Determination is an inner drive that motivates one to do something. In linguistics, this concept refers to the fulfillment of the prolocutor will when delivering the speech. In other words, the speech is delivered consciously and it is not out of sleepiness, drunkenness, insanity and alike. It may appear that rhetoricians’ use of rhetorical devices is unintentional. The present study seeks to explore the concept of determination in rhetorical devices, by employing a pragmatic approach and descriptive-analytic methodology. Therefore, the speech of well-known rhetoricians was studied and rhetorical devices were analyzed in terms of determination and will. The analysis included the production and reception stage. Upon analysis of six rhetorical devices, it became evident that determination played a role in the use of these devices to the extent that overlooking determination might hinder our understanding of these devices. In conclusion, the use of rhetorical devices in rhetoricians’ speech is by no mean unintentional and the concept of “intent” in their speech is not equal to determination, rather a kind of pretension.

Abstract
In the current study on premodern Iranian poetries, from the first century of the history of Persian literature to the period of literary return, it is seen that the imaginary forms used in the poetry of the poets of the third to fifth centuries AH are innovative and the product of their own poetic experience. But with the passage of time from the end of the fifth century onwards, poets, instead of incorporating images of their own personal experience and elements of nature and life into poetry, have always remained within the same images. The question that this research seeks to answer is: why from the end of the fifth century onwards (until the return period), the forms of imagination used in the poetry of Iranian poets are often imitative and repetitive, and devoid of any kind of innovation?
Extended abstract
By examining the poetry of pre-modern Iranian poets, from the first century of the history of Persian literature to the period of literary return, it can be seen that the images used in the poetry of poets of the third to fifth centuries AH are innovative and the product of their personal poetic experience. But over time, from the end of the fifth century onwards, poets, instead of incorporating images of the product of their personal experience and new elements of nature and life into poetry, have always remained within the same range of images of the poets of the past.
The question that this research seeks to answer is: why from the end of the fifth century onwards (until the period of literary return), the forms of imagination used in the poetry of Iranian poets are often repetitive and any innovation is out of the realm of the ancients? Thomas Kuhn's theory of paradigm can be used to answer this question. According to this theory, scientific transformations alternate between normative and revolutionary periods. The movement of science in normative periods takes place through a "paradigm". Scientific paradigms are accepted patterns in the scientific community for significant periods of time about a major aspect of nature. What makes these patterns valid is the metaphysics or philosophy that governs that paradigm. Therefore, what is "scientific, normative and valid" in one paradigm is "unscientific, abnormal and invalid" in the intellectual, philosophical and cultural context of the other paradigm. Sometimes scientists accidentally encounter phenomena that do not conform to the norms and assumptions governing the paradigm. In the first encounter, these cases are considered as exceptional cases or the product of experimental error, and so on. But when the number of these inconsistencies increases, such justifications no longer work, and the paradigm is in crisis. Over time, this crisis deepens until a new paradigm emerges. As the new paradigm grows, so does the previous critical paradigm. Kuhn calls such a development a "scientific revolution." In his view, the "paradigms" before and after the scientific revolutions are "incomparable."
Kuhn's theory of paradigm is true not only of the history of science, but of all phenomena, including art and literature. In general, it can be said that in each period of time, according to the metaphysics of that period, there is a ruling paradigm that has its own presuppositions, norms and rules. These presuppositions and norms are based upon a fixed pattern that the paradigm as a whole imposes. In these paradigms, only those phenomena (including scientific, artistic, literary, etc.) can emerge that are consistent with the norms and assumptions governing the paradigm, while any innovation will be disregarded.
Accordingly, the imitation of imaginary forms in pre-modern Persian poetry is a phenomenon that should be studied in the presuppositions and norms that dominate the pre-modern paradigm. By examining the premodern paradigm as an all-encompassing whole, one can arrive at assumptions and norms that act as a model for all phenomena of this paradigm. One of these presuppositions is the idea of the originality of the past. In this view, everything in the past has an intrinsic value, so they are only valid and normal when they are imitations of that valuable and sacred past. In the eyes of the pre-modern man, the past is a model of the sacred and golden age, which is always viewed with a respectful eye, and man always remembers it as a dream day. This sacred past is a lost paradise to which all efforts are directed at. 
