In this essay, I present and analyze differences in the perception of the world by two people who are representatives of two different cultures and societies. The first one is the anthro- pologist Fernando Santos-Granero and the second is a man from the Amazonian Yanesha group named Matar. Focusing on the description of a specific event that happened during the ethnographic fieldwork, I deal with the differences in its interpretation. Referring to the interactionist theory of reasoning proposed by Dan Sperber and Hugo Mercier and on Anil Seth’s research on perception, I assume that these differences are the result of each person’s individually shaped perceptions and ways of reasoning. In this paper I seek to explain how perception and reasoning influence the formation of representations that arise in the human mind in relation to cultural as well as environmental phenomena.
The aim of this article is to disrupt the “optocentric” paradigm that dominates criticism on travel writing. The main focal points are scent-based impressions and their formulation and function in the text. To this end, the article analyzes a sampling of Polish and Serbian travel writing on China from the turn of the twentieth century.
PL
Celem artykułu jest przekroczenie paradygmatu wzrokocentrycznego rozpowszechnionego w refleksji nad podróżopisarstwem. Głównym obiektem zainteresowania są reprezentacje wrażeń zapachowych: sposób ich tworzenia oraz funkcja w tekście. W tym celu analizowane są wybrane polskie i serbskie teksty podróżopisarskie na temat Chin z drugiej połowy XIX i pierwszej połowy XX wieku.
The aim of this article is to map out the mutual relations between literary studies and sound studies, which has rapidly developed as part of humanities worldwide over the last two decades. Sound studies are of an interdisciplinary nature, drawing on the achievements of various scientific disciplines, whereas literary studies definitely do not rank among the most influential kind. It should be noted that the relationship between the two disciplines is complicated, to say the least, if not downright aporetic. The question arises whether the perspective of sound studies is actually compatible with literary studies, or if it is not just another theoretical turn, which, apart from a few novel terms, will not actually bring anything new to literary studies that we did not already know.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.