1 I feel I have to explain how I selected the texts for this analysis. I was preparing for my “Modern Persian Literature” seminar at our department. It dealt with the period between the second half of the nineteenth century, until the Islamic Revolution. Therefore, I started with the first translations of travelogues, travel memoirs, pamphlets, short stories, novels, and drama. I chose works of Morrier, Marâghei, Tâlebof, Dehxodâ, Jamâlzâde, Hedâyat, ‘Alavi, Čubak, Âl Ahmad, Dânešvar, Golširi, Mahmud and Dolatâbâdi for this purpose. Reading works from these authors, I came upon the wider usage of ta’ârof, which I then decided to examine. Later, I started to select the texts on purpose, looking at them from this viewpoint. Jamâlzâde did not try to reach his aim with the help of the formulas of politeness, but it was the over-stylized speech, the excessive use of foreign and Arabic words, that generated ironic or comic effect in his works. This is also a sort of writer's tool, but it rarely occurs in other writers' works. It is only this work of Jamâlzâde's that has such strong exaggeration. For this reason, I did not choose this story. Hedâyat, Alavi, Čubak, Âl Ahmad must have known this short story very well. Hedâyat once referred to the need defined in the introduction to the collection of short stories entitled Yeki bud, yeki nabud that it was time that the language of average people was presented in writings instead of over refined language. Of course I found ta'ârof elements in others as well, like in Golširi's Sˇâzde Ehtejâb: Midânestid ke xedmat miresam? [Did you know that I'll call in?] (34), but ta'ârof was used in its natural way. That is the reason I did not deal with the others in this study. In another study, I'll deal with this question in the prose literature after the Islamic Revolution, studying two things: has the language itself changed since that time or not, and whether we can find any similar writer's tools— or new ones.

2 Szerdahelyi, I., Irodalomelméleti enciklopédia [Encyclopaedia of Literary Theory] (Budapest, 1995), 127Google Scholar.

3 Szerdahelyi, Irodalomelméleti enciklopédia, 130.

4 Fischer, M. J., “Persian Society: Transformation and Strain, Ph.D.,” in Twentieth Century Iran, ed. Amirsâdeqi, (London, 1977), 190Google Scholar. Ta'ziye was performed in the first ten days of the month Moharram.

5 Wirth, A., “Semiological Aspects of the Ta'ziyeh,” in Ta'ziyeh, Ritual and Drama in Iran, ed. Chalkowski, Peter J. (New York, 1979), 24–31Google Scholar.

6 Beeman, W. O., “Cultural Dimensions of Performance Convention in Iranian Ta'ziyeh,” in Ta'ziyeh, Ritual and Drama in Iran (New York 1979), 24–31Google Scholar.

7 Beeman, W.O., Language, Status and Power in Iran (Bloomington, 1986), 47Google Scholar.

8 Beeman, Language, Status and Power in Iran, 41. See also Beeman, W.O., “Emotion and Sincerity in Persian Discourse: Accomplishing the Representation of Inner States,” in International Journal of the Sociology of Language 148 (2001): 51–52Google Scholar.

10 The translations in my article are mine, not taken from the original sources.

9 Eslâmi, R.Z., “Invitation in Persian and English: Ostensible or Genuine,” in Intercultural Pragmatics Journal 2, no. 4 (2005), 462Google Scholar.

11 Sotude, M., Fârsi barâye englisi zabânhâ (Tehrân, 1983), 76–77Google Scholar.

12 Beeman writes, “I have suggested that the basic social pattern in Iranian interaction consists of a correspondence between the three dimensions I have mentioned above: (1) the controlling arena of activity-bâten/zâher; (2) the controlling social ethic; and (3) the controlling individual ethic represented in the discussion of Porru, kamru.” See Beeman, Language, Status and Power in Iran, 75.

13 Beeman, Language, Status and Power in Iran. 11.

14 M. A. Jazâyeri, Observation on Stylistic Variation in Persian, Actes du X. Congr. Intern. Des Ling, vol. III (Bucharest, 1970), 447–457.

15 Labov, W., The Social Stratification of English in New York City (Washington, D.C, 1966), 320–322Google Scholar; Labov, W., Sociolinguistic Patterns (Philadelphia, 1972b.)Google Scholar

16 I take these words from Beeman, but it is interesting to note that all the various studies use the theory of face enhancing as defined by Grice; that is, during a discourse for the participants, it is most important to preserve their image that comes up to social expectations.