The manifestation of this presupposition can be seen in all intellectual areas of this paradigm. The originality of the past in the field of history has shown itself in the form of a distant view of time, and in the field of philosophy as a belief in the return of people to the origin of existence (first intellect). Looking at the poetry of Iranian poets from the fifth century AH onwards (until the return period), it is also possible to understand this kind of attitude in the world of literature. These poets have either explicitly mentioned their past poets as the supreme example of poetry, or, without openly praising their past, have accepted them as their role models and tried to write poetry like them. So it is natural that these poets, by following the example of the first Persian poets, instead of depicting their personal poetic experiences, repeat the same imaginary forms and images that had been previously tested by previous poets, and as a result, the imagination in their poetry is imitative and lacks innovation, and even if a poet was innovative, he has not left the realm of vision and attitude of the ancients.

Simin Behbahani, Hossein Manzavi, and Mohammad Ali Bahmani, together forming the new Persian Ghazal (short lyric poem) triangle, made significant changes in contemporary Persian Ghazal. Iranian poetry and prose quickly incorporated symbolism into their poetry and prose as one of the essential schools of modern literature. In this study, the researchers have analyzed about 400 symbols in the new Ghazal of the mentioned poets, according to Mahmoud Fotouhi's division of symbols into three categories: micro-, macro-, and structural symbols. They include the analysis of statistics and frequency of symbols, the origins, the concepts, the factors of creation, and the analysis of samples. Among the 326 micro-symbols studied, nature with 73% is the most important source, with a frequency of 326 applications. There are about 14% human symbols and about 11% human-made structures. The Ghazals of the period make little use of macrosymbols. Nevertheless, the organic symbols that have developed into a new art form in contemporary literature appear frequently in Ghazals of Simin, appearing 69 times, making her work distinguishably different from others.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Symbolism is based on axes such as ambiguity and polysemy, and symbols are signifiers that, in addition to explicit concepts, also refer to implicit concepts. The French philosopher and writer Paul Ricoeur, in defining the symbol, says that every signifying structure, has not only the specific and direct primary and literal meaning, but also another meaning which is indirect, secondary and virtual, and this other meaning is obtained only through the primary meaning (Ricoeur, 1974/a, p. 12).
In contemporary literature, symbolism is one of the important schools that has quickly opened its place in Persian poetry and prose. New poetry has been a pioneer in this field with the initiation of Nima Yooshij, and as a result, classical poetry, including the form of ghazal and then the new ghazal, has seen such developments.
Simin Behbahani, Hossein Monzavi and Mohammad Ali Bahmani, as the three sides of the new ghazal’s triangle, made fundamental changes in contemporary ghazal. Among these changes, these poets approached symbolism by implicit expression of political and social issues in order to avoid the consequences of frankness and clarity of speech.
Symbols are generally divided into artistic and non-artistic ones according to the nature of their function. Rhetoricians divide symbols into different categories in terms of their innovation or circulation, the most important of which are conventional or public symbols and individual, personal or innovative symbols. Mahmoud Fotouhi considers the relation of symbol with the texture of poetry to be studied in three parts with a structural and conceptual view. In this article, the authors have analyzed the symbols in the new ghazal, according to its three categories in the book of “rhetoric of image” with the titles of micro-symbols, macro-symbols and organic symbols.
Methodology
The methodology of the current study is based on the nature of data in accordance with the descriptive and analytical model and the purpose of selecting this model was to identify the symbols and then to analyze the content from statistical, stylistic, structural, aesthetic and categorical perspective.
