Refine
Year of publication
- 2011 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (2) (remove)
Language
- German (2) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2) (remove)
Keywords
- Methodologie (2) (remove)
Is there something like a 'scientific' approach to the reading or interpretation of literary texts as is suggested by the German term 'Literaturwissenschaft'? This essay argues that genuinely scientific criteria such as the intersubjective verifiability of a given reading do not apply to the reading of literary texts. The reason is that such texts enable a quasi infinite range of different readings the preconceptions of which are contingent upon the individual readers, their previous experiences, literary as well as non-literary, and their expectations. — What, then, are the tasks of a scholarly reading of literary texts? Firstly, the theoretical reflection upon the status of such texts in comparison to pragmatic texts; secondly, the attempt at reconstructing their historical context (in terms of discursive history), and thirdly, a reading with regard to present-day problems. The 'quality' of a scholarly reading of a literary text would thus be dependent not on its 'objectivity', but rather on its capacity to produce resonances amongst other present-day readers, scholarly and non-scholarly.
Innovation oder Wiederkehr? : Das Methodenspektrum im Kurzzeitgedächtnis der Literaturwissenschaft
(2011)
In recent years, a pronounced methodological self-reflexiveness has been established as a standard in studying language and literature. Methodological pluralism and a specific methodological adaptation to the objects of study are a characteristic feature of present-day literary and cultural studies. In keeping with this tendency, introductory textbooks on literary studies often provide an overview of the broad discussion and spectrum of methods and their seemingly boundless possible applications and the options for combining them. But this is not the first time that the boundaries of our discipline have undergone dissolution. Beginning with early examples of accounts of methodological variety and methodological reflection (Oscar Benda, Harry Maync, Emil Ermatinger, Julius Petersen), the present article discusses the ways in which an awareness of a surprisingly long tradition of discussions concerning methodological competence affects the present self-conception and identity of philology.