The Validity Of Interpretation And Over-interpretation Of Literature Under The Perspective Of The Hermeneutic Circle

The hermeneutic circle is an extremely important concept in hermeneutics,according to the content it can be divided into pre-classical forms of Heidegger and his modern form after. In this paper, the evolution of the concept of the hermeneutic circle from ancient times till now has carried on close combing,in particular, inspected in Ast, Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger and Gadamer's hermeneutical circle thinking.Although no clear explanation of Ancient Chinese Science of reference, but it has a rich hermeneutic thinking.This paper discussed by Mencius represented the "inferring will from meaning" and "reflection of life" the hermeneutical circle thought,hoping to find similar links with the West's spiritual resources,and provide a theoretical reference about that the question of interpretation of literature.From the text and the text within the hermeneutic circle a problem arising out is the validity of interpretation.Initially on the validity of interpretation is presented out by the United States and literary Hirsch, who had a detailed discussion in his book Validity in Interpretation.Juhl theorists have gone further, explicitly that "a work that only a single correct interpretation" of point of the view to maintain the literary interpretation of the scientific and objective.Over-interpretation of the real problem is derived from the interpretation of the validity comes, it was first used by the Italian semiotician Umberto Eco proposed in the 1990s. Compiled and published in the "Interpretation and Over-interpretation" of a collection of Umberto Eco, Richard Rorty and Jonathan Culler's lecture, were each set out on the issue of over-interpretation of its own position and views. This thesis on a thorough analysis on each of the points of Discrimination and sort of thoughts in order on this issue to know more.This article deemed that the distinction between meaning and significant is very important,which can help us recognize that different interpretations of the text lies the theoretical differences.But on Johl's "the only correct interpretation of a work only" view is that some too far. Over-interpretation on the issue, agreed that Umberto Eco on the source of over-interpretation of the history tracking, and Culler's claim on the operating mechanism of the text view.