Folklore in the Midst of Social Change: The Perspectives and Methods of Japanese Folkloristics

Takanori Shimamura Executive, Folklore Society of Japan Kwanseigakuin University

Translated by James E. Roberson Professor of Anthropology Kanazawa Seiryō University

1. What are Folkloristics?

Folkloristics began in the 17th century with the work of Giambattista Vico (1668-1744), and in the social context of the anti-hegemonic and anti-enlightenment movements of 18th and 19th century Germany was formed from the confluence of the Philology strongly promoted by Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803) and the Grimm brothers (Jacob Ludwig Karl Grimm [1785-863] and Wilhelm Karl Grimm [1786-1859]) with the Local Studies of Justus Möser (1720-1794). Folkloristics subsequently spread around the world and uniquely developed as a discipline in each area. It is a scholarly field that engenders knowledge that―based on subjective understandings which incorporate the relationships between human life as developing from dimensions different than the social topologies of authority, the universal, the center and mainstream―overcomes and relativizes bodies of knowledge composed from the criteria of the latter (Shimamura 2017).

What is most important for an understanding of Folkloristics is that it was first fully formed in Germany as a form of resistance to the Napoleonic hegemonism which aimed to control Europe and to the France-centered Enlightenment movement of the 18th and 19th centuries. And, it is important to note that, whether having been directly or indirectly inspired by Germany, folkloristics was independently especially strongly formed in other societies that like Germany shared an anti-hegemonic context. More concretely, folkloristics developed in areas such as Finland, Estonia, Norway, Sweden, Ireland, Wales, Scotland,

Japanese Review of Cultural Anthropology, vol. 18-1, 2017 192 Takanori Shimamura

Japan, China, Korea, the Philippines, and India, as well as in America, Brazil and Argentina.1

Generally speaking, modern social sciences are bodies of knowledge born of the social topologies of authority, the universal, the center and the mainstream. However, folkloristics’ powerful originality lies in giving birth to knowledge that relativizes and overcomes this tendency. Throughout its history, folkloristics has consistently investigated human life in/of dimensions other than those of the social topologies of authority, the universal, the center and mainstream, and it has inquired into the knowledge engendered by such a focus. It thus follows that, while itself also one of the modern social sciences, folkloristics is an alternative discipline vis-à-vis the wider modern social sciences.

Folkloristics aims to be such a discipline, and thus inclusion of life actors (seikatsuhsa) themselves as research objects has been one important method in the research process. Since in addition to researchers affiliated with the academy (universities and other specialist research institutions) folkloristics includes various other actors as researchers, it has been referred to with such labels as “the discipline of the folk by the folk” (No no Gakumon; Suga 2013) or “the intimate Other of the academy” (Noyes 2016:14). This comes from the historical fact that, as a means to gain a subjective understanding of research objects, local life-actors (seikatsuhsa) as directly involved agents (tōjisha) have been included as important actors for folkloristic research. This is something that is true not just of folkloristics in Japan, but which with some degrees of difference may be seen in the folkloristics of America and other countries.

2. Yanagita Folkloristics as The Study of Social Change

The reception of folkloristics in Japan began, as “Dozokugaku (土俗学),” at the end of the 19th century under anthropologist Shōgoro Tsuboi and others. However, after the 1910s, its development was lead by the scholarly activities of Kunio Yanagita (1875-1962). One scholarly media that performed an important function for early folkloristics in Japan was the journal Kyōdo Kenkyū (Local Studies), first published in 1913 by Yanagita and others. In this journal, Yanagita presented one after the other research findings that became important in the history of Japanese folkloristics. Through this journal, many people in the provinces became interested in local studies, and from among these there also arose lay folklore researchers.

Publication of Kyōdo Kenkyū was stopped in 1917, but afterwards folkloristics related journals such as Dozoku to Densetsu (Folklore and Legends; 1918-1919), Minzoku (Nation; 1925-

1 For details on the history and current conditions of folkloristic research around the world, see Bendix and Hasan-Rokem (2012). Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 193

Japan, China, Korea, the Philippines, and India, as well as in America, Brazil and 1929), and Minzokugaku (Folkloristics; 1929-1933) were published. Through such journals, Argentina.1 Japanese Folkloristics grew with the accumulation of resources and the research results based on these. Furthermore, these journals played a major role in cultivating as folklorists Generally speaking, modern social sciences are bodies of knowledge born of the social local intellectuals in the provinces and of organizing them as members of a network with topologies of authority, the universal, the center and the mainstream. However, folkloristics’ Yanagita at its center. powerful originality lies in giving birth to knowledge that relativizes and overcomes this tendency. Throughout its history, folkloristics has consistently investigated human life in/of However, as Kazuko Tsurumi (1997) points out, what is important here is that Yanagita dimensions other than those of the social topologies of authority, the universal, the center imagined Folkloristics not as research aiming to investigate folk traditions as discrete and mainstream, and it has inquired into the knowledge engendered by such a focus. It thus resources but rather as a one type of “social change studies.” Yanagita’s study of social follows that, while itself also one of the modern social sciences, folkloristics is an alternative change was not a simplistic application of western “modernization theory” taking western discipline vis-à-vis the wider modern social sciences. modernization as a universal standard, and it differed from theories of social change then prevalent in sociology.2 Instead, Yanagita’s concern was with the human life-world3 and how Folkloristics aims to be such a discipline, and thus inclusion of life actors (seikatsuhsa) the humanistic elements born of it—such as language, arts, emotions, beliefs, the relations themselves as research objects has been one important method in the research process. of humans and nature, women’s everyday experience, and the cultural creativity of Since in addition to researchers affiliated with the academy (universities and other children—are related to social change. How, in the midst of structural changes of society, do specialist research institutions) folkloristics includes various other actors as researchers, it these change? Which should be abandoned or kept? Or, what new elements should be has been referred to with such labels as “the discipline of the folk by the folk” (No no introduced? How should survivals and newly introduced elements be combined in Gakumon; Suga 2013) or “the intimate Other of the academy” (Noyes 2016:14). This comes approaching the future? For Yanagita, furthermore, consideration of such things should be from the historical fact that, as a means to gain a subjective understanding of research carried out by the concerned life actors themselves (seikatsu tōjisha jishin).4 objects, local life-actors (seikatsuhsa) as directly involved agents (tōjisha) have been included as important actors for folkloristic research. This is something that is true not just of This study of social change of Yanagita’s was itself the folkloristics he conceived, and the folkloristics in Japan, but which with some degrees of difference may be seen in the primary resources needed for the development of such folkloristics as the study of social folkloristics of America and other countries. change were the folk traditions born of and surviving in the life-worlds of currently living people. The folk traditions Yanagita systematically collected became the corpus for the 2. Yanagita Folkloristics as The Study of Social Change development of his study of social change.

The reception of folkloristics in Japan began, as “Dozokugaku (土俗学),” at the end of the However, from the second half of the 1930s, the further formalization and manualization 19th century under anthropologist Shōgoro Tsuboi and others. However, after the 1910s, its of folkloristics progressed—seen in the 1935 founding of the Folk Tradition Society (Denshō development was lead by the scholarly activities of Kunio Yanagita (1875-1962). One no Kai), initial publication of the journal Minkan Denshō (Folk Tradition), and the publication of scholarly media that performed an important function for early folkloristics in Japan was the introductory book Kyōdo Seikatsu no Kenkyūhō (Research Methods of Homeplace Life). With the journal Kyōdo Kenkyū (Local Studies), first published in 1913 by Yanagita and others. In this journal, Yanagita presented one after the other research findings that became 2 Kazuko Tsurumi (1997:446) points out that Yanagita’s study of social change assumes the multilineal development of societies around the world and does not employ the perspective of unilineal development important in the history of Japanese folkloristics. Through this journal, many people in the taking western modernization as standard. provinces became interested in local studies, and from among these there also arose lay 3 The concept of “life-world” here is that (lebenswelt) proposed in the phenomenology of Edmund Gustav Albrecht Husserl (1859-1938) and as advanced in the field of sociology by Alfred Schütz (1899-1959). folklore researchers. 4 Among the concrete works that correspond to Yanagita-style studies of social change, it is possible to mention the following: focusing on language, Kokugo no Shōrai (1939a); focusing on emotions and the arts in everyday life, Fukō naru Geijutsu (1953); focusing on belief, Ujigami to Ujiko (1947); focusing on the relation of Publication of Kyōdo Kenkyū was stopped in 1917, but afterwards folkloristics related humans with nature, Yasō Zakki, Yachō Zakki (1940) and Koen Zuihitsu (1939b); on the women’s everyday journals such as Dozoku to Densetsu (Folklore and Legends; 1918-1919), Minzoku (Nation; 1925- experience, Momen Izen no Koto (1939c); on the cultural creativity of children, Chīsaki Mono no Koe (1942); and, more broadly touching on various humanistic elements contained in sensibilities and emotion, Meiji Taishō Shi: Sesōhen (1931). In various places in these works, Yanagita argues that folkloristics is a method for realizing 1 For details on the history and current conditions of folkloristic research around the world, see Bendix and the importance of the fact that the selection of various old and new humanistic elements is something that Hasan-Rokem (2012). living actors themselves decide in response to societal change. 194 Takanori Shimamura this, understandings of Folkloristics that differed from Yanagita’s conceptualization and that saw Folkloristics as research on Folk Traditions as such (for example, as the investigation of essentialistic meanings and of the origins and historical changes in Folk Traditions) rapidly gained strength.5 Even after the Second World War this didn’t change and continued into the 1990s.6

3. Folkloristics as Folk Tradition (Minkan Denshō) Research

3.1 Debates on the Character of Folkloristics: “Contemporary Science” or “Historical Science”? In 1949, the until then informal research group The Folk Tradition Society (Minkan Denshō no Kai) was reorganized as the Folklore Society of Japan (Nippon Minzoku Gakkai), and corresponding with this the journal Folk Tradition (Minkan Denshō) was designated as the official journal of the latter society. The first issue of the reborn journal Minkan Denshō included an article by Tarō Wakamori (1949) on “On the Methods of Folklore Studies.” Wakamori notes that “The research object of Japanese folkloristics is to be limited to the historical character and meanings of Japanese folk traditions,” (1949:5) and that the research methods of, for example, sociology or geography are not to be approved.

In contrast to this, Keiko Seki (1949a, 1949b) objected that the goal of folkloristics is not the reformulation of “folk history” envisioned by Wakamori but the explication of the contemporary significance of the folk. Shigeru Makita (1951) also criticized Wakamori as well as Toshijirō Hirayama (1951), who emphasized folkloristics as a kind of historical research. Makita writes that, foremost, folkloristics should advance regarding its propositions concerning “Who are the Japanese?” and “What is Japanese culture?” by employing the resources of folk tradition transmitted to the contemporary period. Wakamori (1951) responded to these criticisms in his article on “On the Character of Folklore Studies.” He explains that his argument in his prior article regarding historical character and meaning was not a rejection of the contemporaneous character of folkloristics but rather was a statement regarding the historical character and meaning that may be discovered in folk traditions transmitted into the contemporary era. He further notes that the meaning of

