A Pragma-Semiotic Comparative Study of Childrenʼs Suffering in the Tragedies of Karbala and Gaza

The tragedies of Karbala and Gaza have attracted scholarly interest due to the suffering and violence associated with them. Although separated by centuries, both have produced a body of texts in which children occupy a central role. The study investigates children’s suffering in the tragedies of Karbala and Gaza from a pragma-semiotic perspective. It aims to explore the mechanisms through which this suffering is constructed and to identify points of convergence and divergence between the two contexts. Previous studies have examined Karbala and Gaza from historical, religious, political, and humanitarian perspectives; however, comparative research on child representation across these settings remains limited. This qualitative study employs an eclectic analytical framework integrating Frank and Goodman’s (2012) Rational Speech Act framework, Yule’s (1996) theory of presupposition, and Barthes’ (1968) semiotic theory. The data consist of twelve selected texts organised into six comparative pairs. The analysis is limited to written linguistic material rather than visual data. The findings reveal pragmatic differences: the Karbala texts more often present children speaking, moving, or resisting within specific events, whereas the Gaza texts more often present them in conditions of deprivation, confinement, and loss. In both contexts, children are individualised through naming, kinship, age, or spatial placement, while their suffering is encoded through bodily detail. Semiotic analysis shows that literal descriptions of harm also convey broader meanings, representing the child in terms of bodily suffering, innocence, and family loss. Overall, the comparison demonstrates that common patterns of child representation remain shaped by circumstances specific to each tragedy.