Pub Date : 2020-09-22DOI: 10.30965/25890530-05101002
E. Koch
Literary theory has developed its understanding of narrative as either fictional or factual without taking into account the specific conditions of literature that is grounded in religious faith. The paper discusses the shortcomings of the dichotomy ‘fictional’/‘factual’ with regard to medieval religious literature. It argues that it is necessary to conceptualize further modes of narration in order to describe adequately the historical and global plurality of story-telling. The concept of “fideal narrative” is introduced in order to specify the pragmatic and epistemological conditions of religious literature. Its historical validity is tested in a comparison of the prologues of historiographer and hagiographer William of Malmesbury.
{"title":"Fideales Erzählen","authors":"E. Koch","doi":"10.30965/25890530-05101002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/25890530-05101002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Literary theory has developed its understanding of narrative as either fictional or factual without taking into account the specific conditions of literature that is grounded in religious faith. The paper discusses the shortcomings of the dichotomy ‘fictional’/‘factual’ with regard to medieval religious literature. It argues that it is necessary to conceptualize further modes of narration in order to describe adequately the historical and global plurality of story-telling. The concept of “fideal narrative” is introduced in order to specify the pragmatic and epistemological conditions of religious literature. Its historical validity is tested in a comparison of the prologues of historiographer and hagiographer William of Malmesbury.","PeriodicalId":44401,"journal":{"name":"POETICA-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SPRACH-UND LITERATURWISSENSCHAFT","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48232774","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-02-21DOI: 10.30965/25890530-05001001
J. Küpper
Following John L. Austin’s How to Do Things With Words (1962), it has become a widely accepted view, particularly in literary and textual studies, that the articulation of linguistic signs (vulgo: words) can change reality or even produce ‘new’ realities. This article problematizes the tenability of Austin’s basic assumptions; it submits for consideration that speech acts are only effective if they are instantiations of a previous consensus establishing their validity. The reversal of the Aristotelian hierarchy of intention and act, which is implied in Austin’s views, seems to be based rather on rhetoric than on logic. In its second section, the paper discusses some aspects of the ‘performative turn’ in the Humanities, as initiated by Austin’s theses. With respect to gender theory as developed by Judith Butler, and to Erika Fischer-Lichte’s concept of the ‘transformative power of performance,’ it posits that both here and in the case of speech acts, the previous conceptual frame of performances or performing acts is crucial for the effectiveness of the respective acts. In particular with regard to theatrical performances, it holds that the aesthetic productivity of art performances does not primarily reside in their performative character as such, but rather in their potential to become (albeit in rare cases) the site of phenomena of emergence.
继约翰·L·奥斯汀（John L.Austin）的《如何用词做事》（How to Do Things With Words，1962）之后，语言符号（vulgo:Words）的表达可以改变现实，甚至产生“新的”现实，这已经成为一种被广泛接受的观点，尤其是在文学和文本研究中。本文对奥斯汀基本假设的成立性进行了质疑；它认为，只有当言语行为是建立其有效性的先前共识的实例时，言语行为才有效。在奥斯汀的观点中，亚里士多德意图和行为层次的颠倒似乎是基于修辞而非逻辑。在第二部分中，本文讨论了由奥斯汀的论文引发的人文学科“表演转向”的一些方面。关于朱迪斯·巴特勒（Judith Butler）提出的性别理论，以及艾瑞卡·菲舍尔-利奇特（Erika Fischer Lichte）提出的“表演的变革力量”概念，它认为无论是在这里还是在言语行为的情况下，表演或表演行为的先前概念框架对各自行为的有效性都至关重要。特别是在戏剧表演方面，它认为艺术表演的美学生产力主要不在于其表演性质，而在于其成为（尽管在极少数情况下）出现现象的场所的潜力。
{"title":"Performanz – Emergenz","authors":"J. Küpper","doi":"10.30965/25890530-05001001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/25890530-05001001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Following John L. Austin’s How to Do Things With Words (1962), it has become a widely accepted view, particularly in literary and textual studies, that the articulation of linguistic signs (vulgo: words) can change reality or even produce ‘new’ realities. This article problematizes the tenability of Austin’s basic assumptions; it submits for consideration that speech acts are only effective if they are instantiations of a previous consensus establishing their validity. The reversal of the Aristotelian hierarchy of intention and act, which is implied in Austin’s views, seems to be based rather on rhetoric than on logic. In its second section, the paper discusses some aspects of the ‘performative turn’ in the Humanities, as initiated by Austin’s theses. With respect to gender theory as developed by Judith Butler, and to Erika Fischer-Lichte’s concept of the ‘transformative power of performance,’ it posits that both here and in the case of speech acts, the previous conceptual frame of performances or performing acts is crucial for the effectiveness of the respective acts. In particular with regard to theatrical performances, it holds that the aesthetic productivity of art performances does not primarily reside in their performative character as such, but rather in their potential to become (albeit in rare cases) the site of phenomena of emergence.","PeriodicalId":44401,"journal":{"name":"POETICA-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SPRACH-UND LITERATURWISSENSCHAFT","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45884805","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-02-21DOI: 10.30965/25890530-05001003