Results
By studying the collection of ghazals of the pioneers of new ghazal, Simin Behbahani, Hossein Manzavi and Mohammad Ali Bahmani, the authors have extracted about 400 symbols and analyzed them in three sections of micro-symbols, macro-symbols and organic symbols based on Mahmoud Fotouhi's categorization. And in fact, this article looks at categories that include: statistical and frequency analysis of symbols, their origins, their concepts, innovations, factors of creation, comparison and analysis of samples and data. In the study of micro-symbols, with a frequency of 326 applications, the element of nature with about 73%, has the most important origin. Human symbols with about 14% and human handicrafts with about 11% are in the next stages. Macro-symbols have been used sparingly in the ghazals of this period, but the organic symbols that have formed a new artistic form in contemporary literature, have a significant frequency in the ghazal of Simin Behbahani with a frequency of 69 items. It can be considered as one of the special features and distinct characteristics of her ghazals.
Conclusion
The result of this article can be divided into four categories:
1. Origin: Organic symbols have more than two origins, human and nature, but micro-symbols of this period are notable in terms of their high frequency.
a) Nature: In the study of the micro-symbols of the new ghazal, the element of nature has a more significant frequency, which has appeared respectively in Behbahani, Monzavi and Bahmani’s ghazals. Among the various elements of nature, the element of color and nature in its general meaning, and in the next stage, the element of time, are the most frequent.
b) Human: Micro-symbols with human origin of ghazals of this period are not very frequent. In this section, dominator is symbols with mythological origins and the most important reason for its emergence is the political and social content of the ghazal of this period and its goal is motivating the audience.
c) Human handicrafts: Micro-symbols of this period with the origin of human handicrafts have been found to be less frequent than other patterns. What seems remarkable in this area is the fifty percent use in Bahmani's ghazals.
2. Innovation: The micro-symbols of this period, although considered new in contemporary literature, are not personal; and symbols that are more personal, sometimes had occasional uses in the poems of others. However, in this section, the organic symbols of Simin, such as Koli, Sara, Ilkhan va Zohre, Khar haye zesht, Neyzar, etc. can be considered as personal and private symbols of the poet.
3. Concept: Symbolism in Persian poetry and literature is fundamentally different from its western version, which is based only on artistic arrangements, emphasizing on the doctrine of "art for art's sake”. In the ghazals of this period, the symbol is considered as one of the dominant artistic functions among the various forms of imagination. But of all these rhetorical techniques, none has found more anti-oppressive function.
4. Factors of creation: The factors of creating the micro-symbols of this period are mostly socio-political issues of the poet's time and artistic requirements, then intellectual, philosophical, spiritual and psychological factors. In organic symbols, domination is with socio-political factors that we sometimes see the combination of various factors in Simin's personal symbols in which both political and social issues, intellectual and philosophical ideas, even issues and psychological sufferings of this group are discussed.
 

The subject of literary criticism has been of great importance in the subcontinent, and many critics have written criticism on both poetry and prose. Many critics and their works have been introduced or even published, but some are still preserved in manuscript form in various libraries. Generally, the written reviews are in prose, but among the existing works, reviews are also written in poetry, which is interesting in its own way. Sheyda Fathpouri, Munir Lahori and Abdul Baghi Sahbai are among the prominent critics of the subcontinent who have tried to experience criticism in the form of order, which seems to have been remarkably successful. Although the regularity of their criticism has caused some limitations. Despite the very valuable works that have been written in the field of literary criticism in the subcontinent, with the identification and discovery of different and innovative works in this field, the scope of literary criticism in the subcontinent becomes wider and more obvious every day, and it shows that this category is of great importance among writers, scholars and writers of that country have been blessed. In this article, we have first introduced the critical accounts of the poem, and then we have pointed out the motives of some of these critics in writing their criticisms, and then we have examined and analyzed these criticisms.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Although the knowledge of literary criticism is new and belongs to the last century, but by searching and identifying the past sources, we can see its traces in the ancient works and some writers and critics who professionally dealt with literary criticism. The history of literary criticism in the history of Persian literature has been more or less investigated and books have been written in this field. But what is very important in this context is that this topic enjoyed a lot of prosperity and prestige in the subcontinent, and there were great critics in that land who gave credibility to the topic of literary criticism in Persian literature by writing important works in this context. One of the wonders of literary criticism in the subcontinent is that, in addition to numerous works of criticism, which are written in prose, in a few cases we also come across criticism in verse, which is interesting in its own way. In the subcontinent, some critics have criticized poems or works that have useful points and, in addition to the content of the criticism, are also interesting in terms of structure and appearance.
