BÎNAXWAZÎ Û FAİL-THE AGENT: Rexneya Judith Butler ya li ser determînîzma Lîngûîstîk ya Binyadger (1)

BÎNAXWAZÎ Û FAİL-THE AGENT:

Rexneya Judith Butler ya li ser determînîzma Lîngûîstîk ya Binyadger[1]

BEXTIYAR SECADÎ JI ÎNGILÎZÎ: HÊJA

Puxte: Judith Butler, yek ji dengên xurt ên rexneyî ye ku bersiv daye peyikandina perspektivên psîkoanalîtîk û Marksîst di analîza subjektîvîteyê de. Ev nivîsar dixwaze nîşan bide ku bînaxwaziya radîkal ya Butler û teoriya rexneyî ya ku piştgiriya determînîzma lîngûîstîk dike, ji hev cuda ne. Heke em zimên wek warê şerê îdeolojiyan û kontekstê jî wek cihê ku tê de ji suje pirsiyarî tê kirin (interpellated) bihesibînin, em dikarin bibêjin têgeha Butler ya “fail” û têkiliya wê ya bi zimên re, dema fail nasnameya xwe ji nû de ava dike, rê li ber azadiyeke rêlatîvîst vedike. Li gor têgeha Lacan ya suje, suje nikare nasnameya xwe ava bike ji ber ku Sembolîk bivênevê bandorê li ser suje dike. Ji bo Butler tiştê herî girîng têkiliya fail ya bi zimên re ye, û pozisyona fail ya di konteksteke paşbinyadger de jî ji bo wê girîng e. Nêrîna Butler ya li ser zimên mînakeke kêmpeyda ya rexneya hemdem e û dişibe lêkolîna zimên ya li gor doktrîna bînaxwaz.

Peyvên sereke: Determînîzma lîngûîstîk; bînaxwazî; fail; ziman; jêpirsiyarîkirin; subjektîvîte

Destpêk

Determînîzma lîngûîstîk ji aliyê mekteba binyadger ya rexneya wêjeyî û çandî bi hêz tê parastin. Ez ê di vê nivîsarê de berçav bikim bê Judith Butler çawa doktrîna determînîzma lîngûîstîk bi nêrîneke rexneyî nirxandiye. Judith Butler, yek ji dengên xurt ên rexneyî ye ku bersiv daye îdîaya gerdûnî ya binyadger ya ku dibêje di prosesa bisujekirinê de determînîzma lîngûîstîk raser e. Her wiha, divê ez berê bala we bikişînim ser duserîtiyên li jêr. Ev duserîtî têgehên teorik ên sereke dihewînin ji bo vê nivîsarê:

Binyadgerî û paş-binyadgerî
Determînîzm û Bînaxwazî
Bînaxwazî û Hilweşan
Suje û fail
Bisujebûn û Performatîvî (bisujebûn û bisujekirin wek mînakên sujebûnê)

Judith Butler, jêpirsiyarîkirin (interpellation) û bandora Hegelî

Rengê têgeha hiş (consciousness) a Hegel di sehneya rewşenbîrî ya Fransaya salên 1950yî de xwe bi awayekî xurt deqandiye. Butler xwest ku di lêgerîna subjektiviteyê de bandora Hegel ya li ser perspektîvên psîkoanalîtîka binyadger û Marksîzma binyadger nîşan bide. Di serê kariyera xwe ya akademîk de, ew li fikir û bandora Hegel geriya di pirtûka xwe ya yekemîn ya bi navê Sujeyên Arezûyê: Hizren Hegelî di Frensa Sedsala Bistemîn (Subjects of Desire: Hegelian Reflections in Twentieth Century France, 1987) de. Ev bandora Hegelî di xebatên wê yên paşîn de jî hat nîqaşkirin. Dema ev pirtûk cara duduyan hate çapkirin, wê di destpêka pirtûkê de got: “xebatên min hemî di mahreka hin pirsên Hegelî de dimînin.”[2]

