中国文艺学形式范畴的语义分析及百年来的演变概况

发布时间：2018-04-16 11:31

本文选题：形式范畴 + 形式范畴的语义分析　；参考：《重庆师范大学》2005年硕士论文

【摘要】：自形式范畴在我国文艺学中的出现至今约有一百年的历史,它既被广泛应用,又歧义百出。为了今后更清晰地使用这个文艺学的基本范畴,本文着重做了以下工作。第一,立足于中国文艺学的语境,共时性地研究形式范畴,即对形式范畴作一个语义分析。主要有以下三类用法:(1) 外观,样式,体裁:(2) 内部的组织、安排,结构,技巧:(3) 整体的或独立自足的,与审美、风格相联系的。这几个义项常互相联系,交叠,都有着片面的合理性;前两类用法更多体现了形式范畴的内在生成性,后一类用法更多是受了外来文论的影响。第二,立足于中国文艺学的语境,历时性地研究形式范畴,即梳理形式范畴百年来的接受、论述及运用的概况。以名家名著、统遍自编的文学理论教材中对形式范畴的论述及运用作重点研究对象,并穿插了外来文论中对形式范畴的相关研究成果,从中可见出国人对外来成果的吸收和利用。向培良对形式范畴的论述,标志着建国前对形式范畴研究的高度;童庆炳、周宪在九十年代对形式范畴的论述,标志着建国后至今对形式范畴研究的新高度。第三,建国后近三十年形式范畴一直附庸在内容范畴之下,即使对两者关系的“辨证”论述也容易把形式范畴沦入无足轻重的地位。显而易见的原因:一是由于中国古代文论中“载道”“言志”的强大传统;一是由于启蒙救亡的历史形势和政治影响。从理论上溯源:一是由于单一局面反映论的文学观;一是由于对黑格尔《美学》的误解;一是由于对毛泽东《矛盾论》的简单套用。而内容与形式的关系并非谁决定谁的关系,只有引入中介概念“题材”才能理清二者的关系。第四,有必要对“形式主义”的用法作一个界定。首先应把作为创作方法的形式主义和作为研究方法的形式主义区分开,而后者无可厚非;其次,就作为创作方法的形式主义来说,不适宜用它来批评单篇作品或单个作家,但可用来批评一代文风。
[Abstract]:The category of form has a history of about 100 years since its appearance in Chinese literature and art.In order to use this basic category of literature and art more clearly in the future, this paper focuses on the following work.First, based on the context of Chinese literature and art, synchronic study of form category, that is, to make a semantic analysis of form category.There are three main categories of usage: 1) appearance, style, style) internal organization, arrangement, structure, skill) overall or independent self-sufficiency, related to aesthetics and style.These meanings are often related to each other and overlapped, all of them have one-sided rationality; the first two kinds of usages more embody the inherent generative nature of the formal category, and the latter are more influenced by foreign literary theories.Second, based on the context of Chinese literature and art, the diachronic study of form category, that is, combing the acceptance, discussion and application of form category in the past hundred years.This paper focuses on the discussion and application of form category in the textbook of literary theory compiled by famous writers, and intersperses the relevant research results of form category in foreign literary theory.From this, we can see the absorption and utilization of foreign achievements.Xiang Peiliang's exposition on form category marks the height of the study of form category before the founding of the people's Republic of China, while Tong Qingbing and Zhou Xian's exposition on form category in the 1990s marks the new height of formal category study since the founding of the people's Republic of China.Third, the category of form has been attached to the category of content for nearly 30 years since the founding of the people's Republic of China.The obvious reasons are as follows: one is due to the strong tradition of "carrying Tao" and "expressing ambition" in ancient Chinese literary theory, the other is the historical situation and political influence of enlightenment and salvation.Theoretically, it can be traced to the literary view of the theory of reflection of a single situation, the misunderstanding of Hegel's Aesthetics, and the simple application of Mao Zedong's Theory of contradiction.But the relation between content and form is not who decides whose relation, only introduces intermediary concept "subject matter" to clarify the relationship between the two.Fourth, it is necessary to define the usage of formalism.First of all, we should distinguish formalism as a method of creation from formalism as a method of study, and the latter is not to blame; secondly, as far as formalism as a method of creation is concerned, it is not appropriate to use it to criticize a single piece of work or a single writer,But it can be used to criticize a generation of literary style.
【学位授予单位】：重庆师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2005
【分类号】：I0

【相似文献】