【作者】 郭海红；

【导师】 刘铁梁；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 中国民间文学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 1913年《乡土研究》杂志的创刊,标志着科学意义上的日本民俗学科正式确立,1934、1935年柳田国男的两本概论书《民间传承论》、《乡土生活的研究法》奠定了日本民俗学研究的理论体系。一直到20世纪五、六十年代,日本民俗学在以柳田国男、折口信夫、南方雄楠、涩泽敬三为代表的众多个性鲜明的民俗学者的研究推动下,在民间信仰、口承文艺、时令节庆、人生仪礼、家庭宗族等广泛领域形成了体系化研究,建构了以山乡渔村为对象的日本民俗学的研究特色。柳田国男也以其个人卓越的研究能力和出色的领导能力,使民俗学的研究在中央集权体制下具有了鲜明的个人魅力,以至于这一时期的日本民俗学被称为柳田民俗学。1955—1973年日本经历的经济高度增长期,使得日本社会和经济发生了重大变革,人们的生活方式和意识也都发生了不可逆转、天翻地覆的改变。城市化和过疏化进程席卷全国,山乡渔村的面貌从根基上发生了巨大改变,日本民俗学陷入了“研究对象消亡的危机”。1962年柳田国男离世,核心人物的逝去也使得该时期成为了日本民俗学史上重要的分歧点。同时,在20世纪后半期,日本学术界呈现出多学科研究齐头并进的态势,学科与学科之间的交流和渗透变得愈加深入,相邻学科取得的研究成果也极大地刺激了民俗学的发展。面对现实的改变,日本民俗学者一方面努力摸索发展之路,一方面从学科内部进行理论反思和重新审视。在该时期尤其以坪井洋文为代表,对日本的基础文化构造研究展开了检讨,以响亮的声音提出了民俗文化多元论这一崭新的理论体系,从而突破了“柳田民俗学”时代下的固有框架,很好地完成了向“后柳田时代”的过渡。同时,伴随着战后一批没有接受过柳田个人直接指导的中青年民俗学者的成长,日本民俗学界形成了区别于传统意义研究以外的思潮,诸如以城市民俗学、环境民俗学为代表的新的研究领域,以民俗文化多元论、“日常态·能量枯竭态·非日常态”为代表的学术争论。它们在研究对象和方法论构成上都与以往的民俗学研究表现出显著的差异,从而引发了学者们的极大关注。1975年以学会期刊《日本民俗学》发行第100期为契机,日本民俗学会推出了每两年一次的研究动向专刊,旨在定期地把握研究动向,总结研究成果,指导民俗学的发展,对研究方向提出前瞻性建议。在若干期的动向专刊和专著中,都曾经多次提到城市民俗学、环境民俗学、民俗文化多元论、“日常态·能量枯竭态·非日常态”三态研究,并对其作为新的研究动向和表现出的蓬勃态势给予了认可。该文旨在通过对20世纪70年代以来日本民俗学若干热点领域研究进行学术史的整理和考察,以点带面地分析现代日本民俗学的学科发展特点,思考有关学科本质的问题,进而结合学术大背景,从一个侧面勾勒出日本民俗学近30年的学科发展轨迹,明确这一阶段日本民俗学研究的特色所在。对于热点领域的界定,是指与70年代以前相比,受到极大关注、备受争议的领域和问题。例如在出现频率方面、研究著述的数量方面、受关注度、话语权的掌握等方面被日本民俗学界统一认定为“新的研究动向”或是“受到关注的热点”的领域。但并不是说传统意义的研究内容如对山乡渔村的研究、对常民性的研究、对家族婚姻的研究、对仪式信仰的研究,在该时期内就停滞不前了,这些研究依旧在有条不紊地累积着,只是没能成为关注的热点得以突显,基于本文对热点研究的设定而不得已将其割舍。因此在这里需要阐明的是,尽管本文中选取的四个领域和理论体系并不一定就是日本民俗学研究中的核心问题,也不一定是日本民俗学研究中的本质问题,但是作为在近期内表现高涨、激起涟漪的研究领域或问题,其背后必然有原因存在,也必然有其意义所在,也必然会与基础的、核心的研究发生不可否认的关系。本文的研究便是试图通过对这些热点领域的研究的研究,对关系学科发展、学科本质的东西有所思考。本文的研究方法是以具权威性和代表性的《日本民俗学》动向专刊为主线,结合各个领域的专著、论文等第一手文献资料,将历时性与共时性研究相结合,进行具体、细致的解读,从而从一个侧面完成对70年代以来学术史的考察。论文共分为六大章节,前有绪论后有结论,正文由四大章组成,论文后面有附录。绪论中就课题的确立、研究意义和方法、先行学术史研究进行说明。正文中着重对近年来成为关注热点的四个研究领域和理论体系,即城市民俗学、环境民俗学、民俗文化多元论、“日常态·能量枯竭态·非日常态”三态体系,进行学术史的综述研究。首先,在城市民俗学领域,1973年仓石忠彦发表了《住宅区的民俗》一文,标志着城市民俗研究的发凡,经历了八、九十年代的精进期,进入21世纪城市民俗学研究开始呈现出平稳发展的态势。城市民俗学的研究,把以往位于学科边缘位置甚至被排除在外的城市区域纳入到研究对象中来,使得民俗学成为研究身边、日常、随处可见的生活文化的名副其实的学科。现阶段的城市民俗学研究,以对大都市和传统城下町的民俗研究为主,更具体表现为对城市的庆祝活动、城市中新兴住宅区民俗、城市传说、城市中具有标志性的繁华区民俗的研究。在研究理论和方法上,在对“民俗继承体”·“传承母体”研究范式进行反思的同时,强调城市中以个人、家庭为单位的纵向传承和不同的功能集合的存在,以及“考现学”方法的有效性、侧重个人生活史的写作等等。城市民俗学研究体现了70年代以来日本民俗学研究多样化的特点,其意义在于不是把城市视为一个集合体进行割裂的民俗世界的研究,而是通过对城市中民俗要素的再发现反过来重新审视村落民俗,从而确立民俗学的普遍性研究理论。关于日本民俗学的核心和基础分析概念,在“日常态·非日常态”研究范式的基础之上,1972年波平惠美子在日本民族学会召开的研究大会上第一次提出了“日常态(世俗)·非日常态(神圣)”以外的第三元素“污秽/晦气”。以此为导火索,七、八十年代由众多学者参与并展开了三态体系的讨论,从而确立了赋予不同内涵的三态分析范式,尤其以樱井德太郎的“日常态·能量枯竭态·非日常态”影响力最大。“日常态”、“非日常态”是由柳田国男确立的分析概念,分别指一成不变、平常的时间、空间和适逢时令节庆、人生仪礼等祭祀性、特殊性的时间、空间,两者界限分明,形态上具有鲜明的可对比性。在两态的争论中,以伊藤干治为代表,众多学者阐释了两者间可以相互转换、互为补充的关系。樱井德太郎在此基础上通过赋予第三元素“能量枯竭”的含义,把三态体系阐释为“日常态下的生活是构成日本民俗的重要部分,而在维持日常态的过程中,需要消耗、支出能量。当能量减弱甚至枯竭的时候,即意味着正常的生活、生产状态无法继续维持下去的时候,为了能再次返回到日常态的生产生活中,就必须通过设定非日常态的日子或举行仪式重新获取力量、完成充电的过程”,以三态体系分析了民众生活节奏的构成,进而强调了民俗学之草根文化的特质,提出了应该对“日常态”的民众生活给与更多关注的观点。该热点领域的研究通过在“日常态·非日常态”两态论体系中确立新的第三元要素,建构了更加合理的分析概念体系,在继承的同时进行了创新,使得日本民俗学的方法论得以更加完善。90年代初,自然·环境·生态等字眼开始集中出现在民俗学领域,与生态学中提到的生态环保概念以及环保者的立场和主张不同,也与以往民俗学中仅仅在村落概貌中给予的简单化、概括性描述有很大差异,环境民俗学的研究是以构成复杂的自然环境的基本要素为主,通过对环境与人的生产、生活的关系进行有机地、连续地、多样地、综合地把握,更加明确民众的技术构成、行为方式、生活实态和生产民俗,强调了自然的主体性。以野本宽一、篠原徹、鸟越皓之为代表的民俗学者,分别从“民俗学中的生态链”、“与自然打交道的民众的‘在野的博物志’”、“景观论·环境保护中的民俗符号及其积极作用”等独特视角出发,提出了环境民俗学的构想。此外,安室知和菅丰则对以往劳作生计研究中偏重物质论、技术论的现状提出批判,从生产中的自然环境要素入手,分别考察了复合性劳作生产的实态和COMMONS理论(资源的利用、开发、管理、维持的制度体系)。