哲学、文学和避免阅读

IF 0.8 2区 文学 0 LITERATURE
Nancy Yousef
{"title":"哲学、文学和避免阅读","authors":"Nancy Yousef","doi":"10.1353/nlh.2024.a922182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Abstract:</p><p>“Philosophy of literature” is a thriving subfield of Anglo-American philosophy but virtually unknown within literary studies. This essay aims to address a significant methodological inadequacy that is characteristic of much work in “philosophy of literature”: the remarkable absence of sustained and close textual interpretation as a technique for argument and substantiation. Underlying this approach are assumptions about the separability of meaning from linguistic form that lie at the foundation of modern philosophical approaches to logic and language, instantiated here by Gottlob Frege’s 1918 essay “The Thought.” The implications of Fregean ideas are legible in the interpretive failings of “philosophy of literature.”</p></p>","PeriodicalId":19150,"journal":{"name":"New Literary History","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Philosophy, Literature, and the Avoidance of Reading\",\"authors\":\"Nancy Yousef\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/nlh.2024.a922182\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Abstract:</p><p>“Philosophy of literature” is a thriving subfield of Anglo-American philosophy but virtually unknown within literary studies. This essay aims to address a significant methodological inadequacy that is characteristic of much work in “philosophy of literature”: the remarkable absence of sustained and close textual interpretation as a technique for argument and substantiation. Underlying this approach are assumptions about the separability of meaning from linguistic form that lie at the foundation of modern philosophical approaches to logic and language, instantiated here by Gottlob Frege’s 1918 essay “The Thought.” The implications of Fregean ideas are legible in the interpretive failings of “philosophy of literature.”</p></p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19150,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Literary History\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Literary History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2024.a922182\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Literary History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2024.a922182","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:"文学哲学 "是英美哲学中一个蓬勃发展的子领域,但在文学研究中却几乎无人知晓。本文旨在探讨 "文学哲学 "研究中的一个重要方法论缺陷:即缺乏作为论证和证实技巧的持续、严密的文本解读。这种方法的基础是关于意义与语言形式可分性的假设,这些假设是现代逻辑和语言哲学方法的基础,戈特洛布-弗雷格(Gottlob Frege)1918 年的论文 "思想"(The Thought)就是这种假设的具体体现。弗雷格思想的含义在 "文学哲学 "的阐释失误中清晰可见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Philosophy, Literature, and the Avoidance of Reading

Abstract:

“Philosophy of literature” is a thriving subfield of Anglo-American philosophy but virtually unknown within literary studies. This essay aims to address a significant methodological inadequacy that is characteristic of much work in “philosophy of literature”: the remarkable absence of sustained and close textual interpretation as a technique for argument and substantiation. Underlying this approach are assumptions about the separability of meaning from linguistic form that lie at the foundation of modern philosophical approaches to logic and language, instantiated here by Gottlob Frege’s 1918 essay “The Thought.” The implications of Fregean ideas are legible in the interpretive failings of “philosophy of literature.”

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
New Literary History
New Literary History LITERATURE-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: New Literary History focuses on questions of theory, method, interpretation, and literary history. Rather than espousing a single ideology or intellectual framework, it canvasses a wide range of scholarly concerns. By examining the bases of criticism, the journal provokes debate on the relations between literary and cultural texts and present needs. A major international forum for scholarly exchange, New Literary History has received six awards from the Council of Editors of Learned Journals.
×
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