本文選題：形式范疇 + 形式范疇的語義分析　； 參考：《重慶師范大學》2005年碩士論文

【摘要】：自形式范疇在我國文藝學中的出現(xiàn)至今約有一百年的歷史,它既被廣泛應用,又歧義百出。為了今后更清晰地使用這個文藝學的基本范疇,本文著重做了以下工作。 第一,立足于中國文藝學的語境,共時性地研究形式范疇,即對形式范疇作一個語義分析。主要有以下三類用法:(1) 外觀,樣式,體裁:(2) 內部的組織、安排,結構,技巧:(3) 整體的或獨立自足的,與審美、風格相聯(lián)系的。這幾個義項常互相聯(lián)系,交疊,都有著片面的合理性;前兩類用法更多體現(xiàn)了形式范疇的內在生成性,后一類用法更多是受了外來文論的影響。 第二,立足于中國文藝學的語境,歷時性地研究形式范疇,即梳理形式范疇百年來的接受、論述及運用的概況。以名家名著、統(tǒng)遍自編的文學理論教材中對形式范疇的論述及運用作重點研究對象,并穿插了外來文論中對形式范疇的相關研究成果,從中可見出國人對外來成果的吸收和利用。向培良對形式范疇的論述,標志著建國前對形式范疇研究的高度;童慶炳、周憲在九十年代對形式范疇的論述,標志著建國后至今對形式范疇研究的新高度。 第三,建國后近三十年形式范疇一直附庸在內容范疇之下,即使對兩者關系的“辨證”論述也容易把形式范疇淪入無足輕重的地位。顯而易見的原因:一是由于中國古代文論中“載道”“言志”的強大傳統(tǒng);一是由于啟蒙救亡的歷史形勢和政治影響。從理論上溯源:一是由于單一局面反映論的文學觀;一是由于對黑格爾《美學》的誤解;一是由于對毛澤東《矛盾論》的簡單套用。而內容與形式的關系并非誰決定誰的關系,只有引入中介概念“題材”才能理清二者的關系。 第四,有必要對“形式主義”的用法作一個界定。首先應把作為創(chuàng)作方法的形式主義和作為研究方法的形式主義區(qū)分開,而后者無可厚非;其次,就作為創(chuàng)作方法的形式主義來說,不適宜用它來批評單篇作品或單個作家,但可用來批評一代文風。
[Abstract]:The category of form has a history of about 100 years since its appearance in Chinese literature and art.In order to use this basic category of literature and art more clearly in the future, this paper focuses on the following work.First, based on the context of Chinese literature and art, synchronic study of form category, that is, to make a semantic analysis of form category.There are three main categories of usage: 1) appearance, style, style) internal organization, arrangement, structure, skill) overall or independent self-sufficiency, related to aesthetics and style.These meanings are often related to each other and overlapped, all of them have one-sided rationality; the first two kinds of usages more embody the inherent generative nature of the formal category, and the latter are more influenced by foreign literary theories.Second, based on the context of Chinese literature and art, the diachronic study of form category, that is, combing the acceptance, discussion and application of form category in the past hundred years.This paper focuses on the discussion and application of form category in the textbook of literary theory compiled by famous writers, and intersperses the relevant research results of form category in foreign literary theory.From this, we can see the absorption and utilization of foreign achievements.Xiang Peiliang's exposition on form category marks the height of the study of form category before the founding of the people's Republic of China, while Tong Qingbing and Zhou Xian's exposition on form category in the 1990s marks the new height of formal category study since the founding of the people's Republic of China.Third, the category of form has been attached to the category of content for nearly 30 years since the founding of the people's Republic of China.The obvious reasons are as follows: one is due to the strong tradition of "carrying Tao" and "expressing ambition" in ancient Chinese literary theory, the other is the historical situation and political influence of enlightenment and salvation.Theoretically, it can be traced to the literary view of the theory of reflection of a single situation, the misunderstanding of Hegel's Aesthetics, and the simple application of Mao Zedong's Theory of contradiction.But the relation between content and form is not who decides whose relation, only introduces intermediary concept "subject matter" to clarify the relationship between the two.Fourth, it is necessary to define the usage of formalism.First of all, we should distinguish formalism as a method of creation from formalism as a method of study, and the latter is not to blame; secondly, as far as formalism as a method of creation is concerned, it is not appropriate to use it to criticize a single piece of work or a single writer,But it can be used to criticize a generation of literary style.
【學位授予單位】：重慶師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2005
【分類號】：I0

【相似文獻】

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 王金龍;中國文藝學形式范疇的語義分析及百年來的演變概況[D];重慶師范大學;2005年

，

本文編號：1758725