• Freeing interrogation from the confines of the narrow concept of “rhetorical purpose” and viewing it as an integrated linguistic entity allows us to approach more closely the secret of aesthetic effectiveness in the literary text.

Souad Khalil | Libya

The linguistic discourse of a literary text constitutes a space in which structure intersects with meaning, and form interacts with the aesthetic effect generated within the consciousness of the recipient. Among the stylistic phenomena that call for profound critical reflection is the interrogative style, which emerges as an expressive force that transcends the limits of a direct request for knowledge, becoming an active instrument in shaping meaning and stimulating intellectual and emotional interaction within the reading experience.

Interrogation does not remain merely a grammatical form or a limited structural pattern. Rather, within the context of the literary text, it reveals itself as a vital element that activates meaning and establishes a dynamic relationship between the text and the recipient. Thus, the question is transformed from a mere request for an answer into a mechanism for awakening consciousness, generating meaning, and intensifying the aesthetic effect.

From this perspective, this article seeks to examine the interrogative style in the light of the Arab rhetorical heritage, exploring its semantic nature, its position within textual structure, and the extent to which it moves from its literal meaning toward its rhetorical dimensions. This is undertaken within a vision that regards language as a living act, renewed with every reading.

The forms of linguistic structures that a reader may encounter within a literary text vary, regardless of the literary genre to which the text belongs. These reflections seek to examine one such form because of its active influence on the shaping of meaning within the text and its capacity to produce an aesthetic effect upon the recipient.

Those who follow the development of literary criticism in recent times cannot fail to notice the growing interest in the language of the literary text. Attention to this language has become a means through which critics seek to uncover the meaning of a text. This approach is based on a fundamental question: How does this linguistic element produce that meaning? Such a linguistic orientation in criticism ultimately leads to identifying the role played by language in its most precise and subtle manifestations: the literary text itself.

The writer Tariq Saad Shalabi, in an article entitled The Aesthetics of Reception, states:

“In these lines, we shall attempt to trace the activity of this language, taking the interrogative style as a model. We seek to draw upon the spirit of the old rhetorical tradition without becoming confined within that tradition by merely repeating its propositions, while at the same time allowing us to grasp its methodology and philosophy in examining the elements of language.”

To begin with, we may state that the study of interrogation has occupied a prominent position within various fields of research. Reflecting upon the nature of rhetorical studies, in particular, enables us to understand the essence of this style, especially when rhetorical analysis focuses—as we see it—on the vitality of interrogation and its active role within the text, a role that takes shape through the relationship between the text and the recipient.

In other words, rhetorical scholarship has approached interrogation as a dynamic expressive force, whereas linguistic scholarship, as represented in the writings of linguists, has approached it primarily as a form or structure whose characteristics can be observed from an external perspective.

Accordingly, shedding light on the position of interrogation within rhetorical studies serves two purposes in our analysis of this particular mode of expression. The first is to reveal the theoretical background underlying such an analysis; the second is to uncover the vitality referred to above, which becomes evident through the aesthetics of reception.

Rhetorical studies place interrogation among the constructive forms of expression within the field of ʿIlm al-Maʿānī (the science of meanings). This discipline is concerned with the conditions of Arabic expression through which utterances correspond to the requirements of context. It encompasses a number of major areas, including the circumstances of declarative predication, the circumstances of the subject, the circumstances of the predicate, the complements of the verb, restriction, constructive expression, separation and conjunction, brevity and elaboration, and equality.

The perspective of classical rhetorical scholarship on interrogation reveals a particular concern with the recipient. This becomes evident in the definitions it formulated and in the relationships it established, through which interrogation is distinguished from other rhetorical structures.

Interrogation is closely connected with the desire for knowledge that removes an unknown. It is a request by the speaker addressed to another person to acquire, in their mind, something that was previously unknown to them concerning the matter about which they are asking. This is accompanied by an intellectual activity stimulated by such a desire. Interrogation, therefore, possesses an inherent capacity to attract the recipient’s attention.

Perhaps this issue requires some clarification. Early Arab scholars recognized that rhetorical constructive forms respond to a particular need on the part of the recipient, and they gave this need an evocative term: request. Taken together, these forms fulfill a request, and the one who makes such a request is the recipient. Interrogation differs from other constructive forms because it is associated with a unique kind of request that resembles a space of the unknown. In interrogation, the scope is broader: one seeks something existing outside oneself so that an image corresponding to it may take shape in the mind.

There can be no genuine interrogation in a text whose meaning or reception is overshadowed by habit, inertia, and monotony. The absence of knowledge is a stimulus that activates the mind, a point from which intellectual vitality emerges in the act of reception. This stimulus, and what results from it, crystallizes in what we call the interrogative style.

Its influence can also be traced in the terminology of classical rhetorical studies concerning interrogation. Al-Suyuti explains the distinction between istikhbār (inquiry) and istifhām (interrogation), stating that inquiry concerns something previously encountered but not fully understood; when one asks about it again, it becomes interrogation.

This semantic vitality, significant as it is, represents interrogation in its simplest form, closest to ordinary, non-artistic language, when it performs a direct function and is intended to convey the literal meaning of a question.

Yet there is a remarkable shift in which this vitality is multiplied many times over. Interrogation moves beyond its familiar role of obtaining simple information and becomes a means of acquiring a new meaning, one in which an emotional dimension and a semantic resonance are added to the basic question. This is what crystallizes as the rhetorical purpose.

What, then, does the rhetorical purpose mean?

Interrogation, in itself, possesses the richness, activity, and significance we have already discussed for both the questioner and the person addressed. Once interrogation acquires its new rhetorical meaning, the recipient is confronted with a further question concerning the nature of this enormous semantic shift—from ordinary interrogation to rhetorical interrogation.

This question itself possesses a vitality of its own because it depends upon a semantic paradox and transformation: a movement from literal meaning to rhetorical meaning. Thus, rhetorical interrogation becomes a center from which a considerable amount of the recipient’s interpretive activity unfolds.

This semantic transition is expressed by the author of Miftāḥ al-ʿUlūm in a formulation that reveals an intimate engagement with the text and its relationship to context. For him, meaning is determined by the situation and what suits it, as well as by contextual indicators. When it is impossible to apply these forms according to their original meaning, another meaning appropriate to the context emerges.

Thus, when one says, “Do I have an intercessor?” in a context where the existence of an intercessor cannot realistically be assumed, the interrogative cannot be understood in its original sense; through contextual indicators, it acquires the meaning of a wish or longing.

The process does not end there. The recipient takes a further step and discovers that moving beyond the initial, simple meaning does not mean abandoning it completely. A certain residue of the original interrogative meaning remains present.

This creates the paradox we have referred to: the recipient follows the style retrospectively, first perceiving the original meaning and then recognizing that this surface meaning has undergone a deviation in its course. A different unknown then becomes the destination toward which this surface meaning is directed, after the rhetorical context has redirected it from its original significance.

If, for example, we examine interrogative forms that imply negation, we find that the hypothetical answer is “no one,” and the person who supplies that answer is the listener. It then becomes difficult for the listener to retreat from or forget what they themselves have established, because the answer emerges only after mental effort and reflection.

In its original position, interrogation therefore demands an answer that requires thought before it can be properly formulated.

Since the person addressed is expected, after reflection and consideration, to answer these questions negatively, directing the question toward them effectively leads them toward acknowledging the negative answer. This may help us understand why an explicit negative statement remains less powerful than an interrogative that conveys the same meaning: interrogation possesses aesthetic dimensions for the recipient that negation does not.

The same principle can naturally be applied to the other rhetorical purposes of interrogation.

We have previously discussed the vitality of interrogation as manifested through the aesthetics of reception. Yet there is a parallel degree of semantic vitality that emerges within the text itself, and this vitality deserves attention.