17 Beeman, “Emotion and Sincerity in Persian Discourse,” 51–52.

18 Wehr, H.A., A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, ed. Cowan, J.M. (Beyrut, 1974)Google Scholar. Verb group VI.

19 See Samare AZFA footnotes in volumes I and II where he explains that it is politeness and gives an approximate definition of it; Samare, Y., (AZFA) Persian Language Teaching, vol. 2 (Tehrân, 1993), 62Google Scholar. See also chapter II of Sotude's book, where he presents politeness in a subchapter and gives some examples; Sotude, M., Fârsi barâye englisi zabânhâ (Tehrân, 1983), 76–77Google Scholar. See also footnote 20.

20 Some grammar books give examples, where the authors note in brackets that it is used in polite style or some examples may be provided on one or two pages. See bande, sarkâr in Lazar, G.A., A Grammar of Contemporary Persian (New York, 1992), 106Google Scholar. See also bande, jenâb-e ‘âli in Lazar, Grammar of Contemporary Persian, 181–182.

21 Tabrizi, M. H. X., Borhân-e Qâte’ (Tehrân, n. d.)Google Scholar.

22 Steingass. Persian-English Dictionary (Tehrân, 535/1976).

23 A. Amini, A. Farhang-e'avâm (Tehrân, n.d.).

24 This ta'ârof means that sometimes it happens that the conversational partner accepts something the first time it is offered, but sometimes the partner does not accept it. In some cases, as a joke, one may say “ta'ârof oftâdan nayoftâdan dâre.” I was told by our guest lecturer that in her family when nieces asked if they were to do the washing up, and she said “Yes, please do it,” the nieces jokingly said, “But Aunty, ‘Ta’ârof oftâdan dâre!'”

25 It says about its origin that in the old times when the inhabitants of Šâh ‘Abdolazim learned that their guests had to travel home, they tried to persuade their guests to stay longer. There is a synonymous saying: the ta’ârof-e dar-e šahri [the ta'ârof at the town gate], the background of which is that when the guest got as far as the town gate, then he was asked to stay.

26 It means in a broader sense: Don't do so much ta'ârof, get to the point!

27 Mo'in, M., Farhang-e fârsi (Tehrân, 1377/1998), 1096Google Scholar.

28 ‘Amid, H., Farhang-e Fârsi-ye Amid (Tehrân, 1339/1958), 324Google Scholar.

29 Dehxodâ, M.A., Loghat-nâme (Tehrân, 2002), 6793Google Scholar.

30 It gives a similar meaning to the one found in the Farhang-e'avâm. As verbs, ta’ârof dâdan and ferestâdan mean ‘give and send ta’ârof' as a present, while ta'ârof kardan [make a ta'ârof'], i.e. to offer food/drinks, refers to politeness.

31 Dehxodâ, M.A., Amsâl o hekam (Tehrân, 1352/1973), 547Google Scholar.

32 Hayyem. Farhang-e bozorg-e fârsi-englisi (Tehrân, 1375/1996), 218.

33 A. Âryânpur, English–Persian Dictionary (Tehrân 197), 307.

34 G.H. Sadri Afšâr, N. Hakami, N., and N. Hakami, Farhang-e fârsi-ye emruz (Tehrân, 1377/1998), 238.

35 Used as verbs; the following meanings are provided:

ta'ârof tekke pâre kardan [tearing ta'ârof to pieces], a synonym for being unduly polite;

ta'ârof dâdan [give ta'ârof], that is give a present;

ta'ârof dâštan [possess ta'ârof], the person who always does ta'ârof; and

ta'ârof kardan [make ta'ârof], that is to offer food/drinks to guests; we can also mention ta'ârof nakon! ‘Don't be shy!’

ta'ârofâti, [the person who is shy, too much polite]

36 Anvari, H., Farhang-e bozorg-e soxan (Tehrân, 1381/2002), 1774–1775Google Scholar.

47 Balay, Peydâyeš-e român-e fârsi, 303.

48 Balay, Peydâyeš-e român-e fârsi, 306.

49 Balay, Peydâyeš-e român-e fârsi, 306.

37 Ruznâme-ye xâterât-e'ein ol saltane, jeld-e dovvom: ruzegâr-e pâdešahi-ye Mozaffareddin Šâh, ed. M. Salvar and I. Afšâr (Tehrân, 1377/1998), 1441.

