نقد ساختاری شیوة فرهنگ‌نویسی در لغت‌نامة دهخدا

As the largest lexicographic program of the Persian language, the Dehkhoda Dictionary has played a fundamental role in establishing and transmitting the lexical heritage of the Persian language from one generation to another. Despite the reference status of this work, its internal structure has been less critically examined from a lexicographic perspective. The present study, with the approach of structural criticism, has analyzed the internal structure of the Dehkhoda Dictionary in seven main areas including phonetics, etymology of words, the method of selecting headwords, the structure of entries, combinations, the system of intratextual references, and the method of citing extratextual sources. The research method is descriptive-analytical and based on library data, and the analyses have been conducted based on purposeful sampling of selected entries. The findings show that the Dehkhoda Dictionary, although unique and extensive in terms of the richness of linguistic data and textual evidence, faces confusion and disorganization in terms of lexicographic structure. This study, while explaining the structural confusions of the Dehkhoda Dictionary, provides a basis for a critical review and comprehensive editing of its structure, in order to maintain the position of the Dehkhoda Dictionary as the most comprehensive contemporary Persian dictionary.
 
Extended abstract
1.Introduction
As the largest and most influential Persian lexicographic program in the contemporary century, Dehkhoda's Dictionary has a unique place in Persian history and literature. The unparalleled breadth of vocabulary, the diversity and abundance of linguistic evidence, and the reliance on literary and historical texts have made this work an obvious reference in literary, linguistic, and historical studies. In a way, many subsequent dictionaries have directly or indirectly benefited from its data. However, the magnitude of this work has not led to its internal structure being examined systematically and critically, based on scientific lexicographic criteria. The main issue of the present study is to what extent Dehkhoda's Dictionary has internal coherence, information systematization, and equality with the scientific principles of lexicography, from the perspective of the lexicographic structure that Dehkhoda intended.
Given that in the compilation stage of the dictionary, the style and the non-binding nature of the code and the writing of entries have emerged in the structure of this work due to the knowledge, experience and different authors. In addition, the difference between the entries compiled during Dehkhoda’s lifetime and the sections compiled after that has added to the complexity of this dictionary. The present study, with the fundamental elements of the structure of the Dehkhoda dictionary, attempts to explain an analytical picture of the structure and internal system of the Dehkhoda dictionary.
2.Theoretical framework
In the tradition of modern Persian lexicography, which was established by the scientific and methodical efforts of Ali Akbar Dehkhoda in the past century, the main goal was to create a coherent structure, based on a precise alphabetical order, along with the separation of meanings and systematic citation; a framework that found institutional form in Dehkhoda's dictionary. However, in the long process of compiling the work, especially due to the large number of collaborators and the gradual accumulation of materials, the initial coherence in many entries was weakened and caused disorder in the dictionary. This structural rupture is itself the subject of criticism of this dictionary based on the theoretical framework of Dehkhoda's method of working in lexicography.
3.Methodolgy
This research is of a descriptive-analytical type and is based on the structural criticism and review approach in lexicography. The data collection method is library-based and the latest printed and software edition of the Dehkhoda dictionary (1998) has been used. In the first step, the structure of the entries has been taken and formulated based on a model defined in the dictionary itself. This pattern includes the title or headword, entry recording, language and grammatical identity, meaning, meaning document, evidence, source of evidence, combinations, sources, and references.
In the latter stage, purposeful and diverse samples of entries were selected to measure their level of equality with the pattern defined in the dictionary. These samples, as indicators of qualitative analysis, provided the possibility of assessing the level of internal coherence, uniformity of information, and structural efficiency of the entries. The analyses were conducted in seven main axes: phonetics or recording of words, etymology, method of selection and formation of headwords, generality and internal organization of entries, combinations, system of intratextual references, and method of citing sources and extratextual sources. In each axis, with reference to specific examples, the existing shortcomings and inconsistencies were examined and shown.
4.Results & Discussion
The findings show that the Dehkhoda Dictionary, despite its unparalleled richness of linguistic data and textual evidence, is faced with confusion and disorganization in terms of lexicographic structure. In the field of phonetics, the necessary uniformity and stability in the recording of words is not observed, and sometimes different forms of a word are identified without a system. In etymology, the information provided is also not uniform, and in some entries, the roots have been identified, but in some cases, such information is also omitted or incomplete.
