【摘要】： 西方文論歷來(lái)重視對(duì)文學(xué)意義的研究。傳統(tǒng)的西方文論把文學(xué)文本看作是作者的創(chuàng)作活動(dòng)的結(jié)果，文本是對(duì)作者思想情感的反映或者對(duì)于外在生活世界的再現(xiàn)。所以對(duì)文學(xué)意義的探尋就是追溯作者的原意或理解文本所再現(xiàn)的生活內(nèi)蘊(yùn)。在此基礎(chǔ)上就形成了文學(xué)意義的屬性論�，F(xiàn)代文論經(jīng)過(guò)語(yǔ)言學(xué)轉(zhuǎn)向之后，出現(xiàn)了兩種傾向：一種是把文學(xué)意義看作是文本內(nèi)部語(yǔ)言結(jié)構(gòu)或語(yǔ)言差異對(duì)立的產(chǎn)物；另一種是把文本和讀者、社會(huì)、作者等外在因素聯(lián)系起來(lái)，認(rèn)為文學(xué)意義不是固定在文本中的屬性，而是與其他因素相互作用的過(guò)程。在此基礎(chǔ)上出現(xiàn)了關(guān)系論的文學(xué)意義觀。文學(xué)意義從歷史變化角度來(lái)看主要表現(xiàn)為三個(gè)特征，即從靜態(tài)到動(dòng)態(tài)、從統(tǒng)一到無(wú)序、從意識(shí)到語(yǔ)言。從根本上說(shuō)，這是文論研究對(duì)象從作者到文本再到讀者接受這一變化的必然結(jié)果。 本文結(jié)合對(duì)文學(xué)意義的歷史考察，借鑒赫施(Eric Donald Hirsch)對(duì)文學(xué)意義“含義”和“意義”的區(qū)分以及伊瑟爾(Wolfgang Iser)對(duì)于“文本”和“作品”概念的分析，提出文學(xué)意義是文本含義和作品意味的統(tǒng)一的觀點(diǎn)，認(rèn)為文本含義和作品意味是文學(xué)意義的兩個(gè)構(gòu)成因素，含義是與文本相關(guān)，是文本的一種內(nèi)在屬性；而意味則是與作者、讀者、世界和其他文本等因素相關(guān)聯(lián)，是一種關(guān)系存在。也就是說(shuō)，含義是文本系統(tǒng)的產(chǎn)物，而意味則是關(guān)系下的產(chǎn)物。但是意味不是讀者完全主觀化的產(chǎn)物，它要以文本含義為基礎(chǔ)。文本含義是受語(yǔ)義規(guī)則和語(yǔ)言系統(tǒng)制約的，并且是作家主體邏輯構(gòu)思的產(chǎn)物，因此具有一種整體性和穩(wěn)定性，不同時(shí)代的文本含義是相對(duì)穩(wěn)定的。含義是靜態(tài)的，是意味的潛在形式。意味是動(dòng)態(tài)的，是含義的外在表現(xiàn)形式，是意義的實(shí)現(xiàn)。含義轉(zhuǎn)化為意味或者說(shuō)意義的實(shí)現(xiàn)有賴于讀者的出現(xiàn)。文本含義是一個(gè)具有層級(jí)結(jié)構(gòu)的系統(tǒng)，它包括這樣三個(gè)層面：語(yǔ)言義(簡(jiǎn)稱語(yǔ)義)、形象意(簡(jiǎn)稱象意)、蘊(yùn)意。文學(xué)意義的接受主要包含兩個(gè)層次：理解和解釋、闡釋與批評(píng)。理解和解釋是對(duì)文本含義的揭示，闡釋與批評(píng)是對(duì)作品意味的詮釋。 文本含義和作品意味是一個(gè)問(wèn)題的兩個(gè)方面，二者缺一不可。文學(xué)意義以文本含義為中心，文本含義以一種邏輯統(tǒng)一性或整體性制約著文學(xué)意義的顯現(xiàn)。作品意味不可能是文化的漫無(wú)邊際的馳騁，也不能是語(yǔ)言符號(hào)無(wú)始無(wú)終的能指游戲，文本含義使這一切都包括在一定的范圍內(nèi)。文本含義其實(shí)就是把文學(xué)意義看作是文本的內(nèi)在屬性，而作品意味其實(shí)就是把文學(xué)意義看作是由文本含義與其他文本、文本與作者、文本與讀者、文本和世界相關(guān)聯(lián)而產(chǎn)生的關(guān)系意義。這樣，既給文學(xué)意義以一定的開放性和靈活性，又把文學(xué)意義包括在一定的范圍之內(nèi)，，從而保證了對(duì)文學(xué)意義的理解的客觀性的可能。
[Abstract]:Western literary theory has always attached great importance to the study of literary significance. The traditional western literary theory regards the literary text as the result of the author's creative activities, and the text is the reflection of the author's thoughts and feelings or the reappearance of the external life world. Therefore, the exploration of literary meaning is to trace the original meaning of the author or to understand the meaning of life reproduced in the text. On this basis, the attribute theory of literary meaning is formed. After the linguistic turn of modern literary theory, there are two tendencies: one is to regard the literary meaning as the product of the language structure or language difference within the text; The other is to connect the text with the external factors such as reader, society, author and so on, and think that the literary meaning is not the attribute fixed in the text, but the process of interaction with other factors. On this basis, the relationship theory of literary significance appears. From the perspective of historical changes, literary significance mainly shows three characteristics, that is, from static to dynamic, from unity to disorder, from consciousness to language. Fundamentally, this is the inevitable result of the research object of literary