|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
135420
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article presents the beginnings and early development of sinology in Czechoslovakia, from 1945 when it was first established as an inde pendent academic discipline at Charles University in Prague to 1959 when the Sino-Soviet split occurred. During this period, the foundation for what later has become known as the "Prague School" of sinology was established, with Jaroslav Prûsek (1906-80) as the central figure. Using interviews with former students of Jaroslav Prûsek, along with written sources, such as the popular journal Novy Orient (est. 1945), prefaces and postscripts to Czech translations of Chinese literature, and popular books about China published in Czech, the article demonstrates how popularization, together with academic research, played an impor tant role in Czechoslovak sinology. The sources also reveal a signifi cant persistence of an idealized picture of Chinese culture during World War II that was shared by Czech sinologists of the period with Czech artists and the general public. Following the Communist victory in China, the romantic vision of Chinese culture did not diminish; instead it became fused with the shared ideals of communism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
135428
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The discourse of “political constitutionalism” that emerged in China a few years ago is of considerable scholarly value, and is likely to have impact on the development of Chinese constitutional thought in the longer term. This article discusses the discourse of political constitutionalism in contemporary China by introducing and commenting on the scholarship of Professor Gao Quanxi, the leading theorist of political constitutionalism in China today. The article begins by providing readers with some basic information about modern Chinese constitutional history and the constitutional systems that are in force in mainland China (the People’s Republic of China) and Taiwan (the Republic of China) today. The article then describes the main features of Gao Quanxi’s studies on political constitutionalism. The article concludes by reflecting and commenting on Gao’s scholarship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
135426
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This collection of essays on the history of “sinology,” or “China studies” (I will return to this distinction later) is a very welcome and needed addition to our understanding of the global development of our “eld.” For at least four decades American scholars have rightfully been engaged in extensive discussions and continuing introspection on the evolution of area studies in North America, and recent new contributions have dissected Australian and European interests in the PRC during the Maoist and post-Maoist years. The essays in this issue provide a view from the other side of the Iron Curtain—when it still existed—and of the consequences of its demise for China scholars in Czechoslovakia, Poland, Mongolia, and Russia/USSR. From these contributions, we catch glimpses of the lives of academics who were, at times, secluded from the place they were studying (much like their U.S. counterparts), but who were also connected, if not in obvious and linear ways, to each other within the Eastern bloc and to their European and American peers. We receive insights into the traditions of scholarship and modes of intellectual production that, although distinctive, were continuously in uenced by swings in the global political landscape and also by the resilience of certain attitudes (the old European philological tradition), by changes in public opinion (some of the work by China scholars was translation and “popularization”), and by the ideological ebbs and ows within disciplinary approaches (the Asiatic mode of production vs. “feudal remnants”). We learn, for example, that, quite surprisingly, while nan -cial support and state attitudes toward China studies were susceptible to the vagaries in the relationship with the PRC, sinology could also offer a retreat, a somewhat safe intellectual escape, from the political winds that ravaged the Communist bloc. In a sense, immersing oneself in the intri-cacies of Chinese philology—an attitude that in the West has been justiably criticized for embodying the scholar’s separation from reality—
could produce a different and much healthier form of sheltering in the Eastern bloc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
135419
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The study of China in each of the former socialist states has a long tradition in the humanities. Before the socialist period, the philological tradition was based largely on the legacy of French sinology. During the
socialist period, China Studies adopted scientific principles in accordance with Marxist perspectives, but these were primarily superimposed without any intellectual roots among sinologists. Such was the case in
Czechoslovakia, Mongolia, Poland, Russia, Vietnam, and the other socialist environments. The humanities were considered part of scientific research, thus making for a situation quite different from that in Western, primarily American, institutions of higher education, where the social sciences and the humanities were two different kinds of basic research, with their own epistemological assumptions and methodological approaches.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
135423
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article presents personal accounts by Russian sinologists about their professional work abroad and exchanges with foreign colleagues during the Soviet period (1917‒1991). Divided, isolated, oppressed,
discriminated, limited, and confined to their country for many decades, Russian sinologists still managed to maintain contacts with their colleagues in China, the “socialist camp,” and the global sinology community. Sinologists in the USSR had to implement various methods to penetrate the political and ideological “Iron Veil,” to promote their studies abroad, and to participate in international cooperation on China studies. This study utilizes data obtained from nearly 40 interviews conducted in Russia as part of “The Epistemology of China Studies: Oral History Project” from 2009 to 2014. Its purpose is to demonstrate the uniqueness of professional interviews as a potentially rich source and foundation for further academic explorations of oral history on China studies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
135427
