SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 1

A PHENOMONOLOGICAL APPROACH FROM SUBJECT'S EYES AND LANGUAGE TO THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF FAMILY

ÖZNELERİN GÖZÜNDEN VE DİLİNDEN AİLENİN TOPLUMSAL OLARAK İNŞASINA FENOMONOLOJİK BİR YAKLAŞIM

Oğuzhan PEHLİVAN
Pages
239–268
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result of the research, it is seen that the subject-centered family is built around the world's own sense within the individual's kinship system; changes in age and marital status play a role in these boundaries; it has been determined that the definitions of "your family" and "my family" have turned individuals into individuals within the concept of "our family" in the social construction process, along with their everyday life experiences.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The family description of the subject may be different from the norm or the family definition expressed by the law; and this situation can create some troubles in accepting the family as a research object.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this research, moving with thesis of having a different family definition for each subject, it is aimed to show that the basic characteristic of the family is built on the real time and space that the individual lives, on the meaning that the individual gives to the subjects and the objects.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of the research, it is seen that the subject-centered family is built around the world's own sense within the individual's kinship system; changes in age and marital status play a role in these boundaries; it has been determined that the definitions of "your family" and "my family" have turned individuals into individuals within the concept of "our family" in the social construction process, along with their everyday life experiences.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The family description of the subject may be different from the norm or the family definition expressed by the law; and this situation can create some troubles in accepting the family as a research object. In this research, moving with thesis of having a different family definition for each subject, it is aimed to show that the basic characteristic of the family is built on the real time and space that the individual lives, on the meaning that the individual gives to the subjects and the objects. A qualitative analysis method with a phenomonological view that question the meaning and based on the relations of individuals with time, space and past is used. Face-to-face interviews are conducted with fortysix people selected from Ankara and İzmir. As a result of the research, it is seen that the subject-centered family is built around the world's own sense within the individual's kinship system; changes in age and marital status play a role in these boundaries; it has been determined that the definitions of "your family" and "my family" have turned individuals into individuals within the concept of "our family" in the social construction process, along with their everyday life experiences.

Özet

Öznenin aile tanımı normlar ya da yasalar ile ifade edilen aile tanımından farklı olabilmekte; bu durum da ailenin araştırma nesnesi olarak kabulünde bir takım sıkıntılar yaratabilmektedir. Bu araştırmada, her özne için farklı bir aile tanımı olabileceği savından hareketle, ailenin temel karakteristiği bireyin yaşadığı gerçek zaman ve mekânda, bireyin öznelere ve nesnelere verdiği anlam üzerine inşa ettiğini göstermek hedeflenmiştir. Araştırmada, öznelerin zaman, mekân, yapmış oldukları olaylar ve geçmişleriyle olan ilişkileri temelinde gelişen, derinliklerdeki anlamı sorgulayan, fenomenolojik bir bakış açısıyla nitel analiz yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Ankara ve İzmir kent ve kırsalından seçilen kırk altı kişiyle yüz yüze mülakat yapılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda özne merkezli ailenin, bireyin akrabalık sistemi içerisinde, kendi dünya algısı etrafında inşa edildiği; yaş ve medeni durum değişikliklerinin bu sınırların inşasında rol oynadığı; "senin ailen" ve "benim ailem" tanımlarının bireylerin, gündelik hayat deneyimleri ile birlikte sosyal inşa sürecinde "bizim ailemiz" kavramı içerisindeki bireylere dönüştüğü saptanmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

PEHLİVAN, O. (2018). A PHENOMONOLOGICAL APPROACH FROM SUBJECT'S EYES AND LANGUAGE TO THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF FAMILY. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 1, 239–268. https://ajindex.com/articles/314607

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Allan G. (2008).
  2. Flexibility, Friendship and Family. Journal of Social and Personal Relationship, 15(1), 1–16.
  3. Baxter, L. A. (2004). Relationships as Dialogues. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 1–22.
  4. Berger, P.L. ve Kellner, H. (1971). Marriage and the Construction of Reality: An Exercise in the Microsociology of Knowledge. B.R. Cosin (Ed.). School and Society: A Sociological Reader. (23- 31). London: Routledge Kegan Paul ve Open University Press.
  5. Berger, P.L. ve Luckmann, T. (1991).
  6. The Social Construction of Reality, Penguin Books, London Bernardes, J. (1985). Family Ideology: Identification and Exploration. Sociological Review, 33 (2), 275- 297. Bernardes, J. (1993). Responsibilities in Studying Postmodern Families. Journal of Family Issues, 14, 35- 49. Beşpınar, F. U. (2014). Türkiye’de Evlilik. M. Turğut, S. Feyzioğlu (Ed.). Türkiye Aile Yapısı Araştırması Tespitler, Öneriler içinde (s. 112-169). İstanbul: Araştırma ve Sosyal Politika Serisi 07. Bourdieu, P. (1996). On the Family as a Realized Category. Theory, Culture and Society, 13, 19–26.
  7. Burr, V. (2003). Social Constructionism. New York: Routhledge. Canatan, K. ve Yıldırım, E. (2013). Aile Sosyolojisi. İstanbul:
  8. Açılım Kitap. Creswell, J.W. (2015).
  9. Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri, Beş Yaklaşıma Göre Nitel Araştırma ve Araştırma Deseni. Ankara:
  10. Siyasal Yayın Dağıtım. Duben, A. (2002).
  11. Kent, Aile ve Tarih. İstanbul:
  12. İletişim Yayınları.
  13. Dukes, S. (1984). Phenomonological Methodology in the Human Sciences. Journal of Religion and Health, 23(3), 197-203.
  14. Finch, J. (2007). Displaying Families. Sociology, 41 (2), 165–183.
  15. Floyd, K., ve Morman, M. T. (2006). Introduction: On the Breadth of the Family Experience, K. Floyd and M.T. Morman (Ed.). Widening the Family Circle: New Research on Family Communication (p. 11- 16). CA: Sage, Thousand Oaks. Galvin, K. M., Brommel, B. J., ve Bylund, C. L. (2004). Family Communication: Cohesion and Change. New York: Pearson. Gergen, K. (1999). An Invitation to Social Construction. London: Sage. Giddens, A. (2013). Sosyoloji Kısa Fakat Eleştirel Bir Giriş. Ankara:
  16. Siyasal Kitabevi.
  17. Gittins, D. (2011). Aile Sorgulanıyor. İstanbul:
  18. Pencere Yayınları.
  19. Giorgi, A. ve Giorgi, B. (2003). Phenomenology. London: Sage Publication. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. NY: Garden City, Anchor. Gonzales, S.N. (1965). The Consanguienal Household and Matrifacality. American Anthropologist, 67. Goody, J. (2004). Avrupa’da Aile. İstanbul: Literatür