ABSTRACT

This paper reads two texts, ‘The Argentine Writer and Tradition’ by Jorge Luis Borges and Monolingualism of the Other by Jacques Derrida, to examine the tension between singularity and specificity in comparative work, particularly in comparisons between Jewishness and postcoloniality. ‘Singularity’ is understood here as uniqueness, while ‘specificity’ is the factors that define that uniqueness. Borges’ text serves as an example of the potential pitfalls of comparative work that is inconsistent in its recognition of singularity and specificity. Borges affords Jewish writers singularity, but not specificity, and so ends up denying the very elements of Jewish culture his argument appears to valorise, at the expense of his celebration of the postcolonial condition. Borges’ comparison therefore undermines its own logic. Derrida, meanwhile, appears to exaggerate one particular colonised Jewish community’s exceptionality, but through this apparent focus on the specificity of one group at the expense of others, offers a potential model for how to work comparatively yet still recognise the specificity of multiple groups.

摘要

这篇论文阅读了两篇文章，豪尔赫·路易斯·博尔赫斯的《阿根廷作家与传统》和他者的单语制雅克·德里达 (Jacques Derrida) 着，探讨比较工作中的奇异性和特殊性之间的紧张关系，特别是在犹太人性和后殖民性之间的比较中。“奇点”在这里被理解为唯一性，而“特异性”是定义该唯一性的因素。博尔赫斯的文本作为比较工作潜在陷阱的一个例子，在其对独特性和特殊性的认识上是不一致的。博尔赫斯赋予犹太作家独特性，但没有特殊性，因此最终否认了他的论点似乎站得住脚的犹太文化元素，而牺牲了他对后殖民状况的庆祝。因此，博尔赫斯的比较破坏了它自己的逻辑。与此同时，德里达似乎夸大了一个特定的被殖民犹太社区的特殊性，