hrcak mascot   Srce   HID

Studia ethnologica Croatica, Vol.10/11 No.1 Veljača 2002.

Izvorni znanstveni članak

Ethnology but Anthropology! A Contribution to Discussion of the Theme: Ethnology and?, or?, and/or?, through?, versus? (etc.) Anthropology

Ines Prica ; Institute of Ethnology and Folklore Research, Zagreb, Croatia

Puni tekst: hrvatski, pdf (888 KB) str. 201-214 preuzimanja: 475* citiraj
Prica, I. (1999). Etnologija ali antropologija! Prilog diskusiji na temu: etnologija 1?, ili?, i/ili?, kroz?, versus? (itd.) antropologija. Studia ethnologica Croatica, 10/11(1), 201-214. Preuzeto s

The paper presents one of the, possibly useless but certainly necessary, attempts to determine the relationship (especially prior to important institutionalised interventions that could have permanent professional consequences) between ethnological and anthropological area that would take in regards their (as wide and as complicated as possible, also paradigmatic, historically-scientific and social) background, of their parallel but also at the same time related and inseparable European and global development. In relation to that, this text doesn't offer a simple solution, but mostly points to necessity of discussion and serious study of this problem, especially in the case of recent practice of the renaming of European continental (national) ethnologies. Still, a viewpoint stated is that ethnology is not so easily renamed into anthropology, nor it has the reason to be (for the reasons of broadening the theoretical discussion or perhaps escaping from ethnocentric history), since adequate problems besiege scientific history of social i.e. cultural anthropology. Furthermore, what should be carefully balanced and, for that rate loudly and clearly named is the aspiration of imbuing of anthropology within four-part American academic practice of teaching not typical of recent European tradition (which would be less of a problem) and that is inclined to underline 'lower', 'building', 'local' ethnological perspectives in hierarchically more powerful part of universal human science., in other words, removing of legitimate possibilities of theorisation, interdisciplinary insight and other elements of development within domestic ethnology itself. Not only do the contemporary directions of dismantling of total insights from the point of view of partial and local points of scientific and cultural practice warn of this (for which more suitable and becoming then 'fossilised' and allegedly unquestionable concept of 'anthropology as such' would be introduction of, for example, cultural studies in Croatian university practice), but the tradition of Croatian ethnological thought alone. Separation of 'real' ethnology and 'real' anthropology with clear message on their autonomy, i.e. impossibility of mutual dialogue, would be one of the poorer and hypocritical consequences of otherwise largely awaited broadening and improvement of the study of ethnology within Croatian university.

Ključne riječi
ethnology and anthropology; local practice; possibility of conceptual translation

Hrčak ID: 48548



Posjeta: 867 *