Objective: This study examines the action-oriented and semiotic mechanisms of Ayari discourse and shows how it guides social relations, shapes attitudes, and regulates ethical actions. Ayari discourse is based on valor, chivalry, protecting others’ dignity, responsibility, and adherence to ethical norms. Through coherent narration and interaction among actors, it provides a stable basis for continuity of values and behavioral patterns. It gradually and purposefully produces and consolidates meaning and plays a role in more effectively shaping and directing social agency.

Methodology: This descriptive-analytical, library-based study adopts a semiotic-semantic approach and was conducted in stages and systematically. Darab-nameh by Bighami, edited by Dr. Zabihollah Safa (1339), was selected as the main source because it is a comprehensive narrative related to Ayari discourse and allows identification of actions, signs, and semantic patterns. All data were extracted from it. Sections involving ethical actions, inter-actor interactions, bodily actions, linguistic signs, situational behaviors, and symbolic behaviors were used as units of analysis. Data were categorized by communicative role, semantic function, narrative position, and contribution to consolidating values and directing action. Events and actor interactions were analyzed for action, coordination, interaction management, and meaning transfer. Data were grouped into four categories: linguistic signs, bodily actions, situational behaviors, and symbolic behaviors. Actors were identified, but their names were not mentioned in this section.

Findings: The findings indicate that Ayari discourse in Darab-nameh constructs meaning through systematic interaction of signs and actions. Ayari actors, particularly Behrouz, identify, in confronting the addressee, three types of resistance: emotional, behavioral, and situational. Although the addressee has a limited role, resistance is important in the process of action and decision-making. Actors manage this resistance through strategies such as gradual semantic alignment, tension mitigation, regulation of interaction, and purposeful accommodation. These strategies rely on connecting linguistic signs with bodily and symbolic actions, enabling the organization of action and gradual resistance guidance, including reconfiguring action and directing interaction toward the desired direction.

Conclusion: The results indicate that Ayari discourse in Darab-nameh is not merely a reflection of social reality but shapes and directs it. Management of resistance, regulation of interaction, and shaping of behavior at the narrative level produce meaning and transmit ethical and cultural norms. Through simultaneous action and signs, this discourse reproduces patterns of behavioral intervention, persuasion, and regulation of social relations. Its effect extends beyond its historical context to contemporary action-oriented discourses and social interactions. Overall, Ayari discourse, as a dynamic meaning-producing system, enables a deeper understanding of the formation of action, regulation of meaning, and organization of social interactions.