※ 引述《Mancer (human capacity)》之銘言：
: http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern
: 每次repload這一頁都會有新的論文跑出來 (樂)
讓我想到這篇算是小有名氣的文章，不知道有沒有貼過：
"HOW TO SPEAK AND WRITE POSTMODERN"
by Stephen Katz, Associate Professor, Sociology,
Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada
http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/how-to-talk-postmodern.html
'However, I think the real gulf is not so much positional as linguistic'
'``We should listen to the views of people outside of Western society
in order to learn about the cultural biases that affect us''. This
is honest but dull. Take the word ``views''. Postmodernspeak would
change that to ``voices'', or better, ``vocalities'', or even better,
``multivocalities''. Add an adjective like ``intertextual'', and
you're covered. ``People outside'' is also too plain. How about ``
postcolonial others''? To speak postmodern properly one must master
a bevy of biases besides the familiar racism, sexism, ageism, etc.
For example, phallogocentricism (male-centredness combined with
rationalistic forms of binary logic). Finally ``affect us'' sounds
like plaid pajamas. Use more obscure verbs and phrases, like ``
mediate our identities''. So, the final statement should say, ``We
should listen to the intertextual, multivocalities of postcolonial
others outside of Western culture in order to learn about the
phallogocentric biases that mediate our identities''. Now you're
talking postmodern!
（錯：「我們應該多聽聽來自西方社會以外的人的觀點，才能得知那些影響我們的
文化偏見。」）
後現代：「我們應該多聽聽來自西方社會以外，發自後殖民他者的互文與多音複調；
這樣才能瞭解中介我們身份的陽具理體中心主義偏見。」
' You want to say or write something like, ``Contemporary buildings are
alienating''. This is a good thought, but, of course, a non-starter.
... What do you get? ``Pre/post/spacialities of counter-architectural
hyper-contemporaneity (re)commits us to an ambivalent recurrentiality
of antisociality/seductivity, one enunciated in a de/gendered-
Baudrillardian discourse of granulated subjectivity''. You should be
able to hear a postindustrial pin drop on the retrocultural floor.'
（錯：「當代建築被異化了。」
後現代：「反建築的超—當代性之前／後空間性，透過關於碎化主體性的去／
性別化的布希亞式論述，（再）提帶了我們自身反社會性／可誘惑性裡的
愛恨交織情節的回潮。」）
'If that doesn't work, you might be left with the terribly modernist
thought of, ``I don't know''. Don't worry, just say, ``The instability
of your question leaves me with several contradictorily layered responses
whose interconnectivity cannot express the logocentric coherency you seek.
I can only say that reality is more uneven and its (mis)representations
more untrustworthy than we have time here to explore''.'
（錯：「不了。」
後現代：「你的問題含意的不穩定性讓我必須以各種矛盾而又多層次的回應對待，
但這些回應彼此的相互關連是不能為你所尋求的理體中心而一致的表達方式
所呈現。我只能說現實更為不定，現實的（誤）再現讓人無法信賴，我們
沒有時間討論這個。」）
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 61.64.75.158