---

Nathalie Sarraute belongs to the the modern novelists who take a discrete- fragmentary and physical-intuitive outlook to the representation of the human psyche. In fact, according to Sarraute, it is only within dialogism that the actualities of the human psyche manifest themselves, and such actualities stem from strains and stresses between characters which run through the underlying subspace of the dialogues—what Sarraute calles sub-dialogue, or tropism. We claim that there exists a distinct quality in Sarraute’s tropismes which detaches the reader from the horizontal axis of the narrative and leads him/her vertically into a veiled abstract world, a quality which we call “linguistic transudation, that is, a transudation which disconnects one from the stereotypical level and leads him/her to the veiled underlying world by rendering the imperceptible tropismes tangible. In this article, by referring to Mikhail Bakhtin insights on dialogism and polyphony, we demonstrate how our “linguistic transudation,  as a linguistic technique, maps into to the writer’s view of  discourse  and the negation of the Cartesian Supreme Subject. In fact, Sarraute  dialogism as fragmentary and discontinuous conception shows the resemblance with the principle of discontinuity as a philosophical term in phenomenology.

---

own self dimensions and delegitimize the others’ elements; legitimation, from the semiotic-discursive point of view, is a process that hegemonizes power through discourse articulation. The authors’ aim in this paper is to investigate and identify the way in which the legitimating mechanisms of gendered discourses function in contemporary Persian story literature. Hence, they provide a deconstructive reading of the methodology of Van Leeuwen (2007) based on Laclau and Mouffe (2001) and Derrida (1983) and take advantage of a variety of linguistic tools. Then, in order to analyze the functions of these mechanisms, they go through the “Solok” and purposefully examine some of its parts. Finally, they respond to the research question about how the legitimizing mechanisms of gendered discourses operate and introduce four structures, i.e. simple, compound, complex, and chain, in those mechanisms. Moreover, they show that after gaining and achieving the legitimacy, the gendered discourses step forward to maintain and fix the legitimacy and delegitimize the other explicitly and implicitly- by the way of recontextualization.
 1. Introduction
Legitimation is a discursive mechanism that seeks to hegemonize the operation of any discourse. The purpose of this study is to investigate the function of de / legitimation mechanisms of gendered discourses in the contemporary story literature.
The importance of this research can be discussed in three dimensions. First, the researched body is story literature which benefits from the tools that make it more hegemonic than other wirtten texts such as political ones. The second is its methodology which provides a deconstructive reading of Van Leeuwen (2007) theory of legitimation. Finally, it goes beyond the description and tries to explain how discursive legitimation works in the story under study.
The main question is how gendered discourses in the Dolatabadi's Solok try to legitimize own self dimensions and delegitimize the others’ elements. And finally, the hypothesis is that the gendered discourses in Solok try to legitimize their dimensions by changing their articulations, creating discursive nodes, and crystallizing around those nodes, and try to de-legitimize the other by rejecting the signs’ concepts.
 
2. Methodology
The methodology of this study benefits from the deconstructive reading of the methodology of Van Leeuwen (2007) based on Laclau & Mouffe (2001) and Derrida (1983) and it takes advantage of a variety of linguistic tools.
Van Leeuwen (2007) identified four legitimation mechanisms - each consists of some subcategories - that operates separately or jointly to de / legitimize discourses:

1. Authorization: Legitimation by reference to the authority of tradition, custom, law, and/or persons in whom institutional authority of some kind is vested. It has six types: personal authority, expert authority, role model authority, impersonal authority, the authority of tradition, and the authority of conformity.
2. Moral evaluation: Legitimation by reference to value systems. It is consisted of evaluation, abstraction, and analogies.
3. Rationalization: Legitimation by reference to the goals and uses of institutionalized social action and to the knowledges that society has constructed to endow them with cognitive validity. It could be instrumental or theoretical rationalization, which the former is consisted of goal, means, and effect orientation and the latter of expreintial, scientific, definition, explanation, and prediction.
4. Mythopoesis: Legitimation conveyed through narratives whose outcomes reward legitimate actions and punish nonlegitimate actions. By definition, this category is consisted of moral tales, cautionary tales, single determination, and overditermination which in its turn it is of two types: inversion and symbolization.

