比较文学学科范式转换的必然性与异质性问题

发布时间：2018-07-13 21:33

【摘要】：库恩用"范式"理论分析了科学的常规时期与革命时期,而比较文学也符合这种范式。比较文学法国学派在"欧洲文化中心的历时性范式"之内,运用科学实证主义方法将比较文学精确化、规范化,基本确立了比较文学的学科理论与研究方法,但也因此出现了范式内不能解决的"反常"现象。后来美国学派又在"西方文化中心的共时性范式"之内暂时地解决了法国学派的"反常"现象,确立起了平行研究模式,但与法国学派一样再次将比较文学置入危机的深渊。结合李凯尔特对现实的哲学分析,不仅论证了"自然科学的元范式"追求同质化的本质,同时也证明了中国学派所提倡的"异质性"的合理性。因此中国学派的探索完全能够摆脱法美学派的范式束缚,将比较文学引向一条健康规范的发展道路。
[Abstract]:Kuhn used the theory of paradigm to analyze the normal and revolutionary periods of science, and comparative literature was in accord with this paradigm. In the Diachronic Paradigm of European Cultural Center, the French School of Comparative Literature uses the scientific positivism method to make comparative literature precise and standardized, and establishes the discipline theory and research method of comparative literature. However, there is an abnormal phenomenon which can not be solved in the paradigm. Later, the American school temporarily solved the "abnormal" phenomenon of the French school within the "synchronic paradigm of the western cultural center", and established the parallel research model, but again put the comparative literature into the crisis abyss like the French school. Combined with Rickert's philosophical analysis of reality, this paper not only demonstrates the essence of "meta paradigm of natural science" pursuing homogeneity, but also proves the rationality of "heterogeneity" advocated by Chinese school of thought. Therefore, the exploration of the Chinese school can completely get rid of the shackles of the paradigm of the school of law and America, and lead comparative literature to a healthy and normative way of development.
【作者单位】：长江师范学院文学与新闻学院;
【分类号】：I0-03

【参考文献】