We are particularly struck by the insistence of classical scholars on the precedence of the interrogative particle, especially in their discussions of the grammatical operator governing it. They consistently maintained that interrogation is governed by what follows it rather than by what precedes it.

Some may regard this approach, perhaps dismissively, as an old grammatical concern with little relevance to understanding the text. However, such consensus inevitably raises a question about its underlying rationale, particularly since it appears across different scholarly traditions concerned with interrogative style.

The determination of the governing element here is not merely a formal or theoretical grammatical rule. Rather, it emphasizes that interrogation is always accompanied by a distinctive beginning. We regard this view as an expression of the language’s own conception of the philosophy of interrogation.

In other words, the grammatical rule concerning the governing element points to the distinctiveness and status of interrogation within the text, regardless of the level of grammatical construction involved.

We may even argue that identifying the governing element in interrogation reveals something about the semantic role that interrogation performs within the particular context in which it occurs.

Ibn al-Anbari, for instance, one of the early scholars deeply concerned with the meanings of Qur’anic structures, insisted upon the precedence of the interrogative particle. In his commentary on the Qur’anic verse, “See how We have favored some of them over others,” he explains that kayfa (“how”) functions grammatically in the accusative position and is not governed by unẓur (“see”), because kayfa carries the meaning of interrogation, and interrogation has precedence in speech and is not governed by what precedes it.

This suggests that understanding the meaning of interrogation is, in part, achieved by granting its semantic activity a certain degree of independence. Such activity arises from the fruitful interaction among the components of the interrogative sentence.

In the verse mentioned above, a deeper reading of Ibn al-Anbari’s argument shows that the imperative verb unẓur (“see”) directs the mind toward reflection and then stops there; the nature and substance of that reflection, however, emerge from the semantic horizons generated by interrogation itself and from the interaction of its components.

Discussion of the meaning of interrogation, its reception aesthetics, and its position within the text should not distract us from the artistic dimension of the style perceived by the recipient. The stylistic analyst observes this dimension in several forms, following the phonetic and morphological components and the syntactic patterns of interrogative style.

Through this approach, interrogation becomes a vast linguistic entity with multiple, interconnected dimensions, enabling it to establish relationships of interaction with the other units of the text. Ultimately, these relationships contribute to the larger overall meaning achieved by the text.

Although this interaction takes place within the text, it only fully emerges through the sensitive awareness of a recipient endowed with a keen linguistic sensibility.

In conclusion, we hope to have succeeded in presenting the nature of interrogative style within the text in a way that frees us from the dominance of the concept of purpose, which has prevailed in our thinking about interrogation and other constructive rhetorical forms.

As readers and critics, we have become accustomed to expecting a limited meaning called the “purpose” concealed within these forms, even though they are, in fact, complex and substantial linguistic entities.

We also hope that these reflections express a firmly held conviction: that within our linguistic and rhetorical heritage there are elements capable of deepening our understanding of language and bringing us closer to its remarkable power to generate meaning.

This discussion demonstrates that interrogation in a literary text is not merely a grammatical constructive device whose function can be measured syntactically or confined within the limits of what is traditionally called rhetorical purposes.

Rather, it is a dynamic semantic structure, alive within its context and deriving its effectiveness from its ability to stimulate the recipient’s awareness and involve them in the production of meaning.

At its core, the question does not simply seek an answer; it awakens a horizon of reflection and creates a space of cognitive tension that reshapes the relationship between the reader and the text.

Although classical Arabic rhetoric recognized, at an early stage, the centrality of interrogation and the precedence of its particle, this was not merely a formal or technical matter. Rather, it expressed a profound understanding of its distinctive role in semantic construction.

Accordingly, rereading this heritage through the lens of reception aesthetics does not mean simply repeating its formulations; it means treating it as an open horizon for understanding the latent energy of language and its ability to move beyond the direct and the familiar.

Thus, freeing interrogation from the confines of the narrow concept of “rhetorical purpose” and viewing it as an integrated linguistic entity allows us to approach more closely the secret of aesthetic effectiveness in the literary text.

It confirms that language, in its highest manifestations, is not merely a vessel for meaning but an ongoing act of creation—one renewed with every new reading and whenever consciousness opens itself to new questions.

Read: The Arab Heritage and Psychology

_______________

Souad Khalil, hailing from Benghazi Libya, is a writer, poet, and translator. She has been writing on culture, literature and other general topics.

The post Interrogation and the Reception first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Suyunova Zuhra Oybekovna | Uzbekistan

Culture plays a fundamental role in shaping human identity, social behavior, and communication practices. In an increasingly globalized world, cultural awareness has become an essential element of effective interaction across societies. This article explores the concept of culture and its influence on language, identity formation, and global communication. It examines how cultural values, beliefs, and traditions shape individuals’ perceptions and communicative behavior. Additionally, the study highlights the importance of cultural understanding in fostering intercultural competence and social harmony in contemporary society.

Culture is one of the most complex and multifaceted phenomena in human society. It encompasses values, beliefs, traditions, customs, language, and social norms that are shared by a particular group of people. Culture influences how individuals think, behave, communicate, and perceive the world around them. In the modern era, characterized by rapid globalization and technological advancement, cultural interaction has intensified, making cultural awareness more significant than ever before.

Understanding culture is essential not only for preserving national identity but also for promoting mutual respect and cooperation among diverse communities. As societies become increasingly interconnected, the role of culture in shaping communication and social relationships has attracted growing attention from researchers and educators.

The Concept of Culture and Its Dimensions

Culture can be defined as a collective system of meanings that guides human behavior. It includes both tangible elements, such as art, literature, and rituals, and intangible aspects, such as values, attitudes, and worldviews. Culture is not static; it evolves over time as societies respond to internal and external influences.

Scholars often describe culture through various dimensions, including individualism versus collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and social hierarchy. These dimensions influence how people interact with authority, resolve conflicts, and communicate ideas. As a result, cultural differences can significantly affect social interaction and understanding.

Culture and Language as Interconnected Systems

Language and culture are inseparable, as language serves as a primary vehicle for transmitting cultural knowledge. Through language, cultural values, traditions, and social norms are passed from one generation to another. The way people use language reflects their cultural background and shapes their worldview.

Cultural context influences communication styles, such as directness, politeness strategies, and non-verbal behavior. Misunderstandings often arise when individuals from different cultural backgrounds interpret messages through their own cultural frameworks. Therefore, awareness of cultural differences is essential for effective communication in multicultural settings.

Cultural Identity and Social Interaction

Cultural identity refers to an individual’s sense of belonging to a particular cultural group. It is shaped by factors such as language, religion, history, and social experience. Cultural identity plays a crucial role in shaping personal values, attitudes, and behavior.

In a globalized world, individuals are often exposed to multiple cultures, which may lead to the development of hybrid identities. While cultural diversity enriches society, it may also create challenges related to identity preservation and cultural adaptation. Understanding cultural identity is essential for promoting tolerance, inclusion, and social cohesion.

Culture in the Context of Globalization

Globalization has intensified cultural exchange by facilitating the flow of information, ideas, and traditions across borders. While this process promotes cultural diversity and innovation, it also raises concerns about cultural homogenization and the loss of local traditions.

Mass media and digital technologies play a significant role in shaping cultural perceptions. They influence lifestyles, values, and communication patterns worldwide. As a result, societies must find a balance between embracing global cultural trends and preserving their unique cultural heritage.

The Importance of Cultural Awareness in Modern Society

Cultural awareness is the ability to recognize, understand, and respect cultural differences. It is a vital skill in education, business, diplomacy, and social interaction. Individuals with high cultural awareness are better equipped to communicate effectively, avoid misunderstandings, and build positive relationships.

