کاربردشناسی و کاربست آن در آگهی‌های تجاری: آگهی دورتو

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

دانشجوی دکترای زبان و ادبیات فارسی، گروه زبان و ادبیات فارسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی

چکیده

آگهی‌های تجاری، رهاورد زندگی شهری است. اگر چه در وهلۀ نخست، سازندگان یک آگهی تجاری در پی معرفی محصول خود و اقناع مخاطبان هستند، اما نقش فرهنگ‌ساز و تأثیر  گفتمانی آن‌ها در جامعه نبایست نادیده گرفته شود. هدف این پژوهش، واکاوی میزان رعایت اصول ادب در آگهی‌های تجاری در جایگاه گفتمان است. با واکاوی و ژرف‌نگری در لایه‌های زیرین گفتمان برخی آگهی‌های تجاری، می‌توان دریافت که گفتمان آن‌ها افزون بر زیر پاگذاشتن اصول ادب، به گسترش ارزش‌های ناپسند فرهنگی می‌پردازند. روش این پژوهش توصیفی-تحلیلی است و رویکرد آن نیز تلفیقی از اصول تعاون گرایس (Grice, 1975) و اصول ادب لیچ (Leech, 1983)، و اصول ادب براون و لوینسون (Brown, & Levinson, 1987) است. پیکرۀ پژوهش شامل سه آگهی تجاری از مایع ظرف‌شویی دورتو است که به روش هدف‌مند انتخاب شده‌اند. این آگهی‌ها در فاصلۀ زمانی سال‌های 1396 تا 1399 از شبکه‌های مختلف تلویزیون جمهوری اسلامی ایران پخش شده‌اند. یافته‌های پژوهش نمایانگر آن است که در این آگهی‌ها طبق اصول ادب لیچ (Leech, 1983)، اصول تأیید، تواضع و سازش رعایت نشده‌اند و بر مبنای اصول ادب براون و لوینسون (Brown, & Levinson, 1987) افراد از راهبردهایی مانند بیان مستقیم و صریح بهره گرفته‌اند که در این راهبرد بیشترین تهدید وجهه به چشم می‌آید. اگر چه در برخی مکالمه‌ها نیز سعی کرده‌اند از راهبردهای ادب سلبی و ایجابی استفاده کنند اما با نقض اصول ادب لیچ وجهۀ طرف مقابل را مورد تهدید قرار داده‌اند و منجر به ایجاد تنش در مکالمه‌ها شده‌اند و به این ترتیب، گفتمانی غیر مؤدبانه را ایجاد کرده‌اند.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Pragmatics and Apply it on advertising Case study: Dorto dishwashing liquid

نویسنده [English]

  • Samane Refahi
Persian Language and Literature Department, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

 1.INTRODUCTION
In rhetoric, the secondary meanings of the sentences are discussed. In the same way, in modern rhetoric, one can find theories that deal with this matter and are looking for ways to help them understand the secondary meanings of sentences. The sum of these theories is studied in a branch called pragmatics. Grice Cooperative Principles (1975) is one of these theories. After Grice, other theorists developed his Cooperative Principles. Leech (1983), Brown, and Levinson (1987) were among those who helped complete Grice's Cooperative Principles by introducing Politeness Principles. In conversation analysis based on Politeness principles, the role of each interlocutor in the continuity of the conversation and respect for the other party is measured. Different discourses can be analyzed on this basis. One of the most common discourses in today's society is the discourse that commercials create in society. TV commercials are one of the most effective methods of advertising as a public and popular media. At first glance, every commercial seeks to advertise its desired product, and in order to achieve its goal, which the introduction of the product and convincing the audience are the most important of them, is designed and distributed. But it should be noted that behind this face, it introduces a discourse into society that can have many positive and negative effects on the culture of that society.
 
