コメント2:口述資料の重要性 : 「経験的語り」の歴史叙述(<特集>オーラリティとはなにか)

概要

論文の詳細を見る
This paper explains the characteristics and significances of oral sources as compared with written documents. Collaborating with the research team of historians who respect written documents, the researcher became aware of the historians' underestimation of documents from oral sources and was also reflexively aware of the difference from the historians which resides in our emphasis on oral sources. I have been considering the significances of orality of oral sources from this research experience. I think that "experiential narration" of an interviewee is essential for the description of history. I suggest the following four points of significances based on such a premise. First of all, the quality of orality is well expressed through the "form of narration" and the transcript as an oral source inevitably implies a certain amount of interpretation by the researcher in the process of turning aural objects into visually written ones. Secondly, the written and oral sources are not mutually exclusive but interrelated closely in today's media environment. Thirdly, oral sources are narrative sources, which contain the thoughts, feelings, and expectations of narrators. Their credibility is based on the fact a narrator has experienced the past event directly as first person. Fourthly, history is described through the dialogue between the researcher and the narrator.
2008-10-11