In educational contexts, promoting cultural awareness helps learners develop critical thinking and global competence. It encourages openness, empathy, and respect for diversity, which are essential qualities in modern society.

Conclusion

In conclusion, culture plays a central role in shaping language, identity, and communication in human society. It influences how individuals perceive the world and interact with others. In an era of globalization, cultural awareness and intercultural competence have become indispensable for fostering mutual understanding and social harmony. By recognizing the value of cultural diversity and preserving cultural heritage, societies can promote sustainable development and peaceful coexistence in a rapidly changing world.

Read: Cinema: Dynamic Language of Human Existence

____________________

Suyunova Zuhra Oybekovna born in Toyloq district of the Samarkand region, Uzbekistan is an undergraduate student at Samarkand State Institute of Foreign Languages.

The post Culture’s Impact on Identity and Language first appeared on Sindh Courier.

In the present scenario, the text has been brutalized, its soul drained and words lie scattered like dead bodies in the battlefield of time.

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand | India

Words, whose soul has been sucked, are scattered around, like dead bodies, waiting for community burial. Call great men for final rites of all that was good in human tradition.

If Mahatma Gandhi comes today, he will have more difficult time than he had with the British. Gandhiji is considered an apostle of peace, who represents a timeless philosophy, i.e. the precious legacy of India’s thought systems and spiritual tradition. Mercifully, he was born in a time when truth meant truth, and falsehood meant falsehood. People were, what they were, good or evil, and they could be trusted for that. But these times are different, which make aberrations of men with such sensibilities.

When we say, ‘peace’, the expression evokes a state of happiness, joy and equilibrium. But, utter the word ‘non-violence’.  It conjures scenes of blood bath, and communal riots, to which we are advised to say ‘No’. Peace is the religion of a positive faith, propagated by Guru Nanak Dev Ji and Gautam Buddha. However, in Non-violence, we have to contend with a changed scenario in which violence is a way of life, which has to be denounced and disowned.

Why ‘peace’ undergoes a transformation and becomes ‘non-violence’? Because words are not mute witnesses of our emotions, they are active agents of an invisible eco-system. They attack the mind of the reader, and the revolution begins there. They act like loaded missiles which are shot from a distance. One may ask: why was Gandhi different from Buddha though both gave the message of Peace and co-existence?

A counter question can be: How relevant will be Buddha if he comes alive in this scenario? If he gives his message from Sarnath again, and his language is plain, and does not flirt with socio-political nuances, he can be tolerated. But Guru Nanak Dev ji faced a hostile reaction from the aggressors, when he attacked Babur, describing his forces as ‘Paap ki Janj’ [the marriage band of sinners]. Mahatama Gandhi too had to contend with an empire, which had never seen the setting sun. Therefore, he had to be mentally and morally equipped to take on the powerful British Empire, which believed in violence.

The Core Issue

If Gandhi comes again, will he again resort to Satyagraha, or Non-cooperation, or the idea of Non-Violence? The British Govt. was very insensitive, and committed atrocities on Indians. Jallianwala Bagh massacre is a living example, and fighting these people on their terms [i.e. armed engagement] would have led to collective suicide. In S. Bhagat Singh’s martyrdom, we see a blend of the Gandhianism as well as the philosophy of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. He shook the foundations of the Empire not only by the bombing of the Parliament, but also by his decision not to run away. Same thing was repeated by another brave Sikh S. Udham Singh who killed Michael O’Dwyer, and did not run away after that.  It is clear that both the philosophy of the Gurus

The Murder of the Word

In the present scenario, the text has been brutalized, its soul drained and words lie scattered like dead bodies in the battlefield of time. People, who believed in truth, the power of the word, in good and evil of men,  feared God, and were afraid of Hell – have been replaced by a set of people, for whom words are no more than dead skeletons in the museum of contemporary history.

It is man’s smartness, which has got the better of his wisdom, and combined with knowledge, he has attacked all the sources of his own strength. The scriptures, the family, the teacher, and the religious places – everything which added meaning to the word has been destroyed. We have destroyed nature also, which was a source of wisdom for mankind. In order to understand what we are saying, just think how we turn and return to the animal kingdom. As clever as a fox, putting all eggs in the same basket, a bird in hand is better than two in bush. Everything is becoming irrelevant when nature and its denizens are margined off.

In this world scenario where values have lost their natural placement, if Gandhi comes again, I wonder if concepts like non-violence will be enough. Our people do not kill with bullets, they use words to kill the essence. They destroy the sense and sensibility and even the sensitivity which makes us human. Violence or non-violence, I think, do not matter in this world, which has no faith in anything but power, wealth and luxury. The British Empire he fought against, was cruel, not shameless. Gandhi may have to first start a movement for ethical revival of mankind, and restoration of the sanctity of the human text.  And he may suffer lack of funding too, because the highly educated corporates of today, are the fourth generation of old industrialists, [now extinct], who, once on his suggestion, had funded the Vishwa Bharati, have no faith in philanthropy without returns.

Read: Cause and Effect — A New Dance

_________________________

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand, based in Chandigarh, is an Indian poet and scholar credited with 170 plus books of English literature, philosophy and spirituality. He won great Serbian Award Charter of Morava and his name adorns the Poets’ Rock in Serbia. He was honored with Seneca Award LAUDIS CHARTA by Academy of Arts & Philosophical Sciences, Bari, Italy 2024. He is Founder President of the International Academy of Ethics and conferred Doctor of Philosophy (Honoris Causa) by University of Engineering & Management, (UEM) Jaipur. Email anandjs55@yahoo.com 

The post The Language in the ICU first appeared on Sindh Courier.

• Empower a child’s natural curiosity with systematic, high-tech tools. Ultimately, language is more than just a means of communication; it is the intellectual fuel for the leaders of the future.

Artikova Shohida Anvarovna | Uzbekistan

Modern neurolinguistics and cognitive psychology confirm that childhood is not merely a period of growth, but a phase of “neuroplastic explosion.” When we discuss teaching English to children today, we are not just referring to the memorization of foreign vocabulary; we are talking about shaping a child’s fundamental model of perceiving the world (worldview).

While traditional pedagogy has provided us with a solid foundation—focusing on Basic Vocabulary, Songs, and Visual Aids—today’s generation of “Digital Natives” possesses entirely different cognitive filters. Their attention spans are brief yet hyper-intensive, and their imaginations are limitless but demand a rich environment of visual stimuli. Consequently, we must not simply preserve the classic 12 principles; we must pass them through the prism of “Creative Speech Engineering” and transform them into a modern educational architecture.

This article analyzes strategies for seamlessly integrating classic methodological elements with modern EdTech (educational technology) and creative pedagogy, turning language acquisition from a chore into an “intellectual game.”

The Stages of Modern Transformation

Scientific Fact: The child’s brain relies on emotional connection for 80% of its information processing. Without an emotional (creative) anchor during a lesson, neural connections (synapses) weaken.

1. From Static Visualization to Dynamic Experience

The traditional use of “flashcards” is being replaced by “Contextual Immersion.” In this approach, a child does not merely see a word; they “live” within its context. Using immersive environments allows the learner to experience the language spatially rather than just abstractly.

2. From Repetitive Recitation to Rhythmic Coding

Moving beyond simple songs, the modern evolution of the Total Physical Response (TPR) method involves the synchronous integration of movement and sound. This technique transposes language from short-term memory into “muscle memory,” making retrieval instinctive.

3. From Grammatical Rules to Cognitive Scenarios

Dry structures are being replaced by “Narrative Intelligence.” In this paradigm, grammar is no longer a set of rigid rules to be memorized but is instead presented as the “hidden code” of an engaging game. By navigating story-driven scenarios, children internalize syntax as a tool for solving puzzles and progressing through a narrative.

