نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استاد پیوستۀ آموزش زبان و استاد وابستۀ روان‌شناسی تربیتی، گروه زبان نگلیسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

2 استادیار آموزش زبان فارسی، گروه زبان و ادبیات فارسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

چکیده

برقراری تعامل اجتماعی، بخش جدایی‌ناپذیر زندگی است و انسان‌ها، برای درک احساسات و عواطف یکدیگر به شیوه‌ای متفاوت ابراز نگرانی می‌کنند. در حالی‌که برخی نسبت به دغدغه‌مندی‌های شخص مقابل خود بی‌تفاوت هستند، برخی دیگر تنها همزبانی می‌کنند و در سطحی بالاتر برخی تمایل دارند خود را جای دیگری گذاشته و برای او گام‌هایی بردارند. در پژوهش کیفی حاضر، نگارندگان به بررسی 448 پاره‌گفتار بدست آمده از 30 فیلم و سریال با ژانر اجتماعی و 211 پاره‌گفتار جمع‌آوری شده از مکالمات افراد (با بازۀ سنی 18 تا 69 سال) در مکان‌های عمومی، خصوصی (رسمی/غیررسمی) و فضای مجازی مربوط به زباهنگ «دل‌نگرانی نسبت به دیگری» پرداخته و آنان را در 4 سطح هیچ‌دلی، برون‌دلی، درون‌دلی و براساس الگوی مفهومی تحلیلی زباهنگ مورد مداقه قرار دادند. نتایج نشان داد افراد با اهداف متفاوتی مانند دلسوزی، نصیحت، سلب مسئولیت و تبرئۀ خود، تغییر در تصمیم، شماتت، فداکاری، گلایه و ... از این زباهنگ استفاده می‌کنند. افزون‌براین، این زباهنگ تأییدی بر فرهنگ تعارف، جمع‌گرایی، هلویی، اغراق‌افزوده و غیرمستقیم‌گویی ایرانیان است که افراد نسبت به آن در مرحلۀ درون‌آگاهی قرار دارند. همچنین، نتایج نشان می‌دهد امروزه میزان دل‌نگرانی افراد بیشتر به سمت هیچ‌دلی و برون‌دلی پیش رفته که این امر حاکی از متمایل شدن آنان از جمع‌گرایی به سمت فردگرایی است. بنابراین، واکاوی این زباهنگ‌ به شناسایی بیشتر سطوح درون‌دلی و فرادلی در قالب عبارات زبانی کمک بسیاری می‌کند و راه را برای به‌فرهنگی و شناسایی ژن‌های معیوب در جامعه هموار می‌سازد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Examining the Cultuling of Iranians' Concerns for Others: From Apathy to Metapathy

نویسندگان [English]

  • Reza Peshghadam 1
  • Shima Ebrahimi 2

1 Professor of Language Education and Professor by Courtesy of Educational Psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

2 Assistant Professor of Persian Language Teaching, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Ferdowsi university of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

چکیده [English]

1. Introduction
Since birth and throughout all stages of development, man has been a social being as effective communication and interaction with others have been crucial for him. The capability to understand ideas, emotions and views and being aware of and sensitive to them in social interactions help develop a friendly relationship with others, promote their self-awareness and self-acceptance, and improve group cohesion. Living in an interconnected world means that we will inevitably face difficulties, and consequently, we will need the assistance of others regularly. Iranians have long had a reputation for being kind and helpful to their fellow citizens, and it is essential to remember that even giving verbal support and assistance to others can protect them from potential dangers (Andreoni et al., 2016).
When seeing other people’s problems and issues, individuals use various verbal and functional approaches in accordance with their own perception and understanding of the situation and the mental and emotional state of others. This suggests how much they care about others and are concerned with their problems. Concern for someone is defined as the emotional and cognitive ability to understand emotions and react to the mental and emotional states of others. Interpersonal interactions and socioemotional aspects have been used to differentiate “apathy (have no feelings)” from “sympathy (observe feelings)”, “empathy (understand feelings)” and “metapathy (change feelings)”.
The current research aims to determine the degree of people’s concern for others by analyzing language expressions used in different circumstances when confronted with another issue. To put it another way, the notion of cultuling (language + culture) of concern for others presents a novel form of concern, which is based on the degree of people’s involvement in the problem as well as the closeness between people.
2. Materials and Methods
The current study is qualitative and descriptive. It attempted to analyze and study parts of utterances related to this cultuling at four levels of apathy, sympathy, empathy, and metapathy to uncover those aspects of Iranian culture which deal with the level of concern for others. The study included a purposeful sample of conversations between the characters in Iranian social films (30 movies and TV series). All expressions related to concern (448 utterances) were selected. Additionally, a purposeful sample of natural talks about education, relationships, jobs, etc., —acquired from people’s daily chats across social media platforms (e.g., Telegram, WhatsApp, Instagram)—were analyzed.
The total number of utterances was 211. People who used these expressions in their writing ranged in age from 18 to 69, with educational backgrounds ranging from high school diplomas to doctorates and diverse jobs (student, freelancer, doctor, university professor, housewife, engineer, etc.). Concern-related utterances were then analyzed using the conceptual model of cultuling analysis (CLA).
3. Results and Discussion
Linguistic styles (i.e., utterances) are indicative of people’s degree of concern for others and the difficulties they face. How do they feel and think about others, and how do they respond when others are involved in certain situations? Pishghadam et al. (2022) have categorized concern types into four groups,