M. Benz, Silvia Reuvekamp
The question of the cultural conditions of narrations as a paradigm of historical narratology corresponds to one of the main interests of medieval literary studies: how is literature anchored in its extra-literary fields of reference? However, problems with the modeling of text and context have led to literary texts being understood in a more abstract way as forms of cultural practice, whereas the concrete contexts are neglected. As a result of this development, different cultural theoretical premises are encountered in the field of historical narratology that can hardly be related to one another. In this situation, our paper wants to highlight the importance of very specific text-context references, especially between theological knowledge and the narrative methods (Erzahlverfahren) of Middle High German literature. Firstly, the autodiegesis in Rudolf von Ems’s Der guote Gerhart is interpreted with respect to the question of intentionality, as discussed in Peter Lombard’s Book of Sentences. Secondly, ambiguities in the figuration and the narrative perspective in Ritter von Staufenberg are explained in the horizon of a literary demonology, as it is rooted in Augustinian theology and is developed by Walter Map and Gervasius of Tilbury. With this approach we want to argue that theological knowledge influenced the vernacular narrative not only on the level of content, but also in narrative methods.
{"title":"Mittelhochdeutsche Erzählverfahren und theologisches Wissen","authors":"M. Benz, Silvia Reuvekamp","doi":"10.30965/25890530-05001003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/25890530-05001003","url":null,"abstract":"The question of the cultural conditions of narrations as a paradigm of historical narratology corresponds to one of the main interests of medieval literary studies: how is literature anchored in its extra-literary fields of reference? However, problems with the modeling of text and context have led to literary texts being understood in a more abstract way as forms of cultural practice, whereas the concrete contexts are neglected. As a result of this development, different cultural theoretical premises are encountered in the field of historical narratology that can hardly be related to one another. In this situation, our paper wants to highlight the importance of very specific text-context references, especially between theological knowledge and the narrative methods (Erzahlverfahren) of Middle High German literature. Firstly, the autodiegesis in Rudolf von Ems’s Der guote Gerhart is interpreted with respect to the question of intentionality, as discussed in Peter Lombard’s Book of Sentences. Secondly, ambiguities in the figuration and the narrative perspective in Ritter von Staufenberg are explained in the horizon of a literary demonology, as it is rooted in Augustinian theology and is developed by Walter Map and Gervasius of Tilbury. With this approach we want to argue that theological knowledge influenced the vernacular narrative not only on the level of content, but also in narrative methods.","PeriodicalId":44401,"journal":{"name":"POETICA-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SPRACH-UND LITERATURWISSENSCHAFT","volume":"2015 1","pages":"53-82"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86904295","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-11DOI: 10.30965/25890530-04903003
U. Haselstein
It is a well-known fact that Gertrude Stein participated in psychological experiments at Hugo Münsterberg’s psychological laboratory during her undergraduate studies at Harvard University in the 1890s. She also conducted such experiments, the results of which were published in the Psychological Review. In her autobiographical texts, Stein referred to the experiments and the articles. Biographical research on Stein never fails to mention the experiments, but treats them as proof of Stein’s early interest in character types, while a few scholars regard Stein’s texts as automatic writing and base their claim on the experiments. The essay contextualizes the experiments in the contemporaneous research on suggestion and the “doubling of the mind”. Rejecting the idea of automatic writing, I analyze the section “ROOMS” of Tender Buttons as a literary experiment with suggestion.
