The anecdote and the episode as examples of the precedent analogy

{"title":"The anecdote and the episode as examples of the precedent analogy","authors":"","doi":"10.26485/pp/2023/78/2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What serves as a starting point for the article are theses regarding the analogy in legal acts and regulations – the rule analogy and the precedent analogy. What in turn serves as its point of reference are theses concerning cultural schematization, which include narrative patterns of myth, general (universal) history, and individual history. The legal rule and precedent analogies may be considered as argumentative and narrative strategies. The precedent analogy plays an important role in contemporary, modernist, individualized biographical and autobiographical micronarratives. In fact, the anecdote and the episode may be examined as examples of the precedent analogy. In the contemporary humanities, as well as in the social sciences, the presence of “travelling concepts” has been observed (Mieke Bal). The “episode” and the “anecdote” can be seen as examples of this inter- and trans-disciplinary concept. With this in mind, the article poses questions regarding the argumentation that refers the anecdotal and the episodic in microhistories, especially in particular, individual histories, and, above all, in subjective (auto)biographies. The terms “episode” and “anecdote” pertain to two different modes of describing that which is instant, short-lived, and seemingly included in the allegedly coherent historical whole. The former refers to an extraordinary event that constitutes a breach and disrupts the much sought-after temporal and semantic coherence which helps givemeaning to events. The anecdote, by contrast, confirms this coherence (which includes alleged historical purposefulness and necessity) along with a revealed sense. What serves as a crucial context for the reflections presented in the article is the theory put forward by Max van Manen in Phenomenology of Practice. Meaning-Giving Methods in Phenomenological Research and Writing. In his applied phenomenology, van Manen proposes an argumentative reference to the history of an individual subject – to biography, which he recognizes not only as a documentary testimony to individual existence, but also as an “anecdote” – an example of a general subjective attitude.","PeriodicalId":128140,"journal":{"name":"Prace Polonistyczne","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prace Polonistyczne","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26485/pp/2023/78/2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What serves as a starting point for the article are theses regarding the analogy in legal acts and regulations – the rule analogy and the precedent analogy. What in turn serves as its point of reference are theses concerning cultural schematization, which include narrative patterns of myth, general (universal) history, and individual history. The legal rule and precedent analogies may be considered as argumentative and narrative strategies. The precedent analogy plays an important role in contemporary, modernist, individualized biographical and autobiographical micronarratives. In fact, the anecdote and the episode may be examined as examples of the precedent analogy. In the contemporary humanities, as well as in the social sciences, the presence of “travelling concepts” has been observed (Mieke Bal). The “episode” and the “anecdote” can be seen as examples of this inter- and trans-disciplinary concept. With this in mind, the article poses questions regarding the argumentation that refers the anecdotal and the episodic in microhistories, especially in particular, individual histories, and, above all, in subjective (auto)biographies. The terms “episode” and “anecdote” pertain to two different modes of describing that which is instant, short-lived, and seemingly included in the allegedly coherent historical whole. The former refers to an extraordinary event that constitutes a breach and disrupts the much sought-after temporal and semantic coherence which helps givemeaning to events. The anecdote, by contrast, confirms this coherence (which includes alleged historical purposefulness and necessity) along with a revealed sense. What serves as a crucial context for the reflections presented in the article is the theory put forward by Max van Manen in Phenomenology of Practice. Meaning-Giving Methods in Phenomenological Research and Writing. In his applied phenomenology, van Manen proposes an argumentative reference to the history of an individual subject – to biography, which he recognizes not only as a documentary testimony to individual existence, but also as an “anecdote” – an example of a general subjective attitude.
轶事和插曲作为先例类比的例子
本文的出发点是关于法律行为和法规类比的论述——规则类比和先例类比。反过来,作为其参考点的是有关文化图式化的论点,包括神话、一般(普遍)历史和个人历史的叙事模式。法律规则和先例类比可以看作是论证和叙事策略。先例类比在当代、现代主义、个体化传记和自传体微叙事中发挥着重要作用。事实上,这个轶事和插曲可以作为先例类比的例子来研究。在当代人文学科中,以及在社会科学中,已经观察到“旅行概念”的存在(mike Bal)。“插曲”和“轶事”可以看作是这种跨学科概念的例子。考虑到这一点,本文提出了关于微观历史中轶事和情节的论证的问题,特别是在个人历史中,尤其是在主观(自动)传记中。“插曲”和“轶事”这两个词属于两种不同的模式,用来描述瞬间的、短暂的、似乎包含在所谓连贯的历史整体中的事情。前者指的是一个非同寻常的事件,它构成了一种破坏,破坏了人们迫切需要的时间和语义的连贯性,而这种连贯性有助于赋予事件意义。相比之下,轶事证实了这种连贯性(包括所谓的历史目的和必要性)以及一种揭示的意义。马克思·范·马南在《实践现象学》中提出的理论是本文反思的重要背景。现象学研究与写作中的意义赋予方法。在他的《应用现象学》中,范·马南提出了一种对个体主体的历史的论证参考——传记,他认为传记不仅是对个体存在的书面见证,也是一种“轶事”——一种普遍主观态度的例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信