Three types of social organization in insular southeast Asia Tri vrste socijalnih organizacija na otočju jugoistočne Azije En Hrv

Fiche du document

Date

1990

Types de document
Périmètre
Langue
Identifiant
Organisation

University of Zagreb

Licences

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess , The full texts from this journal can be used for personal or educational goals free of charge respecting the author's and the publisher's copyright. Open-Access: Articles published in this journal are open-access and are distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. Croatian Copyright and Related Rights Act are available at the following link: https://www.dziv.hr/files/File/eng/zakon_autor_ENG.pdf PUBLICATION CHARGES There are no submission, author or Article Processing Charges involved in publishing of this journal.


Mots-clés

Southeast Asia; social organization; kinship terminology Jugoistočna zija; društvena organizacija; terminologija srodstva

Sujets proches Fr

parent

Citer ce document

M. A. Chlenov, « Three types of social organization in insular southeast Asia », HRČAK Portal of Croatian Scientific and Professional Journals, ID : 10670/1.hk6u7b


Métriques


Partage / Export

Résumé En Hrv

Over a hundred years ago Lewis Henry Morgan, comparing the structures of the kinship terminology systems of the Dravidians and the American Indians, strove to see in the similarity of a kinship classification an argument in support of the idea of the Asian origin of the New World aborigines. Now this thought of the graet American ethnographer is cited as perhaps a deskbook example of an ethnographic error. Already in those years he realized that the kinship terminology system (KTS) was derived not from the historical and genetic contacts between peoples, but from the character of social organization. Since then to this day the commonly adopted view of ethnographic (anthropological) science is reduced to the assumption that the kinship systems are, in the final analysis, determined by the social structure.

U članku se raspravljaju Morganove, više od stotinu godina stare, teze o terminologiji srodstva. Morgan svoje zaključke nije izvodio ne temelju historijskih i genetičkih dodira među narodima već na temelju karaktera socijalne organizacije. Njegove teze do sada nisu bile raspravljane ni osporavane ali ih autor u ovome radu ocjenjuje kao etnološke greške. Raspravljaju se i neke postavke E. Leacha. Donose i nove spoznaje autora o tipovima socijalne organizacije na otočju jugoistočne Azije.

document thumbnail

Par les mêmes auteurs

Sur les mêmes sujets

Sur les mêmes disciplines

Exporter en