Digitale Landesbibliothek Berlin Logo

JLT-Gespräch: Die Praxis der Literaturtheorie / Geulen, Eva (CC BY)

Access restriction

There is no access restriction for this record.

Copyright

CC BY: Attribution 4.0 International. You can find more information here.

Bibliographic data

fullscreen : JLT-Gespräch: Die Praxis der Literaturtheorie / Geulen, Eva (CC BY)

Access restriction

There is no access restriction for this record.

Copyright

CC BY: Attribution 4.0 International. You can find more information here.

Periodical

Title:
Journal of literary theory
Publication:
Berlin: ˜deœ Gruyter
Note:
Gesehen am 22.03.23
Ersch. 2x jährl.
Archivierung/Langzeitarchivierung gewährleistet
355!URL-Ä(30-01-12)355!URL-Ä(22-03-23)
Beitr. teilw. in Dt., teilw. in Engl.
Scope:
Online-Ressource
ISSN:
1862-8990
ZDB-ID:
2400367-0 ZDB
VÖBB-Katalog:
15143263
Keywords:
Literaturtheorie ; Zeitschrift ; Zeitschrift
Classification:
Literatur
Collection:
Literatur
Copyright:
Rights reserved
Accessibility:
Free Access
Title:
Journal of literary theory
Publication:
Berlin: ˜deœ Gruyter
Note:
Gesehen am 22.03.23
Ersch. 2x jährl.
Archivierung/Langzeitarchivierung gewährleistet
355!URL-Ä(30-01-12)355!URL-Ä(22-03-23)
Beitr. teilw. in Dt., teilw. in Engl.
Scope:
Online-Ressource
ISSN:
1862-8990
ZDB-ID:
2400367-0 ZDB
VÖBB-Katalog:
15143263
Keywords:
Literaturtheorie ; Zeitschrift ; Zeitschrift
Classification:
Literatur
Collection:
Literatur
Copyright:
Rights reserved
Accessibility:
Free Access

Article

Author:
Geulen, Eva
Martus, Steffen
Spoerhase, Carlos
Title:
JLT-Gespräch: Die Praxis der Literaturtheorie
Publication:
Berlin: ˜deœ Gruyter, 2024
Language:
German
Information:
Abstract: JLT Talks offers a new format for discussing current topics in the field of literary theory. It was inspired by the focus of this special issue, which foregrounds the practice of literary theory. Although the amount of praxeological work has increased in recent years, there are only a few studies that deal specifically with literary theory. The participants in the discussion – Eva Geulen, Steffen Martus, and Carlos Spoerhase – explore the challenges facing a practical analysis of literary theory. They discuss what it might mean to move from the concept of theory to the concept of theorizing, and where the expected advantages and possible deficits of a praxeological approach and reconstruction of theorizing might lie. One focus is put on the questions of how theorizing can be conceptualized, which indicators are to be assumed, to what extent it differs from other practices in literary studies, and which forms and norms of theorizing should be analysed praxeologically. The discussion outlines a spectrum of theorizing practices, ranging from the establishment and implementation of ›grand theories‹ and the theoretical reflection of conceptual foundations to smaller-scale practices, such as abstraction and generalization. In addition, the analytical view of the activities and claims associated with ›theory‹ is distinguished from literary theorists’ self-reflection (self-understanding). Various features are discussed which indicate practices of theorizing, including abstracting, generalizing, explaining and disciplining scientific exchange. In addition, the discussants consider to what extent there are different ›degrees‹ of theorizing, and emphasize the need to distinguish between theory as a result and theory as an activity or process. As proposed, theorizing can be understood as an activity that shapes processes of literary research as a whole and is determined by the subject matter. It becomes clear that practices of theorizing should not be viewed in isolation, but rather in their interplay with other practices, especially practices of interpretation. Further questions that are addressed include the following: What do ›grand theories‹ with general explanatory claims such as deconstruction or systems theory achieve, and to what extent have they changed literary studies? How can theorizing be better conveyed in university teaching? The ›standard‹ approach – reading theoretical texts, deriving methodological consequences from them, and applying them to literary texts – is considered to be inadequate. Instead, in teaching, stronger emphasis should be put on theorizing as an intellectual and collaborative activity. This could be achieved by integrating practices of trial and error into the teaching of theory. The advantage of a theoretical orientation, in the sense of abstraction as well as the generalization of problems and statements, is undisputed, especially with regard to communication and exchange with the international academic community: a common theoretical basis seems to promote international exchange, while facilitating interdisciplinarity. Nevertheless, the question arises as to whether there is a certain ›level of theory‹ that guarantees international and interdisciplinary connectivity. What costs are associated with a specific level of generalization? To what extent is the development of abstract ›grand theories‹ driven by a striving for symbolic capital? Finally, the notorious question of the material required for a comprehensive praxeological analysis of theorizing is addressed.
Scope:
Online-Ressource
Note:
Open Access
Archivierung/Langzeitarchivierung gewährleistet
Keywords:
Praxeologie ; Theoretisieren ; Theoriegeschichte ; Wissenschaftskommunikation ; Lehre
Classification:
Literatur
Sonstiges
URN:
urn:nbn:de:101:1-2409261546029.174841317822
Collection:
Literatur
Sonstiges
Copyright:
CC BY
Accessibility:
Free Access
Author:
Geulen, Eva
Martus, Steffen
Spoerhase, Carlos
Title:
JLT-Gespräch: Die Praxis der Literaturtheorie
Publication:
Berlin: ˜deœ Gruyter, 2024
Language:
German
Information:
Abstract: JLT Talks offers a new format for discussing current topics in the field of literary theory. It was inspired by the focus of this special issue, which foregrounds the practice of literary theory. Although the amount of praxeological work has increased in recent years, there are only a few studies that deal specifically with literary theory. The participants in the discussion – Eva Geulen, Steffen Martus, and Carlos Spoerhase – explore the challenges facing a practical analysis of literary theory. They discuss what it might mean to move from the concept of theory to the concept of theorizing, and where the expected advantages and possible deficits of a praxeological approach and reconstruction of theorizing might lie. One focus is put on the questions of how theorizing can be conceptualized, which indicators are to be assumed, to what extent it differs from other practices in literary studies, and which forms and norms of theorizing should be analysed praxeologically. The discussion outlines a spectrum of theorizing practices, ranging from the establishment and implementation of ›grand theories‹ and the theoretical reflection of conceptual foundations to smaller-scale practices, such as abstraction and generalization. In addition, the analytical view of the activities and claims associated with ›theory‹ is distinguished from literary theorists’ self-reflection (self-understanding). Various features are discussed which indicate practices of theorizing, including abstracting, generalizing, explaining and disciplining scientific exchange. In addition, the discussants consider to what extent there are different ›degrees‹ of theorizing, and emphasize the need to distinguish between theory as a result and theory as an activity or process. As proposed, theorizing can be understood as an activity that shapes processes of literary research as a whole and is determined by the subject matter. It becomes clear that practices of theorizing should not be viewed in isolation, but rather in their interplay with other practices, especially practices of interpretation. Further questions that are addressed include the following: What do ›grand theories‹ with general explanatory claims such as deconstruction or systems theory achieve, and to what extent have they changed literary studies? How can theorizing be better conveyed in university teaching? The ›standard‹ approach – reading theoretical texts, deriving methodological consequences from them, and applying them to literary texts – is considered to be inadequate. Instead, in teaching, stronger emphasis should be put on theorizing as an intellectual and collaborative activity. This could be achieved by integrating practices of trial and error into the teaching of theory. The advantage of a theoretical orientation, in the sense of abstraction as well as the generalization of problems and statements, is undisputed, especially with regard to communication and exchange with the international academic community: a common theoretical basis seems to promote international exchange, while facilitating interdisciplinarity. Nevertheless, the question arises as to whether there is a certain ›level of theory‹ that guarantees international and interdisciplinary connectivity. What costs are associated with a specific level of generalization? To what extent is the development of abstract ›grand theories‹ driven by a striving for symbolic capital? Finally, the notorious question of the material required for a comprehensive praxeological analysis of theorizing is addressed.
Scope:
Online-Ressource
Note:
Open Access
Archivierung/Langzeitarchivierung gewährleistet
Keywords:
Praxeologie ; Theoretisieren ; Theoriegeschichte ; Wissenschaftskommunikation ; Lehre
Classification:
Literatur
Sonstiges
URN:
urn:nbn:de:101:1-2409261546029.174841317822
Collection:
Literatur
Sonstiges
Copyright:
CC BY
Accessibility:
Free Access

