- UID
- 1172569
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2015-11-11
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
【考古2003.10】
[版本1]One anthropologist adopted two roles in studying Dine people: one is to follow her advisor Boaz - did not form a theory before entering the field, the other is to live with a Dine family. Her study is important to understand Dine people. However, she was not in a research university but in a college. In addition, she did not formalize any theory. These factors caused that she was less famous than the other anthropologist who also studied Dine.
[版本2] About an evaluation of a study of an anthropology. It says that a anthropologist named Rechard went to a American tribe. He adopted a role of a daughter of a family, XX AND XX, who were his sponsors. So his research is different with another anthropologist named XX, because Rechard avoided established a theory frame to illustrate the culture of this tribe (question, what did XX did in her study). However, Rechard’s study has less impact on the anthropology profession, because he was just a professor in an undergraduate university, not a research university. (question, why his study has less impact on later study)
Second paragraph, the author says but the his study proved valuable in later research, because
[版本3] 2. one woman scholar called (Richard), studied Dine people.she adopted the role of the daughters of 2 couples in Dine, who BIG FIGURES in the Dine people. but she was just an undergraduate college instructor and she did not have a framework for her study. So compared with that of K who is from a famous research university, her work did not get enough notice among scholars, even though it was initiative. Actually K appled the theory and value system of western society to the Dine people, |
|