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

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  WRITTEN TEXT
help Sort By:

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

THREE FORMS OR THREE KINDS OF ORAL LITERATURE

100%
Voigt V.
World Literature Studies
|
2014
|
vol. 6 (23)
|
issue 3
100 – 110
EN
There are several modern works on oral literature, but they do not distinguish one from the others among three forms of oral literature: the everyday orality (a), orality in the folklore (b), and the professional orality (c) (where official historic narratives, sacred texts or literature exist, from the time before the use of literacy). The author contrasts just the three forms according to the terms of communication theory: addresser – addressee – coding – decoding – message. The chart makes possible to put the question: whether the three forms are the forms of the same “orality”, or they are three different kinds of it. The second alternative will also help the theory of literature and the theory of genres.
2

FILOZOFICKÝ ŠTÝL: MEDZI SEBAIRÓNIOU A DOGMOU

86%
Mikláš N.
Filozofia (Philosophy)
|
2009
|
vol. 64
|
issue 7
693-703
EN
Traditional normative of the neutral style did not prove itself to be the only appropriate critical approach to the obscure style widespread in continental theories. Against the thesis on the self-reference of the text (by which some of the poststructuralists tend to defend the obscure style) the author argues, that it is not 'the text self-irony', but rather 'the author's illusion about his/her importance', that is responsible for the dynamics of the style. The instantiation of this illusion is a 'dogmatic style'. The latter is characterized by an apparent identification of the author with the written text. In conclusion the author tries to answers the following questions: Does 'the dogmatism of writing' apply to all philosophical writing, or even to all literary writing? Is the self-irony or self-reflection of philosophy effective as a tool against such an expanding of dogmatism on the philosophy as a whole?
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.