The Comparative Method and the Tertium Comparationis

Every literary comparison rests on an implicit third term — a category, problem, theme, or form held in common by the things compared. The comparatist's first task is to identify and justify this ground, the tertium comparationis, without which juxtaposition collapses into arbitrary association.

Definition

The tertium comparationis is the shared third term against which two distinct literary objects are measured; the comparative method is the set of procedures for selecting comparanda and establishing and defending that common ground.

Scope

Examines the logical structure of literary comparison: the requirement of a stated common ground, the distinction between genetic comparison (resting on contact and influence) and analogical or typological comparison (resting on resemblance), and the disciplinary debates over whether either is sufficient. Includes the classic definitions of comparative literature as the study of literature beyond the confines of one nation.

Core questions

• On what shared basis are two texts or traditions being compared, and is that basis defensible?
• Does the comparison rest on documented contact (genetic) or on resemblance without contact (typological)?
• How does one avoid smuggling the standards of one literature into the comparison as if they were neutral?
• When does a comparison illuminate, and when does it merely flatten difference?

Key theories

Tertium comparationis

Borrowed from logic and rhetoric, the third term names the common ground without which comparison is incoherent; explicit articulation of it distinguishes rigorous comparison from impressionistic pairing.

Genetic versus typological comparison

Genetic comparison establishes relations of influence, source, and transmission between texts in contact, while typological comparison identifies structural or thematic parallels independent of any historical link.

Remak's definition of the discipline

Remak defined comparative literature as the study of literature beyond the borders of one country and of the relations between literature and other domains of knowledge, fixing a broad but bounded sense of the comparative enterprise.

History

Positivist comparatists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries grounded comparison in traceable lines of influence and source study. Remak's 1961 essay codified a wide definition for the American context, and Wellek's earlier critique of factualism pressed the case for typological and aesthetic comparison. The explicit theorization of the tertium comparationis as a methodological requirement consolidated in introductions to the discipline such as Bassnett's.

Debates

Whether comparison requires demonstrable contact

Genetic purists insist that legitimate comparison must trace real historical transmission, while defenders of typological comparison hold that resemblance can be analytically productive even without contact.

Key figures

• Henry H. H. Remak
• René Wellek
• Susan Bassnett

Seminal works

• remak1961
• wellek1959
• bassnett1993

Frequently asked questions

Why must a comparison state its tertium comparationis?

Without an explicit common ground, a comparison can pair almost anything with anything and prove nothing; naming the third term forces the comparatist to specify what is actually being measured and why the pairing is meaningful.