All
 
|
 
 


“Society”, “State” and Institutional Matrixes: A Case in Interdisciplinary Meso-Analysis
 
PIIS013216250007101-4-1
DOI10.31857/S013216250007101-4
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Svetlana G. Kirdina-Chandler 
Occupation: Chief Researcher, head of the sector for the evolution of social and economic systems
Affiliation: Institute of Economics of Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Maria S. Kruglova
Occupation: Junior Researcher
Affiliation: Institute of Economics of Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Journal nameSotsiologicheskie issledovaniya
EditionIssue 10
Pages15-26
Abstract

The paper presents a study in interdisciplinarity in the developing of sociological theory incorporating immanent content of language constants "society" and "state" into the theory of institutional X-Y matrixes. For this purpose, the method of interdisciplinary meso-analysis is used us to systemize and organize knowledge from linguistics, etymology in sociological studies. In our sample we compare the etymology of “society” and “state” in the languages of those countries where the X-matrix institutions (Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Hindi/Sanskrit/Urdu) dominate and dominant Y-matrix institutions (English, French, German). Etymology of “society” and “state” in the invplved languages quite clearly reflects essential features of institutional organisation in countries with domination of different matrices. This is to say that construction of such a basic language constant as “society” in the countries with dominance of Y-matrices follows the logic “from the particular to the general”, or the deductive logic of aggregating “from the bottom” (bottom-up): from individuals to society. In turn, for countries with dominance of X-matrices, the etymology of “society” reveals inductive logic “from general to particular”, or “from the top” (top-down), when the whole (society) is the primary while individuals are secondary. Also, a different etymology of “state” has been revealed in countries with dominance of the X- or Y-matrix. The results obtained are not only additional evidence of significant differences between societies with the dominance of institutional X-or Y-matrices, but also substantiate feasibility of meso-analysis in interdisciplinary research. They also serve as a contribution to the development of linguistic sociology, showing relationship between the types of societies (their social structures) and the content of the most important linguistic constants characteristic for the types of societies that are “cleansed” from the cultural context. The results obtained are also important for deeper understanding in international communication of sociologists.

Keywordsmeso-analysis, methodological institutionalism, interdisciplinarity, society, state, language constants, theory of institutional X-Y-matrices, linguistic sociology
Received12.10.2019
Publication date13.10.2019
Number of characters31456
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 1390

Readers community rating: votes 0 

1. Akahori S. (2010) The Self-Description of Society in East Asia. In: XVII ISA World Congress of Sociology “Sociology on the Move”. Gothenburg: ProQest.
2. Alaev L.B. (1981) Rural community in northern India. The main stages of evolution. Moscow: GVRL. (In Russ.)
3. Aleksandrov Yu.I., Kirdina S.G. (2012) Types of mentality and institutional matrices: a multidisciplinary approach. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies] No. 8: 3–12. (In Russ.)
4. Baranov, H.K. (2001) Arabic-Russian dictionary. Moscow: Izdatel Valery Kostin. (In Russ.)
5. Baranova Z.I., Kotov A.V. (1990) Russian-Chinese dictionary. Moscow: Russkiy yazyk. (In Russ.)
6. Branca-Rosoff S., Guilhaumou J. (2003) De société à socialisme: l’invention néologique et son contexte discursive. Dictionnaire des usages socio-politiques (1770–1815). F. 7: Notions théoriques. Paris: Honoré Champion: 143–179.
7. Briggs A. (2000) The Age of Improvement: 1783–1867. 2nd ed. New York: Longman.
8. Budagov R. (1940) The Development of French Political Terminology in the 18th Century. Leningrad: ILGU. (In Russ.)
9. Chernykh P. (2004) Historical and Etymological Dictionary of Modern Russian Language. Moscow: Russkiy yazyk-Media. (In Russ.)
10. Chudova I.А. (2015) Postmodernism and sociological theory. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No 5: 33–41 (In Russ.)
11. Dal V. (1989) Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language. Vol. 2. Moscow: Russkiy yazyk. (In Russ.)
12. Durinova G. (2015) Temporal semantics of the word society (XI – first third of the XIX century. Sotsiologicheskoe obosrenie [Sociological Review]. V. 14. No. 1: 68–104. (In Russ.)
13. Etymological dictionary of the Russian language. In 4 vol. (1996) Max Fasmer. Transl. from German by O.N. Trubachev. 3rd ed. Moscow: Izd. Zentr "Terra". Vol. 1. (In Russ.)
14. Fasmer M. (2003) Etymological Dictionary of Russian Language. Moscow: Astrel'. Vol. 3 (In Russ.)
15. Kharkhordin O. V. (2002) What is a “state”? Russian term in the European context. In: Concept of the state in four languages. Proceedings of the Faculty of Pol. Science and Sociology. Vol. 6. Moscow: Letniy sad: 152–217. (In Russ.)
16. Kharkhordin O. V. (2011) Basic concepts of Russian politics. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russ.)
17. Kirdina S. G. (2014 (2000, 2001) Institutional Matrices and Development in Russia. An introduction to X&Y theory. 3rd ed. Moscow-Saint Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya. (In Russ.)
18. Kirdina S.G. (2015) Methodological institutionalism and the meso-level of social analysis. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 12: 51–59. (In Russ.)
19. Kirdina S.G., Kuznetsova A.N., Senko O.V. (2015) Climate and Institutional Matrices. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 9: 3–13. (In Russ.)
20. Kolesov V.V. (2014) Old Russian civilization. Heritage in the word. (Series: Studies of Russian civilization). Moscow: Institut rossiyskoy tsivilizatsii. (In Russ.)
21. Koselleck R. (2010) On the issue of temporal structures in the historical development of concepts. Transl. from German. In: History of concepts, history of discourse, history of metaphors. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie: 21–33. (In Russ.)
22. Liu J. (2018) On the linguistic turn in Sociology. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 7: 115‑123. (In Russ.)
23. Manusmriti with the Commentary of Medhatithi. Ganganatha Jha. Motilal Banarsidass. (1999) 2nd ed. Ch. 7. Verse 157.
24. Mikeshina L.A. (2018) Sociology and epistemology: the need for interaction. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No.10: 3–13. (In Russ.)
25. Monier-Williams M. A (1899) Sanskrit-English dictionary: Etymologically and philologically arranged with special reference to Cognate Indo-European languages. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.
26. Mozheiko M., Lepin S. (2001) Discourse. The Newest Philosophical Dictionary. Minsk: Interpressservis: 277–279. (In Russ.)
27. Podvoisky D.G. (2011) The language of sociology: polyphony or cacophony? Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 5: 3–9. (In Russ.)
28. Popov E.A. (2013) The language of sociality ‑ the construct of an epoch or science? Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 5: 12–18. (In Russ.)
29. Sako T. (2008) Shakai Gainen no Saikentou (Reassessment of Shakai Concept). Jimbun Gakuho. No. 392:131‑153.
30. Social Theory and Asian Dialogues: Cultivating Planetary Conversations. (2018) Ed. Ananta Kumar Giri. Singapore: Springer Nature.
31. Yang Xingshun. (1972) Ancient Chinese philosophy. Texts collection in 2 vol. Vol. 1. Moscow: Mysl. (In Russ.)

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up