本文關(guān)鍵詞：語(yǔ)言維度里的哈羅德·品特戲劇，由筆耕文化傳播整理發(fā)布。

        本論文以受到20世紀(jì)“語(yǔ)言轉(zhuǎn)向”影響的幾種理論為基礎(chǔ)，展開(kāi)對(duì)品特戲劇語(yǔ)言層面的分析。這些理論表面上雖各不相同，但在深層上卻可以統(tǒng)一于對(duì)語(yǔ)言性質(zhì)及其與世界關(guān)系的一種共識(shí)，即：語(yǔ)言是非指涉性的(non-referential)的，它既不是消極反映外物的鏡面，也不是表達(dá)內(nèi)心思想情感的工具。意義并不是來(lái)自詞物吻合或能指所指之間的一一對(duì)應(yīng)，意義只是語(yǔ)言系統(tǒng)內(nèi)各成員之間差異化的產(chǎn)物。所以，語(yǔ)言在本質(zhì)上是一種形式，而非實(shí)質(zhì)。由此，語(yǔ)言獲得了相對(duì)外在世界而具有的獨(dú)立性，這使語(yǔ)言在人秩序化世界的過(guò)程中積極地參與了現(xiàn)實(shí)建構(gòu)，語(yǔ)言賦予世界以秩序，并締造出萬(wàn)事萬(wàn)物之間的關(guān)聯(lián)。對(duì)語(yǔ)言性質(zhì)的這種認(rèn)識(shí)類似一枚鉚釘，鉚接了正文三個(gè)章節(jié)里所使用的不同理論，它們就像幾片扇骨，而每個(gè)章節(jié)里具體展開(kāi)的文本分析就像附著于其上的風(fēng)景各異的扇面。論文正文的第一部分（第二章），首先從理論層面探討了語(yǔ)言維度里現(xiàn)實(shí)與荒誕的關(guān)系。人們用語(yǔ)言賦予世界秩序的方式不是唯一的，現(xiàn)實(shí)可以具有多重維度。品特戲劇充滿自然主義式的細(xì)節(jié)與逼真的日常對(duì)話，但卻缺乏現(xiàn)實(shí)主義內(nèi)在的理性邏輯與精確表達(dá)。品特戲劇不是現(xiàn)實(shí)主義的，但卻非常的“現(xiàn)實(shí)”，因?yàn)樵谶@個(gè)時(shí)代，人們發(fā)現(xiàn)荒誕本身就是現(xiàn)實(shí)多重維度之一維。人是語(yǔ)言的存在，品特戲劇用語(yǔ)言層面的荒誕結(jié)構(gòu)出人存在的荒誕。在《房間》(The Room)里，品特用語(yǔ)言塑造了流沙上的戲劇世界。語(yǔ)言的非指涉性(non-referenciality)取消了人原本預(yù)設(shè)在語(yǔ)言之先、之外的本質(zhì)性存在,形而上學(xué)內(nèi)涵的二元對(duì)立模式失去存在的根基。語(yǔ)言賦予人以存在的意義，然而，這種意義不具有穩(wěn)定性，它只是能指符在差異化的運(yùn)動(dòng)里稍縱即逝的“蹤跡”，這種意義，恰如品特自己的描述，就像流沙，隨時(shí)可能在足底坍塌。在《看管人》(The Caretaker)里，人們“在語(yǔ)言里敵意地棲居”，語(yǔ)言成為主要的戲劇行動(dòng)。人物們以言行事，一面用語(yǔ)言遮掩自身的虛空，一面又試圖通過(guò)言說(shuō)確立自己的身份。話語(yǔ)交鋒內(nèi)含著爭(zhēng)權(quán)奪利，人際關(guān)系的網(wǎng)絡(luò)在流動(dòng)的能指符里不斷波動(dòng)。語(yǔ)言全然就是一陣陣的煙幕，指東言西，大家都在語(yǔ)言的遮掩下回避交流，隱藏自己。在語(yǔ)言角斗場(chǎng)上的斗敗者，失去的將是其存在的根基。《生日晚會(huì)》(The Birthday Party)可以被視為一出“語(yǔ)言說(shuō)人”的悲劇，人是語(yǔ)言的存在，卻不是語(yǔ)言的主宰。人在其成長(zhǎng)及成熟的過(guò)程中，必須進(jìn)入作為象征體系的語(yǔ)言，在此，人會(huì)被剝奪自我獨(dú)立的存在，被語(yǔ)言所運(yùn)載的習(xí)俗和法則異化。想脫離語(yǔ)言鋪天蓋地的羅網(wǎng)，人只能以無(wú)意義的聲音或者絕對(duì)意義上的沉默進(jìn)行對(duì)抗。然而，將自我放逐于語(yǔ)言之外，也就等于遠(yuǎn)離整個(gè)社會(huì)系統(tǒng)。正文第二部分（第三章）先從理論的層面討論了語(yǔ)言與回憶的關(guān)聯(lián)。語(yǔ)言不是鏡現(xiàn)過(guò)去，而是“再造”過(guò)去，語(yǔ)言賦予過(guò)去的原始經(jīng)驗(yàn)以某種秩序和意義，從而讓其得以在現(xiàn)在存在。品特與歷史學(xué)家不同，不以求真為嚆矢，他堅(jiān)稱過(guò)去是不可確證的(unverifiable)，所以，他所做的是用語(yǔ)言的“肌質(zhì)”(texture)還原過(guò)去撲朔迷離的本性。在《風(fēng)景》(Landscape)里，語(yǔ)言的碎片構(gòu)成一組組流動(dòng)的詩(shī)歌意象，牽引著觀眾的想象力做超出語(yǔ)言之外的運(yùn)動(dòng)，在籠罩語(yǔ)言碎片的朦朧詩(shī)意里尋找真相變幻莫測(cè)的面孔，此時(shí)，語(yǔ)言本身成為了真正的風(fēng)景。在《歸于塵土》（Ashes to Ashes）里，品特間接觸及了納粹大屠殺對(duì)人心靈的摧殘這一主題。他試圖在史學(xué)家追求的那種客觀真實(shí)與自己那充滿不確定性的語(yǔ)言之間找到平衡點(diǎn)。品特試著讓語(yǔ)言超越自身，以有限的在場(chǎng)召喚出無(wú)限的不在場(chǎng)，從而悖論性地達(dá)到自身之外。品特還帶動(dòng)語(yǔ)言的運(yùn)動(dòng)，使其不斷自我解構(gòu)，那不斷被推延和被回避的所指，代表著受害人永遠(yuǎn)沒(méi)有勇氣面對(duì)的那個(gè)過(guò)去。能指與所指之間的裂縫，恰如受害人心靈上永遠(yuǎn)無(wú)法彌合的傷口。正文第三部分（第四章）聚焦品特戲劇里備受關(guān)注的沉默。在指涉性的語(yǔ)言觀里，沉默被視為語(yǔ)言的闕如。然而，在差異性的語(yǔ)言觀里，沉默與語(yǔ)言相對(duì)而生，互相轉(zhuǎn)換，沉默甚至可以比語(yǔ)言包蘊(yùn)更多的意義。值得一提的是品特本人作為作者在其作品里保持的沉默，他不佯裝全知全能，也不充任自己創(chuàng)作的戲劇世界里的上帝。品特戲劇里的沉默分為無(wú)聲沉默和有聲沉默兩種。品特對(duì)有聲沉默的界定是：“言說(shuō)實(shí)際上道出的是隱匿其下的另一種言說(shuō)。”在《月光》(Moonlight)里，，沉默調(diào)節(jié)著人物內(nèi)心復(fù)雜情感的強(qiáng)度及走向；表達(dá)出語(yǔ)言所無(wú)法表達(dá)的人物的復(fù)雜心理狀態(tài)；喚起朦朧詩(shī)意；代替語(yǔ)言完成人與人之間的交流。在《微痛》(The Slight Ache)里，品特嘗試著將抽象的沉默“戲劇化”，賦予其可感知的外形，使其制造出戲劇張力，從而推動(dòng)劇情的發(fā)展。該劇里的賣火柴老人可在象征意義上被視為沉默的化身，沉默就像漩渦的中心，帶動(dòng)并吞噬言說(shuō)，語(yǔ)言的存在似乎只是為了填補(bǔ)沉默的空洞。