History of criticism and literary theory of poetry in Persian literature
Literary criticism and theory of poetry in a broad and independent way does not exist in Persian literature. Perhaps some literary debates and controversies in the form of poetry, which has a long history in Persian literature, can be related to the category of criticism to some extent. The most famous of these literary controversies took place between Onsori and Ghazayeri Razi. In addition, some poets have made a general comment about the whole poem, the poetry of other poets, as well as praising their own poems, from a single verse to a complete poem. Even if these can be defined under criticism, they are still completely different from what some critics of the subcontinent have written. The critics of the subcontinent used to criticize poems in a professional manner and pointed out important points in the correction of verses.
Poetry criticism among critics of the subcontinent
As mentioned, some critics of the subcontinent, who are also Persian-speaking poets of that land, have presented their criticism in verse based on their own taste. The story begins when Haji Mohammadjan Qudsi Mashhadi (990-1056 AH), a famous poet of the Indian style, sang an ode in the memory of Imam Reza (PBUH). Sheyda Fathpouri, who was one of the well-known poets of that era, wrote a poetic criticism in the same weight and rhyme of the Qudsi ode and raised objections to some of its verses. After him, Munir Lahori, one of the famous Indian writers, poets and critics, gave a brilliant answer in the same weight and rhyme. Abdul Baqi Sahbai, one of the poets and critics of that period, once again attacked Sheyda with the same weight and rhyme and defended Qudsi. After them, Arzoo wrote the treatise Dad-e Sokhan based on these criticisms and as a "trial" between these critics in prose, and to a large extent he took the side of Qudsi and sometimes Munir. Of course, due to the fact that the critics have restricted themselves to respect the weight and rhyme, in some cases there is a weakness in the verses or filling, but in general they have achieved their purpose and at least they have been able to create a new wave in literary criticism.
Values of systematic criticism format
Perhaps, the main reason for choosing "order" for criticism is a kind of complicity. Because it is very difficult to write a review in verse and in a specific weight and rhyme. In other words, the critics criticized the poem in verse form in order to show off their knowledge and grace to the poets or other scientific rivals. Dealing with poem criticism from another aspect is also noteworthy, and that is the category of defamiliarization. This means that usually the written criticism of an artistic work is usually in prose, but the critics of the subcontinent, like the poets of that land, whose poems we have often witnessed defamiliarization in matters related to the aesthetics of poetry, have welcomed a kind of deconstruction or defamiliarization, which consists of the same criticism is the poem.
The Critics
Sheyda Fathpouri is one of the poets and critics of the 11th century, who is especially famous for his criticism of Qudsi's ode. Sheyda liked the old style in poetry and did not believe in the new style in poetry. He criticized 20 verses of Qudsi's ode in the form of 43 verses.
Munir Lahori (1054-1019) is a well-known poet, writer and critic of the subcontinent who was born in Lahore. Munir was also among the critics who, although he wrote poetry in the "new way" at first, but later changed his style and wrote poetry in the old way. He was one of the fans of the old style, and for this reason, he attacked four Persian-speaking poets of the new style in Siraj Munir and defended several advanced poets. Munir is the first person who responded to Sheyda's criticism of Qudsi and in the form of about 90 verses, he rushed to Sheyda in defense of Qudsi. His criticisms, which in some cases had a sharp and biting tone, were centered on rhetorical and grammatical points, of course Arzoo answered a significant number of them.
Mir Abd al-Baghi Sahbai (died 1094 AH), a poet and writer of the subcontinent, who is less famous than the previous critics. He is also one of Sheyda's critics, but Sahbai's criticism does not have a high analytical power compared to Mounir's and Sheyda's criticisms, as well as Arzoo's, however, new points can also be found in his criticism. Also, the criticism of Sahbai's poems is of great importance in the study of the tradition of literary criticism in the subcontinent.
