Sablasti filološkog zadatka. S onu stranu povratka filologiji

• Authors: Tvrtko Vuković

Abstracts

EN

The paper follows the numerous debates on the importance of philology that have started to emerge in the 1980s, beginning from Paul de Man’s essay Return to Philology. The assumption is that despite obvious devaluation of its importance and institutional ruination, philology survives precisely because the idea of a return is inherent in it. However, as the return is in this context grasped as the return of the repressed, it is claimed that philology survives as a paradoxical discipline whose epistemological power seeks to be represented by the figure of a specter and within hauntology, as Derrida introduced it in his works. It is argued that philology today draws strength precisely from its openness to disciplinary hybridity, institutional uncertainty, and continuous rethinking of its own social role. In conclusion, the work of Vatroslav Jagić, one of the greatest Croatian philologists and world-renowned representative of Slavic philology, whose understanding of the task of philology relates to the theses presented in the paper, is included in the discussion and introduced in the dialogue.

Keywords

EN

humanities; return to philology; hauntology; Vatroslav Jagić

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne
• Year: 2022
• Issue: 23
• Pages: 213-231

Dates

published

2022

Contributors

author

Tvrtko Vuković

• University of Zagreb

• https://orcid.org/0000000306295367

References

• Agamben, G. (2021). Requiem for the Students. U: Where are We Now? The Epidemics as Politics. London: Eris, str. 143–148.
• Aleksandrov-Pogačnik, N. (2007). Vatroslav Jagić između filologije i metodologije. U: Zbornik o Vatroslavu Jagiću. Ur. T. Maštrović. Zagreb: Hrvatski studiji Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, str. 89–96.
• Alsup, J. (2015). A Case for Teaching Literature in the Secondary School. Why Reading Fiction Matters in an Age of Scientific Objectivity and Standardization. New York– London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315742069
• Altschul, N. (2010). What Is Philology? Cultural Studies and Ecdotics. U: Philology and Its Histories. Ur. S. Gurd. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, str. 148–163.
• Auerbach, E. (1969). Philology and ‘Weltliteratur’. „Centennial Review“, vol. 13, br. 1, str. 1–17.
• Bajohr, H., Benjamin, R.D., Vincent, H., Tabea, W. (ur.) (2014). The Future of Philology. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Columbia University German Graduate Student Conference. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
• Bal, M. (1987). Virginity: Toward a Feminist Philology. „Dispositio: revista hispánica de semiótica literaria“, vol. 12, br. 30/32 , str. 65–82.
• Beganović, D. (2016). Filologija i politika iznova: aktuelnost Svetozara Petrovića u promijenjenom kontekstu. „Croatica“, vol. 40, br. 60, str. 1–14.
• Berg, M., Seeber, B. (2016). Slow Professor. Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy. Toronto–Buffalo–London: University of Toronto Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442663091
• Brebanović, P. (2021). Filologija kao otpor. „Fluminensia“, vol. 33, br. 2, str. 561–582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31820/f.33.2.1
• Biti, V. (ur.) (2014). Reexamining the National-Philological Legacy. Amsterdam–New York: Studia imagologica. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401210324
• Bruns, C.V. (2011). Why Literature? The Value of Literary Reading and What It Means for Teaching. New York–London: Continuum.
• Culler, J. (1990). Anti-Foundational Philology. U: What Is Philology? Ur. J. Ziolkowski. „Special issue of Comparative Literature Studies“, vol. 27, br. 1, str. 49–52.
• Damjanović, S. (2006). Opširnost bez površnosti. Podsjetnik na život i djelo Vatroslava Jagića. Zagreb: Hrvatska sveučilišna naklada.
• Daston, L., Most, G.W. (2015). History of Science and History of Philologies. „Isis“, vol. 106, br. 2, str. 378–390. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.62116-5
• Derrida, J. (2002). Sablasti Marxa. Zagreb: Hrvatska sveučilišna naklada. Eaglestone, R. (2019). Literature. Why it Matters. Cambridge: Polity.
• Eisner, M.G. (2011). The Return to Philology and the Future of Literary Criticism: Reading the Temporality of Literature in Auerbach, Benjamin, and Dante. „California Italian Studies“, vol. 2, br. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5070/C321008939
