Abstract: Prague School insisted on the autonomy of literature while admitting external influence, which was evolved from Russian Formalism. This view influnced Mukarovsky's theory of work and gave birth to his Phenomenology-influenced theory of intentionality and nonintentionality of art. Intentionality implies the unity of meaning in a work; to achieve this effect, Mukarovsky transformed authors into general appreciators and art works into independent signs. Nonintentionality refers to all that in art resists and breaks the unity of meaning to give readers the impression that art is from real life and to make an art work "material". However, the latter is affiliated to the former and is viewed as its specific type.
When Vachek absorbed the above views into his theory of literary history, he developed an idea that literature works should be viewed as the center of the study of literary history. This idea focuses on the accepting of literature works as signs, to be exact, the shifts of the ways in which works are accepted.
As a linguist, Jakobson connected three phases of Structuralism. His work analysis is not merely unnecessarily complicated and full of details, but also is characterized by arbitrary editing and random omissions. However, the above views of Prague School formed the transition from Russian Formalism to Paris Structuralism. Paris structuralism further developed the idea of nonsubjectification, made a careful study of the changes of works, to a greater degree applied Semiotics to work analysis and the study of literary history, and even made literature a part of Semiotics.

Key words: view of literary history, work analysis from linguistic approach, influence of Phenomenology, structure, nonsubjectification, theory of works