• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Writing the South Seas: Postcolonialism and the Nanyang Literary Imagination.
【24h】

Writing the South Seas: Postcolonialism and the Nanyang Literary Imagination.

机译：写作南洋：后殖民主义与南洋文学想象力。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Postcolonial studies have increasingly drawn upon the spatial imaginaries of tropical islands and archipelagoes to develop border-crossing theories of the colonial encounter. Such theories aim to transcend the colonizing epistemologies of northern empires still hegemonic in the contemporary formation of global postcoloniality. Largely drawn from authors and critics writing in the colonial languages of former European empires, these studies offer insight into the fraught historical processes of linguistic appropriation, indigenization, and creolization as well as the roles these processes play in the imagination and affirmation of a local culture and land/seascape. Southeast Asia, despite its complexly layered history of colonialism and migration, its vast cultural and linguistic diversity, and its amalgam of peninsular and archipelagic landscapes, has been marginal at best as a source for comparative postcolonial analysis. Nanyang, or the "South Seas" (the traditional Chinese term for Southeast Asia), was the historical destination of a mass settler movement originating not in Europe but another northern civilization: China. Unlike "Southeast Asia," a term whose perspective reflects Europe's colonizing vision of the "Orient," Nanyang implicitly references China's historical imagination of the tropics to the south. This comparative analysis follows the Nanyang literary imagination as it travels across historical boundaries from China to colonial and postcolonial Southeast Asia, engaging issues pertinent to local society while also implicitly writing "back" to multiple sites of discursive hegemony, such as China and the West.;The appropriation, indigenization, and creolization of Nanyang as a spatial imagination moves beyond the dialogic engagement of colonizer and colonized to reveal complex historical convergences of maritime imperialism, settler colonialism, and indigenous and diasporic nationalisms. Foundational modern Chinese authors traveling in colonial Southeast Asia deploy the multicultural and multilingual qualities of "South Seas color" to imagine and reflect upon the ethnocentric pitfalls of diasporic nationalism. Postcolonial Sinophone Malaysian authors marginalized and minoritized within a hierarchical model of state multiculturalism evoke Nanyang to illustrate and challenge diaspora as a unitary category of identity while emphasizing the importance of creolization and local ecology in the affirmation of cultural distinctiveness. Postcolonial Singaporean authors evoke Nanyang to translingually expose the colonial racial logic operative in the state's discourse of the mother tongue, while contemporary Thai writers draw upon Nanyang to demonstrate processes of translingual creolization that are foundational to the nation but elided in Thailand's dual discourses of Chinese assimilation and Sino-Thai biculturalism. In ways specific to discursive context, the Nanyang literary imagination is an evolving and meaningful trope for postcolonial writers in exposing and transcending colonizing and essentialist equivalences of language, ethnicity, and nationality that rob communities of their dynamic histories of localization.
机译：后殖民研究越来越多地利用热带岛屿和群岛的空间假想来发展殖民遭遇的跨界理论。这样的理论旨在超越在当今全球后殖民主义形成中仍然霸权的北方帝国的殖民认识论。这些研究主要来自前欧洲帝国殖民地语言的作者和评论家，这些研究提供了深入的语言占有，本土化和克里奥尔化的历史过程，以及这些过程在想象和肯定本地文化中发挥的作用和陆地/海景。东南亚尽管有着复杂的殖民主义和移民历史，其巨大的文化和语言多样性，以及半岛和群岛景观的混合物，但作为后殖民比较分析的来源，充其量只是边缘。南洋，或“南洋”（东南亚的传统中文术语），是大规模移民运动的历史目的地，它不起源于欧洲，而起源于另一个北方文明：中国。与“东南亚”一词不同，它的观点反映了欧洲对“东方”的殖民观，而南洋则暗指中国对南方热带地区的历史想象。这种比较分析遵循了南洋文学的想象力，因为它跨越了从中国到殖民地和后殖民东南亚的历史界限，涉及与当地社会有关的问题，同时还隐含地将“回头”写回到了中国和西方等多个话语霸权的地点。 ；作为空间想象力的​​对南洋的挪用，本土化和克里奥尔化，超越了殖民者的对话和殖民化，揭示了海上帝国主义，定居者殖民主义以及土著和移民民族主义的复杂历史交汇。在东南亚殖民地旅行的现代中国基础作家运用“南洋色彩”的多文化和多语言特质来想象和反思流散民族主义的以民族为中心的陷阱。在国家多元文化主义的分层模型中，马来西亚后殖民华语研究的作者被边缘化和少数民族化，这使南洋人将散居者作为一个统一的身份类别加以说明和挑战，同时强调了克里奥尔化和地方生态在确认文化独特性中的重要性。后殖民时期的新加坡作家唤起南洋人，以语言方式揭露该州话语中的殖民地种族逻辑，而当代泰国作家则以南洋人为基础，来证明跨语言的文艺化过程，这是国家的基础，但它却掩盖了泰国对华同化的双重话语。和中泰双重文化主义。在特定的话语环境中，南洋文学的想象力对于后殖民作家来说是一个不断发展的有意义的隐喻，它揭示并超越了殖民，本质主义等价的语言，种族和国籍等价物，从而剥夺了社区其本土化的动态历史。

著录项

  • 作者

    Bernards, Brian Christopher.;

  • 作者单位

    University of California, Los Angeles.;

  • 授予单位 University of California, Los Angeles.;
  • 学科 Literature Comparative.;Asian Studies.;Literature Asian.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2011
  • 页码 504 p.
  • 总页数 504
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号