本文選題：尤利·米哈依洛維奇·洛特曼 + 結(jié)構(gòu)符號(hào)學(xué)��； 參考：《南京師范大學(xué)》2002年碩士論文

【摘要】： 尤利·米哈依洛維奇·洛特曼(Юрий　ииайлович　Лотман)(1922—1993)是20世紀(jì)蘇聯(lián)著名文藝?yán)碚摷摇⒎?hào)學(xué)家，他創(chuàng)造性地構(gòu)建了自己的結(jié)構(gòu)文藝符號(hào)學(xué)，在他的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下形成了塔爾圖文化符號(hào)學(xué)派。作為塔爾圖學(xué)派的代表人物，他對(duì)文藝?yán)碚摵头?hào)學(xué)做出的重大貢獻(xiàn)越來越為國際文藝學(xué)界及符號(hào)學(xué)界所矚目。 本文將洛特曼的結(jié)構(gòu)文藝符號(hào)學(xué)置于俄羅斯和西方文藝?yán)碚摪l(fā)展的坐標(biāo)系中，在仔細(xì)研讀他的《結(jié)構(gòu)詩學(xué)講義》、《藝術(shù)本文的結(jié)構(gòu)》等主要理論著作的基礎(chǔ)上，力求抓住洛特曼文藝?yán)碚摰暮诵牟糠�，以他�?duì)藝術(shù)語言這個(gè)重要問題的重新認(rèn)識(shí)為切入點(diǎn)，對(duì)其理論內(nèi)核進(jìn)行闡釋和分析。本文認(rèn)為，洛特曼理論的基本出發(fā)點(diǎn)是把藝術(shù)看作一種特殊的語言，這種特殊的語言是作為第二模擬系統(tǒng)建立在自然語言基礎(chǔ)上的，在把藝術(shù)確定為一種語言體系后，他用語言學(xué)的方法對(duì)它進(jìn)行闡釋。這一理論的核心是用整體性、系統(tǒng)化的研究方法來闡釋藝術(shù)本文問題，把藝術(shù)本文系統(tǒng)作為一個(gè)符號(hào)系統(tǒng)來加以考察，，側(cè)重分析各種文藝現(xiàn)象和要素之間的相互關(guān)系，努力揭示整體結(jié)構(gòu)與各個(gè)組成部分之間的聯(lián)系，通過對(duì)藝術(shù)本文結(jié)構(gòu)的研究來達(dá)到對(duì)藝術(shù)創(chuàng)作內(nèi)容與形式的統(tǒng)一認(rèn)識(shí)。洛特曼在理論上的成功之處是他把藝術(shù)的內(nèi)容與形式有機(jī)地結(jié)合到了一起，他認(rèn)為，藝術(shù)本文結(jié)構(gòu)的變化直接決定著藝術(shù)作品的內(nèi)容和意義，因此在探討藝術(shù)本文的意義生成時(shí)，往往從內(nèi)在聯(lián)系的角度，把本文的內(nèi)容與形式看成是一個(gè)不可分割的有機(jī)整體。在闡釋和剖析其理論的基礎(chǔ)上，本文接著探尋這一理論的歷史淵源，揭示洛特曼在繼承俄國形式主義的基礎(chǔ)上所作的超越和創(chuàng)新，指出這一理論的獨(dú)特價(jià)值在于它繼承了早期蘇聯(lián)結(jié)構(gòu)主義，即俄國形式主義的理論精華，擯棄了俄國形式主義的片面性，糾正了它研究方法上的失誤，做到了分析藝術(shù)作品時(shí)思想內(nèi)容與藝術(shù)形式的有機(jī)結(jié)合，正是在這一點(diǎn)上洛特曼超越了俄國形式主義。理論上的獨(dú)創(chuàng)和對(duì)前人的超越根植于思維方法的更新與重建，本文在第三部分主要探討洛特曼的理論在方法論上給予我們的啟示，通過回顧19世紀(jì)后半期和20世紀(jì)的西方文藝批評(píng)理論發(fā)展的進(jìn)程，揭示這一百多年來西方文藝批評(píng)理論所走過的“批評(píng)的循環(huán)”，并以此指出洛特曼走出了傳統(tǒng)科學(xué)研究中“二元對(duì)立”思維模式的門檻，步入了“多元共生”的新境地，這種思維方式的轉(zhuǎn)變是洛特曼的結(jié)構(gòu)文藝符號(hào)學(xué)創(chuàng)新的 基礎(chǔ)。本文認(rèn)為，洛特曼一直在探尋一種能夠把形式主義批評(píng)與社會(huì)歷史批評(píng)結(jié) 合起來的理論途徑，也就是把空間的靜態(tài)分析與歷史的動(dòng)態(tài)分析融合起來，把本 文的形式研究與文化的語境研究聯(lián)系起來。他在尋求把這兩種批評(píng)結(jié)合起來的過 程中，走的是一條中西方文學(xué)批評(píng)傳統(tǒng)相結(jié)合的途徑，這是洛特曼研究方法的一 個(gè)重要特征。 本文旨在通過對(duì)洛特曼理論的研究，指出洛特曼及其追隨者們對(duì)西方文藝?yán)?論和批評(píng)發(fā)展所做的貢獻(xiàn)，分析他的理論在西方文論發(fā)展史中所處的位置，揭示 其理論在批評(píng)思維模式和分析方法上的創(chuàng)新，并進(jìn)一步指出洛特曼的貢獻(xiàn)己超越 了文藝學(xué)的界限，對(duì)我們整個(gè)人文社會(huì)科學(xué)研究方法論的重新構(gòu)建，都具有十分 重要的意義。
[Abstract]:Yuri Mihailovich Lotman (1922 - 1993) is a famous Soviet literary theorist and Semiotics in twentieth Century. He creatively constructed his own structural literary semiotics and formed the Tartu School of cultural symbols under his leadership. As a representative of the Tartu school, he is a representative of the school of literature. Great contributions to literary theory and semiotics have attracted more and more attention from international literary and art circles and semiotics.
This paper puts Lotman's structural literature and art semiotics in the coordinate system of the development of Russian and Western literary and artistic theories. On the basis of his careful study of his main theoretical works, such as his lecture on structural poetics, the structure of art, and other major theoretical works, it tries to seize the core of Lotman's literary theory and reconsider the important issue of the language of art. The basic starting point of Lotman's theory is to think of art as a special language. This special language is based on