaches, this research emphasizes the need for descriptive and flexible perspectives in language policy-making. Language is a dynamic and social phenomenon that must respond to societal needs and transformations. Ultimately, this study suggests that language policymakers should move away from imposing rigid, norm-based rules and instead recognize linguistic diversity and dynamism as valuable social and cultural capital, distancing themselves from monolingual and exclusionary policies.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)