民国边疆危机与近代中国地理学建构(1911-1949)

IF 1.8 Q2 GEOGRAPHY
Zhihong Chen
{"title":"民国边疆危机与近代中国地理学建构(1911-1949)","authors":"Zhihong Chen","doi":"10.1080/10225706.2016.1252274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The article probes into the connection between territorial nationalism and the disciplinary formation of modern geography in early twentieth-century China. It explores how a group of Republican Chinese geographers, such as Zhu Kezhen 竺可楨 (1890–1974), Hu Huanyong 胡煥庸 (1901–1998), and Zhang Qiyun張其昀 (1900–1985), reexamined Chinese traditional dynastic geography (yange dili) and defined the nature and methodology of what they called the “new geography” under the context of foreign imperialism, Chinese nationalism, and escalating frontier crisis. It argues that Chinese intellectuals’ efforts to overcome the frontier crisis led to a significant shift of major methodology in geography from textual research to actual fieldwork or on-site investigation. The adoption of this new methodology distinguished the “new geography” from the old dynastic geography. Geographers also grappled with multiple concepts and diverse traditions in physical geography, human geography and regional geography. Environmental determinism was adopted but quickly replaced by possibilist approaches. There were also attempts at reforming the traditional Chinese gazetteers using modern geographic ideas. Geographical research was imbued with political concerns. Cooperation between geographers and the state also led to the establishment of important geographical departments and study societies, providing institutional foundation for the maturation of modern Chinese geography as a discipline independent of either history or geology.","PeriodicalId":44260,"journal":{"name":"Asian Geographer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10225706.2016.1252274","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The frontier crisis and the construction of modern Chinese geography in Republican China (1911–1949)\",\"authors\":\"Zhihong Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10225706.2016.1252274\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The article probes into the connection between territorial nationalism and the disciplinary formation of modern geography in early twentieth-century China. It explores how a group of Republican Chinese geographers, such as Zhu Kezhen 竺可楨 (1890–1974), Hu Huanyong 胡煥庸 (1901–1998), and Zhang Qiyun張其昀 (1900–1985), reexamined Chinese traditional dynastic geography (yange dili) and defined the nature and methodology of what they called the “new geography” under the context of foreign imperialism, Chinese nationalism, and escalating frontier crisis. It argues that Chinese intellectuals’ efforts to overcome the frontier crisis led to a significant shift of major methodology in geography from textual research to actual fieldwork or on-site investigation. The adoption of this new methodology distinguished the “new geography” from the old dynastic geography. Geographers also grappled with multiple concepts and diverse traditions in physical geography, human geography and regional geography. Environmental determinism was adopted but quickly replaced by possibilist approaches. There were also attempts at reforming the traditional Chinese gazetteers using modern geographic ideas. Geographical research was imbued with political concerns. Cooperation between geographers and the state also led to the establishment of important geographical departments and study societies, providing institutional foundation for the maturation of modern Chinese geography as a discipline independent of either history or geology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44260,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Geographer\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10225706.2016.1252274\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Geographer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10225706.2016.1252274\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Geographer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10225706.2016.1252274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

本文探讨了20世纪初中国近代地理学学科形成与地域民族主义的关系。它探讨了一群中国共和派地理学家,如竺可桢(1890-1974)、胡环庸(1901-1998)和张启云(1900-1985),如何在外国帝国主义、中国民族主义和不断升级的边境危机的背景下,重新审视中国传统的王朝地理学(杨帝理),并定义他们所谓的“新地理学”的性质和方法。文章认为,中国知识分子克服边疆危机的努力导致地理学的主要方法论从文本研究转向实际的田野调查或实地考察。这种新方法的采用使“新地理学”区别于旧王朝地理学。地理学家还在自然地理学、人文地理学和区域地理学中努力应对多种概念和不同的传统。环境决定论被采纳,但很快被可能性主义方法所取代。也有人尝试用现代地理思想改革传统的中国地名辞典。地理研究充满了政治关切。地理学家与国家的合作也促成了重要的地理系和研究会的建立,为近代中国地理学作为一门独立于历史和地质的学科的成熟提供了制度基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The frontier crisis and the construction of modern Chinese geography in Republican China (1911–1949)
ABSTRACT The article probes into the connection between territorial nationalism and the disciplinary formation of modern geography in early twentieth-century China. It explores how a group of Republican Chinese geographers, such as Zhu Kezhen 竺可楨 (1890–1974), Hu Huanyong 胡煥庸 (1901–1998), and Zhang Qiyun張其昀 (1900–1985), reexamined Chinese traditional dynastic geography (yange dili) and defined the nature and methodology of what they called the “new geography” under the context of foreign imperialism, Chinese nationalism, and escalating frontier crisis. It argues that Chinese intellectuals’ efforts to overcome the frontier crisis led to a significant shift of major methodology in geography from textual research to actual fieldwork or on-site investigation. The adoption of this new methodology distinguished the “new geography” from the old dynastic geography. Geographers also grappled with multiple concepts and diverse traditions in physical geography, human geography and regional geography. Environmental determinism was adopted but quickly replaced by possibilist approaches. There were also attempts at reforming the traditional Chinese gazetteers using modern geographic ideas. Geographical research was imbued with political concerns. Cooperation between geographers and the state also led to the establishment of important geographical departments and study societies, providing institutional foundation for the maturation of modern Chinese geography as a discipline independent of either history or geology.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Asian Geographer
Asian Geographer GEOGRAPHY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: Asian Geographer disseminates knowledge about geographical problems and issues focusing on Asia and the Pacific Rim. Papers dealing with other regions should have a linkage to Asia and the Pacific Rim. Original and timely articles dealing with any field of physical or human geographical inquiries and methodologies will be considered for publication. We welcome, for example, submissions on people-environment interactions, urban and regional development, transport and large infrastructure, migration, natural disasters and their management, environment and energy issues. While the focus of the journal is placed on original research articles, review papers as well as viewpoints and research notes under the category of “Asian Geography in Brief” are also considered. Review papers should critically and constructively analyse the current state of understanding on geographical and planning topics in Asia. The ‘Asian Geography in Brief’ section welcomes submissions of applied geographical and planning research about Asia. The section aims to showcase (1) the diverse geography and planning of Asia; and (2) the diverse geographical and planning research about Asia. The journal will also publish special issues on particular themes or areas. Book reviews can be included from time to time.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信