the natural language as the second simulation system. After the art is defined as a language system, he uses the linguistic approach to it. The core of this theory is to interpret the question of art by means of a holistic and systematic research method, to examine the system of art as a system of symbols, to focus on the analysis of the relationship between various literary and artistic phenomena and elements, to reveal the relationship between the whole structure and the components, and to pass on the art of art. The success of Lotman's theoretical success is that he combines the content and form of art together. He believes that the changes in the structure of art directly determine the content and significance of the art works, so that the meaning of the art is discussed. On the basis of interpretation and analysis of his theory, this article explores the historical origin of this theory and reveals Lotman's transcendence and innovation on the basis of inheriting Russian formalism, pointing out the uniqueness of this theory. The special value is that it inherits the early Soviet structuralism, that is, the essence of Russian formalism, abandoning the one-sided nature of Russian formalism, correcting the errors in its research methods and the organic combination of the ideological content and the artistic form in the analysis of the art works, and that Lotman transcends Russian formalism on this point. In the third part, the third part mainly discusses the enlightenment given to us in the methodology of the theory and the transcendence of the predecessors in the way of thinking. Through the review of the development of western literary criticism theory in the latter half of the nineteenth Century and twentieth Century, the theory of western literary criticism has been revealed. The "cycle of criticism" has been passed and pointed out that Lotman has stepped out of the threshold of "two yuan antagonism" mode of thinking in the traditional scientific research and entered a new situation of "multiple symbiosis". The transformation of this mode of thinking is the innovation of Lotman's structural literary and artistic semiotics.
This article argues that Lotman has been exploring a way to formalism criticism and social history criticism.
The theoretical approach is to combine the static analysis of space with the dynamic analysis of history.
The form of literature is related to the contextual study of culture. He is seeking to combine these two criticisms.
In the process, it is a way to combine Chinese and Western literary criticism tradition, which is one of Lotman's research methods.
An important feature.
This article aims at studying Lotman theory and pointing out that Lotman and his followers are interested in western literary theory.
On the contribution of the development of criticism and the analysis of the position of his theory in the development history of western literary theory,
His theory has made innovations in criticizing the mode of thinking and analytical methods, and further pointed out that Lotman's contribution has surpassed himself.
The boundaries of literature and art are very important for the reconstructing of the methodology of Humanities and social sciences.
Important meaning.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2002
【分類號(hào)】：J0

