Questions related to Philology
Is not the term anti-Semitic, as it is used today to refer to bigotry against Jews, used loosely and erroneously? “Anti-Semitic” literally and technically means being opposed to someone who speaks a Semitic language (e.g. Arabic and Hebrew). My question is: why then was the term “anti-Semitic” coined in 19th century Germany to refer – rather confusingly – to a phenomenon of hatred of Jews in Europe who, however, did not speak a Semitic language at the time? Do we know with any certainty and rigour how much knowledge of philology and linguistics Wilhelm Marr, the German writer who coined the term “anti-Semitic” in 1879, had?
In researching the enduring place of racism in society, I have been impressed with Leon Poliakov's 1971 analysis of various social mythologies/genealogies in "The Aryan Myth." I am also interested in hearing other perspectives on the "stickiness factor" of these ideas.
I am 1st year PhD student of foreign philology specialty and it is totally new field for me, so if you share any important and reliable sources on text analysis, I would be grateful.
Hello, RG Colleagues!
I have a peculiar philological question as follows.
How to know whether what one says, irrespective of matter, is true?
Is there any scientific sort of "truth-meter"?
This question is motivated from a panoptic observation that, a "fallacy", on majority support, becomes an absolute "truth"; and vice versa.
It strikes me as if discourse analysis is concerned with all that is taking place or is implicated in discourse; that is, all that ‘lies hidden’, as Michel Foucault would say, in the depths and in fact all levels of discourse, to enable it ‘to emerge and become clearly visible’. In this case, discourse analysis is to proceed in two stages: exploration, for example by means of philology, and secondly by description. But quite other tools and procedures than these are probably called for in approaches to discourse where the guiding principle is to point out the item of communication, whether intended or not, which is received consciously or subliminally, showing how the transmission and reception are achieved. Which of these two approaches describes adequately the task of discourse analysis; or should we rather be searching for a practice that combines the explanation of all that is going on in discourse with focus on information content that is passed across or garnered?
In my corpus of Dutch Creole texts there are several eighteenth century variants of the same text. However, the chronological distance between the oldest and the youngest variants is only about forty years. In traditional philology, for instance of medieval texts, fifty years between the variants was already considered to be too close for reliable diachronic research. Can you help me with related literature? Thanks in advance!
Here's my Bibliography of Literary Theory, Criticism and Philology. It includes listings on many (very many) topics, but for those interested in narrative, you can find listings on narrative theory and narrative genres under "Subjects: Genres: Narrative"
I was wondering if anyone can suggest some good sources about attitudes towards languages in general, and about attitudes towards native language among students. I'll have to make a questionnaire for the research and now I'm looking for non-Serbian sources on this.
I would like to find out the nature of language acquisition and perception of a language where word meaning is determined by lexical tones and if it is possible to teach tones to students who have hearing disorders and if anybody has already done that. Do you have any experience or advice?