English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 51275/86342 (59%)
Visitors : 8147727      Online Users : 91
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/109045


    Title: "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
    Authors: Lee, Meera
    Keywords: theory;East Asia;translation;transgression;psychoanalysis
    Date: 2016-06-01
    Issue Date: 2016-12-27 14:14:42 (UTC+8)
    Publisher: 淡江大學出版中心
    Abstract: 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?
    Relation: Tamkang Review
    Appears in Collections:[淡江評論] 第46卷第2期

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML158View/Open

    All items in 機構典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


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