韦勒克“内部研究”论重估
发布时间：2018-09-06 19:01
【摘要】： 勒内·韦勒克是20世纪西方最杰出的文学理论家和批评家之一,也是对中国影响最大的西方文学理论家之一。他在与奥斯丁·沃伦合著的《文学理论》中提出的“内部研究”论在80年代的中国引起了一场热烈的争论并直接引发了中国文艺学界研究思路与方法的深刻变革。本文对韦勒克“内部研究”论的重估力图从当前文学批评界存在的主要问题出发,关注“内部研究”论中具有纠正时弊作用的相关论述,试图通过对韦勒克“内部研究”论的重新审视,纠正以往对这一理论的误解和当前文学理论中的偏向,从而为完善当前的文学理论研究及教学、为建设当代中国的文学理论,提供一些可供参考的资料和意见。 本文将韦勒克的“内部研究”论划分为文学作品存在方式论、文学作品层面论和文学整体研究三方面的论述,力图对韦勒克的“内部研究”论做到全面、准确的把握。 第一章分析“内部研究”论的基石——文学作品存在方式论。国内一些学者把“内部研究”简单地等同于文学作品层面论,而没有注意到这一理论的基石——文学作品存在方式论,从而导致了对“内部研究”简单、片面的理解。事实上,韦勒克关于文学的所有思考都是以对“文学作品是如何存在的”这一问题的思考为基础的。韦勒克认为,文学作品是一个“经验的客体”,它通过读者的阅读经验而存在,但并非经验本身,而是造成经验的原因。文学的本体是文学作品的“决定性结构”,而这一结构的“决定性”则是内在于结构的价值。韦勒克正是由此划分了“内部研究”和“外部研究”的界限:“内部研究”研究作品的“决定性结构”,“外部研究”则研究与之相关的经验事实。只有“内部研究”才能揭示文学之为文学的根本,“外部研究”则为“内部研究”提供必要的资料。因此,韦勒克并不否定和排斥“外部研究”,但他更强调“内部研究”,这种强调来自他对文学之为文学的根本价值的关切。在当今价值虚无主义泛滥的文坛上,韦勒克对于文学价值的关切或许正是一剂纠偏的良药。 第二章分析“内部研究”论的主体——文学作品层面论。这是韦勒克“内部研究”论在中国文艺学界影响最大的部分。国内一些学者囿于“内容—形式”二分法的思维框架,将“内部研究”简单地理解为“形式研究”,而韦勒克的文学作品层面论最重要的理论贡献之一,就是用纵向的层面分析法取代的“内容—形式”的横向分析法,从而改写了文学作品的研究方式。根据中国学者刘象愚的观点,韦勒克是把文学作品划分为三个层面:声音(谐音、节奏和格律)、意义(文体和文体学)、世界(意象、隐喻、象征和神话),本章试图通过对韦勒克这一理论的深入分析和“正本清源”,廓清国内学者对这一理论的误解,并说明这一理论在当前的借鉴意义。 第三章讨论“内部研究”论的合理延伸——文学整体研究。韦勒克认为,不但每一部文学作品是一个有机整体,而且,所有的文学作品也构成了“文学”这个整体。针对这个整体,韦勒克探讨了文学的类型、文学的评价和文学史三个问题。在“文学的类型”这一问题上,韦勒克认为,对文学进行共时态的、终极的类型划分是不可能的,文学类型的研究应该是对历史上出现的文学类型的研究。在“文学的评价”这一问题上,韦勒克强调文学评价应当关注的是文学作品的文学价值,同时,他反对将文学作品的艺术价值与思想价值割裂开来,因为文学作品的形而上品质不是外在于作品的说教,而是从作品本身浮现出来的世界观。在“文学史”的研究中,韦勒克指出,在文学史的编写中,历史与价值之间存在着互动关系,历史参照价值,价值从历史中来。以此为指导思想,韦勒克探讨了文学类型史、文学史的分期等问题,并提出了新的文学史的理想,那就是把文学作为一门艺术来写,强调文学自身的价值体系,强调文学之为文学的根本。 第四章分析我国文论界对韦勒克“内部研究”论的借鉴,以及这一理论的当下意义。韦勒克的“内部研究”论在20世纪80年代的中国曾掀起研究的高潮,但其中也存在着在中国特定的文化语境中对其进行的有意无意的误读和变异,而且至今仍不乏误解。“文化研究”的引入确实在某种程度上推动了中国文学理论的发展,但也带来了一些新的问题。其中最重要的是文学研究对象的无限泛化,甚至出现了主张以文化研究取代文学研究的错误倾向。“内部研究”最主要的贡献就在于对审美价值的关切和作品中心的强调。在当今文学理论的背景下,重新发掘和审视韦勒克“内部研究”论的合理内涵,对于矫正时弊有重要的作用和意义。 总之,本文的兴趣在于我国当前的文学理论,关注的是韦勒克的“内部研究”论在我国当代文学理论发展中所作的贡献,以及尚未被人发现和重视的积极意义。本文在结语中,既肯定了“内部研究”论带给我们的启示,又指出了其局限性,这同样是我们建设和完善自己的文学理论所需要的。
[Abstract]:Rene Wellek is one of the most outstanding western literary theorists and critics in the 20th century and one of the most influential western literary theorists in China. His theory of "internal research" in "Literary Theory" co-authored by Austin Warren aroused a heated debate in China in the 1980s and directly triggered the Chinese literature. This paper attempts to reevaluate Wellek's theory of "internal research" from the main problems existing in the current literary criticism circles, and to pay attention to the relevant expositions of the theory of "internal research" which has the function of correcting the current maladies, and to correct the past by re-examining Wellek's theory of "internal research". The misunderstanding of this theory and the bias in the current literary theory provide some references and opinions for the improvement of the current literary theory research and teaching and the construction of contemporary Chinese literary theory.
This paper divides Wellek's theory of "internal research" into three aspects: the existential mode of literary works, the level of literary works and the overall study of literature, trying to grasp Wellek's theory of "internal research" comprehensively and accurately.
The first chapter analyzes the foundation stone of the theory of "internal research" - the theory of literary works'existential mode.Some domestic scholars simply equate "internal research" with the theory of literary works, but fail to notice the cornerstone of this theory-the theory of literary works' existential mode, which leads to a simple and one-sided understanding of "internal research". All of Wellek's thinking about literature is based on the question of how literary works exist. Wellek believes that literary works are an "object of experience" which exists through the reader's reading experience, but is not the experience itself, but the cause of experience. Wellek distinguishes between "internal research" and "external research": the "decisive structure" of "internal research" and the "empirical fact" of "external research". Therefore, Wellek does not deny and reject "external research", but he emphasizes "internal research", which comes from his concern that literature is the fundamental value of literature. In the literary world, Wellk's concern for literary value may be a good remedy for rectifying.
The second chapter analyzes the subject of the theory of "internal research" - literary works level theory, which is the most influential part of Wellek's "internal research" theory in Chinese literary and artistic circles. According to Liu Xiangyu, a Chinese scholar, Wellek divides literary works into three levels: sound (homophony, rhythm and metrics), meaning (meaning). Stylistics and Stylistics, the world (imagery, metaphor, symbolism and myth), this chapter attempts to clarify the misunderstanding of this theory by domestic scholars through the in-depth analysis of Wellek's theory and "clearing the source of the original", and to illustrate the significance of this theory in the current reference.
Chapter Three discusses the rational extension of the theory of "internal research" - literary holism. Wellek holds that not only every literary work is an organic whole, but also all literary works constitute the whole of "literature". On the issue of "literary types", Wellek holds that it is impossible to classify literary types synchronically and ultimately, and that the study of literary types should be the study of literary types that have appeared in history. At the same time, he objected to separating the artistic value and ideological value of literary works, because the metaphysical quality of literary works is not the preaching of literary works, but the world outlook emerging from the works themselves. With this as the guiding ideology, Wellek explored the problems of the history of literary types and the phases of literary history, and put forward the ideal of a new literary history, that is, to write literature as an art, to emphasize the value system of literature itself, and to emphasize that literature is the foundation of literature.
Chapter Four analyzes the reference of Wellek's theory of "internal research" in Chinese literary circles and its current significance. Wellek's theory of "internal research" once set off a climax of research in China in the 1980s, but there are also deliberate or unintentional misunderstandings and variations in it in the specific cultural context of China, and To some extent, the introduction of "cultural studies" has promoted the development of Chinese literary theory, but also brought about some new problems. The most important thing is the infinite generalization of literary research objects, and even the wrong tendency to advocate replacing literary research with cultural studies. The contribution lies in the concern for the aesthetic value and the emphasis on the work center. In the context of contemporary literary theory, it is of great significance and significance to re-explore and examine the rational connotation of Wellek's "internal research" theory for correcting current maladies.
In a word, the interest of this paper lies in the current literary theory of our country. It focuses on Wellek's contribution to the development of our contemporary literary theory and the positive significance that has not yet been discovered and valued. This is also what we need to build and perfect our own literary theory.
【学位授予单位】：河北师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2008
【分类号】：I0
本文编号：2227229
[Abstract]:Rene Wellek is one of the most outstanding western literary theorists and critics in the 20th century and one of the most influential western literary theorists in China. His theory of "internal research" in "Literary Theory" co-authored by Austin Warren aroused a heated debate in China in the 1980s and directly triggered the Chinese literature. This paper attempts to reevaluate Wellek's theory of "internal research" from the main problems existing in the current literary criticism circles, and to pay attention to the relevant expositions of the theory of "internal research" which has the function of correcting the current maladies, and to correct the past by re-examining Wellek's theory of "internal research". The misunderstanding of this theory and the bias in the current literary theory provide some references and opinions for the improvement of the current literary theory research and teaching and the construction of contemporary Chinese literary theory.