Our mission is to empower a child’s natural curiosity with systematic, high-tech tools. Ultimately, language is more than just a means of communication; it is the intellectual fuel for the leaders of the future.

Read: When Education Loses Purpose in Pakistan

___________________

Artikova Shohida Anvarovna is Master’s student at Fergana State University, specializing in “Theory and Methodology of Preschool Education and Upbringing.” Born in 1989 in Margilan, she holds a Bachelor’s degree in Preschool Education. Her research interests focus on innovative pedagogical technologies, modern teaching methodologies, and the development of educational frameworks for preschool children.

The post Language as a New Horizon of Consciousness first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Souad Khalil | Libya

Art, in all its forms, has long been a means of expressing the deepest human emotions and ideas. Poetry and painting, in particular, have played a distinctive role in conveying these sensations indirectly, where thought takes shape through words and through colors. Despite the difference in mediums, the bond between them remains strong: poetry embodies words to create mental images and emotional meanings, while painting employs colors and lines to materialize these feelings in visual compositions.

The shared language between poetry and painting lies in their ability to express emotions and sensations that cannot be confined to words or colors alone. They go beyond mere representation to interpret reality and inner feelings in ways that allow each viewer or reader to perceive them according to their own sensibility. Both attempt to capture a moment and reshape it artistically, granting the recipient freedom of contemplation and interaction with meaning.

Hence, the relationship between painting and poetry is not merely one of proximity between two arts, but rather a relationship that emanates from the human spirit and intellect. It contributes to building a bridge of understanding between words and colors, between mind and body, and between consciousness and emotion.

In this article, we seek to explore the points of similarity and intersection between the poem and the painting, the hidden language they share, and how a poem can transform into a painting, and a painting into a silent poem that speaks through color and shadow.

Salah Hassan Rashid states that the ancient East recognized communication between the arts and the world of the word. At first glance, the relationship between the visual arts and poetry may appear ambiguous to the ordinary reader, yet it is crystal clear to the cultivated reader and specialists alike. There are countless ties and close connections between the worlds of image and word, between painting and poem, between painter and poet. What unites the arts is the unbridled imagination, the visionary outlook, and the capacity for astonishment and wonder.

Many poems gained widespread recognition due to being read through a visual and aesthetic lens, clearly influenced by Cubist and Surrealist artistic movements. Likewise, numerous artworks and exhibitions have captivated audiences by drawing upon the influence of poetry and language. In the Arab world, interest in this relationship began not long ago. In the early twentieth century, the great Egyptian painter Salah Taher expressed intellectual and philosophical poems by the genius Abbas Mahmoud Al-Aqqad through visual works that astonished Al-Aqqad himself, as well as the visitors of his salon and lovers of literature, art, and culture during the 1940s.

In his book *Surrealism in the Eyes of Mirrors*, the writer and translator Amin Saleh—recently published by the General Egyptian Authority for Cultural Palaces—affirms this cultural truth, one that the West preceded us in exploring when its writers, painters, and critics discussed the extent of fusion between poetry and painting, the interpenetration of image in verse and idea in visual taste, and the mutual influence between the two. As a result of our contact with the West in the modern era, the Surrealist movement reached us with its intellectual, philosophical, and artistic tributaries, revealing the relationship between poetry and visual art, and between the beautiful word and dazzling images.

Amin Saleh notes that at the beginning of the twentieth century, young poets were influenced by oil painting, while the generation following World War I sought their direction among visual artists, moving toward a more visual form of poetry. These poets established intimate relationships with painters such as Picasso, Braque, and Derain. André Breton placed words and visual images on the same footing as tools of Surrealist exploration. Thus, painters, poets, and writers collectively contributed to probing the Surreal reality beyond appearances. The relationship between painting and poetry became profoundly close, as painting represented the most fertile field of suggestion for poetry.

Amin Saleh further explains that painting ceased to be merely a tool for representation, illustration, or decoration of literary books. When painters undertook the task of illustrating poets’ works, they did not attempt to describe poetic images, but rather created new images that expanded the meaning of verbal imagery. This is evident in Picasso’s illustrations of Max Jacob’s poems, Max Ernst’s drawings for Breton’s *The Castle of the Stars*, Tanguy’s illustrations for Péret’s  Sleep, Sleep in the Stones*, and Dalí’s images for Lautréamont. Painting, therefore, is not indebted to literary forms, but to the poetic spirit that breathes life into all artistic forms.

André Breton stated that poetry seems to have discovered in painting its widest field for exercising influence, enabling painting to reveal to consciousness the power of spiritual life. At the present time, there is no fundamental difference in artistic ambition between a poem by Paul Éluard or Péret and a painting by Max Ernst, Miró, or Tanguy. André Lhote asserted that the poem and the painting are complementary, and that Surrealist poetry and painting do not tolerate objective representation of a rational subject; rather, they expand it beyond logic.

Amin Saleh also emphasizes that Dadaism, followed by Surrealism, witnessed an exceptional collaboration between poets, painters, and musicians. Never before had poetry and visual art interacted so intensely. Poets painted, painters wrote poetry. When reviewing the names of visual artists, whether within the Surrealist movement or beyond it, we find that many practiced painting alongside poetry, such as William Blake, Hugo Ball, Tristan Tzara, El Greco—whom Élie Faure considered a painter of the metaphysical spirituality of the world—Jean Arp, Max Jacob, Francis Picabia, Mayakovsky, Paul Éluard, André Breton, Picasso, Jean Cocteau, Jacques Prévert, Marcel Duchamp, and others. Moreover, a poetic aura envelops the works of many painters, a quality praised by Éluard himself.

Regarding Baudelaire’s view of Eugène Delacroix, he described him as having elevated his art to the heights of great poetry. Éluard, who regarded painting as a constant source of inspiration for his poetic practice, discovered visual poetry in the works of René Magritte, Joan Miró, and others. He wrote numerous poems about painters or dedicated poems to them, in addition to forming deep friendships with many of them.

The Special Language of Poetry

Joan Miró once remarked that rich and dynamic material is necessary to deliver a blow to the viewer between the eyes at first glance—one that strikes before other ideas have time to intervene. In this way, poetry expressed visually speaks its own language. In *The Rope and the Mice*, André Malraux stated that the subjects of Chardin and Vermeer are not poetic in themselves, nor are the atmospheres of their paintings; rather, it is their act of painting that acquires poetry.

The painter Marc Chagall declared his pursuit of an inseparable unity between poetry and painting, while the poet-painter Adrian Huthier sought to create a shared language between them. Max Ernst also produced visual poems using fragments from old newspapers and books, engraved onto metal plates. Amin Saleh argues that the dialectical relationship between visual art and poetry is evident in poets’ adoption of new and unconventional typographic forms. Instead of horizontal, linear writing, poets turned to visual and structural printing techniques, organizing the poem on the page as a painting in space.

The aim was to shock the sense of sight, not merely the intellect, through visual arrangements of poetic elements on the page, much like a painter filling the canvas. This visual technique allows for the simultaneous presentation of elements to the reader rather than a sequential one. Words, phrases, and spaces coexist, overlap, and unite cohesively, just as shapes, masses, and color patches do in a painting. This approach is partly derived from Cubist painters’ vision of dismantling reality’s elements and reassembling them into a new system.

Eastern Writing Rich in Imagery

Mallarmé employed a typographic style in his poem *A Throw of the Dice*, marking a shift from musical values to geometric ones. Amin Saleh notes that interest in typographic techniques is ancient, as the visual and geometric aspects of writing were given great importance by scribes and poets. Some pages are filled with lines, symbols, images, or even ambiguous marks devoid of explicit meaning, or with vast white spaces. There are also poems whose words are arranged in the shape of bottles or other forms.

