Saltar al contenido principal

ETHNOS_APP

Inicio • Búsqueda • Revistas • Lista 0

Structuralism in Archaeology

Datos Bibliográficos

ID14713229
AutoresAleksandar Palavestra (0000-0001-8536-0360, University of Belgrade, autor de correspondencia)
Año2009
Volumen4
Número2
Páginas137-148
Fecha de publicación2009-11-19
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaEtnoantropološki problemi / Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0353-1589 • E-ISSN: 2334-8801
EditorialUniversity of Belgrade - Faculty of Philosophy - Department of Ethnology and Anthropology (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.21301/eap.v4i2.8
OpenAlexW2620522415
IdiomaEN
Referencias citadas6

Although, back in the 1970s, Edmund Leach threatened archaeology that he will ‘poison’ it with structuralism, his structuralist work did not have that far reaching impact on the changes of archaeological interpretative paradigms. The reason for that is – on the one hand, structuralists’ lack of interest in diachronic interpretation, and on the other, the concept of the universal structures of mind for which upcoming poststructuralism did not have much interest. To be fair, there are some rather interesting structuralist interpretations in archaeology (even in the Serbian one) mostly based on the application of binary oppositions. However, in the broader context, structuralism, work of Levi-Strauss, and de Saussure linguistics in particular, enabled archaeologists to understand material culture in a semiotic field – as a study of signs and contexts of meanings. In other words, objects in archaeology, under the influence of structuralism, have been seen as organised in the wider systems of signs (organised in binary oppositions, but not necessarily) with particular meanings. One of the problems of this semiotic, structural approach in archaeology is that it automatically equates material culture and language, which is highly problematic, since meanings in material culture are rarely arbitrary in the way that it is the case in a linguistic relation between signifier and signified. Poststructuralism, theory of practices and poststructuralist critique of scientific positivism had much higher impact to archaeology, especially postprocessual one

Archaeology · Binary opposition · Context (archaeology · Epistemology · Field (mathematics · Humanities · Interpretation (philosophy · Levi strauss · Linguistics · Meaning (existential · Positivism · Relation (database · Semiotics · Sociology · Structuralism (philosophy of science · History · Philosophy · Semiotics and Representation Studies

  • Thinking about things

    Open Access•Susan M Pearce•Interpreting Objects and…•2012

  • Symbolic and Structural Archaeology

    Open Access•Ian Hodder•Symbolic and Structural Archaeology•1982

  • Rise of Anthropological Theory

    Marvin Harris, Maxine L Margolis•Rise of Anthropological Theory•2001

  • The concept of structuralism

    Philip Pettit•The concept of structuralism•1975

  • Body Metamorphosis and Animality

    Open Access•Dušan Borić•Cambridge Archaeological Journal•2005

Altamente citadoNo
Abrir DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Proyecto Open Source • Licencia MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidad y Cookies • Documentación de la API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código de la API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código del Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae