課程大綱

課程資訊

課程名稱	英文漢學中的問題與爭論 Controversies and Debates in Anglophonic Sinology
開課學期	99-2
授課對象	文學院歷史學研究所
授課教師	宋家復
課號	Hist5390
課程識別碼	123 U8220
班次
學分	3
全/半年	半年
必/選修	選修
上課時間	星期三5,6,7(12:20~15:10)
上課地點	歷史研討室
備註	限學士班三年級以上總人數上限：20人
Ceiba 課程網頁	http://ceiba.ntu.edu.tw/992Hist5390
課程簡介影片
核心能力關聯	核心能力與課程規劃關聯圖
課程大綱
為確保您我的權利,請尊重智慧財產權及不得非法影印
課程概述	中國研究的海內外分進合流近年來已經蔚為風潮，在研究課題和取徑上中外學者分享共通的機會愈見頻繁。本課程的目的，在於藉著閱讀過去半世紀以來英文中國研究學界內（外）所生產的一系列論辯文獻，接引大學部高年級主修歷史(或人文社會科學)的同學平順進入問題取向的跨國語境。這不是一門二次大戰後西方漢學研究的通史或文獻回顧，因為著重的只限於曾經引發學者之間公開爭議辯論的課題。
課程目標	希望在精讀前輩學者們彼此針鋒相對、砥礪琢磨的論述之中，我們學會欣賞學界的多元喧嘩與有情眾生的有限性，並且幫助我們自身研究問題意識的形塑與反思。下列課程進度將依實際上課狀況彈性調整。以下課程進度、讀物、評分標準若有變動，依課堂所發書面課綱及公佈為準。
課程要求	基本的學術英文閱讀能力，審問深思暨自我問題化的意願。評量方式平時(含作業、隨堂測驗、出席與課堂討論)50%，期末(含考試與作業)50%。
預期每週課後學習時數
Office Hours	另約時間
指定閱讀
參考書目
評量方式 (僅供參考)

