《传统节日的符号学研究框架重构与案例试析》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《传统节日的符号学研究框架重构与案例试析（24页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、传统节日的符号学研究:框架重构与案例试析 张骁鸣 陈晓莹 中山大学旅游学院 中山大学旅游发展与规划研究中心 摘 要： 当前以象征人类学理论为基础的传统节日符号研究较为忽视其自身的符号学渊源。“整体-结构-阐释”这样一种符号学分析新框架的提出, 主要目的就在于从根源处对符号学的应用加以重构, 凸显其在呈现社会现实和提出有效命题方面的独特性, 并使之更适合于研究现代社会经济背景下的传统节日及其变迁。鼓藏节、火把节以其典型性成为这一新框架初步试用的案例对象。在这些案例中, 符号整体被诠释为由两组要件共同构成的符号结构:第一组为节日中的主要角色 (鼓藏头或毕摩、村民、政府、游客) , 第二组为联系这些
2、角色的具有简单性和涵括力的基本关系 (支配关系、交换关系、委托关系) 。符号阐释工作即基于这些主要角色和基本关系的不同组合而展开, 从中可初步识别与命名包括符号竞争和符号演化在内的一些现象。关键词： 节日; 符号学; 整体; 结构; 阐释; 作者简介：张骁鸣 (1979) , 男, 重庆荣昌人, 博士, 副教授, 博士生导师, 主要研究方向为旅游现象学、旅游符号学;E-mail:;作者简介：陈晓莹 (1993) , 女, 广东东莞人, 硕士研究生, 主要研究方向为会展经济与管理, E-mail:。收稿日期：2017-04-10基金：国家自然科学基金面上项目“重申现象学方法的人文主义地理学空间体
3、验研究” (41471123) The Semiotics of Traditional Festivals: Frame Construction and Case AnalysisZHANG Xiaoming CHEN Xiaoying School of Tourism Management, Sun Yat-sen University; Abstract： The main approach to the study of the symbolic anthropology of traditional festival signs is to first identify a“si
4、gn”or a“sign system”that is worth analyzing and then directly interpret the meaning of the signs on the basis of observed festival practices. Researchers using this approach usually ignore semiotics, although it is the theoretical foundation of symbolic anthropology. This study, based on an analysis
5、 of the two major semiotics systems of Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles S.Peirce, attempts to construct a new frame for semiotic analysis, and to verify, through case analysis, the applicability of this frame to the study of traditional festivals and their changes under modern social and economic c
6、onditions. This new frame, “wholeness-structure-interpretation, ”appears to have some theoretical common denominators with the two major semiotic systems, which are traditionally considered quite different, and highlights the unique role of semiotics in presenting social reality and putting forward
7、effective propositions. “Wholeness”indicates the ontological stance of this frame toward the object of study and is the logical starting point for all subsequent thinking. Together, the traditional festival itself and its recognized signs appearing in concrete forms can be considered a semiotic whol
8、eness.“Structure”indicates the teleological methodology of this frame. Recognizing the limitation of cognitive ability and directivity of cognitive purpose, it reminds researchers to try to find appropriate and irreducible elements of sign so as to break down wholeness into a referential and operabl
9、e sign system. For example, in Peirces system, wholeness is broken down into three elements-representamen, object, and interpretant-and the constitutive relations between them. Finally, “interpretation”indicates a method of semiotic study whereby we can, through a process of derivative interpretatio
10、n of certain phenomena that are difficult to perceive and confirm with common methods, form concepts and views based on these phenomena, and thus develop a proposition for further study.In short, wholeness, structure, and interpretation are the three separable elements of a unified sign.They are a u
11、nity in terms of their ontological stance, methodology, and specific method. This study focuses on the Guzang Festival (nongx hek nes) of the Miao people and the Torch Festival (as well as its traditional form, “Dut zie”) of the Yi people. It interprets semiotic wholeness as a semiotic structure con
12、sisting of two groups of semiotic elements: the key roles of the festival (leaders, villagers, local government officials, and tourists) , and the basic, simple, and conclusive relations between these roles (dominance, exchange, and clientage) . Semiotic interpretation is carried out on different co
13、mbinations of these key roles and basic relations, so as to identify and name certain phenomena including semiotic competition and semiotic evolution. From a realistic perspective, a traditional festival can maintain its pure authenticity only with difficulty. Instead, it interacts directly or indir
14、ectly with various aspects of the present reality and thus, as a sign system, it develops several identifiable transitions of significance.Keyword： festival; semiotics; wholeness; structure; interpretation; Received： 2017-04-10引言近年来, 国内有关传统节日的研究成果渐增, 源于三个重要背景:国家层面日益重视传统文化, 将节日、节庆列入非物质文化遗产名录可为明证;现代消费
15、经济特别是旅游业的发展启发人们不断挖掘节日、节庆的符号价值, 推动了作为符号经济的节庆旅游的发展1-2;从相关学术领域直接发展出来的研究议题, 主要是象征人类学对于仪式方面的研究, 例如近年来比较有影响的瞿明安等合著的象征人类学理论, 在完成象征人类学理论的介绍和重构之后所开展的 7个案例分析中, 至少有 4 个 (南涧彝族“跳菜”礼仪、贵州土家族傩祭仪式、红河哈尼族奕车人“苦扎扎”献祭礼仪、湘西土家族婚礼) 与作为节日核心环节的仪式、礼仪活动直接相关3。由以上简单梳理可以看出, 在当前的传统节日研究中, 符号与象征、节日与仪式等概念和议题往往交织在一起。因此, 在展开进一步研究之前, 有必要
16、先回顾近年来基于符号、象征视角的传统节日研究及其背后的象征人类学学理基础。既有研究有如下两个明显特征:第一, 从整体上认定节日是一个符号, 例如“节日是民族文化的重要表征, 是人类文明进程中最具绚丽色彩、最有地方特色的文化符号”4, 或“节日符号是民族在长期历史实存中形成并在特定时日集中展现的相关文化元素的集合, 显性地集聚表达了该民族的某些文化特性”5, 或“泼水节在旅游业的语境中已成为仪式性的象征性符号”6;第二, 认为节日本身不但是符号, 而且是一个符号系统, 例如“任何节日活动, 都是由一定的具体符号及其系统所组成, 是对各种符号的系统的整合”7, 或“火把节的象征意义蕴含在节日期间的各种活动和行为之中, 这些活动和行为汇合成一个表征彝族共同体及其传统得以再生产的符号体系”8, 或从仪式角度来看, 仪式本身就包含了各种不同的“符号形式 (如行为、动作、姿态、手势、器物、声音) ”9, 甚至包括已成
