黄霖先生的学术品格

黄霖先生之所以成果卓著,是因为他始终将学人的独立思想和独立人格作为学术研究的先决条件。有独立的学术思想,才能道人之所未曾道;有独立的学术人格,才能道人所未敢道。黄霖先生的＂原人论＂、＂《金瓶梅》作者之谜＂,渗透于研究中的人文精神,都是如此。     

元初温州的遗民群体

宋元易代之际,温州产生以林景熙为代表的遗民群体,严守气节,拒绝与元政权合作。除了杜门诗文著述以怀念故国外,遗民大多选择隐居避世、课子读书,以传承文化为己任,过起了田园诗歌般的悠闲清贫生活。然后遗民“遗世”而不“遗民”,以林景熙为领袖的遗民,依旧关心地方福祉,仍然积极参与到地方公益事业和宗族事务中来。关心民生利病,兴除利弊之举,同时,随着时光流逝,南宋遗民在传承文化的感召下,多以学官出仕元朝。     

林道静形象的互文性解读

《青春之歌》叙述的是一个青年女性知识分子追求自我实现的奋斗历程,它的前文本是鲁迅的《伤逝》、丁玲的《莎菲女士的日记》和茅盾的《虹》。几种前文本对于女性解放问题进行了各自的思考,做出了不同的回答。《虹》与《青春之歌》的互文关系更为直接。梅行素和林道静的性格中都有不安分和为自我实现而敢作敢为、不顾流俗的一面。但梅、林二人性格和经历不同的一面给人印象更深,其中的意味也更值得分析。梅行素与林道静性格最大的区别,是梅的“疑”和林的“信”。林道静性格中的不成熟和她的理想主义激情一起,正是其独特文学魅力之所在,因为它意味着青春。     

从民族志物品收集到东南海洋系文化构建——林惠祥先生收藏与展示实践（1929-1958）

Since the 1980s, critical museum studies have interpreted the‘collecting and exhibi-ting activities’ of a museum as both practical activ-ities as well as a persistent scientific and socio-cul-tural process, and have explored the natures of museum, including the logic and strategy behind these practices. Through reviewing Lin Huixiang ’s collecting and exhibiting practices ( 1929 to 1958 ) , this article aims to explore internal rela-tionships between ( i ) museum practices and ( ii ) the practitioner, all under a particular episteme. This article moreover presents the genealogy of Lin Huixiang ’s academic ideas, museum practices, and‘Southeastern-oceanic-cultural ’ research pro-jects;it covers his earlier activities of ethnographic object collecting and exhibiting practices all the way to the construction of the‘Southeastern-ocean-ic-culture-system ’ within the framework of the‘New Theory of Evolution’ . Seen from a critical perspective, a museum is not a neutral and objective institution but a space full of power and discussion. In addition, in our modern times Museums have become a controver-sial place: the museum’s nature has changed from a‘palace of knowledge’ to a representation-system composed of objects. Eilean Hooper-Greenhill uses the terms“effective history” and“episteme” to ex-amine the history of a museum, and divides it into three stages: ( i ) the irrational cabinet, ( ii ) a classical episteme, and ( iii) a modern episteme. Different epistemes directly influence the collecting and exhibiting practices. Susan Pearce points out that collecting activities express and shape the rela-tionship between the human and material worlds. She distinguishes between “gathering”, “hoard-ing”, and “collecting” and she emphasizes that the term “collecting” points to products of imagi-nation. This imagination metaphorically creates meanings by arrangement and it displays the known world. Therefore, the activity of collecting and ex-hibiting is always practiced under a particular epis-teme;in addition political standpoints, value judg-ments, and academic interests are involved when interpreting the meanings of the objects and the constructing the knowledge order. This article moreover conducts a systematic exploration of Lin Huixiang’s collecting and exhibi-ting practices as well as the genealogy of his aca-demic ideas. All is examined from three aspects:( i) ethnicity, nation, and ethnographic object col-lecting practices; ( ii ) the intellectual, display practices and Museum of Anthropology; ( iii ) the New Theory of Evolution and the establishment of the Southeastern-oceanic-culture-system. The first section of “ethnicity, nation, and ethnographic object collecting practices”focuses on Lin Huixiang’s collecting practices from 1929 until the end of the Second World War. He started to collect aboriginal human objects in Taiwan since 1929 and ethnographical objects in the South Sea since 1937 . As most anthropologists from that area and period, Lin Huixiang’s collecting activities were influenced by patriotism, the establishment of a Chinese anthropology, and by personal academic interests. Chinese anthropologists during the 1920s to 1940s, including Lin Huixiang, believed that nationalism and the ‘Great Harmony ’ would lead to Chinese independence and civilization. And his practices had real significance for China in war-time. On the one hand, these aboriginal objects from Taiwan and the South Sea were regarded as material evidence of an extant“barbarian” culture;this was helpful in understanding that the‘barbari-an’ culture was basically same as that of ours, which then would reduce our ethnic prejudice a-gainst the ‘barbarian’ . On the other hand, these objects also became a means for the public to un-derstand Taiwan, the colony of Japan; in fact, these aboriginal objects even became a symbol of anti-colonialism and aroused the people’s patriot-ism. The second part of “the intelluctual, display practices and Museum of Anthropology” turns to Lin Huixiang’s ideas about the enlightment through a museum and its exhibitions. Lin Huixiang indeed emphasized the educational function of exhibitions and the museum. He displayed his collections to the public, held several exhibitions starting in 1929 , donated all his collections to Xiamen Uni-versity in 1951 , and advocated the establishment of the Museum of Anthropology. Lin Huixiang pointed out that museums were educational institu-tions meant to spread knowledge, and he used specimens, charts, and models to educate the pub-lic. As an anthropologist, Lin Huixiang understood the meaning of an ethnographical museum as an in-strument for teaching, research, and social educa-tion. By reviewing Lin Huixiang’s ‘collecting and exhibiting practices ’ during the period 1929 -1958 , we can clearly come to understand his aca-demic ideas about the discipline of anthropology and about the Southeastern-regional culture. The exhibitions in the Museum of Anthropology of Xia-men University represent his endeavor to construct the Southeastern-oceanic-culture-system within the framework of the New Theory of Evolution. He showed archaeological specimens from the prehis-toric period to the historical period, as well as eth-nographical objects of China’s Southeastern region and Taiwan region, Indonesia, Singapore, India, and of Burma. All objects displayed in exhibitions were used to illustrate the rule of evolution, espe-cially the ethnographic objects that evidenced the primitiveness of human culture; this is helpful to us when exploring the origins of cultures. At the same time, Lin Huixiang compared the cultures of Northern China and Southeastern China, and iden-tified cultural traits specific to the Southeastern ar-ea, aiming to show cultural similarities among China’s Southeastern region and the Taiwan region, and Southeast Asia, which he called the“South-eastern-oceanic-culture-system”.     