In the field of thesaurus selection and structure of entries, the difference in the sizes of entries, the dispersion of meanings, marginalization, and the failure to examine the meanings in a main entry are prominent issues. Sometimes the meanings of a word appear in separate entries, and semantic coherence has been lost. Also, in some entries, supplementary information and long explanations have replaced the well-defined structure, making it difficult to retrieve information.
In the section on combinations, there is no clear and consistent criterion for inserting or deleting combinations. The in-text citation system also faces shortcomings such as the lack of reference entries, inappropriate or distant references, references to polynomial characters without uniform organization, references to previous and subsequent entries, and the deletion of intermediate references; which confuses the user in the process of searching for information.
In the area of ​​extratextual sources and citations, there are also numerous inconsistencies: the lack of clarity of the source, general and inadequate citations, differences in the method of citing (footnotes or in-text), the omission of intermediate sources, the failure to include the source in the main entry, the absence of references in some cases, the inclusion or exclusion of page numbers, excessive mention of pages or citations, and even unnecessary citations or excessive references to dictionaries. This set of inconsistencies and shortcomings shows that the lack of a written and binding style, as well as the differences in the pen and experience of the authors of the entries, have had a direct impact on the final structure. In summary, the structural analysis shows that the Dehkhoda dictionary is influenced by the individual collection style and personal tastes of the authors rather than being a function of a unified system based on scientific principles of dictionary writing. Although this was considered natural during the period of the work’s formation, it has created serious challenges in relation to the standards of contemporary lexicography.
5.Conclusons & suggestions
The present study showed that the Dehkhoda Dictionary, despite its unparalleled status in the history of Persian lexicography, does not have a systematic and unified coherence from the perspective of its internal structure. The observed disorders at various levels, from phonetics and etymology to entry, referencing and citation, indicate that this comprehensive dictionary requires structural revision. This criticism is not aimed at reducing the historical and scientific value of the Dehkhoda Dictionary, but rather with the approach of critical rereading and improving its efficiency.
Accordingly, a comprehensive revision and editing of the structure of the Dehkhoda Dictionary, while preserving its historical authenticity and the richness of its data, can pave the way for transforming this great work into a coherent, systematic cultural work that is in line with contemporary research needs. Such an action will ensure the continuity of the authoritative position of this work and elevate it from the level of a historical legacy to a dynamic and efficient position in the Persian language knowledge system.
Select Bibliography
Anvari, Hasan. Farhang-e Bozorg-e Sokhan (The Great Sokhan  Dictionary). Under the supervision of Hasan Anvari, Tehran: Sokhan, 2003. [In Persian].
Dehkhoda, Ali Akbar. 1998. Loghat-nameh-ye Dehkhoda (Dehkhoda Dictionary), Tehran: Dehkhoda Dictionary Institute, 1998. [In Persian].
Ehteshami, Shole. “Citation Analysis of the Entries of Non-Personal Historical Proper Nouns in the Dehkhoda Dictionary.” Journal of Librarianship, 2003, 37, 40, 173–199. [In Persian].
Mirshamsi, Maryam Dehkhoda and the Dictionary. Tehran: Nashr-e Qatreh, 2024 [In Persian].
Moʿin, Mohammad. Mazdayasna and Persian Literature, Tehran: University of Tehran Press, 1947. [In Persian].
Moʿin, Mohammad. Farhang-e Farsi (Persian Dictionary), 18th edition, Tehran: Amir Kabir Publications, 2001. [In Persian].
Mosahab, Gholamhossein. Dāyerat al-Maʿāref-e Fārsi (Persian Encyclopedia), Tehran: Amir Kabir Publications, 2002. [In Persian].
Ostadi, Reza. “Deficiencies and Weaknesses in the Dehkhoda Dictionary.” Kayhan-e Andisheh, June–July 1998, nos. 78–79, 5–31. [In Persian].
Persian Orthography: Approved by the Academy of Persian Language and Literature, Tehran: Academy of Persian Language and Literature, 2010. [In Persian].
Sadeghi, Ali Ashraf. “Methods of Lexicography in the Dehkhoda Dictionary.” Farhang-nevisi (Lexicography), Academy Special Issue, 2009, 2, consecutive no. 2, 2–39. [In Persian].