Contents

Table of contents

  • Zur Erinnerung an Rudolf Virchow / Virchow, Rudolf (Public Domain)
  • Cover
  • Photograph: Rudolf Virchow im 28. Lebensjahre
  • Title page
  • Preface
  • Das Karthaus vor Schivelbein (1843)
  • Zur Geschichte von Schivelbein (1847)
  • Schivelbeiner Altertümer (1866)
  • Illustration: Schivelbein in der Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts (aus Matthäus Merians Topographia)
  • Photograph: Rudolf Virchows Geburtshaus (jetzt abgerissen)
  • Photograph: Blick vom Markte auf die Pfarrkirche und das Geburtshaus Virchows in Schivelbein
  • Photograph: Das Steintor in Schivelbein
  • Photograph: Das Schloß des Deutschen Ordens in Schivelbein, seit 1455 Sitz der märkischen Landvögte
  • ColorChart

Full text

RE Zentral- Landeær ιναα Berlin
41244555
109

Buchbinderen Ens
Radosszels
v s *

Saurofro
2502
            

Downloads

Downloads

Full record

ALTO TEI Full text PDF (compressed)
TOC
Mirador

This page

PDF Image Preview Image Small Image Medium Image Master ALTO TEI Full text Mirador

Image fragment

Link to the viewer page with highlighted frame Link to IIIF image fragment

Formats and links

Formats and links

The metadata is available in various formats. There are also links to external systems.

Formats

METS MARC XML Dublin Core

Links

OPAC DFG-Viewer

Cite

Cite

The following citation links are available for the entire work or the page displayed:

Full record

This page

Citation recommendation

Please check the citation before using it.

Image manipulation tools

Tools not available

Share image region

Use the mouse to select the image area you want to share.
Please select which information should be copied to the clipboard by clicking on the link:
  • Link to the viewer page with highlighted frame
  • Link to IIIF image fragment

Contact

Have you found an error? Do you have any suggestions for making our service even better or any other questions about this page? Please write to us and we'll make sure we get back to you.

How much is one plus two?:

I hereby confirm the use of my personal data within the context of the enquiry made.