38 Ruznâme-ye xâterât-e'ein ol saltane, jeld-e dovvom: ruzegâr-e pâdešahi-ye Mozaffareddin Šâh, ed. M. Salvar and I. Afšâr (Tehrân, 1377/1998), 1497.

39 ta’ârofât [pleasantries].

40 Ruznâme-ye xâterât-e'ein ol saltane, jeld-e avval: ruzegâr-e pâdeŠâhi-ye Nâsereddin Šâh, ed. M. Salvar and I. Afšâr (Tehrân, 1377/1998), 511, 556.

41 Ruznâme-ye xâterât-e ‘ein ol saltane, jeld-e sevvom: ruzegâr-e pâdeŠâhi-ye Mohammad Ali Šâh va enqelâb-e mašrute, ed. M. Salvar and I. Afšâr (Tehrân, 1377/1998).

42 A.A. Dehxodâ,. Čarand o parand (Tehrân, n. d). Originally, it was published in the sur esrâfil journal during the reign of Mozaffar-eddin Šâh in 1905 and 1906.

43 Dehxodâ, A. A., Čarand o parand (Tehrân, n. d), 59Google Scholar.

44 In one of Bahâr's (Malek ol šo'arâ) poems, called Mehr-e mâdar [“Mother's Love”], we read the following line: Be rahn dâdeam asbâb-e xâne râ diruz ke lâzem ast ta'ârof be in o ân dâdan [I've taken the belongings of the house to the pawn-shop, as it's necessary to give ta'ârof to this or that (person)].

45 Dehxodâ, Čarand o parand, 139.

46 Balay, K., Peydâyeš-e român-e fârsi (Tehrân, 1377/1998), 303Google Scholar, 306.

50 See H. Javâdi, Satire in Persian Literature (UK, 1986), 268 (on Tup-e lâstiki), 240 (on Šikpuš). See also Dastgheib, A., Naqd-e âsâr-e B. 'Alavi (Tehrân, 1979), 41Google Scholar, and Dahbâši, A., Sâdeq Hedâyat (Tehrân, 2001), 355–359Google Scholar.

53 This refers to page 69, lines 1–4.

51 'Alavi, B., “Šikpuš,” in Camedân (Tehrân, 2537/1978), 69–82Google Scholar.

52 Mr. Navâpur, a pretentious, conceited nobody, who presents himself in a modern and enlightened way, also tries to rise above the ‘country-folk’ by his appearance, his way of dressing. The whole story is about his new coat. The narrator obtains the article written by Mr. Navâpur with great difficulty. He is disappointed to discover that in the article, there is nothing else but the things he has already been told so many times. On the other hand, he spots the logo of the cloth-producing company at the end of the article! So the article was prepared to advertise the company.

54 The address of hazrat-e âqâ is rather striking as the wise men and the scholars should be at least on Navâpur's level. This sentence is very interesting in itself because it supports my opinion as opposed to Beeman's claim. According to Beeman, the use of words of foreign origin indicates status, and in formal style, it is more elevated to use words of foreign origin. Here, on the other hand, we see that the wise men and the scholars object to the use of a lot of Arabic words. Beeman, W. O., Language, Status and Power in Iran (Bloomington, 1986), 79Google Scholar.

55 I indicate the response in conversations with this letter.

56 B. Alavi, B. “Critical Writings on the Renewal of Iran,” in Qajar Iran, Political, Social and Cultural Change 1800–1925, ed. E. Bosworth and Carole Hillenbrand (Edinburgh, 1983), 243–255.

57 G. M. Wickens, “Bozorg'Alavi's portmaneteau,” in Critical Perspectives on Modern Persian Literature, ed. Thomas M. Ricks (Washington, D.C. 1987), 293–309. Wickens expresses his opinion about this short story as follows: “The characters want to show off their rhetorical knowledge in the most everyday situations. The elevated style is the parody of the classical prose style perhaps thought to be outdated by Alavi.”

60 Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 26.

59 He brings an analogue here: if two people are repairing a car and one needs four screws, he would not like to get six or only two screws from the partner (Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 28).

62 Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 27.

61 He brings another analogue here: if two people are cooking together and one of them needs sugar, he wouldn't like to get salt instead. Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 28

64 Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 27.

63 He brings a third analogue here: if somebody is preparing a cake (mixing ingredients), he wouldn't like to be given an oven cloth (even if he'll need it at a later stage). Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 28.