Eastern writing is particularly rich in visual imagery and symbolic forms. Attention to typographic art can also be observed among the Italian Futurists. This method of constructing images from words is part of an ancient tradition found among the Chinese, Greeks, and Byzantines. Amin Saleh affirms that a dominant unity characterizes Surrealist art, one not dismantled by artists’ shifts from one method to another. The Surrealist stamp was not tied to a particular mood, psychological state, or technical approach, but rather to a metaphysical proximity to reality, translatable in countless ways and capable of penetrating the deepest layers of the mind.

The Fusion of the Poetic and the Visual

The Spanish artist Joan Miró showed profound appreciation for the Surrealists’ insistence on achieving fusion between the poetic and the visual, and for their belief in the necessity of expanding the human sensory field through every possible means. This involves exploring worlds that are difficult to comprehend and have yet to be fully examined—those of the subconscious. Amin Saleh notes that in poems inspired by Picasso’s drawings, Paul Éluard paid tribute to Picasso, praising his grand vision and elevating the act of seeing itself above the visible object.

Thus, we discover that poetry and painting are separate only in form; in essence, they are complementary and speak a single language—the language of sensation, contemplation, and emotional response. Both strive to seize a fleeting human moment and transform it into a lasting imprint on the soul. While poetry weaves images through words, painting draws emotions with colors. Together, they reshape the inner and outer worlds through a language that requires no translation, only sincere feeling and refined aesthetic perception.

The encounter between poetry and visual art is not merely an aesthetic luxury, but an artistic necessity that opens doors to deeper understanding and multifaceted appreciation. It grants the recipient a unique opportunity to read the world with two eyes: the eye of the word, and the eye of color.

Read: Heritage as the National Culture

_________________

Souad Khalil, hailing from Libya, is a writer, poet, and translator. She has been writing on culture, literature and other general topics.

The post Shared Language between Poetry and Painting first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Saidova Mahzuna Farhod qizi | Uzbekistan

Language is a product of the socio-historical development of humanity and participates directly in all spheres of social life. It is not only a means of communication but also the most important socio-cultural phenomenon reflecting national culture, mentality, historical memory, and traditions. From this perspective, studying language in relation to society—the social environment and culture—has become one of the current directions in linguistics.

In recent years, the trend of examining language units from a sociocultural perspective has grown, drawing on the directions of linguoculturology and sociolinguistics. In particular, it is important to study how society is expressed through language by identifying and analyzing linguocultural units used in texts. This, in turn, allows for the joint study of the communicative, ideological, cognitive, and cultural functions of language. The inseparable link between language and society is considered one of the important directions of modern linguistics. Directions such as sociolinguistics and linguoculturology provide a basis for analyzing language not only as a system of structural units but also as a socio-cultural code. From this standpoint, identifying linguocultural units in texts and studying their communicative significance in society is a necessary direction for contemporary linguistic research.

Linguocultural units are understood as language units inherent in a particular culture, entrenched in social consciousness, and carrying national-religious and historical meaning. Through them, values, mentality, traditions, and historical thinking in society are manifested.

A fully developed and coherent methodology for scientifically classifying linguocultural units and determining their real communicative function in society has not yet been formed. The degree of connection between these units and sociocultural factors has not been sufficiently analyzed in Uzbek linguistics.

It is necessary to study such units within texts using a comprehensive approach—that is, on semantic, pragmatic, discursive, and ethnolinguistic criteria. In particular, cultural connotations of language units can be determined using ethnolinguistic indicators, and discursive analysis can be used to study their dynamics in social communication.

Main scientific approaches and examples

Classification of linguocultural units (Karasik, 2002):

Karasik divides linguistic units into “universal,” “national-cultural,” and “individual” levels. For example, units such as “dua olmoq,” “aq fatiha,” and “or-nomus” in Uzbek embody national-cultural codes. These units express moral norms and religious values in society.

Sociocultural codes in texts (Vorkacheva, 2009):

Vorkacheva emphasizes that social roles and statuses are reflected through linguocultural units. For example, expressions such as “otar kiz” and “kelin salom” used in literary texts indicate social roles in Uzbek society.

Discursive analysis:

In particular, expressions such as “praising the homeland” and “living with the pain of the people” used in journalistic texts perform a sociopragmatic function. They serve to strengthen the dominant ideologies in society.

Reflection of national thinking through linguocultural units:

Example: Expressions such as “to become an Asian,” “to melt like this,” and “to my native language—it has become ingrained in my soul,” found in the poems of Sultan Jora, reveal the connection between national identity, feelings for language, and social values.

Conclusion

Linguocultural units in language act as a bridge between society and culture, through which the cultural memory of society, historical views, and national values are reinforced in language texts. With these units, language is not only a means of transmitting information but also a communicative system with the power to shape and reinforce social consciousness.

The analysis shows that linguocultural units not only reflect national identity but also continuously transmit socio-philosophical concepts such as social norms, cultural stereotypes, moral standards, and historical monuments through texts. This demonstrates that when analyzing language, it should be studied not only as a structural or grammatical phenomenon but also as a socio-cognitive one.

In the future, a more complete picture of the social position of language in society can be obtained by studying the relationship between language and society in linguistics in greater depth through linguocultural units, especially by determining the role of these units in national literary texts, folklore, and journalism, political and social discourse. Linguocultural units are a key factor in illuminating the complex relationship between society and language. Language acts not only as a means of communication but also as a means of cultural thinking and social identification. The use of linguocultural units in text analysis enables deep exploration of values, ideologies, traditions, and social roles in society. This underscores the need to consider the triad of language–culture–society as a stable scientific model in modern linguistics.

Read: The Visual Language Explored

_________________

Saidova Mahzuna is 3^rd year student at Faculty of Philology, Uzbek Language and Literature, Shahrisabz State Pedagogical Institute, Uzbekistan

The post How Society Shapes the Language first appeared on Sindh Courier.

• He studied philology, graduated in 1918, worked in education, and in 1921 founded the influential “Bakhtin Circle” of criticism.

 Souad Khalil | Libya

Critical theory is considered one of the literary theories that are strongly and directly influenced by the prevailing philosophy of the era to which it belongs. With the emergence of various and sometimes opposing philosophies, literary theory itself changes. For example, in the nineteenth century, the ideas and philosophy of Hegel dominated people’s minds as well as the literary and critical theories of the time. However, by the end of the century, with the rise of new philosophies such as Marxism, the situation changed completely. Gradually, Marxism became the dominant theory.

Generally speaking, literary theories have always oscillated between two poles: the descriptive and the normative. The first regards the literary work as independent from society and the historical context to which it belongs, focusing instead on the emotional and affective aspects expressed by the writer in the artistic work. The second focuses on linking the work to the society it belongs to. Naturally, both directions undergo development from time to time in their theoretical premises and practical applications.

The first orientation gave rise to what is known as “New Criticism,” led by T. S. Eliot, as well as Russian Formalism and structuralist approaches. The second orientation found its most famous expression in Marxist criticism, which was rooted in Marxist philosophy.

Within this second orientation, many critics emerged at different historical periods. Yet this does not mean that, from time to time, a critic might not attempt to combine the two approaches—the formalist and the social—in order to produce a new theory.

This is precisely what happened with Mikhail Bakhtin. It is difficult to classify him solely as a Marxist critic, and equally difficult to place him within the framework of Russian Formalism. To clarify this, it is necessary to highlight the key features of the two schools.

Marxism regarded the study of literature within its historical and social framework. For some critics, literary works were even subject to the same economic laws that governed other sciences within society. Thus, for a period of time, literature was treated as a form of ideological propaganda. Among the most prominent critics of this orientation were Georg Lukács, Louis Althusser, Pierre Zima, and Lucien Goldmann.

