Čínská literárnost: pojem a téma // Chinese literariness: concept and theme

Clicks: 267
ID: 105637
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The works of critics as dissimilar, in almost every other respect, as Shklovsky, Tynianov, Vodicka, Paul de Man, etc. show the usefulness of “comparative approach” to the general concept of “literariness”, however heterogeneously it may be put to work. The author of the essay argues that the distinction Literariness vs. Literature corresponds with the idea of autonomous worlds of literariness from the typological point of view in the global inequality; it presents the field of “comparative literature” as a way of reading and re-reading in unexpected ways of devices and vices. Chinese literariness as a typological, historically closed and theoretically productive in-between of Sinology and comparative literature.
Reference Key
kral2017nskasvt Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Král, Oldřich;
Journal svět literatury
Year 2017
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.