当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of English as a Lingua Franca › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Guri Ellen Arnstein Hjelde Sigmund Kvam Anastasia Parianou John Todd: Language and nation. Crossroads and connections
Journal of English as a Lingua Franca Pub Date : 2018-03-26 , DOI: 10.1515/jelf-2018-0011
Philip Riley 1
Affiliation  

This multilingual collection includes a very brief preface in English, German and French and 14 articles, of which six are in English, five are in German and three in French. Ten of the articles are by academics holding posts in Norway, two hold posts in Greece (Corfu), one in Finland and one in Scotland. The selection of topics is highly eclectic and, with the exception of the first, in which the editors set about “Making the case for an interdisciplinary approach to language and nation,” do not appear in any discernable thematic order or grouping. Unfortunately, at less than four pages, the first case-making article is also the shortest article in the book by far (the rest average over 20 pages), which is rather short rations for dealing with such a complex rationale. Still, it seems reasonable to begin this commentary by looking at the three principal constituents of that title: “interdisciplinary,” “language” and “nation.” The term “interdisciplinary” is notoriously ambiguous, but is left largely unexamined here, where it seems to be consistently used to refer to the separate application of several different approaches to a common topic or problem. This perfectly valid understanding of the term is stated explicitly in the very first sentence of the preface: “This interdisciplinary work on language and nation, with its contributions from the fields of linguistics, translatology, history, literature and political science ....” There is, of course, another understanding of “interdisciplinarity,” one which seems to be particularly favoured in the fields of education and knowledge management, where it refers to a hybrid discipline of some kind, forged from parts of two or more other disciplines but internally coherent and greater than the sum of its parts. In these contexts, it is invariably assumed that interdisciplinarity is a Good Thing and anyone involved in bidding for research grants these days is well advised to use the term from time to time, despite the major practical and intellectual obstacle formed by the fact that there is no agreement as to how we might go about defining one discipline, let alone two or more.

中文翻译:

Guri Ellen Arnstein Hjelde Sigmund Kvam Anastasia Parianou John Todd:语言和民族。十字路口和连接

这个多语言合集包括一个非常简短的英语、德语和法语前言和 14 篇文章,其中 6 篇是英语,5 篇是德语,3 篇是法语。其中 10 篇文章来自在挪威任职的学者,两篇在希腊(科孚岛)任职,一篇在芬兰,一篇在苏格兰。主题的选择是高度折衷的,除了第一个,其中编辑着手“为语言和民族的跨学科方法提供案例”,没有出现在任何可辨别的主题顺序或分组中。不幸的是,第一篇案例制作文章不到四页,也是本书迄今为止最短的文章(其余平均超过 20 页),对于处理如此复杂的基本原理来说,这是相当短的口粮。仍然,通过查看该标题的三个主要组成部分来开始这篇评论似乎是合理的:“跨学科”、“语言”和“民族”。“跨学科”这个词是出了名的含糊不清,但在这里基本上没有经过检验,它似乎一直被用来指代几种不同方法对一个共同主题或问题的单独应用。序言的第一句话明确说明了对这个术语的完全有效的理解:“这本关于语言和民族的跨学科著作,其贡献来自语言学、翻译学、历史、文学和政治科学……”当然,对“跨学科”还有另一种理解,这种理解似乎在教育和知识管理领域特别受欢迎,它指的是某种混合学科,由两个或多个其他学科的部分组成,但内部是连贯的,并且大于其各部分的总和。在这些情况下,人们总是假设跨学科是一件好事,并且建议当今参与竞标研究资助的任何人不时使用该术语,尽管存在主要的实践和智力障碍关于我们如何定义一门学科,更不用说两个或更多。
更新日期:2018-03-26
down
wechat
bug