马新的中英文源流东南亚研究及其比较（1800-1965）

发布时间：2018-05-03 12:59

本文选题：东南亚研究 + 马新　；参考：《厦门大学》2009年博士论文

【摘要】： 马来亚自古成为东西交通孔道,东西文化荟萃,留下了不少政治、经济、社会和文教的遗迹,这其中不乏文字记录。这些文字语种纷呈,有葡文、荷文、英文、中文和巫文等,不一而足;其内容也五花八门,有档案记录、个人观感和游历文字、传教文字、报章杂志、学术研究著述等是;撰述的作者也极为庞杂,有传教士、殖民官员、旅行探险家、作家、文教人员、学术人员等等。这些由身份各异的作者以不同语文所撰述成的著述,无疑成为构筑马新学术发展史的重要组成部分。本文针对1965年以前英文和中文源流在马新之学术发展脉络、概况、演变和发展进行整理爬梳,理清两者的流变,并进行比较研究,以见其异同和交汇之所在。在英文源流方面本文将之分成三期,第一期是观察家主导时期,从1800年开始至1876年止,此时期只是初步认识和观察的开始,主要以个人观感和记录为主,或者是一种提供英人在进行殖民统治或商贸之需的了解。第二期是殖民学术行政人员主导时期,从1877年开始至1941年,这些殖民官员因为职务上的需要以及个人兴趣,利用他们政务繁忙以外的时间进行研究,并组织学会共同砥砺,提供发表平台。从第一期的记录书写开始进入研究的领域。第三期是专业学术研究人员为主的时期,从1946年开始迄1960年代,研究的话语权开始从殖民官员过渡至学院派的学术人员,更为重要的是开始自觉地摆脱殖民者的论述,追求本土化。中文源流方面同样也分成三期,第一期是滥觞期,开始于1930年代至1941年太平洋战争爆发前夕,一批南来的学者和报人透过报章开始积极推动南洋研究,是华文源流学术研究的起点。之后经历了一段三年八个月的日据时期,学术研究基本停滞。第二期是开创期,从1945年至1955年止,南来学人延续第一期的努力,并逐渐凝聚一股南洋研究的队伍,形成风气。第三期是高峰期,开始于1956年,至1969年止,由于南洋大学历史系的成立,南洋研究由民间自发的研究进入学院,成为专业的学术研究,同时也透过大学培育研究专员。这三个时期的研究传统统称为“南洋研究”的学术传统。以上两个看似没有太多交汇,异质性要大于同质性的学术源流,其实也有不少少相似的地方。两者的学人背景和研究动机皆经历由业余书写走向学术研究、从外来人员到本土人员、从工具理性到学术理性的转换过程,两者皆不约而同以马来亚为主要研究区域。研究方法上则英文源流最早是从语言入手,中文则以传统文献考据为主,战后中文源流学者接受西方学科训练后,在方法上两者也渐合流;两者可谓皆建构了各自的学术研究传统。两者最大的歧异反映在研究内容,中文源流侧重华侨华人研究和古史地考据,英文源流侧重马来研究。中文源流透过译作、征引和参考和英文学界有所互动交流,反之英文源流向中文学界取经则属罕见。
[Abstract]:Since ancient times, Malaya has become an east-west traffic channel, with a mixture of East and West cultures, leaving a lot of political, economic, social, cultural and educational relics, among which there are written records. There are many languages, such as Portuguese, Dutch, English, Chinese and witchcraft, and their contents are varied, including archival records, personal perception and travel, missionary writing, newspapers and magazines, academic research works, etc. The authors are also extremely diverse, with missionaries, colonial officials, travel explorers, writers, cultural and educational personnel, academics, and so on. These works written by different writers in different languages have undoubtedly become an important part of the history of Ma Xin's academic development. This paper deals with the academic development, general situation, evolution and development of English and Chinese in Ma Xin before 1965, clarifies their rheology, and makes a comparative study to see their similarities and differences. In terms of the source and stream of English, this paper divides it into three periods. The first period is the period of observers' leading, from 1800 to 1876. This period is just the beginning of preliminary understanding and observation, mainly focusing on personal perception and record. Or an understanding that the British need for colonial rule or commerce. The second period was dominated by colonial academic administrators. From 1877 to 1941, these colonial officials used their time outside of their busy affairs to conduct research and to organize and learn to work together for the sake of their duties and personal interests. Provide publishing platform. From the first issue of the writing of records into the field of research. The third issue was a period in which professional academic researchers were the majority. From 1946 to the 1960s, the right to speak began to transition from colonial officials to academicians, and, more importantly, it began to consciously get rid of the discussions of colonists. The pursuit of localization. The source of the Chinese language is also divided into three periods. The first is the beginning period, which began from the 1930s to the eve of the Pacific War in 1941. A group of scholars and journalists from the South began to actively promote the study of the South Ocean through newspapers. It is the starting point of academic research on the origin of Chinese language. After a period of three years and eight months of Japanese occupation, academic research basically stagnated. The second stage is the pioneering period, from 1945 to 1955, the Nanlai Scholars continued their efforts in the first phase, and gradually condensed a group of Nanyang researchers to form a general atmosphere. The third was the peak period, which began in 1956 and ended in 1969. As a result of the establishment of the Department of History at Nanyang University, Nanyang Studies was entered into the College by voluntary folk research, and became a professional academic research. At the same time, it also nurtured research specialists through universities. The research tradition of these three periods is referred to as the academic tradition of Nanyang study. The above two do not seem to intersect much, heterogeneity is greater than homogeneity of the academic source, in fact, there are a lot of similarities. The academic background and motivation of both experienced the transition from amateur writing to academic research, from foreign personnel to native people, from instrumental rationality to academic rationality. Malaya was the main research area. In terms of research methods, the first source of English is language, while Chinese is mainly textual research of traditional literature. After the post-war Chinese origin scholars received western discipline training, the two methods gradually converged. Both can be said to construct their respective academic research traditions. The major differences between the two are reflected in the content of the study, the origin of Chinese and the textual research of the ancient history of overseas Chinese, and the study of Malay in English. The source and stream of Chinese through translation, quotation and reference and English academic interaction, on the contrary, the English source flow to Chinese literature is rare.
【学位授予单位】：厦门大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2009
【分类号】：K338

【参考文献】