The above is the start point of our methodology in this study. While using it as the core of the methodology, we tried to deconstruct its categorizations by the use of Derrida’s approach on deconstruction and threshold as well as Laclau & Mouffe’s explanation on the concept of discourse.  
Derrida (1983) discusses about “deconstruction” in “Letter to a Japaness Friend”. He believes “Deconstruction takes place, it is an event that does not await the deliberation, consciousness, or organisation of a subject, or even of modernity. It deconstructs it-self. It can be deconstructed.”. Then, he emphasizes on the importance of “context”. While describing Derrida in detail, Nojoumian writes: “Derrida believes that the boundaries between discourses are invalid and says that discourses leak into each other” (2016: 56). Thus, the legitimation cannot remain tough and untouchable, because the discourse fixation is limited and temporary, and it collapses at the discourse boundaries - the threshold - and is placed in a paradoxical status.
Moreover, Laclau & Mouffe (2001) define the discourse as to the following:
we will call articulation any practice establishing  a  relation  among  elements  such  that  their  identity  is modified  as  a  result  of  the  articulatory  practice.  The  structured totality resulting from  the articulatory practice, we will call discourse. The differential  positions, insofar as they appear articulated within a discourse, we will call moments. By contrast, we will call element any difference that is not discursively articulated.
Following Van Leeuwen (2007) we asked the narrator “Why should I accept your narration?” and / or “Why should I accept the gendered discourses as you represented them?”. And finally, having new tools of analysis with regard to the concept of discourse, its articulation, and its unstable boundaries, i.e. the threshold, as well as the deconstructive reading of Van Leeuwen (2007), we analyized of Dolatabadi’s “Solok”.
 
3. Conclusion
The innovation of this research has two prominent aspects. First, the authors dealt with the story literature which uses a high degree of hegemony and the narrator benefits from a variety of linguistically narrative and aesthetic mechanisms to legitimize his omniscience and narration. Second, the authors methodologically adopted a deconstructive reading of Van Leeuwen (2007) by use of Laclau & Mouffe (2001) and Derrida (1983).  
In the analysis, it has been noticed that despite the narrator’s efforts to gain, maintain, and fix the legitimacy for the intended discourses in the story, he had no way but to be caught in paradox. Hence, the research hypothesis of changing the articulation of gendered discourse in SOLOK in order to legitimize their own nodes and simultaneously de-legitimize the other’s dimension is confirmed. 
Also, the linguistic structure of de/legitimation mechanisms can be generally presented in four categories: 1) simple: a proposition de/legitimize another proposition, 2) compound: at least two propositions de/legitimize the other proposition, 3) complex (nested): a proposition that is de/legitimizing the other proposition, has a de/legitimation structure in itself. 4) chainlike: sequences of propositions that move one after the other in the direction of legitimizing, maintaining and fixing it.

---

Considering the analysis of phenomenological discourse from the semiotic perspective, the tattoo semiotic system focuses on linguistic reproduction. Discourse reveals some aspects of sensory perception to the subject. Proper body is a path to the sensory perception of the lost dimensions of meaning and the lived experience of phenomena. The purpose of this study is to investigate the process of sensory perception of phenomenological tattoo in the framework of semiotics of discourse. Throughout the research process and with the development of Merleau-Ponty and Landowski theory, the authors  study the written tattoo with the semiotic approach of  Paris school of semiotics by dealing with the process of discovering, producing and receiving meaning. In the present study, the findings showed that  the phenomenological tattoo leads the semiotic system of language towards the discovery of the lived experience of presence and reveals the hidden layers of meaning and conceal the obvious meanings. This is a feature of meta-discourse that manifests itself within discourse in order to achieve power and immortality, and leads to transcendence of  semiotic system of discourse.

