【摘要】：尹紹亭和斯科特分別從生態(tài)、政治兩個(gè)角度對(duì)刀耕火種展開(kāi)調(diào)查研究。尹紹亭從基諾族的刀耕火種田野調(diào)查入手,致力于刀耕火種研究迄今20年有余。斯科特對(duì)刀耕火種的研究過(guò)程更為曲折:他一開(kāi)始關(guān)注刀耕火種技術(shù),后來(lái)把視線(xiàn)轉(zhuǎn)向生態(tài)環(huán)境與政治的關(guān)聯(lián)。二人視域重合時(shí),卻因視角不同而產(chǎn)生了不同解讀:內(nèi)容涉及刀耕火種的農(nóng)業(yè)技術(shù)、山地特征、族群關(guān)系、農(nóng)耕禮儀,以及刀耕火種消失的原因等。兩人的解讀既有重合又有差異,但兩種視角重疊,更能展現(xiàn)出人類(lèi)學(xué)的生物文化整體觀(guān)(biocultural holism)及其創(chuàng)新張力。
[Abstract]:Yin Shaoting and Scott from the ecological and political perspectives of slash-and-burn research. Yin Shaoting has been devoted to the research of slash-and-burn cultivation for more than 20 years. Scott's research on slash-and-burn farming was even more tortuous: he first focused on slash-and-burn technology, then turned his attention to the ecological and political connection. When the two people have the same vision, they have different interpretations because of the different perspectives: the content involves the agricultural technology of slash-and-burn cultivation, the characteristics of mountain, the relationship between ethnic groups, agricultural etiquette, and the reasons for the disappearance of slash-and-burn cultivation and so on. The two people's interpretation is not only consistent but also different, but the two angles of view overlap, which can show the (biocultural holism) and its creative tension of anthropology's whole view of biology and culture.
【作者單位】： 上海大學(xué)社會(huì)學(xué)院;
【基金】：國(guó)家社會(huì)科學(xué)基金項(xiàng)目“學(xué)科重建以來(lái)的中國(guó)民族志實(shí)踐與書(shū)寫(xiě)研究”(項(xiàng)目編號(hào):14CSH074)的階段性成果
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：C95

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 康凱;《飛來(lái)橫�！穂J];前線(xiàn);1999年04期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 本報(bào)記者 包慶 楊楠 發(fā)自上海;普利斯科特：尋找高效、合理的養(yǎng)老模式[N];第一財(cái)經(jīng)日?qǐng)?bào);2005年

，

本文編號(hào)：2128911