{"title":"Ökonomie der Aufmerksamkeit","authors":"U. Haselstein","doi":"10.30965/25890530-04903003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/25890530-04903003","url":null,"abstract":"It is a well-known fact that Gertrude Stein participated in psychological experiments at Hugo Münsterberg’s psychological laboratory during her undergraduate studies at Harvard University in the 1890s. She also conducted such experiments, the results of which were published in the Psychological Review. In her autobiographical texts, Stein referred to the experiments and the articles. Biographical research on Stein never fails to mention the experiments, but treats them as proof of Stein’s early interest in character types, while a few scholars regard Stein’s texts as automatic writing and base their claim on the experiments. The essay contextualizes the experiments in the contemporaneous research on suggestion and the “doubling of the mind”. Rejecting the idea of automatic writing, I analyze the section “ROOMS” of Tender Buttons as a literary experiment with suggestion.","PeriodicalId":44401,"journal":{"name":"POETICA-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SPRACH-UND LITERATURWISSENSCHAFT","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43103288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-11DOI: 10.30965/25890530-04903002
L. Jäger
For a long time, in the tradition of semiotics the sign was considered to be of inferior epistemological value, and even Baumgarten’s attempt to develop the conception of a semiotic aesthetics did not free the sign from its theoretical low status. 1 Following Kant and his Kritik der ästhetischen Urteilskraft, especially Humboldt and Hegel ascribed to the sign a considerably higher theoretical value in their reflections about aesthetics. The sign no longer was considered to be a mere expression of a content that existed independently from it, but a constitutive role was given to the sign within the production of sense. The discourse of aesthetics, emerging by the end of the 18th century, therefore seems to contain a semiological subtext that grounds its aesthetic program on a theory of signs, whereas in the tradition of semiology, the skepticism towards the semiotic idea of the sign originated from the presuppositions of its conception of aesthetic represenation (Darstellung). Within a work of art, the content and its expression are combined by means of a semiological mediation as a result of which they are “so voneinander durchdrungen, daß das Äußere, Besondere ausschließlich als Darstellung des Inneren erscheint” (Hegel). This conception of representation was later called ‘symbolische Prägnanz’ by Cassirer. The emancipation of signs from their inferior theoretical value was predominantly based on the idea of an aisthetische form of expression such as Hegel had established within his philosophy of Kunstversinnlichung.
{"title":"Ästhetik und Semiologie","authors":"L. Jäger","doi":"10.30965/25890530-04903002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/25890530-04903002","url":null,"abstract":"For a long time, in the tradition of semiotics the sign was considered to be of inferior epistemological value, and even Baumgarten’s attempt to develop the conception of a semiotic aesthetics did not free the sign from its theoretical low status.\u00001\u0000 Following Kant and his Kritik der ästhetischen Urteilskraft, especially Humboldt and Hegel ascribed to the sign a considerably higher theoretical value in their reflections about aesthetics. The sign no longer was considered to be a mere expression of a content that existed independently from it, but a constitutive role was given to the sign within the production of sense. The discourse of aesthetics, emerging by the end of the 18th century, therefore seems to contain a semiological subtext that grounds its aesthetic program on a theory of signs, whereas in the tradition of semiology, the skepticism towards the semiotic idea of the sign originated from the presuppositions of its conception of aesthetic represenation (Darstellung). Within a work of art, the content and its expression are combined by means of a semiological mediation as a result of which they are “so voneinander durchdrungen, daß das Äußere, Besondere ausschließlich als Darstellung des Inneren erscheint” (Hegel). This conception of representation was later called ‘symbolische Prägnanz’ by Cassirer. The emancipation of signs from their inferior theoretical value was predominantly based on the idea of an aisthetische form of expression such as Hegel had established within his philosophy of Kunstversinnlichung.","PeriodicalId":44401,"journal":{"name":"POETICA-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SPRACH-UND LITERATURWISSENSCHAFT","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49616062","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-11DOI: 10.30965/25890530-04903007
C. Markschies
This article contextualises Rudolf Bultmann’s account of hermeneutics, one of the most influential contributions to the philosophical and theological tradition of hermeneutics since the 18th century. Not only does the article provide a detailed description of a fundamental shift from the hermeneutic understanding of a text to the self-understanding of the interpreter of a text; it also highlights the consequences of that very shift for the hermeneutic interpretation of texts. The article concludes with an examination of the particular capacities and limits of this notable “project of the century”.
