مرسی or Merci? French Loanwords and Identity in Modern Farsi
Photo credit/Mention de source: Tina Mokhtarnejad
Sana Mohtadi
(FR) Cet article traite de l’origine des éléments empruntés au français présent dans le farsi moderne à partir du XIXe siècle. Il souligne également le lien entre les relations franco-iraniennes de l’époque et la tendance des Iraniens du début de cette ère moderne à privilégier la culture occidentale. Afin d’arriver à ces conclusions, seul le Farsi moderne standard a été examiné dans cet article, excluant ainsi tout dialecte. L’analyse de ces emprunts français dans le langage persan permet de mettre en avant les divers changements culturels qui ont pris place en Iran — à savoir l’évolution d’une culture théocratique vers une culture laïque, en conséquence du régime de Reza Shah Pahlavi, puis à nouveau après 1979. Par exemple, l’ubiquité du simple « mersi », empruntée au français « merci », remplaçant le traditionnel « tashakor », montre ce que Mateusz Klagisz nomme avec justesse la « vitalité » des lexèmes français (2015, p.1). La résistance de certains à cette influence occidentale sur le farsi suit le courant de purification de la langue qui s’est déroulé tout au long du règne de la Dynastie Pahlavi à la suite d’une révolution constitutionnelle au tournant du XIXe siècle. Ainsi, la célébration ou le rejet des lexèmes français sont symptomatiques des profondes inquiétudes culturelles autour de l’identité persane au sein de l’Iran et en opposition à ses voisins arabophones.
This paper will analyze the roots of French loanwords in Modern Farsi from the 19th century onward, highlighting the connection between French-Iranian relations and the privileging of Western culture in Early Modern Iranian society. For the purposes of this general essay, only standard New Modern Farsi, barring any dialects, will be examined. Analysis of loanwords integrated into Persian speech provides insights into Iran’s varied cultural shifts—i.e. from a theocratic to secular orientation—at the behest of Reza Shah Pahlavi’s regime, and once again post-1979. For example, the ubiquity of the simple mersi, replacing the traditional tashakor, is indicative of what Mateusz Kłagisz aptly calls the “vitality” of French lexemes (2015, p.1). Resistance to Western influence in Farsi parallels the purification of the language throughout the reign of the House of Pahlavi following the Constitutional Revolution at the turn of the 19th century. Thus, the adaptation and celebration or rejection of French lexemes is symptomatic of far-reaching cultural anxieties surrounding Persian identity within Iran and in relation to its Arabic-speaking neighbors.
Persian Lexicography
Bearing in mind that dictionaries exist as snapshots of a certain period of a language’s lifespan, an analysis of Persian lexicography is essential to an understanding of Latin/Romance loanwords in Farsi. The Persian lexicon underwent major shifts at the turn of the 19th century, during which what is now known as “New Modern Farsi” emerged. The first comprehensive Persian dictionary to include phonetic Latinised translation of lexemes was the Farhang-e nafisi published in 1902 (Perry 2011). The text built upon the time-honored tradition of using samples of Classical Persian writing, such as lyric poetry in order to construct a robust lexicon which honored the literary tradition of the Iranian people. Therefore, the cultural motivation behind the codification of Farsi is inextricable from the sentimental attachment to and reverence for the mythic and historical inception of Iran. The creation of a new dictionary was built upon an arguably antiquated methodology that relied heavily on what Encyclopedia Iranica calls the “national myth-making by perpetuating the spurious Avestan vocabulary of the Dasātīr” (Perry, 2011). The Avestan, or “Zend” language is a paramount example of the concerted insertion of Old Persian into the first modern Iranian dictionaries while the work of nation building, via constitutional congress, paved the way for the Pahlavi dynasty to lay claim to the vacant throne.
Following the collapse of the Qajar Dynasty, the first “modern collaborative lexicography” developed in Iran was the Loḡat-nāma-ye Dehḵodā, compiled by scholar and political activist, Ali-Akbar Dehḵodā, during WWI (Perry, 2011). Ironically, in the new Iranian era, heavy censorship prevented Dehḵodā from pursuing political writing and in turn, the scholar turned his attention to lexicography and the preservation of Farsi. At this point, Reza Shah Pahlavi had assumed leadership of the nation and began enacting a series of modernization initiatives that ranged from structural changes to the nation’s Parliament to the banning of the chador (Afary & Mostofi, 2018).
