摘要
亨利·雷马克在《比较文学的定义与功用》中将“文学与人类其他领域的比较”即“跨学科研究”纳入比较文学范畴。“跨学科研究”破坏了比较文学本有的逻辑理路。“跨学科”与“跨国家(等)”的逻辑指向不可同日而语:前者是文学与邻科的“邻种”之跨,后者则是文学之间的“亚种”之跨。然而,近四十年来,“跨学科”的另类性一直没有得到应有的反省,而是石化为比较文学当然的理论话语。造成这一谬误的有三个叠因:雷马克以唯“文学性”为依据而无视两种“跨越”的异向性;“跨学科研究”迎合某些“欲跨(跨语言)而没能跨”的学者;“寒山式效应”在比较文学界的重演以及国内知名学者的照搬与推介。
Henry Remak put"comparison of literature with other fields of human beings",namely Interdisciplinary Studies,into the category of comparative literature in The Definition and Function of Comparative Literature (1961). The author believes that Interdisciplinary Studies destroyed and interrupted the origin logic of comparative literature. The logical orientation of inter-disciplines and cross-nations (etc) are not the same thing: the former is the cross of adjacent species while the later is the cross of subspecies.However,Interdisciplinary Studies had been taken for granted as comparative literature in the past forty years. There are three main causes contributed to this ridiculous phenomenon. Firstly,Remak just based his idea on literary purposes and ignored the logical different orientation between inter-disciplines and cross-nations. Secondly,Interdisciplinary Studies caters to those who wish to cross languages or cross nations but failed to cross. And thirdly,Interdisciplinary Studies was recommended by well-known domestic scholars. The three causes made Interdisciplinary Studies look like an integral part of comparative literature. The revealing the otherness of Interdisciplinary Studies will make comparative literature back to its own logical system.
出处
《晓庄学院社会科学学报》
CSSCI
北大核心
2019年第3期79-86,共8页
Journal of Social Science of Hunan Normal University
基金
国家社会科学基金后期资助项目“比较文学个体性向度研究”(18FWW015)广东省哲学社会科学“十三五”规划2018年度一般项目《比较文学个体性向度研究》[GD18CWW05]
广东外语外贸大学外国文学文化研究中心2018年度标志性成果培植课题《中国与希腊悲剧形态比较研究》[18BZCG06]资助