1. Introduction
Linguistic signs that are purposefully imprinted on the body by painting, tattooing or bruising are considered to be tattoo in this article. What is clear is that the tattoos are painted on human bodies for ideological, cultural, social, epic, mystical, ritual and aesthetic functions. The presence of Tattoos in Iranian folk culture with various functions indicates its importance in the manifestation of the language system. The subject, in an Ethos relationship due to the presence of the tattoo object, mutates beyond an aesthetic discourse into meta-discourse and seeks a direct interaction with the existence of presence. Merleau-Ponty believes that the world contains meanings in relation to the body-subject. According to him, sensory perception is a kind of absorption and fascination in the world. The actant subjects are separated from the system of continuity in the spark of the moment, and thus meaning is reproduced and perceived at the level of discourse deep structure. The subject faces a fundamental challenge and problem within himself for essence and the way of survival and to express power in life; and by imprinting a mental idea on his body, it crystallizes the flow of linguistic fluid, the result of which is the metamorphosis of the stative subject from within.
 
2. Literature Review
The main issue of this research is to read the semantic system of a corps propre beyond a definite linguistic text as a phenomenal text, based on the study of semiotigue with a phenomenological perspective. The main question in this research refers to the way of the subject's sensory perception in the interactive process of the subject and the tattoo object, and examines the phenomenal text based on Landowski's discursive semantic systems. The discourse analysis of the semantic system in this study is based on the sensory perceptual principle. The theoretical foundations of this interdisciplinary research are the combination of Merleau-Ponty phenomenology with the semiotigue of the Paris school. The study of the corpus in this research is descriptive-analytical and the method of data analysis is qualitative. The present study is grounded on the Landowski's accident and adjustment discourses based on the sensory perceptual principle.
 
3. Methodology
Semiotigue is a discourse-oriented approach that concentrates on the process of producing, receiving and perceiving meaning and reads it in a dynamic and fluid communication of enunciation. In soft semiotigue, which was initially formed from the idea of Greimas's imperfection of signification, subjects attempt to create language with a poststructuralist view in order to achieve imperfection of signification, and avoid repeating definite linguistic implications. In reading Eastern literary and visual texts with soft semiotigue, one can reflect on the process of discovering and intuition of subjects within the narrative; and with the passage of linear time at language deep structure in a pure and attractive form due to the moment of spark, one can perceive deep abstract concepts derived from religion that are beyond the reach of subjects at the level of semantic surface structure.
 
4.Conclusion
In the analysis of tattoos from the perspective of Landowski's semantic systems, we have reached the approach that the semantic function of tattoos is not always definite and due to the occurrence of meaning, there is a possibility of the presence of a corps propre. Phenomenological tattoo leads the semantic system of language towards the discovery of the lived experience of presence.
The discourse of rebellion transforms the actant subject into an anti-actant one, and in adaptive interaction with the pseudo-subject imprinted on his body, intensifies the risk of discourse. Discourse transforms the rebellion of the active subject into a subconscious and, in adaptive interaction with the pseudo-subject imprinted on itself, intensifies the risk of discourse. In these works, the phenomenal text reveals the underlying and hidden layers of meaning and conceals the obvious and definite meanings. This is a prominent feature of meta-discourse that manifests itself within discourse in order to achieve the value of power, becoming a hero, and survival, and transcend the semantic system of discourse. This phenomenal space is no longer definite, argumentative, and cognitive, and brings the subject into an existential discourse.
 

---

Authorization is a process in narration that according which the narrator constructs her/ his own legitimation and narration using the discursive articulations. The authors’ aim in this paper is to investigate the linguistic processes of development, maintenance and fixation of authorization which the female and male narrators use in the narrations. Hence, they provided a deconstructive reading of the authorization by Van Leeuwen (2007) based on Laclau and Mouffe (2001) and Derrida (1983). Then, in order to identify the linguistic tools of development, maintenance and fixation processes of the personal authority, they went through the “Se-Ketab” by Pirzad and “Solok” by Dolatabadi and purposefully examined those parts. Finally, it was found that Pirzad and Dolatabadi try to legitimize their own dimensions by using their selves and others’ positions, creating discursive nodes, and crystallizing around them. At the same time, they try to delegitimize by rejecting the meanings of the signs from others’ narratives. Also, on a larger scale, it was revealed that the two narrators’ self-representation was different; Pirzad constituted the discursive “We” and Dolatabadi an omniscient narrator. Neither of these two narrators could escape the paradox.