<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">RUDN Journal of Sociology</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">RUDN Journal of Sociology</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Социология</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">2313-2272</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2408-8897</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumamba</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">21674</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.22363/2313-2272-2019-19-3-387-396</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>Theory, Methodology and History of Sociological Research</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>Вопросы истории, теории и методологии</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Indigeneity in the context of globalization: epistemological and sociocultural aspects</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Индигенность в контексте глобализации: эпистемологический и социокультурный аспекты</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Kuropjatnik</surname><given-names>M. S.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Куропятник</surname><given-names>Марина Степановна</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>доктор социологических наук, заведующая кафедрой культурной антропологии и этнической социологии Санкт-Петербургского государственного университета</p></bio><email>kuropjatnik@bk.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Saint Petersburg State University</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Санкт-Петербургский государственный университет</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2019-12-15" publication-format="electronic"><day>15</day><month>12</month><year>2019</year></pub-date><volume>19</volume><issue>3</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en">VOL 19, NO3 (2019)</issue-title><issue-title xml:lang="ru">ТОМ 19, №3 (2019)</issue-title><fpage>387</fpage><lpage>396</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2019-09-11"><day>11</day><month>09</month><year>2019</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2019, Kuropjatnik M.S.</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2019, Куропятник М.С.</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2019</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Kuropjatnik M.S.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Куропятник М.С.</copyright-holder><ali:free_to_read xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/"/><license><ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0</ali:license_ref></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journals.rudn.ru/sociology/article/view/21674">https://journals.rudn.ru/sociology/article/view/21674</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>In recent decades, the “indigenization of modernity” has become one of the significant trends of the reconfiguration of landscapes of social and cultural diversity. In its contemporary meaning, the concept of indigeneity expresses the desire of indigenous peoples and various social and cultural communities, formerly marginalized within the borders of national states, to independently determine their development. From the global perspective, indigeneity is no longer associated with certain types of societies or cultural scripts of authenticity and traditional lifestyles. Indigenous actors cease to play the role of the Other in contemporary discourses and intellectual life of the West. The transition from the genealogical model of indigeneity based on the ideas of origin, kinship and cultural authenticity to the relational model allows to shift the focus from the features of the indigenous ones to the relationships between indigenous and non-indigenous actors. Indigenous peoples constitute and represent their culture taking into account public opinion, national legislation and international conventions, which leads to the fundamental transformation of the actors themselves. Their characteristics can no longer be represented only in terms of primordiality. Under globalization, the cultural patterns of indigeneity are diverse and conceptualized on the basis of new approaches to the study of the social organization of cultural diversity and models of its management. The concepts “partial relations”, “entanglement” and “intercultural relations” constitute the discourse of indigeneity, which implies recognition of multiple partial relations connecting subject and object, indigenous and non-indigenous worlds and cultural practices. Changes in the discourse of indigeneity both in social-cultural and epistemological aspects are also associated with reconfiguration of the thematic field of social anthropology.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>В последние десятилетия одной из значимых тенденций реконфигурации ландшафтов социального и культурного разнообразия становится «индигенизация современности». В своем современном значении концепт «индигенность» выражает стремление коренных народов (indigenous peoples) и разных сообществ, прежде маргинализованных в границах национальных государств, самостоятельно определять перспективы своего развития. В глобальной перспективе индигенность утрачивает прежнюю сопряженность с определенными типами обществ или культурными сценариями аутентичности и традиционных образов жизни, и индигенные акторы перестают играть роль радикально Другого в современных дискурсах и интеллектуальной жизни Запада. Переход от генеалогической модели индигенности, основанной на идеях происхождения, родства и культурной аутентичности, к реляционной модели позволяет сместить фокус внимания со свойств, присущих тем, кто понимается как индигенный в определенном контексте, на отношения индигенных и неиндигенных акторов. Коренные народы конституируют и репрезентируют свою идентичность и культуру с учетом общественного мнения, национального законодательства и международно-правового регулирования, что приводит к фундаментальным трансформациям самих акторов. Их характеристики больше не могут быть представлены только в терминах примордиальности. В условиях глобализации культурные паттерны индигенности отличаются разнообразием и осмысляются на основе новых подходов к изучению социальной организации культурного разнообразия, а также моделей управления им. Современный дискурс индигенности поддерживают такие концепты, как «частичные отношения», «вовлеченность», «интеркультурные отношения», что подразумевает признание множественных частичных отношений, связывающих субъекта и объект, индигенные и неиндигенные «миры» и культурные практики. Изменение характера дискурса индигенности как в социокультурном, так и эпистемологическом аспекте сопряжено и с реконфигурацией проблемного поля социальной антропологии.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>social anthropology</kwd><kwd>indigenous peoples</kwd><kwd>globalization</kwd><kwd>indigeneity</kwd><kwd>relational approach</kwd><kwd>intercultural relations</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>социальная антропология</kwd><kwd>коренные народы</kwd><kwd>глобализация</kwd><kwd>индигенность</kwd><kwd>реляционный подход</kwd><kwd>интеркультурные отношения</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group/></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Arendt H. Otvetstvennost i suzhdenie [Responsibility and Judgment]. Moscow: Izd-vo Instituta Gaydara; 2013 (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Арендт Х. Ответственность и суждение. М.: Изд-во Института Гайдара, 2013</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Balzer M.M. Korennye kosmopolity, ekologicheskaya zashchita i aktivizm v Sibiri i na Dalnem Vostoke [Indigenous cosmopolitans, ecological defense, and activism in Russia’s Siberia and the Far East]. Sibirskie Istoricheskie Issledovaniya. 