نقد و بررسی فرهنگ فارسی عامیانه

Abstract
The slang language and literature of any society encompass many of its cultural components and, consequently, serve as the most appropriate tool for understanding the cultural identity of its people. In this context, the lexicography of vernacular language, which has flourished in the contemporary era, plays an effective role in recognizing this identity. One of the prominent works in the field of vernacular lexicography is the Dictionary of Colloquial Persian (Farhang-e Fārsi-ye Āmiyāneh) by Abolhassan Najafi, which examines colloquial Tehrani lexical units from the beginning of the fourteenth solar century. This study aimed to evaluate the extent of this book’s success in adhering to the principles of lexicography, based on a library research methodology. The findings, following an examination of these principles and the elements of lexicography, indicate that this work is the best dictionary in the field of vernacular language; this is because, unlike similar previous works, it possesses a comprehensive, systematic, and up-to-date lexicographical structure, and it has avoided relying on oral sources in favor of a coherent written corpus—though it does contain some minor deficiencies in terms of formal lexicographical aspects.”
Keywords: Colloquial Language, Colloquial Persian Dictionary, Critique, Lexicography
1. Introduction
From the perspective of speaker social class, language is categorized into three tiers: super-standard, standard, and sub-standard. The super-standard variety is specific to classical literary texts, characterized by the use of literary devices and historical grammar. The standard variety refers to the formal, common written language prevalent among the educated class residing in the capital. The sub-standard (spoken) variety is further divided into two categories: ‘everyday/conversational/colloquial’ and ‘slang/vernacular.’ The everyday variety represents the spoken language of the educated stratum of society, whereas the slang variety belongs to semi-educated classes and includes two sub-categories: ‘slang in its conventional sense’ and ‘jargon/street slang’ (jahili). Conventional slang often features metaphorical and idiomatic expressions infused with humor, while the jahili variety is specific to the less-educated, illiterate, or anti-social classes, often manifesting phonological processes such as metathesis (e.g., chisep instead of chips), which the educated or semi-educated classes avoid using (Najafi, 2008).
In the contemporary era, numerous dictionaries have been compiled to define and explain the words and expressions of the slang variety, including: Farhang-e Avam by Mirqoli Amini, Farhang-e Loghat-e Amiyaneh by Mohammad Ali Jamalzadeh, Farhang-e Loghat-e Amiyaneh va Moaser by Reza Anzabi-Nejad and Mansour Servat, Farhang-e Farsi-ye Amiyaneh by Abolhassan Najafi, and Ketab-e Koucheh by Ahmad Shamlu."
Research Questions
1) What are the distinguishing features persian slang lexicon from other similar lexicon?
2) To what extent does persian slang lexicon conform to the fundamental criterias of modern lexicography?
3) Can persian slang lexicon be considered the best work in the field of Persian slang lexicography?
2. Literature Review
Four detailed articles have been written so far on the criticism of Persian slang lexicon: Baha' al-Din Khorramshahi, in his article "The Turning Point and Deep Transformation in Persian Lexicography," makes several criticisms of some elements of lexicon. Then, by comparing the frequency of slang entries in Najafi's work with Jamalzadeh's lexicon of slang Words and Today's Persian lexicon by Sadri Afshar and the Hekmi Sisters, he concludes that Persian slang lexicon is unique in terms of form, content, and methodology.
In his article, "Slang or Spoken Persian Dictionary, Which?", Ali Mohammad Haqhshenas considers this dictionary, like many similar works, to be data-based, compiled based on a specific linguistic corpus, and this characteristic, in addition to the comprehensiveness and coherence it gives to the work, also deprives it of many important sources. For example, the combinations "water to gather in one's mouth" in the meaning of "someone's appetite to be stimulated" and "water to flow over one's head" in the meaning of "overwhelmed by problems" are not included. Another is that some entries are recorded without mentioning their slang meaning or even their evidence. For example, the entry "Ay bi-kolah" is included with its dictionary meaning and, consequently, without mentioning the evidence of irony, and the entry "Ay bakolah/ay maddi" is also recorded with its literal and dictionary meaning; while the appropriate ironic meaning can be extracted from that evidence. Haqhshenas also mentions the special advantages of this work as follows: The author's linguistic corpus is quite specific and structured. Some words that appear to belong to the formal language class, but are used in common usage with a figurative meaning, have been recorded for the first time in this work; such as: book (in the sense of thinness), rubbing (in the sense of being eliminated), and string (in the sense of information and awareness). Also, the colloquial meaning of grammatical words has been described for the first time in this dictionary. For example, the suffix "به" has been recorded with ten meanings, of which we will mention three below: 1) Before: I woke up at two o'clock in the afternoon. 2) Dependent on, subject to: If a man has a beard..., he also has a goat. 3) I swear to, I swear to: By five people if I were a person of these words. Or some of the meanings of the conjunction "ta" are recorded as follows: 1) As far as: Ta works. 2) As soon as: Ta ignored it, he picked up the rug... 3) (before the verb in the imperative mood) to express a transaction, for example: You wanted me to do it, so I didn't do it.