Pozîsyona Butler ya ku ji ber têgeha wê ya performatîviyê navdar bûye, divê di konteksta Lacan û Foucault û Derrida de bê xebitîn. Lê belê, xwendineke nêzîk a li ser têgeha performatîviyê diyar dike ku ew herwiha di bin tesîra şêweya îdeolojiyê ya Althusserî de jî maye. Ji bo Althusser tiştê ku rewşên sujebûnê bi awayekî bêveger ji nû ve ava dike performansa têkiliyên me yên bi yên din re û bi taybetî jî bi saziyên îdeolojîk re ye. Nirxandina Butler ya li ser teoriya Althusser (jêpirsiyarîkirina îdeolojîk) di pirtûkên wê yên bi navê: Axaftina Biheyecan: Polîtîkayek Performatîviyê (Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative, 1997) û bilhassa di Jiyana Psîşîk ya Îqtidarê:Teoriyên Bisujebûne (The Psychic Life of Power: Theories of Subjection1997) de tê dîtin.

Butler jî wek Žižek bi awayekî rexneyî têkiliyê bi têgeha jêpirsiyarîkirinê ya Althusser re datîne. Lê xwendina Butler ji ya Žižek pêşketîtir e, ji ber ku ew di heman demê de hem li ser teoriya Althusser û hem jî li ser zimên hûr dibe. Di Axaftineke Biheyecan de Butler bi îqtidara ku ziman li ser suje bi kar tîne re eleqedar dibe. Pirtûka wê bi lêkolîna li ser kêliyên ku suje ji aliyê “zimên ve tê birîndarkirin” dest pê dike. Dipirse bê “Kengî em îdîa dikin ku em ji aliyê zimên ve hatine birîndarkirin,” û “ev îdîayeke çawa ye em dikin”[3] Wekî ku Butler bawer dike em qudretekê atfî zimên dikin û xwe wek “qurbanên birîndar yên wê qudretê dihesibînin,” ew dibêje ne tenê têkiliyeke xurt di navbera îqtidar û zimên de heye, lê herwiha ew îqtidara ku em behsê dikin, ziman bi xwe ye. Loma, angaşta xwe ya li ser “bizimankirina qada siyasî” bi referansên Althusser û Foucault pêşniyaz dike.

Di nirxandina xwe ya li ser “sehne”ya jêpirsiyarîkirinê ya Althusser de Butler mefhûmên Hegelî bi kar tîne. Hegel dibêje avabûna xwe-hişyariya (self-conscious- ness) nasnameya kole dijberiyeke nav-subjektîvî ava dike. Ango, diyalektîka di nav- bera kole û xwedî de, têkoşîna du subjektîvîteyan e. Ev têkoşîn hem berî avabûna xwe-hişyariyê û hem jî piştî wê heye. Loma, ji bo ku jêpirsiyarîkirina îdeolojîk pêk were, ne mecbûr e du kes hebin. Ev dikare wek fenomeneke di navbera sujeyekî/ê û rastiya derveyîn de jî pêk were.

Ev nêrîna li ser teoriya Althusser di pirtûka Jiyana Psîşîk ya Îqtidarê de jî tê dîtin. Di vê pirtûkê de beşek ji bo “subjektîvîteya Althusser” hatiye veqetandin. Di serê nîqaşa xwe de Butler jêpirsiyarîkirina Althusser bi nav dike. Tevî ku li dijî hin hêlên vê têgehê derdikeve jî, dibêje “krîtîka vê doktrînê hê jî berdewam e.” Butler di felsefeya Althusser de li ser kêliyên jêpirsiyarîkirinê hûr dibe, ango ew kêliyên ku takekes serê xwe li banga polêsan dizivirînê. Butler vê sehneya Althusserî wek tiştekî “mînakwarî û alegorîk” radigire. Analîza awayên cuda yên li dora xwe zîvirînê pêşkeş dike û analîza xwe bi fêmkirina Nietzsche ya ‘wijdan’ û bi pirsa ‘tewanê’ ve girê dide. Butler bawer dike “behsa wijdanê ya di ‘Îdeolojî û Saziyen Dewletê yên îdeolojîk’ (Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses) ya Althusser de pir kêm bala rexnegiran kişandiye.” Loma Butler nîqaş dike ku “teoriya îdeolojiyê pişta xwe daye komek metaforên teolojîk û tevlihev.” Althusser di çîroka Peter de wek mînak behsa avakirina sujeya ji aliyê Xwedê dike. Butler jî nivîsandiye ku ev mînakdayîn bi awayekî awarte hêza îdeolojiyê nîşan dide di kelama Althusser de:

Hêza xwedê ya navlêkirinê teoriya jêpirsiyarîkirinê binyad dike. Ew jî dibe sedema avabûna îdeolojîk ya suje. Amûrên lîngûîstîk yên ku suje pê mecbûr dimîne tev li civakê bibe, bi mêrûnê (vaftîzê) bi mînak dibe. Xwedê dibêje “Peter” û ew dibe Peter, û ev binavkirin xwedê wek serekaniya Peter saz dike.[4]

Lê di sehneya jêpirsiyarîkirinê ya Althusser de em bi vegotineke cuda rûbirû dimînin, ji ber ku di vê sehneyê de polêsek û kesê tê binavkirin jixwe hene. Em nikarin bibêjin ew kesê ku tê binavkirin, berî binavkirina polês ne sujeyek bû. Bi a polês kirin û serê xwe li banga wî zivirandin sujeyeke gramatîk ferz dike. Wek encam, Butler dibêje:

Heke ev stûxwarkirin suje ava bike, wê demê ew kelama ku dixwaze çîroka vê stûxwarkirinê vebêje tenê dikare bi îstismarkirina gramerê pêş bikeve, ji ber ku bandorên wê yên xeyalî hene. Ew kelama ku dixwaze vebêje bê suje çawa ava bûye, berî vejîna suje vebêje hebûna wê ya gramatîk ferz dike.[5]

Ew dibêje divê ewil sujeyeke gramatîk hebe û haya wê ji xwe hebe, û dûre li banga polês bizîvire. Butler dibêje: dema “suje bi awayê gramatîk bê qebûlkirin, dê wisa xuya bike ku divê ewil haya suje ji wê hebe, lê ez îdîa dikim, heke ev jixwehaydarbûn tunebe suje jî tuneye”[6] Di vê kêlîyê de jêpirsîyarîkirin formeke nav-subjektîvî digire. Ango, jêpirsiyarîkirin berê di nasnameya suje de, dûre wek bertekeke li dij banga polês pêk tê. Ev fikra Butler pêşiya meriv ronak dike ji ber ku têgeheke Althusserî bi rengekî Hegelî pêşkêş dike. Heke meriv gazinên Althusser yên li ser Hegel bîne ber çavê xwe, xwendina li ser Althusser ya bi vî rengî nûjen xuya dibe.

Butler cudatiya di navbera xwe û Althusser de dide xuyanî û dibêje Althusser di mînaka xwe ya silavdayînê de zimên tenê bi axaftinê ve girê dide lê Butler dibêje ziman nikare tenê bi axaftinê ve bê girêdan. Di Axafineke Biheyecan de Butler îdîa dike ku ziman divê ne tenê di forma ziman de bê dîtin. Tevî ku, li gor piraniya teoriyên subjektiviteyê (tevî ya Butler bi xwe) “destpêkirina sujeyê, lîngûîstîk” be jî, “şikilgirtina ‘zimên’ ya damezrîndar ne mecbûr e bi axaftinê ve bê girêdan, lê Althusser wan bi hev girê dide. ”[7] Tiştê herî balkêş ew e ku, Butler bi xwe bawer dike ku paşkoyîtiya suje bi rêya zimên pêk tê. Ev tê wê wateyê ku, ziman ne tenê amûra jêpirsiyarîkirina îdeolojîk e lê konteksta vî tiştî bi xwe ye.

Têgeha dubaretiyê (Iterability) ji aliyê Derrida hatiye çêkirin, û Derrida seranserî kariyera xwe ya entellektuel ev têgeh bi pêş ve biriye.[8] Dema Butler li ser vê têgehê disekine, ew yekser çend konseptan ji Althusser û Lacan û Foucault jî digire û wan berfireh dike. Tevî ku sûd ji Derrida wergirtibe jî, di esasê xwe de Butler bi mantiqa Foucault ya veşartî mayî re mijûl dibe. Dema Foucault behsa pêkhatina suje ya rabêjî dike ev mantiqa ku Butler pê mijûl e jî derdikeve holê. Loma, tevî ku Butler wek rexnegireke di hundir paradîgmaya Foucaultyî de tê nasîn jî, pozisyona wê divê wek pêşvebira rexneyî ya Foucault bê nirxandin. Ev pêşvebirin bi rêya bikaranîna psîkoanalîza Lacanî û hin tesîrên din li gel fikra Foucaultyî mumkin bûye. Ango ew berê nasnameyê wek pirsgirêkeke ji kokên siyasî hatiye dihesibîne û dûre wê bi psîkoanalîzê şîrove dike. Butler bawer dike, têkiliyek di navbera îqtidar û derûniyê de heye, bi vê baweriya xwe ew bi eşkereyî Foucault û Lacan li hev dihûne.