Sympathy involves understanding from your perspective. Empathy involves putting yourself in the other person’s shoes and understanding WHY they may have these feelings. The difference in meaning is usually explained with some variation of the following: sympathy is when you share the feelings of another; empathy is when you understand the feelings of another but do not necessarily share them. Empathetic and sympathetic are similar words, but they are not the same. While being empathetic means putting yourself quickly and thoroughly in another person’s shoes, being sympathetic means showing concern for someone when something wrong happens to them. Sympathy is observation and acceptance of what someone else is going through. Empathy involves taking on someone else’s feelings. Empathy is better than sympathy, so it is considered better. Empathy and sympathy are suitable traits because they support people who need them. It is right to say that if we believe apathy as introspection (see inside oneself) and sympathy/empathy as outrespection (see outside oneself), metapathy is a kind of anterospection based on which individuals see ahead of themselves (Pishghadam et al., 2022).
The findings of the data analysis based on the CLA demonstrated that people in all formal, informal, public and private settings have various goals, including sympathy, counsel, assistance, and cooperation, together with absolving themselves of blame and denying guilt, changing one’s mind, humiliating, shaming, and blaming. Most people are self-aware of these expressions when they use them in various settings, such as protesting, expressing worry, complaining, and defending one’s reputation. It is, however, striking that these phrases frequently appear in the form of sympathy. In other words, individuals attempt to provide comforting words and empathize with the person. This demonstrates Iranians’ complacency (Koutlaki, 2002) and collectivism (Pishghadam & Ebrahimi, 2020). Indeed, in communities that value relationships, individuals try to find emotional trust in others (Meyer, 2014). In these cultures, caring for others, even on a verbal level, helps people develop meaningful social connections. Individuals even attempt to verbally calm others to prevent injuring someone struggling with themselves (Mohammedaminzadeh et al., 2017).
The findings suggested that Iranians seek to establish their own identities and avoid meddling unnecessarily in other people’s lives, a shift from collectivism to individuality. However, Pishghadam (2022) believes that at the metapathy level, the audience may feel uncomfortable with the speaker’s suggestion, but after a while, he will understand the speaker’s concern and how he wants to save him from a dangerous situation. In other words, the speaker is concerned for the audience’s well-being and wants to save him from a difficult situation; however, the audience is upset about this situation and does not have much desire to do so.
4. Conclusion
Culture is like a gene passed from one generation to the next generation and has a significant impact on the destiny of people (Ferastkhah, 2014). If the language of care for others is presented and promoted effectively at the level of empathy and metapathy in the society and if social literacy about it is developed, we can expect and observe acceptable behaviors within the society and people will enjoy greater social and mental health. It should be noted that cultuling analysis tries to understand the culture transmitted through language in the form of dialogues, stories, poems and parables to flag defective genes and raise people’s awareness about them, and if necessary, they should be engineered and changed (Pishghadam & Ebrahimi, 2020). It is thus feasible to find the main reasons for the decline of empathy and metapathy in society and offer solutions for promoting and advancing empathy and metapathy in society. This can be achieved through the analysis of cultuling in contemporary poetry, music and literary works.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • 'Cultuling"
  • "Apathy"
  • "Sympathy"
  • "Empathy"
  • "Metapathy"