{"title":"语言、文学与冲突管理","authors":"Tony E. Afejuku","doi":"10.56907/gfrp8x9l","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents reflections on Language, Literature and Conflict Management to point out the difference between the creative literary mind and the uncreative literal mind, which is that one is prodigiously complex and rich, and accommodates paradoxes and ambiguities, while the other, in the sublime words of Chinua Achebe, is “the one-track mind, the simplistic mind, the mind that cannot comprehend [that] where one thing stands, another will stand beside it” (5). In other words, the “one-track mind” sees things, interprets things and phenomena from a narrow prism, without giving sufficient thought to all the nuances involved in the acts (and art) of interrogation. By implication, I hope to determine the boundaries or “limits of what is knowledge in thought,” to borrow the words of Noam Chomsky, as paraphrased by Mitsou Ronat, who interviewed Chomsky primarily on matters of “philosophy of language” reflected in Chomsky’s highly stimulating book, Reflections on Language (117).","PeriodicalId":362245,"journal":{"name":"CLAREP Journal of English and Linguistics","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Language, Literature and Conflict Management\",\"authors\":\"Tony E. Afejuku\",\"doi\":\"10.56907/gfrp8x9l\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper presents reflections on Language, Literature and Conflict Management to point out the difference between the creative literary mind and the uncreative literal mind, which is that one is prodigiously complex and rich, and accommodates paradoxes and ambiguities, while the other, in the sublime words of Chinua Achebe, is “the one-track mind, the simplistic mind, the mind that cannot comprehend [that] where one thing stands, another will stand beside it” (5). In other words, the “one-track mind” sees things, interprets things and phenomena from a narrow prism, without giving sufficient thought to all the nuances involved in the acts (and art) of interrogation. By implication, I hope to determine the boundaries or “limits of what is knowledge in thought,” to borrow the words of Noam Chomsky, as paraphrased by Mitsou Ronat, who interviewed Chomsky primarily on matters of “philosophy of language” reflected in Chomsky’s highly stimulating book, Reflections on Language (117).\",\"PeriodicalId\":362245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CLAREP Journal of English and Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CLAREP Journal of English and Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56907/gfrp8x9l\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CLAREP Journal of English and Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56907/gfrp8x9l","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文通过对语言、文学和冲突管理的反思,指出创造性文学思维与非创造性文学思维的区别,即创造性文学思维极其复杂和丰富,能够容纳悖论和歧义,而非创造性文学思维,用奇努阿·阿契贝的崇高话语来说,是“单线思维,简单化思维,无法理解一件事存在的地方,另一件事会站在它的旁”(5)。“单轨思维”看待事物、解释事物和现象的角度很狭隘,没有充分考虑审讯行为(和艺术)中涉及的所有细微差别。通过暗示,我希望确定边界或“思想中的知识的界限”,借用诺姆·乔姆斯基的话,正如米苏·罗纳特(Mitsou Ronat)所述,他主要就乔姆斯基的“语言哲学”问题采访了乔姆斯基,这些问题反映在乔姆斯基极具启发性的著作《语言反思》(Reflections on language, 117)中。
This paper presents reflections on Language, Literature and Conflict Management to point out the difference between the creative literary mind and the uncreative literal mind, which is that one is prodigiously complex and rich, and accommodates paradoxes and ambiguities, while the other, in the sublime words of Chinua Achebe, is “the one-track mind, the simplistic mind, the mind that cannot comprehend [that] where one thing stands, another will stand beside it” (5). In other words, the “one-track mind” sees things, interprets things and phenomena from a narrow prism, without giving sufficient thought to all the nuances involved in the acts (and art) of interrogation. By implication, I hope to determine the boundaries or “limits of what is knowledge in thought,” to borrow the words of Noam Chomsky, as paraphrased by Mitsou Ronat, who interviewed Chomsky primarily on matters of “philosophy of language” reflected in Chomsky’s highly stimulating book, Reflections on Language (117).