    The dissertation argues for a reevaluation of Pinteresque language in the lightof the20thcentury Linguistic Turn, which has produced some profound changes in thebasic perceptions of language. The belief that language-word link is the relation ofreference, meaning of a word being the object it refers to, is replaced by the idea thatlanguage is non-referential, meaning stemming not from the correspondence betweenthe signifier and the signified but from relations of difference between components oflanguage. Therefore, language in essence is a kind of form rather than content and it isindependent from the outside world. Actually, language constitutes the world by givingit orders and forms. Meanwhile when human beings employ language, what actuallyhappens is “l(fā)anguage speaking rather than human beings speaking”, because the subjectof human beings is a cultural structure “interpellated” by language. Furthermore,language carries power while it functions, both at a macro and micro level.Close reading of Pinter’s seven dramas in the new understanding of languageaforementioned constitutes the main body of the present dissertation composed of threeparts. In the first part it is argued that “reality” is multi-dimensional because the wayhuman beings impose orders upon the world through language is varied. Pinter’s plays,as he himself claims, are not realistic, but real. In fact, what renders his plays a sense ofreality is not the naturalistic minutiae but a spirit of absurdity, because in thepostmodern world, the absurd is found to be one possibility of the reality. In Pinter’sdramatic world, reality is redefined in the perspective of linguistic absurdity. In his TheRoom, Pinter creates a world based on the words of quicksand, where Rose’s incessantattempts to force orders upon an orderless world with language is repeatedly frustratedand finally defeated. Unceasingly gliding signifiers only leads Rose to more and moreother signifiers rather than the absolute signified which is able to get everything fixed.The Caretaker shows how in a world linguistically constituted human beings exploitlanguage to negotiate their position or identity within various relationships into whichthey are thrust now that their existence and essence is not pre-language andextra-language. The Birthday Party is concerned with the cultural construction of subjectivity through language and can be viewed as a dramatization of what Heideggerterms as “l(fā)anguage speaks us.” Stanley resists being spoken by language in the tragicway of keeping silent, talking nonsense, and feigning mad.The second part first explores in a theoretical way the relations between languageand memory. Language recreates the past instead of mirroring it. It endows what mighthave disappeared with a linguistic shape. Different from historians endeavoring to seekthe only truth of history, Pinter believes that the past is misty and unverifiable. So in hismemory plays, Pinter exploits to a great degree the ambiguous potential of language toexhibit the mistiness of the past and the vagaries of memory. In Landscape, languageitself is fore-grounded as the real “l(fā)andscape” of this play. Pinter focuses our attentionon the pure form, or the texture of the language of this play. Beth’s recollection iscomposed of linguistic fragments of flowing poetic images, which leads ourimagination surpassing language itself. In Ashes to Ashes, Pinter touches upon thetheme of Nazi holocaust allusively. He tries to maintain a subtle balance between theabsolute truth in historical studies and his language full of uncertainties and ambiguities.Pinter uses language in a paradoxical way, bringing into presence the infinitenon-presence with the limited presence. He makes language to deconstruct language,thus rendering language to transcend itself to reach the realm of the unfathomable. Thecontinually deferred and deluded signified symbolizes the evasive past which Rebeccafinds no courage to confront. What buries deep in the eternal split between the signifierand the signified is the unspeakable suffering the victim experienced.The third part explores Pinter’s well-known deployment of silences. In thelinguistic theory of reference, silence is viewed as the absence of meaning due to itslack of audible sound, the signifier. After the Linguistic Turn, language is understood ascreative and constructive in nature. Thus, silence is taken as part of language, bothcomplementary and interchangeable to audible speaking. Silence is soundlesscommunication and can be just as or even more articulate than speaking. Pinter employssilences in a multitude ways to create meanings of various kinds. Apart from textual silences, there exists another kind of silence, the silence of the author. Pinter keepssilent by giving up his omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent existence in hisdramatic world. Pinter distinguishes two kinds of silences—one when no word isspoken, and the other when a torrent of words is used evasively. In his Moonlight,silences, verbal and nonverbal, regulate the intensity and trend of characters’ complexemotions; express the interior state that is beyond any expression; create poetictension; serve as ways of real communication; etc. Besides wordless silence andeloquent silence, Pinter attempts to dramatize silence, giving concrete shape to thisabstract void. In The Slight Ache, the elderly match seller who never utters a word is thesymbolization of silence per se. Like a deep whirlpool, he stimulates and assimilatesEdwards’ torrents of speech and finally leads to his collapse. Words seem to be thematerial used to fill the infinite void of silence.

