English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In our classical literature, commentaries were written on both prose and prose works. Some of these annotations contain detailed information, while others merely give the meaning of words, while in rare cases they provide some explanations. In the second category, it is more correct to consider the commentary of Destaviz-i Daniş written for the Persian divan of Yavuz Sultan Selim. This commentary is based on the printed Divan by Hüseyin Hilmi in 1306/1888-89. The Destaviz-i Daniş commentary, which contains a total of 106 poems, has a rather incomplete position compared to the printed Persian Divan which was published in 1904 by Paul Horn. This deficiency is not only seen in the number of poems but also in the number of verses included in the poems. For instance, the total number of couplets of 63 gazel in the Destaviz commentary is 342, and the number of couplets of the same gazel’s on the printed divan printed by Paul Horn is 389. In this article, the poems disseminated in the commentary of the Destaviz will be compared with the texts of the Persian Divan’s poem prepared by Paul Horn and the text of the translation of Tarlan based on this divan, and some of the differences and inconsistencies between them will be examined.

DESTÂVÎZ-İ DÂNİŞ ŞERHİYLE MATBU YAVUZ DİVANI VE TARLAN TERCÜMESİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI