| dc.contributor.advisor | 王心玲 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Wang, Hsin-ling | en_US |
| dc.contributor.author (Authors) | 吳哲硯 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author (Authors) | Wu, Che-yen | en_US |
| dc.creator (作者) | 吳哲硯 | zh_TW |
| dc.creator (作者) | Wu, Che-yen | en_US |
| dc.date (日期) | 2003 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 17-Sep-2009 16:16:45 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 17-Sep-2009 16:16:45 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 17-Sep-2009 16:16:45 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) | G0090551007 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33328 | - |
| dc.description (描述) | 碩士 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 國立政治大學 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 英國語文學研究所 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 90551007 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 92 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 在《坎特伯里故事集》中，喬叟曾多次直接指出或間接暗示旅程中的故事競賽為一遊戲。然而，對此文本的研究文獻，卻鮮少從遊戲觀點切入分析。即便有，也多是從語言角度，來處理文本中各角色間的口語遊戲，或喬叟本人的文字遊戲，離真正的遊戲本身，似還有一段距離。有鑑於此，我試著以惠欽格及凱洛斯對遊戲的論述，做為理論框架，來分析《坎特伯里故事集》中的遊戲元素。我首先將找出證據，來證明整個朝聖之旅符合遊戲的定義，然後以其中三個故事為例，來分析四種遊戲範疇。本論文將分為五章，在第一章，我先說明遊戲長期以來被人忽視的地位，接著我將引入惠辛格及凱洛斯的論述。惠辛格提出遊戲的概念、定義，及功能；凱洛斯作為惠辛格在遊戲論述領域中的繼承人，則將惠辛格的成就，加以推展及補充，並將遊戲定義為四個範疇：競爭、機會、模仿、暈眩。所有的遊戲都可被歸納為這四類。在第一章的後半部，我將逐一從文本中，找出證據，來證明《坎特伯里故事集》在在都符合遊戲的定義。在第二章，我將討論＜騎士的故事＞中競爭與機會之運作。在第三章中，我將從模仿的層面來分析＜赦罪修士的故事＞。在第四章中，我將從暈眩的角度來看＜修女院教士的故事＞。在第五章中，我將總結前四章的要點，然後探討文學作為遊戲的可能性。最末，從遊戲的往復特性來看，我將主張《坎特伯里》遊戲尚未結束，它是遊戲昇華為藝術的最佳範本。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | In many places of The Canterbury Tales, Geoffrey Chaucer points out that this story-telling contest would be a game. However, researches on this text have scarcely been done from the perspective of game. In view of this, I try to apply Jonah Huizinga and Roger Caillois’ concepts of game as the main theoretical framework to The Canterbury Tales. In this thesis, I justify the pilgrimage as a big game first and then discuss the elements of play in three tales respectively. The thesis is divided into five chapters. In chapter one, I recount the subordinate position of game first and then introduce Huizinga and Caillois’ discourses. Huizinga comes up with the concept, definition, and function of game; Caillois modifies Huizinga’s notions and then categorizes games into four kinds: agon, alea, mimicry, and ilinx. In the following part of chapter one, I prove that The Canterbury Tales as a whole matches the notion of a game. In chapter two, I discuss the exercises of agon and alea in The Knight’s Tale. In chapter three, I analyze The Pardoner’s Tale from the aspect of mimicry. In chapter four, I see The Nun’s Priest’s Tale from the perspective of ilinx. In chapter five, I summarize the previous chapters first, and then explore the possibility of literature as the game. I argue that the game of The Canterbury Tales is not over and that it is the sublimation form of game into art. | en_US |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | Acknowledgment........................ivChinese Abstract......................ixEnglish Abstract......................xiChapter OneIntroduction...........................1Chapter TwoAgon/Alea in The Knight’s Tale.......20Chapter ThreeMimicry in The Pardoner’s Tale.......38Chapter FourIlinx in The Nun’s Priest’s Tale....56Chapter FiveConclusion............................72Works Cited...........................87 | zh_TW |
| dc.format.extent | 18763 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 17869 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 29108 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 16677 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 17930 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 19339 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 77998 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 86917 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 77730 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 70020 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 61855 bytes | - |
| dc.format.extent | 38505 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
| dc.source.uri (資料來源) | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0090551007 | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 喬叟 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 遊戲 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 玩 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 惠欽格 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 凱洛斯 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 伽達默 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 巴赫汀 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 高夫曼 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 競爭 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 機會 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 模仿 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 暈眩 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Chaucer | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | game | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | play | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Huizinga | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Caillois | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Gadamer | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Bakhtin | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Goffman | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | agon | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | alea | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | mimicry | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | ilinx | en_US |
| dc.title (題名) | 遊戲尚未結束：喬叟《坎特伯里故事集》中的遊戲元素 | zh_TW |
| dc.title (題名) | The Game Is Not Over: The Elements of Play in Geoffrey Chaucer`s The Canterbury Tales | en_US |
