重构、建构与解构之间——从文学形式论史学类型与史学性质

发布时间：2018-07-01 10:07

本文选题：史学类型 + 文学形式　；参考：《史学理论研究》2012年01期

【摘要】：凯斯·詹金斯和艾伦·穆斯洛将当代西方史学界对于历史学性质问题的立场划分为重构主义、建构主义、解构主义三种分野。重构主义强调历史知识与过去实在相符合的客观性与真理性,相信史家具有以历史叙事的方式重建过去的技能;建构主义主张历史在根本层面上依旧是对过去的摹写,但在经验事实之外需要借助其他学科的理论和方法,以期实现对总体历史的建构;解构主义则指出了过去与历史之间、真实与叙述之间、实在与语言之间联结的脆弱性,主张以解构历史编纂学的方式透析过去如何被编制为各种历史。这种史学类型的划分本身即蕴涵了后现代主义的基本理论立场与实际指涉,从中可以更加清晰地辨识其对历史学性质问题挑战的核心范围与思想取向。
[Abstract]:Keith Jenkins and Alan Mustello divided the contemporary western historians' position on the nature of history into three categories: reconstructivism constructivism and deconstruction. Reconstructionism emphasizes the objectivity and truth of historical knowledge and the reality of the past, and believes that historians have the skills to reconstruct the past in the way of historical narration, while constructivism advocates that history is still a copy of the past on the fundamental level. However, in addition to empirical facts, theories and methods of other disciplines are needed in order to construct the overall history. Deconstruction points out the fragility of the connection between the past and history, between reality and narration, between reality and language. To analyze how the past was compiled into various history by deconstructing historical codification. The classification of this type of history itself implies the basic theoretical position and practical implication of postmodernism, from which the core scope and ideological orientation of the challenge to the nature of history can be more clearly identified.
【作者单位】：首都师范大学历史学院;
【基金】：教育部人文社会科学研究基金资助项目“历史学对后现代主义挑战的回应与分析”(项目批准号09YJA770044)的阶段性成果之一
【分类号】：K092

【相似文献】