Journals / Kafkasya Çalışmaları / 2016 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2

Alan Antropolojisinin Sorunları ve Yöntemleri: Çerkes Diasporası [Problems and Methods of the Field Anthropology: The Circassian Diaspora]

Pages
33–42
Publication Date
2016-03-19
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)

The article also deals with the decrease, over the years, in the numbers of informants who continue to carry the traditional culture and linguistic heritage, as well as the social aspects ( i.e. etiquette, ethic, gender) of the communication between the researcher and the informant, which are the problems of the academic disciplines of folklore and anthropology.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Circassian diaspora, which was formed as a result both of the Russian-Caucasian War in the mid 1860s and of the two world wars of the 20th century, reside in more than fifty countries around the world and comprise almost 90% of the world's Circassian population.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This article is based on the materials the author collected and the observations she made during field trips in 2009, 2011, 2014 and 2015 to one of the Circassian cultural enclaves in Turkey, the Uzunyayla region of the Central Anatolian city of Kayseri.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The article also deals with the decrease, over the years, in the numbers of informants who continue to carry the traditional culture and linguistic heritage, as well as the social aspects ( i.e. etiquette, ethic, gender) of the communication between the researcher and the informant, which are the problems of the academic disciplines of folklore and anthropology.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Çerkes · folklor/halkbilim · alan antropolojisi

Abstract

The Circassian diaspora, which was formed as a result both of the Russian-Caucasian War in the mid 1860s and of the two world wars of the 20th century, reside in more than fifty countries around the world and comprise almost 90% of the world's Circassian population. This article is based on the materials the author collected and the observations she made during field trips in 2009, 2011, 2014 and 2015 to one of the Circassian cultural enclaves in Turkey, the Uzunyayla region of the Central Anatolian city of Kayseri. In this field study, the ethnic aspect of interpersonal and intra-group communication is investigated. The article also deals with the decrease, over the years, in the numbers of informants who continue to carry the traditional culture and linguistic heritage, as well as the social aspects ( i.e. etiquette, ethic, gender) of the communication between the researcher and the informant, which are the problems of the academic disciplines of folklore and anthropology.

Özet

Çerkes nüfusunun % 90’ını oluşturan ve dünyanın 50’den fazla ülkesine dağılmış diasporası, Rus-Kafkas Savaşı’na (19. Yüzyıl) ve iki dünya savaşına bağlı olarak oluştu. Makale yazarının gözlemleri Türkiye’nin yerel Çerkes kültürel adacıklarından biri olan Uzunyayla’da 2009, 2011, 2014 ve 2015 yıllarında gerçekleştirilen alan araştırmaları sırasında yapıldı. Alan çalışmasında kişiler arası ve gruplar arası iletişimin etnik özellikleri incelendi. Bu makalede Çerkes diasporasında otantik folklorun (dilin ve geleneksel kültürün) taşıyıcılarının azalması, derlemecinin ve kaynak kişilerin sosyal (toplumsal davranış, etik, toplumsal cinsiyet) iletişimi gibi halkbiliminin ve antropolojinin sorunları ele alınıyor.

🔖

Cite This Article

PASHTOVA, M. (2016). Alan Antropolojisinin Sorunları ve Yöntemleri: Çerkes Diasporası [Problems and Methods of the Field Anthropology: The Circassian Diaspora]. Kafkasya Çalışmaları, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2, 33–42. https://ajindex.com/articles/782741

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (5)

  1. Fadeyeva L. V. (2008), “Rasskazçik i kommentator: pozitsii v ustnom povestvovanii, Aktualnıye problemı polevoy folkloristiki”, Sbornik nauçnıh trudov. Vıp. 4 – Sıktıvkar: İzd-vo SıktGU, 15-23.
  2. İvanov Vyaç. Vs. (2015), “Lingvistika tretego tısyaçeletiya: Voprosı k buduşçemu”, http://www.philology.ru/linguistics1/ivanov-04a.htm
  3. Klyaus V. L. (2006), “K probleme videofiksatsii folklora, Pervıy Vserossiyskiy kongress folkloristov”, Sbornik dokladov, T. III, Moskva, 83-97, 95. Neklyudov S. Y. (2015), Zvuçaşeye slovo v folklore. http://www.ruthenia. ru/folklore/neckludov13.htm. Paştova M. (2014), “Bir Uzunyayla "Öyküsü" Diaspora Hakkında Bir Halkbilim Araştırması”, Geçmişten Geleceğe Çerkesler Kültür, Kimlik ve Siyaset", ed. Sevda Alankuş ve Esra Oktay Arı, Ankara, 285-291.
  4. Paştova M. M. (2012), “Folklor v çerkesskoy diaspore Turtsii: funktsionalnıye i regionalno-lokalnıye osobennosti”, Folkloristika i kulturnaya antropologiya segodnya. Tezisı i materialı mejdunarodnoy şkolı- konferentsii, Moskova, RGGU, 418-425. http://www.ruthenia.ru/folklore/may2012proceedings.pdf
  5. Unarokova R. B. (2004), “Folklor adıgov Turtsii. Vstupitelnaya statya”, Tırkuyem yis adığeher. Orıuateher (Тыркуем ис адыгэхэр. IорыIуатэр) (Çerkesçe)., ed. R.B. Unarokova, Maykop, 15-24.