Kültürel Etkileşim Sürecinde Değişen Gündelik Yaşam: Ankara'daki "Sandıklılar"

Modern sosyal bilimin alternatif bir yaklaşımı olarak değerlendirilen nitel araştırma yöntemi, sadece antropoloji de değil aynı zamanda sosyolojide de yaygınlaşmaya başlamıştır. Nicel araştırma yönteminin aksine nitel araştırma yönteminin temel özelliği, belirli bir örnekleme tekniği, teori, hipotez ve istatistik kullanılmadan uygulanabilmesidir. Bu, bazı grupların gündelik yaşamının “hayat hikayesi” veri toplama tekniği ile incelenmesinin günden güne daha da kolaylaşması anlamına gelir. Bu nedenle, bu çalışma özellikle Sandıklılılar grubunun Sandıklı’dan Ankara’ya göçün önemli sonuçlarından biri olan kültürel değişim sürecine odaklanmaktadır. Bu bakış açısından, bu göçün diğer “plansız” ve “rastlantısal” göçlerden farklılığı belirginleşir. Aile gruplarının ev sahipliği ve Sandıklı düğünlerinde önemli yer tutan diğer kültürel etkinliklerin sürdürülmesindeki güçlükler, bu çalışmanın dikkate değer iki sonucudur.

Estimated as an alternative approach of modern social science, qualitative method has begun to widespread not only in anthropology but also in sociology. Unlike quantitative method, main characeristics of qualitative method is that it could be applied without using any accurate sampling techniques, theories, hypothesis and statistics. This means examining some group’s everyday life getting easier day by day via “life story” data collection. That’s why, this paper particularly focuses on “Sandıklılılar” group’s cultural change process which is one of the significant outcome of migration from Sandıklı to Ankara. From this perspective, differences of this migration from other “unplanned” and “accidental” migrations become clear. Hosting of family groups, and difficulties to sustain other cultural activities which took crucial place in Sandıklı wedding ceremonies is two considirable result of this paper.

