|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
| Arab rhetoric is good statement and a powerful of influence. However, Chinese rhetoric is used
to express the meaning beautifully and clearly, and contains accuracy and
comprehensiveness. There are many researchers study about of Arabic and Chinese rhetoric,
but there are few comparative studies of “analogy style” in Arabic and Chinese rhetoric.
Therefore, this research aims to clarify the concept of rhetoric in Arabic literature and
Chinese literature. Also, it aims to know the opinion of scholars in the “analogy style”
in Arabic rhetoric and Chinese rhetoric. This research analyzes the similarities and differences
in the analogy between Arabic rhetoric and Chinese rhetoric. It also analyzes
similarities and differences in the analogy between selected short stories "Shams wa Layl" by
Mahmoud Taymour and "zhong guo yu yan gu shi" by Chen jin an. This research is based on the
inductive method, the analytical descriptive approach and the comparative approach. The
research found that there are four types of analogy in Arabic and Chinese rhetoric, which are:
al-tashbih al-mursal is similar to the ming yu, al-tashbih al-mu’akkad similar to an yu,
and al- tashbih al-tamthiliy is similar to duo xiang yu, al-tashbih al-maqlub
resemblance to dao yu. Although the language used by Arabs and Chinese is very different,
the objectives of the analogy are also the same. The differences between them including the
components of the analogy, in the Arabic analogy, are four components: al-mushabbah,
al-mushabbah bih, adah al-tashbih and wajh al-shabh, but in the Chinese analogy, there are only
three components: ben ti, yu ti and yu ci. As for the type of analogy, it is very much in Chinese
rhetoric compared to Arabic. In conclusion, there are similarities and differences
between the analogy style in Arabic and Chinese languages.
|
| References |
???.???.?2003??.????.??.?????????.
??.?1999??.???????.??.?????.
????????????.?2001??.??????.??.???????.
???.?1980??.??.??.???????.
???.?2010??.???????.??.?????????.
???.???.???.?2001??.?????????.??.?????????.
??????????????????.?1991???????????????..??.??????????.
???.?2016??.???????-????????.?????.
???.?2014??.?????.??.???????.
???.?2016??.???????.??.???????.
??.?2010??.????.??.???????.
??.?1956??.?????.??.???????.
???.???.?2003??.????.??.???????.
???.?1994??.??????.??.????????.
??.?1940??,????.??.???????.
??.?2011??.???????????????.??.???????.
???.?2013??.??????????.??.???????.
???.?2000??.???.??.???????.
???.?1995??.????.??.???????.
??.?2005??.????.??.???????.
??.?2002??.???.??.???????.
???????.?2003??.????.??.?????.
??.?2002??.????.??.???????.
???.?1942??.??????. ??. ?????.
???.?1984??.????????????.??. ?????.
???.?1959??.????. ??. ?????.
???.?1980??.????????. ??. ?????.
???.?1982??.????. ??. ?????.
???.?1985??.????. ??. ?????.
???.?1990??.????. ??. ?????.
???.?2014??.?????. ??. ?????.
???.?2006??.???????. ??. ???????.
???.???. ?2006??.????????. ??. ???????.
???.?2011??. ?????. ??. ?????????.
|
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |