@Muhammed45 and
@SalarHaqq ..I promised to tag both of you when I see how IR is propagating Arabic language in Iran ...This is how Iran's official "Fars" news agency is reporting events..replacing already existing "Farsi" words with new Arabic words..the assault on "Frasi" language is so
"low key" and clever that the readers do not even notice they are being "Arabized" by their elected government....I am no language police but if we lose our language then the Arabs have conquered Iran without firing a single shot and they have done it in our own hands..
صدها تن از شیعیان مقیم انگلیس پس از یک ماه
تزکیه نفس، صبح سه شنبه با حضور در مرکز اسلامی انگلیس در لندن، نماز عید فطر را
اقامه کردند.
another one..(I only highlight new Arabic words the older ones already part of language )
حجتالاسلام سرلک در همین رابطه میگوید: «در وصف
فضائل نماز عید سعید فطر روایت بسیاری وجود دارد، بنابراین
Thank you for tagging me. I understand what you mean now. I thought you were referring to outright Persian vocabs being replaced by Arabic ones, which I agree could then be qualified as a form of linguistic Arabization.
In the three cases you mentioned though, it seems to me (correct me if I'm wrong) that the most commonly used synonyms to these vocabs are themselves of Arabic origin... Also if I'm not mistaken, the cited words are featured in the classic
Dehkhodā encyclopaedia, which means they too have been part of the Persian language.
The third word marked in red is actually common in religious discourse. Take a concept like
fazle Elāhi for instance, I'm used to hearing it for as long as I can remember. Not sure there ever was a more widespread synonym to it, including before the Islamic Revolution. If I'm mistaken, please don't hesitate to correct me.
To me, if a signified that is most commonly designated by a signifier of Persian origin (such as the noun
kuh to take a random example) comes to be referenced through an Arabic equivalent, that will represent an unwelcome defilement of the Persian language for sure. Less so if some Arabic word from
Dehkhodā is used in place of what is essentially another Arabic one.
I believe context and language register matter here as well, however. The sentences you showed are talking about a purely Islamic occasion. And using the highlighted terms in lieu of trivial ones, tends to come across as more bookish in tone. I believe there's more legitimacy to it if the content of the text is dealing with strictly religious matters. I'm not sure whether the same journalists at Fars News or other agencies would resort to these vocabs to the same extent or as often if the subject matter was a wholly different one. If so, it'd be more problematic.
I understand your objection. Personally, I wouldn't start worrying about the Persian language unless and until we see seldom used Arabic terms become the norm in publications not focusing on exclusively religious topics, and especially if common Iranian-origin words were sidelined for Arabic ones on a wider scale, which to be honest isn't happening. Well, that's my humble opinion at least, I guess we would perhaps agree to disagree on this particular aspect.