5 Further, in addition to this movement, there arose from the 1920s a movement―centering on a string of graduates from the History Department in the School of Literature at Kyoto Imperial University including Kazuo Higo, Akihide Mishina, Toshijirō Hirayama and Kenichi Yokota―to designate folk traditions as historical resources and to include these in historical research. Referred to as “culture history,” it is possible to locate this current as one part of “history.” However, at the same time, if this is something that “engenders knowledge that―based on subjective understandings which incorporate the relationships between human life as developing from dimensions different than the social topologies of authority, the universal, the center and mainstream―overcomes and relativizes bodies of knowledge composed from the criteria of the latter,” then it is possible to locate that current as part of folkloristics as “historical folkloristics.” And, again from the 1920s, beginning with a line of research begun by literary scholar Shinobu Orikuchi, there arose a movement to view folk traditions as resources for literary research and to incorporate these within Japanese literary research. If such is the case, it is also possible to locate this literary studies movement as part of folkloristics. 6 Even now, the understanding of folkloristics in general society is often an extension of this kind of line. Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 195 this, understandings of Folkloristics that differed from Yanagita’s conceptualization and (Japanese) folkloristics is, thus, “Within comparative research on contemporary folk culture, that saw Folkloristics as research on Folk Traditions as such (for example, as the the search for the original nature of the Japanese people”(1951:35). investigation of essentialistic meanings and of the origins and historical changes in Folk Traditions) rapidly gained strength.5 Even after the Second World War this didn’t change In the history of Japanese folkloristics, the above debate is referred to as the “Folkloristics and continued into the 1990s.6 Character Debate” (Minzokugaku Seikaku Ronsō). This debate began with arguments as to whether Japanese folkloristics was a science of the contemporary or an historical science. 3. Folkloristics as Folk Tradition (Minkan Denshō) Research And, it may be said in summation that Wakamori, who at first emphasized that folkloristics is an historical science, later revised his position to that of seeing folkloristics as a 3.1 Debates on the Character of Folkloristics: “Contemporary Science” or contemporary science which pays careful attention to the historicity of things. “Historical Science”? In 1949, the until then informal research group The Folk Tradition Society (Minkan Denshō 3.2 Cultural Essentialism no Kai) was reorganized as the Folklore Society of Japan (Nippon Minzoku Gakkai), and In the above debate, there appeared opinions that the issues which folkloristics should corresponding with this the journal Folk Tradition (Minkan Denshō) was designated as the explain were those of “who the Japanese people are,” “what Japanese culture is” and of “the official journal of the latter society. The first issue of the reborn journal Minkan Denshō original nature of the Japanese.” The posing of these as issues was influenced by the included an article by Tarō Wakamori (1949) on “On the Methods of Folklore Studies.” perspective of Eiichirō Ishida, who prior to this had proposed that “Folkloristics has to the Wakamori notes that “The research object of Japanese folkloristics is to be limited to the end the goal of the intensive understanding of the uniqueness or ‘ethnos’ of the ‘single’ historical character and meanings of Japanese folk traditions,” (1949:5) and that the ethnic group [‘tan’ minzoku no kosei—ethnos—]” (1948:211), and that “the highest goal of research methods of, for example, sociology or geography are not to be approved. Japanese folkloristics must be the revisiting and recording of the ethnos in each farming, mountain, and fishing village and in every corner of each city, as well as the integration and In contrast to this, Keiko Seki (1949a, 1949b) objected that the goal of folkloristics is not understanding of this as the living form of the ethnic cultural collective as a whole” the reformulation of “folk history” envisioned by Wakamori but the explication of the (1948:213). Ishida’s thesis that “something ethnic equals something racial, that is, ethnos” contemporary significance of the folk. Shigeru Makita (1951) also criticized Wakamori as (1948:210) had a large influence on the postwar world of folkloristics. Various introductory well as Toshijirō Hirayama (1951), who emphasized folkloristics as a kind of historical texts, etc., expressed the same view of folkloristics as that noted by Tokutarō Sakurai when research. Makita writes that, foremost, folkloristics should advance regarding its he wrote that “The scholarly goal of Japanese Folklorisitics is to investigate the ethnos or propositions concerning “Who are the Japanese?” and “What is Japanese culture?” by volkstum of the Japanese race [Nippon Minzoku] through the investigation of the traditional employing the resources of folk tradition transmitted to the contemporary period. Wakamori lifeways thus far lived or being presently pursued by the Japanese race” (1957:112). (1951) responded to these criticisms in his article on “On the Character of Folklore Studies.” He explains that his argument in his prior article regarding historical character and However, Keigo Seki has aptly criticized this, writing: “How are we to grasp this Ethnos? meaning was not a rejection of the contemporaneous character of folkloristics but rather was Even though one may be able to contemplate this at one’s desk, how are we to capture just a statement regarding the historical character and meaning that may be discovered in folk what should be abstracted as this Ethnos from our actual folklore surveys and social traditions transmitted into the contemporary era. He further notes that the meaning of research? Given the current stage of our research techniques, it is surely impossible to grasp even a glimpse of it. The posing of Ethnos may provide researchers with a sense of security, 5 Further, in addition to this movement, there arose from the 1920s a movement―centering on a string of graduates from the History Department in the School of Literature at Kyoto Imperial University including but Folkloristics is a positivist science the results of which must be knowable by anyone” Kazuo Higo, Akihide Mishina, Toshijirō Hirayama and Kenichi Yokota―to designate folk traditions as (1958:154). The theories of Japan (Nippon-ron), as theories of Ethnos which were seen in historical resources and to include these in historical research. Referred to as “culture history,” it is possible to locate this current as one part of “history.” However, at the same time, if this is something that “engenders Japanese Folkloristics at this time were nothing other than essentialistic culture theories knowledge that―based on subjective understandings which incorporate the relationships between human life and it goes without saying that they fundamentally differed from the problem consciousness as developing from dimensions different than the social topologies of authority, the universal, the center and mainstream―overcomes and relativizes bodies of knowledge composed from the criteria of the latter,” then it in folkloristic studies of social change pointed to in the preceding section of this paper. is possible to locate that current as part of folkloristics as “historical folkloristics.” And, again from the 1920s, beginning with a line of research begun by literary scholar Shinobu Orikuchi, there arose a movement to view folk traditions as resources for literary research and to incorporate these within Japanese literary research. If such is the case, it is also possible to locate this literary studies movement as part of folkloristics. 6 Even now, the understanding of folkloristics in general society is often an extension of this kind of line. 196 Takanori Shimamura

3.3 Written Materials on the Method of “Proof by Re-Citation” and on “Peripheral Zone Theory” Discussion of Folkloristic Theory such as that above occurred during the 1950s. Excluding this, the contents of the journal of the Folklore Society of Japan was long occupied by case studies of individual examples of Folk Tradition. Concerted debate on methodology next occurred in 1969. In that year, there was a special issue (Volume 60) of the Society’s journal, Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, that dealt with “Folkloristics Methodology,” with contributions on the three themes of “the method of proof by re-citation” (jūshutsu risshō-hō), “peripheral zone theory’ (shūken-ron), and “archival resources and folk resources.”

“The method of proof by re-citation” is a methodology proposed by Kunio Yanagita (1934) which drew on the theories of George Laurence Gomme (1908) of England. It was a method to reconstruct history from fragmentarily existing materials of folk traditions by juxtaposing these as a kind of “multiple exposure photograph.” There were six essays which investigated the effectiveness of this method, those by: Tanaka (1969), Noguchi (1969), Ushijima (1969), Doi (1969), Kawakami (1969) and Inokuchi (1969a).

“Peripheral Zone Theory” is the theory that cultural elements diffuse from geographic centers to peripheries in concentric circles and that older conditions are thus distributed (survive) in peripheral zones. Kunio Yanagita (1930) first pointed this out regarding spoken dialects, and afterwards other folklorists attempted to generalize this as applicable to particular aspects of general folk traditions. Five articles in the special issue examined the validity of this theory, those by: Fukuta (1969), Hirayama (1969a), Ogawa (1969), Ono (1969) and Inokuchi (1969b).

There were seven essays in the 1969 special issue concerning the theme of “archival resources and folk resources.” As many of the “folk resources” that Folkloristics deals with are those of tradition obtained through field interviews, these essays addressed the issues of how to incorporate archival resources (mainly historical writings) and of how to balance the use of these different kinds of written and unwritten resources. Essays included those by: Kameyama (1969), Inokuchi (1969c), (Kazuhiko) Hirayama (1969b, 1969c), Miyata (1969), Makita (1969), and (Toshijiro) Hirayama (1969).

As seen above, this special issue on methodology included numerous articles, but almost all stopped at discussing the handling or interpretation of folk tradition resources and materials. The one exception to this was an essay by Kazuhiko Hirayama (1969c), in which he argues that, regarding methodology, discussion must be held concerning the scholarly Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 197

3.3 Written Materials on the Method of “Proof by Re-Citation” and on worldview that should be placed at the base of methodology, as in the “keisei-saimin”7principle “Peripheral Zone Theory” of Kunio Yanagita. In the special issue there was also not, for example, debate about how to Discussion of Folkloristic Theory such as that above occurred during the 1950s. Excluding use folk tradition materials in developing discussions of social change. In this respect, one this, the contents of the journal of the Folklore Society of Japan was long occupied by case can catch a glimpse here of the state of affairs in Japanese Folkloristics in which Yanagita’s studies of individual examples of Folk Tradition. Concerted debate on methodology next study of social change has been nearly forgotten. occurred in 1969. In that year, there was a special issue (Volume 60) of the Society’s journal, Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, that dealt with “Folkloristics Methodology,” with contributions on 4. Omens of Change the three themes of “the method of proof by re-citation” (jūshutsu risshō-hō), “peripheral zone theory’ (shūken-ron), and “archival resources and folk resources.” 4.1 The Influence from Anthropology From the mid-1960s, research based on methodological concepts other than those of “proof “The method of proof by re-citation” is a methodology proposed by Kunio Yanagita (1934) by re-citation” and “peripheral zone theory” also began to appear. These newer concepts which drew on the theories of George Laurence Gomme (1908) of England. It was a method were those from structural-functionalist theory of social anthropology. This was especially to reconstruct history from fragmentarily existing materials of folk traditions by juxtaposing seen in research based on fieldwork in Okinawa, including work by Higa (1965), Mabuchi these as a kind of “multiple exposure photograph.” There were six essays which investigated (1965), Matsuzono (1970), Muratake (1967), Sudō (1971), Takahashi (1978), Ushijima and the effectiveness of this method, those by: Tanaka (1969), Noguchi (1969), Ushijima (1969), Noguchi (1967), Watanabe (1970 1971a, 1971b), and Yamaji (1971). Many of these authors, Doi (1969), Kawakami (1969) and Inokuchi (1969a). it should be noted, claimed social anthropology, not folkloristics, as their scholarly discipline. It may thus be seen that at this time there were many researchers who, while “Peripheral Zone Theory” is the theory that cultural elements diffuse from geographic anthropologists, did field research in Japan and who published their research results in the centers to peripheries in concentric circles and that older conditions are thus distributed journal of the Folklore Society of Japan. At this time, then, the boundaries between these (survive) in peripheral zones. Kunio Yanagita (1930) first pointed this out regarding spoken two disciplines were rather loose.8 dialects, and afterwards other folklorists attempted to generalize this as applicable to particular aspects of general folk traditions. Five articles in the special issue examined the This sort of functionalist research also influenced researchers from Japanese folkloristics validity of this theory, those by: Fukuta (1969), Hirayama (1969a), Ogawa (1969), Ono proper. In such cases, it was characteristic that they were not simply doing synchronic (1969) and Inokuchi (1969b). functionalist analyses, but reformulating methodologies that articulated these with analyses of historicity. Ajio Fukuta (1984) argued that a methodological change should be made from There were seven essays in the 1969 special issue concerning the theme of “archival research based on the prior perspective of nationwide comparisons using the notions of resources and folk resources.” As many of the “folk resources” that Folkloristics deals with “proof by re-citation” and “peripheral zone theory.” He instead advocated surveys and are those of tradition obtained through field interviews, these essays addressed the issues of research that could grasp the organic links among folk traditions occurring in “regional how to incorporate archival resources (mainly historical writings) and of how to balance the use of these different kinds of written and unwritten resources. Essays included those by: 7 “Keisei-saimin” (経世済民) is the principle that folkloristics should ultimately be of some practical “help to the Kameyama (1969), Inokuchi (1969c), (Kazuhiko) Hirayama (1969b, 1969c), Miyata (1969), world, help to the people.” It may be thought of as a call to do what might be termed “public folkloristics” in Makita (1969), and (Toshijiro) Hirayama (1969). the same sense as “public anthropology.” 8 In Japan, together with the minzokugaku (民俗学) meaning Folkloristics, there is also a minzokugaku (民族学) meaning Ethnology (Social-Cultural Anthropology). Though written with different Chinese characters, since As seen above, this special issue on methodology included numerous articles, but almost both share the same pronunciation as “minzokugaku”, it is customary to refer their relationship as the two minzokugaku. It is possible to summarize the relationship between these two minzokugaku in Japan as follows: all stopped at discussing the handling or interpretation of folk tradition resources and Until the first half of the 1930s, the “two minzokugaku” were in a nearly undifferentiated condition. However, in materials. The one exception to this was an essay by Kazuhiko Hirayama (1969c), in which 1934, The Japanese Society of Ethnology (日本民族学会; now called the Japanese Society of Cultural Anthropology, 日本文化人類学会) was established and the next year, 1935, The Folk Tradition Society (民間伝 he argues that, regarding methodology, discussion must be held concerning the scholarly 承の会, Minkan Denshō no Kai; the current Folklore Society of Japan, 日本民俗学会) was established. From this time, the division between the two gradually progressed, with Ethnology conducting research abroad and Folkloristics conducting research domestically. However, even after this, not a few researchers have been active in both Societies, and this continued into the 1980s. With the exception of a small number of researchers, the tendency to participate in both has since declined. Kuwayama (2004) provides details on the relationships of these two minzokugaku. 198 Takanori Shimamura social contexts” (denshō botai) comprised of a single community (shūraku) and the related regional folk histories incorporating these. This methodology was labelled “individual analysis” (kobetsu bunseki-hō; Fukuta 1984) or “regional folkloristics” (chiiki minzokugaku; Miyata 1985). Fukuta and others strongly criticized the elementism of research based on “proof by re-citation” and “peripheral zone theory” as failing to pay attention to regional social contexts. At this time, debates thus developed concerning folkloristic ethnographies and the recording of folk traditions using the methods of “individual analysis”and “regional folkloristics” (see: Chiba 1977; Ebara 1977; Hashimoto 1977; Inokuchi 1977; Iwasaki, et al. 1977; Moriyama 1977; Ohba 1977; Sakuma 1977; Takeda 1977; Takizawa 1977; and Yamaguchi 1977).

From the latter half of the 1970s and into the 1980s, work related to structuralism and symbolic theory appeared, including that by Kawada (1987), Nozawa (1982, 1983), and Suzuki (1979, 1982, 1984).

4.2 Urban Folkloristics Another trend that began from the 1970s was the appearance of research which takes cities, in addition to rural villages, as research objects. At first, this research attempted to grasp the nature of traditional castle towns, which were formed centered on castles during early modern times, and which exist between rural villages and contemporary cities. For example, in 1980 a special issue (Volume 129) of The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan on “The Folk Traditions of Castle Towns” included articles by Hotta (1980), Iwamoto (1980), and Kobayashi (1980), while another special issue in 1981 (Volume 134) on “The Folk Traditions of Cities: Focusing of Castle Towns” included papers by Amano and Miyata (1981), Iwamoto (1981), Kobayashi (1981), and Kuraishi (1981).