Bînaxwazî an Determînîzma Lîngûîstîk?

Bînaxwaziya radîkal ya Butler, wê û teoriya rexneyî ya ku determînîzma lîngûîstîk dixwaze ji hev cuda dike. Di vê mijarê de Butler ji Lacan jî cuda ye, ji ber ku Lacan wek elementa herî mezin ya Sembolîkê li ser zimên disekine û cî ji tevgerên serbixwe re nahêle (ji bo suje karibe tev bilive.) ‘Fail’a Butler ji sujeya Lacan azadtir xuya dike ji ber ku fail dikare di rewşa ku tê de hatiye bicîkirin xwe tev bide, lê sujeya Lacan di heman rewşê de nikare xwe tev bide ji ber ku di çarçoveya ji aliyê zimên ve hatiye amadekirin de cit bûye. Butler li vir xwe ji teoriyên binyadger ên ku bi eslê xwe xwedî karakterekî determînîst in, dûr dixe û nêzî nêrîna paşbinyadger dibe. Li gor paşbinyadgeriyê, bi taybetî jî ji bo Derrîda suje qabilî hilweşanê ye. Lê belê, di vê mijarê de kêfa Butler zêdetir ji têgeha ‘bê-bisazîkirinê’ re tê. Ev têgeh li gor hin çavkaniyan têgeheke Foucaultyî ye.

Di Bedenên ku Dibin Mesele (Bodies That Matter,1993) de Butler îhtimala failtiyê li ber çavan digire di proseseke lihevkirî ya dubarekirinê de. Ji bo wê jiberkirin dikare bibe dîsa-watelêkirin jî. Prosesa dubaretiyê dikare konvensiyonên nîşan kirine hem bihêz bike hem jî lawaz bike. Veronika Vasterling nêrîna Butler ya li ser suje û zimên bi van peyvan berçav dike:

Di vegotina Butler ya li ser têkiliya suje û zimên de, pirsgirêk … ew e ku suje hema her tim ji aliyê zincîrên watelêkirinê yên zimên bînaxwaz dibe û dîsa-bînaxwaz dibe. Suje bi temamî ne pasîv e, ew dikare bilêvkirinê bike û ev ji bo (dîsa)bînaxwaziya wê şertekî pêwist e. Loma, Butler bi awayekî meşrû dikare îdîa bike ku suje bi tena serê xwe ji prosesa (dîsa) bînaxwaziyê derbas nabe.[9]

Suje hema her tim çavê xwe di hundir zimanekî de vedike. Di hundir vî zimanî de kêm zêde konvensiyonên watelêkirinê yên damezirandî hene. Lê dîsa jî, di vir de ji bo afirîneriyê cih heye: em dikarin, bi qestî, hewl bidin ku berê konvensiyonên watelêkirinê (yên ku em tê de ne) biguherînin. Li gor Butler, suje ji aliyê formên konvensiyonel û naveroka zimên ve tê avakirin, lê heman suje dikare wateyên nû li wê naveroka zimên û li formên konvensiyonel bike.

Nêrîna Butler ya li ser suje dişibe nêrîna Arîstotales ya li ser giyaniya ku şikil dide beden û wê çarçove dike. Di Rabêj û Sembol (Le discourse et le symbole, 1962) de Edmund Ortigues bi tundî guh û çav ji hev cuda dike, û wan bi tixûbên cuda yên Sembolîk û Xeyaliyê ve têkildar dike. Em bi rêya çavên xwe rastî Xeyaliyê tên û em bi rêya guhê xwe ji Sembolîkê haydar dibin. Ji ber vê, kesê ku em dibînin ji mevcûdiyetekê pêvetir ne tiştek e, tenê bedenek e lê yê ku em pê re diaxivin suje ye.