尽管切入角度、关注侧面有所不同,但其共同点是对人与环境相互关系的分析,可以统一称为环境民俗学研究。该领域面对现代社会,更加强调民众地方性知识的积极影响和劳动中的娱乐要素,通过将生态学、环境论、社会学思想引进民俗行为和民俗体系,更加微观、细致地考察了人与自然、人与人的相互关系,丰富了生产民俗和生活民俗的研究理论,对思考人类生存本质提供了实证性成果。另一理论体系民俗文化多元论的研究是对日本民俗学方法论体系进行的建构。柳田民俗学围绕稻作农耕民的研究展开,甚至忽视了其他种族、文化的存在,以至于形成了日本=瑞穗国、日本文化=稻作农耕文化一元论的幻象。但伴随着考古遗存的不断发现,六、七十年代民族学家冈正雄“种族文化”理论、中尾佐助·佐佐木高明为代表的“照叶树林文化论”理论的提出,使得稻作以前=绳纹时代下的杂谷耕种、块根类作物栽培的农业形态进入到学者们的视线中。在日本学术界对以火田耕种为代表的旱作农耕文化关注的大背景下,坪井洋文从民俗学的学科角度出发,通过对“芋头正月”、“日本人为何选择了稻米”的思考,推论了旱作农耕文化体系的存在,从同等价值的多元论体系确立了“年糕正月”对“芋头正月”、稻作农耕民文化对旱作农耕民文化的民俗文化多元论学说。坪井的研究修正了柳田的稻作文化一元说,把对日本文化的研究由一元论发展为多元论,为日本民俗学提示了新的方法论体系。70年代末80年代初坪井的一系列研究著述,对日本民俗学界产生了深远的影响,带动了之后旱作研究的高涨、以及从地域类型论展开的日本东西/南北的多元文化论研究,推动了日本民族基础文化的研究。直至今日,围绕坪井学说的讨论仍在继续,尤其在劳作生计领域,90年代以安室知为代表提出了“复合型劳作生计”的观点,针对“类型”论强调了“复合”的研究视角。结论部分是对论文整体构成进行的总结和主要观点的阐述。通过对城市、环境、民俗文化多元论、三态体系四个不同领域和理论的学术史研究综述,可以发现他们的共同特点是:①对传统研究范式、方法论的重新解读、反思和批判。②在多学科共同搭建的平台之上开展学科建设的特色。现代的日本民俗学不再禁锢于传统民俗学研究的固有框架内,而是更加敏锐地把握社会变化、积极地吸收新的研究成果,通过跨学科的横向研究和理论的纵向积累,拓展学科领域,以实际行动阐释了民俗学作为“现代科学”的学科根本性格,所表现出的“面对现实,解决问题,取义为民”的积极面值得肯定和学习。而在这些热点领域得以形成的背后,我们能够发现其中最为关键的主线是来自民俗文化多元论的提出者,同时又是对权威柳田学说的检讨者坪井洋文。坪井洋文作为特殊时期下的跨越“柳田”与“后柳田”的存在者之一,出色地完成了民俗学在不同辈人之间、不同社会现实下的传递和交接。他的“芋头文化”理论的提出,从观点主张到研究态度都极大刺激了20世纪中后期的研究,成为了流淌于地层深处推动日本近30年热点领域研究的一股暗流。因此从这个角度可以说,在70年代以后的研究中坪井洋文不再是一个败北者的存在,他发出的声音极大影响了近30年日本民俗学的学科发展轨迹,而城市民俗学、环境民俗学、三态理论之热点领域的研究也印证了这条主线的存在。作为今后的课题,作者将会继续密切关注日本民俗学的学科发展,思考日本民俗学方法论体系的建构和普遍性原理的形成。更多还原

【Abstract】 The first publication of the journal, Native Studies, in 1913 marked the formal establishment of scientific Japanese folklore study. Two theoretical books, Folk Inheritance Theory and Research Methods of Native life, written by Yanagita Kunio in 1934 and 1935 laid down the theoretical system of Japanese folklore study. Until the 1950s and the 1960s, propelled by studies and researches of a number of outstanding folklorists like Yanagita Kunio, Orikuchi Shinobu, Minakata Kumakusu and Shibuzawa Keizou, systematic study had taken form in a wide range of fields like folk beliefs, verbal culture and art, seasons and festivals, life and rites, and family and clans, and the characteristic of taking mountainous and fishing villages as subjects had taken shape. The excellent research ability and leadership of Yanagita Kunio endowed folklore study under the highly centralized system with strong personal charm, so that the study is also called Yanagita Kunio folklore study.Year 1955 to 1973 witnessed a rapid development of Japanese economy, which brought about great changes to Japanese society and economy as well as irreversible and tremendous changes to people’s lifestyle and ideology. Nationwide urbanization and depopulation changed the appearance of mountainous and fishing villages fundamentally. As a result, Japanese folklore study was confronted with ’the crisis of disappearance of research subject’. The passing away of the key figure Yanagita Kunio in 1962 also made this period an important watershed in the history of Japanese folklore study. Meanwhile, in the latter half part of the 20th century, a trend of multiple disciplines advancing side by side was seen in academic circles. Interdisciplinary communication and permeation progressed and the achievements reaped by other related disciplines gave an impetus to folklore study.Considering the changes in reality, Japanese folklorists tried to find out a way out on one hand, and on the other hand made theoretical reflection and reexamination