（英语语言文学专业论文）意象、象征、原型同异点的跨文化研究.pdf

- iii - abstract (chinese) 意象、象征和原型是文学研究和文学批评的基本术语，文学评论家们经常把 这三者放到一起讨论。由于这三个术语有着内在的联系，评论家们有时混淆其概 念的内涵及外延，从而加重了文学术语乱用和滥用的现象。近几十年来，随着中 国的改革开放和国际化，中西文学交流频繁，东西方学者对意象，象征，原型这 三个重要文学术语的不同阐释给文学交流带来的不变不断加剧， 在某种意义上影 响了读者对文学理论本质的把握以及文学的传播。文论研究的基础是概念，概念 的混乱将会使其失去作为文学研究基础的价值，因此基础概念的研究是重要的， 也是必要的。因此，对意象、象征和原型概念的异同点做跨文化的研究有其深刻 的现实意义。 中西文学理论基于不同的文化背景之上，中国文化属于内倾型文化，而西方 文化属于外倾型文化，因而基于这两种文化背景之上的文学理论对意象、象征、 原型的认知必有不同。本文旨在对意象，象征和原型这三个文学术语做一梳理， 并对这三者的异同点做跨文化研究，从而探索出中西方文化对其理解的同异，最 后，分析三者的关系。 本文的结构安排如下：第一章，大致介绍意象、象征、原型，包括其研究现 状，以及研究中出现的问题等；第二章，从英汉权威字典、文学术语词典以及知 名学者角度给出三者的权威性定义；第三章，以第二章为基石，在这些权威定义 和文论大家的观点的基础上， 对意象、 象征、 原型的同异点做跨文化评判性研究。 通过研究，试图：1. 梳理意象、象征、原型在中西方文化中的发展历程并在中 西文学和文化范围内分别给出各自的定义；2. 寻找意象、象征、原型在中西方 - iv - 文学和文化中的同异点；3. 探讨意象、象征、原型三者的定义，重新阐述三者 的关系。第四章，总结本文的研究目标以及本文写作的局限性。另外需要指出的 是，由于近代中国文坛受西方文论影响较大，所以本文的中国文学主要指中国传 统文学。此外，意象的研究偏重于文学视角，而象征及原型的研究偏重于文化视 角。 本文研究的结论是：中西方学者在对意象、象征、原型的研究同中有异。 这三个文学术语有着深厚的文学渊源，因而很难给出一个简明标准的定义，但是 本文的研究将对读者掌握三者的内涵和外延， 以及三者的关系有很大帮助。 此外， 中西文化的不同见解也给我们提供了相互借鉴的机会。 这也是笔者写作此论文的 初衷。 关键词：意象；象征；原型；对比 - i - abstract (english) image, symbol and archetype are basic literary terms, and they always turn up together. as the three are closely related, literary critics always talk about the three together, and sometimes, even use one term to substitute another, although they do not share the same ideas. in addition, with the contemporary literary exchanges becoming more frequent, translation of foreign literary works into chinese languages has worsened the confusion, because the three are understood different by chinese and western translators. the confusion among image, symbol and archetype indicates that their definitions are not clearly made or it is hard to define them. it is known that definitions of the key terms are the foundation of literary study, the confused concepts are harmful to academic researches and thus, it is important and necessary to do a basic systematic study of these concepts. this thesis is divided into four chapters: introduction, a comparative analysis of the definitions of images, symbols and archetypes from dictionaries and scholars, a critical cross cultural study of images, symbols and archetypes, and conclusion, which follows the routine thesis arrangement. chapter two lists the definitions of images, symbols and archetypes from english and chinese dictionaries, dictionaries of literary terms and famous scholars. the third chapter, the main body of the thesis, makes a critical cross cultural study of images, symbols and archetypes, and it finds out the similarities and differences of them between chinese and western culture. images, symbols and archetypes have all evoked literary movements in western literature, and the chapter also discusses the understanding of images between imagism and the classical chinese culture; of symbols between symbolism and the ancient chinese civilization; of archetypes between frye s archetypal criticism and jungian archetype. in addition, it also discusses the relationships among images, symbols and archetypes. the conclusion summarizes the statements of the thesis, and emphasizes that clearing literary terms is the first step to do literary researches. the thesis concludes that chinese and westerners have something in common towards the three literary terms image, symbol and archetype, and some differences do exist due to cultural and psychological diversities. although it is difficult to make concise and standard definitions because the three terms have very long histories, the thesis aims to distinguish them with new findings and hard facts. keywords: image; symbol; archetype; comparison 学位论文独创性声明 本人郑重声明：所呈交的硕士学位论文，是本人在指导教师的指 导下，独立进行研究工作所取得的成果。除文中已经注明引用的内容 外，本论文不包含任何其他个人或集体已经发表或撰写过的作品成 果。对本文的研究做出重要贡献的个人和集体，均已在文中以明确的 方式标明。本人完全意识到本声明的法律结果由本人承担。 作者签名： 日期： 学位论文使用授权声明 本人授权沈阳师范大学研究生处， 将本人硕士学位论文的全部或 部分内容编入有关数据库进行检索； 有权保留学位论文并向国家主管 部门或其指定机构送交论文的电子版和纸质版， 允许论文被查阅和借 阅； 有权可以采用影印、缩印或扫描等复制手段保存、 汇编学位论文。 保密的学位论文在解密后适用本规定。 