CET - PHYSICS - 2011 VERSION CODE: A - 4

Jzangui

Description

• exposé

1 45o 30o time d is p la c e m e n t O B 8 kg A 2 kg 10 N CET – PHYSICS – 2011 VERSION CODE: A – 4 1. If C be the capacitance and V be the electric potential, then the dimensional formula of CV2 is 1) M1 L – 3 T1 A1 2) M0 L1 T – 2 A0 3) M1 L1 T – 2 A – 1 4) M1 L2 T – 2 A0 Ans: (4) CV2 = Energy  The dimentional formula is ML2 T-2 2.

• tension
• speed of light
• x230sin isin rsin isin
• horizontal table
• planoconvex lens
• tube of smaller diameter
• unknown frequency
• surface

Sujets

• Exposé
• Frequency
• Diameter
• Surface
• Tension

Informations

• Publié par: shawyer
• Nombre de lectures: 19
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

COMPARATIVE LITERATURE:
Method and Perspective
EDITED BY Newton P. Stallknechtand Horst Frenz
Southern Illinois University Press CARBONDALE
-iii-

Questia Media America, Inc. www.questia.com

Publication Information: Book Title: Comparative Literature: Method and Perspective.
Contributors: Horst Frenz - editor, Newton P. Stallknecht - editor. Publisher: Southern Illinois
University Press. Place of Publication: Carbondale, IL. Publication Year: 1961. Page Number: iii.















COPYRIGHT © 1961 by Southern Illinois University Press. All rights reserved.
"Literature and Psychology" © 1961 by Leon Edel. Printed with the permission of the
author.
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 61-11111
Printed in the United States of America by Kingsport Press, Inc., Kingsport, Tenn.
DESIGNED BY ANDOR BRAUN
-iv-





























PREFACE
ALTHOUGH the essays in this volume may be considered independent
contributions, it should be noted that they have been motivated by an interest,
common to all the contributors, in the problems and methods the student of
comparative literature may encounter. In each essay, the author has undertaken
to indicate certain objectives and to characterize certain procedures which he
considers essential in approaching his particular problem; and in so doing, he has
tried to illustrate theoretical statements by including examples drawn from his
own reading and research. As a result these essays may be of considerable
assistance in helping the student, whatever his special interests, to find his way
in this broad area of study.

Comparative literature is, relatively speaking, a young discipline in this country
and accordingly its practitioners are still keenly interested in fixing its objectives
and defining its scope. Professor Remak turns his attention to these two aspects
and gives us a reasoned interpretation of his own, set against other definitions
which are included as background. He has appended to his argument an
annotated list of historical and critical studies, bibliographies, and similar
reference works, which a student of comparative literature will find indispensable.
Professor Seeber supplements the opening essay by considering in detail certain
problems of terminology which all students of comparative literature must face if
they hope to speak a language intelligible to one another and to the pub-
-v-

lic. He warns the students that many terms employed in the discussion of literature have
changed their meaning from period to period and from area to area and must always be
weighed against the background of historical interpretation.
The study of the influence of one writer upon another has long occupied a prominent place
in literary research. However, it has seemed to many critics in recent years that such
studies have been carried to extremes and that there has been too much speculation
about the debt which almost every famous author is said to owe to certain of his
predecessors, immediate and remote. The problem here has been to develop a technique
for the responsible study of literary influence and literary indebtedness. Professor Shaw
undertakes briefly to characterize such a technique and to illustrate its operation with
reference to his own study of Anglo-Russian literary relations. As a result, it is possible to
make a case in defense of this type of research which, when properly executed,
contributes significantly to our understanding and appreciation of certain writers.
While the student of comparative literature should be acquainted with a number of foreign
languages, he will still be deeply concerned with the problem of translation. He must, in
certain cases, himself depend on the use of translations and he will recognize that
translations of important literary works from one language to another constitute a major
avenue of literary influence. In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to the
many problems faced by the translator. Professor Frenz has discussed these problems
emphasizing his belief that translating should be considered an art in itself.
Professor Edel argues that "literature and psychology have come to recognize in our century that they stand upon common ground," and explores the various ways in which
-vi-

this generalization may be supported. The interpretation of human consciousness and
behavior springing from the works of Freud and Jung is shown to be relevant to the study
of contemporary literature--Continental, British, and American. Mr. Edel defends the
proposition that "psychoanalysis has contributed important aids to three facets of literary
study: (1) to criticism itself, (2) to the study of the creative process in literature, (3) to
the writing of biography."
Professor Stallknecht considers the study of literature in its relation to the history of ideas.
He is interested in the way in which philosophical ideas are appropriated or absorbed by
creative writers and in the manner in which certain ideas undergo transformation as they
pass from one period to another. Mr. Stallknecht's orientation is derived from the writings
of the English philosopher R. G. Collingwood and the German critic Erich Auerbach rather
than from the work of A. O. Lovejoy. The latter's notion of a "unit-idea" is considered
critically.

Literature, like any cultural activity, does not and cannot exist in a vacuum, and we must
consider, for example, the relationship between literature and the other arts, especially
music and painting. This is as rewarding a study as that of the relationship between the
literatures of different periods and different countries. Professor Gaither defends this point
of view with a number of illustrations which indicate certain significant connections
between literature and the fine arts. In the course of her discussion, Miss Gaither
comments on a number of critics who, in the tradition of Lessing Laocoön, consider the
several arts in comparison with each other.
What we call "literature" is descended from preliterary forms of expression, when the
spoken word constituted virtually the only mode of communication. Professor Thompson
considers the persistence of these preliterary forms in
-vii-

this generalization may be supported. The interpretation of human consciousness and
behavior springing from the works of Freud and Jung is shown to be relevant to the study
of contemporary literature--Continental, British, and American. Mr. Edel defends the
proposition that "psychoanalysis has contributed important aids to three facets of literary
study: (1) to criticism itself, (2) to the study of the creative process in literature, (3) to
the writing of biography."
Professor Stallknecht considers the study of literature in its relation to the history of ideas.
He is interested in the way in which philosophical ideas are appropriated or absorbed by
creative writers and in the manner in which certain ideas undergo transformation as they
pass from one period to another. Mr. Stallknecht's orientation is derived from the writings

of the English philosopher R. G. Collingwood and the German critic Erich Auerbach rather
than from the work of A. O. Lovejoy. The latter's notion of a "unit-idea" is considered
critically.
Literature, like any cultural activity, does not and cannot exist in a vacuum, and we must
consider, for example, the relationship between literature and the other arts, especially
music and painting. This is as rewarding a study as that of the relationship between the
literatures of different periods and different countries. Professor Gaither defends this point
of view with a number of illustrations which indicate certain significant connections
between literature and the fine arts. In the course of her discussion, Miss Gaither
comments on a number of critics who, in the tradition of Lessing Laocoön, consider the several arts in comparison with each other.
What we call "literature" is descended from preliterary forms of expression, when the
spoken word constituted virtually the only mode of communication. Professor Thompson
considers the persistence of these preliterary forms in
-vii-

modern times and their relation to literature proper. His study ranges from comments on
the composition of such epics as the Iliad and Odyssey to the development and wide
diffusion of folk tales in ancient and modern times. The student of comparative literature
cannot ignore the relationship of literature to the vast body of "unlettered" myths, epics,
and tales studied by the folklorist.
From the time of Aristotle to the present decade, European students have found the
interpretation of tragedy one of the most fascinating problems both in the history and the
philosophy of literature. The historian, the critic, the moralist, and the s