Better Use an Arrow: ‘I-Thou,’ ‘Relation,’ and Their Difference in Martin Buber’s I and Thou

IF 0.2 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Asaf Ziderman
{"title":"Better Use an Arrow: ‘I-Thou,’ ‘Relation,’ and Their Difference in Martin Buber’s I and Thou","authors":"Asaf Ziderman","doi":"10.1515/naharaim-2022-0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper corrects a pervasive mistake in readings of Buber’s iconic trope, “I-Thou” (Ich-Du; hereafter, I-You). The mistake lies in considering it synonymous to the principal concept of his dialogical thought, “relation” (Beziehung). A detailed reading of relevant passages in Buber’s I and Thou (hereafter, IAT) reveals their difference: While both “relation” and “I-You” refer to the same reality—to the dialogic moment—they do so with a different focus and scope: “Relation” refers to the dialogic moment in its bilateral entirety. However, “primary word I-You” (hereafter, PWIY)—the phrase in which the I-You trope in fact appears in IAT—focuses on the active share of only one of the two interlocutors in the dialogic moment. While PWIY does refer to the dialogical moment (which is indeed bilateral), it denotes only a partial aspect of the dialogical moment. It focuses exclusively on my active turning toward you and defocuses your concurrent turning toward me (which, no doubt, is present as well). This mistake, I show, is due to interpreters’ enthusiastic endorsement of Buber’s later phrase, the “I-You relation,” which is indeed synonymous with “relation.” It is then easy to read back the “I-You relation” into the earlier, more focused concept of PWIY. Furthermore, this enthusiasm has blinded readers from realizing that, following IAT, Buber in fact abandoned the I-You trope and used it only reluctantly, mainly when addressing his interpreters who used it themselves, or when discussing IAT where it indeed appeared.","PeriodicalId":40309,"journal":{"name":"Naharaim","volume":"0 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Naharaim","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/naharaim-2022-0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This paper corrects a pervasive mistake in readings of Buber’s iconic trope, “I-Thou” (Ich-Du; hereafter, I-You). The mistake lies in considering it synonymous to the principal concept of his dialogical thought, “relation” (Beziehung). A detailed reading of relevant passages in Buber’s I and Thou (hereafter, IAT) reveals their difference: While both “relation” and “I-You” refer to the same reality—to the dialogic moment—they do so with a different focus and scope: “Relation” refers to the dialogic moment in its bilateral entirety. However, “primary word I-You” (hereafter, PWIY)—the phrase in which the I-You trope in fact appears in IAT—focuses on the active share of only one of the two interlocutors in the dialogic moment. While PWIY does refer to the dialogical moment (which is indeed bilateral), it denotes only a partial aspect of the dialogical moment. It focuses exclusively on my active turning toward you and defocuses your concurrent turning toward me (which, no doubt, is present as well). This mistake, I show, is due to interpreters’ enthusiastic endorsement of Buber’s later phrase, the “I-You relation,” which is indeed synonymous with “relation.” It is then easy to read back the “I-You relation” into the earlier, more focused concept of PWIY. Furthermore, this enthusiasm has blinded readers from realizing that, following IAT, Buber in fact abandoned the I-You trope and used it only reluctantly, mainly when addressing his interpreters who used it themselves, or when discussing IAT where it indeed appeared.
最好用箭:马丁·布伯的《我与你》中的“我与你”、“关系”及其差异
摘要本文纠正了在阅读布伯的标志性比喻“我你”时普遍存在的错误。错误在于认为它是他对话思想的主要概念“关系”的同义词(贝济洪)。详细阅读布伯的《我和你》(以下简称IAT)中的相关段落,可以发现它们的区别:虽然“关系”和“我和你”都指的是同一个现实——指的是对话时刻——但它们的重点和范围不同:“关系”指的是双边整体的对话时刻。然而,“主词I-You”(以下简称PWIY)——I-You比喻实际上出现在IAT中的短语——只关注两个对话者中的一个在对话时刻的积极份额。虽然PWIY确实指的是对话时刻(实际上是双边的),但它只是指对话时刻的一个部分。它只关注我主动转向你,而忽视你同时转向我(毫无疑问,这也是存在的)。我认为,这个错误是由于口译员对布伯后来的短语“我与你之间的关系”的热情支持,这确实是“关系”的同义词。因此,很容易将“我与我之间的关系“读回早期、更集中的PWIY概念。此外,这种热情让读者无法意识到,在IAT之后,Buber实际上放弃了I-You这个比喻,只是不情愿地使用了它,主要是在对自己使用它的口译员讲话时,或者在讨论IAT时,它确实出现了。
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
Naharaim
Naharaim HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书