• Felski, R. (2015). The Limits of Critique. Chicago–London: The University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226294179.001.0001
• Felski, R. (2016). Namjene književnosti. Zagreb: Jesenski i Turk.
• Ferguson, F. (2013). Philology, Literature, Style. „ELH“, vol. 80, br. 2, str. 323–341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2013.0018
• Glavaš, Z. (2015). Povraci filologije između igre i komentara. „Croatica“, vol. 39, br. 59, str. 19–32.
• Gumbrecht, H.U. (2003). The Powers of Philology: Dynamics of Textual Scholarship. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.
• Gurd, S. (ur.) (2010). Philology and Its Histories. Columbus: Ohio State University Press. https://muse.jhu.edu/book/24305 (28.12.2021).
• Hamacher, W. (2009). 95 Theses on Philology. „Diacritics“, vol. 39, br. 1, str. 25-44. DOI: 10.1353/dia.2009.0004
• Harpham, G. G. (2009). Roots, Races, and the Return to Philology. „Representations“, vol. 106, br. 1, str. 34–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/rep.2009.106.1.34
• Holquist, M. (1999). Erich Auerbach and the Fate of Philology Today, „Poetics Today“, vol. 20, br. 1, str. 77–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/463620
• Holquist, M. (2000). Forgetting Our Name, Remembering Our Mother. „Special Millennium Issue. Special issue of PMLA“, vol. 115, br. 7, str. 1975–1977.
• Holquist, M. (2002). Why We Should Remember Philology. „Profession“, str. 72–79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1632/074069502X85220
• Holquist, M. (2011). The Place of Philology in an Age of World Literature. „Neohelicon“, vol. 38, br. 2, str. 267–87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11059-011-0096-7
• Hui, A. (2017). The Many Returns of Philology: A State of the Field Report. „Journal of the History of Ideas“, vol. 78, br. 1, str. 137–156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/jhi.2017.0006
• Jacob, C. (1999). From Book to Text: Towards a Comparative History of Philologies. „Diogenes“, vol. 47, br. 2, str. 4–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/039219219904718602
• Jagić,V. (1867). Historija književnosti naroda hrvatskoga isrpskoga. Knjiga I. Staro doba. Zagreb: Štamparija Dragutina Albrechta.
• Jagić, V. (1867a). Istorija srpske književnosti. Pregled ugadjan za školsku upotrebu. Napisao Stojan
• Novaković 1867. u Beogradu [književna obznana]. Rad JAZU, I, str. 236–242. Jagić,V. (1871). Napredak slovinske filologije posljednjih godina. Rad JAZU, XIV, str. 169–212.
• Jay, P. (2014). The Humanities „crisis“ and the Future of Literary Studies. New York: Palgrave. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137398031
• Johnson, B. (1990). Philology: What Is at Stake? U: What Is Philology?. Ur. J. Ziolkowski. „Special issue of Comparative Literature Studies“, vol. 27, br. 1, str. 26–30.
• Katičić, R. (2014). Vatroslav Jagić u hrvatskoj kulturnoj povijesti. „Radovi Zavoda za znanstveni rad HAZU Varaždin“, vol. 25, br. 25, str. 99–105.
• Liddell, H.G., Scott, R. (1940). A Greek-English Lexicon. Revised and Augmented Throughout by Sir Henry Stuart Jones with the Assistance of Roderick McKenzie. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Lönnroth, H. (ur.) (2017). Philology Matters! Essays on the Art of Reading Slowly. Leiden: Brill. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004349568
• de Man, P. (1979). Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke and Proust. New Haven–London: Yale University Press.
• de Man, P. (1981). Hypogram and Inscription: Michael Riffaterre’s Poetics of Reading. „Diacritics“, vol. 11, br. 4, str. 17–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/464972
• de Man, P. (1986). The Return to Philology. U: The Resistance to Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minessota, str. 21–26.
• Maštrović, T. (ur.) (2007). Zbornik o Vatroslavu Jagiću. Zagreb: Hrvatski studiji Sveučilišta u Zagrebu.
• McGann, J. (2013). Philology in a New Key. „Critical Inquiry“, vol. 39, br. 2, str. 327– 346. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/668528
• Messling, M. (2012). Philology and Racism: On Historicity in the Sciences of Language and Text. „Annales“, vol. 67, br. 1, str. 151–180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S2398568200000613
