Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  DURISIN DIONYZ
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

DURISIN: THE DRIFT TOWARDS INTERLITERARINESS AND PROCESSUALITY FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE WORLD

100%
Koprda P.
Slovak Review. A Review of World Literature Research
|
2006
|
vol. 15
|
issue 2
122-147
EN
The objective of the paper is to point at the superficial character of the contemporary sociology and the culture oriented trends in the research of the interliterariness. It has been very often neglected that the object of the literature research is the beauty of literature, as that which causes the changes in the development. There was a Russian-Slovak (and structuralist) chapter in the history of interliterariness. At present it lives as a whole in the world but its findings have been utilized differently. Unfortunately, it appears that the theses of the Russian-Slovak school have been exploited for the utilitarian goals. Instead of the aesthetic essence of a phenomenon in its historical form, which was Durisin's intention, the models of literature subjugated to a cultural interest has become an objective of the research of interliterariness. The paper is also devoted to the various forms in which Durisin is present in the contemporary theory of interliterariness. In this connection, Franka Sinapoli maintains that the hermeneutic value of the history of interliterariness has been increased and that Durisin is the key personality of this encouraging occurrence. Mario Juan Valdés says that interliterariness is the only research project that proves the invalidity of Foucault's episteme theory. It is due to the fact that the hermeneutic value of the history of interliterariness increased after the Russian-Slovak period. The paper also focuses on Earl Miner's theory. Miner maintains that 'comparisons are more stimulating if they place real differences into mutual relationships'. Lotman proves that Durisin found out that a difference in the sign (of a structure) is equally relevant as the difference between the literature of Western Europe and that of Japan. Nowadays, even the thematic criticism (Harry Perkins) holds that literature is based on a difference (distance) of what is actually close. In spite of this, Durisin is conceived of as a founder of the transition of literary research from intraculturality to interculturality, i. e. as a theoretician of 'big differences'. Unfortunately, the idea that only a big difference is a difference, and that only a big difference is worth of examination, and that all minute differences are the forms of identity is so wide-spread that it creates a new situation in the theory of interliterariness in the form of a return to the big literatures, to the big literary phenomena. This idea is dangerous to the Slovak literature, to the Slavonic interliterary community, to the Czecho-Slovak interliterary community, and, generally, to interliterary communities which are a form of existence of the world literature.
2
Content available remote

THE SLOVAK COMPARATIVIST, DIONYZ DURISIN, AND HIS INTERNATIONAL RECEPTION

86%
Galik M.
World Literature Studies
|
2009
|
vol. 1(18)
|
issue 1
6-13
EN
The paper deals with the work of Dionyz Durisin (1929-1997) and his response in world literature science. Durisin was one of the best Slovak literature theorists and world well known comparativist. Many of his works were translated into foreign languages, including Chinese and Japanese. They motivated the inter-literary research in whole Europe as well as in the USA, Canada, Latin America, China and Japan. In 1970 Durisin brought in his conception on the 6-th International congress AILC in Bordeaux. His works were known and cited also by Rene Wellek, Douwe W. Fokkema and Ulrich Weisstein. W. Fokkema pointed out inventiveness and originality of his conception. Earl Minner mentioned his significant contribution to the discussion on the notion of the influence. The others noticed the relation of his thought with translation research as well as with the Israeli school of poly-systems theory. In the 80s Durisin elaborated theory of inter-literary communities and in the last time he dealt with the notion of literary centrism and world literature.
3
Content available remote

THE PERMANENT CRISIS, OR CAN, COULD OR SHOULD COMPARATIVE LITERARY STUDIES SURVIVE?: BETWEEN HISTORY, THEORY AND AREA STUDIES

86%
Pospisil I.
World Literature Studies
|
2009
|
vol. 1(18)
|
issue 1
50-61
EN
At the same time comparative literature is approach, method and autonomic discipline of literary science with developed terminology and methodology. In the past besides positivism it passed through psychologism and immanent methods, esp. formalism and structuralism too. At present its characteristic feature is deep self-reflection. Comparative literature represents discipline, which contains history, theory, terminology and type of research method in the structure of literary science. Its long history already makes from comparative literature specific discipline that goes from study of Mediterranean area, antique and than from national literatures. Traditions, which are created in the Czech and Slovak cultural area and directed from Wollman's ideology to Durisin's special inter-literary community, disclosed not only the power but also lower aspects of literary comparatistics. One of the aspects of contemporary comparative literature is linked with cultural dialogue and area studies, which spread background of comparative researches. Contemporary status of comparative literature is rather complicated: on one hand there are traditional comparative methods and on the other, there is a keen quest for radical innovations. And, last but not least, comparative literature has appeared in the focus of application as a methodological tool when conceiving a new model of literary history or a history of any national literature that cannot be understood outside its comparative framework. The answer to the question in the title of this paper may be: comparative literature may function as loos net of historically tested approaches, single methods and visions, or as a chain of more complex approaches connected with new subjects and problems of world literature.
4
Content available remote

