Abstract
Anlam edebiyat eleştiri teorilerinin en önemli tartışma konularından bir tanesidir. Her bir
teori anlamı belirli bir temele dayandırarak gerçekliğe ulaşmayı amaçlar. Dış dünya ile metin
arasındaki ilişkiyi irdeleyen tarihsel kuramlar anlamı metnin dışında yer alan toplumsal
bağlam, dönemdeki felsefi tartışmalar ve edebiyat akımlarında ararlar ve metnin yapısal
özellikleri üzerinde durmazlar. Bu yaklaşımı benimseyen eleştirmenler edebiyatı hayatın
bir yansıması olarak görür ve her bir metnin de- antik dönemde olduğu gibi, anlamının tarih ve toplum tarafından belirlendiğini düşünürler. Yapısalcılık, Yeni Eleştiri Kuramı ve
Formalistler için ise anlamın tarafsız olarak incelenebilmesi için metnin kendi yapısına
bakılmalıdır. Bu kuramı benimseyenler metin dışı yaklaşımların tamamının taraflı bir
değerlendirmeye sahip olduğunu, bu nedenle de bilimsel olamayacağını savunurlar. Okurtepkisi
kuramında ise eleştirmenler yazarın okura karşı tutumu, okur türleri ve okurların
metindeki farklı anlamları ortaya çıkarırken içinde bulundukları süreç, okuma gelenekleri,
metin eleştirisi ve metnin statüsü gibi konulara odaklanarak anlamı açıklamaya çalışırlar.
Buna göre bir metnin anlamını yazar-okur-metin etkileşimi ortaya çıkarır.
Keywords
References
- Abrams, M.A., A Glossary of Literary Terms New York: Harcourt Brace College Publisher, 1993.
- Bruns, G.L., Hermeneutics Ancient and Modern New Haven: Yale University, Press, 1992. Culler, J. Structuralist Poetics, Structuralism, Linguistics and the Study of Literature Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1976.
- Fish, S., Is There a Text in this Class? Harvard University Press, London, Massachusetts, 1980.
- Guerin, W.L., A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature Oxford: OUP, 1999. Ingarden, R. The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art, Translated by Ruth Ann Cowley and Kenneth Olson Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1973.
- Poulet, G., Criticism Aand the Experience of Integrity, In the Structuralist Controversy: The Language of Criticism and Science of Man, Edited by Richard, Macksey and Eugenio Donato Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1972.
- Selden, S., The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism Cambridge: CUP, 1995.
- Tompkins, P.J., Reader-Response Criticism, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1994.
- Topakkaya, A. W. Dilthey and His Philosophy, Say Publisch. İstanbul 2016.
- Topakkaya; A. “Philosophical Hermemenutics”, Flsf Dergisi, volume 4, pp.75-92.
Abstract
The central issue in nearly all critical approaches is focused on the problem of meaning; each
critical theory places the meaning of a text in a certain ground and tries to reach at truth
with reference to the meaning. Theories that concern themselves with the external facts
such as historical and biographical information, social context, philosophical and literary
trends influential during the time of text’s production search for meaning and truth outside
the text, thus do not pay much attention to the textual context. They argue that poetry –
literature- is an imitation of real life, therefore, meaning of a text is historically and socially
defined. Theories, like Formalism, New-criticism, Structuralism, on the other hand, attack
the former theories for their lack of textual, formal and literary qualities claiming that
theories of these kinds bring subjective view, therefore, cannot be counted as a scientific
and objective interpretation. Reader response criticism deals with author’s attitude towards
the reader, kinds of reader, the role of different readers in the determination of meaning, the
relation of reading conventions to textual criticism, and status of a literary text. Meaning in
the text is a result of interaction between reader, text and author.
References
- Abrams, M.A., A Glossary of Literary Terms New York: Harcourt Brace College Publisher, 1993.
- Bruns, G.L., Hermeneutics Ancient and Modern New Haven: Yale University, Press, 1992. Culler, J. Structuralist Poetics, Structuralism, Linguistics and the Study of Literature Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1976.
- Fish, S., Is There a Text in this Class? Harvard University Press, London, Massachusetts, 1980.
- Guerin, W.L., A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature Oxford: OUP, 1999. Ingarden, R. The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art, Translated by Ruth Ann Cowley and Kenneth Olson Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1973.
- Poulet, G., Criticism Aand the Experience of Integrity, In the Structuralist Controversy: The Language of Criticism and Science of Man, Edited by Richard, Macksey and Eugenio Donato Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1972.
- Selden, S., The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism Cambridge: CUP, 1995.
- Tompkins, P.J., Reader-Response Criticism, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1994.
- Topakkaya, A. W. Dilthey and His Philosophy, Say Publisch. İstanbul 2016.
- Topakkaya; A. “Philosophical Hermemenutics”, Flsf Dergisi, volume 4, pp.75-92.
Details
| Journal Section | Articles |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | January 18, 2018 |
| Submission Date | December 4, 2017 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2018 Issue: 8 |
