Modernism and structuralism: Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century

Modernisation of Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the second quarter of the twentieth century was marked by structuralism. More precisely, structural analysis that became a must of the analytical interpretation was based on the work of Claude Levi-Strauss, but also on those of the predecessors of s...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Ivan Kovačević
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN FR SR
Publicado:	University of Belgrade 2016
Materias:	Anthropology GN1-890
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/37d07a9764734e8e84000598e8fe28d6
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:37d07a9764734e8e84000598e8fe28d6
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:37d07a9764734e8e84000598e8fe28d62021-12-02T05:25:23ZModernism and structuralism: Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century0353-15892334-8801https://doaj.org/article/37d07a9764734e8e84000598e8fe28d62016-02-01T00:00:00Zhttps://eap-iea.org/novi-ojs/index.php/eap/article/view/293https://doaj.org/toc/0353-1589https://doaj.org/toc/2334-8801Modernisation of Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the second quarter of the twentieth century was marked by structuralism. More precisely, structural analysis that became a must of the analytical interpretation was based on the work of Claude Levi-Strauss, but also on those of the predecessors of structural analysis, like Van Gennep and Prop; British followers of structuralism like E. Leach and M. Douglas, as well as on the Russian semiotic school and Barth’s semiology. Taking aside predecessors of structural analysis, main sources of Serbian structural-semiotic revolution came from Levi-Strauss structural anthropology. When in the 1970s Serbian readers faced anthropological books coming from different intellectual backgrounds and representing major theoretical trends in anthropology, Serbian ethnology, firmly based on its hundred years old romantic roots, gave equally opportunities to all theoretical approaches that fought for the intellectual domination in the discipline. This paper tries to answer the question why structural analysis played a crucial part in the modernisation of Serbian ethnology/anthropology, while the ideas coming from functionalism, culture and personality school, or neo-evolutionism did not have the same revolutionary and deep impact.Ivan KovačevićUniversity of BelgradearticleAnthropologyGN1-890ENFRSREtnoantropološki Problemi, Vol 4, Iss 2 (2016)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN FR SR
topic	Anthropology GN1-890
spellingShingle	Anthropology GN1-890 Ivan Kovačević Modernism and structuralism: Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century
description	Modernisation of Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the second quarter of the twentieth century was marked by structuralism. More precisely, structural analysis that became a must of the analytical interpretation was based on the work of Claude Levi-Strauss, but also on those of the predecessors of structural analysis, like Van Gennep and Prop; British followers of structuralism like E. Leach and M. Douglas, as well as on the Russian semiotic school and Barth’s semiology. Taking aside predecessors of structural analysis, main sources of Serbian structural-semiotic revolution came from Levi-Strauss structural anthropology. When in the 1970s Serbian readers faced anthropological books coming from different intellectual backgrounds and representing major theoretical trends in anthropology, Serbian ethnology, firmly based on its hundred years old romantic roots, gave equally opportunities to all theoretical approaches that fought for the intellectual domination in the discipline. This paper tries to answer the question why structural analysis played a crucial part in the modernisation of Serbian ethnology/anthropology, while the ideas coming from functionalism, culture and personality school, or neo-evolutionism did not have the same revolutionary and deep impact.
format	article
author	Ivan Kovačević
author_facet	Ivan Kovačević
author_sort	Ivan Kovačević
title	Modernism and structuralism: Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century
title_short	Modernism and structuralism: Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century
title_full	Modernism and structuralism: Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century
title_fullStr	Modernism and structuralism: Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century
title_full_unstemmed	Modernism and structuralism: Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century
title_sort	modernism and structuralism: serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century
publisher	University of Belgrade
publishDate	2016
url	https://doaj.org/article/37d07a9764734e8e84000598e8fe28d6
work_keys_str_mv	AT ivankovacevic modernismandstructuralismserbianethnologyanthropologyinthelasttwentyfiveyearsofthetwentiethcentury
_version_	1718400403353108480

Modernism and structuralism: Serbian ethnology/anthropology in the last twenty five years of the twentieth century

Ejemplares similares