語言學(xué)-形式主義

FORMALISM

Readingforform1(New

Criticism)Readingforform2(RussianFormalism)2Newcriticism:Americainthe1930sTheNewCriticssawpoetryasawayoflivingauthenticallyinashallowworld(post-warmassdisappointment).Intheirvision,interpretingatextexcludesboththereaderandthepoet.Theformisparamountinordertofindthe“real”ofthetextmeaning.3IntentionalFallacytheory(IF)IF(W.K.Wimsatt):theconfusionofauctorialintentionwiththerealityofthetextThetextinitselfneedstoguideus,notindicatewhattheauthormeant.Theauthor’sintentions/commentariesareoflittleimportance.Thetextisself-sufficient.4….&AffectiveFallacytheory(AF)Thereadertakeshis/heremotionalreactiontothetextwithwhatthetext“really”meanstoconvey.The“real”meaningofthetextishiddenfromthereader.TheNewcriticismpostulatedreadingandinterpretedthesheertext.Oncethereaderandauthorhavebeeneliminated,theactofcriticismisreducedtoanalyzingthetechniquesandstrategiesusedtoconveytheliteratureeffect.

Readingforform(New

Criticism)

TheNewCriticshavecreatedaspecialkindofcriticalcanon,a“Procustianbed”.Themaincharacteristicsareirony,ambiguity,maturity,self-discipline(thepoet/writerwerenotallowedtopersonalizethepoem/work)ThistheoryisreflectedinVirginiaWoolf’s

TotheLighthouse,orJ.Joyce’s

Ulysses.Thistypeofliteraturebecomestheblue-printofauthenticity,and“masculine”lucidity.RussianFormalismInthefirstdecadesof20thcenturyinMoscowandSt.PetersburgemergestheEuropeantraditionofmodernliterarystudies.ResearchwasmovedtoPragueinthelate20’sbecauseoftherepressiveSovietregime.TheFormalistSchooliseventuallyestablishedinFranceafterthe2ndWorldWar.TheFormalistschoolreachesitspeakinthe60’s(Structuralism).RussianFormalism(follow-up)ItbecomesnotoriouswhenthelinguistRomanJakobsonmovestoN.Y.,before2ndworldwar.Theformalist’sworksweretranslatedintoEnglishbtw.1950-1960.InFrancetherewasaparallelmovementofculturalanthropologyCl.LeviStrauss.FrancewasthepromoterofStructuralismwhichwasalsogoingtobecomefamousinNY.RussianFormalism

Initiallyfocusedonpoetry.Theironlyconcernistheformofaliterarywork,inordertoreadthedeepmeaningofthetext.Notinterestedinthesocialfunctionofliterature.Theyignorethereferentialfunction(theoldAristotelianmimesisconcept)Theybelievedliteratureisautonomousfromtherestofreality.Highlyinterestedindecipheringthewayinwhichliteraturefunctions.EssentialquestionsoftheFormalistapproachWhatmakesatextliterature/literary?Whatdoallliterarytextshaveincommon?Isthereacommonliteraryfactor?TheFormalist’sanswer:literarityisthesumofallspecificdefinitionsforestablishingtheboundariesfor“non-literature”.Tr幻玉ad膛it酷io膛na喘l間wa耀ys形o馬f認(rèn)id益en洞ti界fy啄in用g哨li湯te敬ra雁tu腎reMi既me而si敞s-渡th黑e門ol亂de桶st割o陜f頌cr藥it阻er劇ia喉.粘Re惰st醒ri架ct鼻iv賢e群be耗ca姿us存e臣it閱e逢xc泰lu怪de寫s顧ev暖er命yt更hi宋ng炭t孕ha捐t扮is信n勝ot貴m鋸im務(wù)et鵲ic隆(跪po蘋et為ry姨).Ex無pr批es岸iv登it秘y-盾em選er費gi削ng舍e對mo易ti攀on活s其th賤ou犁gh比e帶mp染at炊hy奴.Re卵th溫or殿ic渾s–輩re織ly霧in診g鋸on建s脖ty亮li拌st襪ic膀d季ev半ic亦es換,客as堡w嘴el船l強(qiáng)as趣o澆n擁th供ei慚r洗ca卻pa夕ci次ty扯t般o咽im廳pr叼es蜜s猴an蠶d貴in魚fl寶ue衣nc鄉(xiāng)豐e皆th熔e艇re動ad短er請.Po寇et教ic蝴s–訓(xùn)th櫻os警e教tr來ai宇ts鋸w院hi止ch靜d澤if誤fe儀re巡壽nt郵ia蛇te骨a亦p搞oe疑ti有c蹤蝶te捎xt制f剝ro我m震an奶ot貼he燥r母li己te潑ra格ry暢t猜ex帖t.Na籍ra慚ti奇vi影ty-下pe敗rm嗎an低en此tl毅y猜ci硬rc劇um員sc智ri笨be啊d咬to眠l狀it垮er本at災(zāi)ur帶e.Me宰an須s桂of演i逃de乎nt類if腿yi濕ngli征te辱ra曠ri濟(jì)tyin趟F由or附ma糖li茅smDe饞fi李ne馳d齒by位a柔c仇om洗bi看na中ti翅on冬o都f刪de聰p巾ro段ce偽du肺re路s:de酒fa偉mi插li私ar禾iz暫in牧gof托c稿om樣mo徹n款la犁ng揮ua途ge考t礙hr報ou寒ghri濫tm贏ican上dme句tr殼ic太est屯ru柄ct謝ur套es作(俊R.Ja祖ko己bs揉on)na怕rr閑at邪iv屋eco胸ns贈tu轎ct氏io女n(Sl缺