Overall, the introduction of a Latinised Persian phonology commenced the introduction of Western lexemes into the Iranian lexicon, and perhaps even the nation’s psyche. An openness to the West, especially European nations such as Germany and France, spearheaded by Shah I was reflected in the new tradition of lexicography which reached backwards towards antiquity and the medieval era to create a wholly new linguistic genealogy which honored pre-Islamic Iran. Such a shift foreshadowed the later de-Arabization movement and facilitated the insertion of French (above all, Romance/Latin languages) into Farsi (Jazayery, 1983, p. 88).
Historical Backgrounds and Socio-political Shifts
Perhaps the most drastic act related to Iranian language was the official international renaming of Persia to “Iran,” asserting Iran’s linguistic independence from the West, especially its enduring conflict with the Greek Empire during antiquity. Reza Shah declared that what was known as “Persia” to the Western world be known as Iran, the colloquial name for the nation, more consistent with the reality of Farsi-speakers; “Persia” itself is a relatively inaccurate label derived from the ancient province of Pars, where the Greeks situated themselves during the Achaemenid Empire. The “purification” of Farsi, however, was more complicated than a blanket name change (Afary & Mostofi, 2018).
Kłagisz stipulates that French integration into Farsi actually predates the Modern period, extending backwards into the 18th and 19th centuries, especially when the tongue was considered the “language of politics, culture and science” (2015, p. 39). The Qajar kings modeled their educational institutions after European schools, even going as far as to access and translate almost all their materials from French resources (2015, p. 39). What is considered “The turning point in the relations of Iran and Europe definitely dates back to […the] time of second Shah, Fath Ali Shah, who allied Persia with France, resulting also [in] people going to France to pursue education or just to visit,” during the 19th century (Moghaddam & Moghaddam, 2013, p.72).
Loanwords and Semantic Change
The over 1000 French loanwords that exist in Farsi are not relegated to any specified form of discourse. Rather, the French language appears in dozens of disparate vocabulary groups in Persian, related to clothing, familial relationships, furniture, technology, geography, months, transportation, medicine, and more. Furthermore, Sharifi and Moghaddam postulate that French lexemes are integrated into Farsi in four ways, related to their form and meaning (2013, p. 72).
1. − Some items have undergone no change in form/signifier as well as in meaning/signified.
2. − Some items may have undergone change in form/signifier but no change in meaning/signified.
3. − Some items may have undergone change in meaning/signified with no change in form/signified
4. − Some items may have undergone changes in both form/signifier and in meaning /signified.
For example, /figur/ is understood as “form; diagram; face; human shape,” whereas in Farsi, its meaning has been transfigured to mean “form; human sense; gesture” (Moghaddam & Moghaddam, 2013, p. 72) Such a transition is a change of the fourth kind, wherein a word is borrowed from the secondary language, yet modified over time to suit the needs of the populace. Eventually, the word is “shaped to sound and look like a native word” in the case of Farsi, changing script (Danesi, 2018, p.76). This evolution challenges the idea that loanwords are simply placeholders for signs that “don’t exist” in the reality of a community, as stipulated by Klasgiz. [“It is no wonder that if something had no New Persian name, it had to be created or, just simply, borrowed from that European language” (2015, p. 39).] Instead, such data suggests that the community that adopts a secondary vocabulary has the capacity to build upon and ultimately transform a lexeme which was once foreign to it. The distinction between necessary loans and luxury is especially relevant to this case. Klasgiz writes: “The final number of French loanwords in modern New Persian is variously estimated as 1200 […] but we must bear in mind that some French words like telefon have their origin in Latin or Greek, or had been originally used in some other languages, then entered French as loanwords and from French came to New Persian” (2015, p. 39). At the same time, the history of the Iranian bourgeoisie privileging French lexemes is crucial to an understanding of the significance of loanwords in Persian. For example, Jazayery writes that “Borrowing Western words thus became more and more common [...] Then came the time when the use of Persian resources was more and more encouraged [...] displacing Western loans. This was the time when the movement for language 'purification ' gained momentum in Iran [...] during the zenith of the regime of Reza Shah” (1966, p. 93). Further, new Farsi words were invented or derived from Old Persian to replace the “foreign” (European and Arabic) lexemes that had found their way into the nation’s vocabulary.