Arzoo (1169-1099 AH), the most famous critic of the subcontinent, who has many works in various fields of rhetoric, linguistics, tazkira, description of literary texts, etc., has three very important books in the field of literary criticism; Tanbieh al-Ghafilin, Siraj Munir and Dad-e Sokhan said that the subject of the recent treatise is a response to these criticisms of the poem and in a way a defense of Mashhad's sacredness. While quoting these poetic criticisms, Arzoo has tried to answer them in a scientific, precise and fair manner.
The main motivations of Sheyda from Qudsi criticism
The root of Sheyda's criticism can be found in several other cases. One is his poetic taste and style; In such a way that Sheyda, contrary to the common style of his contemporaries, was inclined to the old style and simplicity and moderation of their poetry in terms of the use of metaphors. Another important issue is that Sheyda is the leader of a literary movement in India that believes that the Persian language and literature are not only for Iranians, and that Indian-origin professors of Persian literature are experts in this field and have the right to occupy it. Also, Sheyda believed that Iranians do not believe and pay attention to Indian poets and do not value the poets of this region in terms of poetry and literature. These factors can be seen as an introduction to his enmity with a poet like Qudsi who was Iranian. The majority of Sheyda's criticisms in this criticism are related to lexical, rhetorical and "everyday language" or colloquial issues, and sometimes legal and philosophical issues, which are often not free of mistakes. From this criticism of Sheyda and also the responses of the protestors, it can be seen that his criticisms were not without bias and mostly because of the lack of attention of Iranian poets to him. It is also clear from Arzoo's reviews of Sheyda that, due to Sheyda's strong relationship with the old style and lack of belief in the new style, he is not very familiar with the stylistic characteristics of the poetry of this period, especially in terms of the use of metaphors, or at least he is not interested in this style.
Some axes of critical criticism Sheyda
Sheyda has paid attention to many minor and major issues in his criticism of Qudsi verses. From the lack of meaning in the verse to dealing with legal and philosophical issues. Here we only discuss the main and most important points of Sheyda's criticism of Mashhadi's Qudsi ode: Lack of semantic connection in the structure of holy poetry, ignoring everyday language, failure to pay attention to grammar and language points, incorrect combinations in Qudsi poetry and not having a document and history in using some phrases and combinations.
Conclusion
Poetry criticism in the subcontinent has been successful with all its structural limitations, and critics have presented their criticisms regardless of poetic limitations. Another issue is that by carefully detailing the content of the reviews, it can be concluded that critics have attached more importance to formalism in poetry. If we pay attention to the axes of Sheyda's criticism and other people's answers, we can clearly see this approach to structure and form. Also, based on these reviews, we can see that people like Sheyda and Munir had no belief or interest in the new way or the basics of Indian style, but people like Arzoo and to some extent Sahbai believed and were interested in this style. Another thing is that since the vast majority of written criticisms in the subcontinent are in prose, writing poetry criticism is a kind of norm avoidance and highlighting, which is one of the characteristics of Indian poets in poetry. Another issue is that although compared to the prose criticisms written in the subcontinent, the poetry criticisms have occupied a much smaller volume (perhaps ten percent), but those criticisms cannot be ignored, and certainly in the review of the history of literary criticism in the Persian language and literature, these systematic reviews should also be evaluated.
 

After Islam appearance, Persian rhetoric first originates from the Quran and Arabic rhetoric, and later, by translating the works of Greek philosophers, Islamic rhetoric and accordingly Persian rhetoric is deeply influenced by Western works and rhetoric. Therefore, the literary works, especially the aesthetic tools of the knowledge of expression in Persian rhetoric are influenced by the Arabic and Western rhetorical manners; or at least they have some similarities. However, by considering the system of rhetoric and reviewing Persian literary industries, we find out that a type of these techniques, i.e. combined artworks, despite the dependence and correlation with Arabic and Western rhetorical techniques, is of special independence and monopoly. They have found that we do not see the same in other rhetorical manners. This survey, which is written in a descriptive-analytical way, tries to show that by examining the similarities between the methods of Persian rhetoric and Arabic and Western rhetorical manners, the combined artworks are specific to the coordinates of Persian rhetoric and other manners. The result of this research confirms that Persian rhetoric, due to the ability to reflect the cultural and ethnic elements of irony, as well as the double reading of its essential and necessary dimensions. Of course, this issue is more than a claim, it is an invitation from the experts in the aforementioned fields, which ultimately, whether the author's opinion is rejected or accepted, will be considered a new achievement for the field of rhetoric.