from inside. Tuboi Hirofumi was the representative in this period, who reviewed the basic cultural structure study, came up with a brand new theoretical system of folklore culture pluralism, realized the breakthrough from the fixed framework of "post Yanagita Kunio folklore study", and completed the transition to ’post-Yanagita period’. At the same time, with the growth of a number of young and middle-aged folklorists who were not directly and personally trained by Yanagita Kunio, Japanese academic circles of folklore developed a trend of thoughts which are different from traditional study and research. For example, new research fields with urban folklore and environment folklore as representatives, and academic debates with folklore culture pluralism and "ke, kegare and hare" as representatives. These thoughts showed striking differences from traditional folklore study in research subject and methodology, therefore arousing great interest in experts and scholars.In 1975 on the occasion of the hundredth publication of an academic journal Japanese Folklore, the Folklore Society of Japan decided to publish a trend special biyearly, aiming at keep track of study trend periodically, summarizing research results, guiding the development of folklore study and offer suggestions on study trend. A number of trend special and academic works mentions often the studies and researches on urban folklore, environment folklore, folklore cultural pluralism and "ke, kegare and hare" triple element system, and recognizes them as new research trend and praises their prosperous development.This dissertation takes aim at, by historically examining and investigating some hot research fields in Japanese folklore study since the 1970s, analyzing the overall development features of modern Japanese folklore with a few researches, discussing the essential issues of this discipline, outlining the development tracks of Japanese folklore study in the past three decades by taking academic background into consideration, and finally defining present research features. The hot research fields here refer to the fields and issues that attracted much attention and are much debated, compared with those before the 1970s. For instance, fields of "new trend" or "much-concerned hot issues" universally agreed by Japanese folklore circles in the aspects of occurrences, number of research articles, attention received, and control of discursive power and so on. It does not mean that traditional study on mountainous and fishing villages, folks, family and marriage, rites and beliefs came to halt. They were making steady progress, only that they were not prominent as hot issues, thus are not discussed here because of the delimitation of hot issues. Therefore it requires clarification that though the four fields and theoretical systems selected here may not necessarily be the core issues nor essential issues in Japanese folklore study, there must be reasons and meaning for those research fields or problems to recently attract much attention and have wide repercussion, and they definitely develop relationships with fundamental and core studies. This dissertation tries to present reflections on something that are related to discipline development and essentials, by means of examining the studies and researches of these hot fields. The methodology adopted here is that it centers on the trend