Cooperative rhetoric question in contemporary Persian literature

Ma'ani as a field of rhetoric in Persian literature has so many things to be revealed. In fact, this field of literature is trying to explain the secondary meaning (connotation) of sentences. From ancient times, ma'ani is explained based on Arabic literature and only in recent times we have had some books on this literary science and on the basis of Persian literature. Hereupon we need some modern studies in this field of literature. One of the issues studied in the traditional rhetoric, is rhetoric question. Sirus Shamisa has counted 28 functions for question sentences. In this paper, In addition to these 28 functions another function is cited for rhetorical questions which are called "cooperative rhetoric question". These kind of rhetoric questions are often seen in new literary texts because these texts in a conscious way and more than the past times try to share the readers in defining texts. In other words, these sentences gave a reader-based property to the text and in this way the text is released from the author's domination. The important matter is that since the text has a coherent universality, for answering these kind of questions the reader requires an understanding of the text system. And traditional rhetoric is commonly incapable in understanding such a system. In linguistics, afterwards Saussure, it was debated that signs find their meaning in a system and the meaning and life of signs depends on the system which lives in; sign is only an analytic concept. (Sojudi, 1387/2008:198) Therefore in literature and also in ma'ani, the meaning which can be inferred from different sentences is subordinated to different systems: system which include these sentences (literary text), the literary system in which the text is embodied, the cultural system in which the text is embodied and etc. However our important focus point are those systems in which the text reader interpret the signs; systems like cultural system, meta-functional system, time and place system ant etc. And in this way different readers may infer different meanings from the same signs. This paper shows the history of such a discussion in linguistic studies and in literary discussions figure on poststructuralists' perspectives. In Drida's view, in reading a text some special relations should be inferred that are not stated by the author; relations among those he expects from its language and unexpected ones. In current era, and especially after structuralism, most of the approaches to t