作者签名： 日期： acknowledgements image, symbol and archetype are very basic terms of both chinese and western academic fields, and they are so widely used in many sectors so that it is hard to do a cross- cultural study to find out their similarities and differences, and thus, the thesis talks about them within literary sector. moreover, i have little talent and learning so that this thesis is not easy for me to handle with. the conclusions are made out by me, and they must not perfect, and i apologize for that. i would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, professor gexin, fan, who has constantly guided me through the whole process of my m.a. study and master thesis writing with his great patience and deep insight, and without his enlightening suggestions and careful revisions, the present study would not have been achieved. meanwhile, i would like to take this opportunity to thank professor jianhui, wang, professor zhongzhuang, guo, professor ruoxin, zhang, professor chengyu, zhang for their enlightening lectures on literature. it is their profound knowledge and great personalities that i benefit a lot from. last but not the least, this thesis is dedicated to my parents. - 1 - chapter introduction since the 20th century, some misty uses of literary terms, especially the basic ones have hindered literary studies. as a worsening problem, it has some causes. firstly, different schools of literary criticism have emerged in large numbers. they have really enriched literary studies, but to some extent, they have also worsened the confused use of literary terms. secondly, the active international academic exchanges in recent years have quickened the misuse of many basic literary terms, and the introduction of western literary theories into china has broadened the chinese literary visions, but it has also caused some “ problems” , because western literary terms do not share the same roots with the chinese ones. therefore, it is not surprising that the misuse of literary terms has been unchecked, and become obstacles in literary and academic exchanges between the west and china. the misuse of literary terms has caused some problems home and aboard, and it hinders not only the international exchanges but also domestic communications of literature. thus, it is believed that a study of basic literary terms is the first step to do literary researches. image, symbol and archetype are very common terms in literary studies, and literary critics in china and the west hold different ideas and explanations of these terms; moreover, the three terms are very basic and more- often- used, and it is necessary and academically important to do a comparative study of these three terms and clarify the confused concepts of them. - 2 - a. a brief introduction to image the latest definition of “ image” in the western authoritative literary dictionary is defined in the oxford english dictionary (2nd edition), and an image is “ to reflect, mirror” , and it is “ an object of perception or thought; to imagine, picture in the mind, represent” , it is often “ present(ed) by an emblem or metaphor” , and it is used “ to represent or set forth in speech or writing” (simpson 667). while in latest chinese dictionary, it is defined as “ artistic images expressed by language with authors emotionsthe nature of images is that the figures they chosen are able to evoke readers imagination” (xu and zhang 500). image is a very important term in both chinese and western literary studies. “ image” is believed to be the first literary theory established in the ancient china. the appearance of image can be found in qin (221 b.c.- 207 b.c.) and han dynasties (25 a.d.- 220a.d.) period. the concept of image in the ancient china was not clearly defined as it was used in different fields. “ image” was then called “ yi xiang” （易象） as “ yi” means “ emotion” and “ xiang” stands for “ picture” , yi and xiang are two words. it is wang chong (wang, chong 王充), a philosopher, who used yi and xiang as one concept. many scholars in ancient china held their own ideas about image. however, literature, philosophy and religion were blended together between qin dynasty (221 b.c.- 207 b.c.) and han dynasty (25 a.d.