The Language of Archaeology II (or: How I survived the paradigm shift)
The paper is an auto-reflexive critical reconsideration of the author’s own previous writings on theory in archaeology. The imperfections of the early papers are scrutinized in connection to the prevailing attitude in the local disciplinary community at the time. Archaeology in Serbia has been withd...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN FR SR |
| Publicado: |
University of Belgrade
2016
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/9841856c4119419bbec4584e3334c2a5 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | The paper is an auto-reflexive critical reconsideration of the author’s own previous writings on theory in archaeology. The imperfections of the early papers are scrutinized in connection to the prevailing attitude in the local disciplinary community at the time. Archaeology in Serbia has been withdrawn from the main theoretical discussions, and the individual attempts were aimed at compensating for this setback, introducing the essence of the current debates. Since the two major paradigms of the discipline – processual and post-processual, formulated in their original setting within the timespan of almost three decades, were presented simultaneously, they were merged in an unconsistent manner. |
|---|