|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
146036
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The 6th World Forum on China Studies (shijie zhongguo luntari) was held in Shanghai on November 20-21, 2015. It was devoted to the subject "Chinese reforms - chances for the world." The Forum was attended by about 230 Chinese and foreign scholars, all in all, there were more than 700 people present. The Forum was initiated by the PRC State Council Information Office and Shanghai Municipal People's Government and organized by the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences and the Information Office of the Shanghai Municipal Government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
157521
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article aims to give a broad picture of the development of Chinese/China Studies at the University of Hong Kong until the 1970s. Courses on Chinese were conducted from the very beginning of the establishment of the University of Hong Kong. Chinese Studies at the University of Hong Kong started with the first two migrant scholars to Hong Kong and reflected the pre-Republican style cultivated in the imperial civil service examinations. However, the curriculum changed gradually after the establishment of the Department of Chinese. Xu Dishan and Chen Junbao took the reform further. In the post-World War II period, Frederick Seguier Drake was Professor in the Department of Chinese Studies until 1964 and consolidated the Department. Its development coincided with the basic policy of neutrality pursued by the Hong Kong government with respect to the ongoing tension between the United States and the PRC. By the 1960s, it appeared that more expatriate staff were becoming interested in the study of China and Hong Kong. This led to the establishment of the Centre of Asian Studies in 1967, the first centre where Contemporary China Studies could be pursued.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
141111
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Public interest in China, as reflected in the level of media attention, is burgeoning in the West and elsewhere in the world. This interest is driven by China's increasing presence and importance in the lives of people around the world; and for the same reason is likely to continue growing. Since media discourses are the main way in which Western publics receive information about China, contributing to media reports and helping journalists reach deeper understandings is an important task and opportunity for academics whose specialist knowledge of China is often more nuanced than that of generalist China correspondents. Although developments in the two professions are demanding closer and more frequent interactions, many scholars are reluctant to engage. This is partly due to structural disincentives within the academy, and partly due to obstacles in the scholar–media relationship. Focusing on the latter, the objective of this article is to illuminate how China scholars and journalists currently interact, and to identify means to increasing their efficiency and sustainability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
151585
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Situating external engagement within the broader context of developments in Western higher education (HE) and technologies that are changing many aspects of academic life, this research note draws on the experiences of a large number of China scholars to assess the merits of Twitter for individual academics and the field as whole. Celebrating its tenth anniversary in March 2016, Twitter has shaken off its earlier image of celebrity stalking and inane ephemera and has become a tool used by many professionals working on China. Despite initial scepticism, many academics have recognized the utility of Twitter for various professional activities, including networking, increasing research visibility, gathering and disseminating information, and building a public profile. As external engagement activities become a routine expectation for academics in many Western universities, social media like Twitter have drawn attention as potentially useful tools. However, there are numerous obstacles to effective use, which this note addresses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
112845
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Shi Tianjian's whole academic career was devoted to the understanding of citizens' values and behaviours in China. With exceptional competence in survey design and analysis, he aimed at explaining how citizens perceive and interact with politics within the Chinese cultural and institutional context. His studies on the Chinese case are at the same time closely integrated with the debates about political culture and institutions. Throughout his career, his work closely engaged concepts and paradigms in comparative political studies as well as general social science. That way, his work provided and continues to provide ample opportunities for scholarly debates and further advancement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
134184
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Southeast Asian studies of Chinese humanities are intertwined with the changing discourses and practices of Chineseness of indigenous Chinese residents. However, scholars rarely encounter this subject. Humanity and pragmatism are two distinctive features of how intellectuals of Southeast Asia understand China and Chineseness in the twenty-first century. These features emerge because descendants of Chinese historical migrants comprise a significant portion of the population in Southeast Asian countries. The strategy of survival and development of the descendants, along with their evolving self-understanding, inevitably affects the perspectives on China and Chinese studies in their countries. These studies simultaneously implicate subjectivity, which pertains to how authors and their readers position themselves among ethnic, national, and civilizational identities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