Russian Formalism, on the other hand, focused on the linguistic structure of the work, rejecting any study of the social context or the author in relation to the literary text. Key figures of this school included Roman Jakobson, Viktor Shklovsky, Boris Eikhenbaum, and—interestingly—Bakhtin himself.

Before we explore how Bakhtin defined language—based on what Reda Ismail wrote about Bakhtin, language, and ideology, and how Bakhtin relied on literary structure to reveal the dynamic nature of language—let us briefly introduce who Bakhtin was.

He was a Russian philosopher, born in 1895 in the city of Oryol and died in 1975. He studied philology, graduated in 1918, worked in education, and in 1921 founded the influential “Bakhtin Circle” of criticism.

Bakhtin was arrested due to his association with Christianity and was also exiled to Siberia for six years, from 1929 to 1936. He later returned to Leningrad (St. Petersburg), where he worked at the Institute of Art History, which at the time was one of the strongholds of Russian Formalists. He then moved to Saransk, where he served as a professor at its university. From 1969, he settled in Klymovsk (a suburb of Moscow) after his health deteriorated. There, he wrote for several journals, particularly Problems of Literature and Context.

Philosophical inquiry permeates Bakhtin’s theoretical framework. He wrote extensively on literary theory, language, semiotics, criticism, and textual studies. He contributed to shaping theoretical conceptions of language, poetics, and semiotics in their intricate relations with society and history. His comprehensive theory was formed through philosophy, the humanities, and metalinguistics.

Bakhtin defined language as a system of signs organized within a particular structure that is, at the same time, ideological. Language, for him, is also the ordinary embodiment of social communication. Therefore, the study of linguistic signs inevitably involves engaging with the social and economic relations as well as the prevailing ideologies of reality.

Although in this definition he connects language with ideology, Bakhtin, in his literary studies, did not focus on tracing the reflection of social and political forces within the text. Rather, he concentrated on literary structure, revealing the dynamic nature of language in certain types of literary heritage. He also focused on how language can be fashioned into a liberating discourse—resisting and rejecting domination, and demanding freedom. Language, therefore, is not static, merely expressing what occupies society’s mind. Through its rhetorical formations, it reflects the concerns and struggles of that society.

For this reason, critics often describe Bakhtin’s language as dynamic and polyphonic, not static or isolated from its social context, as in the case of Formalism or Structuralism. At times, language and its forms may directly articulate class struggle and issues of freedom. Thus, the source of the literariness of a work lies in its social language, not in an abstract or detached one.

Bakhtin further argued that the specific element of aesthetic communication is that it is fully realized within the artistic work itself and in its continuous renewal through the reader’s participation in the creative process. It requires no additional external validation. Yet this special form of communication is not abstract or isolated; it participates in the flux of social life, reflects the broader economic base, and enters into processes of interaction and exchange with other forms of communication. Our task, therefore, is to understand the shape of the poetic utterance as a form of collective communication realized within linguistic material.

Among Bakhtin’s most famous works, which exemplify his applied studies, is his 1929 book Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. In it, he compared the novels of Dostoevsky and Tolstoy—two of the greatest Russian novelists in history—from a linguistic perspective. His study concluded that Tolstoy’s novels are fundamentally bound to a single ideology—that of the author himself. They do not contain perspectives or voices other than the author’s ideological framework. Dostoevsky, by contrast, gave expression to the people at large, presenting a plurality of voices (polyphony) within his works.

In Dostoevsky’s novels, many characters embody different and independent worldviews. Their consciousness does not merge with the author’s; they are not mere mouthpieces for his ideas and opinions. Rather, they represent distinct and autonomous perspectives. For this reason, Dostoevsky is considered more representative of society and its issues than Tolstoy. Consequently, Bakhtin referred to Dostoevsky’s novels as polyphonic novels (multi-voiced), while Tolstoy’s were characterized as monologic (single-voiced).

Focusing specifically on this study, due to its great importance in the field of novel writing, we encounter a crucial question: does the author, in a literary work, remain confined within the boundaries of his own self—especially if he belongs to a society full of upheaval, revolutionary ferment, and a yearning for freedom? Naturally, this issue is one of the most significant in the philosophy of literature, as it may vary from one writer to another.

However, it is clear that an author cannot completely detach himself from his society—except perhaps in certain genres such as lyric poetry. In the case of the novel and drama, such detachment is nearly impossible, as these genres inherently impose a multiplicity of voices upon their authors. As Bakhtin states, language must sometimes serve as a catalyst for liberation and even revolution.

From this, we understand that Bakhtin never dismissed the role of the author in the literary work—as did Formalism and Structuralism. Rather, he regarded the author’s artistic ability as the primary force shaping the creative work.

Bakhtin also devoted attention to the study of the phenomenon of the *carnival*, which had attracted the interest of many European playwrights, who drew from it certain modern traditions of theatrical writing. The carnival, as Bakhtin viewed it, is a celebration unrestricted by fixed boundaries. As Dr. Gaber Asfour puts it, it is a “festival in which hierarchical distinctions of relationships, classes, and conventions are overturned.”

What Bakhtin derived from this phenomenon was an inquiry into the impact of carnivalesque elements on the formation of literary genres since ancient times, beginning with Socrates. Broadly speaking, Bakhtin’s theory has fascinated many critics because of its dual emphasis—both social and formal—in analyzing the social strata embedded in language.

In the Arab world, many critics have also turned to Bakhtin’s ideas—for example, Sayed El-Bahrawy. Yet, at the same time, some accusations have been directed at this theory, claiming that it lacks the qualities necessary to be considered a true critical theory. Some view it as nothing more than a personal orientation specific to Bakhtin and a small circle of critics.

This view, however, is incorrect. Although its contributions and applied studies may be relatively few, at the theoretical level it is rich in ideas and procedures, making it a significant critical theory in the history of literary criticism. According to Reda Ismail, it is important for three main reasons:

1. It focuses on the study of literary works.
2. It is procedural in its analysis of the language of literary discourse.
3. It pays close attention to the analysis of language in actual social reality.

This is what Reda Ismail states in his study Bakhtin: Between Language and Ideology*. Another study, however, highlights Bakhtin’s theory of the text in determining its identity and interpretive methodology, as well as his understanding of interpretation as a response. Bakhtin viewed the text—whether written or oral—as the foundation of all fields of study (linguistics, philology, literary studies, and the humanities in general). For him, the text is immediate reality: without the text, there is no object for inquiry or questioning, and no field of research.

Epistemology, in Bakhtin’s thought, rests on his theory of language, which begins with human speech as the product of the interaction between language and context bound to history. Speech, in his view, is not merely individual, nor is it infinitely variable and boundless; rather, it is an object of a new kind of linguistic inquiry that he called metalinguistics.

He argued that this science makes it possible to overcome the sterile dichotomy of form and content and provides tools for the formal analysis of ideologies. Bakhtin also believed that the most important feature of discourse is its dialogic nature—that is, its intertextual dimension. Every utterance, therefore, engages in dialogue with the discourses that preceded it and those that are yet to come.

Bakhtin adopted this as a foundation for developing his new conception of cultural interpretation: culture, in his view, is constituted by the discourses preserved within collective memory. Each speaker (whether as interlocutor, sender, or communicator) must therefore determine the position of their discourse in relation to these cultural discourses.

Read: Reflections on Modern Painting

__________________

Souad Khalil, hailing from Libya, is a writer, poet, and translator. She has been writing on culture, literature and other general topics.

The post Bakhtin: Ideology and Language first appeared on Sindh Courier.

