Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/94961
題名: 落地生根或落葉歸根:族群接觸與上海台商子女身份認同之關係
作者: 蘇祐磊
貢獻者: 耿曙
蘇祐磊
關鍵詞: 台商子女
認同
族群接觸
Taiwanese Entrepreneurs` Following Generation
Intergroup Contact
Identity
日期: 2009
上傳時間: 9-May-2016
摘要: 在中國大陸的台商為免與家人長期分隔兩地,逐漸出現舉家遷移的情形,而被帶領到大陸生活的台商子女,在台商學校、港澳台班、國際學校與本地學校這些與當地接觸程度各有不同的學校環境中,有著迥異的族群接觸機會及經驗,對於這些孩子們的自我身份認同,會不會有影響?若有,則是什麼效果?\n\n本文認為,父母決定了其子女與當地深度接觸機會的多寡,若沒有與當地族群深度接觸的機會,由於他們對當地的印象僅來自表面的觀察,而產生或加深對當地的偏見,使其更為認同台灣;如果深度機會多但經驗不佳,亦會讓他們傾向認同台灣,但相較於前者仍有同時認同當地的可能;而深度接觸當地機會多且有正面經驗的孩子,將開始認同中國,但未必拋卻對台灣的認同,或可說其不再以國族、族群,而以生活品味、素質等標準作為我群與他群的分際。
In case of family separation, some Taiwanese entrepreneurs have migrated to China so that their children would have various opportunities of intergroup contact and experience in diversity kinds of school. For instance, “Taiwan businessman’s schools”, “Classes for Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan”, “International schools”, and “Local Schools”. Would these varied environments affect their identities? If the answer is “yes”, then what the effect is and how it works?\n\nThis thesis indicates that, indeed, whether the children contact the locals deeper or not which is due to their parents’ decision. If the children lack for such chances to contact the locals, they would identify themselves as Taiwanese. Since the children’s local cognition has been only affected by superficial observation, it produces or strengthens their prejudice toward the locals. While the children are in a “Melting Pot” but not feel happy with their peers; hence, they tend to have Taiwanese identities and it is not impossible to have Chinese identities simultaneously in the future. As for the children who have local acquaintances certainly have Chinese identities more than those illustrated above. However, it does not mean that they would definitely forsake their Taiwanese identities in stead of a new one. In fact, they may discard ethnic and use other standards as means of their identity options such as life styles and tastes.
參考文獻: 一、中文\n\n王寧,2001,《消費社會學:一個分析的視角》,北京:社會科學文獻。\n石之瑜,1998,《兩岸關係概論》,台北:揚智。\n石之瑜、姚源明,2004,〈社會科學認同的幾個途徑〉,《東亞研究》第35卷第1期,頁1~36。\n伊慶春、章英華,2006,〈對娶外籍與大陸媳婦的態度:社會接觸的重要性〉,《台灣社會學》,第12期,頁191~232。\n宋秉忠,2002,〈大陸台商子女教育—兩岸的「臍帶戰爭」〉,《天下雜誌》,第261期。\n李美枝,2003,〈台灣地區族群與國族認同的顯性與隱性意識〉,《本土心理學研究》,第20期,頁39~71。\n吳乃德,1996,〈自由主義和族群認同:搜尋台灣民族主義的意識形態基礎〉,《台灣政治學刊》,第1期,頁5-39。\n吳乃德,2005,〈麵包與愛情:初探台灣民眾民族認同的變動〉,《台灣政治學刊》,第9卷第2期,頁5-39。\n周敏,2006,《美國華人社會的變遷》,郭南譯,上海:上海三聯書店。\n馬岳琳,2007,〈上班族的中國愁〉,《天下雜誌》,第370期。\n耿曙,2003,〈連綴社群:WTO背景下兩岸民間互動的分析概念〉,許光泰、方孝謙、陳永生編,《世貿組織與兩岸發展》,台北:政大國關中心,頁57-87。\n曹敏娟,2007,〈影響東莞台校學生身分認同的因素分析〉,銘傳大學公共事務學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。\n陳朝政,2005,〈台商在兩岸的認同與流動:經驗研究與政策分析〉,東吳大學政治學系博士論文。\n陳鏗任、吳建華,2006,〈是故鄉,還是異鄉?從東莞台校學生的學習經驗看台商子女的身份認同意象〉,《師大學報教育類》,第51卷第2期,頁173~194。\n莊耀嘉,2003,〈族群與偏見在兩岸關係中的角色:社會認同理論的檢驗〉,《本土心理學研究》,第20期,頁73~104。\n鄧建邦,2005,〈我們是誰?跨社會流動下中國大陸台商的認同〉,發表於第二屆「跨界流離:公民身份、認同與反抗」國際學術研討會,台北:世新大學,12月9-10日。\n蔣逸青,2008,〈拒絕融化的冰:作為政治社會化機制的東莞台校〉,發表於第三屆「台商研究」碩博士論文發表會,台中:中興大學,6月14日。\n魏鏞,2002,〈邁向民族內共同體:台海兩岸互動模式之建構、發展與檢驗〉,《中國大陸研究》,第45卷第5期,頁1-55。\nJenkins, Richard,2006,《社會認同》,王志弘、許妍飛譯,台北:巨流。\nSmith, Anthony D.,2002,《全球化時代的民族與民族主義》,龔維斌、良警宇譯,北京:中央編譯出版社。\n\n二、英文\n\nAllport, Gordon W., 1954, The Nature of Prejudice, Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.\nAlmond, Gabriel A., 1960, “A Functional Approach To Comparative Politics,” in Gabriel A. Almond and James S. Coleman eds., The Politics of Developing Areas, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.\nAlmond, Gabriel A. & Sidney Verba, 1963, The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.\nBogardus, Emory S., 1925, “Social Distance and Its Origin,” Journal of Applied Sociology, Vol. 9, pp. 216-226.\nBrown, Rupert, 1995, Prejudice: Its Social Psychology, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.\nEaston, David. & Jack Dennis, 1969, Children in the Political System: Origins of Political Legitimacy, NY: McGraw-Hill.\nGeertz, Clifford, 1973, “Integrative Revolution: Primordial Sentiments and Civil Politics in the New States,” in Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures, New York: Basic Books, pp. 255-311.\nGreenstein, Fred I., 1960, “The Benevolent Leader: Children’s Images of Political Authority,” American Political Science Review, vol.54, pp. 934-934.\nHyman, Herbert H., 1959. Political Socialization: a Study in the Psychology of Political Behavior, NY: Free Press.\nKasinitz, Philip, John Mollenkopf, and Mary Waters, eds., 2004, Becoming New Yorkers: Ethnographies of The New Second Generation, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.\nPortes, Alejandro, ed., 1996, The New Second Generation, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.\nKeng, Shu, Lu-huei Chen & Kuan-bo Huang, 2006, “Sense, Sensitivity, and Sophistication in Shaping the Future of Cross-Strait Relations,” Issues & Studies, Vol. 42, No.4, pp. 23-66.\nTajfel, Henri and John C. Turner, 1986, “The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior,” in Stephen Worchel and William G. Austin eds., Psychology of Intergroup Relations, Chicago: Nelson Hall, pp. 7-24.\nWeissberg, Robert, 1975, Political Learning, Political Choice, and Democratic Citizenship, Englewood-Cliffs: NJ: Prentice-Hall.
描述: 碩士
國立政治大學
東亞研究所
95260015
資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095260015
資料類型: thesis
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.