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王愛紅;祁海成;;對(duì)產(chǎn)品設(shè)計(jì)中引入傳統(tǒng)文化的思考[J];商業(yè)文化(上半月);2011年08期

2 王銘玉;;符號(hào)的模式化系統(tǒng)與符號(hào)域——洛特曼符號(hào)學(xué)思想研究[J];俄羅斯文藝;2011年03期

3 譚善明;;修辭與意識(shí)形態(tài)——羅蘭·巴特符號(hào)學(xué)思想探析[J];聊城大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年04期

4 董春雷;韋力文;;符號(hào)學(xué)視角下的文化翻譯[J];中北大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年03期

5 謝瑾;;從二元實(shí)體到四元系統(tǒng)——蘇珊·朗格符號(hào)思想解讀[J];學(xué)習(xí)月刊;2011年12期

6 白虹;;陜北窯洞的符號(hào)學(xué)解讀[J];紅河學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

7 黃漢華;;音樂符號(hào)能指-所指問題之詞源學(xué)思考[J];音樂研究;2011年05期

8 司文會(huì);;符號(hào)學(xué)·文學(xué)·文化——羅蘭·巴特的符號(hào)學(xué)思想研究[J];社會(huì)科學(xué);2011年09期

9 王寅;;體驗(yàn)人本觀視野下的認(rèn)知符號(hào)學(xué)[J];外語研究;2011年03期

10 包威;;《所羅門之歌》的文本圖像特征[J];外語學(xué)刊;2011年05期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前5條

1 劉健剛;董靜;;從符號(hào)學(xué)看標(biāo)點(diǎn)在語音文本中的技術(shù)實(shí)現(xiàn)[A];2011'中國西部聲學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)交流會(huì)論文集[C];2011年

2 張杰;;符號(hào)學(xué)王國的構(gòu)建:語言的超越與超越的語言——巴赫金與洛特曼的符號(hào)學(xué)理論研究[A];全國語言與符號(hào)學(xué)研究會(huì)第五屆研討會(huì)論文摘要集[C];2002年

3 張杰;;符號(hào)學(xué)王國的構(gòu)建:語言的超越與超越的語言——巴赫金與洛特曼的符號(hào)學(xué)理論研究[A];終結(jié)與起點(diǎn)——新世紀(jì)外國文學(xué)研究[C];2002年

4 曾東京;高媛媛;;論翻譯學(xué)詞典的描寫性與規(guī)定性[A];譯學(xué)辭典與翻譯研究——第四屆全國翻譯學(xué)辭典與翻譯理論研討會(huì)論文集[C];2007年

5 王銘玉;;談?wù)Z言符號(hào)學(xué)理論系統(tǒng)的構(gòu)建[A];北京論壇（2007）文明的和諧與共同繁榮——人類文明的多元發(fā)展模式：“多元文明沖突與融合中語言的認(rèn)同與流變”外國語分論壇論文或摘要集（下）[C];2007年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 清郁;當(dāng)今世界符號(hào)學(xué)研究趨勢(shì)[N];中國社會(huì)科學(xué)院院報(bào);2004年

2 曹進(jìn)　劉建珍;中國符號(hào)學(xué)研究回顧與展望[N];光明日?qǐng)?bào);2005年

3 黨西民 復(fù)旦大學(xué)博士后;是誰盜取了意義[N];中國社會(huì)科學(xué)報(bào);2011年

4 南京師范大學(xué)外國語學(xué)院 季海宏;交流中的理解與誤解[N];社會(huì)科學(xué)報(bào);2007年

5 本報(bào)記者 羅四

本文編號(hào)：1895503