| 查看: 1393 | 回复: 4 | |||
| 本帖产生 1 个 翻译EPI ，点击这里进行查看 | |||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | |||
[交流]
英译汉已翻译，请求润色。
|
|||
|
It is the locus of this practice, the institution itself, that is the thing most lacking from Bowman’s analysis. The ivory tower, a solid, if lofty, metaphor for the academy, seems here to have melted into air. The matter of institutional context is absent. That disciplines are textual, that the institutional is textual, is not in doubt. There is, how-ever, a reluctance to read these texts as anything more than published scholarship. The greater fabric of the institution, of the contemporary university, the bodies, the buildings, the stuff ideas inhabit and are inscribed within, appears tangential to Bowman. His few remarks about pedagogy, specifically about teaching cultural studies, are disparaging. He mocks the notion that “teaching can consciously educate others and that these others might somehow ‘do something’ with the knowledge cultural studies has given them” (191). 制度本身正是这次实践的原因所在,这是鲍曼（氏）分析中最缺乏的东西。从象牙塔里走出来，一个坚固、高雅的隐喻学问，似乎在这里已经融化了到空中。体制方面的问题不存在。这学科的制度是文本，这是是毫无疑问的。有不愿读作任何事情比公布这些文本奖学金更多。对当代大学机构，建筑物，内在的思想都与鲍曼的观念看起来似乎很远。他很少评论教育学，特别是关于教学中的文化研究，这是一种蔑视。他嘲笑这个概念，即“教育教学能自觉他人，这些人可能会以某种方式来做他们的知识文化研究”(191)。 It is, however, these others, the student body, who usually end up leaving the “cloistered privacy of academic institutions” (125).Bowman is correct to query whether the effects of teaching can be guaranteed, but he appears to underestimate its political potential: the power of the contingent. The things that occur in lectures and seminars can “go unrecognized and are unpredictable in their effects” (McQuillan, 53), but this does not mean we should deny their possibility. Post-Marxism versus Cultural Studies teaches the reader many things. The theorization it offers of post-Marxism’s current failings, for instance, is a tour de force. It does not, however, afford enough attention to pedagogy as a textual practice of freedom, as a form of articulation and an act of intervention. It does not start to do justice to teaching. 学生们最终会离开“与世隔绝隐私的学术机构”(125)。鲍曼的质疑是正确的，教学的效果是否可以得到保证？但他似乎低估了其政治潜力：意外的力量。在讲座和研讨会上发生的事情有可能是“难以识别的，在他们的影响不可预测的”(麦奎伦，53)，但这并不意味着我们应该否认他们的可能性。后马克思主义与文化研究相比，交给读者许多东西。理论化的后马克思主义是当前的失败体，举例来说，它是一个绝技。但是，它没有能够承担起足够的重视，教育学作为自由的原始形式，作为衔接的一种形式和一种干预的方式。他对教学是不公平的。 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
今天系统多次维护，明天很可能放榜！
已经有5人回复
-
欢迎发来filecode的Mz6后的代码验证其规律
已经有74人回复
-
岩土工程学报什么时候才能终审完呐
已经有4人回复
-
时间戳又变了8-15
已经有25人回复
-
2027广东省杰青
已经有6人回复
-
快农历七夕节了，轻松一下，男人悄悄话，女施主请不要进来。
已经有3人回复
-
哪位老哥知道今年的国自然具体哪一天放榜？
已经有9人回复
-
咱们一起用铁证分析2026国家社科基金中标与否
已经有26人回复
-
我的国基提前知道中了，可是同事的操作让我实在接受不了，怎么会有这样的人
已经有16人回复
-
有时候，自然基金真的不能太认真 （我的申报经验）
已经有12人回复
» 抢金币啦！回帖就可以得到:
-
今天看到省基金挂了，希望国基面上能中吧
+5/425
-
祝福！基金中中中！！！！
+1/396
-
[求助]请问水下焊接技术有啥进步？
+1/191
-
山东征女友，坐标济南
+1/164
-
中国科学院空天院精密干涉测量团队 精密机械结构工程师招聘启事
+1/81
-
北京信息科技大学机电工程学院硕士研究生招生线上宣讲会——8月16日
+1/81
-
东南大学杰青/海优团队招聘催化方向博士后
+1/81
-
中国科大-合肥国家实验室冷原子量子网络团队招聘启事
+2/40
-
广东医科大学博士后招聘-基础医学，生信等方向
+1/38
-
加拿大/英属哥伦比亚大学曹彦凯课题组招收博后 [机器人/控制方向]
+1/33
-
加拿大/英属哥伦比亚大学曹彦凯课题组招收全奖博士/博后 [机器人/控制方向]
+1/31
-
祝福！祈福！！基金中中中！
+5/15
-
祈福
+1/14
-
27级博士生 + 福州大学 + 经管学院 + 管理科学与工程（见贴则有指标）
+1/8
-
北京理工大学-集成电路与电子学院杰青团队-招博士后
+1/6
-
北理工集成电路杰青团队 | 诚招科助理
+1/5
-
中国科学院生物物理研究所田勇课题组招聘联合培养生
+1/3
-
中国科学技术大学环境学院招聘招生
+1/2
-
中山大学国家级青年人才课题组招收推免硕士2名（2027年入学）
+2/2
-
空间多组学解码实体瘤 CAR-T 耐药：GPC3 靶向装甲型 CAR-T 治疗
+1/2
5楼2011-01-03 18:46:50
2楼2010-12-28 16:32:15
3楼2010-12-28 18:15:47
或者改成求英译汉
|
It is the locus of this practice, the institution itself, that is the thing most lacking from Bowman’s analysis. The ivory tower, a solid, if lofty, metaphor for the academy, seems here to have melted into air. The matter of institutional context is absent. That disciplines are textual, that the institutional is textual, is not in doubt. There is, how-ever, a reluctance to read these texts as anything more than published scholarship. The greater fabric of the institution, of the contemporary university, the bodies, the buildings, the stuff ideas inhabit and are inscribed within, appears tangential to Bowman. His few remarks about pedagogy, specifically about teaching cultural studies, are disparaging. He mocks the notion that “teaching can consciously educate others and that these others might somehow ‘do something’ with the knowledge cultural studies has given them” (191). It is, however, these others, the student body, who usually end up leaving the “cloistered privacy of academic institutions” (125).Bowman is correct to query whether the effects of teaching can be guaranteed, but he appears to underestimate its political potential: the power of the contingent. The things that occur in lectures and seminars can “go unrecognized and are unpredictable in their effects” (McQuillan, 53), but this does not mean we should deny their possibility. Post-Marxism versus Cultural Studies teaches the reader many things. The theorization it offers of post-Marxism’s current failings, for instance, is a tour de force. It does not, however, afford enough attention to pedagogy as a textual practice of freedom, as a form of articulation and an act of intervention. It does not start to do justice to teaching. |
4楼2010-12-29 15:46:34
