English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 51931/87076 (60%)
造訪人次 : 8482129      線上人數 : 69
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧:
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號",以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋,建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位,可獲得較完整資料
  • 進階搜尋
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/109045


    題名: "Doing" Theory In and About East Asia: Transgression and Translation
    在東亞內「做」相關東亞的理論:踰越和翻譯
    作者: Lee, Meera
    關鍵詞: theory;East Asia;translation;transgression;psychoanalysis
    日期: 2016-06-01
    上傳時間: 2016-12-27 14:14:42 (UTC+8)
    出版者: 淡江大學出版中心
    摘要: Academics typically conceive of theory as a Western way of conceptual
    thinking or producing knowledge. In today’s academic context, nevertheless,
    theory is influential in the non-Western world as well, as many scholars outside
    of the West adopt a theoretical stance in the production of knowledge.
    Therefore, as scholars of East Asia, we must rethink its relation to theory.
    Theory has been discussed in the literature in connection with East Asia,
    but the place of theory, both in the study of East Asia and in the region itself,
    still remains obscure if not unstable. Here, my term “East Asia” refers to both
    geographical and academic sites; that is to say, the term refers to both the
    region of East Asia and the academic field of East Asian studies, especially in
    Western academia. Native East Asian scholars of any subject, and scholars
    who study East Asia, whether they are situated in a Western or non-Western
    academic context, all face similar challenges when they attempt to engage in
    theory. The perception of theoretical scholars in East Asia, from both the
    West and the East, is at best ambivalent, if not antagonistic. In opposition to
    this perception, this paper will illuminate the positive aspects of theory in and
    about East Asia. To this end, I propose the following guiding question about
    the relation between theory and East: what does “doing” theory mean when it
    comes to East Asia? Since the term “East Asia” risks being quickly associated
    or conflated with the colonialist conception of the Orient or the Other – namely,
    a mythic territory – a more helpful question might be: what does using theory
    mean for both scholars of East Asia and scholars in East Asia?
    關聯: Tamkang Review
    顯示於類別:[淡江評論] 第46卷第2期

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    index.html0KbHTML167檢視/開啟

    在機構典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.

    TAIR相關文章

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - 回饋