This thesis involves intellectuals' identity problems through the relationship between intellectuals and the public, which is revealed in public discourse of Chinese intellectuals of 1920-30s. It is because various discourse of intellectuals to the public is necessarily exposed to its distinction by relationship methods between the discourse's production subject 'intellectuals' and the public. Therefore, the relationship between intellectuals and the public focuses on ultimately solving confrontational relationship between the imaginary public and real public by intellectuals. To solve the very confrontation, Ideologies like the Enlightenment and socialism come out. However, these trials to narrow realistic gaps between intellectuals and the public accompany realistic effects, which mean confusion of intellectuals' identity(or individuality), in other words, affirmation and denial to intellectuals' existence. Thus public discourse of intellectuals is to raise an essential question to intellectuals themselves by mediating the public. In those days, recognition of intellectuals exposed from public discourse is largely divided into four patterns: dichotomous attitudes of recognition such as 1)minority and majority, 2)old and new things, 3)bourgeoisie(or feudality) and the proletariat and 4)the West and China. This paradigm is exposed to highly complex combination methods rather than simple types. It not only provides notions of intellectuals, but also has characteristics chosen according to their ideological tendency. Intellectuals' identity problems clearly exposed by relationship with the public are equally applied to Chinese intellectuals after Chinese reform. That's because at present classism of the so-called 'proletariat' disappeared, and the relationship by intellectuals is trying again. But intellectuals' identity problems required by relationship between intellectuals and the public still remain not solved.

This thesis involves intellectuals' identity problems through the relationship between intellectuals and the public, which is revealed in public discourse of Chinese intellectuals of 1920-30s. It is because various discourse of intellectuals to the public is necessarily exposed to its distinction by relationship methods between the discourse's production subject 'intellectuals' and the public. Therefore, the relationship between intellectuals and the public focuses on ultimately solving confrontational relationship between the imaginary public and real public by intellectuals. To solve the very confrontation, Ideologies like the Enlightenment and socialism come out. However, these trials to narrow realistic gaps between intellectuals and the public accompany realistic effects, which mean confusion of intellectuals' identity(or individuality), in other words, affirmation and denial to intellectuals' existence. Thus public discourse of intellectuals is to raise an essential question to intellectuals themselves by mediating the public. In those days, recognition of intellectuals exposed from public discourse is largely divided into four patterns: dichotomous attitudes of recognition such as 1)minority and majority, 2)old and new things, 3)bourgeoisie(or feudality) and the proletariat and 4)the West and China. This paradigm is exposed to highly complex combination methods rather than simple types. It not only provides notions of intellectuals, but also has characteristics chosen according to their ideological tendency. Intellectuals' identity problems clearly exposed by relationship with the public are equally applied to Chinese intellectuals after Chinese reform. That's because at present classism of the so-called 'proletariat' disappeared, and the relationship by intellectuals is trying again. But intellectuals' identity problems required by relationship between intellectuals and the public still remain not solved.

, , , , , , ,