原型批评和原型类别论析

发布时间：2018-04-17 15:05

本文选题：神话批评 + 原型批评　；参考：《东北师范大学》2002年硕士论文

【摘要】： 神话批评与原型批评，进而言之，心理原型与文学原型等概念以及它们之间的关系，一直是我们在对这一流派研究中面临的重要问题。国内学术界对这些概念认识上的模糊和内涵使用上的混乱，常常使读者阅读这类著作时，，如坠云雾之中。所以，认真分析和科学把握这些概念的内涵，以期正确地使用它们，是当前批评界要做的主要任务。本文正是在这种认识的基础上，选择这一课题进行研究的。本论文的重要内容如下：一、神话批评和原型批评的关系。很多学者认为两者异名同实，笔者经过辨析，提出了不同意见。本篇论文的第一章集中论述了神话批评和原型批评各自的研究重心所在，并依照美国学者M·H·艾布拉姆斯在《镜与灯》中对文学批评理论的总结成果，区分了二者。笔者认为神话批评主要是一种对文学的外在性研究，原型批评则是一种对于文学内部的本体论研究，内外视角的不同是它们的根本区别所在。二、对于原型概念的理解。原型概念在荣格和弗莱的著作中均占据重要位置，但它们的意义并不一致。荣格和弗莱十分强调他们分别从事的心理学和文学研究的学科独立性，因此原型概念的内涵和外延在他们那里具有鲜明的学科特色，也就是说他们对于原型概念的使用是在不同层面上、不同领域中展开的。但是，后来的许多学者在使用原型概念时对这两层含义并未首先做出区分，这造成了对作为文学批评方法的原型批评理论理解上的混乱。本文第二章建议明确提出“心理原型”和“文学原型”之分，并分别就原型在心理学领域和文学领域中的具体所指做山了论述。笔者出于兴趣涉足原型批评领域，但在阅读中遇上了许多难题。本篇论文针对原型批评理论中的一些重要问题陈述了笔者十分简略的个人看法，希望能在众多老师的帮助下进一步开展研究。
[Abstract]:Mythological criticism and archetypal criticism, and furthermore, the concepts of psychological archetype and literary archetype, as well as the relationship between them, have always been the important problems we face in the study of this school.The vagueness of understanding of these concepts and the confusion of the use of their connotations in domestic academic circles often make readers fall into a cloud when reading such works.Therefore, it is the main task of the current critical circle to analyze and scientifically grasp the connotation of these concepts in order to use them correctly.This paper chooses this subject to study on the basis of this understanding.The main contents of this thesis are as follows:First, the relationship between mythological criticism and archetypal criticism.Many scholars believe that the two are synonymous, the author through differentiation, put forward different views.The first chapter of this thesis focuses on the focus of research on mythological criticism and archetypal criticism, and distinguishes them according to the American scholar M. H. Abrams' summary of literary criticism theory in Mirror and Lamp.The author holds that mythological criticism is mainly a study of the externality of literature, while archetypal criticism is an ontological study of literature, and the fundamental difference lies in their internal and external perspectives.Second, understanding the concept of prototype.Archetypal concepts play an important role in both Jung and Frye's works, but their meanings are not the same.Jung and Fry stressed the independence of the psychology and literature studies they were engaged in, so the connotation and extension of the prototype concept had distinct disciplinary characteristics.In other words, their use of archetypal concepts takes place at different levels and in different domains.However, many scholars did not distinguish these two meanings in the use of archetypal concept, which caused confusion in understanding the archetypal criticism theory as a method of literary criticism.In the second chapter, the author puts forward the distinction between "psychological archetype" and "literary prototype", and discusses the specific implications of archetype in the field of psychology and literature respectively.Out of interest, the author dabbles in the field of archetypal criticism, but encounters many difficulties in reading.This paper presents my personal views on some important problems in archetypal criticism theory and hopes to carry out further research with the help of many teachers.
【学位授予单位】：东北师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2002
【分类号】：I06

【引证文献】