中、德两国区域国别研究核心概念及研究方法比较

Core Concepts and Methods of Area Studies in China and Germany:A Comparative Analysis

纵观中、德两国区域国别研究领域已有成果,我们会发现两国都缺乏对该领域核心概念的比较研究,包括区域、区域国别、文化、空间、边界和文化交叠空间等。因为文化和思维方式上存在差异,中德学者对同一概念的理解存在较大的差异。就拿Area Studies这个词语来说,在中国它被译作“区域国别研究/国别和区域研究/国别区域研究/区域和国别研究/地区研究”,在德国则被译作“区域/地区研究(Die regionalen Studien/Die Regionalstudien)”。从字面意思来看,两者的区别只在于有没有“国别”二字,事实上,情况要复杂得多。中、德两国学者对核心概念“区域国别”和“区域”的理解存在一致之处,但也有很大的差异,这些差异继而导致研究方法的不同。通过对两者的比较分析,这些共性和差异得以发现。在此基础上,我们才能够理解究竟是哪些差异,在什么地方导致研究方法的不同。另外,作为一门“文化翻译和转译”学科,区域国别学的重要任务之一是了解和理解自身与他者的联系和区别,从中窥见不同国家区域国别学科发展的一些独特性。本文在比较和阐释的基础上,尝试明晰中德两国区域国别研究的利弊,进而取长补短,为区域国别研究领域中的比较研究提供一种新的思路和路径。

A critical examination of area studies in China and Germany reveals a notable gap in comparative research concerning foundational concepts within the discipline.Key terms such as region/area,area-country,culture,space,boundaries,and cultural overlap are subject to divergent interpretations due to the distinct cultural and conceptual frameworks that inform Chinese and German scholarship.The translation of“area studies”itself—rendered variably as“area and country studies”or“country and area studies”in China,and as“Die regionalen Studien”or“Die Regionalstudien”in Germany—reflects more than a linguistic difference;it underscores the complexity of cross-cultural academic discourse.While there exists a degree of consensus between Chinese and German scholars on the notions of“area and country,”discrepancies are more commonly encountered,influencing methodological approaches within each context.This paper conducts a comparative analysis to illuminate these shared understandings and disparities,exploring how they manifest in distinct research methodologies.Area studies,as an academic pursuit of“cultural translation and transcreation,”fundamentally aims to interpret the unique attributes of the discipline as practiced in various nations.By delving into these core concepts,the paper seeks to uncover specific traits that characterize area studies in China and Germany.Through this comparative elucidation,the study enhances our comprehension of the relative strengths and limitations inherent to area studies in both countries,fostering a reciprocal enrichment of scholarly practices.