查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | Genres, between Essentialism and Nominalism=論「文類」--介乎本質主義與唯名論之間 |
---|---|
作 者 | 薛佛; 劉千美; | 書刊名 | 哲學與文化 |
卷 期 | 34:11=402 2007.11[民96.11] |
頁 次 | 頁31-59 |
專 輯 | 「文」與「象」之戲動專題 |
分類號 | 810 |
關鍵詞 | 文學研究; 知識論; 文學範疇歸類與存有學立場; 文類; 文類標籤與文本結構; Literary studies; Epistemology; Literary categorizations and ontological commitments; Genre; Genre labels and textual structure; |
語 文 | 英文(English);中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 文類名目,如悲劇、小說之類,通常是我們放心使用的歸類標籤。然而,「文類」地位的爭議卻始終熱烈:「類」的問題討論結果總是本質主義與唯名論間的存有學之爭。恆常擺盪於兩個互不相容的答案間的預設理由,在於妄以為恰當的答案只能有一個。本篇論文探討以一個「類」或「種」的辭彙作歸類標籤、實際指涉大千世界不同事實的可能性。這樣的研究要求方法學上的改變:要瞭解甚麼是「文類」,只能以文類標籤進行的語言運作為起點。只有透徹瞭解「文類」根植於社會的語言遊戲後,我們才能處理介乎文類標籤與文本事實間之多重可能關係的複雜問題。 |
英文摘要 | Genre names like tragedy, novel, and so on, are labels which we generally use with great confidence. At the same time, the status of “genres” has always been hotly debated: Discussions on “genre” generally end up in an ontological battle between essentialism and nominalism. The hypothesis here will be that the reason for this permanent oscillation between two incompatible answers is due to the belief that there can be only one good answer. This paper explores the possibility that what is labelled by one term-”genre” or “kind”-could refer really to a wide range of different facts. Such an exploration asks for a change in methodology: To understand what “genres” are, our starting-point can only be the linguistic uses to which genre labels are put; it is only after gaining a thorough understanding of the socially embedded language game of “genres”, that we can address the more complex question of the possibly multiple relationships between genre labels and textual facts. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。