式样哲学
The Philosophy of Style

  • 作   者:

    赫伯特·斯宾塞
    Herbert Spencer

  • 出版社:

    外语教学与研究出版社
    Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press

  • 语   言:

    中文 / 英文 / 双语

  • 支   持:

  • 电子书:

    ¥5.90

  • 0(0人评过)
  •   评论(0)
  •   读后感(0)

开创了写作上形式主义的潮流。

《式样哲学》开创了写作上形式主义的潮流。他高度关注英语句子的各个部分的正当排列,定立有效写作的指引。斯宾塞的目标是把散文从“阻力与惯性”释放出来。读者不因吃力研讨上文下理及句子的精确意义而缓慢下来。透过这样方式作家能够达到最高沟通效率。这成为修辞学上形式主义者最权威的支持。

This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the original. Due to its age, it may contain imperfections such as marks, notations, marginalia and flawed pages. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions that are true to the original work.

赫伯特·斯宾塞(Herbert Spencer,1820年4月27日–1903年12月8日) ,英国哲学家。他为人所共知的就是“社会达尔文主义之父”,他提出的一套学说把进化理论适者生存应用在社会学上尤其是教育及阶级斗争。但是,他的著作对很多课题都有贡献,包括规范、形而上学、宗教、政治、修辞、生物和心理学等等。在斯宾塞的时代存在许多著名哲学家和科学家,譬如约翰·斯图亚特·穆勒(John Stewart Mill)、汤马士·亨利·赫胥黎和查尔斯·达尔文都是当代知名的人物。在理论上的阐述英国哲学家,进化论的先驱,先于达尔文。据说斯宾塞比较厌恶柏拉图学说,他那句“即使三流小说家,也会比他(指柏拉图)强”,无疑是对柏拉图的侮辱。这大概是因为斯宾塞是一个怀疑论者,而柏却是一个攻击怀疑论的辨证论者。另外,杰克·伦敦对斯宾塞不无推崇,在其代表作《马丁·伊登》中,杰克·伦敦对斯宾塞不无赞美。

Herbert Spencer (27 April 1820 – 8 December 1903) was an English philosopher, biologist, anthropologist, sociologist, and prominent classical liberal political theorist of the Victorian era.

特里斯特拉姆•项狄的父亲能言善辩却不懂形式逻辑。在评论这个似乎矛盾的现象时,项狄说:“我这位可敬的家庭教师,还有他学术团体里的其他两三位同仁,连自己使用的工具是什么都不知道,竟然还能效仿着使用它——这真是个奇迹。”斯特恩的言下之意是,了解辩论规则未必造就优秀辩者,优秀辩者亦未必需要通晓辩论原则。这一观点毋庸置疑。在语法上同样如此。诚如莱瑟姆博士在批评林德利•默里的学校日常练习时,恰如其分地评论道:“粗言鄙语是个应该预防的错误;但防治之法,在于培养习惯而非制定规则。”同样,美文佳作更多倚赖的是实践与天资,而非通晓写作法则。清晰的头脑、敏捷的思维、灵敏的耳朵,几乎让所有修辞手法显得多余。每天耳濡目染优美语句,自然会或多或少学着运用类似语句。倘若智力上有某种独癖,比如语言记忆有欠缺,又或逻辑思维不清晰,又或条理顺序性差,又或建设性才智缺乏;那么,再多教导也无法弥补这些缺陷。然而,熟悉文体原则却有望产生一些实际效果。这一过程尽管漫长,但是努力遵从法则一定会显现成效。如果润饰文章别无他法,那么,获取明辨美丑的知识则大有裨益。

Commenting on the seeming incongruity between his father’s argumentative powers and his ignorance of formal logic, Tristram Shandy says:—“It was a matter of just wonder with my worthy tutor, and two or three fellows of that learned society, that a man who knew not so much as the names of his tools, should be able to work after that fashion with them.” Sterne’s intended implication that a knowledge of the principles of reasoning neither makes, nor is essential to, a good reasoner, is doubtless true. Thus, too, is it with grammar. As Dr. Latham, condemning the usual school-drill in Lindley Murray, rightly remarks: “Gross vulgarity is a fault to be prevented; but the proper prevention is to be got from habit—not rules.” Similarly, there can be little question that good composition is far less dependent upon acquaintance with its laws, than upon practice and natural aptitude. A clear head, a quick imagination, and a sensitive ear, will go far towards making all rhetorical precepts needless. He who daily hears and reads well-framed sentences, will naturally more or less tend to use similar ones. And where there exists any mental idiosyncrasy—where there is a deficient verbal memory, or an inadequate sense of logical dependence, or but little perception of order, or a lack of constructive ingenuity; no amount of instruction will remedy the defect. Nevertheless, some practical result may be expected from a familiarity with the principles of style. The endeavour to conform to laws may tell, though slowly. And if in no other way, yet, as facilitating revision, a knowledge of the thing to be achieved—a clear idea of what constitutes a beauty, and what a blemish—cannot fail to be of service.

  • 第一章 语言有力的原因在于脑力的节省

  • 第二章 语言有力的原因在于节省大脑感知力

  • Part I Causes of Force in Language Which Depend Upon Economy of the Mental Energies

  • Part II Causes of Force in Language Which Depend Upon Economy of the Mental Sensibilities

    暂时还没有读后感,等待第一篇…