It's not just a question, as obviously Foucault and Barthes are always suggesting, of deferring to authority as though the authority were the police with a baton in its hand, right?

这不仅仅是一个，如福柯和巴特经常暗示的一样明显的，尊崇作者权威就好像这种权威,是一个手握警棍的警官的问题，对吧？

耶鲁公开课 - 文学理论导论课程节选

So we consider a text as a structured entity, or perhaps as an entity which is structured and yet at the same time that's the case with Roland Barthes.

所以，我们把原文视为一个结构上的实体，或者是作为一个,有结构上的实体同时,这就是罗兰，巴特的例子。

耶鲁公开课 - 文学理论导论课程节选

In other words, the author, the traditional idea of the author -so much under suspicion in the work of Foucault and Barthes in the late sixties--can be turned on its ear.

换言之，有一种传统的看法就是对作者置之不理,六十年代晚期在福柯和巴特的,作品中有那么多疑点。

耶鲁公开课 - 文学理论导论课程节选

By the same token, there is the work of Roland Barthes and some of his contemporaries--Poulet, whom I mentioned, - Jean Starobinski and others-- that was called in the French press La Nouvelle Critique.

同样的，罗兰巴特的一些作品,还有很多和他同时期的人，比如我们提到过的乔治普莱，让·斯塔罗宾斯基，还有其他人的作品-,也都被当时的法国媒体称为“新批评“

耶鲁公开课 - 文学理论导论课程节选

By the way, once again there's a bit of a rift there between Barthes and Foucault. Foucault wouldn't say "quite futile."

顺便说一句，这里巴特和福柯,又有了分歧，巴特不会说“没有希望“

耶鲁公开课 - 文学理论导论课程节选

This is 1969, and the purpose that's alleged for appealing to the author as a paternal source, as an authority, is, according to both Barthes and Foucault, to police the way texts are read.

这是1969年，断言把作者作为一种,父性的资源，一种权威的目的，根据巴特和福柯的说法，是为了监督文本被阅读的方式。

耶鲁公开课 - 文学理论导论课程节选