COMPARATIVE LITERATURE AND ARTISTIC TRANSLATION (Porovnavacia literatura a umelecky preklad)

72%
Franek L.
World Literature Studies
|
2009
|
vol. 1(18)
|
issue 2
25-41
EN
At the beginning of the paper the author characterizes the fundamental features of comparative literature since its formation. He understands the discipline as a complex interdisciplinary area of cognition, whose uniqueness stems from the affiliation to systematism as well as from the instability of criteria, terminology and valid norms. In order to provide an example of a multilateral approach, the author summarizes the research of the Cuban scholar C. Suarez Leon on the influence of V. Hugo on J. Marti's ideoaesthetic concept of universality. The author emphasizes the bond between Marti and the Hispanic American continent, which is also reflected in Marti's thoughts about his own translations of Hugo's work. In the next part of the paper the author focuses on the theoretical heritage of Slovak comparative literary studies (D. Durisin) and historical poetics (M. Bakos). In Slovakia the work of M. Bakos is considered to be the first important step towards interdisciplinarity. The author simultaneously draws attention to the violent interruption of the intra-literary research in the development of national literatures at the beginning of the 70s. The author, familiar with Durisin's theory, deepens and broadens Durisin's comparative approach in his own inter-literary analysis of Slovak translations from French poetry. Besides M. Bakos's formal method, the author finds inspiration in the structural poetics of J. Cohen. The author demonstrates the fruitful use of semiotics in comparative research on the example of the polysemy of Romanian languages. He leans on the significant role of Slovak criticism of artistic translation (J. Felix), which has developed in Slovakia more than in Western countries. On this basis, the author revaluates Durisin's unequal relationship between the received and the receiving literary context. In accordance with the ideas of the Spanish comparatist C. Guillen (Between the One and the Diverse), he accentuates the need for a critical-analytical approach to literary texts, and especially so in connection with the translated literature. As far as the pedagogical purposes are concerned, he with the emphasis on students' own creativity argues for the interconnectedness of theory and practice and for the complex effect of the discipline (literary history, stylistics, literary translation) in the teaching process. The developments in modern and post-modern literature have been increasingly influencing this interdisciplinary method by multicultural symbiosis. Thanks to this, the comparative literature has not lost its original human dimension and importance even today.
5
Content available remote

THE NOTION OF WORLD LITERATURE AND THE DEFINITION OF LITERATURE IN WESTERN AND INDIAN LITERARY STUDIES

72%
Gafrik R.
World Literature Studies
|
2009
|
vol. 1(18)
|
issue 1
28-42
EN
World literature is one of the key concepts of comparative literature. The famous German writer J.W. Goethe used the term to describe the growing availability of texts from other nations. The additive and the selective notion of world literature have later gained common acceptance among literary scholars. The Slovak theorist Dionyz Durisin developed his own historiographical notion of world literature which finally led him to abandon the traditional comparatistics altogether. The present paper is an attempt at situating the notion of literature underlying Durisin's notion of world literature in the discourse about literature in the West and in India. Comparative poetics, which is the best known among Western comparativists through the work of Earl Miner, pointed out the existence of literary critical traditions outside the Western world. The Sanskrit tradition, which also developed a poetics belonging to this category, includes a rich theoretical discourse on the nature of literature. Durisin based his theory of inter-literariness on Veselovsky's historical poetics combined with structuralism. His theory, which claims to offer a theoretical background for writing a history of world literature, tries to understand literature through history. Sanskrit poetics, however, sees the value of a literary text predominantly in its ability to offer an opportunity for the enjoyment of 'rasa'. The experience of 'rasa' is a gustation of permanent human emotional states and is not bound to interpretational changes due to the different historical situation. The structuralist approach, not to mention its limitations as perceived by Western literary scholars, proves to be totally inadequate in case of non-Western literatures. It follows then, that although the theory of inter-literariness tries to overcome the Euro-centrism of the earlier literary studies by its openness to literatures of the non-Western world, its theoretical basis remains euro-centric. The existence of affective-expressive poetics represents a challenge to the theory of inter-literariness.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.