WEKO3
アイテム
{"_buckets": {"deposit": "a754530e-7d6a-4670-9f68-8b360a2c8da9"}, "_deposit": {"created_by": 14, "id": "3336", "owners": [14], "pid": {"revision_id": 0, "type": "depid", "value": "3336"}, "status": "published"}, "_oai": {"id": "oai:seijo.repo.nii.ac.jp:00003336", "sets": ["788"]}, "author_link": ["8299", "8300"], "item_10002_biblio_info_7": {"attribute_name": "書誌情報", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"bibliographicIssueDates": {"bibliographicIssueDate": "2012-03", "bibliographicIssueDateType": "Issued"}, "bibliographicIssueNumber": "17/18", "bibliographicPageEnd": "15", "bibliographicPageStart": "1", "bibliographic_titles": [{"bibliographic_title": "成城美学美術史"}]}]}, "item_10002_description_24": {"attribute_name": "ページ属性", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_description": "P(論文)", "subitem_description_type": "Other"}]}, "item_10002_description_5": {"attribute_name": "抄録", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_description": "R. G. Collingwood in The Principles of Art (1938) discusses Plato\u0027s theory of poetry in Republic 10, coming to the general conclusion that not poetry as a whole but only the representative part of it was banished from his ideal state. The three footnotes (pages 46 and 48) given in this connection on grammatical interpretation of specific passages in the original Greek text catch the reader\u0027s eye with their disproportionate minuteness. This paper attempts to make clear his motive for this by examining his reading of the original passages as well as the framework in which the subject is dealt with in The Principles of Art, by comparing it with his earlier essay \"Plato\u0027s Philosophy of Art\", to which he expressly refers in one of the three notes, and by matching his theory of art and representation with that of Plato\u0027s. These investigations show that Collingwood, while mostly keeping sound in philological terms, wanted to interpret Plato\u0027s criticism of representation to conform to his own conception of it. According to Collingwood, Plato failed to distinguish between magical representation and amusement representation, with the result that Plato attacked representation at large, instead, as he should, of amusement representation only. It was under such a scheme that the modern philosopher gave the seemingly superfluous philological notes.", "subitem_description_type": "Abstract"}]}, "item_10002_description_6": {"attribute_name": "内容記述", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_description": "R. G. Collingwood in The Principles of Art (1938) discusses Plato\u0027s theory of poetry in Republic 10, coming to the general conclusion that not poetry as a whole but only the representative part of it was banished from his ideal state. The three footnotes (pages 46 and 48) given in this connection on grammatical interpretation of specific passages in the original Greek text catch the reader\u0027s eye with their disproportionate minuteness. This paper attempts to make clear his motive for this by examining his reading of the original passages as well as the framework in which the subject is dealt with in The Principles of Art, by comparing it with his earlier essay \"Plato\u0027s Philosophy of Art\", to which he expressly refers in one of the three notes, and by matching his theory of art and representation with that of Plato\u0027s. These investigations show that Collingwood, while mostly keeping sound in philological terms, wanted to interpret Plato\u0027s criticism of representation to conform to his own conception of it. According to Collingwood, Plato failed to distinguish between magical representation and amusement representation, with the result that Plato attacked representation at large, instead, as he should, of amusement representation only. It was under such a scheme that the modern philosopher gave the seemingly superfluous philological notes.", "subitem_description_type": "Other"}]}, "item_10002_full_name_3": {"attribute_name": "著者別名", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"nameIdentifiers": [{"nameIdentifier": "8300", "nameIdentifierScheme": "WEKO"}], "names": [{"name": "TSUGAMI, Eske"}]}]}, "item_10002_publisher_8": {"attribute_name": "出版者", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_publisher": "成城大学"}]}, "item_10002_relation_12": {"attribute_name": "論文ID(NAID)", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_relation_type_id": {"subitem_relation_type_id_text": "110009610890", "subitem_relation_type_select": "NAID"}}]}, "item_10002_source_id_11": {"attribute_name": "書誌レコードID", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_source_identifier": "AN10440186", "subitem_source_identifier_type": "NCID"}]}, "item_10002_source_id_9": {"attribute_name": "ISSN", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_source_identifier": "13405861", "subitem_source_identifier_type": "ISSN"}]}, "item_creator": {"attribute_name": "著者", "attribute_type": "creator", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"creatorNames": [{"creatorName": "津上, 英輔"}], "nameIdentifiers": [{"nameIdentifier": "8299", "nameIdentifierScheme": "WEKO"}]}]}, "item_files": {"attribute_name": "ファイル情報", "attribute_type": "file", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"accessrole": "open_date", "date": [{"dateType": "Available", "dateValue": "2014-11-25"}], "displaytype": "detail", "download_preview_message": "", "file_order": 0, "filename": "art-17_18_01.pdf", "filesize": [{"value": "863.1 kB"}], "format": "application/pdf", "future_date_message": "", "is_thumbnail": false, "licensetype": "license_free", "mimetype": "application/pdf", "size": 863100.0, "url": {"label": "art-17_18_01", "url": "https://seijo.