In his article “Bazham” on Persian slang lexicon, Houshang A’lam considers many of the lexicon entries to be old and abandoned due to the type of sources used and the author’s non-Tehranian origin. He also considers many vernacular entries such as: “Ouf shodan” (in childish language), “Baybay” (to say goodbye)”, “Khuda bebakhshad” (in response to “Bebakhshid!”), “Shoke kerden/sheden”, “Tayyeb va Tahir”, “Langderaz” and “Nokar Babaye Kasi” to be worthy of being recorded in the lexicon, but he believes that the reason for their absence is that the author did not refer to publications such as “Towfiq”, “Baba Shamal” or the works of Sadegh Chubak, Mohammad Masoud and “Ketabe Kocheh”. He considers some of the pronunciations to be due to the use of written, official and non-vernacular sources (Nakas, “Neshastan”). A'lam considers another flaw in the work to be the failure to determine the linguistic levels (formal, abandoned, ignorant, and vulgar) of the entries, and believes that knowledge of these levels is essential for authors of bilingual dictionaries (in order to find stylistic equivalents) and speakers of the language (in order to know the type of social status of the use of words or proverbs). He considers the old-fashioned language of some of the definitions, inconsistency in the way pronunciations are recorded, and the failure to mention the antonyms of the entries to be other flaws in this work.
In his valuable article, History of Persian slang lexicography, Mehrdad Naghzgooi Kohan, after mentioning the history of slang lexicography, introduces Persian slang lexicon. After mentioning Najafi's view on the classification of type slang, he describes the general characteristics of the work. Then, in a six-line paragraph, he only criticizes part of its phonetic transcription method and then states the advantages of the work over other dictionaries.
3. Methodology
This research examines the extent of its success in adhering to the principles of contemporary lexicography through a detailed study and examination of Persian slang lexicon.

4. Results
Compared to similar works, Abolhasan Najafi's Persian slang lexicon is the most consistent with the standards of contemporary lexicography.
So far, Persian slang lexicon is the best work in the field of Persian slang lexicography due to its structural methodology.
5. Discussion
Previous works in the field of criticism of Persian slang lexicon had only dealt with a limited and brief examination of this work, and none had criticized all elements of the culture, such as: entry, evidence, phonetics, and etymology, in accordance with scientific and modern standards of lexicography. However, the present study has examined and criticized it in detail with the aim of proving the superiority of this lexicon over similar works.
6. Conclusion
Despite all its structural shortcomings, the Persian slang lexicon remains the best—and perhaps the only—lexicon in the field of slang language. This is because it has examined slang Tehrani lexical units from the beginning of the 14th [solar] century using an extensive written corpus, to the extent that half of its entries have not been found in any previous general or even slang Persian lexicons. Furthermore, Persian slang lexicon has examined the entries in accordance with standard, up-to-date lexicographical practices; upon recording an entry, the dictionary—wherever possible—provides phonetic transcription, etymology, grammatical identification, and occasionally usage labels, followed by a definition, illustrative examples, and the sources for those examples. In addition to these features, it is the first slang lexicon to have recorded even negative verb forms with their specific slang meanings.
Bibliography:
A’lam, Houshang. (2001). Again about Persian slang lexicon. Nameh Farhangestan, 1(17), 96-125.
Haqhshenas, Ali Mohammad. (1990). Which is slang or colloquial Persian language?. Danesh Publication, 96, 59-65.
Khorramshahi, Baha'uddin. (1990). A turning point and profound change in Persian lexicography. Bukhara, 12, 352-387.
Khorramshahi, Baha'uddin. (2008). From Word to lexicon. Nahid.
Naghzgooye kohan, Mehrdad. (2007). History of Persian slang lexicography. Lexicography (Special Issue of the Academy Journal), 1, 167-183.
Najafi, Abolhasan. (2008). Persian slang lexicon. Niloufar.