In translation criticism the critic deals with two texts: the original and the target. In this process, the target text is contrasted with the original, and then the good and weak points are dealt with on the basis of translation principles and theories. Some grammatical and linguistic weak points can be found and improved even without contrast, but the keystone for investigating the accuracy of the meaning in the target text is the original.In literary criticism a speech is evaluated according to its literary aspects, and a critic may criticize a literary text from different points of view, such as literary style, and ethical, social, economical, political, historical, cultural and religious aspects, as well as in accordance with the level of knowledge and thought of the speaker.In the present article the emphasis is put on this point that personal view of the critic will always have its effect on both translation and literary criticism. Therefore, it should be said that different persons may criticize a literary text or translation differently due to their different personal notions.

The new theory of criticism calling into question the traditional mode that had governed the literary analyses during several centuries, tries to challenge the truth that this one pretends In explore. To encourage In reconsidering the meaning of Truth and introducing it as a subject out of the Traditional criticism function or any other one, is the philosophy that confronts the New criticism with its old and strong rival. Accepting the principle of "impossibility of reaching the Truth", the new critic presents his literary interpretation from his own point of view. So he looks for coherence in text that can justify his subjective interpretation from one of the linguistical, psychoanalytical, anthropological. theories. In this article, studying the principles of Traditional and New criticism, we would compare their functions in the literature. Referring In the famous critics' theories, we will verify the New criticism opinions and the horizon that this theory opens to the literature by commanding a free reading.

Today, the concept of criticism, both from its theoretical and practical aspects, is one of the most important topics studied in various fields of human sciences. In the meantime, historical criticism and literary criticism have the most affinities and have been exposed to the most attentions and controversies. In fact, the common link that has brought these two areas of criticism so close is the centrality of "text" in both areas. Historical texts and literary texts have a lot in common in terms of their "textuality". And from this point of view, historical criticism and literary criticism, which are actually criticism of the historical text and criticism of the literary text, also have these aspects in common. Therefore, practical methods in both historical and literary criticism are based on common principles and foundations. These principles and foundations have appeared in the field of historical criticism in the form of interpretivism and in the field of literary criticism mainly in the form of new historicism. With this description, in this research, the attempt is made to analyze and examine the two areas of literary criticism and historical criticism with an analytical-comparative method and by relying and emphasizing on interpretivism and new historicism.  Key words: historical criticism, literary criticism, interpretivism, new historicism, discourse.

New criticism focuses on rigorous analysis of poetry and literature, irrespective of peripheral issues. Its fundamental tenet is the autonomy of literary texts. Therefore, New criticism shuns dealing with such peripheral issues as authors' biography, social, political and historical events; since this approach considers all these issues as non-artistic. In principle, the followers of New criticism subscribe to closed analysis; because, only semantic and aesthetic dimensions are important for them and texts are seen more like closed and insulated systems. The writer of this article introduces systematic theories and their characteristics. Literary texts are seen as a system, based on the systematic models. The writer has also attempted to examine the 'analytic and mechanistic' dimensions of New criticism, as well as the interaction of sub-systems with meta-systems in literary texts.

Humanism in modern western civilization is a fundamental idea. Underlying root, perhaps, in contradiction of the contemporary West with the Iran Islamic Revolution hidden in the humanistic nature of modernity, since the modern west pivotal view in all dimensions of life is humanistic, and human-like rather than God-oriented one. To this aim, a critical method used. Humanism has two meanings: first, the humans’ rights, kept and their dignity and then, attach prime importance to humans on all grounds. Based on the first, it reduces the possibility of humanism criticism and will display only as an indisputable fact in the past and the present. Humanism term employment of the outside its life domain, along with appendixes such as Islamic, etc. is unnecessary and even forged and incorrect. Concerning the second interpretation, humanism can cultivate from two aspects. First, from the viewpoint of intra thought school and then, from the perspective of inter thought school. Fundamental self-contradiction (either in theory dimension or in practice dimension), is the most basic fault that has made the humanoriented thought school facing crises. The unjust extension of humanism to the outside of its life forms the most basic inter critique of thought school.

Architecture is one of the prominent manifestation of civilisation. The role of architecture in the creation of the environment is quite clear. Nowadays, Architecture, in contrast with the past, is a scientific disipline and grows through analysis. While Iranian architecture has a valuable history, it is often criticisied. In the post Islamic revolution period, a masive construction has been occurred in the country, however, the cities of Shiraz and Esfahan are still the main destinations for tourism. What is the reason? Among the various dimensions of the problem, architectural criticism is a major chalange. This paper tries to define the necessities and architectural criticism obstacles, also present its principles through a matrix.

It was in the decade of seventies that two units were assigned as comparative literature for B.A. students instead of M.A. and by the committee program of science organ in Arabic language and literature groups. In such condition, I composed entitled Al Adab Al Motagharen (Lessons on Theories and Comparative), to provide the students and colleagues and young teacher's needs, this book is the result of close study as extracting ten, authentic sources of comparative from beginning, in order to introduce this science as the scientific methodology, to consider the gradual formation of it in the historical bed, or the different approaches in the simple, fluent language for native students and young teachers in theoretical, comparative fields. After studying it in a term, they learn the necessary information, the new horizons, to consider future. This book has been composed by two respected teachers; Mahmud Heidari from Yasuj University and Farhad Rajabi from Gilan University, have been criticized. After studying the different criticism and greeting the critics either in positive and negative aspects, the authors have considered the goals of composing the book have rejected the contextual criticism devoid of formative aspects, and they have some approving on their rejection, and they criticized that the book hasn't logical coherence, struggle or culture, western culture, non-biased, scientific consideration, renunciation of titles of science organ, excess the theories in Islamic, comparative literature have answered some insults considering fair and the well method of debate, it invites the respectful critics to closely study the book in comparative literature considering all aspects.

Without ever claiming to be methodical in his individualistic historiography, Mohammad Ibrahim Bastani Parizi (1304-1391) repeatedly used negative criticism and ijtihad as well as positive criticism and ijtihad to disambiguate historical texts in all his works. The main question of this study is how Bastani Parizi used the weapon of historical criticism and ijtihad to infer the truth not mentioned in the sources and how this was reflected in his historiography. The results of this study will show that Bastani Parizi used negative criticism (ijtihad) and positive criticism (ijtihad) in all his famous works to respond to historical ambiguities and that he saw this technique as a way to achieve historical truth and objectivity. Thus, that it can be argued that this issue is the distinguishing feature and one of the most important features of his historiographical style. Accordingly, Bastani Parizi should be considered among the objectivist historians who believe that it is possible for a historian to achieve objectivity and historical truth in the light of historical criticism and ijtihad.

The present article intends to study the theoretical and methodological principles of the formalistic criticism of poetry on the basis of the Russian formalists and American formalists or "new critics" views. For this aim, our approach has been the analytical-critical approach. Finally, this article organizes the method of "gravitational criticism of poetry" by the creation of profitable contact between theoretical and practical achievements of the two branches of formalism. This method analyses all of the form elements of poetry, not as "connective criticism of poetry" by way of the horizontal-vertical, but according to the systematic and structured nature of this literary genre by way of the polyhedral-hierarchical mathod in relation to its "fundamental technique".