Passing from classical structuralist narrative semiology with a text-centered view and deterministic meanings towards semiotics is a transition from action and programming towards interaction. In classical semiology, the current of meaning is exclusively shaped through action and predetermined program and toward gaining the value object. But in semiotics, meaning is formed by creating a sensory-perceptual relationship with the phenomena, and is perceived through interaction with another person or co-subject. Such a meaning cannot be investigated only with semantic regimes of classical semiology, i. e. action and manipulation. Therefore, Landowsky proposed two complementary regimes, i. e. adjustment and accident. The present research probes to find what actions by the characters in Zal-and-Rodabe show the adherence of actors to Landowsky's regimes of interaction. It was found that when faced with challenges, some characters first follow a specific regime of interaction, but later, become inclined to other regimes. Others continue to adhere to a single regime. Examining the interactions shows the transition from the classical narrative regime based on action and program to the modern narrative based on interaction, which ultimately results in the unification of the characters towards the realization of a forbidden love. Introduction: Passing from classical structuralist narrative semiology with a text-centered view and deterministic meanings towards semiotics is a transition from action and program-centeredness towards interaction. In classical semiology, the stream of meaning is exclusively shaped through action and a predetermined program and toward gaining the value object. In fact, what is obtained is external to the actor and is the end that the actor intends to achieve. Therefore, it can be considered extrinsic and goal-oriented. Movement is also included in this regime because one place must be left and some stages must be passed so as to reach the place where the desired object is. But with the turn of semantic studies towards phenomenology and the emergence of a new field called semiotics, we witness the introduction of new words such as "body", "perception" and "sensory-perceptual relationship" into meaning studies. In semiotics, meaning is formed by creating a sensory-perceptual relationship with the phenomena and is perceived through interaction with another person or co-subject. Such a meaning cannot be investigated only with semantic regimes of classical semiology, i. e. action and manipulation. Eric Landowsky’s introduction of the two complementary semantic regimes of adjustment and accident happened in line with this turn. In the semantic regime of adjustment, a bilateral interaction is formed between related narrative factors as a consequence of a sensual affair. In fact, the two parties involved in the interaction feel each other and transmit this feeling to each other and sometimes to the entire narrative. In the regime of accident, which is based on luck and fortune, the interaction is realized by accident,the system is meaningless, and luck is shown in its purest form. Method: Linguistics provides scientific tools for the study of language and literature. Indeed, literature is a place for the manifestation of language in different forms and through the interaction of linguistics and literature, the discovery of meaning becomes possible. Therefore, re-examining ancient texts, trying to find patterns and semantic regimes, along with the use of linguistic theories facilitate the discovery of the meaning formation mechanisms. As a classic work and a great example of an epic narrative, Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh has various micro-narratives that are the objective manifestation of this phenomenon. The formation of meaning in these micronarratives is the result of the integrated function of these four regimes. One of the most interesting of these micronarratives is the story of Zal and Rudabeh. The present research was carried out using a descriptive analytical method and samples were selected from all parts of the story. The researchers first investigated the important and prominent parts of the story and then extracted the behaviors and reactions of the characters in the story when faced with the events. These reactions were analyzed based on Landowsky’s four semantic regimes. In this regard, the narrative was divided into three important periods in the life of the protagonist: Zal’s birth and isolation, taking him back from Simorgh (phoenix), and Zal’s love for Rudabeh. Then, the lines of the poem were anallyzed to identify the challenges and tensions of each period. The behavior of the main narrative characters against those challenges and tensions was reviewed in order to determine the degree of conformity of each performance with Landowsky's four semantic regimes. Since events in the story of Zal and Rudabeh contradict the wishes of the main actors, and because their thinking and action fail to solve these problems, the narrative stream pushes them towards adjustment and sometimes accident and thus becomes the solution to the challenge and tension. In the present paper, an attempt is made to find manifestations of these four regimes in the behavior and reactions of the narrative characters. In more precise terms, the main problem of this research is to examine the degree of conformity of the narration and the interactions of the actors and the characters in the narrative Zal and Rudabeh with the fourfold semantic regimes proposed by Landowsky. In this research, we are trying to see which of Landowsky’s semantic regimes corresponds to the meaning-making process in Zal and Rudabeh narrative when the main characters or actors face challenges. Results Using semantic regimes is one of the methods of creating meaning in narratives. These semantic systems help the narrative actor to advance narrative goals and overcome challenges and tensions. In the story of Zal and Rudabeh, two challenging tensions in the course of the story encourage each of the characters to act and apply these semantic regimes. Some of the characters of the narrative follow a specific semantic regime at the beginning, but in the middle of the story, they tend to shift to other semantic regimes. Still, some others continue to adhere to a single semantic regime. What can be raised at the end of this research is that the characters reach a consensus in order to achieve the fruit of love, which happens against the general norms of society. In fact, the course of events in the narrative has proved the ineffectiveness of action and program and reveals the necessity of creating bilateral communication and interactions in order to solve the narrative challenges. In the end, the outcome of the events in this story is towards the interactions of the actors and reaching the fusion. This merging takes place through the actions of the actors to interact with each other, i. e. Zal’s letter to his father, Sindokht’s visit to Sam, and Sam’s letter to Manouchehrshah. In the end, this chain of communication and interactions causes feelings and sensory connections to emerge in the form of consensus towards the acceptance of a forbidden love. This finding of the research can be considered a new achievement in the criticism and analysis of the narrative of Zal and Rudabeh. One of the most interesting points in the analysis of such narratives is the change in the structure of the narrative and the movement from the classical narrative to the modern narrative (cf. Shairi, 2019. b). Therefore, this convergence is the result of the movement from the classical narration to the modern narration. The turning of the narrative is from mere programming towards interaction and creating a sensory relationship. The actors who, in the course of the narrative, were striving to obtain value or objects in the outside world, simultaneously reveal aspects and ways of living differently and looking differently through interaction and agreement with each other. Keywords: semiotics, narrative, regimes of interaction & meaning, Eric Landowsky, Zal and Rudabe