Evidently, a shift had taken place over generations from the adoption of Arabic to French loanwords to the impulse to replace such loans with purely “Persian” signs. Jazayery stipulates that Classical Arabic became a less popular second language as Western influences, such as military, academic, and economic interests began to flood Iran (1966, p. 93). Gradually, the number of French loanwords quickly permeated Iranian vocabulary, parallel to the modernizing efforts of Reza Shah. Of course, the arguably autocratic rule of Reza Shah and his regime could not control the linguistic habits of millions of Iranian citizens.
Changing Attitudes Towards the West
The reign of the US-backed Mohammad Reza Shah fostered a burgeoning animosity towards Western influences in Iran. Political and economic tensions between Iran and the United Kingdom also suffered during the post-war period after the Shah’s forced abdication at the hands of the United States and Britain (Afary & Mostofi, 2018).
Thus, the French and Iranian culture became more intimate during the early years of the second Shah’s reign. Britannica Iranica writes: “The ideological and political language of the Persian nationalists, including Moḥammad Moṣaddeq himself, and indeed the political elite in general, was French” (Perry, 2011). Furthermore, the kinship between the French and the Persians was bolstered by the emphasis on French-Farsi bilingualism of the upper classes, mirroring the Shah’s own Swiss-educated clan. The loanwords that had found their way into Farsi some hundred years prior were now doubly relevant in Persian society. Combined with the nationalist efforts of both Shahs to purge Arabic lexemes from national discourse, the marriage between French loanwords and the reintegration of Old Persian words was a linguistic turning point for Iran.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt and in a short period of time, the 1979 Iranian Revolution changed the cultural landscape of Iran beyond recognition. Following the revolution, various blacklisted individuals such as Marxists and Monarchists fled to France where, ironically, Ruhullah Khomeini had sought refuge under Mohammad Reza Shah (Afary & Mostofi, 2018). Britannica claims that “the revolution dealt an almost fatal blow to what was left of French culture in Persia. The departure of the royal family and the upper bourgeoisie, whose second language was French, the closure of French schools [...] and later closure of French cultural institutes were among contributory factors” (Perry, 2011). Such rapid change raises the question: how did shifting attitudes alter Farsi post-Revolution?
Of the estimated 1200 French loanwords in Farsi, the word manteau /monto/ is a case study in the collision between French, Farsi, and Arabic. The word can roughly be translated to “overcoat” or “cloak,” in French, while in Farsi, /monto/ signifies a “woman’s uniform,” or, rather, the acceptable public covering for women in the newly formed Islamic Republic of Iran. Moghaddam and Sharifi argue that /monto/ underwent a “narrowing” semantic change, granting a theocratic, legal meaning to what was once an inoffensive word for an article of clothing (2013, p. 80). In this case, the French loanword did not simply replace the Persian word for coat, but was specialized to meet a societal norm imposed by the government. Despite the animosity toward the West, especially France as explicated above, the appropriation of French vocabulary persisted in post-Revolution Iran even among the most anti-Western stratum of society, namely the judicial system and its affiliates. Therein lies the irony of language, and especially the combination of discrete tongues over historical periods. While an individual may proclaim to hate one thing, the very word they use may betray their intentions.
The purpose of this paper was to explore the intimate relationship that exists between Farsi and French, and further, to analyze how the appearance of French loanwords in Persian either enabled or deviated from the sociopolitical climate of Iran. The over 1200 French lexemes that saturate Farsi continue to illustrate the disparities that exist within a nation thousands of miles away from their home. Regardless of the staying power of French loanwords as New Modern Persian continues to develop and morph, the union between France and Iran is immortalized in the literature, radio, film, letters, and other such modes of communication forever.