{"title":"比较“西方”和“其他”:超越欧洲中心主义?","authors":"T. D’haen","doi":"10.53397/hunnu.jflc.202201007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From different perspectives, Shu-mei Shih, Rey Chow, and Revathi Krishnaswamy have accused Comparative Literature of being inherently Eurocentric in that the comparative study of non-European/Western literatures continues being steered by European/Western paradigms. In what follows I briefly outline their respective positions, and argue that over the past few decades at least some attempts have been made to move beyond Eurocentrism.","PeriodicalId":65200,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Languages and Cultures","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing “West” and “Rest”: Beyond Eurocentrism?\",\"authors\":\"T. D’haen\",\"doi\":\"10.53397/hunnu.jflc.202201007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"From different perspectives, Shu-mei Shih, Rey Chow, and Revathi Krishnaswamy have accused Comparative Literature of being inherently Eurocentric in that the comparative study of non-European/Western literatures continues being steered by European/Western paradigms. In what follows I briefly outline their respective positions, and argue that over the past few decades at least some attempts have been made to move beyond Eurocentrism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":65200,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Languages and Cultures\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Languages and Cultures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1092\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53397/hunnu.jflc.202201007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Languages and Cultures","FirstCategoryId":"1092","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53397/hunnu.jflc.202201007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
From different perspectives, Shu-mei Shih, Rey Chow, and Revathi Krishnaswamy have accused Comparative Literature of being inherently Eurocentric in that the comparative study of non-European/Western literatures continues being steered by European/Western paradigms. In what follows I briefly outline their respective positions, and argue that over the past few decades at least some attempts have been made to move beyond Eurocentrism.