• Momma, H. (2012). From Philology to English Studies: Language and Culture in the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139023412
• Nichols, S. G. (1990). Introduction: Philology in a Manuscript Culture. U: The New Philology. „Special issue of Speculum“, vol. 65, br. 1, str. 1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2864468
• Nichols, S. (1997). Why Material Philology?. „Zeitschrift für Deutsche Philologie“, br. 116, str. 10–30.
• Nietzsche, F. (1973–1974). Notes for ‘We Philologist’. „Arion. A Journal of Humanities and the Classics”, vol. 1, br. 2, str. 279–380.
• Nussbaum, M. (2005). Pjesnička pravda. Književna imaginacija i javni život. Zagreb: Deltakont.
• Pennigton, M., Waxler R.P. (2018). Why Reading Books still Matters. The Power of Literature in Digital Times. New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315210247
• Peti-Stantić, A. (2019). Čitanjem do (spo)razumijevanja. Od čitalačke pismenosti do čitateljske sposobnosti. Zagreb: Ljevak.
• del Pilar Blanco, M., Peeren, E. (ur.) (2013). The Spectralities Reader. London–New Delhi–New York–Sydney: Bloomsbury.
• Pollock, S., Benjamin A.E., Chang, K.K. (ur.) (2015). World Philology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674736122
• Pollock, S. (2009). Future Philology? The Fate of a Soft Science in a Hard World. „Critical Inquiry“, vol. 35, br. 4, str. 931–961. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/599594
• Roche, M.W. (2004). Why Literature Matters in the 21st Century. New Haven–London: Yale University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300104493.001.0001
• Royle, N. (2003). Jacques Derrida. London–New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203380376
• Said, E.W. (2004). The Return to Philology. U: Humanism and Democratic Criticism. New York: Columbia University Press, str. 57–84.
• Sumara, D.J. (2002). Why Reading Literature in School Still Matters. Imagination, Interpretation, Insight. Mahwah–New Jersey–London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410603449
• Turner, J. (2014). Philology: The Forgotten Origins of the Modern Humanities. Princeton: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt5hhrxf
• Vadde, A. (2012). The Re-Return to Philology. „Novel: A Forum on Fiction“, vol. 45, br. 3, str. 461–465. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/00295132-1723053
• Vuković, T. (2015). Studij nacionalne književnosti u doba čudovišta. Politike tjeskobe i neoperativnosti u hrvatskoj znanosti o književnosti. U: Transmisije kroatistike. Zbornik radova smeđunarodnog znanstvenog skupa održanog u Poznanju 9. i10. prosinca 2013. Ur. K. Pieniążek-Marković, T.Vuković.Zagreb: Filozofski fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, str. 237–255.
• Vuković, T. (2021). Humanities at the Periphery. The Return to Philology and the Importance of Literary Studies. U: Periferno u hrvatskoj književnosti i kulturi. Ur. K. Bagić, M. Levanat-Peričić, L. Małczak. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, str. 19–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31261/PN.4028.03
• Warren, M.R. (2003). Post-Philology. U: Postcolonial Moves: Medieval Through Modern. Ur. P.C.Ingham, M. R.Warren. New York: Palgrave, str. 19–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403980236_2
• Warren, M. R. (2010). Introduction: Relating Philology, Practicing Humanism. U: Philology Matters. Ur. M. R.Warren. „Special issue of PMLA“, vol. 125, br. 2, str. 283– 288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1632/pmla.2010.125.2.283
• Watkins, C. (1990). What Is Philology? U: What Is Philology? Ur. J. Ziolkowski. „Special issue of Comparative Literature Studies“, vol. 27, br. 1, str. 21–25.
• Wegmann, N. (2014). Philology-An Update. U: The Future of Philology. Ur. H. Bajohr, R.D. Benjamin, H.Vincent, W. Tabea. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Columbia University German Graduate Student Conference. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
• Ziolkowski, J. (1990). Introduction. U: What Is Philology? Ur. J. Ziolkowski. „Special issue of Comparative Literature Studies“, vol. 27, br. 1, str. 1–12.
• Zunsine, L. (2006). Why We Read Fiction. Theory of Mind and the Novel. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/pss.2022.23.10

Biblioteka Nauki

15582244