俄國後現代主義雖接受大部分西方後現代主義的特質，然俄國後現代主義卻擁有異於西方後現代主義本質上的特點，包括俄國歷史發展由社會主義過渡到民主政體的獨特性，社會價值､意識形態實質上的危機，先前神話與意識形態的膨脹導致「真實」的消逝，以及蘇聯烏托邦的瓦解所帶來的「歷史終結」。所選四篇彼列文的短篇小說表現出特定的相似點:諷刺手法，「真實」的問題，文本互涉手法，對知識論的不信任，去意識形態化，哲學思維方法。本論文嘗試將當代受歡迎之彼列文的短篇小說中所蘊含的後現代特點系統化，並依據這些特點具體分析《透明世界》《維拉•芭芙洛夫娜的第九個夢》《隱士與六指》《妮卡》這四篇短篇小說。彼列文以去神話化､去意識形態化､去象徵化､去隱喻化､悖論､雙關語､矛盾修辭法等文藝手法具體表達「諷刺敘述模式」。本文列舉並評論在短篇小說中文本互涉之引喻､玄秘情節，聖經､神話､社會的象徵意義，同時也分析研究文本片段之修辭､語言對比差異。

事實證明艾可(Umberto Eco)的小說《玫瑰之名》在學術界和大眾文化兩個領域中都是一項極大的成就。小說不僅提供了感官上的享受，更充滿了深奧的哲思。更由於艾可本人兼具小說家及符號學(semiotics)理論家的雙重身份，使得小說在「詮釋」的議題上呈現出頗具理論深度的省思。 　　本論文將「詮釋」定義為一種帶有政治動機與意涵的行為(a politicallymotivated act)，不再接受「文本自成一體」(text-in-itself)的觀念。所採取之立場是強調權力機構如何介入論述(discourse)之產生與傳遞。然而本論文亦將由符號學之角度探討符號的本質和閱讀、表意(signification)等問題。 　　論文第一章分析小說中有關「異端」、「貧窮」、以及「笑」等主題之論述，及其與權力抗爭之互動，亦即「權力／論述／知識」(power/ discourse/knowledge)之結構。第二章分別討論埃索(Adso)與威廉(William)兩人解讀(reading/decoding)符號迷宮之行為。第三章處理小說中「文本互涉」與「對話論」之觀念。第四章特別檢視作者艾可在面對自己作品時的「發言位置」(enunciative position)。 　　本論文並未特別遵循任何一種理論之分析方法，目的在於將小說置於當代論述形成之網絡，呈現其中相互輝映、相互批判之潛在關係。最終期望得以驗證艾可的小說與其它當代理論同等「理論化」，並且重新檢視小說／理論之界限。 / Umberto Eco's <u>The Name of the Rose</u> has been proved a great success in both academies and popular culture. It is a novel full of sensuous wonders and philosophical profundity. Owing to Eco's unsual status--a popular novelist and a semiotic theorist --<u>The Name of the Rose</u> (re)presents a thoughtful contemplation on the issues of interpretation. 　　This thesis assesses "interpretation" as a politically motivated act. Thus, the concept of the "text-in-itself" is rejected. Rather, I take the stance the accentuates power institution's interference with the production and the distribution of discourses. But, this thesis also offers a semiotic survey on the nature of sign and the process of reading and signification. 　　Chapter One focuses on the production of discourses on heresy, poverty, and laughter in the novel and its connection with power: in other words, the power/discourse/knowledge structure. Chapter Two respectively discusses the process of Adso's and William's reading/decoding the labyrinth of signs. Chapter Three deals with the ideas of "intertextuality" and "dialogism" presented by the novel. Chapter Four specially examines Eco's enunciative position with respect to the interpretations on his own text. 　　This thesis does not particularly favor any theoretical stance of methodology. The purpose is to discuss the novel as part of the network of the contemporary discourses. The tentative goal of this study is to prove that Eco's novel is no less theorized than other theories as such and finally to re- examine the boundary between theory/novel.