66 Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 27.

65 He brings his last analogue here: I expect a partner to make it clear what contribution he is making and to execute his performance with reasonable dispatch. Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 28.

58 Grice, H.P., Studies in the Way of Words (Cambridge, 1989), 22–37Google Scholar.

67 Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 30–33. He brings examples for each group. For the first group, he brings the following example: A: I'm out of petrol. B: There's a garage round the corner. (If B knows that the garage is open, no violation happened. For the second group, he says: A: Where does C live? B: Somewhere in the South of France. Here B shows that he lacks the information. For the third group, he brings examples when somebody wishes to opt out of the performance, wishes to bring irony, ambiguity or metaphor into the communication to hinder a new meaning to the utterance. Grice, Studies in the Way of Words, 31–34.

68 Mihanparast in Hedâyat, S. Sag-e velgard (Tehrân, 1338/1959), 138–170. Mihanparast sets out to be ironic about how when some less intelligent people have power, they try to make use of the reputation of intelligent people and gain public acknowledgement.

69 An Iranian dessert.

70 Here we meet the same sort of artificial humility that he has always despised. Hedâyat shows here that he is at a lower level compared to the tourist because he does not speak English.

71 Ahmad, J. Âl, “Nazdik-e Marzun Abâd,” in Setâr (Tehrân, 1357/1978), 91–101Google Scholar.

72 As already mentioned, in traditional drama, we can speak of audio-visual codes, but here readers only find mental codes. Subtle references are made to ensure that the readers understand which gendarme is the good one and which one is not, which one was able to accept the fact that the differences in rank had ceased due to the position he held.

73 Lâstiki, Tup-e, in Antari ke Lutiyaš morde bud (Tehrân, 1341/1962), 113–187Google Scholar. Dâlaki is the Šâh's interior minister. One day they see a gendarme who is on guard in front of his house. He becomes very frightened, thinks that they have come to arrest him, and ponders why. He expects his usual guests for a card game. One of his two sons-in-laws is a high-ranking officer and one is a colonel. It is very interesting that as soon as the guests learn what has happened, they switch over from informal address to dry formal address and leave the house without delay. Finally, it turns out that the gendarme's wife is their servant and their son has kicked the neighbor's ball to them, and the gendarme would only like to have the ball back. It is interesting that as long as the interior minister does not know what the gendarme wants, he addresses him formally and offers him a seat. When the reason becomes known, he shouts at him and curses him. In the whole drama, there is nothing unusual in two characters' language: the wife's, who does not know anything about politics, and the language of her son, Xosro, whom everybody condemns for his revolutionary ideas. Their speech is void of superfluous phrases and they remain natural all the way through.

74 The address of Mammad is informal; it is the diminutive form of the proper noun Mehdi. It shows their close relationship.

75 In a nutshell, the plot of the novel is that Mâkân is a famous artist who was opposed to the Šâh's regime and he is said to have been killed by the Šâh's supporters. Nobody knows anything. The caretaker of the school spots a painting, the title of which is Češmhâyaš [Her Eyes], and he has been pondering for years who is depicted in the painting. One day a woman rings the bell and asks the caretaker to let her in to see the paintings. The caretaker finally agrees, provided the woman tells him her life story because he recognizes right away that it is her eyes that are drawn in the painting. The woman pays him for stealing the painting and tells him her life story. The novel is actually the artist's life story as told by the woman.

76 As this attempt was considered “new,” Hedâyat and Alavi tried to be on the safe side so that the readers would not misunderstand their message; therefore, they were also expressing their view of the characters. Nasrollâh expresses his opinion of the minister several times. In Âl Ahmad's and Cubak's works, this writer's tool did not need to be explained; however, we encounter confessions in Âl Ahmad's short story entitled Did o bâzdid-e ‘eyd [“New Year's Visit and Return Visit”]. The grandmother says that she does not know these “new fashionable” phrases and the narrator says that he hates these forms of politeness, but both of them use them. The narrator uses them superfluously and incorrectly when he says goodbye to his grandmother.

77 It is interesting to note here that when the two friends are talking, they use the same forms of politeness, they mutually respect each other, and the verbs are conjugated in second person plural. This means that even if the writer says that they are friends, they are not close friends; on the other hand, the writer describes them as friends on equal level to influence us, the readers. Otherwise these phrases are used with verbs in third person plural.