论文部分内容阅读
(1)余祥生同志在《“第二自然”探源》(刊登于《语文学习》第九期)中的观点基本上是正确的。但有一点需要纠正:①文中认为“第二自然”是人化了的自然”,这是不妥的。人化,即人格化,即把动物、植物景观赋予的特征,使它们具有人的思想感情和行为。讲“人格”就是讲“自然”变得切近于“人”了。实际上,不是说“自然”切近于“人”,而是讲这个“自然”不是一般的纯自然风景,是有着人的积极活动的参与的风景,用公式简易表示,即为人的积极活动+纯自然风景=“第二自然”。用茅盾的原话讲就是一般的纯自然风景因为“加上了人的活动”而完全改观。改观的结果是什么呢?不是把“自然”改成了“人”,
(1) The point of view of Comrade Yu Xiangsheng in “The Source of the Second Nature” (published in “Language Learning”, Issue 9) is basically correct. However, there is one point that needs to be corrected: 1 It is inappropriate to think that “the second nature is a humanized nature.” Humanization, that is, the personification, that is, the characteristics that give animals and plants landscapes, gives them human thinking. Feelings and behaviors, speaking of “personality” means that “nature” becomes closer to “man.” In fact, instead of saying that “natural” is close to “human”, it is not a matter of saying that “nature” is not an ordinary pure natural landscape. It is a landscape that involves people’s active activities and is represented by a simple formula, that is, people’s active activities + pure natural scenery = “second nature.” Using Mao Dun’s original words is an ordinary pure natural landscape because “adding people “The activity” is completely changed. What is the result of the change? Instead of changing “natural” to “person,”