specials of Japanese Folklore, together with first-hand data from works and articles in various fields, and makes detailed interpretation synchronically and diachronically, so as to reach a summary of the academic history since the 1970s.The dissertation is divided into six chapters with an exordium and a conclusion. The main body has four chapters and an appendix is included. The exordium part presents a discussion of the topic selection, the meaning, the methodology and previous studies. The body part is a comprehensive study of four research fields and theoretical systems that has been hot in recent years, that is, urban folklore, environment folklore, folklore culture pluralism and the triple element system of "ke, kegare and hare".First, in the field of urban folklore Kurayishi Tadahiko published Residential District in 1973, which marked the origination of urban folklore. After a period of fast development in the 1980s and 1990s, urban folklore study began to advance steadily in the 21st century. By including urban area, which is previously marginal or even excluded, as a research subject, urban folklore study transforms folklore study into intimate folk study that focuses on daily life and culture. Present urban folklore study centers on big cities and traditional feudal cities, more specifically city celebrations, folklore of new residential district, city tales and downtown folklore. Reflecting on paradigm of "folklore inheritance entity" and "inheritance parent entity", the research theory and methodology emphasize longitudinal inheritance, which has individuals and family as the center, the aggregation of different functions, the validity of the subject that study modern society, and the writings with their emphasis on personal history. Urban folklore study has the characteristic of pluralism in Japanese folklore study since 1970s. Its meaning lies in that it doesn’t regard city as a collective one that is separate from others but re-examines countryside folklore by re-discovering the folklore elements in cities. In this way, universal research theory in folklore is established.As regards the core and basic analyzing concepts of Japanese folklore, based on "ke and hare" paradigm, Namihira Emiko in 1972 for the first time put forward a third element "kegare" other than "ke （secularity） and hare （sacredness）". Inspired by it, many experts in the 1970s and the 1980s were involved in the discussions of the triple element system, and then established different triple analyzing paradigms with "ke, kegare and hare" by Sakurai Tokutarou being the most influential. "ke" and "hare" are two analyzing concepts put forward by Yanagita Kunio, which respectively refer to regular, constant time and space and sacrificing, special time and space like festivals and rites. The two have clear boundaries and strong comparability in form. In the debate of the two forms, with Ito Kanji as a representative, many experts elaborated on their relationship of mutual conversion and mutual complementarity. Based on this, Sakurai Tokutarou added "kegare" to the third element definition and interpreted the triple element system as that "life under ke is an important part of Japanese folklore. The maintenance of ke consumes energy, and when energy declines or exhausts, that is, normal life and production are unable to continue, it is necessary to setup days of hare