| dc.type (資料類型) | thesis | en |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Bakhtin, Mikhail. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Trans. and Ed. Caryl Emerson. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1984. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | ---. Rabelais and His World. Trans. Helene Iswolsky. Cambridge, MA: MIT P, 1968. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Baldwin, Ralph. “The Unity of The Canterbury Tales.” Chaucer Criticism: An Anthology. Ed. Richard J. Schoeck and Jerome Taylor. Notre Dame, IN: U of Notre Dame P, 1960. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations. Ed. Hannah Arendt. Trans. Harry Zohn. New York: Shocken, 1968. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge, 1994. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Blaine, David. Mysterious Stranger: A Book of Magic. New York: Villard, 2002. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Bradbury, Nancy Mason. “Popular-Festive Forms and Beliefs in Robert Mannyng’s Handlyng Synne.” Farrell. 158-79. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Brody, Saul Nathaniel. “Truth and Fiction in the Nun’s Priest’s Tale.” Modern Critical Views: Geoffrey Chaucer. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea, 1985. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Caillois, Roger. Man, Play, and Games. Trans. Meyer Barash. New York: Free P of Glencoe, 1961. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Trans. David Wright. New York: Oxford UP, 1985. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | ---. The Riverside Chaucer. Ed. Larry D. Benson. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1987. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich. Four Plays. Trans. David Magarshack. London: Hill and Wang, 1969. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Farrell, Thomas J. “Introduction: Bakhtin, Liminality, and Medieval Literature.”Farrell. 1-14. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | ---, ed. Bakhtin and Medieval Voices. Gainesville: UP of Florida, 1995. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Fine, Alan Gary. Shared Fantasy: Role-Playing Games as Social Worlds. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1983. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Frasca, Gonzalo. “Chapter II: Games and Videogames.” Videogames of the Oppressed: Videogames as a Means for Critical Thinking and Debate. Thesis. Georgia Institute of Technology, 2001. 2 February 2004 <http://www.ludology.org/articles/thesis/>. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Freud, Sigmund. “Beyond The Pleasure Principle.” The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Ed. James Strachey, Anna Freud, and Carrie Lee Rothgeb. London: Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1959. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Frost, Joe L. Play and Playscapes. New York: Delmar, 1992. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and Method. Trans. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall. New York: Crossroad, 1989. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Ganim, John M. Chaucerian Theatricality. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Goffman, Erving. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon, 1982. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | ---. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday, 1959. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Gredler, Margaret. Designing and Evaluating Games & Simulations: A Process Approach. London: Gulf, 1994. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Huizinga, Johan. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-element in Culture. Boston: Beacon, 1955. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Huppe, Bernard Felix. A Reading of the Canterbury Tales. New York: State U of New York P, 1964. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Hussey, S. S. Chaucer: An Introduction. New York: Methuen, 1981. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Knapp, Peggy Ann. Chaucer and the Social Contest. New York: Routledge, 1990. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Kole, Andre, and Jerry MacGregor. Mind Games. Phoenix, AZ: ACW P, 2002. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Kolve, V. A. Chaucer and the Imagery of Narrative: The First Five Canterbury Tales.London: Arnold, 1984. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Lindahl, Carl. Earnest Games: Folkloric Patterns in The Canterbury Tales. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1987. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Lyotard, Jean-Francois, and Jean-Loup Thebaud. Just Gaming. Trans. Wlad Godzich.Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1985. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | McGerr, Rosemarie Potz. Chaucer’s Open Books: Resistance to Closure in Medieval Discourse. Gainesville: UP of Florida UP, 1998. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media. New York: Routledge, 2001. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Muscatine, Charles. “Order and Disorder.” Geoffrey Chaucer’s the Knight’s Tale. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea, 1988. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Olson, Glending. “Chaucer’s Idea of a Canterbury Game.” The Idea of Medieval Literature: New Essays on Chaucer and Medieval Culture in Honor of Donald R. Howard. Ed. James M. Dean and Christian K. Zacher. Newark: U of Delaware P, 1992. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Park, Robert Ezra. Race and Culture. Glencoe, IL: Free, 1950. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Pelen, Marc M. “The Escape of Chaucer’s Chauntecleer: A Brief Revaluation.” The Chaucer Review 36.4 (2002): 329-35. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Perfetti, Lisa. “Taking Laughter Seriously: The Comic and Didactic Functions of Helmbrecht.” Farrell 38-60. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Richmond, Velma Bourgeois. Geoffrey Chaucer. New York: Continuum, 1992. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Schick, Lawrence. Heroic Worlds: A History and Guide to Role-Playing Games. New York: Prometheus, 1991. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Strindberg, August. Six Plays of Strindberg. Trans. Elizabeth Sprigge. New York: Anchor, 1955. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Taylor, Andrew. “Bakhtin and the Smithfield Decretals.” Farrell 17-37. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Traversi, Derek Antona. The Canterbury Tales: A Reading. Newark: U of Delaware P, 1983. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Wilson, R. Rawdon. In Palamedes’ Shadow: Explorations in Play, Game, & Narrative Theory. Boston: Northeastern UP, 1990. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Wood, Chauncey. Chaucer and the Country of the Stars: Poetic Uses of Astrological Imagery. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1970. | zh_TW |