Balpişta Butler ya li ser ‘bizimankirina qada siyasî’ çarçoveyeke Lacanî û Foucaultyî dişopîne. Butler bi psîkoanalîza Lacanî nêzî têgeha îqtidarê ya Foucault bûye û têgeha wê ya Performatîviyê encama vê nêzbûnê ye. Dema îdeolojî bi awayekî Althusserî ji takekesan sujeyan diafirîne, têgeha Foucault: rabêj, tesîrê li ser îdeolojiyê dike. Tiştê ku îdeolojiyê bi rabêjê ve girê dide têgeha Foucault ya dij-pozîtîf e. Û dij-pozîtîf dişibe têgeha Althusserî: Saziyên Dewletê yên Îdeolojîk. Avabûna rabêjî ya suje dikare di konteksta Saziyên Dewletê yên îdeolojîk de bê vekolîn. Ji bo Butler tiştê herî girîng, têkiliya fail ya bi zimên re ye û ev têkilî di konteksteke paşbinyadger de cih girtiye. Nêrîna Butler ya li ser zimên mînakeke kêmpeyda ya rexneya hemdem e ku dişibe lêkolîna zimên ya li gor doktrîna bînaxwaz. Û herwiha, dozîna Butler ya li ser têkoşîna di navbera takekesê fail û bisazîkirinê dişibe dijberbûna di navbera zimanê suje yê/a Lacanî û îdeolojiyên Althusserî yên ku ji suje jêpirsiyariyê dikin. Li gor Butler têkiliya fail ya bi zimên re an konvensiyonê bi hêz dike an jî lawaz dike. Û ev nîqaş di xwendina diyalektîka nav-sujeyî ya di navbera sujeyan de amûrtiyê dike. Û ev nav-subjektîvîte bi taybetî dema karakter bi zimanên din re rûbirû dimîne derdikeve hole.

Mînak û Bikaranîn

Mînakên di karên edebî de yên ku dixwazin qaîdeyên sîntaktîk û semantîk yê zimanekî bin pê bikin, di nêrîna îroyîn de wek mînakên hewldana fail ya xwe bêsujekirinê tên hesibandin. Dema suje hertim di warê determînîzma lîngûîstîk de dimîne, fail li tevgerên bînaxwaz digere. Bînaxwaziya lîngûîstîk, rê li ber dîsa-bînaxwazkirina nasnameya sujeyê vedike. Di wêjeya îngilîzî de, mînakên sereke yên veguherîna suje, ji bo fail ev in:

Di William Shakespeare de hevedudanîtî (portmanteauism) (mînak: di Anthony û Cleopatra)
Di Jiyan û Fikrên Tristram Shand (The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shand, Gentleman) ya Laurence Sterne de hevedudanîtî û binpêkirina sîntaktîk.
Di Alice di Ecêbîstanê de (Alice Adventures in Wonderland) ya Lewis Carroll de lihevanîna peyvan û hevedudanîtî
Di romana modernîst de, dîsa-watedarkirina zincîra watelêkirinê (mînak: James Joyce, Ulysses û Finnegans Wake (Ulysses and Finnegans Wake) û William Faulkner, Dakeve jêr Mûsa (Go Down Moses)
Di helbesta modernîst de binpêkirina sîntaktîk (mînak: helbestên E. E. Cummings)

Encam:

Heke em zimên wek warê şerê îdeolojiyan û kontekstê jî wek cihê ku tê de ji suje pirsiyarî tê kirin bihesibînin, em dikarin bibêjin têgeha Butler ya “fail” û têkiliya wê ya bi zimên re, dema fail nasnameya xwe ji nû de ava dike, rê li ber azadiyeke rêlatîvîst vedike. Fikra Butler ya fail ji sujeya Lacan cudatir e, û ji bo xebatên edebî yên ku tê de nasnameya karakteran ji nû de tê avakirin muhîm e. Herwiha, wê bi awayekî rexneyî xwe daye ber têgeha Althusser: jêpirsiyarîkirinê jî. Ji bo wê, jêpirsiyarîkirin di hundirê suje de pêk tê. Loma rengekî wê yê nav-subjectîvî heye. Û ev reng, analîza ku dixwaze diyalektîka nav-subjektîvî (di navbera subjektîvîtiyên îdeolojîk yên nasnameya suje de) nîşan bide û nêrîna Butler nêzî hev dike. Dema binyadgerî ji bo sujeyan li ser determînîzma lîngûîstîk disekine, paşbinyadgerî ji bo fail bi mînakên bînaxwaziyê re rûbirû dimîne. Loma, cihêtiyek tûj di navbera têgeha binyadger: suje, û têgeha bînaxwaz: fail de heye. Di wêjeyê de tradîsyonên ku tê de nivîskar navên nû li zincîra watelêkirinê dikin hene. Sujeyê/a bi performatîviyê têkildar, naxwaze bi zincîrên watelêkirinê ve bê girêdan. Ev suje zêdetir dixwaze bibe failek û ji girtîgeha determînîzma lîngûîstîk bireve.

[1] Ev nivîsar li Fakulteya Edebiyat û Zimanên Biyanî ya Zaningeha Kurdistanê ya li Sînê, di 06.12.2014 de hatiye daberandin.

[2] Judith Butler, Subjects of Desire: Hegelian Reflections in Twentieth-Century France, New Yotk: Columbia University Press, 1987, r. xiv

[3] Judith Butler, Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative, New York: Rutledge, 1997,r. 1.

[4] Judith Butler, The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997, r. 111-2.

[5] lbid. r. 112.

[6] Ibid. r. 68.

[7] Vicki Kirby, Judith Butler: Live Theory, London: Continuum, 2006, r. 95.

[8] Dubaretî (Iterability) dikare wek îhtimala dûbarekirina peyvan û nivîsan bê tarif kirin. Li gor Derrîda, ev dûbare kirin di rewşên cûda cûda û ser hev, ser hev pêk tê. Derrîda di maqaleyên xwe yên Limited Inc. de vê têgehê derdixe. Wek mînak binêr: Jacques Derrida, “Signature Event Context,” di Limited Inc, ed. Gerald Graff, trans. Samuel Weber and Jeffrey Mehlman, Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1988, , r. 1-25.

[9] Veronica Vasterling, “Butler’s Sophisticated Constructivism: A Critical Assessment,” diHypatia, Vol. 14, No.3 (Havîn 1999), r. 28.

ÇAVKANÎ

Butler, Judith. Subjects of Desire: Hegelian Reflections in Twentieth-Century France. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987.

—. “Conscience Doth Make Subjects of Us All.” Yale French Studies, No. 88, Depositions: Althusser, Balibar, Macherey, and the Labor of Reading, (Fall 1995), rr. 6-26.

—. Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative. New York: Rutledge, 1997.

—. The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997.

Butler, Judith, Ernesto Laclau and Slavoj Žižek. Contingency, Hegemony, Universality:

Contemporary Dialogues on the Left. London: verso, 2000.

Hawks, Terence. Structuralism and Semiotics. London: Routledge, 1992.

Kirby, vicki. Judith Butler: Live Theory. London: Continuum, 2006.

Larmore, Charles. “The Concept of a Constitutive Subject.” di nav The Talking Cure: Essays in Psychoanalysis and Language. Colin MacCabe, ed. London: Macmillan, 1981, rr.10 8-31.

Thom, Martin. “The Unconscious Structured as a Language” di nav The Talking Cure: Essays in Psychoanalysis and Language. Colin MacCabe, ed. London: Macmillan, 1981. rr. 1-44.

vasterling, veronica. “Butler’s Sophisticated Constructivism: A Critical Assessment.” Hypatia, Cild. 14, No. 3 (Havîn 1999), rr. 17-38.

Wolfreys, Julian. Critical Keywords in Literary and Cultural Theory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

BÎNAXWAZÎ Û FAİL-THE AGENT: Rexneya Judith Butler ya li ser determînîzma Lîngûîstîk ya Binyadger (1)

Vejandina Zimanê Îbranî

Nûrealîzma Îtalî, Yilmaz Guney û Hêvî

Tehlîlek di Peywenda Teorîya Monomîtê de li ser Çîroka “Meymûn Xanim û Mîrze Memûd”

Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

BÎNAXWAZÎ Û FAİL-THE AGENT: Rexneya Judith Butler ya li ser determînîzma Lîngûîstîk ya Binyadger (1)

Related Posts

Vejandina Zimanê Îbranî

Nûrealîzma Îtalî, Yilmaz Guney û Hêvî

Tehlîlek di Peywenda Teorîya Monomîtê de li ser Çîroka “Meymûn Xanim û Mîrze Memûd”

Leave A Reply Cancel Reply