[“民族文献学”与人文学科学科形成的历史]。

Studium (Rotterdam, Netherlands) Pub Date : 2011-01-01
Gert-Jan Johannes
{"title":"[“民族文献学”与人文学科学科形成的历史]。","authors":"Gert-Jan Johannes","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The start of discipline formation in the 'national philologies' (such as 'English language and literature', 'Germanistik', etc.) is often considered to have taken place around the middle of the nineteenth century. At that time, the German philological school of scholars such as Jacob Grimm gained influence at universities all over Europe. Meticulous analysis of the oldest (medieval) texts, as well as rigorous application of the methods of historical-comparative linguistics in editing these texts, became the norm and the nec plus ultra of philology. Other forms of academic and scholarly attention to national literature--e.g., the study of the history of literature in post-medieval and modern times--were from then on looked down upon as mere hobbies, made obsolete by the 'modern', 'truly scientific' methods of the German school. The case of the 'national philologies' thus seems to corroborate the common idea that discipline formation in science consists mainly of a process of specialization and differentiation. However, an overview of the history of 'Neerlandistiek' (the academic study of Dutch language and literature) over the course of the nineteenth century suggests that the success of German School's methods was in fact but a temporary episode. In the history of 'national philologies' such as the 'Neerlandistiek', episodes of specialization seem to alternate with episodes in which the main emphasis is not on specialization but on extension of the scope, on integration of elements from other disciplines, and on reinforcement of the ties with social institutions such as the education system. Interdisciplinarity is not a new phenomenon but can already be found in the days of the discipline's origin in Holland. Back then, the first professors of 'Dutch rhetorics' around 1800 rapidly expanded their specialist studies into the study of 'Dutch language and literature' in the broadest possible sense. Phenomena such as these seem to apply more generally to the process of discipline formation in the humanities. The fact that disciplines such as the 'national philologies' still exist, suggests that specialization, differentiation and 'boundary wars' are not the only road to scientific legitimacy. Extension of the scope, (re)unification with other disciplines and intense communication with social systems inside and outside university are at least as important.</p>","PeriodicalId":89624,"journal":{"name":"Studium (Rotterdam, Netherlands)","volume":"4 1","pages":"31-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[The 'national philologies' and the history of discipline formation in the humanities].\",\"authors\":\"Gert-Jan Johannes\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The start of discipline formation in the 'national philologies' (such as 'English language and literature', 'Germanistik', etc.) is often considered to have taken place around the middle of the nineteenth century. At that time, the German philological school of scholars such as Jacob Grimm gained influence at universities all over Europe. Meticulous analysis of the oldest (medieval) texts, as well as rigorous application of the methods of historical-comparative linguistics in editing these texts, became the norm and the nec plus ultra of philology. Other forms of academic and scholarly attention to national literature--e.g., the study of the history of literature in post-medieval and modern times--were from then on looked down upon as mere hobbies, made obsolete by the 'modern', 'truly scientific' methods of the German school. The case of the 'national philologies' thus seems to corroborate the common idea that discipline formation in science consists mainly of a process of specialization and differentiation. However, an overview of the history of 'Neerlandistiek' (the academic study of Dutch language and literature) over the course of the nineteenth century suggests that the success of German School's methods was in fact but a temporary episode. In the history of 'national philologies' such as the 'Neerlandistiek', episodes of specialization seem to alternate with episodes in which the main emphasis is not on specialization but on extension of the scope, on integration of elements from other disciplines, and on reinforcement of the ties with social institutions such as the education system. Interdisciplinarity is not a new phenomenon but can already be found in the days of the discipline's origin in Holland. Back then, the first professors of 'Dutch rhetorics' around 1800 rapidly expanded their specialist studies into the study of 'Dutch language and literature' in the broadest possible sense. Phenomena such as these seem to apply more generally to the process of discipline formation in the humanities. The fact that disciplines such as the 'national philologies' still exist, suggests that specialization, differentiation and 'boundary wars' are not the only road to scientific legitimacy. Extension of the scope, (re)unification with other disciplines and intense communication with social systems inside and outside university are at least as important.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":89624,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studium (Rotterdam, Netherlands)\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"31-45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studium (Rotterdam, Netherlands)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studium (Rotterdam, Netherlands)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

“民族文字学”(如“英语语言文学”、“日耳曼学”等)学科形成的开端通常被认为发生在19世纪中叶左右。当时,以雅各布·格里姆(Jacob Grimm)为代表的德国语言学学派在欧洲各地的大学都产生了影响。对最古老(中世纪)文本的细致分析,以及在编辑这些文本时对历史比较语言学方法的严格应用,成为了文献学的规范和极致。对民族文学的其他形式的学术和学术关注——例如:从那时起,这些学科就被视为纯粹的爱好,被德国学派的“现代”、“真正科学”的方法所淘汰。因此,“民族文献学”的案例似乎证实了一个普遍的观点,即科学中的学科形成主要由专业化和分化的过程组成。然而,纵观19世纪荷兰语言和文学学术研究的历史,我们发现德国学派的研究方法的成功实际上只是一个暂时的插曲。在像《荷兰文献学》这样的“民族文献学”的历史中,专业化的时期似乎与主要强调不是专业化而是范围的扩展、其他学科元素的整合以及加强与社会机构(如教育系统)的联系的时期交替出现。跨学科并不是一个新现象,但在该学科起源于荷兰的日子里已经可以找到。1800年左右,第一批“荷兰修辞学”教授迅速将他们的专业研究扩展到最广泛意义上的“荷兰语言和文学”研究。诸如此类的现象似乎更普遍地适用于人文学科的学科形成过程。像“民族文献学”这样的学科仍然存在的事实表明,专业化、分化和“边界战争”并不是通往科学合法性的唯一道路。范围的扩大,与其他学科的(重新)统一以及与大学内外社会系统的密切交流至少同样重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[The 'national philologies' and the history of discipline formation in the humanities].

The start of discipline formation in the 'national philologies' (such as 'English language and literature', 'Germanistik', etc.) is often considered to have taken place around the middle of the nineteenth century. At that time, the German philological school of scholars such as Jacob Grimm gained influence at universities all over Europe. Meticulous analysis of the oldest (medieval) texts, as well as rigorous application of the methods of historical-comparative linguistics in editing these texts, became the norm and the nec plus ultra of philology. Other forms of academic and scholarly attention to national literature--e.g., the study of the history of literature in post-medieval and modern times--were from then on looked down upon as mere hobbies, made obsolete by the 'modern', 'truly scientific' methods of the German school. The case of the 'national philologies' thus seems to corroborate the common idea that discipline formation in science consists mainly of a process of specialization and differentiation. However, an overview of the history of 'Neerlandistiek' (the academic study of Dutch language and literature) over the course of the nineteenth century suggests that the success of German School's methods was in fact but a temporary episode. In the history of 'national philologies' such as the 'Neerlandistiek', episodes of specialization seem to alternate with episodes in which the main emphasis is not on specialization but on extension of the scope, on integration of elements from other disciplines, and on reinforcement of the ties with social institutions such as the education system. Interdisciplinarity is not a new phenomenon but can already be found in the days of the discipline's origin in Holland. Back then, the first professors of 'Dutch rhetorics' around 1800 rapidly expanded their specialist studies into the study of 'Dutch language and literature' in the broadest possible sense. Phenomena such as these seem to apply more generally to the process of discipline formation in the humanities. The fact that disciplines such as the 'national philologies' still exist, suggests that specialization, differentiation and 'boundary wars' are not the only road to scientific legitimacy. Extension of the scope, (re)unification with other disciplines and intense communication with social systems inside and outside university are at least as important.

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
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