I consider any new analysis on narrative structure can be relevant. As far Linguistics aren't a Church where you're forced to repeat the same text over and over, after decades of mind tyranny, new optics are gonna be needed.

Regarding Stuctural Linear analysis very interesting - Following !

يجب تطبيق المنهج السيمياءي لتحليل هذا النوع من القصص والحكايات كونه يغوص في اغوار البنية اتحتية لمثل هذه النصوصالسردية والبحث عن المعاني والدلالات والعلامات المختلفة مما يتيح للقارء اكتشاف المغزى الحقيقي لهكذا نصوص

Vadim S. Gorshkov

Thank you for responding.

Yea. Propp's theory came 90 years back and several revisions have already come, taking tales from different backgrounds. Is a new revision relevant or useful in some way, taking tales from India as the specimen for analysis? looking for ur opinion.

Fred Romano

Thank you for responding!

What do you think about revising and putting forth a new framework, keeping Propp's as the reference and tales from India as the analytical specimen, by incorporating Ochs and Capps Linearity theory?

Looking for your suggestion.

ممكن الاشتغال على القصص والحكايات الهندية كونها فيها الكثير من العجاءبية والخيال الممزوج بالواقع فقد تستفيد كثيرا وتصلىالى حقاءق مذهلة

Haseena Naji do you mean tales from India are based on live experiences? Very interesting. It looks like a reflected image of Ochs and Capps, going from the background to the text. But I surely consider Indian tales have various levels of understanding and Ochs and Capps are into linearity.

جميل جدا . بالتوفيق

نعم يمكن تطبيق هذا النمةذج العاملي . ولكن بمزيد من الرؤية والتاويل لوصول الى نتاءج مرضية

I will take the liberty to divide your question into two:

How relevant is the Propp's model now?

I was asking the similar a few months ago when I tried to rethink reasons for the popularity of late a version of Tibetan biography of Milarepa. I talked to one folklore scholar then (https://cuni.academia.edu/PetrJanecek; his name resembles mine but it is just a coincidence) and his answer was that in folklore studies V. Y. Propp continues to be an important authority primarily in most of Europe and the USA. In Russia, he was criticized in the 1990s however there is nothing to replace/significantly improve his theory (except French narratologists - I think authors like A. J. Greimas, C. Bremond and G. Genette were on his mind).

It is important to consider (as Mr Gorskhov had remarked) that this theory is 90 years old. On the other hand, it was appreciated 30 years after its first publishing when translated into English (1958). But I feel Propp's theory is not used much. Maybe it is connected to "decline" of structuralism (at least in anthropology) and its criticism for the intellectualistic approach and creating something like cognitive crystallography (e.g. Kirmayer 1993). You may find a fine application by A. Dundes in FFC (which you probably know). There were also some attempts to apply his methods on Czech ghost stories by B. Benes (this was, in fact, interesting because the role of the hero was cancelled here). Apart from that, his method was used in attempts to make computer-generated stories and to analyse modern literature (like Dickens). So I do not think that someone will be able to prove that Propp's theory is obsolete. I strongly agree with remark that Hugh-Jones pointed out in his lecture (https://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/2709496; 3:00): "...it is not correct to view anthropological or sociological theories as trainer fashions..."

Is it possible to mix Propp with Ochs and Capps?

I believe that this question should be more general and focused on combining and mixing methods. As fas as I know, it is possible or even modern to mix methods in qualitative research. So why do not to try to combine or mix these two methods to gain some interesting results? I do not think it is possible to prove that these two methods are not combinable. The researcher just has to explain exactly how and why he has combined/mixed methods and be able to find arguments to resist possible (or probable) criticism. I have also heard lectures on methodology ending like: "...and you must read this and that. It is all wrong from a methodological point of view but it is a piece of scholarship which influenced me a lot..." I guess it is connected to the assumption that social sciences are producing rather understanding than knowledge. However, my knowledge of methodology is very limited...

البحث في الانثروبولوجيا شيق وجميل وبخاصة ما تعلق بتراث امة من الامم بالتوفيق

Petr Jandáček Thank you for the wonderful response! It was very much reassuring to my research.

بالتوفيق

مرحبا على ما اظن ان تقسيمات بروب الوظائفية ههي الامثل في دراسة الانثروبولجيا ولكن لكثرة الوظائف وتشعبها في راي تقسيمات غريماس اشمل وافضل تحياتي واتنمى لك التوفيق