Such urban research was has been further deepened by work by Miyata (1982) and Tano (2008) dealing with the Tokyo and Osaka metropolitan areas. However, such urban research was not necessarily carried out using methodologies clearly different than those of prior folkloristic research taking rural farming, mountain and fishing villages as field sites, and there was not a little urban research that stopped at investigating folk traditions surviving in the cities.

Takahiro Ōtsuki criticized this situation and, using the debates about folkloristics as material, he attempted to fundamentally reconsider both urban and rural folkloristic methodological approaches. Around the time of the publication of his essay on “The Essential Characteristics of ‘Urban Folklore Studies’” (Ōtsuki 1985), he and other younger researchers of the same generation began a movement to rethink folkloristics from its very roots. Based on an examination of Kunio Yanagita’s folkloristics thought, Ōtsuki clarified that for Yanagita “folkloristics” was a movement to create “a database accessible by anyone Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 199 social contexts” (denshō botai) comprised of a single community (shūraku) and the related in [Japanese] society―at a time when [Japan] had established itself in a modern form and a regional folk histories incorporating these. This methodology was labelled “individual real popular society at begun to arise―in oreder to find answers to the various doubts, analysis” (kobetsu bunseki-hō; Fukuta 1984) or “regional folkloristics” (chiiki minzokugaku; distress and difficulties that, without any way to be clearly comprehended, were emerging Miyata 1985). Fukuta and others strongly criticized the elementism of research based on one after the other and accumulating before their eyes” (Ōtsuki 2004:171). According to “proof by re-citation” and “peripheral zone theory” as failing to pay attention to regional Yanagita, this movement would have as members citizens living outside of academics and it social contexts. At this time, debates thus developed concerning folkloristic ethnographies would be a type of civic education cultivating critical abilities regarding knowledge and and the recording of folk traditions using the methods of “individual analysis”and “regional information—and, based on this, it would provide people with the ability to choose their own folkloristics” (see: Chiba 1977; Ebara 1977; Hashimoto 1977; Inokuchi 1977; Iwasaki, et al. futures (Ōtsuki 2004). 1977; Moriyama 1977; Ohba 1977; Sakuma 1977; Takeda 1977; Takizawa 1977; and Yamaguchi 1977). 5. Developments in Contemporary Folkloristics

From the latter half of the 1970s and into the 1980s, work related to structuralism and Upon entering the 1990s, Japanese Folkloristics began to fundamentally change. Research symbolic theory appeared, including that by Kawada (1987), Nozawa (1982, 1983), and that probed for the roots of and historical changes in folk traditions as such, as well as Suzuki (1979, 1982, 1984). research that explored for essentialistic meanings, receded into the background. Meanwhile, research that placed in its field of vision engagement with contemporary society, and 4.2 Urban Folkloristics particularly with changes in society, became central to folkloristics. This change in Another trend that began from the 1970s was the appearance of research which takes folkloristics may be thought to have been the outgrowth of the trend from the 1970s toward cities, in addition to rural villages, as research objects. At first, this research attempted to urban research, in which researchers were groping for new methods and issues or concerns grasp the nature of traditional castle towns, which were formed centered on castles during that differed from the framework of prior research on the folk traditions of rural (farming, early modern times, and which exist between rural villages and contemporary cities. For mountain and fishing) villages. example, in 1980 a special issue (Volume 129) of The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan on “The Folk Traditions of Castle Towns” included articles by Hotta (1980), Iwamoto (1980), Two theoretical articles that clearly show the changes in folkloristics during this period and Kobayashi (1980), while another special issue in 1981 (Volume 134) on “The Folk are those by Yukihiko Shigenobu (1989) and Michiya Iwamoto (1998). Shigenobu―who Traditions of Cities: Focusing of Castle Towns” included papers by Amano and Miyata (1981), together with Takahiro Ōtsuki, mentioned above, led the movement to reform Japanese Iwamoto (1981), Kobayashi (1981), and Kuraishi (1981). folkloristics―notes that originally folkloristics was “an intellectual tactic with which to, while simultaneously relativizing oneself, talk about oneself from the ground up, and that it Such urban research was has been further deepened by work by Miyata (1982) and Tano was a method to weave words narrating the self as relativized against one’s ‘everyday’” (2008) dealing with the Tokyo and Osaka metropolitan areas. However, such urban research (1989:2). He argues that from this, for example, it becomes possible to understand the was not necessarily carried out using methodologies clearly different than those of prior contrivance of “the modern”—itself constituted by changes in the nature of daily life due to folkloristic research taking rural farming, mountain and fishing villages as field sites, and the transcendence of everyday life beyond an embodied human scale—as a shared space of there was not a little urban research that stopped at investigating folk traditions surviving “listening-writing” in which “listeners” and “narrators” as people mutually living “the now” in the cities. reconcile their queries (1989:2,29.9

Takahiro Ōtsuki criticized this situation and, using the debates about folkloristics as Iwamoto, meanwhile, based on a re-investigation of Yanagita’s folkloristics thought, notes material, he attempted to fundamentally reconsider both urban and rural folkloristic that for Yanagita, folkloristic research was intended to solve “questions spreading before methodological approaches. Around the time of the publication of his essay on “The real daily life in society” and from this to “lead the future of human daily life toward Essential Characteristics of ‘Urban Folklore Studies’” (Ōtsuki 1985), he and other younger happiness” (1998:26. Iwamoto criticizes as “the cultural resource studies-ization” (bunkazai researchers of the same generation began a movement to rethink folkloristics from its very gaku-ka) the fact that folkloristics afterwards turned into a discipline whose goal became just roots. Based on an examination of Kunio Yanagita’s folkloristics thought, Ōtsuki clarified the study folklore as such, forgetting the problem consciousness of Yanagita in which that for Yanagita “folkloristics” was a movement to create “a database accessible by anyone 9 This claim was afterwards argued in more detail (Shigenobu 2012, 2015). 200 Takanori Shimamura folklore, as “knowledge of/from the past” was to be used as resources in addressing social issues. Iwamoto argues that it is necessary to turn from being a discipline that studies folklore and return to being a discipline that studies using folklore.10

While neither Shigenobu or Iwamoto used the word “study of social change” (shakai hendōron) as such, it is possible to say that the content of their discussions clearly aspire to Yanagita-style social change studies, and that in this aimed for the re-departure of Japanese folkloristics as the study of social change. I label Japanese folkloristics as seen from the 1990s as “Contemporary Folkloristics,” and below introduce a number of examples of research that relatively clearly display the special characteristics of this (a more comprehensive introduction of work based on fields of research will be included in the next volume of JRCA).

The research taken up below shares the point of attempting to clarify how people’s life- worlds are adjusting within and to changes in social structures, through analyses of the concrete dynamics of experience, understanding and expression—that is, of folklore―occurring in life-worlds. Much of this research, that interprets social change from within the life-worlds of the people undergoing it, also holds the potential to develop discussions which consider how it is possible for people in the midst of social change to imagine better life-worlds; and in this, it possible to see the folkloristic studies of social change initiated by Kunio Yanagita.

5.1 Birth-Aging-Illness-Death (Shōrōbyōshi) Volume 232 (2002) of The Bulletin, was a special issue on “Birth and Life,” which included articles dealing with the reproductive revolution and new reproductive technologies (Uesugi 2002), changes in the sense of shame regarding giving birth and the issue of introducing male obstetric assistants (Sasaki 2002), and changes in thinking about and disposal of the placenta (ena; Saruwatari 2002). Folkloristic research about life in an aging society has also been accumulating. For example, The Power of Maturity: Towards a Rich “Old Age” (Miyata, Mori and Amino, eds., 2002) was published as part of the 50th year celebration of the founding of the Folklore Society of Japan. Prior to this, Volume 213 (1998) of The Bulletin consisted of a special issue on “Aging and the Elderly,” which included a number of articles (Tadenuma 1998; Kawamori 1998; Ōishi 1998; Miyata 2000; see also: Nomoto 2000; Morikuri 2000; Amino 2000) arguing for the use of folkloristic perspectives to discover and understand the richness of aging, or the “strength of maturity.” Research has also appeared that deals with care/nursing (Shibuya 2001; Ōshiro 2011; Muguruma 2012, 2015), or that, labelling “reminiscence therapy” carried out in sites of care as an application of a folkloristic practice, experientally considers its potential uses (Iwasaki 2004, 2008).

10 This claim was later developed further by Iwamoto (2002). Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 201 folklore, as “knowledge of/from the past” was to be used as resources in addressing social Regarding illness and medical treatment, the work of Noriyuki Kondō (1992) considers issues. Iwamoto argues that it is necessary to turn from being a discipline that studies how “the culture of death” has changed with the introduction of modern medicine. He argues folklore and return to being a discipline that studies using folklore.10 that folkloristic research on hospitals should expand to include “hospital ethnographies.” The work of cultural anthropologist Emiko Namihira (2001) is also rich in suggestion for the While neither Shigenobu or Iwamoto used the word “study of social change” (shakai future of the folkloristics of medical treatment. Namihira takes as forms of folklore, and thus hendōron) as such, it is possible to say that the content of their discussions clearly aspire to as new themes for folkloristic medical research, such things as: “the meanings and values Yanagita-style social change studies, and that in this aimed for the re-departure of Japanese attached to doctors, nurses and other medical specialists, to medical institutions and the folkloristics as the study of social change. I label Japanese folkloristics as seen from the treatment practiced there, and to relationships between medical patients and practitioners;” 1990s as “Contemporary Folkloristics,” and below introduce a number of examples of “the customs and systems that have become established in medical institutions, regardless research that relatively clearly display the special characteristics of this (a more of their not being included in the formal educational curricula for doctors or nurses, or in the comprehensive introduction of work based on fields of research will be included in the next internal rules of hospitals or of the medical association;” “the private decisions regarding the volume of JRCA). use of purchased or household drugs;” “daily customs and foods believed to be effective in maintaining health or preventing illness;” and, “‘medicines’ which while not modern medical The research taken up below shares the point of attempting to clarify how people’s life- pharmaceuticals are treated as such by the people using them.”(2001:243-244). Regarding worlds are adjusting within and to changes in social structures, through analyses of the death, funerals and burials in contemporary times, in addition to Kondō’s (1992) work, concrete dynamics of experience, understanding and expression—that is, of which also dealt with death while in hospital, there is folkloristic work dealing with folklore―occurring in life-worlds. Much of this research, that interprets social change from funerary changes such as the introduction of funeral companies or of cremation within the life-worlds of the people undergoing it, also holds the potential to develop (Yamada1995, 1996; Hara 1999; Hata 2002; Katō 2002), or with changes in burial systems discussions which consider how it is possible for people in the midst of social change to (Maeda 2001). imagine better life-worlds; and in this, it possible to see the folkloristic studies of social change initiated by Kunio Yanagita. 5.2 Beliefs, Rites and Rituals There has been much research dealing with changes in beliefs, rites and rituals occurring 5.1 Birth-Aging-Illness-Death (Shōrōbyōshi) in the midst of broader social change. Among these many publications are: Takanori Volume 232 (2002) of The Bulletin, was a special issue on “Birth and Life,” which included Shimamura’s (1996) discussion of the process of being a believer of a new religion among articles dealing with the reproductive revolution and new reproductive technologies (Uesugi Okinawan people searching for solutions to the differences between new civil laws and 2002), changes in the sense of shame regarding giving birth and the issue of introducing customary laws regarding the succession of mortuary tablets (ihai) occurring with estate male obstetric assistants (Sasaki 2002), and changes in thinking about and disposal of the inheritance; Masataka Ichida’s (2001) analysis of the many roles played by religious ritual at placenta (ena; Saruwatari 2002). Folkloristic research about life in an aging society has also times when, with the entry into the modern period, regionally held understandings of been accumulating. For example, The Power of Maturity: Towards a Rich “Old Age” (Miyata, history were relocated inside a national history; Jirō Koshikawa’s (2000) discussion of how Mori and Amino, eds., 2002) was published as part of the 50th year celebration of the temples and shrines, among which previously there were not a few which produced and founding of the Folklore Society of Japan. Prior to this, Volume 213 (1998) of The Bulletin distributed medicines to followers, responded to restrictions in such practices after WWII consisted of a special issue on “Aging and the Elderly,” which included a number of articles due to the passage of The Pharmaceutical Affairs Act; Kazuhisa Nakayama’s (1997) analysis (Tadenuma 1998; Kawamori 1998; Ōishi 1998; Miyata 2000; see also: Nomoto 2000; of the “invented pilgrimages” of the modern period, using the case of pilgrimages to sacred Morikuri 2000; Amino 2000) arguing for the use of folkloristic perspectives to discover and sites in the Kantō area of eastern Japan; Kazuyo Nakamura’s (2010) analysis of the process understand the richness of aging, or the “strength of maturity.” Research has also appeared by which village festivals were transformed into cultural symbols of the nation-state; that deals with care/nursing (Shibuya 2001; Ōshiro 2011; Muguruma 2012, 2015), or that, Takeshi Kaneko’s (2009) discussion of conflicts regarding the creation of new festivals with labelling “reminiscence therapy” carried out in sites of care as an application of a folkloristic women as leaders; and, Tōru Anami’s (2007) analysis of local athletic meets created in the practice, experientally considers its potential uses (Iwasaki 2004, 2008). modern era as celebratory festivals.

10 This claim was later developed further by Iwamoto (2002). 202 Takanori Shimamura

5.3 Family, Kinship and Local Society Until the 1980s, research on family and kinship developed as structural-functional analyses or, based on these, as static classifications. However, from the 1990s, research began to appear that described family and kinship dynamically, including how these are practiced, managed or narrated based on individual subjective choice and action. For example, such analyses included those of Kaoru Ishizuki (2002), who discussed the life-world of mainland Japanese women living as wives in Okinawa; Shino Yamamoto (2010), who used individual diaries to analyze farming women’s urban employment; Yōko Taniguchi (2008), who explicated the meanings for families and local society of women’s apprenticeship experiences; and, Yōji Yukawa (1998), who advocated analyses focusing on individual practice in villages undergoing hollowing-out.

In addition, folkloristic research with the clear character of being studies of social change included other work such as Shunichi Horie’s (1991) discussion, based on articles in women’s magazine, of early 20th century “Yamanote Life; ” Akira Nakamura’s (1990, 1991, 1994) analyses, based on “life advice” articles, of contemporary family consciousness; and, Michiya Iwamoto’s (2002) analyses, using case studies of parent-child double-suicide (oya-ko shinjū) and of reproductive medical technologies, the conditions in which the until then not seriously considered consciousness of “blood relations” (ketsu-en) had in the modern period expanded, become taken-for-granted and regulated the consciousness and behavior of contemporary people.

5.4 Consumer Society and Scientific Technology Also from the 1990s, discussions were made of the necessity to analyze the relationships between the consumer economy and life-worlds. The first to argue this was Tōru Anami (1998), followed by Takehisa Kadota (2010), who further advanced the theoretical arrangements here. Case studies include: Takehisa Kadota’s (2010) analysis of how participants as consumers re-interpret as their own pilgrimages that have been pre-readied as consumer goods; Elemer Veldkamp’s (2011) discussion of how electronic toys have been brought into life-worlds and normalized; and, Kenichi Noguchi’s (2011, 2016) descriptions, based on famers’ subjective life-world understandings, of modern industrialized agricultural sites that utilize scientific technologies.

5.5 Folklorism, Homeplace, Cultural Heritage and Tourism Folklorism (the performance of “folklore-ness” or the secondary use of “folklore”) became a major topic in Folkloristics from the 1990s. There were special issues of The Bulletin and a great accumulation of research on this, including work by Kōno (2003), Yagi (2003), Hokkyo (2003), Iwasaki (2003), Aoki (2003), Morita (2003), Kawamori (2003), Kahara (2003), Kagawa (2003), Hamada (2003), Yamada (2003), and Yano (2003). Included in this was the work of Kawamura (2003), who pointed out that authentic “folklore” did not exist as such Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 203

5.3 Family, Kinship and Local Society but was “folklorism” formed through the intervention of the media. In the background to the Until the 1980s, research on family and kinship developed as structural-functional formation of “folklorism” was the nostalgic gaze that takes “folklore” as something “nostalgic” analyses or, based on these, as static classifications. However, from the 1990s, research (natsukashī). This gaze is intimately related to city dwellers’ views of “homeplace” (furusato), began to appear that described family and kinship dynamically, including how these are which has been analyzed by Tōru Yagi (1996), Keiichi Yano (1997), Manami Yasui (1997), practiced, managed or narrated based on individual subjective choice and action. For and others. example, such analyses included those of Kaoru Ishizuki (2002), who discussed the life-world of mainland Japanese women living as wives in Okinawa; Shino Yamamoto (2010), who used Upon entering the 21st century, some “folklore” items have been designated Intangible individual diaries to analyze farming women’s urban employment; Yōko Taniguchi (2008), Cultural Heritage by UNESCO. Michael Dylan Foster (2013) clarifies how the practitioners who explicated the meanings for families and local society of women’s apprenticeship of “folklore” designated as intangible cultural heritage understand the fact of this experiences; and, Yōji Yukawa (1998), who advocated analyses focusing on individual designation and insert their own subjectivities it into. And, research by Shinya Morita (1997, practice in villages undergoing hollowing-out. 2003), and Naoko Andō (2002) analyzes how the directly concerned parties (tōjisha) of folklore act when folklore becomes inserted into tourist contexts. Here as well, these authors portray In addition, folkloristic research with the clear character of being studies of social change the conditions in which the directly concerned parties incorporate tourism into their own included other work such as Shunichi Horie’s (1991) discussion, based on articles in women’s life-worlds and subjectively use it. magazine, of early 20th century “Yamanote Life; ” Akira Nakamura’s (1990, 1991, 1994) analyses, based on “life advice” articles, of contemporary family consciousness; and, Michiya 5.6 War Iwamoto’s (2002) analyses, using case studies of parent-child double-suicide (oya-ko shinjū) Folkloristics research on war was also something begun from the 1990s. Kunimitsu and of reproductive medical technologies, the conditions in which the until then not Kawamura (1998) analyzes reports and editorials published during the Second World War in seriously considered consciousness of “blood relations” (ketsu-en) had in the modern period Folk Tradition, the official journal of The Folk Tradition Society. He shows that while on the expanded, become taken-for-granted and regulated the consciousness and behavior of one hand these aided the heightening of wartime morale, the reality of a degree of control contemporary people. could also be seen. And, he notes that although based on Society members’ case-study reports there was an accumulation of records of the wartime creation of war folklore by the 5.4 Consumer Society and Scientific Technology common people, these reports were cut short due to the direction of the editorial board. Also from the 1990s, discussions were made of the necessity to analyze the relationships Yasuaki Maruyama (2004), incorporating also the existence of suppressed memories, between the consumer economy and life-worlds. The first to argue this was Tōru Anami discusses the politics regarding the monument built to remember and console the spirits of (1998), followed by Takehisa Kadota (2010), who further advanced the theoretical the 120 soldiers who died in 1902 during training in the snowbound mountains of Aomori arrangements here. Case studies include: Takehisa Kadota’s (2010) analysis of how Prefecture. Riko Kitamura (2006), meanwhile, while reviewing the literature on war and participants as consumers re-interpret as their own pilgrimages that have been pre-readied folklore, and while drawing on her own fieldwork, makes sharp points regarding the problem as consumer goods; Elemer Veldkamp’s (2011) discussion of how electronic toys have been of the emotions of those directly concerned parties who debunk the fictitiousness of the “war brought into life-worlds and normalized; and, Kenichi Noguchi’s (2011, 2016) descriptions, dead” (senbotsusha) and “spirits of the war dead” (literally, hero-spirits, eirei) and the problem based on famers’ subjective life-world understandings, of modern industrialized agricultural of the consoling of spirits not contained/able in the Yasukuni Shrine. sites that utilize scientific technologies. 6. Further Investigation of Methodologies 5.5 Folklorism, Homeplace, Cultural Heritage and Tourism Folklorism (the performance of “folklore-ness” or the secondary use of “folklore”) became a As can be seen above, it may be said that the folkloristics of social change as widely major topic in Folkloristics from the 1990s. There were special issues of The Bulletin and a defined has become a nearly commonly held stance in contemporary Folkloristics. However, great accumulation of research on this, including work by Kōno (2003), Yagi (2003), Hokkyo on this common base, there are also a number of discussions and debates that inquire into (2003), Iwasaki (2003), Aoki (2003), Morita (2003), Kawamori (2003), Kahara (2003), yet more radical methodologies. These include, for example: the reformulation of Kagawa (2003), Hamada (2003), Yamada (2003), and Yano (2003). Included in this was the understandings of “oral tradition,” long a key concept in folkloristics, as more individually- work of Kawamura (2003), who pointed out that authentic “folklore” did not exist as such oriented via research using narrative approaches (Kadota 2007); the positive evaluation of 204 Takanori Shimamura individual creative performance that transcends set narratives (Kawamori 2007); the call for collaborative ethnographies between folklorists and concerned parties (tōjisha) that actively incorporate “concerned party’s narratives” (tōjisha no katari; Kawamori 2012); and the proposal of viewpoints that do not take “oral tradition” and “literate culture” as opposites but that employ grounded analyses of their mutual influence and coalescence (Koike 2013; Watanabe 2013).

As one form of the participatory academics (shimin sanka-kei no gakumon) now being demanded by contemporary society, there is a growing movement to re-evaluate the character of Folkloristics as a “grassroots discipline, or discipline of the folk by the folk (no no gakumon),” which describes one line of the academism of Folkloristics (Shinno 2006). And, also appearing are movements to debate, based on concrete examples of practice, the social practice of folklorists as research methodology. Thus, for example, Morikuri (2005) discusses the roles to be played by folklorists as facilitators of town (re)development in cases of natural disaster recovery, while Suzuki (2012) argues that interviews and dialogues with disaster victims function as a kind of “attentive listening” (keitoku). Such achievements, which may be called “public folkloristcs” (kōkyō minzokugaku; see Suga 2010; Baron 2013), are important as methodologically substantive instantiations of the “keisei-saimin” (for the world, for the people) orientation of Yanagita Folklorisitcs that has been investigated by Takashi Fujii (1993).

The internationalization of Folkloristics has witnessed rapid development in the 2000s. Much work introducing theoretical/methodological trends in the Folkloristics of the West, East Asia and other regions (Kaschuba 2010; Lehmann 2010; Herlyn 2010; Hokkyō 2010; Tamura 2009; Wang 2009; Nam 2009; Lee 2009; Huang 2009; Konagaya 2010, 2016), or that offers translations of folkloristic articles from America and China (Bauman 2013; Cashman 2013; Gao 2013; Shi 2003; Liu 2013), has appeared in The Bulletin of the Folklore Society of Japan. In parallel with this, there has also been an effort to re-locate the concepts and lineages of Japanese Folkloristics within a global context (Shimamura 2014). Kunio Yanagita (1986:53- 56) himself discussed his vision of a “World Folkloristics” that would find completion when the folkloristics of all of the countries of the world, including Japan, having been constructed by the people living in each country, were brought together on a global scale. This was in the 1930s. This vision, which argues for overcoming the binary opposition between “the West as researcher” and “the non-West as researched,” and for non-Western peoples to study themselves, is none other than a philosophy (shisō) that attempts to relativize the system of knowledge dominated by the West. It is an argument that is fully applicable to the postcolonial conditions of today. Takami Kuwayama (2000) lauds this vision and argues for the positive unification of so-called “native anthropology” and folkloristics. Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 205 individual creative performance that transcends set narratives (Kawamori 2007); the call for REFERENCES collaborative ethnographies between folklorists and concerned parties (tōjisha) that actively incorporate “concerned party’s narratives” (tōjisha no katari; Kawamori 2012); and the Amano, Takeshi and Noboru Miyata 天野武・宮田登 proposal of viewpoints that do not take “oral tradition” and “literate culture” as opposites but 1981 「第 32 回年会シンポジウム 「都市の民俗―城下町を中心に―」 (Report on the that employ grounded analyses of their mutual influence and coalescence (Koike 2013; Symposium on “he Folklore of Cities: Focusing on Castle Towns,” held at the 32nd Annual Watanabe 2013). Meeting of the Folklore Society of Japan)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 134: 1-4. As one form of the participatory academics (shimin sanka-kei no gakumon) now being Amino, Fusako 「『中洲の町』向島における老いのあり方」 『老熟の力 demanded by contemporary society, there is a growing movement to re-evaluate the 2000 (Nakasu Town: Aging in Mukaijima) ―豊かな〈老い〉を求めて―』 宮田 character of Folkloristics as a “grassroots discipline, or discipline of the folk by the folk (no no (In The Power of Maturity: Towards a Rich “Old Age”). 登・森謙二・網野房子編 (Noboru Miyata, Kenji Mori and Fusako Amino, eds.). 東京：早稲田大 gakumon),” which describes one line of the academism of Folkloristics (Shinno 2006). And, 学出版部 (Tokyo: Waseda University Press) pp. 131-144. also appearing are movements to debate, based on concrete examples of practice, the social Anami, Tōru 阿南透 practice of folklorists as research methodology. Thus, for example, Morikuri (2005) discusses 1998 「『消費』の民俗学的理解に向けて」(Toward a Folkloristics Understanding of “Consumption”) the roles to be played by folklorists as facilitators of town (re)development in cases of natural 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 216: 40-55. disaster recovery, while Suzuki (2012) argues that interviews and dialogues with disaster 2007 「運動会のなかの民俗―釧路市民大運動会の事例から―」(Folklore in Public Sports Days: victims function as a kind of “attentive listening” (keitoku). Such achievements, which may be Examples from the Citizens’ Sports Day of Kushiro [Hokkaido]) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon called “public folkloristcs” (kōkyō minzokugaku; see Suga 2010; Baron 2013), are important as Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 249: 1-37. methodologically substantive instantiations of the “keisei-saimin” (for the world, for the Andō, Naoko 安藤直子 people) orientation of Yanagita Folklorisitcs that has been investigated by Takashi Fujii 2002 「地方都市における観光化に伴う「祭礼群」の再編成―盛岡市の六つの祭礼の意味付けをめぐ (1993). る葛藤とその解消―」(The Impact of Tourism on the Restructuring of a “Festival Cluster” in a Regional City: Conflict and Resolution in the Redefinition of Six Festivals in Morioka City) The internationalization of Folkloristics has witnessed rapid development in the 2000s. 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 231: 1-31. Much work introducing theoretical/methodological trends in the Folkloristics of the West, Aoki, Toshiya 青木俊也 East Asia and other regions (Kaschuba 2010; Lehmann 2010; Herlyn 2010; Hokkyō 2010; 2003 「昭和 30 年代生活再現展示とノスタルジアにみるフォークロリズム的状況」(The State of Tamura 2009; Wang 2009; Nam 2009; Lee 2009; Huang 2009; Konagaya 2010, 2016), or that Folklorism as Seen in an Exhibition Reproducing Life in the Shōwa 30s [1955-1965] and offers translations of folkloristic articles from America and China (Bauman 2013; Cashman Nostalgia)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan)236: 2013; Gao 2013; Shi 2003; Liu 2013), has appeared in The Bulletin of the Folklore Society of Japan. 82-91. バロン，ロバート In parallel with this, there has also been an effort to re-locate the concepts and lineages of Baron, Robert 「アメリカにおける公共民俗学―その課題・実践・展望―」 Japanese Folkloristics within a global context (Shimamura 2014). Kunio Yanagita (1986:53- 2013 (American Public Folklore: Issues, Practices and Prospects) (吉村亜弥子・室井康成 共訳, Ayako Yoshimura and Yasunari 56) himself discussed his vision of a “World Folkloristics” that would find completion when Muroi, trans.)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) the folkloristics of all of the countries of the world, including Japan, having been constructed 273: 96-127. by the people living in each country, were brought together on a global scale. This was in the Bauman, Richard バウマン，リチャード 1930s. This vision, which argues for overcoming the binary opposition between “the West as 2013 「ヴァナキュラーの文献学」(The Philology of the Vernacular) (谷口陽子 訳, Yoko Taniguchi, researcher” and “the non-West as researched,” and for non-Western peoples to study trans.)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 9-16. themselves, is none other than a philosophy (shisō) that attempts to relativize the system of Bendix, Regina F. and Galit Hasan-Rokem, eds. knowledge dominated by the West. It is an argument that is fully applicable to the 2012 A Companion to Folklore. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. postcolonial conditions of today. Takami Kuwayama (2000) lauds this vision and argues for Cashman, Ray キャッシュマン，レイ the positive unification of so-called “native anthropology” and folkloristics. 2013 「北アイルランドにおける批判的ノスタルジアと物質文化」(Critical Nostalgia and Material Culture in Northern Ireland) (渡部圭一 訳, Keiichi Watabe, trans.)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 17-54. 206 Takanori Shimamura