2014; 2 (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Балзер М.М. Коренные космополиты, экологическая защита и активизм в Сибири и на Дальнем Востоке // Сибирские исторические исследования. 2014. № 2</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bevernage B. Allokhronizm, ravenstvo vo vremeni i sovremennost. Kritika proekta radikalnoy sovremennosti Johannesa Fabiana i dovody v polzu novoy politiki vremeni [Allochronism, coevalness and modernity. Criticism of the project of radical modernity by Johannes Fabian and the arguments in favor of the new time policy]. Sotsiologoya Vlasti. 2016; 2 (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Бевернаж Б. Аллохронизм, равенство во времени и современность. Критика проекта радикальной современности Йоханнеса Фабиана и доводы в пользу новой политики времени // Социология власти. 2016. № 2</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Calhoun C. Natsionalizm [Nationalism]. Moscow: Territoriya budushchego; 2006 (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Калхун К. Национализм. М.: Территория будущего, 2006</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Said E. Orientalizm. Zapadnye kontseptsii Vostoka [Orientalism. Western Conceptions of the Orient]. Saint Petersburg: Russky mir; 2006 (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Саид Э. Ориентализм. Западные концепции Востока. СПб.: Русский мир, 2006</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Funk D.A. Vvedenie k spetsialnoy teme nomera [Introducing the theme]. Sibirskie Istoricheskie Issledovaniya. 2014; 2 (In Russ.).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Функ Д.А. Введение к специальной теме номера // Сибирские исторические исследования. 2014. № 2</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>Appadurai A. Putting hierarchy in its place. Cultural Anthropology. 1988; 3 (1).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation>Beach H. Self-determining the Self: Aspects of Saami identity management in Sweden. Acta Borealia. Nordic Journal of Circumpolar Societies. 2007; 24 (1).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>Beteille A. The idea of indigenous people. Current Anthropology. 1998; 39 (2).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>Bunzl M. Foreword: Johannes Fabian’s time and Other: Synthesis of critical anthropology. Fabian J. Time and the Other. How Anthropology Makes its Object. New York: Columbia University Press; 2002.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>Clifford J. Returns. Becoming Indigenous in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2013.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>Clifford J., Marcus G. (Eds.) Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1986.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>Dussart F., Poirier S. Knowing and Managing the Land: The Conundrum of Coexistence and Entanglement. Dussart F., Poirier S. (Eds.) Entangled Territorialities. Negotiating Indigenous Lands in Australia and Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2017.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation>Fabian J. Time and the Other. How Anthropology Makes its Object. New York: Columbia University Press; 2002.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation>Friedman J. Indigeneity: Anthropological notes on a historical variable. Minde H. (Ed.) Indigenous Peoples. Self-Determination. Knowledge. Indigeneity. Eburon: Eburon Akademik Publishers; 2007.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hannerz U. Transnational Connections. Culture, People, Places. London — New York: Routledge; 1996.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Hannerz U. Transnational Connections. Culture, People, Places. London - New York: Routledge; 1996.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation>Karlsson B. Anthropology and the “indigenous slot”. Claims to debates about indigenous people’s status in India. Critique of Anthropology. 2003; 23 (4).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><mixed-citation>Li T.M. Articulating indigenous identity in Indonesia: Resource politics and the tribal slot. Comparative Studies in Society and History. 2000; 42 (1).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation>Merlan F. Indigeneity: Global and local. Current Anthropology. 2009; 50 (3).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><mixed-citation>Merlan F. Theorizing relationality: A response to the Morphys. American Anthropologist. 2013; 115 (4).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><mixed-citation>Narayan K. How native is a ‘native’ anthropologist? American Anthropologist. 1993; 95 (3).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B22"><label>22.</label><mixed-citation>Niezen R. A World Beyond Difference. Cultural Identity in the Age of Globalization. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing; 2004.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B23"><label>23.</label><mixed-citation>Peterson N. Is there a role for anthropology in cultural reproduction? Maps, mining and the “cultural future” in Central Australia. Dussart F., Poirier S. (Eds.) Entangled Territorialities. Negotiating Indigenous Lands in Australia and Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2017.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B24"><label>24.</label><mixed-citation>Poirier S. Nehirowisiw territoriality: Negotiating and managing entanglement and coexistence. Dussart F., Poirier S. (Eds.) Entangled Territorialities. Negotiating Indigenous Lands in Australia and Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2017.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B25"><label>25.</label><mixed-citation>Robbins J. Beyond the suffering subject: Toward an anthropology of the good. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. 2013; 19 (3).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B26"><label>26.</label><mixed-citation>Sahlins M. Two or three things that I know about culture. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. 1999; 5.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B27"><label>27.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Strathern M. (Ed.) Shifting Contexts. Transformations in Anthropological Knowledge. London — New York: Routledge; 1995.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Strathern M. (Ed.) Shifting Contexts. Transformations in Anthropological Knowledge. London - New York: Routledge; 1995.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B28"><label>28.</label><mixed-citation>Strathern M. Partial Connections, Updated Edition. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press; 2004.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B29"><label>29.</label><mixed-citation>Trouillot M.-R. Global Transformations. Anthropology and the Modern World. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2003.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B30"><label>30.</label><mixed-citation>Zapata-Barrero R. Interculturalism: main hypothesis, theories and strands. Zapata-Barrero R. (Ed.) Interculturalism in Cities: Concept, Policy and Implementation. Cheltenham: Edward-Elgar Publishing; 2015.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
