Myth has a convoluted etymological history in terms of its origins, meanings, and functions. Throughout this essay, I explore the signification, structure, and essence of myth in terms of its source, force, form, object, and teleology derived from archaic ontology. Here, I offer a theoretic typology of myth by engaging the work of contemporary scholar, Robert A. Segal, who places fine distinctions on criteria of explanation versus interpretation when theorizing about myth historically derived from methodologies employed in analytic philosophy and the philosophy of science. Through my analysis of an explanandum and an explanans , I argue that both interpretation and explanation are acts of explication that signify the ontological significance, truth, and psychic reality of myth in both individuals and social collectives. I conclude that, in essence, myth is a form of inner sense.

中文翻译：

---

神话的本质

就其起源，意义和功能而言，神话具有令人费解的词源历史。在整篇文章中，我将从起源于古代本体的神话的来源，力，形式，对象和目的论方面探讨神话的含义，结构和本质。在这里，我通过邀请当代学者罗伯特·塞加尔（Robert A. Segal）的工作来提供神话的理论类型学，他在解释历史上从分析哲学和科学哲学中使用的方法论得出的神话时，对解释和解释的标准进行了很好的区分。通过对一个解释词和一个解释词的分析，我认为解释和解释都是说明性的行为，这些行为表示神话在个体和社会集体中的本体论意义，真理和心理现实。我的结论是，从本质上讲，