The distance of the gap needs to be between the outer limits of boredom and overstrain according to Iser.
根据伊瑟尔的观点，这种差距应该在无聊和过度劳累的外部界限之间。
It's put in a different way by Iser, but it is in a large degree the same idea.
伊瑟尔用了不同的方法来讲述，但很大程度上说的也是同一概念。
So these are forms of the experience of reading fiction of which Iser disapproves because there's no work being done.
这就是那些阅读小说经历的形式,伊瑟尔不赞同这种形式，因为这种阅读没有任何成就。
After that, Iser makes a thorough inquiry about the intrinsic compose of literary - "repertoire and strategies".
在这之后，伊瑟尔对文学本文的内在构成——“剧目”与“策略”进行了具体而详细地探究。
It's the vocabulary, it's the complexity of the thought, and so on that makes it difficult. Iser acknowledges this.
是词汇，思想的复杂性等等，使它变得难懂，伊瑟尔承认这一点。
Iser says that a literary work has two poles, "the author's text" and "the realization accomplished by the reader."
伊瑟尔说每部文学作品都有两个支柱，即赋予作者思想的“原文”和“读者读时版本”。
So these are forms of the experience of reading fiction of which Iser disapproves because there's no work being done.
这就是那些阅读小说经历的形式，伊瑟尔不赞同这种形式，因为这种阅读没有任何成就。
I think that the distinction Iser is making between reading and interpretation can be understood in much the same way.
我想伊瑟尔想指出的，阅读与诠释之间的差异也基本上也可以这样理解。
This of course brings us to the issue of "gaps" and the role that they play in the act of reading as Iser understands it.
这理所当然地把我们引到了“间隙“的问题上“,以及照伊瑟尔的理解,间隙在阅读中起到的作用。
It has to be a bigger distance, a broader abyss, and that's what Iser is working with in the passages I'm about to quote.
它必须是一个更大的距离，更宽的深渊，这就是伊瑟尔在我想引用的那些话里面所试图说明的。
Wolfgang Iser, a scholar of aesthetic response, presents a concept of "the implied reader" after studying the other models carefully.
读者反应批评大师沃夫冈·伊泽尔在研究了这些理论的优、缺点之后，推出了“隐含读者”这个概念。
Iser has established an acceptance theory established by text processing center, the authors and readers two-way interactive dynamic study of new ideas.
伊瑟尔建立的接受理论确立了一种以文本处理为中心、作者和读者双向互动动态研究的新思路。
In other words, Iser is no more an historicist than Gadamer is but insists rather on the mutual exchange of prejudice between the two horizons in question.
换句话说就是，伊瑟尔并不比葛达玛更历史主义，但他相反却坚持在两个有争执的视域中，偏见的互换。
As you'll see when we return to Iser after I've said a few things about Hirsch, this, as you'll see, is the fundamental difference between Gadamer and Iser.
正如你们所看到的，当我谈论了赫施的问题之后，又回到了伊瑟尔，这就是葛达玛和伊瑟尔的明显不同。
People enjoy that in ways that Iser may not be fully acknowledging in this argument, but there's no question that it doesn't involve the violation of expectations.
人们很开心地看到，从某种程度上伊瑟尔可能，没有在他的论点中完全承认，但是毫无疑问，论点中并没有期望的违背。
Continuing to page 1004, the upper right-hand column: xpectations"--this word is what Iser thinks governs the sort of dialectic that the reading process is playing with.
接着看1004页，右上角一栏：,“期望“，伊瑟尔认为正是这个词，“…,支配着阅读过程中的对立。
Continuing to page 1004, the upper right-hand column: xpectations"--this word is what Iser thinks governs the sort of dialectic that the reading process is playing with.
接着看1004页，右上角一栏：,“期望“，伊瑟尔认为正是这个词，“…,支配着阅读过程中的对立。
应用推荐