總結/Summary

雅各布森在《結束語》這篇文章中，提出了一個包含六要素的語言學框架，並且按照形式主義一貫的理解，把其中的一個要素對應的功能，解釋為詩性。這是雅各布森解答語言學和詩學對立的形式主義核心問題的最終嘗試：他試圖調和爭論的兩者，並提出一種包容兩者的框架，讓形式主義追求的獨立詩學建基在語言學上。

In his essay Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics (1960), Jakobson proposes a linguistic framework containing the six elements and, in accordance with the usual formalist understanding, interprets the function corresponding to one of them as poetic. This is Jacobson's final attempt to answer the central formalist question of the opposition between linguistics and poetics: he attempts to reconcile the two at issue and proposes a framework that embraces both, allowing the independent poetics of the formalist quest to be grounded in linguistics and thus gain conclusive scientific validity.

我們在第二小節已經批判了他的解釋方案。然而，如果我們移除形式主義的成見，並且沿著從語言學到文學的路線，在語言學六要素理論的基礎上，再思考得遠一點點，我們就能獲得一種新的解釋方案。而這只要求我們簡單地把語言學的六要素一對一地轉譯為文學的六要素，可以做到了。

We have already criticized this interpretative scheme in the second subsection. However, if we remove this formalist stereotype and think a little further along the lines of linguistics to poetics, on the basis of the six elements of linguistics, we can obtain a new interpretative scheme. And this requires simply translating the six elements of linguistics into the six elements of literature, just one by one.

不過，我們思考這樣一個問題。為什麽同樣是從語言學中獲得啟示，結構主義成功地建立了一種解釋整個符號系統，也就是文化，的理論，而形式主義失敗了在解釋一種特殊的符號系統，也就是文學？從重新解釋雅各布森的六要素理論，我們或許可以獲得答案：語言學的資源不能提供特殊性，只能提供普遍性，提供一個普遍的框架。從語言學中尋找詩的特殊性是不可能實現的，雅各布森，以及整個形式主義，都已經向我們顯示了這一點。但如果去尋找能應用於詩學的語言學的普遍框架呢？

However, let us consider this question. Why, again drawing inspiration from linguistics, did structuralism succeed in building a theory that explains an entire sign system, that is, culture, while formalism failed in explaining a particular sign system, that is, literature? From a reinterpretation of Jacobson's six-factor theory, we might gain an answer: the resources of linguistics cannot provide particularity, but only universality, a universal framework. Finding the particularity of the poem in linguistics is impossible to achieve, as Jacobson, and formalism in general, has shown us. But what if one goes in search of a universal framework for linguistics that can be applied to poetics?

因此，我想這就是重讀雅各布森這篇舊文的意義。雖然有一些我們可能已經無法接受的觀點，但依然有著挖掘出的潛力。不僅是雅各布森觀點是這樣，想必俄國形式主義也是這樣。詩性和陌生化的觀點可以被拋棄，但形式主義是不是也有待重新發掘，是不是也具有，能找出一些新東西的潛力呢？通過閱讀雅各布森的文本，我們能得到一種新詩學，那麽俄國形式主義是否也孕育著一種潛在的新詩學呢？這就有待今後進一步的研究告訴我們了。

So, I think this is the point of re-reading this old article by Jakobson, that although there are some ideas that we may no longer be able to accept, there is still the potential to unearth something new. This is not only true of Jakobson』s view, but I suppose it is also true of Russian Formalism. The idea of poetry and estrangement can be discarded, but does Formalism not also have the potential to be rediscovered and to find something new? That is for further research to tell us in the future.

尾注

[1] Roman Jakobson, 「Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics」, in Style in Language, ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok (New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., London, 1960), p.350

[2] 同上 p.356

[3] 同上 p.356

[4] 同上 p.357

[5] 同上 p.356

[6] " Zadaci poetiki," Voprosy teorii literatury: Stat'i 1919-1926 (Leningrad, 1928), p.39·, cited from Peter Steiner, Russian Formalism: A Meta-poetics (1984, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London), p.138

參考文獻

Reference

Roman Jakobson, 「Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics」, in Style in Language, ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok (New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., London, 1960)

雅各布森的原文，中文譯本來自於趙毅衡編的的符號學文學論文集，大概在170-180頁附近。另外這份中譯版只翻譯了前三分之一，後三分之二的內容沒有翻譯和收錄，後面的內容並不是很重要就是了。

Terry Eagleton, Literary Theory: An Introduction (London, Blackwell Press, 1996)

中譯本這本書叫20世紀文學理論，特雷伊格爾頓的作品。

Victor Erich, Russian Formalism: History and Doctrine (Pair, New York, The Hague Mouton, 1980)

我記得是有中譯本的，厄裏希著。

Peter Steiner, Russian Formalism: A Meta-poetics (New York, Cornell University Press, 1984)

彼得施泰納的《俄國形式主義：一種元詩學》，這本書徹底改變了我對形式主義的印象，可惜沒有中譯本。

Jonathan D Culler, Structuralist poetics: structuralism, linguistics, and the study of literature (London, Routledge Press, 2002)

喬納森卡勒，《結構主義詩學》。