Construction, Classification, and Identity: Study of Ethnic Identity of Kanakanavu in “Southern Tsou”
|Keywords:||族群分類;族群認同;族群意識／族群性;鄒族;Kanakanavu;本體性內化;想像共同體;ethnic classification;ethnic identity;ethnicity;Tsou;Kanakanavu;naturalization;imagined communities||Issue Date:||2007||Abstract:||
多位傑出的族群理論研究者指出，族群分類體系之所以為殖民政權視為重要之統治工具，乃是因為它有助於殖民者對殖民領地中眾多陌生人群進行有系統地分類與量化，而將之轉換為可進行科學歸類、辨識、與計量的群體，然後逐步納入近代國家行政體系當中。有些研究者甚至主張，這些建構與創構出來的族屬論述，不但逐漸影響這些人群以同樣分類架構去認知世界，而且所有被歸類為同範疇的人們也可能認為彼此共享集體認同。去被歸類為「鄒族」／「曹族」一支的Kanakanavu就是一個很好的民族誌實例。儘管日本學者關於「鄒族」族屬的意見莫衷一是，但是過去日本殖民政府以及當代臺灣人類學學術與官方行政分類，仍然將 “Kanakanavu” 和 “Hla’alua” 歸類為「南鄒族」，而將「阿里山Tsou」歸類為「北鄒族」。這種建構出來的「真實」影響部分阿里山Tsou希望能建構一個「鄒族想像共同體」，同時也影響部分Kanakanavu人認同自己應該為「鄒族」的一份子。而，這並不表示Kanakanavu人已經放棄Kanakanavu的族群身份與認同，因為，Kanakanavu人仍然持續透過儀式和族屬論述，將其有別於鄰近族群的生活經驗「本體性內化」為族群認同的「關鍵性文化表徵」，因而得以強化身為Kanakanavu人的族群意識與認同感。長久以來，Kanakanavu人經歷頻繁的族群通婚過程，其特有的命名制度和家與家之間的日常交換是Kanakanavu認同得以常續的關鍵文化機制。過詳細審視官方與學術族群分類和族屬論述建立的過程，筆者論證了Kanakanavu (和Hla’alua)如何被殖民統治者與學術研究分類與建構成為「南鄒族」，同時，筆者強調瞭解Kanakanavu主體觀點的重要性。於長期參與和關注Kanakanavu、Hla’alua、以及阿里山Tsou族人的日常互動與生活經驗，本論文不僅對於「鄒族」／「曹族」如何被建構出來之歷史過程與政治經濟脈絡，以及原住民豐富的地方知識與細膩的主觀感受進行深度理解。同時，本論文研究成果將以此一具有理論關懷的民族誌實例為基礎，進一步建立出一個更具全貌觀、更具有解釋力的泛文化族群認同和族群關係研究模型，而這將有助於人文社會科學的族群研究與臺灣原住民研究之未來發展。
Several well-known social scientists who are interested in ethnic theories have suggested that ethnic classification systems as the primary devices were employed by the colonial state in order to distinguish all peoples and make them countable and able to be incorporated into the state organization. Some social scientists even maintained that, the use of ethnic classifications as ethnic discourses would construct and create a particular vision of reality. All people are assigned to a single category, and hence are conceptualized as sharing a collective identity.he case of Kanakanavu serves as a very good example. Although Japanese scholars’ opinions about the classification of “Tsou people” were different, former Japanese colonial government and current Taiwanese anthropological classification still consider the two groups of Kanakanavu and Hla’alua as “Southern Tsou”, and Alishan Tsou as “Northern Tsou”. This constructed “reality” has made some Kanakanavu identify themselves as “Tsou people”. owever, this does not mean that they have given up Kanakanavu identity, because they still manipulate some rituals and ethnic discourses, which naturalize some significant cultural symbols, to identify themselves as Kanakanavu. More importantly, naming systems and the regular exchanges between families are the key cultural mechanisms of persisting distinctive identity of Kanakanavu who have been practicing interethnic marriages for a long time. hrough the analysis of the dynamic process and discourses of the official and academic classifications, I demonstrate how Kanakanavu (with Hla’alua) was classified as “Southern Tsou” by colonial rulers and some social researchers, and accentuate the importance of considering the subjectivities of Kanakanavu.ased on my long-term fieldwork and its bottom-up perspective on social life, this research has the advantage of generating first hand local knowledge of ethnicity at the level of everyday interaction. In this dissertation, I provide not only a deeper understanding of the complexity and subtlety of the construction of Tsou tsu/ Tsau tsu in Taiwan, but also an innovative case study and a more holistic and effective model for ethnic identity and indigenous culture studies.
|Appears in Collections:||人類學系|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.