By Abdullah Usman Morai | Sweden

Words are the invisible threads that weave human civilization. They build bridges, shape identities, foster understanding—and when misused, they divide, deceive, and destroy. In an age where information floods our screens and soundbites sway public opinion, the manipulation of words has become one of the most powerful and subtle tools of control. It is not merely what is said, but how it is said, when it is said, and what is left unsaid that influences minds. From political speeches to social media posts, advertising slogans to religious rhetoric, wordplay is often weaponized to alter perceptions, reshape narratives, and, in extreme cases, incite violence.

This article explores how manipulation of words permeates our society through media, politics, relationships, marketing, and more. By examining real-life cases and the psychology behind verbal manipulation, we uncover the urgent need for critical thinking and linguistic awareness in our personal and collective lives.

The Anatomy of Manipulation

Manipulation differs from persuasion in one essential way: intent. While persuasion respects the autonomy of the listener, manipulation seeks to override it, using language to guide someone toward a decision that benefits the speaker, often at the listener’s expense. Manipulation thrives on ambiguity, half-truths, selective framing, emotional appeals, and rhetorical devices that disguise intent.

Psychologically, humans are vulnerable to verbal manipulation because of cognitive biases. We respond to authority figures, emotionally charged language, and repeated messages, often without realizing it. Our need for belonging, fear of rejection, and desire for certainty make us susceptible to narratives, however misleading, that offer simplicity over nuance.

The Political Theater: Framing Reality

One of the most prominent stages for word manipulation is politics. Politicians rarely lie outright—they choose words that reshape perceptions.

Case Study 1: The “Patriot Act” – United States (2001)

After the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. government introduced legislation to expand surveillance powers. Naming it the “Patriot Act” was a masterstroke in linguistic framing. To oppose it felt unpatriotic. The actual contents—mass surveillance, detention without trial, limited civil liberties—were debated, but the name alone subdued public dissent.

Case Study 2: “Clean Karachi” Campaign – Pakistan (2019)

Launched as an initiative to tackle waste management, the campaign’s language emphasized cleanliness and civic duty. However, it also deflected from systemic issues such as poor governance and privatization of municipal services. By focusing the blame on “irresponsible citizens” rather than structural inefficiencies, the language shifted responsibility from the authorities to the people.

Framing Techniques:

• “Freedom fighter” vs. “terrorist”
• “Enhanced interrogation” vs. “torture”
• “Job creators” vs. “corporate tax evaders”

Words frame how we perceive the world—not just what we think, but what we think about.

Media and the Manufacturing of Consent

In the media, manipulation occurs not only through what is reported but how it is reported—and what is conveniently omitted.

Example: Headlines that Mislead

Consider the difference:

• “Protesters clash with police”
• “Police attack peaceful demonstrators”

Both may describe the same event. The first implies mutual aggression; the second assigns responsibility. Often, headlines use passive voice to obscure agency: “Mistakes were made,” instead of “The minister misled the public.”

Media outlets—especially in polarized societies—often use language to stoke fear, confirm biases, or maintain viewership. The result is not always fake news, but framed news—language carefully curated to direct interpretation.

Case Study 3: Media in India-Pakistan Conflicts

During military tensions, both Indian and Pakistani media have used terms like “surgical strike,” “martyred,” or “aggressor state” to sway public emotion. These terms create hero-villain binaries, suppressing dissent and rational dialogue. Words ignite nationalism, making peace seem like weakness.

Personal Manipulation: Gaslighting and Guilt

Manipulative language is not confined to politics or media—it shows up in homes, friendships, and relationships.

Example: Gaslighting

A form of psychological abuse where one person denies reality to confuse and control another. Phrases like:

• “You’re too sensitive.”
• “That never happened.”
• “You’re imagining things.”

Aim to erode the other’s sense of reality.

Guilt Manipulation:

• “If you loved me, you would…”
• “After all I’ve done for you…”

Such phrases use obligation and emotion to override free will.

Case Study 4: Domestic Abuse Cases

In many domestic violence cases reported in South Asia, victims were manipulated through language long before physical abuse began. Abusers use charm, religious justification, or shame to silence partners. The lack of education around emotional abuse makes it harder to identify manipulation masked as love or duty.

Advertising: Selling Dreams, Not Truth

Marketers are masters of word manipulation. Their goal is not to inform, but to sell—and they use aspirational language to bypass rational scrutiny.

• “Limited time offer” – creates false urgency.
• “All-natural” – vague, unregulated, emotionally appealing.
• “You deserve it” – makes consumption feel moral.

Example: Fairness Creams in South Asia

Products like Fair & Lovely (now renamed) promoted fairness as a key to success and beauty. Advertisements used manipulative language and imagery to equate lighter skin with self-worth and success, embedding colonial and racist standards through everyday language.

Religion and Ideology: The Sacred Shield

Religious and ideological leaders often use reverent language to shield manipulation from criticism.

Case Study 5: Extremist Rhetoric

Extremist groups across the world—whether religious or political—employ language that creates “us vs. them” narratives:

• “Martyrdom,” “infidel,” or “sacred duty” are often manipulated to justify violence.
• Charismatic leaders distort scriptures or nationalist texts using selective interpretation, cloaking manipulation in divine authority.

This linguistic distortion creates moral justification for actions that would otherwise be condemned.

Education and Resistance: Reclaiming the Narrative

So, how do we protect ourselves from word manipulation?

1. Media Literacy:

Understanding how headlines, visuals, and language influence perception. Schools and universities must teach not just what to think, but how to think.

2. Critical Thinking:

Asking: Who is saying this? Why now? What is being left out?

Identifying logical fallacies and emotionally manipulative phrases helps deconstruct false narratives.

3. Language Awareness:

Being conscious of euphemisms and ambiguous language. Replacing vague terms with specific facts reduces room for distortion.

4. Ethical Communication:

Encouraging honesty, transparency, and active listening in personal and public communication helps reduce manipulative tendencies.

5. Manipulation in Friendships: Seeds of Division

Manipulation doesn’t always wear a villain’s cloak. Sometimes, it comes wrapped in shared laughter, comforting words, or friendly advice. Among peers and even so-called close friends, verbal manipulation can take a subtle and destructive form—sowing seeds of doubt, jealousy, or conflict among others to gain control, attention, or dominance in the group.

Example: The Divisive Friend

A friend might say:

• “Don’t get me wrong, but have you noticed how she’s been ignoring you lately?”
• “He was saying things behind your back—I didn’t want to tell you, but I care about you.”

Such statements are crafted not to inform, but to influence—often deepening rifts and shifting loyalties in the speaker’s favor.

This manipulation thrives on insecurity, ambiguity, and emotional dependency. By planting doubts, the manipulator positions themselves as the “trusted one,” while quietly isolating others.

Case Study 6: Social Group Fallout

In many university and workplace settings, friend groups have fallen apart because of one member’s strategic whisper campaigns—twisting words, misrepresenting conversations, or exaggerating conflicts. These manipulators don’t lie outright; they frame narratives in ways that emotionally trigger others while preserving their image.

The result? Mistrust, gossip, exclusion, and often, emotional harm that lasts longer than the friendship.

Why It Works:

• People want to be seen, heard, and believed.
• We often trust friends without questioning intent.
• Emotional manipulation among friends hides behind concern, honesty, or protectiveness.

How to Resist It:

• Always verify before believing emotionally charged information.
• Confront with compassion rather than suspicion.
• Watch for patterns—do certain people always bring bad news about others?
• Remember that real friends unite, not divide.

Friendship should be a space of loyalty, clarity, and mutual respect. When language is used to divide or dominate, it ceases to be friendship and becomes control under disguise.

Words Matter—Choose Them Wisely

The manipulation of words is not new. From ancient orators to modern influencers, those who control language often control thought. But in a world inundated with content, where attention is currency and outrage sells, the need to recognize manipulation is more urgent than ever.

