摘要
希腊悲剧有两种著名的解读,一是"命运说",一是"过失说"。这两说截然相反,互相对立。为什么会出现"一文两读"的奇特现象?这两说有什么内在的联系?学界对这一背谬现象常常采取回避的态度。事实上,亚里士多德的"过失说"并不是一种忠实原义的解读,而是一种带目的性的"改读",是对希腊悲剧中神话的伦理化,是人类文明从"神/英雄时代"到"人的时代"转型期必然出现的神话历史化现象。
There are two well-known theories interpreting Greek tragedies： the theory of ＂destiny＂ and that of ＂hamartia＂. But how can the two opposite theories coexist？ Is there any intrinsic relationship between the two？ By and large, academics have been avoiding this subject. In fact, Aristotle＇s ＂hamartia＂ is not a faithful interpretation of the true meaning of tragedies, but rather an intentional ＂altered reading＂. It is a form of euhemerizati0n in Greek tragedies and a historical phenomenon as human civilization develops from the ＂age of gods/heroes＂ to the ＂age of human beings. ＂
出处
《国外文学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2011年第2期3-9,共7页
Foreign Literatures
