本論文探討維吉尼亞．吳爾芙之創作，與著名羅馬尼亞現代主義作家何闐西亞．芭帕達-班傑斯古之間交錯關連。有鑑於吳爾芙以及芭帕達-班傑斯古兩者之關連正座落於改編與互文兩者的重疊之處，同時兩者之交流亦可從時代精神的較大脈絡探討，故論文之導論部分首先釐清上述觀念之間差異，其中強調文章標題所使用之問號正點出．芭帕達-班傑斯古針對吳爾芙具女性主義導向的文學創作之改編並非全然是有意的。論文第二部份剖析兩次大戰間羅馬尼亞吳爾夫接受問題，其中並帶入有其價值之補充材料，補足Mary Ann Caws與Nicola Luckhurst兩學者所編纂之《吳爾夫於歐洲之接受》（The Reception of Virginia Woolf in Europe）文集，因雖忠實探究法國、德國、波蘭、瑞典、丹麥、希臘、義大利、西班牙、葡萄牙、但遺珠在東歐範圍內之任何發展。除簡短介紹羅馬尼亞作家作品外，第三部份試圖建立與兩位女性作家──吳爾夫與芭帕達-班傑斯古──有著共同精神遺產並且兩位作家均仰慕的普魯斯特（Marcel Proust）與柏格森（Henri Bergson）之可能關連；此部份對於吳爾夫與芭帕達-班傑斯古皆挪用自《回憶似水年華》（À la recherche du temps perdu）作者處的文學技法有較多著墨。第四部份討論可說是芭帕達-班傑斯古對現代主義敘事技法之改編，同時檢視若干不同的意識流定義，其間並呈現羅馬尼亞作家如何選擇探索角色之內在經驗的流動。下一部份處理兩位作家的詩性小說（poetic fiction）以及研究芭帕達-班傑斯古藉由針對如吳爾夫一般西方現代作家之改編所學習到的，作為其女性主義之企劃。此部份包含針對芭帕達-班傑斯古的短篇小說〈海洋〉（”Marea” [The Sea]）的詳細探索，因論者曾將此作品與吳爾夫的《海浪》（The Waves）相比擬。論文結尾對稱地回到對於吳爾夫有關其創作普遍性的反思，此特質亦可見於我們發掘出來芭帕達-班傑斯古與吳爾夫關連的各個面向中。

This article explores several intersections between Virginia Woolf's creation and that of a famous Romanian modernist writer, Hortensia Papadat-Bengescu. Since these intersections are at the border between adaptation and intertextuality but also can be placed within the larger context of Zeitgeist, the introductory section carefully makes distinctions between these terms, emphasizing that the question mark in the title of the article signals precisely that Papadat-Bengescu's creation was not always conscious adaptation of Woolf's feminist approach to literature. The second section discusses Woolf's reception in interwar Romania, bringing several valuable additions to Mary Ann Caws and Nicola Luckhurst's edited volume The Reception of Virginia Woolf in Europe, which recorded faithfully what happened in countries like France, Germany, Poland, Sweden, Denmark, Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, yet ignored anything that happened in Eastern Europe. After briefly introducing the Romanian writer's creation, the third section establishes possible connections between Woolf's and Papadat-Bengescu's works via the two major figures both female writers admired: Marcel Proust and Henri Bergson with whom they shared a heritage; the section focuses more on those literary devices that both Woolf and Papadat-Bengescu borrowed from the creator of À la recherche du temps perdu. Section four looks at what can be considered Papadat-Bengescu's adaptations of modernist narrative techniques and starts from several definitions of the stream of consciousness, showing also the way in which the Romanian writer chose to explore the characters' flow of inner experiences. The next section deals with the two novelists' poetic fiction and investigates Papadat-Bengescu's feminist programme as an adaptation of what she learned from other contemporary Western writers like Woolf. This section also includes an extended analysis of a fragment from Papadat-Bengescu short story “Marea” [The Sea] which is compared to Woolf's The Waves. The article ends symmetrically on a reflection upon Woolf's declaration on the universality of her creation that is extended to the findings on Papadat-Bengescu's connections with it.