This is the first English version of a text out of print for more than 40 years, summarising the positions and key concepts of an influential stream of linguistic thought. Using quotations as entries, J. Vachek (1909-1997), a leading advocate of the Prague School, employed more than 160 sources, papers and monographs, by well over 30 representatives of the school (Mathesius, Trnka, Skalicka, Dane, Dokulil, Mukarovský, Jakobson, Trubetzkoy, Isachenko, and others). The dictionary both captures the pioneering efforts and achievements of the school from its foundation in 1926, and provides a framework for assessing the current state of affairs, attesting to its originality and serving as a preventive to treading paths already explored. The headword concepts are provided with French, German and Czech equivalents and Vachek's original preface is supplemented by a foreword which traces the development of the school up to the present date and puts it into perspective.
This is a core introduction to the most innovative and influential writings to have shaped and defined the relations between language, culture and cultural identity.
Volume 2 of the Prague Linguistic Circle Papers constitutes a single whole together with Vol. 1 of the series, reviving the classical series of Travaux du Cercle linguistique de Prague which was of great importance for the development of European structural linguistics in the 1930s. In the present volume, nine Czech linguists and eight authors from abroad present new ideas in various domains from basic properties of the system of language to discourse types and to history of linguistics in the 20th century. Fundamental issues of structural linguistics are discussed by C.H. van Schooneveld and F. ?ermak, those of quantitative linguistics by M. T? itelova, of sentence structure by H.-H. Lieb, Y. Tobin, J. Panevova, T. Gross and J. abr ula, discourse patterns are dealt with by J. Hoffmannova, S. ?mejrkova and F. ticha, phonology and graphemics by E. Battistella, A. Svoboda and P.A. Luelsdorff with S.V. Chesnokov, and the lexicon by L. Waugh and V. Strakova.
This is precisely the book I have been looking out for ever since working at my Das Drama. Theorie und Analyse (1977; The Theory and Analysis of Drama, 1988), and discovering from a few specimens the incisive usefulness and importance of Prague School theatre semiotics. There is everything one could possibly wish for in this monumental Theatre Theory Reader: Prague School Writings: all the by now canonical texts and many others presented for the first time in English, arranged in a systematic order which fully renders the sense of the scope and development of Czech theatre semiotics, and all of them in highly competent translations aware of the terminological complexities at stake and supported by helpful annotations. With such a rich harvest garnered, this anthology of Prague School Writings is bound to become nationally as well as internationally a prime work of reference and give to them a second lease of life in the 21st century. Manfred Pfister *** Modern theatre theory, no matter what its orientation, can trace its roots back to the structuralist and semiotic explorations of the Prague School in the early twentieth century. This comprehensive and informed overview is therefore most welcome in understanding the course and development of that theoretical tradition. It is not, however, of purely historical interest, important as that is. Whether they use the terminology of the Prague School or evoke the names of its contributors, analysts of theatre and performance today still find the strategies and articulations of those pioneers of ongoing relevance. This collection thus provides an important double service, providing contemporary theatre scholars with a clearer idea of where they have come from and an inspiration for where they may be going. Marvin Carlson *** I think it is a great idea not to group the articles according to the different authors but following a systematic that covers as many aspects of theatre as possible. This way, it becomes quite clear that the theories of the so-called Prague or Czech structuralists and semioticians were able to apply their theories when discussing most diverging questions related to theatre. The choice of texts is excellent. It makes more than clear that these theories are not outdated, do not only have historical value and are interesting with regard to the history of ideas only. Rather, it becomes evident that they are highly relevant in the context of discussions led today. Erika Fischer-Lichte *** The Prague School and the Czech structuralism have had a considerable impact on the development of semiotic studies and theatre studies at large in the 1960s and 70s. But this has been quickly forgotten and with the rise of poststructuralism and deconstruction in the 80s and 90s, they were not only neglected, but also unjustly disregarded or even forgotten. This is why the Theatre Theory Reader: Prague School Writings is a very welcome book which comes at the right moment, when postmodernism, poststructuralism and postdramatic theatre seem to have lost their momentum, as if the requirements of today’s quest for a new way of living and of making business had become so strong that we must go back to the basics. Structuralism and a critique of ideology are now back, at least as a sign to not give up thinking and theorizing in a world which has become self-centred and mad. The afterword by Pavel Drábek, Martin Bernátek, Andrea Jochmanová and Eva Šlaisová is a sort of book within the book, as it neatly puts in perspective all the important names and theories of the Prague School. It does this in a very user-friendly manner, where complex theories are summarized in a clear, yet precise, introduction. This makes the reading of the different chapters easier and immediately connected to our contemporary way of thinking. Patrice Pavis
The importance of the Prague School for the rise of structuralism and for integration of the theoretical linguistics of today can hardly be overestimated. The volume brings together 13 papers showing the main results of the research of the Prague School and of its continuation in the domains of phonemics and written language, morphemics and word formation, lexicon, syntax and semantics, text structures, stylistics and typology. The authors all actively contributed to the domain they are treating here.