Chiba, Tokuji 千葉徳爾 1977 「民俗誌の目的」(The Purposes of Ethnography) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 27-32. Doi, Takuzi 土井卓治 1969 「重出立証法の適用について」(On the Application of the Method of Proof by Re-citation)『日本 民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 8-9. Ebara, Yoshimori 恵原義盛 1977 「民俗誌私見」(A Reconsideration of Ethnography)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 58-62. Foster, Michael Dylan フォスター，マイケル・ディラン 2013 「視覚的想像―「甑島のトシドン」における見る／見られる関係の一考察―」(The Optic Imaginary: Thoughts on the Relationship of Seeing and Being Seen in “Koshikijima no Toshidon”) (塚原伸治 訳，Shinji Tsukahara, trans.)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 55-95. Fujii, Takashi 藤井隆至 1993 「民俗学の社会的意義―柳田國男の場合―」(The Social Significance of Folklore: The Case of Kunio Yanagita)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 196: 1-21. Fukuta, Ajio 福田アジオ 1969 「周圏論の歴史」(The History of Peripheral Zone Theory) 『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 13-15. 1984 『日本民俗学方法序説―柳田國男と民俗学―』(An Introduction to Japanese Folkloristics Methods: Yanagita Kunio and Folkloristics). 東京：弘文堂 (Tokyo: Kyōbundō). Gao, Bingzhong 高丙中 2013 「無形文化遺産研究の課題としての民間信仰」(Folk Beliefs as a Topic for Research on Intangible Cultural Heritage) (西村真志葉訳，Mashiba Nishimura, trans.)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 171-193. Gomme, George Laurence 1908 Folklore as a Historical Science. London: Methuen & Co. Hamada, Takuji 濱田琢司 2003 「民芸と民俗―審美的対象としての民俗文化―」(Folk Crafts and Folklore: Folk Culture as Aesthetic Object)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 127-136. Hara, Tomoaki 原知章 1999 「儀礼と社会変動―沖縄・与那国島における死者儀礼の事例より―」(Ritual and Social Change: Funeral Rites on Yonaguni Island in Okinawa Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 217: 32-62. Hashimoto, Tetsuo 橋本鉄男 1977 「私の民俗誌体験」(My Ethnographic Experience)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 52-57. Hata, Sōichirō 畑聰一郎 2002 「葬儀と墓制の変化―愛知県日間賀島における両墓制の崩壊・火葬の受容―」(Changes in Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 207

Chiba, Tokuji 千葉徳爾 Funerals and Graves: The Disintegration of the Two-Graves System and the Acceptance of 1977 「民俗誌の目的」(The Purposes of Ethnography) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Cremation in Himaka Island, Aichi Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 27-32. of the Folklore Society Japan) 231: 97-110. Doi, Takuzi 土井卓治 Herlyn, Gerrit ヘアリン，ゲリット 1969 「重出立証法の適用について」(On the Application of the Method of Proof by Re-citation)『日本 2010 「人生記録研究・日常文化研究のテーマとしての科学技術」(Science and Technology as Themes 民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 8-9. for Research on Human Documentation and Everyday Culture) ( 池松瑠美 訳, Rumi Ebara, Yoshimori 恵原義盛 Ikematsu, trans.)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society 1977 「民俗誌私見」(A Reconsideration of Ethnography)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Japan) 263: 57-74. Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 58-62. Higa, Masao 比嘉政夫 Foster, Michael Dylan フォスター，マイケル・ディラン 1965 「村落の祭祀組織と＜ハラ＞の祭祀組織―沖縄南部における事例から―」(Village and “Hara” 2013 「視覚的想像―「甑島のトシドン」における見る／見られる関係の一考察―」(The Optic Kinship Group Ritual Organizations: Case Studies from Southern Okinawa)『日本民俗学会報』 Imaginary: Thoughts on the Relationship of Seeing and Being Seen in “Koshikijima no (Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, Bulletin of Folklore Society Japan) 39: 20-28. Toshidon”) (塚原伸治 訳，Shinji Tsukahara, trans.)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Hirayama, Kazuhiko 平山和彦 Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 55-95. 1969a 「周圏論をめぐる諸問題」(Problems Regarding Peripheral Zone Theory)『日本民俗学会報』 Fujii, Takashi 藤井隆至 (Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 15-21. 1993 「民俗学の社会的意義―柳田國男の場合―」(The Social Significance of Folklore: The Case 1969b「民俗学と「歴史」の問題」(The Problem of Folklore Studies and “History”)『日本民俗学会報』 of Kunio Yanagita)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society (Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 36-37. Japan) 196: 1-21. 1969c 「方法論および問題意識ということ」(Regarding Methodologies and Problem Consciousness) Fukuta, Ajio 福田アジオ 『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 1969 「周圏論の歴史」(The History of Peripheral Zone Theory) 『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon 42-44. Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 13-15. Hirayama, Toshijirō 平山敏治郎 1984 『日本民俗学方法序説―柳田國男と民俗学―』(An Introduction to Japanese Folkloristics 1951 「史料としての伝承」(Oral Traditions as Historical Materials)『民間伝承』(Folk Tradition) Methods: Yanagita Kunio and Folkloristics). 東京：弘文堂 (Tokyo: Kyōbundō). 154: 2-9. Gao, Bingzhong 高丙中 1969 「亀山慶一氏の文章を読んで」(On Reading Keiichi Kameyama)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon 2013 「無形文化遺産研究の課題としての民間信仰」(Folk Beliefs as a Topic for Research on Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 41-42. Intangible Cultural Heritage) (西村真志葉訳，Mashiba Nishimura, trans.)『日本民俗学』 Hokkyō, Hakaru 法橋量 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 171-193. 2003 「ドイツにおけるフォークロリスムス議論のゆくえ―発露する分野と限界性―」(The Gomme, George Laurence Folklorism Controversy in German Volkskunde: The Emergent Field and Its Limitations)『日 1908 Folklore as a Historical Science. London: Methuen & Co. 本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 49-71. Hamada, Takuji 濱田琢司 2010 「現代ドイツ民俗学のプルーラリズム―越境する文化科学への展開―」(Pluralism in 2003 「民芸と民俗―審美的対象としての民俗文化―」(Folk Crafts and Folklore: Folk Culture as Current German Folklore: The Development of an Interdisciplinary Culture Studies)『日本民 Aesthetic Object)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society 俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 263: 5-30. Japan) 236: 127-136. Horie, Shunichi 堀江俊一 Hara, Tomoaki 原知章 1991 「明治末期から大正初期の『近代的家族像』―婦人雑誌からみた『山の手生活』の研究―」 1999 「儀礼と社会変動―沖縄・与那国島における死者儀礼の事例より―」(Ritual and Social (The Image of Modern Family from the Late Meiji Period to the Early Taishō Period: A Study Change: Funeral Rites on Yonaguni Island in Okinawa Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon of “Yamanote Life” as Seen from a Women’s Magazine)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 217: 32-62. Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 186: 39-73. Hashimoto, Tetsuo 橋本鉄男 Hotta, Yoshio 堀田吉雄 1977 「私の民俗誌体験」(My Ethnographic Experience)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The 1980 「城下町の民俗試論」(An Essay on the Folklore of a Castle Town [Matsuzaka, Mie Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 52-57. Prefecture])『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 129: Hata, Sōichirō 畑聰一郎 1-10. 2002 「葬儀と墓制の変化―愛知県日間賀島における両墓制の崩壊・火葬の受容―」(Changes in Huang, Lie-Yun 黄麗雲 208 Takanori Shimamura

2009 「現代台湾民俗文化研究の動向について―研究と実践の重層性―」(Currents in Modern Taiwanese Folklore Studies: The Reduplication of Research and Practice)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 259: 138-163. Ichida, Masataka 市田雅崇 2001 「〈歴史の共有〉と宗教儀礼―気多神社平国祭の事例から―」(“Sharing History” and Religious Observances: The Example of the Kunimuke Festival of Keta Shrine)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 228: 35-66. Inokuchi, Shōji 井之口章次 1969a 「重出立証法をめぐって」(Regarding The Method of Proof by Re-citation)『日本民俗学会報』 (Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 10-12. 1969b 「周圏論以外」(Beyond Peripheral Zone Theory)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 25-27. 1969c 「文献資料と民俗資料」(Archival Resources and Folklore Resources)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 30-36. 1977 「民俗誌小考」(A Study of Ethnography)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 32-36. Ishida, Eiichirō 石田英一郎 1948 「歴史科学としての民俗学と民族学」(Folkloristics and Ethnology as Historical Science)『人文』 (Jinbun) 2(1): 60-70. Ishizuki, Kaoru 石附馨 2002 「ヤマトゥンチュ嫁試論―現代沖縄の“生活者たち”を考えるために―」(Observations on Mainlander Wives: Who Are “Members” in Contemporary Okinawan Life?)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 231: 67-96. Iwamoto, Michiya 岩本通弥 1980 「城下町の社会と民俗―茨城県古河の常民生活誌から―」(The Social Organization and Folklore of a Castle Town: From a Commoner’s Lifestyle Magazine in Koga, Ibaragi Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 129: 32-51. 1981 「鳶の社会史―城下町古河の社会と民俗―」(The Social History of “Tobi” Workers: The Society and Folklore of Castle Town Koga [Ibaraki Prefecture]) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 134: 11-16. 1998 「「民俗」を対象とするから民俗学なのか―なぜ民俗学は「近代」を扱えなくなってしまった のか」(Is it Folklore Studies because its Object is “Folklore”? Why Has Folklore Studies Become Unable to Deal with “The Modern Age?”)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 215: 17-33. 2002 「『家』族の過去・現在・未来」(The Past, Present and Future of the Ie of Families)『日本民 俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 232: 106-123. Iwasaki, Masaki, Michihiro Suzuki, Seiichirō Matsuda and Tadamoto Yamamoto 岩崎真幸・鈴木通 大・松田精一郎・山本質素 1977 「＜民俗誌＞の系譜」(The Genealogy of Ethnography in Japan) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 1-21. Iwasaki, Takehiko 岩崎竹彦 Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 209

