查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 反省式民族誌與社會學質化方法:二個研究傳統的文獻評述與討論
- George Fitzhugh's "Sociology for the South"
- Crushing the Berlin Wall of Sociology: A Review Essay on The Babel Tower of Ideas [by Chi-chan Yeh] (Taipei: Socio Publishing, 2005)
- 新書介紹:Comparative Sociology. Robert M. Marsh (Harcourt, Brace, & Inc., N. Y., 1967) pp. xvi,-528; U.S.$95.0.
- 歷史的觀察者:中華傳播學會20週年與臺灣公共電視發展關連
- 臺灣數位落差與成人數位教育方案:以社會教育學觀點分析
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 反省式民族誌與社會學質化方法:二個研究傳統的文獻評述與討論=Reflexive Ethnography and Qualitative Method in Sociology: A Literature Review |
---|---|
作 者 | 蔣斌; | 書刊名 | 國立臺灣大學考古人類學刊 |
卷 期 | 51 1996.06[民85.06] |
頁 次 | 頁106-128 |
分類號 | 540.1 |
關鍵詞 | 反省式民族誌; 社學學質化方法; Reflexive ethnography; Qualitative method; Sociology; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本文主旨在回顧“反省式民族誌”(reflexive ethnography)書寫傳統在人類學中發展、形成的脈絡。其次回顧社會學中質化方法(qualitative method)到“俗民方法論”(ethnomethodology)的發展脈絡。將二者加以比較,可以看出:在表面上二者關注的主題均為社會互動情境與知識生產過程的關聯,但由於二門學科發展的歷史、關注的課題,存在著若干基本的差異,使得這二個走向,在發展的過程中,互相援引之處,並不如預期的豐富。社會學質化方法由符號互動論(symbolic interactionism)出發,以微觀互動的情境為主要的分析架構;反省式民族誌則為詮釋人類學的架構。社會學質化方法發展到俗民方法論,由於互動分析的細膩,幾乎已經可以擺脫個別文化的範圍;反省式民族誌則由文化相對論出發,探討異文化溝通的本質。 |
英文摘要 | Anthropology of the 1970's witnesses the appearance of a new series of critical reflections on ethnographic fieldwork process. Chronologically they coincide with the beginning of a more prominent phenomenological impact in sociology, which gives new strength to the long standing qualitative approach in the discipline. The theme of this trend of "reflexive ethnography" is in accord with the stance of phenomenological sociology, namely a rejection of the uncritical positivism built-in to the methodology of anthropology and to look into the process of the production of anthropology and to look into the process of the production of knowledge through social interaction. An examination of the development of the two methodological trends in their respective disciplinary contexts, however, reveals that there were less exchange of concepts and analytical frameworks between the two trends than might be expected. Phenomenological sociology and ethnomethodology have as their original analytical framework the conceptual tool developed by symbolic interactionism. Without such a conceptual tool to deal with the situation of micro-interaction between individual actors, while reflecting upon the process of fieldwork communication, reflexive ethnogrphers often resort to the concept of culture itself. A further examination shows that the concept of culture commonly associated with phenomenology is the singular one -- the Tylorian notion of "culture", which denote extra-somatic heritage of mankind. As a reinvigorated and sophisticated heir of cultural relativism, reflexive ethnography, on the other hand, follows a phural notion of culture--the Boasian usage of the term which denotes collective customary behavioral regulatory, and mentally schematic plans of individual social groups. The crucial problems remained to be answered, then, are as follower: (1) How is inter-cultural communication possible in fieldwork situation? And (2) if it is in fact achiecved, how can the relativistic notion of culture be epistemologically or ontologically justified? |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。