Extended Abstract
After Islam appearance, Persian rhetoric first originates from the Qur'an, and this book becomes a source of inspiration and the extraction of rhetorical rules. Factors such as justifying the challenge and proving Quranic rhetoric, the influence of non-Arabic works (Persian, Roman, Greek, and Indian) in Islamic culture, etc., provide the necessary prerequisites for motivating Muslim rhetoricians and formulating rhetorical opinions. But over time, especially from the 2nd century of Hijri onwards, with the translation of the works of Greek philosophers, Islamic rhetoric is strongly influenced by it, and especially it imposes rhetorical and logical standards on classical rhetoric. During this period, some of the works of Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle were also translated into the official language of that time, i.e. Arabic, and left a positive impact in the field of Islamic rhetoric. With these explanations, what is certain is that Persian rhetoric after Islam was formed and matured under the influence and under the influence of Arabic (Islamic) and Greek (Western) rhetoric. One of the manifestations of this influence is the presence of common literary works, especially the aesthetic tools of expression in Persian rhetoric.
However, by considering the system of rhetoric and reviewing Persian literary industries, we find that a type of these techniques, i.e., hybrid art structures, despite the dependence and correlation with Arabic and Western rhetorical techniques, is of special independence and monopoly. They have found that we do not see the same in other rhetorical manners (Arabic and Western). Of course, this issue is more than a claim, it is an invitation from the experts in the aforementioned fields, which in the end, whether the author's opinion is rejected or accepted, is considered a new achievement for the field of rhetoric. In more precise terms, if there are no combined works of art in the Western and Arabic rhetorical system, while the author's opinion is correct, a special and different aspect of the climate of Persian rhetoric will be displayed, and if the aforementioned techniques are in the Western rhetorical system, Arabic and... can be observed, opening a new horizon for new and comparative studies in this field (exploring the structure of images of rhetorical manners of other languages).
This essay, which is written in a descriptive-analytical way, tries to show that by examining the similarities of Persian rhetorical manners with Arabic and Western ones, that the hybrid art forms are specific to the coordinates of Persian rhetoric and the rhetorical manner of other cultures. They are deprived of this kind of aesthetic tools.
Despite the differences between Persian, Arabic, and Western rhetorical manners, in general, these manners are common in using some literary techniques, especially the individual artifices. The point to be noted in this regard is the relative similarity and independence of strategies in different rhetorical manners; That is, literary elements such as simile, metaphor, etc., have an almost similar and independent presence in the geography of Western, Arab, and Persian rhetoric, and each method has an aesthetic function, separate and apart from other methods. However, in the context of Persian rhetoric, in addition to being separate and independent, these techniques also have a mixed and mixed quality, and this is the dividing line between Persian rhetoric and Arabic and Western rhetoric.
 Considering the ability to reflect the cultural and ethnic elements of irony, as well as the double reading of its necessary and necessary dimensions, and also due to the inherent coordinates of the Persian language in the area of ​​combinability, with the combination of individual techniques, independent industries and It creates a uniqueness that is specific to Persian rhetoric and we do not see a sign of it in other rhetorical manners (Arabic and Western). It is the existence of these art structures that ultimately causes the formation of the Indian style, and the construction of many images of this style have been created with the help of these art structures, and basically the analysis of the structure of the Indian style images (and many other images) styles without using these combined tools will be better and incomplete.
At the end of this research, it is necessary to repeatedly acknowledge that the topic of this survey (the relevance of composite works of art to Persian rhetoric) is more than a claim, it is an invitation to experts in the field of rhetoric in other languages ​​and an opening of horizons. New for new and comparative studies in this field (exploring the structure of images of rhetorical manners of other languages).