2009 「現代台湾民俗文化研究の動向について―研究と実践の重層性―」(Currents in Modern 2003 「フォークロリズムからみた節分の巻ずし」(Setsubun Sushi Rolls as Seen from Folklorism)『日 Taiwanese Folklore Studies: The Reduplication of Research and Practice)『日本民俗学』(Nihon 本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 72-81. Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 259: 138-163. 2004 「回想法と民俗学」(Reminiscence and Folkloristics)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Ichida, Masataka 市田雅崇 Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 238: 124-129. 2001 「〈歴史の共有〉と宗教儀礼―気多神社平国祭の事例から―」(“Sharing History” and 2008 『福祉のための民俗学―回想法のススメ―』(A Folkloristics for Well-being: Recommending Religious Observances: The Example of the Kunimuke Festival of Keta Shrine)『日本民俗学』 Reminiscence) 東京：慶友社 (Tokyo: Keiyūsha). (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 228: 35-66. Kadota, Takehisa 門田岳久 Inokuchi, Shōji 井之口章次 2007 「対話と信心―巡礼経験者の語りにみる自己・他者・社会―」(Dialogue and Belief: An 1969a 「重出立証法をめぐって」(Regarding The Method of Proof by Re-citation)『日本民俗学会報』 Analysis of Pilgrim Narratives, Focusing on Self, Others and Society)『日本民俗学』(Nihon (Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 10-12. Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 251: 55-87. 1969b 「周圏論以外」(Beyond Peripheral Zone Theory)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, 2010 「巡礼ツーリズムにおける『経験』の解釈―サービスと宗教性の交叉的生成に基づく間身体的 The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 25-27. 共同性―」(Commercialism, Religious Experience, and Inter-corporality: The Interpretation 1969c 「文献資料と民俗資料」(Archival Resources and Folklore Resources)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon of “Experie” in Contemporary Pilgrimage Tourism)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 30-36. Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 261: 1-33. 1977 「民俗誌小考」(A Study of Ethnography)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Kagawa, Masanobu 香川雅信 Folklore Society Japan) 113: 32-36. 2003 「郷土玩具のまなざし―趣味家たちの「郷土」―」(A Look into Rural Toys: The Hometown Ishida, Eiichirō 石田英一郎 (Kyōdo) of Hobbyists)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society 1948 「歴史科学としての民俗学と民族学」(Folkloristics and Ethnology as Historical Science)『人文』 Japan) 236: 119-126. (Jinbun) 2(1): 60-70. Kahara, Nahoko 加原奈穂子 Ishizuki, Kaoru 石附馨 2003 「地域アイデンティティ創出の核としての桃太郎―岡山における桃太郎伝説の事例から―」 2002 「ヤマトゥンチュ嫁試論―現代沖縄の“生活者たち”を考えるために―」(Observations on (Momotaro (the Peach Boy) as a Core for the Creation of Local Identity: The Case of the Mainlander Wives: Who Are “Members” in Contemporary Okinawan Life?)『日本民俗学』 Momotaro Legend of Okayama)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 231: 67-96. Society Japan) 236: 109-118. Iwamoto, Michiya 岩本通弥 Kameyama, Keiichi 亀山慶一 1980 「城下町の社会と民俗―茨城県古河の常民生活誌から―」(The Social Organization and 1969 「これまでの文献資料と民俗資料に対する考え方」(Ways of Thinking to the Present Regarding Folklore of a Castle Town: From a Commoner’s Lifestyle Magazine in Koga, Ibaragi Archival Resources and Folklore Resources)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 129: Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 28-30. 32-51. Kaneko, Takeshi 金子毅 1981 「鳶の社会史―城下町古河の社会と民俗―」(The Social History of “Tobi” Workers: The 2009 「もう一つの戸畑『提灯山笠』―『女山笠』創出をめぐる葛藤の構図―」(An Alternative Society and Folklore of Castle Town Koga [Ibaraki Prefecture]) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Tobata “Paper Lantern Float” (Chōchin Yamakasa): Focusing on the Conflict Surrounding the Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 134: 11-16. Creation of a “Women’s Float”)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore 1998 「「民俗」を対象とするから民俗学なのか―なぜ民俗学は「近代」を扱えなくなってしまった Society Japan) 258: 65-95. のか」(Is it Folklore Studies because its Object is “Folklore”? Why Has Folklore Studies Kaschuba, Wolfgang カシューバ，ヴォルフガング Become Unable to Deal with “The Modern Age?”)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The 2010 「ヨーロッパとグローバル化― ヨーロッパ民族学の新たな挑戦― 」 (Europe and Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 215: 17-33. Globalization: New Challenges for European Ethnology [Europa und die Globalisierung: Neue 2002 「『家』族の過去・現在・未来」(The Past, Present and Future of the Ie of Families)『日本民 Herausforderungen fur die Europaische Ethnologie]) (エルメル・フェルトカンプ 訳 (Elmer 俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 232: 106-123. Veldkamp, trans.)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Iwasaki, Masaki, Michihiro Suzuki, Seiichirō Matsuda and Tadamoto Yamamoto 岩崎真幸・鈴木通 Japan) 263: 75-93. 大・松田精一郎・山本質素 Katō, Masaharu 加藤正春 1977 「＜民俗誌＞の系譜」(The Genealogy of Ethnography in Japan) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon 2002 「焼骨と火葬―南西諸島における火葬葬法の受容と複葬体系―」(Cremation and Changes Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 1-21. in the Double Funeral System in the Amami and Okinawa Societies of Japan)『日本民俗学』 Iwasaki, Takehiko 岩崎竹彦 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 228: 1-34. 210 Takanori Shimamura

Kawada, Makito 川田牧人 1987 「妖怪の交響楽―奄美・加計呂麻島における妖怪譚の構造分析論―」 (The Ghost’s Symphony: A Structural Analysis of Ghost Folk Tales on Kakeroma Island, Amami)『日本民俗 学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 169: 37-72. Kawakami, Kazuo 河上一雄 1969 「重出立証法についての私見」(A Personal Perspective on the Method of Proof by Re-citation) 『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 9- 10. Kawamori, Hiroshi 川森博司 1998 「昔話と老人の語り」(The Elderly and Narrating of Folk Tales) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 214: 91-94. 2003 「伝統文化産業とフォークロリズム―岩手県遠野市の場合―」(The Traditional Cultural Industry and Folklorism: The Case of Tōno City, Iwate Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 103-108. 2007 「昔話の語りの変容と語り手の実践―伝承の衰退の議論を読み替える―」(Change of Narrative and the Practice of the Storyteller in Japanese Folktales: Beyond the Devolutionary Premise in Japanese Folklore Studies)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 251: 1-22. 2012 「柳田の口承文芸論と柳田以後の昔話研究―伝承と社会の変化を視点にして―」(Yanagita’s Oral Literature Theory and Post-Yanagita Folk Tale Research: Focusing on Folk Tale Transmission and Social Change)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 270: 30-49. Kawamura, Kunimitsu 川村邦光 1998 「戦争と民俗／民俗学」(War and Folklore/Folklore Studies)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 215: 34-48. Kawamura, Kiyoshi 川村清志 2003 「フォークロリズムとメディア表象―石川県門前町皆月の山王祭りを事例として―」 (Folklorism and Media Representations: The Case of the Sannō Festival of Minatsuki in Monzen-town, Ishikawa Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 155-171. Kitamura, Riko 喜多村理子 2006 「戦争と民俗―戦場の死の受け止め方をめぐって―」(War and Folklore: Responses to Battlefield Deaths)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 247: 195-218. Kobayashi, Tadao 小林忠雄 1980 「伝統都市における民俗の構造―城下町金沢の年中行事を中心に―」(The Folkloric Structure of a Traditional City: Annual Events in Castle Town Kanazawa [Ishikawa Prefecture])『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 129: 11-31. 1981 「伝統都市における民俗の構造（2）―金沢の民間信仰を中心に―」 (The Folkloric Structure of a Traditional City 2: Folk Beliefs in Kanazawa)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 134: 4-11. Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 211

Kawada, Makito 川田牧人 Koike, Junichi 小池淳一 1987 「妖怪の交響楽―奄美・加計呂麻島における妖怪譚の構造分析論―」 (The Ghost’s 2013 「文字文化を扱うことで民俗研究の視界はどのように広がるか―文字の伝承と書物の民俗―」 Symphony: A Structural Analysis of Ghost Folk Tales on Kakeroma Island, Amami)『日本民俗 (The Potential for Broadening Folklore Studies Through Inclusion of Literate Culture: The 学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 169: 37-72. Transmission of Writing and the Folklore of Written Materials) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Kawakami, Kazuo 河上一雄 Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 275: 1-13. 1969 「重出立証法についての私見」(A Personal Perspective on the Method of Proof by Re-citation) Konagaya, Hideyo 小長谷英代 『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 9- 2010 「パフォーマンス理論―「ポスト」領域の民俗学―」(Performance Theory: Folklore 10. Studies in a Post-Disciplinary Era)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Kawamori, Hiroshi 川森博司 Folklore Society Japan) 263: 127-152. 1998 「昔話と老人の語り」(The Elderly and Narrating of Folk Tales) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon 2016 「『ヴァナキュラー』―民俗学の超領域的視点―」(Vernacular: A Supra-disciplinary Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 214: 91-94. Perspective for Folkloristics)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore 2003 「伝統文化産業とフォークロリズム―岩手県遠野市の場合―」(The Traditional Cultural Society Japan) 285: 1-30. Industry and Folklorism: The Case of Tōno City, Iwate Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Kondō, Noriyuki 近藤功行 Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 103-108. 1992 「死を迎える文化の変容―島嶼社会の調査分析から―」(Cultural Transformation in Facing 2007 「昔話の語りの変容と語り手の実践―伝承の衰退の議論を読み替える―」(Change of Death: From Investigative Analyses of Island Society)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Narrative and the Practice of the Storyteller in Japanese Folktales: Beyond the Devolutionary Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 190: 71-87. Premise in Japanese Folklore Studies)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Kōno, Shin 河野眞 Folklore Society Japan) 251: 1-22. 2003 「フォークロリズムの生成風景― 概念の原産地への探訪から― 」 (The Formative 2012 「柳田の口承文芸論と柳田以後の昔話研究―伝承と社会の変化を視点にして―」(Yanagita’s Background to Folklorism: Searching for Conceptual Origins) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Oral Literature Theory and Post-Yanagita Folk Tale Research: Focusing on Folk Tale Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 3-19. Transmission and Social Change)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Koshikawa, Jirō 越川次郎 Folklore Society Japan) 270: 30-49. 2000 「薬と信仰―身延日蓮宗寺院の諸薬とその法的規制をめぐって―」(Medicine and Belief: In Kawamura, Kunimitsu 川村邦光 Connection with the Various Medicines of the Nichiren Sect of the Minobu Temples and Their 1998 「戦争と民俗／民俗学」(War and Folklore/Folklore Studies)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, Legal Regulation)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 215: 34-48. Japan) 222: 33-63. Kawamura, Kiyoshi 川村清志 Kuraishi, Tadahiko 倉石忠彦 2003 「フォークロリズムとメディア表象―石川県門前町皆月の山王祭りを事例として―」 1981 「マチの民俗と民俗学―都市民俗学成立の可能性―」(Folklore and Folklore Studies in (Folklorism and Media Representations: The Case of the Sannō Festival of Minatsuki in Urban Areas: On the Possibility of Establishing an Urban Folklore Studies)『日本民俗学』 Monzen-town, Ishikawa Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 134: 17-22. Folklore Society Japan) 236: 155-171. Kuwayama, Takami 桑山敬己 Kitamura, Riko 喜多村理子 2000 「柳田國男の『世界民俗学』再考―文化人類学者の目で―」(A Reconsideration of Kunio 2006 「戦争と民俗―戦場の死の受け止め方をめぐって―」(War and Folklore: Responses to Yanagita’s “Global Folkloristics”: Through the Eyes of A Cultural Anthropologist)『日本民俗学』 Battlefield Deaths)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 222: 1-32. Japan) 247: 195-218. 2004 Native Anthropology: The Japanese Challenge to Western Academic Hegemony. Melbourne: Kobayashi, Tadao 小林忠雄 Trans Pacific Press. 1980 「伝統都市における民俗の構造―城下町金沢の年中行事を中心に―」(The Folkloric Lee, Seung-Soo 李承沫 Structure of a Traditional City: Annual Events in Castle Town Kanazawa [Ishikawa 2009 「韓国における現在の民俗学状況」(The Current State of Folklore Studies in Korea)『日本民俗 Prefecture])『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 129: 学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 259: 82-110. 11-31. Lehmann, Albrecht レーマン，アルブレヒト 1981 「伝統都市における民俗の構造（2）―金沢の民間信仰を中心に―」 (The Folkloric 2010 「意識分析―民俗学の方法―」(The Analysis of Consciousness: The Method of Folkloristics Structure of a Traditional City 2: Folk Beliefs in Kanazawa)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, [Bewußtseinsanalyse: Methoden der Volkskunde]) (及川祥平訳，Shōhei Oikawa, trans.)『日本民 The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 134: 4-11. 俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 263: 31-56. 212 Takanori Shimamura

