:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:柳宗元山水詩意象析論--與陶、謝詩比較
書刊名:輔大中研所學刊
作者:林秋碩
作者(外文):Lin, Chiu-shuo
出版日期:2005
卷期:15
頁次:頁95-113
主題關鍵詞:柳宗元陶淵明謝靈運山水詩田園詩意象Liou Tsong-yuanTao Yuan-mingXie Ling-yunLandscape poetryFarm poetryImagesImagery
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:319
柳宗元的山水詩,得力於陶淵明和謝靈運甚多,但又有自己的風格。因此本文擬藉由柳宗元和陶淵明、謝靈運詩歌意象的比較,進一步看他的山水詩的寫作方法,最後,看他的山水詩的感情世界。首先,比較柳宗元和陶淵明、謝靈運在詩歌意象的運用情形,發現柳宗元的山水詩雖有陶淵明田園詩意象的沖淡高遠,但有些卻更為孤高寂寞;雖有謝靈運山水詩意象的生動鮮明,但有些卻更為淒愴。其次,藉由柳宗元和陶、謝二人作詩方法的比較,發現柳宗元雖學陶淵明的寫意之筆,但有時卻只是字句上相似;雖學謝靈運的寫景方法,但卻並非按照記遊、寫景、興情、悟理的架構,而是有不同的表現方式。最後,就山水詩的感情世界來看,陶淵明是真能自得,謝靈運是表面上的超脫,柳宗元則有閒淡自適、孤高寂寞、了悟道理、暫時移情、愁緒與山水合一等情形。
In composing his landscape poetry, Liou Tsong-yuan was considerably inspired by Tao Yuan-ming and Xie Ling-yun. Liou nevertheless has his own idiosyncratic style. This paper first analyzes the imagery in Liou’s poety, as compared and contrasted with that in Tao’s and Xie’s poetries. It then examines Liou’s methods of composing landscape poetry and the theme of feelings as manifested in his landscape poetry. First, when imagery was investigated in Liou’s, Tao’s, and Xie’s poetries, it was found that though some of Liou’s landscape poems convey image of plain ordinariness and loftiness, which was found also in Tao’s farm poetry, some of Liou’s poems actually convey a higher degree of loftiness and loneliness. Some of Liou’s landscape poems convey vivid images just like those found in Xie’s landscape poems. However, a sense of sadness was also found in Liou’s poems, a characteristic peculiar to Liou’s poems. Next, in terms of methods of poem composition, it was found that, though Liou mimics Tao’s expressive style, in many ways the two poets employ similar words at best. When Liou’s depiction of landscape was compared and contrasted with Xie’s, it was found that Liou employs a means of expression other than that commonly employed in the description of travels, landscapes, feelings, and deeper understandings of life in the world. Finally, in terms of the depiction of various manifestations of feelings, one finds that while Tao’s poems exhibit genuine self-contentedness, Xie’s poems convey a superficial tranquility derived from a deeper understanding of life in the face of setbacks. By contrast, liou’s poems manifest a combined sense of easiness and self-contentedness, loftiness and loneliness, a sudden insight into life, a temporary oblivion to worries in life, and a feeling of sadness projected onto the landscape.
期刊論文
1.翁細金(1999)。被縛的憤懣與自縛的困惑-論謝靈運的優游山水與山水詩創作。溫州師範學院學報,20(5),11-14。  延伸查詢new window
2.劉懋疇(1996)。泄為山水詩,逸韻諧奇趣-讀謝靈運《登池上樓》。南京廣播電視大學學報,1,13-15。  延伸查詢new window
3.高黎娜(1999)。謝靈運和中國山水詩。唐都學刊,15(1),74-78。  延伸查詢new window
4.王正海(2003)。謝靈運與柳宗元山水詩歌意境之比較。柳州師專學報,18(2),5-10。  延伸查詢new window
5.劉濟才(1998)。柳宗元與陶淵明比較論。遼寧教育學院學報,15(2),77-81。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.劉昫、楊家駱(1976)。新校本舊唐書。臺北:鼎文書局。  延伸查詢new window
2.劉勰、周振甫(1994)。文心雕龍注釋。臺北:學海書局。  延伸查詢new window
3.蘇軾、毛晉(1971)。東坡題跋。臺北:廣文書局。  延伸查詢new window
4.楊伯峻(1970)。列子集釋。臺北:明倫出版社。  延伸查詢new window
5.王國瓔(199607)。中國山水詩研究。臺北:聯經出版社。  延伸查詢new window
6.葉嘉瑩(20000200)。陶淵明飲酒詩講錄。臺北:桂冠圖公司。  延伸查詢new window
7.洪興祖(1995)。楚辭補注。臺北:藝文印書館。  延伸查詢new window
8.許學夷、杜維沫(1998)。詩源辯體。北京:人民文學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
9.元好問、王雲五(1968)。遺山先生文集。臺北市:臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
10.沈振奇(1986)。陶謝詩之比較。臺北:臺灣學生書局。  延伸查詢new window
11.陳植鍔(1990)。詩歌意象論。中國社會科學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
12.渭卿(1999)。陶淵明詩選。陶淵明詩選。濟南。  延伸查詢new window
13.李森南(1989)。山水詩人謝靈運。山水詩人謝靈運。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
14.謝靈運、曹明綱(2002)。陶淵明.謝靈運.鮑照詩文選評。上海:上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.(清)汪中(1970)。詩品注,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
2.(南朝宋)謝靈運。謝靈運詩選,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
3.王國安(1993)。柳宗元詩箋釋,上海。  延伸查詢new window
4.(清)劉永濟。唐人絕句精華,北京。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.林文月(1996)。鮑照與謝靈運的山水詩。山水與古典。台北:三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
2.葉嘉瑩(1997)。從元遺山論詩絕句談謝靈運與柳宗元的詩與人。迦陵論詩叢稿。河北:河北教育出版社。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE