بررسی تطبیقی فرآیند شکل‌گیری معنا درمتن ادبی در آثار کمال أبودیب و صلاح فضل براساس نظریه‌ی ساختارگرایی

Introduction: Kamal AbuDib and Salah Fadhl are two well-known contemporary critics whose studies researches have played a prominent role in acquainting Islamic researchers with the modern criticism. Influenced by the structuralism school, these critics define the mechanism of text comprehension as a productive process.
Since long, comprehension of the meaning has been a challenge for all those that endeavor to conceive the meaning of texts and writing signs. And now, despite the available literary characters and traces, the challenge continues. Besides, the difference of conceptions mostly shows the diversity of readers’ interpretation styles. This accentuated the necessity of aiming at the comprehension of meaning by finding solutions to decrease conflicting interpretations.
Generally, the process of text comprehension is the result of interaction between three factors together, namely Writer, Text and Reader. In the sight of traditional critics, the meaning of a text is dominated by the author, but, in modern criticism, meaning has two other sides; that is, text and reader. Obviously, if the author holds the meaning, the result will be his or her domination, and, if the reader holds and dominates the meaning, the result is multi-meaning contents.
According to this theory, based on the literary text purpose, one of these three elements can be used to create and comprehend the text.
Methodology: Based on a comparative analytical method, the present article seeks to explain the theoretical approach of contemporary Islamic critics to the process of "understanding the literary text". This is done through a theoretical study and selection of two contemporary scholars in the Arabic criticism. The research analyzes the theory of the contemporary Islamic scholars regarding the process of text comprehension according to an analytic comparative method by focusing on two influential scholars in the domain of critical structuralism in Arab countries. There is also an investigation of the influence level of traditional criticism in the development of their subjects.
Results and Discussion: As for the influence of pattern in the text conception, Abuadib and Fadhl are selected to study for their structuralism criticism and the adaptation of their thoughts to selected literary texts on the purpose of defining the textual aspects and text conception processes and gaining the intended meanings. So, the following questions are sought to be answered:
 
1. What are the steps of the text realization process by Abuadib and Fadhl, as forerunners of contemporary Arabic criticism?
2.  How are they affected by traditional criticism heritage?
3. How much have they innovated in the accommodation of their critical theory to literary texts?
 
The results indicate that these critics define the meaning formation in four stages, despite differences in the use of traditional Arabic criticism. What distinguishes the quality of the structural study between these critics is the difference in the method of analyzing the relationships of partial elements. AbuDib fully utilizes the achievements of structuralism critics without neglecting the legacy of traditional critics, especially in syntax and rhetoric. Fadhl uses less traditional criticism and seeks only to do a multi-layered study of signification words based on the structuralism school.
Conclusion: The study of the views of the two Islamic scholars in the field of understanding literary texts shows that both have a productive approach to understanding the meaning of the text. They believe that the process of understanding the text is to invent and create, and receiving meaning is considered as an action operation not a reaction operation. The study of the works of these two structuralist critics also shows that Abudib, in comparison with Fazl, believes more in preserving the traditional heritage of Arabic criticism along with using the concepts of structuralist criticism. However, Kamal Abdueb, by reflecting on the theory of Jorjani order, has a considerable sense of aristocracy over the legacy of Arabic criticism. Unlike Aboudib, Fazl has adapted the stages and analytical levels of the structuralist school to specific literary texts just a little and has sought to explain the theoretical angles of this school and other contemporary western schools. At the same time, Abudib has always tried to develop Islamic thought and culture by using the evidence from the Arabic literature. He has also paid special attention to the application of contemporary critical theories, especially structuralist critiques on Arabic culture and literary heritage and poetry. According to Abudib, the formation of the meaning in a literary text has four stages including identifying the main elements and the existing dualities, determining the central duality, examining and analyzing the existing relations between the dualities and elements of the text simultaneously and in two axes. These axes are companionship and substitution in the final and general meaning of the text using the relationships discovered between the existing elements. Besides, an analysis of the general structure of convergent literary texts is necessary to achieve a comprehensive structure. Fazl recognize semantic analysis stages of a literary work based on the school of structuralism that suggests the four levels of discovery and identification of the constituent elements of the text, classification of smaller units in general components, study of relationships between text elements based on contextual relations and reaching the general meaning. He recommends the study of the general meaning, of the text and the use of the achievements of other related sciences such as sociology and literary psychology for semantic networking.