課程進度

週次	日期	單元主題
第1週	2/23	中國思想中有自然法概念嗎？ Joseph Needham, Science and Civilization in China, vol. II, pp. 518-83. Derk Bodde, “Evidence of ‘Laws of Nature’ in Chinese Thought,” HJAS 20:3 & 4 (1957), pp. 709-27.
第2週	3/02	科學革命發生在中國嗎？ Joseph Needham, Science and Civilization in China, vol. V, part 2, pp. xxii-xxvii. Nathan Sivin, “Why the Scientific Revolution did not take place in China – or did it?” Chinese Science 5 (1982), 45-66; The Environmentalist 5:1 (1985), pp. 39-50; http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~nsivin/scirev.pdf (2005.8.24 revised).
第3週	3/09	為什麼中國沒有自發性資本主義？ Gary G. Hamilton, “Why no Capitalism in China? Negative Questions in Historical, Comparative Research,” in Max Weber in Asian Studies, ed. by Andrew E. Buss, pp. 65-89. Mark Elvin, “Why China Failed to Create an Endogenous Industrial Capitalism? A Critique of Max Weber’s Explanation,” Theory and Society 13 (1984), pp. 379-91.
第4週	3/16	中國歷史的空間結構，成立嗎？ G. W. Skinner, “The Structure of Chinese History,” JAS 44:2 (1985), pp. 271-92. Barbara Sands and Ramon H. Myers, “The Spatial Approach to Chinese History: A Test,” JAS 45:4, pp. 721-43. Daniel Little and Joseph W. Esherick, “ Testing the Testers: A Reply to Barbara Sands and Ramon Myers’s Critique of G. W. Skinner’s Regional Systems Approach to China,” JAS 48:1, pp. 90-99. Barbara Sands and Ramon H. Myers, “Economics and Macroregions: A Reply to Our Critics,” JAS 49:2 (1990), p. 344-46.
第5週	3/23	孔子：聖凡之間與漢學的箍套(sinological torque)? Herbert Fingarette, Confucius – The Secular as Sacred, 1972. Charles Wei-hsun Fu, “Fingarette and Munro on Early Confucianism: A Methodological Examination,” PEW 28:2 (1978), pp. 181-98. Fingarette’s reply, pp. 223-26.
第6週	3/30	尋找論語原本的樣貌？ E. B. Brooks & A. T. Brooks, The Original Analects: Sayings of Confucius and His Successors, Columbia UP, 2001. Edward Slingerland, “Why Philosophy is not “Extra” in Understanding the Analects,” PEW 50:1 (2000), pp. 137-41. Brooks’ response, pp. 141-46. Slingerland’s reply, pp. 146-47.
第7週	4/06	放假
第8週	4/13	世界詩還是中國詩？ Stephen Owen, “The Anxiety of Global Influence: What is World Poetry,” The New Republic (Nov. 1990), pp. 28-32. 奚密，<差異的憂慮 – 本土性、世界性、國際性的分疏>，《當代》 59 (1991.3).
第9週	4/20	中國也有一個人文自由傳統？ Wm Theodore de Bary, The Liberal Tradition in China, Columbia UP, 1983. F. W. Mote, “The Limits of Intellectual History?” Ming Studies 19 (1984), pp. 15-25. De Bary’s reply, 27 (1986), pp. 77-92. Mote surrejoinder, pp. 93-94.
第10週	4/27	「新儒學」乎？「道學」乎？ Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, “ A New Direction in Confucian Scholarship: Approaches to Examining the Differences between Neo-Confucianism and Tao-hsüeh,” PEW 42:3 (1992), pp. 455-74. W. Theodore de Bary, “The Uses of Neo-Confucianism: A Response to Professor Tillman,” PEW 43:3 (1993), pp. 541-55. Tillman’s response, 44:1 (1994), pp. 135-42. De Bary’s reply, pp. 143-44. Hilde de Weerdt, “Canon formation and examination culture: the construction of guwen and daoxue traditions,” Journal of Sung-Yuan Studies (Albany, NY) 29 (1999) 91-134.
第11週	5/04	文化中國的定義問題 Tu Wei-ming, “Cultural China: The Periphery as Center,” Daedalus: Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 120: 2 (1991). Paul A. Cohen, “Cultural China: Some definitional Issues,” PEW 43:3 (1993), pp. 557-63.
第12週	5/11	中國中心史觀：外國學者的分寸 Michael Gasster, “Discovering China in History: Some Comments on Paul Cohen’s Discovering History in China,” The American Asian Review 5: 2 (1987), pp. 121-53. Paul A. Cohen, “Our Proper Concerns as Historians of China: A Reply to Michael Gasster,” The American Asian Review 6:1 (1988), pp. 1-24.
第13週	5/18	徘徊在文本與脈絡之間的思想傳記 Ying-shih Yü, “The Intellectual World of Chiao Hung Revisited: A Review Article,” Ming Studies 25 (1988), pp. 24-66. Edward T. Ch’ien, “Neither Structuralism Nor Lovejoy’s History of Ideas: A Disidentificaion with Professor Yü Ying-shih’s Review as a Dis-course,” Ming Studies 31 (1991), pp. 42-86.
第14週	5/25	懷柔遠人：望文生義抑或就事論事 Joseph W. Esherick, “Cherishing Sources from afar,” Modern China 24:2 (1998), pp. 135-61. James Hevia, “Postpolemical Historiography: A Reply to James Hevia,” Modern China 24:3 (1998), pp. 319-27. Esherick’s reply, pp. 328-32.
第15週	6/01	儒學第三期 – 追求或臆想？ Tu Wei-ming, “Iconoclasm, Holistic Vision, and Patient Watchfulness: A Personal Reflection on the Modern Chinese Intellectual Quest,” Daedalus 116:2 (1987), pp. 75-94. Arif Dirlik, “Confucius in Borderlands: Global Capitalism and the Reinvention of Confucianism,” Boundary 2 (1995), pp. 229-73.
第16週	6/08	“孔夫子主義Confucianism”根本是傳教士建構的產物？ Lionel M. Jensen, Manufacturing Confucianism: Chinese Traditions and Universal Civilization, Duke UP, 1997. Willard J. Peterson, review, HJAS 59:1 (1999), pp. 276-83. T. H. Barrett, “Is There a Chinese Word for “Confucius”? A Review Article,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 62:1 (1999), pp. 105-10.
第17週	6/15	中國如何如何，誰說了算？ Robert Bagley, review of Monumentality in Early Chinese Art and Architecture by Wu Hung, HJAS 58:1 (1998), pp. 221-56. Wu Hung, “A Response to Robert Bagley’s Review of My Book,” Archives of Asian Art 51 (1998/99), pp. 92-102.
第18週	6/22	期末考