Words build nations, shape histories, and define identities—but they can also disguise, distort, and destroy. Manipulation doesn’t always come with malice. Sometimes, it’s a survival tactic, a marketing trick, or an inherited habit. But when left unchecked, it chips away at truth, trust, and autonomy.

The antidote lies not in silence, but in conscious speech and listening. To speak clearly. To question kindly. To hear fully. And to remember that the most dangerous lies are not the ones shouted in anger, but those whispered in beautiful words.

Read: The Quiet Power of Patience

__________________

Abdullah Soomro, penname Abdullah Usman Morai, hailing from Moro town of Sindh, province of Pakistan, is based in Stockholm Sweden. Currently he is working as Groundwater Engineer in Stockholm Sweden. He did BE (Agriculture) from Sindh Agriculture University Tando Jam and MSc water systems technology from KTH Stockholm Sweden as well as MSc Management from Stockholm University. Beside this he also did masters in journalism and economics from Shah Abdul Latif University Khairpur Mirs, Sindh. He is author of a travelogue book named ‘Musafatoon’. His second book is in process. He writes articles from time to

The post The Manipulative Language Strategies first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Into the language of gods

So little is said

And so much is left

To the understanding of the reader…

Jernail S. Anand, an eminent poet from India, shares his poem

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand, based in Chandigarh, is an Indian poet and scholar credited with 170 plus books of English literature, philosophy and spirituality. He won great Serbian Award Charter of Morava and his name adorns the Poets’ Rock in Serbia. He was honored with Seneca Award LAUDIS CHARTA by Academy of Arts & Philosophical Sciences, Bari, Italy 2024. He is Founder President of the International Academy of Ethics and conferred Doctor of Philosophy (Honoris Causa) by University of Engineering & Management, (UEM) Jaipur. Email anandjs55@yahoo.com 

THE LANGUAGE OF POETRY

Those who have problem

Handling words and ideas

Images and imagination

Have to write long

Prologues and then epilogues

To finally say

What he has tried to say

All the way.

The masters of metaphor

Often use silence

And what they say

Which is in fact very little

Is charged with intense feeling

Stanzas are like hand grenades

Which explode with meaning

When thrown after removing the pin

Some people turn poetry

Into the language of gods

So little is said

And so much is left

To the understanding of the reader

It depends on your wisdom

Or its opposite

How you treat the oracle’s words

Which are spoken with gaps

And obvious disconnection.

___________________ 

Read: A Poem Dedicated to Mothers

The post Poem: The Language of Poetry first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Interviewed by Ana S. Gad

What first inspired you to pursue art, and how has your journey evolved?

I took to the sketchbook and colors when I was 7 years old. Drawing nature, human figures and almost anything that caught my eye was a hobby I practiced with great joy. However, I got disconnected with art for some time as life’s many demands took over. But as the saying goes “In the end, we return to the roots of our beginnings, and there we find the seeds of our future” and that’s exactly what happened. I reconnected with art after a long gap, as a creative outlet for healing and transformation, reinventing a new chapter in my life. And since then, there has been no looking back. Reviving my artistic journey, has given me a voice that continues to empower me and push me forward fearlessly. The journey evolves every day, where I get a chance to explore and experiment with new techniques. It’s a journey of endless seeking, learning and growth, and I embrace it wholeheartedly.

How do your Indian roots and life in Dubai influence your artistic style?

India’s long struggle for freedom, resilience and its eventual victory, combined with Dubai’s dynamic, modern, yet deeply rooted, all-embracing culture have shaped a unique fusion in my artistic expression. The interplay of rich heritage and colors, history and modernity allow me to explore diverse perspectives and techniques. My artistic style is guided by intuition, where I don’t keep a plan and let go of expectations, but I embrace the freedom of expression, allowing my emotions, instincts, and the energy of the moment to guide each piece. I seek to bridge the old and the new, celebrating both the timelessness of tradition and the excitement of contemporary expression.

Your work is deeply connected to poetry, yoga, and spirituality. How do these elements shape your creative process?

Poetry, yoga, and spirituality deeply influence my creative process, shaping the way I approach movement, expression, and symbolism in my paintings. Just as yoga unites breath and motion, my art intertwines dynamism with abstraction, figuration, and surrealist imagery. Each brushstroke becomes a step in this meditative dance—an extension of emotions, ideas, and experiences. The layering techniques I use, such as underpainting, texts, dripping, and glazing, mirror the depth of poetic expression and the fluidity of spiritual exploration.

Through a blend of eclectic and soothing tones, I strive to evoke serenity, peace, and inner revival. Ultimately, I see my art as a journey, one where viewers can find their own reflections and connections, becoming part of the story themselves.

As both an artist and educator, how do these roles complement each other?

As a visual artist and an English Language teacher, I’m fascinated by the uncanny connection between language and art. Unlike words which use a definite sequence to express ideas, art expresses myriad ideas, symbols and forms in non-grammatical ways. But both, I believe have the power to connect the human mind beyond race and border. As both an artist and educator, I find that these roles naturally complement each other. My artistic practice fuels my teaching, allowing me to share not just techniques but also the deeper, expressive potential of art. Through my workshops for young learners and working professionals, I use color and creativity as tools for enhancing well-being, encouraging participants to explore self-expression, mindfulness, and emotional release. Teaching, in turn, enriches my own artistic journey, offering fresh perspectives and inspiring new ideas through interaction with diverse creative minds.

How do Buddhism and Ikigai influence your approach to art and teaching?

Buddhism and Ikigai deeply influence both my art and teaching, shaping them into mindful, purposeful practices. Like Buddhism, my approach to art is meditative and fluid—each brushstroke is an expression of presence, emotion, and inner exploration. I blend abstraction, figuration, and surreal symbolism, using techniques like underpainting, dripping, and layering to evoke serenity, peace, and spiritual revival. Similarly, my teaching aligns with the philosophy of Ikigai—the pursuit of meaning and fulfilment. Through my art workshops, I use color and creativity as tools for well-being, encouraging self-expression, mindfulness, and emotional release.

This philosophy extends to my English language teaching as well, where I integrate creative methods to make learning an immersive and enriching experience. Just as art allows for personal interpretation and connection, language learning, too, becomes a journey of discovery, self-confidence, and communication. Whether through storytelling, visual thinking, or interactive expression, I aim to create a space where both art and language empower individuals to find their voice and purpose.

You describe art as a way to create a ‘new reality.’ What do you hope to express through your work?

Through my work, I strive to capture moments of introspection, transformation, and emotional depth. I believe that each of us has a story to tell, and through art, we continuously rediscover and recreate ourselves. Art opens up a world where there is no right continuously rediscover and recreate ourselves. Art opens up a world where there is no right or wrong, no limitations, and no judgment. It is a space of absolute freedom, where emotions take form, ideas breathe, and creativity flows without restraint. In this world, imperfections are not flaws but unique imprints of individuality. Through my works, I hope to encourage others to see the world not just as it is, but as it  could be—a space where imagination leads the way, self-expression knows no boundaries,  and intuition guides every brave, unfiltered stroke. Art is an act of courage, a journey into the unseen, where vulnerability and strength coexist, and where authenticity shines through the boldness of creation.

What advice would you give to aspiring artists and educators looking to follow their passion?

Follow your heart, your instincts and believe in yourself. Each of us is unique— just like a cherry, peach or plum, with their own essence and purpose. So, there’s no need to compare or compete with the world outside. The only competition lies within us, to evolve every day, refine our craft and become the best version of who we are meant to be. We must continue to nurture our passions like seeds that need patience and care to flourish. The journey may be challenging, but determination and perseverance turn dreams into reality.

Read: Woman Scream Festival: Echoes of Her Soul

________________

Courtesy: Sands And City

Photos: Sanili Sahi Instagram

The post Creating Space for Art and Language first appeared on Sindh Courier.