Pokaż uproszczony rekord

dc.contributor.authorPokrywka, Rafał
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-10T12:33:33Z
dc.date.available2016-10-10T12:33:33Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.citationŚwiat i Słowo 2015, nr 2, s. 135-145.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://repozytorium.ukw.edu.pl/handle/item/3853
dc.description.abstractThe popular usage of the terms „autobiographism” and „autobiographical” in numerous papers on the work by Czesław Miłosz suggests that there is a general consensus about their meaning. Yet there are many meanings as well as many methods of researching into the autobiographical element: the immanent, the declarative, the referential, the intertextual, the autobiographical pact and the phantasm. Every of these approaches situates the research in one of the great paradigms of literary studies, first of all within the opposition of hermeneutics and deconstruction. Professional Miłosz studies tend to ignore these distinctions. Thus the assertion of their discursive character seems questionable.en_US
dc.language.isoplen_US
dc.subjectCzesław Miłoszen_US
dc.subjectautobiographismen_US
dc.subjectautobiographyen_US
dc.subjectdiscourseen_US
dc.subjecthermeneuticsen_US
dc.subjectdeconstructionen_US
dc.subjectintentionen_US
dc.subjectautobiografizmen_US
dc.subjectautobiografiaen_US
dc.subjectdyskursen_US
dc.subjecthermeneutykaen_US
dc.subjectdekonstrukcjaen_US
dc.subjectintencjaen_US
dc.titleAutobiografizm(y) Miłosza - metody badań, konflikty interpretacjien_US
dc.title.alternativeMilosz’s autobiographism(s) - methods of analysis, conflicts of interpretationsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Pliki tej pozycji

Thumbnail

Pozycja umieszczona jest w następujących kolekcjach

Pokaż uproszczony rekord