or perform rites to restore energy so as to return to the life and production of ke". He used the triple element system to analyze the construction of people’s living pace and further stressed that folklore as grassroots’ culture should pay more attention to people life of "ke". The study in this hot field constructs a more reasonable analyzing concept system by establishing a third element in the bipolar system of "ke and hare". It follows the tradition and at the same time innovates, thus perfecting Japanese folklore methodology.In the early 1990s, words like nature, environment and ecology were frequently seen in folklore study. Environment folklore study is different from environment protection ideas in ecology and the claims and standing point of environment protectionists. And it is quite different from the traditional folklore study that describes countryside in simple and general terms. The study of environment folklore focuses on the elements that construct the complex natural environment, further specifies the technical construct, behavior mode, the real state of living and production folklore by understanding environment, human production and life in an organic, continuous, varied and comprehensive way, and highlights the subjectivity of nature. Nomoto Kannyichi, Shinohara Tooru, Torigoe Tadayuki are the representatives. They put forward the conception of environment folklore from the unique perspectives of "ecological chain in folklore study", ’"non-official records of natural sciences’ by folks who have dealings with nature" and "landscape theory and folklore symbols in environment protection and its positive effects" and the like. Besides, Yasumuro Satoru and Suga Yutaka criticized the stress on material theory and technique theory in the previous studies of laboring and livelihood, and began by considering natural environment elements in production to investigate respectively the real state of compound laboring and production and COMMONS theory, which is an institutional system of resource use, exploitation, management and maintenance. Although perspectives and concerned aspects are different, they share the common features of relationship analysis between humans and the environment and thus all belong to environment folklore study. This field takes modern society into consideration, attaches more importance to positive effects of folks’ local knowledge and recreational elements in laboring, examines in the micro level the relationship between human and nature, human and human by introducing ecology, environment theory and sociology thoughts into folklore behavior and system, enriches the theories of production folklore and living folklore, and provides empirical evidences to support the thoughts on the essence of human existence.Another theoretical system, pluralism, is an effort to construct Japanese folklore methodological system. Folklore study focuses on rice growing culture to the extent of ignoring the other groups and cultures and contributing to the monism illusion that Japan is a mizuho country, and Japanese culture is rice-growing culture. However, with the appearance of new findings in archaeology, in the 1960s and the 1970s "racial culture" theory put forward by ethnologist Oka Masao and the theory of "evergreen broad leaf culture" mainly advocated by Nakao Sasuke and Sasaki Koumei brought the agriculture of grain