Liu, Zongai 劉宗迪 2013 「書面パラダイムから口頭パラダイムヘ―民間文芸学のパラダイムシフトとディシプリンの自 立について―」(From Written Paradigm to Oral Paradigm: On Paradigm Shifts in Folk Literary Studies, and the Autonomy of the Discipline) (西村真志葉 訳, Mashiba Nishimura, trans.)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 194- 214. Mabuchi, Tōichi 馬淵東一 1965 「波照間島その他の氏子組織」(Cult Group Organization on Hateruma Island and Other Islands)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 41: 1-11. Maeda, Shinichirō 前田俊一郎 2001 「両墓制の再検討―近代に成立した両墓制をめぐって―」(Reexamination on the Double Grave System: In Connection with the Double Grave System Formed in Recent Times)『日本 民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 225: 35-66. Makita, Shigeru 牧田茂 1951 「民俗の時代性と現代性― 日本民俗学の目標について― 」 (The Temporality and Contemporaneity of Folklore: Regarding the Goals of Japanese Folklore Studies)『民間伝承』 (Folk Tradition) 157: 32-37. 1969 「資料の年代をめぐって」(Regarding the Age of Resources) 『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 39-40. Maruyama, Yasuaki 丸山泰明 2004 「モニュメントと記憶―八甲田山雪中行軍遭難事件をめぐる記憶の編成―」(Monuments and Memories: The Formation of Memory Regarding the Hakkōda Mountains Death March Incident)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 238: 56-88. Matsuzono, Makio 松園万亀雄 1970 「沖縄座間味島の門中組織」(Munchū Organization of Zamami Island, Okinawa)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 71 :1-28. Miyata, Noboru 宮田登 1969 「文献と伝承」(Written Materials and Tradition)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 37-39. 1982 『都市民俗の課題』(Issues in Urban Folkloristics) 東京：未来社 (Tokyo: Miraisha). 1985 『新版 日本の民俗学』(Japanese Folkloristics, New Edition) 講談社 (Kodansha). 2000 「老人文化と民俗学」(Culture of the Elderly and Folkloristics)『老熟の力―豊かな〈老い〉 を求めて―』 (In The Power of Maturity: Towards a Rich “Old Age”). 宮田登・森謙二・網野房 子編 (Noboru Miyata, Kenji Mori and Fusako Amino, eds.). 東京：早稲田大学出版部 (Tokyo: Waseda University Press). Miyata, Noboru, Kenji Mori, and Fusako Amino (eds.) 宮田登，森謙二， 網野房子 編) 2000 『老熟の力―豊かな〈老い〉を求めて―』(The Power of Maturity: Towards a Rich “Old Age”). 東京：早稲田大学出版部 (Tokyo: Waseda University Press). Morikuri, Shigekazu 森栗茂一 2000 「21 世紀の都市モデル・向島―都市化と老いの世相変化から―」(Mukaijima, 21st Century Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 213

Liu, Zongai 劉宗迪 Model City: Seen From Changes in Urbanization and Aging)『老熟の力―豊かな〈老い〉を 2013 「書面パラダイムから口頭パラダイムヘ―民間文芸学のパラダイムシフトとディシプリンの自 求めて―』 (In The Power of Maturity: Towards a Rich “Old Age”). 宮田登・森謙二・網野房子 立について―」(From Written Paradigm to Oral Paradigm: On Paradigm Shifts in Folk 編 (Noboru Miyata, Kenji Mori and Fusako Amino, eds.). 東京：早稲田大学出版部 (Tokyo: Literary Studies, and the Autonomy of the Discipline) (西村真志葉 訳, Mashiba Nishimura, Waseda University Press) pp. 81-95. trans.)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 194- 2005 「神戸の地蔵信仰と復興まちづくり―伝承再構築支援の民俗学―」(Jizō Belief and Town- 214. Planning Recovery in Kobe: Folkloristics and Assistance for the Reconstruction of Tradition) Mabuchi, Tōichi 馬淵東一 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 243: 141-149. 1965 「波照間島その他の氏子組織」(Cult Group Organization on Hateruma Island and Other Morita, Shinya 森田真也 Islands)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society 1997 「観光と「伝統文化」の意識化― 沖縄県竹富島の事例から― 」 (Tourism and the Japan) 41: 1-11. Consciousness of “Traditional Culture”: An Example from Taketomi Island in Okinawa)『日本 Maeda, Shinichirō 前田俊一郎 民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 209: 33-65. 2001 「両墓制の再検討―近代に成立した両墓制をめぐって―」(Reexamination on the Double 2003 「フォークロリズムとツーリズム―民俗学における観光研究―」(Folklorism and Tourism: Grave System: In Connection with the Double Grave System Formed in Recent Times)『日本 On Tourism Research in Folklore Studies)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of 民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 225: 35-66. the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 92-102. Makita, Shigeru 牧田茂 Moriyama, Taitarō 森山泰太郎 1951 「民俗の時代性と現代性― 日本民俗学の目標について― 」 (The Temporality and 1977 「民俗誌のあり方―二、三の提言―」(A Model of Ethnography)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Contemporaneity of Folklore: Regarding the Goals of Japanese Folklore Studies)『民間伝承』 Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 42-46. (Folk Tradition) 157: 32-37. Muguruma, Yumi 六車由美 1969 「資料の年代をめぐって」(Regarding the Age of Resources) 『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon 2012 『驚きの介護民俗学』(Surprising Care Folkloristics) 東京：医学書院 (Tokyo: Igakushoin). Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 39-40. 2015 『介護民俗学へようこそ―『すまいるほーむ』の物語―』(Welcome to Care Folkloristics: Maruyama, Yasuaki 丸山泰明 The Story of “Smile Home”). 東京：新潮社 (Tokyo: Shinchōsha). 2004 「モニュメントと記憶―八甲田山雪中行軍遭難事件をめぐる記憶の編成―」(Monuments Muratake, Seiichi 村武精一 and Memories: The Formation of Memory Regarding the Hakkōda Mountains Death March 1967 「日・琉族制研究における構造論―柳田民俗学と社会人類学―」(Structural Theory in Incident)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 238: Studies of Family and Kinship Systems in Japan and the Ryūkyūs: Japanese Folklore Studies 56-88. and Social Anthropology)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Matsuzono, Makio 松園万亀雄 Folklore Society Japan) 54: 1-9. 1970 「沖縄座間味島の門中組織」(Munchū Organization of Zamami Island, Okinawa)『日本民俗学』 Nakamura, Akira 中村彰 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 71 :1-28. 1990 「『人生相談』にみるイエ意識―現代民俗学のひとつの試みとして―」(The Concept of Ie as Miyata, Noboru 宮田登 Viewed from Personal Affairs Advice Columns: An Attempt at Modern Folklore Studies)『日本 1969 「文献と伝承」(Written Materials and Tradition)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, 民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 181: 136-155. The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 37-39. 1991 「『人生相談』にみる結婚観」(Views on Marriage as Seen from Personal Affairs Consultation 1982 『都市民俗の課題』(Issues in Urban Folkloristics) 東京：未来社 (Tokyo: Miraisha). Columns)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 185: 1985 『新版 日本の民俗学』(Japanese Folkloristics, New Edition) 講談社 (Kodansha). 92-104. 2000 「老人文化と民俗学」(Culture of the Elderly and Folkloristics)『老熟の力―豊かな〈老い〉 1994 「メディアのなかの男と女―『人生相談』にみる現代日本の主婦―」(Men and Women in を求めて―』 (In The Power of Maturity: Towards a Rich “Old Age”). 宮田登・森謙二・網野房 Media: Present Day Japanese Husbands and Wives As Seen in Their Consultatations about 子編 (Noboru Miyata, Kenji Mori and Fusako Amino, eds.). 東京：早稲田大学出版部 (Tokyo: Their Personal Affairs)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Waseda University Press). Japan) 198: 91-103. Miyata, Noboru, Kenji Mori, and Fusako Amino (eds.) 宮田登，森謙二， 網野房子 編) Nakamura, Kazuyo 中村和代 2000 『老熟の力―豊かな〈老い〉を求めて―』(The Power of Maturity: Towards a Rich “Old 2010 「村の『民俗』から国家のシンボルへ―韓国河回別神グッタルノリのナショナル・ブランド化 Age”). 東京：早稲田大学出版部 (Tokyo: Waseda University Press). 過程―」(From Village “Folk Custom” to National Symbol: the Process of the National Morikuri, Shigekazu 森栗茂一 Branding of the Pyolshin-Gut T’al-Nori Folk Play in the Korean Village of Hahoe)『日本民俗 2000 「21 世紀の都市モデル・向島―都市化と老いの世相変化から―」(Mukaijima, 21st Century 学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 261: 34-63. 214 Takanori Shimamura

Nakayama, Kazuhisa 中山和久 1997 「巡礼と現代―関東三十六不動霊場を中心として―」(Pilgrimages and the Present Day: Centering on the Pilgrimage to the Thirty-Six Fudō Temples in the Kantō Region)『日本民俗 学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 211: 32-65. Nam, Kun-Wu 南根祐 2009 「韓国民俗学の現在―「民俗」の文化財化と観光資源化を中心に―」(Contemporary Folklore Studies in Korea: The Transformation of “Folklore” into Cultural Assets and Tourist Resources)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 259: 5-27. Namihira, Emiko 波平恵美子 2001 「『民俗』の再考と再生をめざして」(Aiming for the Reconsideration and Rebirth of “Folklore”)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 227: 237-244. Noguchi, Kenichi 野口憲一 2011 「農村・農業研究に関する『当事者』研究の提案―蓮根生産農業の『当事者』研究を事例に ―」(A Proposal for “Actor” Self-Research in Relation to Research on Agricultural Villages and Farming: the Example of “Actors” involved in Lotus Root Production)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 267: 68-83. 2016 「〈産業としての農業〉を営むという実践を理解する―徳島県におけるレンコン生産農業の事 例から―」(Operating Agriculture as an Industry: A Case Study of Lotus Root Production in Tokushima Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 285: 57-77. Noguchi, Takenori 野口武徳 1969 「重出立証法に対する問題提起」(Problems with the Method of Proof by Re-citation)『日本民俗 学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 3-6. Nomoto, Kanichi 野本寛一 2000 「老熟者の座標―民俗社会の伝統の中で―」(Coordinates of the Mature Elderly: In Folk Society Tradition)『老熟の力―豊かな〈老い〉を求めて―』(In The Power of Maturity: Towards a Rich “Old Age”). 宮田登・森謙二・網野房子編 (Noboru Miyata, Kenji Mori and Fusako Amino, eds.). 東京：早稲田大学出版部 (Tokyo: Waseda University Press) pp. 22-46. Noyes, Dorothy 2016 Humble Theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Nozawa, Kenji 野沢謙治 1982 「身体のフォークロア―糞尿・ツバ・裸・髪―」(Folklore of the Human Body: Feces, Saliva, Nudity and Hair)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 141: 35-43. 1983 「続・身体のフォークロア―強食・大食の論理―」 (Folklore on the Human Body, Continued: The Rationality Behind Coercive Offerings of Food and Overeating)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 147: 49-58. Ogawa, Tōru 小川徹 1969 「周圏論に対するコメント」(A Comment on Peripheral Zone Theory)『日本民俗学』『日本民 俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 21-23. Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 215

Nakayama, Kazuhisa 中山和久 Oguma, Makoto 小熊誠 1997 「巡礼と現代―関東三十六不動霊場を中心として―」(Pilgrimages and the Present Day: 2015 The Study of Japan through “Japanese Folklore Studies.” Japanese Review of Cultural Centering on the Pilgrimage to the Thirty-Six Fudō Temples in the Kantō Region)『日本民俗 Anthropology 16: 237-250. 学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 211: 32-65. Ohba, Yoshimi 大庭良美 Nam, Kun-Wu 南根祐 1977 「島根の民俗誌」(Ethnography of Shimane Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The 2009 「韓国民俗学の現在―「民俗」の文化財化と観光資源化を中心に―」(Contemporary Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 63-67. Folklore Studies in Korea: The Transformation of “Folklore” into Cultural Assets and Tourist Ōishi, Yasuo 大石泰夫 Resources)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 259: 1998 「民俗芸能における『老いと老人」(“Aging and the Elderly” in Folk Performing Arts)『日本民 5-27. 俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 214: 95-99. Namihira, Emiko 波平恵美子 Ono, Jūrō 小野重朗 2001 「『民俗』の再考と再生をめざして」(Aiming for the Reconsideration and Rebirth of 1969 「実践的周圏論を」(Concerning a Practical Peripheral Zone Theory)『日本民俗学』『日本民俗 “Folklore”)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 227: 学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 23-24. 237-244. Ōshiro, Hiromi 大城博美 Noguchi, Kenichi 野口憲一 2011 「介護現場の民俗誌―『呼び寄せ型』の人たちを中心に―」(Documenting the Folklore of 2011 「農村・農業研究に関する『当事者』研究の提案―蓮根生産農業の『当事者』研究を事例に Nursing Care Sites: Focusing on “Called-for Type” People)『現代民俗学研究』(Journal of ―」(A Proposal for “Actor” Self-Research in Relation to Research on Agricultural Villages Living Folklore) 3: 47-57. and Farming: the Example of “Actors” involved in Lotus Root Production)『日本民俗学』 Ōtsuki, Takahiro 大月隆寛 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 267: 68-83. 1985 「「都市民俗学」論の本質的性格」(The Essential Characteristics of “Urban Folklore Studies”) 2016 「〈産業としての農業〉を営むという実践を理解する―徳島県におけるレンコン生産農業の事 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 157/158: 81-103. 例から―」(Operating Agriculture as an Industry: A Case Study of Lotus Root Production in 2004 『全身民俗学者』(Whole-body Folklorist). 東京：夏目書房 (Tokyo: Natsume Shobō). Tokushima Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Sakuma, Junichi 佐久間惇一 Japan) 285: 57-77. 1977 「民俗誌のことども」(On Ethnography)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Noguchi, Takenori 野口武徳 Folklore Society Japan) 113: 37-42. 1969 「重出立証法に対する問題提起」(Problems with the Method of Proof by Re-citation)『日本民俗 Sakurai, Tokutarō 櫻井徳太郎 学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 3-6. 1957 「日本史研究との関連」(Relations with Japanese History Research)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Nomoto, Kanichi 野本寛一 Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 4(2): 111-119. 2000 「老熟者の座標―民俗社会の伝統の中で―」(Coordinates of the Mature Elderly: In Folk Saruwatari, Toki 猿渡土貴 Society Tradition)『老熟の力―豊かな〈老い〉を求めて―』(In The Power of Maturity: 2002 「近・現代における胞衣習俗の処理習俗の変化―胞衣取扱業者の動向をめぐって―」 Towards a Rich “Old Age”). 宮田登・森謙二・網野房子編 (Noboru Miyata, Kenji Mori and (Changes in the Customs of Disposing the Placenta in the Modern Ages: Concerning the Fusako Amino, eds.). 東京：早稲田大学出版部 (Tokyo: Waseda University Press) pp. 22-46. Attitude of the Occupation of Placenta Disposal)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Noyes, Dorothy Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 226: 1-34. 2016 Humble Theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Sasaki, Michiko 佐々木美智子 Nozawa, Kenji 野沢謙治 2002 「男性助産婦導入問題と出産観」(The Problem of the Introduction of Male Midwives and 1982 「身体のフォークロア―糞尿・ツバ・裸・髪―」(Folklore of the Human Body: Feces, Concepts of Childbirth)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Saliva, Nudity and Hair)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Japan) 232: 70-85. Society Japan) 141: 35-43. Seki, Keigo 関敬吾 1983 「続・身体のフォークロア―強食・大食の論理―」 (Folklore on the Human Body, 1949a 「民俗学方法の問題（上）―和歌森氏の所論に関連して―」(Problems of Folklore Studies Continued: The Rationality Behind Coercive Offerings of Food and Overeating)『日本民俗学』 Methods (I): Regarding Wakamori’s Thesis)『民間伝承』(Folk Tradition) 134: 15-21. (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 147: 49-58. 1949b 「民俗学方法の問題（下）―和歌森氏の所論に関連して―」(Problems of Folklore Studies Ogawa, Tōru 小川徹 Methods (II): Regarding Wakamori’s Thesis)『民間伝承』(Folk Tradition) 135: 39-48. 1969 「周圏論に対するコメント」(A Comment on Peripheral Zone Theory)『日本民俗学』『日本民 1958 「歴史科学としての民俗学」(Folkloristics as Historical Science) in『日本民俗学大系：第２巻： 俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 21-23. 日本民俗学の歴史と課題』(Survey of Japanese Folkloristics: Vol. 2: History and Issues of 216 Takanori Shimamura

