Article published in:
Literature as Dialogue: Invitations offered and negotiated
Edited by Roger D. Sell
[Dialogue Studies 22] 2014
► pp. 251270
References
Aristotle
1983Physics: Books III and IV. E. Hussey (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beiser, Frederick
2003The Romantic Imperative. The Concept of Early German Romanticism. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Benjamin, Walter
1996The Concept of Criticism in German Romanticism. In Selected Writings, vol. 1 (1913-1926). M.P. Bullock, ‎M.W. Jennings (eds.). Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Blanchot, Maurice
1969 “L’Athenaeum”. In L’Entretien infini. M. Blanchot (ed.), 515-527. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bubner, Rüdiger
1995 “Von Fichte zu Schlegel.” In Innovationen des Idealismus. R. Bubner (ed.), 140-152. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Dali, Salvador
1971Oui, vol 2. Paris: Denoël/Gonthier.Google Scholar
Frank, Manfr
ed. 1996 “Wechselgrundsatz. Friedrich Schlegels philosophischer Ausgangspunkt.” In Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 26-50.Google Scholar
Granger, Gilles Gaston
1988Essais d’une philosophie du style. Paris: Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
Hegel, GWF
1971Phänomenologie des Geistes,Werke 3. E. Moldenhauer, K.M. Markus (eds.). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
1971aBerliner Schriften, Solgers nachgelassene Schriften und Briefwechsel, Werke 11. E. Moldenhauer, K.M. Markus (eds.). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
1971bHegel, Vorlesungen über Ästhetik , Werke 13. E. Moldenhauer, K.M. Markus (eds.). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
1971c Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie , Werke 20. E. Moldenhauer, K.M. Markus (eds.). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Hüsch, Sebastian
2013 “When Phiosophy must become literature: Søren Kierkegaard’s Concept of Indirect Communication.” In Sell, Borch and Lindgren 2013: 213-228.Google Scholar
Lejeune, Guillaume
2012 “Towards a pragmatic semantics: Dialogue and Representation in Friedrich Schlegel and Schleiermacher.” In Dialogue and Representation. A. Létourneau, F. Cooren (eds.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2013Sens et Usage du langage chez Hegel. Du problème de la communication de la philosophie à celui des philosophies de la communication. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
Leventhal, Robert
2007 “Transcendental or Material Oscillation: An Alternate Reading of Friedrich Schlegel’s Wechselerweis 1795-1797”. In Athenäum: Jahrbuch für Romantik (2007), J. Hörisch, M. Frank, G. Oesterle (eds.), 93-134.Google Scholar
Novalis [ = Georg Philipp Friedrich Freiherr von Hardenberg].
1997Philosophical Writings. Margaret Stoljar (ed.). New York: SUNY.Google Scholar
Plato.
1973Phaedrus and Letters VII and VIII. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Schanze, Helmut
1999 “Das romantische Fragment zwischen Chamfort und Nietzsche: über einige historische Widersprüche im Fragmentbegriff bei F. Schlegel und Novalis.” In Über das Fragment. A. Camion, W. Drost et aliquid (eds.), 30-37, Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar
Schelling, F.W.J
1856 [1800] “System der transzendentalen Idealismus.” In Sämmtliche Werke. K.F.A. Schelling (ed.). Stuttgart, Augsburg: Cotta.Google Scholar
Schlegel, Friedrich
1958 “Wissenschaft der europäischen Literatur”. In Kritische Ausgabe. Vol. XI. Ernst Behler (ed.). Paderborn: Schöningh Verlag.Google Scholar
1963 “Philosophische Lehrjahre (1796-1806).” In Kritische Ausgabe. Vol. XVIII. Ernst Behler (ed.). Paderborn: Schöningh Verlag.Google Scholar
1964 “Philosophische Vorlesungen (1800-1807).” In Kritische Ausgabe. Vol. XII. Ernst Behler (ed.). Paderborn: Schöningh Verlag.Google Scholar
1964b “Philosophische Vorlesungen (1800-1807).” In Kritische Ausgabe. Vol. XIII. Ernst Behler (ed.). Paderborn: Schöningh Verlag.Google Scholar
1966 “Studien zur Geschichte und Politik.” In Kritische Ausgabe. Vol. VII. Ernst Behler (ed.). Paderborn: Schöningh Verlag.Google Scholar
1971Lucinde and the Fragments. Peter Firchow (trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
1974 “Charakteristiken und Kritiken I (1796-1801).” In Kritische Ausgabe. Vol. II. Hans Eichner (ed.). Paderborn: Schöningh Verlag.Google Scholar
1985 “Briefe von und an Friedrich und Dorothea Schlegel. Die Periode des Athenäums (1797-1799).” In Kritische Ausgabe, Vol. XXIV. R. Immerwahr (ed.). Paderborn: Schöningh Verlag.Google Scholar
Schleiermacher, Friedrich Daniel Ernst
1998 “Vorlesungen über die Lehre vom Staat.” Kritische Gesamtausgabe , vol II-8. Walter Jaeschke (ed.). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2002 “Vorlesungen über die Dialektik.” Kritische Gesamtausgabe, vol II-10,1. Andreas Arndt (ed.). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sell, Roger D
2011Communicational Criticism: Studies in Literature as Dialogue. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(ed.) 2012Literary Community-Making: The Dialogicality of English Texts from the Seventeenth Century to the Present. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sell, Roger D., Borch, Adam and Lindgren, Inna
(eds) 2013The Ethics of Literary Communication: Genuineness, Directness, Indirectness. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Siebers, Johan
2013 “The Utopian Horizon of Communication: Ernst Bloch’s Traces and Johann-Peter Hebel’s Treasure Chest .” In Sell, Borch and Lindgren 2013: 189-212.
Taylor, Charles
1979Hegel and Modern Society. New York, Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Todorov, Tzvetan
1977 “La crise romantique”. In Théories du symbole. Todorov (ed.), Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Vigus, James
2009 “Transzendentalpoesie bei Friedrich Schlegel im Vergleich zum Begriff ‘philosophic poem’ bei Coleridge.” In Friedrich Schlegel und Friedrich Nietzsche: Transzendentalpoesie oder Dichtkunst mit Begriffen. Klaus Vieweg (ed.), 133-143. Paderborn: Schöningh.Google Scholar
2011 “The Romantic Fragment and the Legitimation of Philosophy: Platonic Poems of Reason.” Leopardi Centre website, University of Birmingham. http://​www​.leopardi​.bham​.ac​.uk​/fragments​/paper​-vigus​.pdf
Wehrs, Donald R. and David P. Haney
(eds) 2009Levinas and Nineteenth Century Literature: Ethics and Otherness from Romanticism through Realism. Newark: University of Delaware Press.Google Scholar
Weigand, Edda
2009Language as Dialogue. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Dialogue: The Mixed Game. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, Rainer
1986 “Zur Erkenntnis Funktion des Fragments. Friedrich Schlegel und Novalis.” In Zeitschrift für Aesthetik und allgemeine Kunstwissenschaft, 30-43.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

No author info given
2016.  In Experimentalism as Reciprocal Communication in Contemporary American Poetry [FILLM Studies in Languages and Literatures, 4], Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 july 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.