如何重新规划“普遍性”?——柄谷行人《书写语言与民族主义》与“独特普遍性”的构想

How to Create “Universality”in a New Way?: Kojin Karatani's “Written Language and Nationalism”and the Idea of “Particular Universality”

柄谷行人的《书写语言与民族主义》通过重读索绪尔以及德里达、时枝城记对索绪尔的阅读来展开论述,一方面是对"表层阅读"的方法论自觉,另一方面则是如何用这种方法来重读经典。由此,对柄谷行人这篇文章的解读同样具有双重性:不仅阅读柄谷的论述,而且更要重读他如何阅读索绪尔以及德里达、时枝城记对索绪尔的阅读,加上德里达对柄谷的文章的直接回应,使得人们能更切近地观察到对阅读者的再阅读,构成了一个完整的阅读过程。正是通过一系列重读,柄谷行人将东西方重要的语言理论纳入到批判视野中。这种批判不仅是语言的批判,更是现代性的批判,特别是立足于东亚——具体表现为西方、日本和中国之间复杂的语言关系——特殊历史经验对于现代性的批判。但这种批判不是一种"特殊性"对"普遍性"的批判,柄谷行人力图将自己思考的"日本问题"加以"普遍化",《书写语言与民族主义》一文对现代性批判包含了透过"独特性"重新创造"普遍性"的可贵努力。

In its rereading of Saussure on the one hand and Derrida's and Tokieda Motoki's reading of Saussure on the other,Kojin Karatani's'Written Language and Nationalism'shows a methodological awareness of the 'surface reading'and how to reread classics with this method as well. Similarly,this paper interprets Karatani's work at two levels: we not only read the discussion of Karatani but also interpret how he read Saussure on the one hand and Derrida's and Motoki's reading of Saussure on the other hand. In addition,Derrida's direct response to Karatani lets us see closely the rereading of the reader,which helps to form a complete process of reading. It is in a series of rereading that Karatani criticizes important Oriental and Western theories of language. His critique is not only a critique of language,but also a critique of modernity-especially a critique of modernity based on the special historical experience in East Asia,that is,the complicated relations among Western,Japanese and Chinese languages. However,it is not a critique of universality from the perspective of particularity since Karatani tries to universalize his 'Japanese issue'. 'Written Language and Nationalism'demonstrates a valuable effort to recreate universality through particularity.