growing and root crop growing in Jomon period, the period before rice growing, into the consideration of scholars. Against the background of drying farming culture which is characterized by field burning cultivation, Tuboi Hirofumi reflected on "taro New Year" and "the causes of Japanese choosing rice" from the perspective of folklore, reasoned out the existence of farming system, and established the pluralism theory of "rice cake New Year" vs. "taro New Year", rice growing agriculture vs. dry farming agriculture. In this theory, they are of equal value. Tuboi Hirofumi revised the monism theory of rice-growing of Yanagita Kunio, developed Japanese study from monism to pluralism, and provided a new methodology to Japanese folklore study. A series of works by Tuboi Hirofumi in the late 1970s and early 1980s exerts longstanding influence on Japanese folklore circles, contributes to later development of dry farming study and the pluralism study of Japanese east to west and north to south from the perspective of regional types, and gives an impetus to Japanese basic culture study. To date there are discussions on Tuboi Hirofumi’s theory, especially in the field of laboring and livelihood. In the 1990s Yasumuro Satoru and others came up with the idea of "compound laboring and livelihood" with emphasis on the perspective of "compound" as opposed to "type" theory.The conclusion part is a summary of the main points in the dissertation. By reviewing the academic history of the four different theories, that is, urban folklore, environment folklore, folklore pluralism and the triple element system, common features can be found among them: （1） re-interpretation, reflection and criticism of traditional research paradigm; and （2） development that is peculiar to each theory on a multidisciplinary basis. Modern Japanese folklore study does not confine itself to the framework of traditional folklore, rather reacts quickly to social changes and draws on new research results, broadens the view through cross-sectional study with related disciplines and longitudinal advancement of theory. Its actual research reflects the basic features of folklore study as a "modern science" and the positive aspect of "considering reality, solving problems and studying for human welfare" deserves evaluation and borrowing. Among the origins of the hot fields, the key figure in the major trend is Tuboi Hirofumi, who put forward folklore culture pluralism and criticized the authoritative theory of Yanagita Kunio. Tuboi Hirofumi went through both "Yanagita Kunio period" and "post-Yanagita period" and achieved successful transition between different generations and social realities. His "taro culture" greatly promoted the study in the middle and latter 20^th century in the aspects of providing viewpoint and research attitude and was a latent force in the development of Japanese hot fields in recent 30 years. Therefore Tuboi Hirofumi is not a failure in the study after the 1970s. His idea influenced the development of folklore study in the past three decades, and the study in the hot fields of urban folklore, environment folklore and triple element system justify the existence of the main thread. Researches in the future will have a close eye on Japanese folklore study and mediate on the construction of the system of folklore methodology and the formation of universal principles.更多还原