{"title":"解构作为重复的划除与出现的运动——论德里达1964/65海德格尔阅读","authors":"Benjamin Schuppert","doi":"10.3366/OLR.2021.0355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Taking the question of phenomenality as its guiding thread, this paper attempts to shed light on the relationship between Heidegger's turn and Derrida's 1964/65 seminar on Heidegger. I argue that deconstruction can be understood as a performative attempt to take into account Heidegger's thinking of originary semblance or errancy, which already announces itself in Sein und Zeit and is a central figure of what the later Heidegger calls ‘the turn’. Instead of trying to grasp this errancy or this différance phenomenologically, Derrida takes up the necessity to read and repeat what is already given, what already appears, and thereby undermines, through his reading of Heidegger's Crossing Out of the Word ‘Sein’, the phenomeno-fundamental ontological approach of Sein und Zeit, or rather: shows that it is always already undermined.","PeriodicalId":43403,"journal":{"name":"OXFORD LITERARY REVIEW","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deconstruction as Repetitive Crossing Out and the Movement of Appearing: On Derrida's 1964/65 Heidegger Reading\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Schuppert\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/OLR.2021.0355\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Taking the question of phenomenality as its guiding thread, this paper attempts to shed light on the relationship between Heidegger's turn and Derrida's 1964/65 seminar on Heidegger. I argue that deconstruction can be understood as a performative attempt to take into account Heidegger's thinking of originary semblance or errancy, which already announces itself in Sein und Zeit and is a central figure of what the later Heidegger calls ‘the turn’. Instead of trying to grasp this errancy or this différance phenomenologically, Derrida takes up the necessity to read and repeat what is already given, what already appears, and thereby undermines, through his reading of Heidegger's Crossing Out of the Word ‘Sein’, the phenomeno-fundamental ontological approach of Sein und Zeit, or rather: shows that it is always already undermined.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43403,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"OXFORD LITERARY REVIEW\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"OXFORD LITERARY REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/OLR.2021.0355\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OXFORD LITERARY REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/OLR.2021.0355","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文以现象性问题为主线,试图揭示海德格尔的转向与德里达1964/65海德格尔研讨会之间的关系。我认为,解构主义可以被理解为一种表现性的尝试,它考虑了海德格尔对原始表象或错误的思考,这已经在《Sein und Zeit》中宣告了自己,并且是后来海德格尔称之为“转向”的核心人物。德里达没有试图从现象学上把握这种错误或差异,而是认为有必要阅读和重复已经给出的东西,已经出现的东西,从而通过他对海德格尔的《划掉‘Sein’这个词》的阅读,破坏了《Sein und Zeit》的现象基础本体论方法,或者更确切地说:表明它总是已经被破坏了。
Deconstruction as Repetitive Crossing Out and the Movement of Appearing: On Derrida's 1964/65 Heidegger Reading
Taking the question of phenomenality as its guiding thread, this paper attempts to shed light on the relationship between Heidegger's turn and Derrida's 1964/65 seminar on Heidegger. I argue that deconstruction can be understood as a performative attempt to take into account Heidegger's thinking of originary semblance or errancy, which already announces itself in Sein und Zeit and is a central figure of what the later Heidegger calls ‘the turn’. Instead of trying to grasp this errancy or this différance phenomenologically, Derrida takes up the necessity to read and repeat what is already given, what already appears, and thereby undermines, through his reading of Heidegger's Crossing Out of the Word ‘Sein’, the phenomeno-fundamental ontological approach of Sein und Zeit, or rather: shows that it is always already undermined.
期刊介绍:
Oxford Literary Review, founded in the 1970s, is Britain"s oldest journal of literary theory. It is concerned especially with the history and development of deconstructive thinking in all areas of intellectual, cultural and political life. In the past, Oxford Literary Review has published new work by Derrida, Blanchot, Barthes, Foucault, Lacoue-Labarthe, Nancy, Cixous and many others, and it continues to publish innovative and controversial work in the tradition and spirit of deconstruction. Planned issues include ‘Writing and Immortality’, "Word of War" and ‘Deconstruction and Environmentalism’.