語(yǔ)言維度里的哈羅德·品特戲劇

摘要5-7Abstract7-9第一章：緒論10-32    第一節(jié) 品特研究綜述11-18    第二節(jié) 語(yǔ)言：一種可供選擇的維度18-25    第三節(jié) 理論概述25-32第二章：品特戲劇里的荒誕：在語(yǔ)言里“荒誕地”棲居32-56    第一節(jié) 現(xiàn)實(shí)、語(yǔ)言和荒誕33-37    第二節(jié) 《房間》：語(yǔ)言的流沙37-43    第三節(jié) 《看管人》：語(yǔ)言的角斗場(chǎng)43-49    第四節(jié) 《生日晚會(huì)》：“當(dāng)說(shuō)者被說(shuō)的時(shí)候”49-56第三章：品特戲劇里的回憶：語(yǔ)言的追憶56-75    第一節(jié) 語(yǔ)言與回憶56-63    第二節(jié) 《風(fēng)景》：語(yǔ)言的“風(fēng)景”63-69    第三節(jié) 《歸于塵土》：語(yǔ)言的悖論69-75第四章：品特戲劇里的沉默：無(wú)聲勝有聲75-92    第一節(jié) 沉默的聲音76-81    第二節(jié) 《月光》：沉默里的言說(shuō)與言說(shuō)里的沉默81-88    第三節(jié) 《微痛》：戲劇化的沉默88-92第五章：結(jié)語(yǔ)92-96Works Cited96-102參考文獻(xiàn)102-109Appendix109-120后記120-122

  本文關(guān)鍵詞：語(yǔ)言維度里的哈羅德·品特戲劇，由筆耕文化傳播整理發(fā)布。