PDF

___

ALBRECHT, Don, Gordon BULTENA, Eric HOIBERG ve Peter NOWAK 1982 “Measuring Environmental Concern: The New Environmental Paradigm Scale.” Journal of Environmental Education. 13(3):39-43.
ARCURY, Thomas A. 1990 “Environmental Attitude and Environmental Knowledge.” Human Organization. 49(4):300-4.
ARCURY, Thomas A. and Timothy P. JOHNSON 1987 “Public Environmental Knowledge: A Statewide Survey.” Journal of Environmental Education. 18:31-37.
BOWMAN, James S. 1977 “Public Opinion and Environment: Post-Earth Day Attitudes Among College Students” Environment and Behavior. 9(3):385-395.
BUTTEL, Frederick H. 1978 “Environmental Sociology: A New Paradigm?” The American Sociologist. 13:252-256.
BUTTEL, Frederick H. ve William L. FLINN. 1974 “The structure of support for the Environmental Movement, 1968-1970.” Rural Sociology. 39(1):56-69.
BUTTEL, Frederick H. and Donald E. JOHNSON 1977 “Dimensions of Environmental Concern: Factor Structure, Correlates, and Implications for Research.” Journal of Environmental Education. 9:49-64.
BUTTEL, Frederick H. ve William L. FLINN 1978 “The Politics of Environmental Concern: The İmpacts of Party Identification and Political Ideology on Environmental Attitudes.” Environment and Behavior. 10(1):17-35.
BUTTEL, Frederick ve Peter TAYLOR 1994 Environmental Sociology and Global Environmental Change: A Critical Assessment.” Ed: M. Redclift and T. Benton. Social Theory and the Global Environment. Routledge, London.
CANAN, Penelope 1996 “Brining Nature Back in: The Challenge of Environmental Sociology.” Sociological Inquiry. 66(1):29-37.
CATTON, William R. ve Riley DUNLAP 1978 “Environmental Sociology: A New Paradigm.” The American Sociologist. 13:41-49.
CATTON, William R. ve Riley DUNLAP 1980 “A New Ecological Paradigm for Post-Exuberant Sociology.” American Behavioral Scientist. 24(1):15-47.
CLUCK, Rodney, Duane A. GILL, Ralph BROWN ve Xiaohe XU 1997 “Attitudes Towards and Commitment to Environmentalism: A Multidimensional Conceptualization. (Paper presented at the 60th meeting of the Rural Sociological Society, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, August, 1997)
COTTRELL, Stuart P. ve Alan R. GRAEFE 1997 “Testing a Conceptual Framework of Responsible Environmental Behavior.” The Journal of Environmental Education. 29(1):17-27.
DOBSON, Andrew (ed) 1991 The Green Reader: Essays Toward a Sustainable Society. San Francisco, Mercury House.
DUNLAP, Riley E. 1975 “The Impact of Political Orientation on Environmental Attitudes and Actions.” Environment and Behavior. 7(4):428-453.
DUNLAP, Riley E. and William R. CATTON 1994 “Struggling with Human Exemptionalism: The Rise, Decline and Revitalization of Environmental Sociology.” The American Sociologist. Spring, 1994: 5-30.
DUNLAP, Riley E. ve Kent D. VAN LIERE 1978 “The ‘New Environmental Paradigm.’” Journal of Environmental Education. 9(Summer):10-19.
DUNLAP, Riley E. ve Kent D. VAN LIERE 1984 “Commitment to the Dominant Social Paradigm and Concern for Environmental Quality.” Social Science Quarterly. 65(4):1013-28.
ECKERSLEY, Robyn 1996 Environmentalism and Political Theory. State University of New York Press, New York.
EDER, Klaus 1996 The Social Construction of Nature: A Sociology of Ecological Enlightenment. Sage Publication,. London.
FREUDENBURG, R. William 1991 “Rural-Urban Differences in Environmental Concern: A Closer Look.” Sociological Inquiry. 61(2):35-45.
FREUDENBURG, R. William ve Kenneth KEATING 1985 ”Applying Sociology to Policy: Social Science and the Environmental Impact Statement.” Rural Sociology. 505(4): 578-605.
GOLDBLATT, David 1996 Social Theory and the Environment. Westview Press.
HANNIGAN, John A. 1995 Environmental Sociology: A Social Constructionist Perspective. Routledge, London and New York.
HARPER, Charles L. 1996 Environment and Society: Human Perspectives on Environmental Issues. Printice Hill, New Jersey.
INGLEHART, Ronald 1995 “Changing Values, Economic Development and Political Change.” International Social Science Journal. 145(Sep.):379-403.
HARPER, Charles L. 1996 Environment and Society: Human Perspectives on Environmental Issues. Printice Hill, New Jersey.
KEMPTON, Willett, James S. BOSTER, ve Jennifer A. HARTLEY 1995 Environmental Values in American Culture. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
LENSKI, Gerhard E. 1966 Power Privilege: A Theory of Social Stratification. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.
LOVELOCK, James 1991 “The Gaia Hypothesis.” Ed: Andrew Dobson. The Green Reader: Essays Toward a Sustainable Society. Mercury House Incorporated, San Francisco.
MILBRATH, Lester W. 1984 Environmentalists: Vanguard for New Society. State University of New York Press, Albany.
MOHAI, Paul ve Ben W. TWIGHT 1987 “Age and Environmentalism: An Elaboration of the Buttel Model Using National Survey Evidence.” Social Science Quarterly.
MOL, Arthur P.J. ve Gert SPAARGAREN 1993 “Environment, Modernity and the Risk-Society: The Apocalyptic Horizon of Environmental Reform.” International Sociology. 8(4):431-459.
NAESS, Arne 1991 “Deep Ecology” The Green Reader: Essays Toward a Sustainable Society. Ed: Andrew Dobson. Mercury House, Incorporated, San Francisco.
RAMSEY, Charles E. ve Roy E. RICKSON 1976 “Environmental Knowledge and Attitudes.” Journal of Environmental Education. 8:10-18.
STERN, Paul C., Thomas DIETZ ve Linda KALOF 1993 “Value Orientations, Gender, and Environmental Concern.” Environment and Behavior. 25(3):322-348.
TARRANT, Michael A. ve H. Ken CORDELL. 1997 “The Effects of Respondent Characteristics on Environmental Attitude-Behavior Correspondence.” The Journal of Environmental Education. 29(5):618-637.
TUNA, Muammer 1997 Environmentalism: An Empirical Test of Multi-Effects on Environmental Attitudes in more and Less Developed Countries, Unpublished Dissertation, Mississippi State University, USA.
TUNA, Muammer 2002 “Globalization of Environmentalism:World Environmentalism System,” Paper presented at the XV. World Congress of Sociology and published: http://203.94.129.73/docs/p1702.rtf
YEARLY, Steven 1994 “Social Movement and Environmental Change.” Ed: M. Redclift and T. Benton. Social Theory and the Global environment. Routledge, London.