http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 로저 L. 자넬리(Roger L. Janelli) (검색결과 9 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
-
-
-
임돈희(Yim Dawn-hee),로저 L. 자넬리(Roger L. Janelli) 비교민속학회 2002 비교민속학 Vol.22 No.-
Modernization theory per se has fallen out of favor, in large measure because neither industrialization nor its concomitant social changes were found to have followed the same trajectory in all societies. Yet, some of these theories’ fundamental premises about the uniformity of social transformations persist. The purpose of this essay is to show that recent changes in the South Korean family that accompanied industrialization were no mere automatic response to the industrialization process. Comprehending these changes requires a consideration of shifting cultural understandings about family and kinship, the government’s choice of industrialization policies, and the ways in which easier communication and transportation have fostered a rethinking about possibilities for maintaining ties among separated kin. Modernization theorists hypothesized that families would become smaller as a result of industrialization. Careful scrutiny of South Korean families, however, do not substantiate the claim that a smaller family size has been the result of succumbing to the functional demands of an industrialized way of life. First of all, a majority of Korean households appear to have been composed of nuclear families even before industrialization. Second, the high rates of rural emigration by the younger segment of the population, which separated adult offspring from their siblings and parents, was encouraged by the government’s choice of an urban- and industrial-zone-centered export-oriented capitalist industrialization strategy. Third, higher standards of education, the rising cost of raising children, and various governmental birth-control campaigns have shifted cultural understandings about the ideal number of children that parents can raise adequately. Fourth, the development of easier communication and transportation between persons living in separate residences has made possible the maintenance of a quasi-family relationship over distances. Indeed. recent research has shown that which persons belongs to one’s own “family” is often a contested issue in contemporary South Korea. And finally, stronger ties between married women and their natal parents have encouraged an extension of family relationships with matrilateral relatives, despite a continued if weakening reluctance of elderly parents to live with their married female rather than male offspring. In sum, new Korean family forms appear not to be the result of an automatic functional adaptation to the demands of industrial life, as modernization theorists hypothesized, but have resulted in no small measure from governmental and individual choices made in light of shifting cultural understandings about the nature of the family and obligations of intergenerational reciprocity in new settings.
-
임돈희(Yim Dawn-hee),로저 L. 자넬리(Roger L. Janelli) 비교민속학회 2005 비교민속학 Vol.0 No.28
The Cultural Heritage Protection Act passed by the Republic of Korea's government in 1962 constituted the legal basis of its cultural protection program. Another feature of the Republic of Korea's intangible cultural heritage system is that rather than regard the designation of heritage items as its only goal, it also provides a system for continuing the transmission of the item This transmission system is highly refined and structured. Those who are designated as Living Human Treasures transmit to trainees the techniques of their art. So that these younger persons can receive that special training at no charge, the Republic of Korea government gives the Living Human Treasurers an additional one-hundred thousand won (about 850 U.S. dollars) a month, free medical treatment, and other special privileges. These public privileges help to elevate the prestige of the Living Human Treasures. In Korea's past, artists were looked upon with contempt rather than esteem However, the cultural heritage system now gives these performers not only economic compensation but also greater prestige and individual self-respect. Although this program has been highly effective for attaining its goal of heritage protection, the system has room for improvement. Here are three specific suggestions for enhancing the present system: 1) Compared with tangible heritage, intangible heritage receives far less financial support. Only 10% of the annual budget of the Office of Cultural Heritage is spent on intangible heritage. Greater financial support could be allocated to its preservation and perpetuation. 2) The education for transmission could be enriched by adding more diversified means than the current Treasure-Trainee system Formal class instruction, education via the Internet, education by radio and television broadcasts are some of the means by which such diversity could be attained. 3) Rather than given the same amount of financial support to each designated performer, it would be better to consider the financial needs of each type of art and customize the level of support provided.
-
-
임돈희(Yim Dawn-hee),로저 L. 자넬리(Roger L. Janelli),박환영(토론자) 비교민속학회 2004 비교민속학 Vol.0 No.26
The World Heritage Convention, one of the most successful program established by UNESCO in 1972, applies only to tangible cultural and natural heritage. Because it does not include intangibles, many member states expressed a need for a program that would protect intangible cultural heritage as well. In light of these concerns, UNESCO adopted the "Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore" in 1989. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the program that resulted from this recommendation and point out its significance. Intangible heritage is often identified with national or ethnic groups and plays an important role in maintaining cultural identity and diversity. However, due to globalization or other transnational developments, such as commercialization, war, industralization, cultural standardization, migration, and urbanization, many items of intangible heritage are in danger of disappearance. In order to respond to the emergency of disappearing intangible cultural heritage, UNESCO's Executive Board adopted in 1998 the "Proclamation of Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity." The 1st Proclamation occurred in 2001. Member states submitted candidature files by December of 2000, and the UNESCO secretariat sent the candidature files to NGO experts for evaluation. UNESCO's director general appointed 18 international jurors, who were charged with selecting for UNESCO's designation the masterpieces from among the candidature files that had been evaluated by the NGOs. The international jury met from May 15 to 18 to make its choices. Each candidature me was reviewed by examining submitted written material and videos. As a result, 19 of the 32 candidature files were selected. The second proclamation meeting was held two years later on November of 2003. The procedures used were similar to those of the first. This time, 56 member states submitted candidature files (of which 4 were multinational candidatures), and intangible heritage items of 28 nations were selected. The next proclamation meeting will occur in 2005. UNESCO's new proclamation program has had two major impacts. The first is that intangible heritage is becoming recognized as being as valuable as tangible heritage. It is often thought that tangible heritage is more important and worthwhile for protection, and thus intangible has been given less attention or even ignored entirely. Now, however, it is hoped that public will value the latter as much as the former. The second impact of the new program is that non-western Europe member states are becoming more active in cultural heritage protection. Among the 47 proclaimed masterpieces, only 3 intangibles are from the Western European member states whereas 15 have been selected from Asia. While tangible cultural heritage policies and cultural hegemony have been focused largely on western nations, intangible cultural heritage is now primarily being accomplished by non-western states.
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