论林砺儒的师范教育思想

林砺儒是我国著名的教育家，他一生致力于从事师范教育，在理论和实践方面都有很大建树并形成了自己独特的师范教育思想。本文摘取其思想中的几点，主要从师范教育的特征、中学教师的培养、师范生的实习、师范教育的独立性等几个方面对其思想进行了简要论述。     

林黛玉“忧患”意识的美学象征意义

里程碑式意义的《红楼梦》巨著,深蕴着清末文学巨匠曹雪芹“立志补天”的独特卓著的参与社会变革的忧患意识,林黛玉形象是这种忧患意识的主要载体。林黛玉对贾府命运前景之忧患,象征着超脱之外的积极用世;对身世之忧患,象征张扬人格的独立;对爱情之忧患,象征做定了封建礼教的叛逆;读书之忧患,象征着追求真理的“扬弃”。林黛玉形象更深刻的美学象征意义还在于:深切关注现实危机;积极参与挽救现实危机;“大厦将倾”的家族危机演示成“危如累卵”的社会危机。     

清新晓畅,意到神到--评林语堂英译《浮生六记》

文学翻译最重要的是做到达意传神，林语堂先生英译沈复的《浮生六记》较好地做到了这一点。译文遣词准确、简洁，富有表现力；在句子表达方面，如人物刻画、风景描写等与原文和谐一致，因而读来清新自然，毫无斧凿痕迹。     

抓住细节,突破难点,提高课堂教学效率——《祝福》教学体会谈

本文通过对《祝福》中的细节描写进行分析,说明了文学作品的细节刻画是展示人物性格,表明作品主题的重要艺术手段。     

林语堂与外国文化（上）

与许多中国现代作家不同,林语堂与外国文化有着天然的、经验的和稳定的联系,这就决定了探讨林语堂与外国文化关系的重大价值和意义。林语堂对古希腊、印度、日本、美国和英国都有研究,并形成了自己独特的看法,这既是反观林语堂文化思想的前提,也是理解中国现代文学及其文化的一个透视点。     

善昭的禅教育思想

禅宗发展到善昭,其对僧徒的接引教育方式达到相对完善形态。这种教育可以概括为两个方面:基础教育和门风特色接引。两方面都有突出特色,尤其后者被称为“汾阳门风”,承继临济宗的“大机大用”,具有义玄以降各代宗师的凌厉峻烈风格。同时,在活跃、细腻、完善等方面又有所发展。