105499
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
157522
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article divides China watching by the two dimensions of position and purpose. By position, the article asks if a narrator looks at China from an external or an internal perspective. By purpose, it asks if the narrative is to critically provide an evaluative perspective, to objectively represent an authentic China, or to practically discuss a life and identity strategy of Chinese people. Specifically, the complex sensibilities towards China among Taiwanese migrant scholars reify the genuine and yet often-unnoticed agency required to proceed with writing on China. With initially both the Chinese Civil War and later pro-independence politics in Taiwan poisoning relationships with China, the politically divided Taiwanese scholars enter a different environment in Hong Kong, which urges neither total confrontation nor complete loyalty in approaching China. How the Hong Kong circumstances have impacted upon the choices of these Taiwanese intellectuals in their presentation of the subject matter of China, in comparison with their other colleagues in Hong Kong, is the primary goal of the following discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
158091
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The current study relies on the social psychological notion of altercasting and the anthropological notion of post-Chineseness to appreciate the identity strategies of the Philippine’s China watchers. Basically, the case study suggests that the attainment of the sympathetic capacity to understand China can enrich the knowledge of those China watchers coming from an external position. However, adhering to an internal position of China watching would disempower ethnic Chinese scholars in the Philippines in fully participating in the indigenous community. Therefore, in the long run, the trend is for all ethnic scholars to establish distance from internal perspectives on China and practice watching China from the outside from time to time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
134185
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper seeks to analyze the development of three aspects of Chinese Studies, namely Sinology, China Studies, and Chinese Overseas Studies in Malaysia. Each aspect corresponds to different levels of looking at China: civilizational, state, and ethnic. It also examines how identity politics in Malaysia shapes the development of these fields and how these fields created different images of China. Sinology depoliticizes China and presents the magnificent Chinese culture as a positive element in Malaysian nation-building project. Chinese Overseas Studies de-centers China and examines the multiple identities of the Chinese people. China Studies were officially pursued under the agendas of inter-civilizational dialogue and friendship between China and Malaysia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
157516
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Hong Kong exemplifies a geo-cultural path that the literature on hybridity has not seriously considered. Hong Kong’s particular geo-cultural path is different from what the literature refers to as hybridity because Hong Kong’s identity encompasses non-synthetic, lingering Confucian, Christian, liberal, patriotic and other identities that exist parallel to each other, rather than merging into a certain hybrid identity. Because of this unique identity, the already hybrid identity of Hong Kong could disintegrate at any time because of re-imagined or re-enacted traditions. In other words, the coexisting parallel identities support a cyclical historiography rather than the celebrated postcoloniality that moves Hong Kong irrevocably away from any alleged past. Hong Kong demonstrates this constant re-appealing that takes place on the basis of solid traditions in Confucianism, Christianity and patriotism, in addition to the familiar liberalism and anti-Communism. Chineseness has become extremely difficult to define and attempts at doing so generate bitter feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
163710
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Bringing knowledge about China to the disciplines has reduced the outsized role that research on Europe and America has on many topics. But mainstreaming China studies also leads to certain tradeoffs. How should we manage these tradeoffs and produce research that is both true to China and contributes to the social sciences? In the last 40 years, China scholars have developed many strategies to navigate the territory between area studies and the social sciences. I myself have vacillated about how China studies and political science should interact and inform each other. How are scholars addressing this issue now, in an era of mixed methods, sophisticated quantitative research, experiments and “big data?”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
185060
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The objective duality of the world and humanity should correspond to the juxtaposition of Oriental and Western studies, but science and pedagogy know only the former, i.e., Orientalism. This monopoly was a consequence of the formation of the modern system of sciences in an era of global domination by the West, which presented the East as its opposite, the non-West, and/or interpreted its relations with it in value-asymmetric categories of culture and barbarism. The publication in 2006 of the Russian translation of E. Said's famous book Orientalism and the scientific and educational reforms of 2010-2013 led to a discussion among Russian Orientalists about the meaning of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
102760
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|