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/3336/files/art-17_18_01.pdf"}, "version_id": "5dc00bdb-d053-4bdc-bcce-ef34b1dfecb3"}]}, "item_language": {"attribute_name": "言語", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_language": "jpn"}]}, "item_resource_type": {"attribute_name": "資源タイプ", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"resourcetype": "departmental bulletin paper", "resourceuri": "http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]}, "item_title": "\"哲学と文献学の新たな仲違い\" : プラトーンの詩人論を解釈するコリンウッド", "item_titles": {"attribute_name": "タイトル", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_title": "\"哲学と文献学の新たな仲違い\" : プラトーンの詩人論を解釈するコリンウッド"}, {"subitem_title": "\"A New Disagreement between Philosophy and Philology\" : Collingwood Interpreting Plato\u0027s Theory of Poetry", "subitem_title_language": "en"}]}, "item_type_id": "10002", "owner": "14", "path": ["788"], "permalink_uri": "https://seijo.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/3336", "pubdate": {"attribute_name": "公開日", "attribute_value": "2014-11-25"}, "publish_date": "2014-11-25", "publish_status": "0", "recid": "3336", "relation": {}, "relation_version_is_last": true, "title": ["\"哲学と文献学の新たな仲違い\" : プラトーンの詩人論を解釈するコリンウッド"], "weko_shared_id": -1}
"哲学と文献学の新たな仲違い" : プラトーンの詩人論を解釈するコリンウッド
https://seijo.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/3336
https://seijo.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/3336ff8a475c-6265-4887-84c3-6e7e2a0bdb5f
名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
---|---|---|
art-17_18_01 (863.1 kB)
|
|
Item type | 紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
公開日 | 2014-11-25 | |||||
タイトル | ||||||
タイトル | "哲学と文献学の新たな仲違い" : プラトーンの詩人論を解釈するコリンウッド | |||||
タイトル | ||||||
言語 | en | |||||
タイトル | "A New Disagreement between Philosophy and Philology" : Collingwood Interpreting Plato's Theory of Poetry | |||||
言語 | ||||||
言語 | jpn | |||||
資源タイプ | ||||||
資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||
資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||
ページ属性 | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||
内容記述 | P(論文) | |||||
著者 |
津上, 英輔
× 津上, 英輔 |
|||||
著者別名 | ||||||
識別子Scheme | WEKO | |||||
識別子 | 8300 | |||||
姓名 | TSUGAMI, Eske | |||||
抄録 | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||
内容記述 | R. G. Collingwood in The Principles of Art (1938) discusses Plato's theory of poetry in Republic 10, coming to the general conclusion that not poetry as a whole but only the representative part of it was banished from his ideal state. The three footnotes (pages 46 and 48) given in this connection on grammatical interpretation of specific passages in the original Greek text catch the reader's eye with their disproportionate minuteness. This paper attempts to make clear his motive for this by examining his reading of the original passages as well as the framework in which the subject is dealt with in The Principles of Art, by comparing it with his earlier essay "Plato's Philosophy of Art", to which he expressly refers in one of the three notes, and by matching his theory of art and representation with that of Plato's. These investigations show that Collingwood, while mostly keeping sound in philological terms, wanted to interpret Plato's criticism of representation to conform to his own conception of it. According to Collingwood, Plato failed to distinguish between magical representation and amusement representation, with the result that Plato attacked representation at large, instead, as he should, of amusement representation only. It was under such a scheme that the modern philosopher gave the seemingly superfluous philological notes. | |||||
内容記述 | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||
内容記述 | R. G. Collingwood in The Principles of Art (1938) discusses Plato's theory of poetry in Republic 10, coming to the general conclusion that not poetry as a whole but only the representative part of it was banished from his ideal state. The three footnotes (pages 46 and 48) given in this connection on grammatical interpretation of specific passages in the original Greek text catch the reader's eye with their disproportionate minuteness. This paper attempts to make clear his motive for this by examining his reading of the original passages as well as the framework in which the subject is dealt with in The Principles of Art, by comparing it with his earlier essay "Plato's Philosophy of Art", to which he expressly refers in one of the three notes, and by matching his theory of art and representation with that of Plato's. These investigations show that Collingwood, while mostly keeping sound in philological terms, wanted to interpret Plato's criticism of representation to conform to his own conception of it. According to Collingwood, Plato failed to distinguish between magical representation and amusement representation, with the result that Plato attacked representation at large, instead, as he should, of amusement representation only. It was under such a scheme that the modern philosopher gave the seemingly superfluous philological notes. | |||||
書誌情報 |
成城美学美術史 号 17/18, p. 1-15, 発行日 2012-03 |
|||||
出版者 | ||||||
出版者 | 成城大学 | |||||
ISSN | ||||||
収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||
収録物識別子 | 13405861 | |||||
書誌レコードID | ||||||
収録物識別子タイプ | NCID | |||||
収録物識別子 | AN10440186 | |||||
論文ID(NAID) | ||||||
識別子タイプ | NAID | |||||
関連識別子 | 110009610890 |