薩爾曼•魯希迪的《摩爾人的最後嘆息》運用想像與史實描繪出一個印度家族的故事。這個四代家族所經歷的時間橫跨整個二十世紀，一般說來在這個世紀前半部分大多數國家經歷了殖民統治與帝國主義，而在後半部分則面臨去殖民與國家主義的風潮。因此，書中論及的這些殖民與後殖民的經驗也引發了一些重要的議題，像是混雜、多元文化，和國家主義。霍米•巴巴提出‘閾限空間’這個概念有助於對這本小說做深入的評價與賞析，特別是能促進對以上三個議題更深入而具體的認知。霍米•巴巴將許多概念納入‘閾限空間’這個總括性術語的討論範圍，因此本論文將從中擷取三個概念來論述這本小說，分別是混雜、文化差異、及國家意識。 本論文的導論先闡釋霍米•巴巴‘閾限空間’這個概念並且發掘魯希迪這本小說中許多重要的後殖民議題。這些議題與‘閾限空間’ 這個概念的關係密不可分，因此這個概念所延伸論及的理論便可用於理解並賞析這本小說。接下來的三章將分別以混雜、文化差異、及國家意識來發掘並建立《摩爾人的最後嘆息》與‘閾限空間’這概念之間的關係。第二章將藉由霍米•巴巴對殖民者與被殖民者之間的矛盾關係的論述進而深入理解小說中意欲呈現的殖民混雜與後殖民混雜。這種矛盾的關係理論上與他者化的過程有關聯，在這過程中身分認同與主體化不論是在後殖民理論還是此本小說中都是值得商榷的議題。第三章利用霍米•巴巴的‘文化差異’來重新檢視並且重新定義所謂的多元文化。魯希迪在小說中巧妙地將現在的印度重疊在過去由摩爾人統治的西班牙之上，這種後殖民的羊皮紙影像便可藉由文化差異與多元文化的概念得到更具體的意義。此外，閾限空間也是一種不同文化的接觸地帶，這樣的中介地域也有助於理解魯希迪在流行文化與高等文化間所採的折衷主義。第四章則著重於探討霍米•巴巴如何發展閾限空間與國家意識的理論關係，還有國家與敘事之間的關係。此章也將利用國家與敘事的關係來理解魯希迪是如何在這本小說中運用許多文學技巧在小說世界中重構國家形象，尤其是文本互涉的材料與歷史的指涉這樣的技巧。 最後的總論將重申在本論文中提及的一些重要的論點，藉由重申這些論點來總結論文提及的一些重要概念的大意，並且讓魯希迪的《摩爾人的最後嘆息》與巴巴的‘閾限空間’這個文本與理論相互闡釋並佐證的關係更為清楚。 / Salman Rushdie’s The Moor’s Last Sigh delineates, fictively and historically, a family saga in India. The four-generation family approximately spans the twentieth century that, generally speaking, has gone through colonization and imperialism in the first half as well as de-colonization and nationalism in the second half. Accordingly, they bring forth a few significant issues, such as hybridity, multiculturalism, and nationalism. Homi Bhabha’s idea of ‘liminal space’ is conducive to the evaluation of the novel, and expressly to the discussion of the above three concepts in a more specific way. He subsumes a lot of ideas under the umbrella term ‘liminal space’, so this thesis is to extract three ideas—hybridity, cultural difference, and nationness—to elaborate on the novel. The introductory chapter expounds Bhabha’s idea of ‘liminal space’ and also explores a few post-colonial issues in the novel. The issues in question are related to Bhabha’s idea of ‘liminal space’, from which some key ideas are derived so as to appreciate the fictional world Rushdie constructs in the novel. The following three chapters are respectively based on the three liminality-related ideas, whereby to find the relation of the novel with Bhabha’s ‘liminal space’. The second chapter is to obtain a deeper apprehension of colonial and post-colonial hybridity through Bhabha’s argumentation concerning the ambivalent relationship between colonizer and colonized. The ambivalent relationship is theoretically associated with the othering process. In the process, identification and subjectification are moot questions not only in post-colonial theory but in the novel as well. The third chapter is intended to make use of Bhabha’s idea of ‘cultural difference’ to review and redefine what the word ‘multiculturalism’ is like. In turn, it helps to shed much more light upon Rushdie’s palimpsesting modern India over Moorish Spain. In addition, liminal space refers to a contact zone of cultural difference that elucidates Rushdie’s eclecticism between popular culture and high culture in the novel. The fourth chapter is to discuss the way Bhabha colligates liminal space and the idiolect ‘nationness’ and the way he relates the idea of nation to narration. The relationship between nation and narration is applied to the understanding of how Rushdie utilizes literary techniques, especially intertextual materials and historical allusions, for a re-construction of a nation in a fictional world. The conclusive chapter is to reiterate some important arguments that are germane to the above key concepts and to the reciprocal clarification between Bhabha’s ‘liminal space’ and Rushdie’s The Moor’s Last Sigh.