چکیده مقاله :
گافمن یکی از نظریه‌پردازان اجتماعی نیمه‌ی دوم قرن بیستم است که مدت درازی به عنوان یک شخصیت حاشیه-ای در نظریه‌ی جامعه‌شناسی بشمار می‌آمد. گافمن در عرصه‌ی نظریه‌ی جامعه‌شناسی موقعیت متناقضی دارد. از سویی وی را جامعه‌شناسی فاقد نظریه‌ای کلی، تک‌رو، خارج از جریان اصلی تفکر نظری و مبدع اصطلاحات خودساخته و غریب می‌دانند و از سوی دیگر، پیوندهای اندیشه‌ی وی با دورکیم، زیمل، مکتب کنش متقابل نمادی و اتنومتدولوژی و تلاش وی برای بنیاد نهادن جامعه‌شناسی زندگی روزمره، او را به نظریه‌پردازی با موقعیت متناقض تبدیل می‌کند. هدف اصلی این مقاله ارایه‌ی روش‌شناسی نظریه‌ی اجتماعی گافمن است. روش مطالعه‌ی این مقاله بر اساس روش کتابخانه ای انجام شده و بررسی توصیفی، موقعیت روش و نظریه‌ی گافمن را مورد باریک بینی قرار می‌دهد. گافمن در مباحث نظری خود بیش‌تر به مردم‌نگار دنیای زندگی روزمره شبیه است و همین امر سبب می‌شود تا سبک نوشتاری وی شباهت زیادی به دیگر نظریه‌پردازان جامعه‌شناسی نداشته باشد. گافمن پس از افول نظریه‌ی کنش به زایش تحلیل نمایشی به عنوان صورتی دیگر از کنش متقابل نمادی کمک نمود و به این خاطر شهرت فراوانی کسب نمود. در مباحث روش شناختی، گافمن را به خاطر بحث‌های غنی که در قالب رهیافت تفسیری در علوم اجتماعی دارد، می‌توان یکی از برجسته‌ترین راهبران این رهیافت فکری بشمار آورد.
چکیده انگلیسی:
Goffman is one of the second half twentieth century social theorists who was a marginal and even conceal personality in sociology theory for long time. He has been known as lacking of general theory, innovator of strange and self-made expressions. On the other hand by blending his though with Durkhim, simmel, symbolic interaction approach and ethno-methodology and his attempt for establishing everyday life sociology, convert him to a theorist with a contradictory situation. The main purpose of this paper is presenting the methodology of Goffman. This article using documentary research method to describe situation of method and theory of Goffman. Goffman in theory discussions is more likely to ethnographers in explaining everyday live that this factor causes his written style becomes irresemblance with the rest of sociology theorists. After falling period of action theory, Goffman helped displaying analysis creation as another from of symbolic interaction, and because of it he became famous. In methodological discussions, for his rich discussions on interpretations approche in social science, he is deserved to be named as one of the greatest leaders in this area.
منابع و مأخذ:
1- Adibi, H and A. Ansari. (1358). Sociological Theory, Tehran: Society
Pub.(persian)
2- Annells, M. (1996). “Grounded theory method: philosophical perspectives,
paradigm inquiry, and postmodernism”. Qualitative Health Research, Vol. 6,
No. 3, pp: 379-93.
3- Blackburn, S. (1996). Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, London: Cambridge
University Press.
4- Blaikie, N. (1993). Approaches to Social Inquiry, London, Polity Press.
6- Burns, T. (1992). Erving Goffman, London: Rutledge.
7- Collins, R. (1988). The Theoretical Continuities in Goffman s Work, Boston:
Northeastern University Press.
8- Denzin, N. K. (2001). Interpretive Interactions, Thousand Oaks, London,
New Delhi.
9- Giddens, A. (1383). Sociology. Translated by M. Sabouri. 11ed. Tehran:
Naei Publication.
10- Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums.(ed) D. Cressey. New York: Holt, Reinhart &
Winston.
11- Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City,
Anchor Books.
12- Goffman, E. (1386). Stigma Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity.
Translated by M. Kyanpour. Tehran: Markaz Publication.
13- Iman, M T. (1380). Criticize to Quantitative Methods and Regarding
Qualitative Methods in Media Researches. Human and Social sciences Journal.
Shiraz University, No2.PP: 130-147.
14- Karous, M.D. Roubert. (1386). Social Psychology Theories. Translated by
M. Kotobi, 3ed. Tehran University press. (persian)
15- Kivisto, P. (2008). Classical Contemporary Theory, Sage Publication,
United Kingdom.
16- Kottak, P. C. (1996). “Mirror for humanity”, McGraw-Hill I nc. New York.
17- Kyusto,P. (1378). Foundation Thought in Sociology. Translated by M.
Mohsseni. Tehran: Naei Publication.
18- Little, D. (1373). Explaining in Social Sciences… Translated by A.
Soroush. Tehran:Serat Cultural Association.
19- Manning, P. (1992). Erving Goffman and Modern Sociology. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
20- Minig, p. (1380). Erving Gofman and Modern Society. Translated by S.
Kamiar. Tehran: Sarallah Publication.
21- Psathas, G.(1996). “Theoretical perspectives on Goffman: Critique and
commentary.” Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 383-391.
22- Reitzer, G. (1380). Contemporary Sociological Theory. Translated by M.
Salasi. 5ed. Tehran: Scientific Publication.
23- Sarokhani, B. (1375). An Overview on Social Sciences Dictionary. Tehran:
Scentific Kyhan Publication.(persian)
24- Shayanmeher, A. (1379). Social Sciences Dictionary. Tehran: Kyhan
Dictionary. (persian)
25- Schwandt, T.A. (1994). “Constructivist, Interpretive Approaches to Human
Enquiry”. In N. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (ed), Handbook of Qualitative
Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26- Straus, M. A. (1996). "A sociological perspective on the prevention and
treatment of wife beating in battered women," in M. Roy (Ed.). Battered
women: A psycho sociological study of domestic violence. pp. 194-239. New
York: van Netherlands Reinhold.
27- Turner, B. (2006). The Cambridge Dictionary of Sociology, Cambridge
University Press.
28- Turner, J. H. (2003). The Structure of Sociological Theory, United State,
Wadsworth.
29- Verhoeven, J. C.(1993). “An interview with Erving Goffman.” Research on
Language and Social Interaction, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 317-348.
30- Williams, R. (1379). Great Sociological Scholars. Traslated by M.
Mirdamadi. Tehran: Markaz Publication.
31- Williams, S. (1986). “Appraising Goffman”, The British Journal of
Sociology. No 3. PP, 49-87.