{"title":"Theologische Hermeneutik – Erinnerung an ein Jahrhundertprojekt","authors":"C. Markschies","doi":"10.30965/25890530-04903007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/25890530-04903007","url":null,"abstract":"This article contextualises Rudolf Bultmann’s account of hermeneutics, one of the most influential contributions to the philosophical and theological tradition of hermeneutics since the 18th century. Not only does the article provide a detailed description of a fundamental shift from the hermeneutic understanding of a text to the self-understanding of the interpreter of a text; it also highlights the consequences of that very shift for the hermeneutic interpretation of texts. The article concludes with an examination of the particular capacities and limits of this notable “project of the century”.","PeriodicalId":44401,"journal":{"name":"POETICA-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SPRACH-UND LITERATURWISSENSCHAFT","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43745372","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-11DOI: 10.30965/25890530-04903004
A. Kablitz
Gerhard Regn zum 75. GeburtstagAbstractThe emergence of the so called Bildwissenschaft in recent humanities constitutes a major challenge to philology, as this newly established branch of art studies claims that images have a potential of generating meaning that is equivalent to, yet independent from, any linguistic means of producing semantics. Linguistics as well as literary studies have hardly reacted to this challenge until now. Therefore, the first part of this article proposes a comparative analysis of the procedures of generating meaning in images and in language, exploring their differences as well as their intersections. The second part is dedicated to a case study and comparison between the medieval hymn Stabat mater and Matthias Grünewald’s Isenheim Altarpiece as an illustration and simultaneously a test of the theoretical assumptions developed in the first part of the paper.
Gerhard Regn zum 75岁。GeburtstagAbstracts在最近的人文学科中出现了所谓的Bildwisenschaft，这对语言学构成了重大挑战，因为这一新成立的艺术研究分支声称，图像具有产生意义的潜力，这种意义等同于但独立于任何产生语义的语言学手段。语言学和文学研究迄今为止几乎没有对这一挑战做出反应。因此，本文的第一部分对图像和语言的意义生成过程进行了比较分析，探讨了它们的差异和交叉点。第二部分以中世纪赞美诗《Stabat mater》和马蒂亚斯·格吕纽瓦尔德的《Isenheim祭坛画》为例进行了个案研究和比较，同时对论文第一部分提出的理论假设进行了检验。
{"title":"Die Provokation der Bildwissenschaft","authors":"A. Kablitz","doi":"10.30965/25890530-04903004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/25890530-04903004","url":null,"abstract":"Gerhard Regn zum 75. GeburtstagAbstractThe emergence of the so called Bildwissenschaft in recent humanities constitutes a major challenge to philology, as this newly established branch of art studies claims that images have a potential of generating meaning that is equivalent to, yet independent from, any linguistic means of producing semantics. Linguistics as well as literary studies have hardly reacted to this challenge until now. Therefore, the first part of this article proposes a comparative analysis of the procedures of generating meaning in images and in language, exploring their differences as well as their intersections. The second part is dedicated to a case study and comparison between the medieval hymn Stabat mater and Matthias Grünewald’s Isenheim Altarpiece as an illustration and simultaneously a test of the theoretical assumptions developed in the first part of the paper.","PeriodicalId":44401,"journal":{"name":"POETICA-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SPRACH-UND LITERATURWISSENSCHAFT","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42742146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：