Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

DIALOGUE AND INTERPRETATION IN CONTEMPORARY ANTHROPOLOGY

100%
Kaniowska K.
Etnografia Polska
|
2006
|
vol. 50
|
issue 1-2
17-34
EN
Interpretation can be seen as a method of anthropology based on the new paradigm. It is something more than the hermeneutic exegesis of texts. The main problem with anthropological interpretation arises from the fact that contemporary anthropology, which accepted the new paradigm, is still an empirical discipline. Because of the empirical dimension of anthropological knowledge, the category of experience should be the main one in the methodological discourse in our discipline. According to all the changes, which had rebuilt anthropological thinking, we can assume that dialogue is an experience and an interpretation at the same time. Anthropological dialogue, as well as anthropological experience, has always its specific context. Dialogue/experience becomes the object of interpretation. There are, in fact, two levels of anthropological dialogue . the first appears from contact and context of researcher-informant meeting; the second comes from an anthropological description and narration appearing after the first one and has also its own context. Anthropological knowledge is than the result of the processes of interpretation and dialogical contextualization appropriate to the level of the dialogue: the vivid one, connecting two interlocutors, and the second, shadow-dialogue, as Crapanzano called it. Anthropological dialogue therefore, is not simply Gadamer's model of dialogue. Dialogue in anthropology is rather a specific, double interpretation which links up experience with representation and reflection.
2
Content available remote

Leiris and Ethnography

100%
Kaniowska K.
Konteksty - Polska Sztuka Ludowa
|
2007
|
vol. 61
|
issue 3-4(278-279)
270-273
EN
An attempt at perceiving the ethnography of Michel Leiris through the prism of the programme declarations of Surrealism. Leiris comprehended ethnographic writings in a manner typical for every Surrealist: writing is a form of self-expression as is ethnography. The ethnography represented by Michel Leiris concentrated on a description of the unknown discovered in the known. This is a 'reversed' ethnography since the examined object casts light on the examiner; the otherness of that which is unknown becomes a pretext for self-cognition, for discerning and describing the unknown in us. Ethnography, Leiris seemed to maintain, can (but does not have to) offer hope for discovering some sort of a way of establishing relations with the world which would assist in understanding not the order of the world but its disorder and differentiation; it is also helpful for finding balance between alien elements, mutual strangers. Ethnography is tantamount to manipulating details, Leiris wrote, shifting small registers of reality, noting down thoughts, and documenting the world on innumerable fiches. The essence of all those activities is not a reconstruction of the described. The most important value is reflection: the self-reflection of the subject.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.