- 220a.d.) and yi and xiang (image) grew to be a term with lots of literary, philosophical and religious elements and concepts. and yet, as a literary theory in chinese classical literature, “ image” with abundant connotations has had a clear development. - 3 - however, the concepts of image have become very confusing for its wide use. unlike the western theories of literature, chinese literary theories are always loose in definition, because they cover many areas, and are not systematic. the concepts of image in the w est remained the same name in the literary theory, maybe because image was a recent idea. immanuel kant ( 1724- 1804), a german scholar, is considered as the first person who discusses the function of image in the literary theory, which is 1300 years later than that of chinese counterpart liu xie (liu, xie 刘勰 about 465- 521). however, the theory of images has developed very fast since the first world war. susanne langer, ezra pound, c. day lewis and others have all mentioned images in their works. for instance, according to pound, “ images” are combinations of emotional and intellectual elements, which have stimulated fierce discussions. everything has two sides: on the one hand, their discussions have promoted the development of the theory of image; on the other hand, the various viewpoints have confused readers understanding of the term “ image” . in brief, chinese and western literature have different attitudes as well as some similarities to “ image” , and the thesis will discuss it in the third chapter. b. a brief introduction to symbol the latest western authoritative definition of “ symbol” is that “ symbol is something that stands for, represents, or denotes something else, esp. a material object representing or taken to represent something immaterial or abstract, as a being, idea, - 4 - quality, or condition; a representation or typical figure, sign, or token” (simpson 451). and the counterpart of chinese definition is that a “ symbol” is used “ to convey some special meanings by concrete objects” (liu 738). both the two latest concepts have shown that a “ symbol” usually says something and conveys something else. indeed, “ symbol” is a basic literary term in either western culture or chinese culture. chinese symbol is also derived from book of change, and it is called “ xiang” with the literal meaning “ a figure” and it is used to express profound meanings of truth; that is to say, symbol already has symbolic meanings at the very beginning of its birth. and then chinese traditional writing skill “ xing” , which is very similar to western symbol, is appeared. contemporary chinese writers zhou zuoren (zhou, zuoren 周作人) and liang zongdai (liang, zongdai 梁宗岱) have all believed that chinese traditional “ xing” is the counterpart of western symbol for “ xing” and symbol sharing many characteristics. for example, both of them prefer to express abstract meanings by something concrete; both of them prefer to express implicitly, and they stresses the implications. in addition, all natures mentioned above are the basic features of western symbol, and thus, it is reasonable to say that chinese traditional “ xing” is analogous to western symbol. with the introduction of symbolism, western symbol has been introduced into china and contemporary chinese writers name the chinese traditional symbol “ xiangzheng” . “ xiang” is figures, and “ zheng” is symbolic meanings, the word “ xiangzheng” means to express symbolic meanings by descriptions of figures. western symbol derives from the ancient greek, and german scholar georg - 5 - wilhelm friedrich hegel is the first westerner who has discussed symbol systematically in esthetics. for him, a symbol should include two parts: something concrete and the suggestive meanings expressed by the concrete thing. the concrete thing can be pictures or figures, which may bring the idea of real things to mind. moreover, instead of the descriptions of pictures, the implications are the focus. then many contemporary scholars have talked about it in many ways, although diversities are existed, they all admit that symbol is a method to express a writer s feeling through concrete things to show something suggestive. the symbolism movement has pushed western symbol to its climax, and symbol has become a key method to express symbolists chaotic thoughts. symbols of symbolists are obscure, and they are difficult to understand. in a word, “ symbol” in the west and china are not identical, and they have shared many similarities, for instance, “ symbol” in both cultures are suggestive, meaningful and conventional. but they also have some differences, and one of the main differences is that the functions of “ symbol” are not the same. c.a brief introduction to archetype differing from image and symbol, archetype is a western theory, and then it has been introduced into china recently. although traditional chinese literature has some tokens similar to archetypes, it has not developed into a systematical literary theory. the latest definition of “ archetype” is given in the oxford english dictionary (2nd edition), which defines it as “ the original pattern or model from which copies are - 6 - made; a prototype (simpson 611). the definitions emphasize “ archetype” as the original pattern. actually, the term “ archetype” derives from plato s eidos, which means “ ideas” , and then it is used in many fields, especially in religion, psychology and literature. swiss scholar c. g. jung and canadian scholar northrop frye are representatives of the archetypal theory, whose achievements are great contributions to the development of archetype. jung has introduced archetype into psychology, and he has developed it into psychological archetype, and then he has applied it into literary analysis. although his analysis remains focusing on psychological aspect, it is a great progress for his introduction of archetypes into literature. years later, canadian scholar northrop frye works on archetypes. different from jung, his attention has changed into literary field, and he has developed archetypes into archetypal criticism, which is considered as an important event in literary theory for its enormous influence. jung and frye have chosen the same name for their theories, but their archetypes are different, the thesis will probe the similarities and differences between the two kinds of archetypes. in brief, jungian archetypes and frye s archetypes are not the same. for jung, “ archetype” is more psychological, while frye s archetype focuses on literary analysis. but it is not very appropriate to announce that the two types of archetype have no connections at all. jungian archetype has enlightened frye, especially jungian methods of studying myths, which is a very important factor of frye s discovery of the structures of mythology. - 7 - d. the thesis statement every theory has to share the basic terms, and literary theory is not an exception. this thesis tries to do a cross- cultural study of the basic literary terms: image, symbol and archetype, with the attempts to do the following research: first, the thesis will pay attention to a comparative study of the definitions given by professional scholars from china and the west, and authoritative dictionaries respectively, try to do a research to explore the similarities and the differences of the three terms between chinese and western cultures, and conclude the common thoughts of each term in different cultures. besides, the thesis will state its own attitudes towards image, symbol and archetype, and it will also give new definitions of the three literary terms based on the previous study. second, the thesis will clear the confused concepts of image, symbol and archetype. the three concepts are so basic that they are adopted in literary field repeatedly; furthermore, the three terms are always used together for the special connections among them. for instance, symbols are usually conveyed by images, archetypes have something to do with both images and symbols. therefore, the three terms are always been missy used. based on the above situation, it is important to find out the relations among the three, no matter the differences or the connections. third, it is the author s brave attempt to assert her definitions of image, symbol and archetype, and the concepts of each term will be stated in western and chinese cultures separately. this thesis is divided into four chapters: introduction, a comparative analysis of the definitions of image, symbol and archetype from dictionaries, dictionaries of - 8 - literary terms and scholars, a critical cross- cultural study of image, symbol and archetype, and the conclusion, which follows the routine thesis arrangement. chapter two lists the definitions of image, symbol and archetype from english and chinese dictionaries, dictionaries of literary terms and notable scholars. and this part serves as the theoretical foundations of the third chapter. the third chapter, the main body of the thesis, makes a critical cross- cultural study of image, symbol and archetype. at last, it finds out the similarities and differences of the three between china and the west. for literary theory derived from its culture, chapter three discusses the origins of images, symbols and archetypes in both western and chinese literary fields, moreover, their cultural background will help the reader understand the three terms deeply. in addition, it