2.MATERIALS AND METHODS
In 1967, Grice proposed the theory of conversational Implicature and in 1975 in the paper entitled Logic and Conversation, he proposed a more advanced theory of the Cooperative Principles, or CP. Grice considers the four basic principles necessary for conversation, these four principles are quality, quantity, relation and manner of expression, which together form Grice's Cooperative Principles.
Grice's Cooperative Principles, as a basic theory, have been reviewed by many. One of these people is Leech (1983) who believes that Grice's solutions are not enough to study conversations and therefore has proposed the Politeness Principles as a complement to Grice's Cooperative Principles. Brown and Levinson (1987) are other theorists who have theorized about the Politeness Principles and the completion of Grice's Cooperative Principles. Before addressing the principles of Leech (1983), Brown, and Levinson (1987) Politeness Principles, it is necessary to explain some interpretations and terms. One of the concepts that is considered in the Politeness Principles is the concept of face, followed by the face threatening act and the face-saving act. Attitude in technical terms, it means the general self-image of a person and refers to the emotional and social aspect of the person that each person has and expects others to recognize it. There are generally two types of images: negative and Positive; negative means the need to be independent of others and positive means the need to be associated with them. According to Brown and Levinson, politeness is about respecting another's face and using strategies to avoid threatening his face. They define four strategies for using face-threatening actions: on record, positive politeness, negative politeness, and off record.
 
3.RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The body of this research is formed by three commercials of "Dorto" dishwashing liquid that have been broadcast on various Iranian TV channels for about three years, and considering this relatively long period, its discursive role should not be neglected. In a number of conversations of these advertisements, Politeness Principles have been violated and the face of the other party has been threatened, and by this, they have hidden a discourse far from politeness in their deep-structure. In these advertisements, according to the principles of Leech, the Maxims of Approbation, Modesty and Agreement have not been observed, and according to the principles of Brown and Levinson, people have used strategies such as on record expression, which is the most threatening face. Although in some conversations they have tried to use negative and positive strategies, by violating the principles of Leech Principles, they have threatened the other party and caused tension in the conversations, thus creating an impolite discourse.
All three of these ads focus on the party. Parties that are accompanied by tension and unhappiness when the guest arrives at the landlord's house and make the landlord's family members suffer. Aunt frowns, Violating the Politeness Principles, the man says to the woman: "Did you not wash with Dorto?"; The child apologizes for borrowing dishwashing liquid; All of this creates a discourse that turns value into anti-value. If the child did not lend the dishwashing liquid to the neighbor, it would not have caused all this discomfort, and even earlier, if the family members had not invited guests, they would not have had to endure this reprehensible atmosphere. This is the discourse that this ad depicts for the audiences.
 
