| 英文摘要 |
During the late Qing period, especially after the First Sino-Japanese War, a lot of very negative and derogatory discourses regarding China and the Chinese people appeared in Meiji Japan. Nevertheless, quite a number of these very negative Japanese“representations of the other”were quickly translated and introduced into China. Ironically, these negative discourses soon became dominant discourses in defining the true nature of China as well as the characteristics of the Chinese people. Moreover, these new concepts/vocabularies, analytical frameworks, and logics of reasoning in defining China and the Chinese people were eagerly adopted and appropriated by Qing intellectuals in articulating their own views and criticism of Chinese and in constructing national identity. Although these“Orientalist discourses”form Japan are full of reductionist and essentialist fallacies, there seems to have been an“elective affinity”between these“Orientalist discourses”and narratives of national identity. This historical phenomenon of“alternative Self-Orientalization”in the late Qing period has long been ignored by the current scholarship, which mainly deals with Japan’s role in introducing western learning to China and Japan’s invention of new vocabularies. My research on the issue of“alternative Self-Orientalization”will critically analyze how Liang Qichao appropriated Ozaki Yukio’s“Dynasty vs. Nation”discourse in defining the true nature of the Chinese empire, showing the“travelling theory”phenomenon indicated by Edward Said. My study will shed new light on our understanding on this important and complicated inter-cultural and trans-lingual historical phenomenon. |