theory from the author to the text to the reader to accept this change. Based on the historical investigation of literary significance, this paper draws lessons from Hershey (Eric Donald Hirsch) 's distinction between "meaning" and "meaning" of literary meaning and Iser (Wolfgang Iser) 's analysis of the concepts of "text" and "work". This paper puts forward the viewpoint that literary meaning is the unity of text meaning and work meaning, and holds that text meaning and work meaning are two constituent factors of literary meaning, meaning is related to text and is an intrinsic attribute of text. The meaning is related to the author, the reader, the world and other factors, and it is a kind of relationship. In other words, meaning is the product of the text system, and meaning is the product of the relationship. But the meaning is not the product of the reader's completely subjective, it should be based on the meaning of the text. The meaning of text is restricted by semantic rules and language system, and is the product of the writer's subjective logic conception. Therefore, it has a kind of integrity and stability, and the meaning of text in different times is relatively stable. Meaning is static, is the potential form of meaning. Meaning is dynamic, is the external manifestation of meaning, is the realization of meaning. The realization of meaning into meaning or meaning depends on the appearance of readers. The meaning of text is a system with hierarchical structure, which includes three levels: linguistic meaning (abbreviated as semantics), image meaning (image meaning) and implication. The acceptance of literary meaning consists of two levels: understanding and interpretation, interpretation and criticism. Understanding and interpretation are the revelations of the meaning of the text, and interpretation and criticism are the interpretations of the meaning of the works. The meaning of text and the meaning of works are two aspects of a problem, both of which are indispensable. The meaning of literature is centered on the meaning of text, and the meaning of text restricts the appearance of the meaning of literature by a kind of logical unity or wholeness. The meaning of the work can not be the boundless galloping of culture or the endlessly referential game of the language symbol. The meaning of the text makes all of this included in a certain scope. The meaning of the text is actually regarded as the intrinsic attribute of the text, and the meaning of the work is actually regarded as the meaning of the text and other texts, texts and the author, the text and the reader, and the meaning of the works is the meaning of the text and other texts, text and the reader. The relationship between text and the world. In this way, it not only gives a certain degree of openness and flexibility to the literary meaning, but also includes the literary meaning within a certain scope, thus ensuring the objectivity of the understanding of the literary meaning.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2007
【分類號(hào)】：I0

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 吳茂娟;論文學(xué)活動(dòng)中的文學(xué)程式[D];山東大學(xué);2011年

本文編號(hào)：2446620