4.CONCLUSION
Analysis of people's conversations in three Dorto dishwashing liquid commercials based on pragmatics showed that the discourses created in these ads are inconsistent with Iranian and Islamic culture and promote distasteful cultural values. The non-observance of the principles of cooperative and politeness in the conversations of individuals in these advertisements has created a discourse that leads to aversion to the discourse recommended in Iranian and Islamic culture, which is hospitality. Another value that has become anti-value in these conversations is the tradition of lending in the recommendations of Iranian and Islamic culture. Based on the research findings, in a number of conversations of these advertisements, Politeness Principles have been violated and the face of the other party has been threatened, and by this, they have hidden a discourse far from Politeness in their deep-structure. Cultural issues must be considered in advertisements because they inadvertently initiate a discourse into the culture of society, which can have many destructive consequences. According to the results of this study, it seems that TV commercials need more attention and review from a cultural perspective.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Advertising
  • Discourse Analysis
  • Dishwashing Liquid Dorto
  • Politeness Principles
  • Pragmatics
  • Grice
  1. آقاگل‌زاده، فردوس (1385). تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی. تهران: علمی و فرهنگی.
  2. باقری کرم، شهره (1390). بررسی کاربردشناسی پیامک‌های زبان فارسی. پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه اصفهان.
  3. پاکروان، حسین (1383). «تحلیل منظورشناختی محاورۀ فارسی». مجله علوم اجتماعی و انسانی دانشگاه شیراز. دورۀ 21. شمارۀ 1. صص 56-82.
  4. خدایی مقدم، معصومه، محمود الیاسی و شهلا شریفی (1396). «توصیف و تحلیل چند واژۀ مؤدبانه و کارکرد آنها در زبان فارسی در چارچوب نظریۀ ادب براون و لوینسون». زبان‌پژوهی. سال 9. شمارۀ 22. صص 25-55.
  5. رستمی، زهرا (1395). توصیف پاسخ منفی دادن به درخواست دیگران و ارتباط آن با اصول همکاری گرایس و اصل ادب لیچ در بین سخن‌گویان فارسی زبان. پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
  6. رسولی، محمدرضا. (1382). «بررسی مؤلفه‌های سبک زندگی در تبلیغات تجاری تلویزیون». فصلنامه علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی. دورۀ10. شمارۀ 23. صص. 43-93.
  7. شمیسا، سیروس (1386). معانی. تهران: میترا.
  8. شمیسا، سیروس (1393). بیان و معانی. چ 4. تهران: میترا.
  9. فقیهیان، نعیمه (1389). بررسی کاربردشناختی برخی اشارات تضمنی در تبلیغات تجاری فارسی. پایان نامۀ کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه اصفهان.
  10. کوه‌کن، سپیده و فردوس آقاگل‌زاده (1395). «تحلیل نشانه-کاربردشناختی تبلیغات تجاری متروی شهر تهران». مجموعه مقالات چهارمین همایش ملی تحلیل گفتمان و کاربردشناسی. به کوشش فردوس آقاگل‌زاده. تهران: نویسه پارسی. صص 173-197.
  11. یول، جورج. (1393) کاربردشناسی زبان. ترجمۀ محمد عموزاده و منوچهر توانگر. چ 6. تهران: سمت.
  12. Aghagolzadeh, F. (2006). Critical Discourse Analysis. Tehran: Elmi & Farhangi [In Persian]
  13. Bagheri Karam, Sh. (2011). A Pragmatic Study of Sms Text Messages in Persian (Master’s thesis). University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran [In Persian]
  14. Baider, F. H., Cislaru, G. & Claudel, C. (2020) Researching Politeness: From the ‘Classical’ Approach to Discourse Analysis … and Back. Corpus Pragmatics. 4, 259–272.
  15. Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universal in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  16. Cook, G. (2001). The discourse of advertising. 2nd ed. London & New York: Routledge
  17. Faghihiyan, N. (2010). A Pragmatic Study of Some Implicatures in Persian Advertising. (Master’s thesis). University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran [In Persian]
  18. Geis, M. L. (1982). The language of television advertising. New York: Academic Press
  19. Grice, H.P. (1975). "Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics, (Vol. 3. pp. 41–58) USA: Academic Press.
  20. Hardin, K. J. (2001). Pragmatics in persuasive discourse of Spanish television advertising. Dallas, TX: International Academic Bookstore
  21. Khodaei Moghaddam, M., Elyasi, M. & Sharifi, Sh. (2017). Describing and Analysing some Polite Words in Persian based on Brown and Levinson’ s Politeness Theory. Journal of Language Research 10 (22), 25-53 [In Persian]
  22. Koohkan, S. & Aghagolzadeh, F. (2016). A Semio-Pragmatic Study on Business Advertising in Tehran Subway. In F. Aghagolzadeh (Ed.), 4th National Conference on Discourse Analysis & Pragmatics (pp.173-195). Tehran: Nevisseh Parsi [In Persian].
  23. Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
  24. Mills, S. (2017). English Politeness and Class. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  25. Pakravan, H. (2004). pragmatics analysis of Persian conversation. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 21(01), 56-82 [In Persian].
  26. Rasuli, M. (2003). A Study on Life Style in the Iranian Television Advertisements. Social sciences 10(23), 43-93 [In Persian]
  27. Rostami, Z. (2017). Description of Saying Negative Response to Other's Requests and its Relation to the Grice s Cooperative Principles and Lich Politeness principle among Persian Speakers. (Master’s thesis) Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran [In Persian]
  28. Schmidt, R., Shimura, A., Wang, Z., & Jeong, H. (1995). Suggestions to buy: television commercials from the U.S., Japan, China, and Korea. In S. Gass & J. Neu (eds.), Speech acts cross cultures: Challenges to communication in a second language, 285-316. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter
  29. Shamisa, S. (2011). Figurative language and rhetoric. Tehran: Mitra [In Persian]
  30. Shamisa, S. (2014). Figurative language. Tehran: Mitra [In Persian]
  31. Yule, J. (2013). Pragmatics. (M. Amuzadeh, & M. Tavangar, Trans.). Tehran: Samt [In Persian]