古代不可言说的意识形态及其回响

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Signs and Society Pub Date : 2018-01-01 DOI:10.1086/695143
Naomi Janowitz
{"title":"古代不可言说的意识形态及其回响","authors":"Naomi Janowitz","doi":"10.1086/695143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ancient ideas about the limits of what can be put into words demonstrate the popularity of the notion that language is a guide to truth, even if that truth is defined by the limits of language. Two ancient and one modern example all locate truth in a reality that can be tracked both by the possibility of and the inherent failure of definition. Ancient exegetes started with the basic concept that words were both names for objects and the best formal representations of divinity. Yet names were not capable of fully defining ineffable divinity. These two ideologies—that names formally represent divinity and yet fail to completely describe divinity—coexisted in a delicate balance. The theme of divine ineffability, first articulated as part of a theology emphasizing the complete power of the deity over matter, has been adopted by modern scholars and converted to a theory to locate reality in hard-to-define personal experiences. The ineffable as what cannot be spoken about shifts focus from divinity to the self (the locus of modern experience).","PeriodicalId":51908,"journal":{"name":"Signs and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/695143","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ancient Ideologies of Ineffability and Their Echoes\",\"authors\":\"Naomi Janowitz\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/695143\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ancient ideas about the limits of what can be put into words demonstrate the popularity of the notion that language is a guide to truth, even if that truth is defined by the limits of language. Two ancient and one modern example all locate truth in a reality that can be tracked both by the possibility of and the inherent failure of definition. Ancient exegetes started with the basic concept that words were both names for objects and the best formal representations of divinity. Yet names were not capable of fully defining ineffable divinity. These two ideologies—that names formally represent divinity and yet fail to completely describe divinity—coexisted in a delicate balance. The theme of divine ineffability, first articulated as part of a theology emphasizing the complete power of the deity over matter, has been adopted by modern scholars and converted to a theory to locate reality in hard-to-define personal experiences. The ineffable as what cannot be spoken about shifts focus from divinity to the self (the locus of modern experience).\",\"PeriodicalId\":51908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Signs and Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/695143\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Signs and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/695143\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Signs and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/695143","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于语言表达的界限的古老观念表明,语言是通向真理的向导这一观念很受欢迎,即使真理是由语言的界限来定义的。两个古代的例子和一个现代的例子都把真理定位在一个现实中,这个现实可以通过定义的可能性和固有的失败来追踪。古代的注释者从一个基本概念开始,即单词既是物体的名称,也是神性的最佳形式表征。然而,名字并不能完全定义不可言喻的神性。这两种意识形态——名字形式上代表神性,但不能完全描述神性——在微妙的平衡中共存。神圣不可言说的主题,最初是作为强调神对物质的完全力量的神学的一部分被阐述出来的,已经被现代学者采纳,并转化为一种理论,在难以定义的个人经历中定位现实。不可言喻的东西是不能被谈论的,它把焦点从神性转移到自我(现代经验的轨迹)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ancient Ideologies of Ineffability and Their Echoes
Ancient ideas about the limits of what can be put into words demonstrate the popularity of the notion that language is a guide to truth, even if that truth is defined by the limits of language. Two ancient and one modern example all locate truth in a reality that can be tracked both by the possibility of and the inherent failure of definition. Ancient exegetes started with the basic concept that words were both names for objects and the best formal representations of divinity. Yet names were not capable of fully defining ineffable divinity. These two ideologies—that names formally represent divinity and yet fail to completely describe divinity—coexisted in a delicate balance. The theme of divine ineffability, first articulated as part of a theology emphasizing the complete power of the deity over matter, has been adopted by modern scholars and converted to a theory to locate reality in hard-to-define personal experiences. The ineffable as what cannot be spoken about shifts focus from divinity to the self (the locus of modern experience).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Signs and Society
Signs and Society Multiple-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊最新文献
From Transcendence to Kitsch: Have We Lost Faith? Enregistering Grammatical Gender: Indexing Brabantishness through Languagecultural Practices in Digital Tiles Signs of Solidarity and Difference: Kaçak Tea, Samimiyet, and the National Public in Turkey An Unheard Voice: The Paintings of Zohar Tal Inbar, a Mother Looking at Her Soldier Son The Enregisterment of Luxembourgish Standards in the Nineteenth Century
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1