试谈过程论理念与文化遗产可持续发展——兼论文化遗产学思想与方法

过程论思想能够深化我们对于文化遗产之为过程的认识,过程控制有益于我们进行文化遗产保护与利用过程中的精细化管理,从而最大限度地维持文化遗产的健康生命,推进文化遗产的可持续发展,实现惠及广大民众、增进社会和谐的最终目标.与此同时,随着文化遗产学学科的逐步确立,学科性质、学科特色、研究对象等问题已达成基本共识,但其思想基础与研究方法仍悬而未决,过程论思想同样给我们提供了有益的启迪.     

甲骨学发展的新总结——评《中国甲骨学》

一在甲骨文发现110周年之际,王宇信先生的新著——《中国甲骨学》问世了。该书是阐述110年来甲骨学发展历程与成就的煌煌巨著,全书分上、中、下三篇,共28章,总计90余万字。王宇信先生长期关注甲骨学的历史发展状况。他曾先后出版过两本专著———《建     

试论东方学理论视野中的“夷学”构建

文化研究的重要目的之一是探讨文化创造的可能性机制。在西方,萨义德东方学理论的提出,对于西方文化语境中东西方文化关系的反思有极其重要的现实意义,对于我们用以分析和反思以夏文化为主流的中原文化跟周边偏远地区的文化关系亦有着重要的启示意义。但由于文化背景的差异,东方学理论限于对抗性、批判性的局限,向中国的文化现实提出了创造性地创建新型文化关系理论的要求。本文从东方学理论入手,论证了“夷学”提出的理论必要性和现实性,并且论述了“夷学”与文化创造的思维模式与内在联系。     

Landscape Archaeology,Heritage and the Community in Devon: An Oral History Approach

In the context of recent media, governmental, academic and popular attention and enthusiasm for debates surrounding the construction and meaning of the British countryside, this paper outlines the potential for oral history to make a contribution. Working in Devon, the authors outline how an oral history methodology can engage with the fields of landscape archaeology and heritage studies. As well as augmenting and supporting more traditional approaches to landscape, oral history techniques can be used to challenge and destabilise existing knowledge, thereby moving the process of ‘democratisation’ in knowledge construction of the rural landscape from practices of scientific ‘complicity’ towards one of critical engagement.     

基础日语说课

说课,是介于备课和上课之间的一种教学研究活动,现在已经成为了各大中小学校评价教师教学效果、教学质量的一种教学活动,是教师在备课的基础上,面对同行、专家,系统而概括地解说自己对某一门课程或者某一章节的理解,阐述自己的教学观点,表述自己执教的教学思想、方法、手段以及组织教学的形式等,然后由大家进行评说。说课,是一种新的教学研究活动,需要广大教师认真学〉-j,积极参与。     

出入“经”“史”:“古史三系说”之本意及蒙文通学术旨趣

蒙文通的古史研究在民国学界破旧立新的古史运动中有意无意地起到推波助澜之功效,《古史甄微》中打破上古一元的古史三系说,也暗合了当时"新史学"所高举的"古史多元观",蒙文通由此而日益受到民国学界的重视。但若回到蒙文通自身的学术脉络,不难发现,《古史甄微》旨在"羽翼经学":通过追溯三皇五帝说的起源,以地理、民族、文化的视角创立古史三系说,重建上古国史,澄清经史关系,以史证经,申明儒学在中国文化中的地位。     

Knowledge and professional identity in engineering: code‐switching and the metrics of progress

When nations redefine their priorities and re‐plot their directions of travel, engineers get worried about the contents of their knowledge. The cultural and historical specificity of their responses illustrates the extent to which the questions of what counts as engineering knowledge and what counts as an engineer are linked tightly together, and also suggests that both may be tied to local images of the nation. After summarizing recent historical work comparing national patterns in engineering knowledge and engineers' work, this essay outlines how a focus on professional identity may provide a way of accounting for national and transnational influences on engineers while avoiding the specter of determinism. Offering brief case studies drawn from France, the UK, Germany and the USA, the authors describe engineers as ‘responding’ to codes of meaning that live at different scales, including contrasting metrics of progress and images of private industry. The paper is concluded with a brief assessment of some further implications of the analysis of professional identity for work in engineering studies.     

美国学者的中国妇女史研究--美国加州大学圣克鲁斯分校历史学教授贺萧访谈录

贺萧(GailB.Hershatter)教授长于研究现代中国社会与文化史、劳工史、妇女史、性史、女性主义理论。其专著《危险的愉悦:20世纪上海的娼妓问题与现代性》在学界受到好评。     

Between Regionalization and Centralization: The Creation of the Musée Léopold II in Elisabethville (Musée national de Lubumbashi), Belgian Congo (1931–1961)

Since “museumland” was revisited in the 1980s, different authors have studied the history of colonial museums in Europe within a broader discussion on colonial bias, the creation of traditions and the theory of representation. It has become clear, for example, how African utensils were exported to Europe, where they were exhibited as curiosa, ethnographical objects or art. But what happened when the very notion of the museum was exported back to Africa? Who created these institutes and in what context? Was the relationship between colonizers and colonized altered? Did the “social life” of the objects on show change? And what was the relationship between the “old” museums in Europe and the “new” ones created in the colony? These questions have rarely been studied. In this article, the creation of the Musée Léopold II will be used as a basis to offer insight into the links between colonial “science” and “policy”, which proved not to be as monolithic as often portrayed, but rather were complex amalgamations of different opinions and even conflicting interests.