This paper divides Wellek's theory of "internal research" into three aspects: the existential mode of literary works, the level of literary works and the overall study of literature, trying to grasp Wellek's theory of "internal research" comprehensively and accurately.
The first chapter analyzes the foundation stone of the theory of "internal research" - the theory of literary works'existential mode.Some domestic scholars simply equate "internal research" with the theory of literary works, but fail to notice the cornerstone of this theory-the theory of literary works' existential mode, which leads to a simple and one-sided understanding of "internal research". All of Wellek's thinking about literature is based on the question of how literary works exist. Wellek believes that literary works are an "object of experience" which exists through the reader's reading experience, but is not the experience itself, but the cause of experience. Wellek distinguishes between "internal research" and "external research": the "decisive structure" of "internal research" and the "empirical fact" of "external research". Therefore, Wellek does not deny and reject "external research", but he emphasizes "internal research", which comes from his concern that literature is the fundamental value of literature. In the literary world, Wellk's concern for literary value may be a good remedy for rectifying.
The second chapter analyzes the subject of the theory of "internal research" - literary works level theory, which is the most influential part of Wellek's "internal research" theory in Chinese literary and artistic circles. According to Liu Xiangyu, a Chinese scholar, Wellek divides literary works into three levels: sound (homophony, rhythm and metrics), meaning (meaning). Stylistics and Stylistics, the world (imagery, metaphor, symbolism and myth), this chapter attempts to clarify the misunderstanding of this theory by domestic scholars through the in-depth analysis of Wellek's theory and "clearing the source of the original", and to illustrate the significance of this theory in the current reference.
Chapter Three discusses the rational extension of the theory of "internal research" - literary holism. Wellek holds that not only every literary work is an organic whole, but also all literary works constitute the whole of "literature". On the issue of "literary types", Wellek holds that it is impossible to classify literary types synchronically and ultimately, and that the study of literary types should be the study of literary types that have appeared in history. At the same time, he objected to separating the artistic value and ideological value of literary works, because the metaphysical quality of literary works is not the preaching of literary works, but the world outlook emerging from the works themselves. With this as the guiding ideology, Wellek explored the problems of the history of literary types and the phases of literary history, and put forward the ideal of a new literary history, that is, to write literature as an art, to emphasize the value system of literature itself, and to emphasize that literature is the foundation of literature.
Chapter Four analyzes the reference of Wellek's theory of "internal research" in Chinese literary circles and its current significance. Wellek's theory of "internal research" once set off a climax of research in China in the 1980s, but there are also deliberate or unintentional misunderstandings and variations in it in the specific cultural context of China, and To some extent, the introduction of "cultural studies" has promoted the development of Chinese literary theory, but also brought about some new problems. The most important thing is the infinite generalization of literary research objects, and even the wrong tendency to advocate replacing literary research with cultural studies. The contribution lies in the concern for the aesthetic value and the emphasis on the work center. In the context of contemporary literary theory, it is of great significance and significance to re-explore and examine the rational connotation of Wellek's "internal research" theory for correcting current maladies.
In a word, the interest of this paper lies in the current literary theory of our country. It focuses on Wellek's contribution to the development of our contemporary literary theory and the positive significance that has not yet been discovered and valued. This is also what we need to build and perfect our own literary theory.
【学位授予单位】：河北师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2008
【分类号】：I0
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 刘再复;;文学研究思维空间的拓展(续)——近年来我国文学研究的若干发展动态[J];读书;1985年03期
2 林大中;;文学的纯文学研究——评韦勒克·沃伦《文学理论》[J];读书;1986年05期
3 尉天骄;文学批评:批评什么和怎样批评?——借鉴韦勒克[J];淮北煤师院学报(社会科学版);1995年04期
4 陈雪虎;文学性:现代内涵及其当代限度[J];河北学刊;2004年04期
5 旷新年;“重写文学史”的终结与中国现代文学研究转型[J];南方文坛;2003年01期
6 金元浦;文化研究:学科大联合的事业[J];社会科学战线;2005年01期
7 胡苏晓,王诺;文学的“本体性”与文学的“内在研究”——雷纳·威勒克批评思想的核心[J];外国文学评论;1992年01期
8 刘再复;;论文学的主体性[J];文学评论;1985年06期
9 杨春时;;论文艺的充分主体性和超越性——兼评《文艺学方法论问题》[J];文学评论;1986年04期
10 支宇;文学作品的存在方式——韦勒克文论的逻辑起点和理论核心[J];西南民族学院学报(哲学社会科学版);2002年03期
，本文编号：2227229
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/wenxuell/2227229.html
