文學院

Permanent URI for this communityhttp://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/handle/20.500.12235/2

院成立於民國44年，歷經50餘年的銳意發展，目前設有國文、英文、歷史、地理、臺文等5個學系、翻譯和臺灣史2個獨立所，以及全球華人寫作中心和國際臺灣學研究中心。除臺史所僅設碩士班，其餘6個系所均設有碩、博士班；目前專兼任教師近250人，學生約2500餘人。

本院早期以培養優秀中學國文、英文、歷史和地理教師為鵠的，臺灣中學語文和史地教育的實踐與成功，本院提供不可磨滅的貢獻。近年來，本院隨師範體系轉型而調整發展方向，除維持中學師資培育的優勢外，也積極朝理論研究和實務操作等面向前進。目前，本院各系所師培生的教師檢定通過率平均在95%以上；非師培生在文化、傳播、文學、應用史學及環境災害、地理資訊系統等領域發展，也已卓然有成。

本院各系所教師的研究能量極為豐富，參與國內外學術活動相當活躍。根據論文數量、引用次數等指標所作的學術力評比，本院居人文領域全國第2名。各系所之間，無論是教師的教學與研究，或學生的生活與學習，都能相輔相成、榮辱與共，彼此渾然一體，足堪「為師、為範」而無愧。

News

系所網址：http://www.cla.ntnu.edu.tw/main.php

Browse

Filters

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Anthony Curtis AdlerSubject: search.filters.subject.Derrida

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Managing the Unmanageable: Agamben’s The Kingdom and the Glory and the Dance of Political Economy
    (英語學系, 2014-09-??) Anthony Curtis Adler
    While The Kingdom and the Glory addresses the specifically economic dimension of modern biopolitical forms of governmentality, it goes even farther than earlier volumes of Homo Sacer in obscuring the specific dynamic of modern capitalism. Rather than simply challenging Giorgio Agamben’s conclusions from an external perspective, the following paper proposes an immanent, “deconstructive” critique, showing that Agamben’s neglect of the problem of “economic value,” and of its close filiation to the circular movement of glory, is intimately related to his attempt, through the signature, to effectively neutralize the Derridean play of the signifier. While Agamben introduces the signature alongside the example as a second, economic-theological rather than political-theological paradigm for understanding paradigmicity as such, he seeks to stabilize the relation between the two. Contesting such stabilization, this paper develops a logic of surplementarity, positing the impossibility of keeping the “play of the signature” from disrupting the ideality of semantic value. Special attention will be given to Agamben’s tendency, neglecting the relation between oikonomia and dance, to identify the “acclamatory” aspect of glory with song alone. Thus he seeks to understand the economy as ordering into unison, rather than as a more complex, differential relation of singularities. This goes hand in hand with the failure to address the graphic, chrematistic dimension of modern capitalism. But it is ultimately when, turning to Hölderlin, he stresses the “national” essence of poetry, that the full consequences of his suppression of dance emerge. Attending to the role of dance in Hölderlin will nevertheless suggest another way to think the glorious economy.