| Reference : Verstehen und Befremden. Objektivierungen des ‚Anderen’ in der ethnographischen Forschung |
| Scientific journals : Article | |||
| Social & behavioral sciences, psychology : Education & instruction | |||
| Educational Sciences; Multilingualism and Intercultural Studies | |||
| http://hdl.handle.net/10993/33473 | |||
| Verstehen und Befremden. Objektivierungen des ‚Anderen’ in der ethnographischen Forschung | |
| German | |
Kuhn, Melanie  [] | |
| Neumann, Sascha [University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Language and Literature, Humanities, Arts and Education (FLSHASE) > Integrative Research Unit: Social and Individual Development (INSIDE) >] | |
| 2015 | |
| Zeitschrift für Qualitative Forschung | |
| Budrich | |
| 16 | |
| 1 | |
| 25-42 | |
| Yes (verified by ORBilu) | |
| 1438-8324 | |
| Leverkusen-Opladen | |
| Germany | |
| [de] Ethnographie ; Migrationsforschung | |
| [en] Central to the present essay is the question,
how the ‘other’ is constituted as a topic of ethnographic research. This question is addressed by using the example of ethnographic migration research. The different ways of objectifying the ‚other‘ are discussed within the context of two different methodological strategies of ethnographic research which are currently the most prominent strands. Those strands refer in various ways to the guiding ethnographic difference between strangeness and familiarity: on the one hand the approach of understanding the supposedly ‘strange’ lifeworlds and perspectives of various social actors and on the other hand the approach of rendering the familiar strange. It is seen that these ways of objectification tend to either transcend a postulated difference between the own and other or consciously produce precisely that break from what is allegedly familiar. In conclusion, also the similarites of both strands are discussed against the background of the emphasized differences between the ways of objectification. By doing so, the question is also raised to what extend it is actually a matter of categorial different varieties of an ethnographic access to reality. | |
| http://hdl.handle.net/10993/33473 |
| File(s) associated to this reference | ||||||||||||||
|
Fulltext file(s):
| ||||||||||||||
All documents in ORBilu are protected by a user license.
