Academic Dependency Theory and the Politics of Agency in Area Studies: The Case of Anglophone Vietnamese Studies from the 1960s to the 2010s

0 ANTHROPOLOGY Sociology Lens Pub Date : 2022-03-29 DOI:10.1111/johs.12363
Yufen Chang
{"title":"Academic Dependency Theory and the Politics of Agency in Area Studies: The Case of Anglophone Vietnamese Studies from the 1960s to the 2010s","authors":"Yufen Chang","doi":"10.1111/johs.12363","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Academic dependency theory argues that scholars of developing countries uncritically imitate Western academia. Anglophone Vietnamese studies presents a puzzle: many scholars, particularly historians, follow the research frameworks developed in Vietnam and emphasize Vietnam's agency since the field emerged in the 1960s. To explain, this essay conducts content and citation analyses of 25 key texts on history of Vietnam. The findings show that they are influenced by Vietnamese official historiography in the following ways. First, they adopt Vietnam's “nation to nation” framework and essentialize China into a Confucian Other in dealing with the asymmetrical dimension between the two societies. Second, while their works utilize sources in Literary Sinitic, they seem to rely on modern Vietnamese translations and reinterpretations rather than on original primary sources. Third, the scholars are more attentive to Chinese authors' ethnocentrism than to their Vietnamese counterparts, even though ethnocentrism is inherent in both. By following Vietnam's nationalistic historiography and emphasizing Vietnam's agency, Anglophone scholars are wittingly or unwittingly involved in the power struggles between the United States and China, a current hegemon and a historical one that has been rising rapidly in the twenty-first century.</p>","PeriodicalId":101168,"journal":{"name":"Sociology Lens","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/johs.12363","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology Lens","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/johs.12363","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Academic dependency theory argues that scholars of developing countries uncritically imitate Western academia. Anglophone Vietnamese studies presents a puzzle: many scholars, particularly historians, follow the research frameworks developed in Vietnam and emphasize Vietnam's agency since the field emerged in the 1960s. To explain, this essay conducts content and citation analyses of 25 key texts on history of Vietnam. The findings show that they are influenced by Vietnamese official historiography in the following ways. First, they adopt Vietnam's “nation to nation” framework and essentialize China into a Confucian Other in dealing with the asymmetrical dimension between the two societies. Second, while their works utilize sources in Literary Sinitic, they seem to rely on modern Vietnamese translations and reinterpretations rather than on original primary sources. Third, the scholars are more attentive to Chinese authors' ethnocentrism than to their Vietnamese counterparts, even though ethnocentrism is inherent in both. By following Vietnam's nationalistic historiography and emphasizing Vietnam's agency, Anglophone scholars are wittingly or unwittingly involved in the power struggles between the United States and China, a current hegemon and a historical one that has been rising rapidly in the twenty-first century.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学术依赖理论与区域研究中的代理政治:以20世纪60年代至2010年代的越南英语国家研究为例
学术依赖理论认为,发展中国家的学者不加批判地模仿西方学术界。以英语为母语的越南研究提出了一个难题:许多学者,特别是历史学家,遵循在越南发展的研究框架,强调越南的代理,因为该领域在20世纪60年代出现。为了说明这一点,本文对25篇越南历史的关键文本进行了内容和引文分析。研究结果表明,他们在以下方面受到越南官方史学的影响。首先,他们采用越南的“国对国”框架,并将中国本质化为儒家的他者来处理两个社会之间的不对称维度。其次,虽然他们的作品使用文学汉文的来源,但他们似乎依赖于现代越南语的翻译和重新解释,而不是原始的原始来源。第三,学者们更关注中国作家的民族中心主义,而不是越南作家,尽管民族中心主义在两国都是固有的。通过跟踪越南的民族主义史学并强调越南的代理,英语学者有意无意地卷入了美国和中国之间的权力斗争,美国和中国是当前的霸主,也是在21世纪迅速崛起的历史霸主。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Sociological and Political Origins in IBN Khaldun's State Theory Making “Enemies”: Industry-State Subterfuge and US Fair Trade Practices Towards Non-Market Economies Since 1960 Public Discourse on the Israel-Hamas War 2023: A Comparative Analysis of Lithuania and the United Kingdom A Global Phenomenology of Whiteness: Turkey, Europe and Institutional Global Racism
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1