论文部分内容阅读
就我所知,在教学古典文学作品中,有两种不正确的态度。一种是钻牛角尖。如有位教师讲《西游记》中“大闹天宫”,竟去“钻研”中国猴子与印度猴子的关系。还有的教师在讲《桃花源记》一文时,对文中的三个“外人”大作文章,结果越讲越弄不清楚。显然,在教学中这样钻牛角尖,将会引导学生误入迷途。另一种是囫圇吞枣,不求甚解。如有位教师讲《荆軻刺秦王》中“……得赵人徐夫人匕首”一句,竟以为“徐夫人”是女性,把司馬迁受宫刑解釋成“受了宫廷的刑罰”。还有位教师講授王維《輞川閑居赠裴秀才迪》这首詩时,竟把“渡头余落日”,望文生义解释成“余”
As far as I know, there are two incorrect attitudes in the teaching of classical literature. One is drilling horns. If a teacher said “Journey to the West” in “Havoc in Heaven,” went so far as to “study” the relationship between Chinese monkeys and Indian monkeys. Some teachers talk about the “Peach Blossom Spring,” a text, the text of the three “outsiders” make a fuss, the more the more the results get confused. Obviously, in teaching such a cusp, will guide students to go astray. The other is swallowed, do not ask for a solution. If a teacher said “Jing Ke thorn Qin Wang,” “... Zhao Xu Ren dagger” one sentence, actually think “Mrs. Xu” is a woman, Sima Qian interpreted by the palace as “subject to the court’s sentence.” There is also a teacher to teach Wang Wei, “Wang Chuan Wan Ju free to give Pei Xiu Cai Di” when the poem, actually the “restless days,” literary meaning interpreted as “Yu”