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Job satisfaction has long been argued as an important indicator of both the quality of an individual’s working life and organizational efficiency. Using the person-environment fit theory as an interpretive framework,Job satisfaction has long been argued as an important indicator of both the quality of an individual’s working life and organizational efficiency. Using the person-environment fit theory as an interpretive framework, this study explores the extent of job satisfaction among Chinese criminal defense lawyers and its key determinants. Contrary to findings in Western studies claiming that overall job satisfaction is more likely to be affected by “job-content” than “job-context” variables, the results of our survey data suggest that in China job satisfaction is primarily driven by “job-context,” not by “job-content,” variables. In addition, professional commitment significantly impacts overall job satisfaction. An in-depth analysis of the context vs. content variables sheds light on both the progress and the limitations of the judicial reforms in China.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
135429
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The practice of investigative journalism in China burgeoned in the early 1980s in the wake of the economic reforms, and it has been growing rapidly since the mid-1990s. Today, it is one of the most vibrant parts of Chinese media. As a thermometer for press freedom and a crucial site for examining the media‒state relationship in China, investigative journalism has attracted a substantial amount of scholarly
attention during the past three decades. This article critically reviews research, published both in mainland China and overseas, on the topic from 1978 to 2013. We first present a quantitative analysis outlining
certain basic characteristics of the field of investigative journalism research based on a sample of 112 mainland publications and 14 overseas publications. We then present a qualitative review of existing knowledge about investigative journalism in China. Finally, we highlight some of the newest developments in the phenomenon and discuss several directions for future research.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
135424
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The theoretical foundation for Soviet studies of social relations in traditional and semi-traditional China was based on Lenin’s version of the Marxist theory of social-economic formations. Unlike Marx, who
identified two different trends in world history, which represented the unique Western and Eastern historical experiences, Lenin emphasized the universal character of the development of human civilization. In his view, the “feudal mode of production” was the basis for the system of social-economic relations in all parts of the world prior to the emergence of the “capitalist mode of production” in the West. This approach to the world in general, and to Chinese history in particular, became an unchallengeable paradigm in the late 1930s, when the partisans of the “Asiatic mode of production” among Soviet historians were defeated. Nevertheless, even after the concept of the “Asiatic mode of production” was declared to be “anti-Marxist and anti-scientific,” the latent controversy between these two paradigms in Soviet sinology became the essence of the polemics on the nature of the Chinese form of feudalism and the driving social force behind the Chinese revolution. Recently, Russian Sinology has demonstrated a retreat to some of the arguments of the partisans of the “Asiatic mode of production” under the framework of “Chinese traditional society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
135422
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This study looks at how an understanding of sinology as a discipline evolved among Polish specialists on China against the background of the epistemological debates on the study of China in the Western world. Based on interviews and focusing on two periods in the history of postwar Polish sinology—the 1950s–1960s and then the 1990s and thereafter—it provides insights into the discourses among academics. The findings from an analysis of the interviews demonstrate that the epistemological divide on the study of China in Western intellectual spheres has been particularly marked in academic circles in Poland. This is evident in the debates among Polish scholars who struggle both to establish the meaning of sinology and, at the same time, to determine the future of their profession. Whereas this divide has greatly influenced the program of sinological training at the University of Warsaw, it has not had an influence in Poznań and Łódź, the two other centers of sinology in Poland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
135421
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While the humanities dominated the sinological agenda in Mongolia before the 1950s, political intervention in the 1960s transformed the style of research. To begin, academic relations with China were severed. Sinologists received their training in the Soviet Union. Nevertheless, a string of humanity lingered on in the style of research carried out by the 1950s’ generation and had an impact on later developments among the early generation of students trained after the mid-1970s. New generations of students invariably go to China or Taiwan for training. In the twenty-first century, Russia has completely lost its pedagogical position. However, those trained in the Soviet Union during the Sino-Soviet conflict have continued to hold many political and academic positions. Other than that they may hold relatively critical views of the Chinese government, differences in research and perspectives are no longer clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
135425
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The article shows how problems in Soviet and later Russian sinology contributed to the uneven development of the discipline because ideology and dwindling resources, both material and human, influenced the integrity of the research and led to a transformation of Chinese Studies in post-Soviet Russia. By presenting an overview of Chinese Studies in Russia in key disciplinary segments over the last twenty-five years, the article reveals how the appearance of modern research themes addressing foreign policy issues, history, and law helped to produce methodologies for an integral interdisciplinary China research program that did not exist during Soviet times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|