Japanese Folkloristics) 東京：平凡社 (Tokyo: Heibonsha) pp. 242-258. Shi, Aidong 施愛東 2013 「フィールドよさらば」(Farewell to the Field) (西村真志葉 訳，Mashiba Nishimura, trans.) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 154-170. Shibuya, Ken 渋谷研 2001 「その後の人たち―老人介護のフォークロア」(People Needing Care: The Folklore of Elder Care)『国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告』(Bulletin of the National History of Japanese History) 91: 411-425. Shigenobu, Yukihiko 重信幸彦 1989 「『世間話』再考―方法としての『世間話』へ―」(Reconsidering “Sekenbanashi” [Small Talk] as Research Method)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 180: 1-35. 2012 「『声』のマテリアル―方法としての『世間話』・柳田國男から現代へ―」(The Material of “Voices”: “Sekenbanashi” [Small Talk] as Research Method, From Kunio Yanagita to the Present)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 270: 85-110. 2015 「民俗学のなかの『世間話』―『明治大正史世相篇』（一九三一）から―」(“Sekenbanashi” [Small Talk] in Folklore Studies: From “Meiji and Taishō History: Social Conditions” (1931)) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 281: 47-67. Shimamura, Takanori 島村恭則 1996 「沖縄の民俗宗教と新宗教―龍泉の事例から―」(New Religion and Folk Religion in Okinawa: As Seen from the Case of Ijun)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 204: 1-37. 2014 「フォークロア研究とは何か」(What is Folkloristics?)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 278: 1-34． 2017 「グローバル化時代における民俗学の可能性」(The Potential of Folkloristics in the Age of Globalization)『アジア遊学』(Asia Yūgaku) 215 (印刷中) (to be published). Shinno, Toshikazu 真野俊和 2006 「野の学問はどこに行くのか」(Wither the Discipline of the Folk by the Folk?)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 246: 115-120. Sudō, Kenichi 須藤健一 1971 「喜界島の親族組織」(The Kinship Organization of Kikaijima, Amami Islands)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 78: 51-61. Suga, Yutaka 菅豊 2010 「現代アメリカ民俗学の現状と課題―公共民俗学(Public Folklore)を中心に―」(The Current State of American Folklore Studies and Future Issues, Focusing on “Public Folklore”) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 263: 94-126. 2013 『「新しい野の学問」の時代へ―知識生産と社会実践をつなぐために―』(Toward the Era of the “New Discipline of the Folk by the Folk”: Connecting Knowledge Production and Social Practice) 東京：岩波書店 (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten). Suzuki, Masataka 鈴木正祟 1979 「荒神神楽にみる自然と人間」(Man and Nature in the Kōjin Ritual Dance)『日本民俗学』 Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 217

Japanese Folkloristics) 東京：平凡社 (Tokyo: Heibonsha) pp. 242-258. (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 125: 1-17. Shi, Aidong 施愛東 1982 「対馬・木坂の祭祀と村落空問」(The Rites and Village Space in Kisaka, Tsushima Island) 2013 「フィールドよさらば」(Farewell to the Field) (西村真志葉 訳，Mashiba Nishimura, trans.) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 140: 35-43. 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 273: 154-170. 1984 「対馬・仁位の祭祀と村落空間」(Rituals and Village Cosmology in Nii, Tsushima Island)『日 Shibuya, Ken 渋谷研 本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 151: 1-24. 2001 「その後の人たち―老人介護のフォークロア」(People Needing Care: The Folklore of Elder Suzuki, Iwayumi 鈴木岩弓 Care)『国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告』(Bulletin of the National History of Japanese History) 2012 「いま、震災被災地で民俗学者ができること」(Now, What Folklorists can do in Earthquake 91: 411-425. Disaster Areas)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) Shigenobu, Yukihiko 重信幸彦 270: 232-237. 1989 「『世間話』再考―方法としての『世間話』へ―」(Reconsidering “Sekenbanashi” [Small Tadenuma, Yasuko 蓼沼康子 Talk] as Research Method)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore 1998 「日本民俗学における老いと老人―家族の側面から―」(Aging and the Elderly in Japanese Society Japan) 180: 1-35. Folklore: From a Side View of the Family)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of 2012 「『声』のマテリアル―方法としての『世間話』・柳田國男から現代へ―」(The Material of the Folklore Society Japan) 214: 87-90. “Voices”: “Sekenbanashi” [Small Talk] as Research Method, From Kunio Yanagita to the Takahashi, Tōichi 高橋統一 Present)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 270: 1978 「宮座の構造とその周辺」(The Structure and Surroundings of Parish Guilds)『日本民俗学』 85-110. (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 115: 1-7. 2015 「民俗学のなかの『世間話』―『明治大正史世相篇』（一九三一）から―」(“Sekenbanashi” Takeda, Akira 竹田旦 [Small Talk] in Folklore Studies: From “Meiji and Taishō History: Social Conditions” (1931)) 1977 「民俗誌と民俗学」(Ethnography and Folklore Studies)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 281: 47-67. Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 68-73. Shimamura, Takanori 島村恭則 Takizawa, Shūichi 滝沢秀一 1996 「沖縄の民俗宗教と新宗教―龍泉の事例から―」(New Religion and Folk Religion in 1977 「地域住民の手で綴る民俗誌を」(Toward Ethnographies Composed by Local Inhabitants)『日 Okinawa: As Seen from the Case of Ijun)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the 本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 113: 47-51. Folklore Society Japan) 204: 1-37. Tamura, Kazuhiko 田村和彦 2014 「フォークロア研究とは何か」(What is Folkloristics?)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The 2009 「中国民俗学の現在―現地調査と民俗志を中心に―」(Contemporary Chinese Folklore Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 278: 1-34． Studies: Focusing on Fieldwork and Ethnographies)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The 2017 「グローバル化時代における民俗学の可能性」(The Potential of Folkloristics in the Age of Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 259: 28-56. Globalization)『アジア遊学』(Asia Yūgaku) 215 (印刷中) (to be published). Tanaka, Senichi 田中宣一 Shinno, Toshikazu 真野俊和 1969 「重出立証法の歴史」(History of the Method of Proof by Re-citation)『日本民俗学会報』(Nihon 2006 「野の学問はどこに行くのか」(Wither the Discipline of the Folk by the Folk?)『日本民俗学』 Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 2-3. (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 246: 115-120. Taniguchi, Yōko 谷口陽子 Sudō, Kenichi 須藤健一 2008 「女性の奉公経験と家族および地域共同体における評価―山口県豊北地方の漁業集落矢玉を事 1971 「喜界島の親族組織」(The Kinship Organization of Kikaijima, Amami Islands)『日本民俗学』 例として―」(The Valuation of Family and Community Based on Women’s Experiences as (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 78: 51-61. Hōkōnin [Live-in Servants])『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Suga, Yutaka 菅豊 Society Japan) 253: 1-26. 2010 「現代アメリカ民俗学の現状と課題―公共民俗学(Public Folklore)を中心に―」(The Tano, Noboru 田野登 Current State of American Folklore Studies and Future Issues, Focusing on “Public Folklore”) 2008 『水都大阪の民俗誌』(The Ethnography of Water Metropolis Osaka) 大阪：和泉書院 (Osaka: 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 263: 94-126. Izumi Shoten). 2013 『「新しい野の学問」の時代へ―知識生産と社会実践をつなぐために―』(Toward the Era Tsurumi, Kazuko 鶴見和子 of the “New Discipline of the Folk by the Folk”: Connecting Knowledge Production and Social 1997 「社会変動論のパラダイム―柳田國男の仕事を軸として―」(Paradigms of Social Change Practice) 東京：岩波書店 (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten). Theory: With the Work of Yanagita Kunio as Axis)『鶴見和子曼荼羅Ⅰ、基の巻』(In Tsurumi Suzuki, Masataka 鈴木正祟 Kazuko Mandala I: Basics) 東京：藤原書店 (Tokyo: Fujiwara Shoten) pp. 442-483. 1979 「荒神神楽にみる自然と人間」(Man and Nature in the Kōjin Ritual Dance)『日本民俗学』 Uesugi, Tomiyuki 上杉富之 218 Takanori Shimamura

2002 「生殖革命と新生殖技術―出産及び生命観に及ぼす社会・文化的影響―」(The Reproduction Revolution and the New Reproductive Technologies: Socio-Cultural Implications for the Concepts of Birth and Life)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 232: 86-105. Ushijima, Iwao 牛島巌 1969 「重出立証法に対するコメント」(Comments Concerning the Method of Proof by Re-citation)『日 本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 6-7. Ushijima, Iwao and Takenori Noguchi 牛島巌・野口武徳 1967 「沖縄本島東部島嶼社会の門中と祭祀組織―与那城村宮城島における事例を中心として―」 (Munchū Kin Groups and Ritual Organization in the Society of the Eastern Islets off the Main Island of Okinawa: Focusing on Cases from Yonashiro Village, Miyagi Island)『日本民俗学会 報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 50: 13-30. Veldkamp, Elemer フェルトカンプ・エルメル 2011 「科学技術とフォークロア―『たまごっち』の生と死に対する文化的反応―」(Scientific Technology and Folklore: the Cultural Reaction to Life and Death of Tamagotchi)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 265: 30-56. Wakamori, Tarō 和歌森太郎 1949 「民俗学の方法について」(On the Methods of Folklore Studies)『民間伝承』(Folk Tradition) 132: 2-9. 1951 「民俗学の性格について」(On the Character of Folklore Studies)『民間伝承』(Folk Tradition) 159: 34-37. Wang, Xiaokui 王暁葵 2009 「人類学化と「非物質文化遺産保護」―現代中国民俗学研究について―」(Anthropology and “Non-material Cultural Heritage Protection”: On Contemporary Chinese Folklore Studies Research)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 259: 111-137. Watabe, Keiichi 渡部圭一 2013 「周縁の史料学の可能性」(The Possibilities of the Documentary Study of Peripheries)『日本民 俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 275: 58-72. Watanabe, Yoshio 渡邊欣雄 1970 「機能契機にみるムラ構成とその変化―千葉県安房郡旧平群村の事例―」(Structure of a Village Organization and Change as Seen in Function-Opportunities: The Case of in Awa District, Chiba Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 72: 7-19. 1971a 「沖縄北部農村の門中組織― 大宜味村字田港の事例― 」 (The Munchū Kin Group Organization of Farming Villages in Northern Okinawa Island: The Case of Taminato, Ogimi) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 74: 16-20. 1971b 「沖縄の世界観についての一考察―東村字平良を中心として―」(A Study of Okinawan Cosmology: Centering on Taira, Higashi Village) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 74: 10-30. Yagi, Tōru 八木透 1996 「家・女性・墓―女性たちにとっての故郷― 」 (Homes ・ Women ・ Graves: Furusato Takanori Shimamura Folklore in the Midst of Social Change 219

2002 「生殖革命と新生殖技術―出産及び生命観に及ぼす社会・文化的影響―」(The Reproduction [Hometowns] for Women)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Revolution and the New Reproductive Technologies: Socio-Cultural Implications for the Society Japan) 206: 36-55. Concepts of Birth and Life)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Yagi, Yasuyuki 八木康幸 Society Japan) 232: 86-105. 2003 「フェイクロアとフォークロリズムについての覚え書き―アメリカ民俗学における議論を中心 Ushijima, Iwao 牛島巌 にして―」(Notes on Fake-lore and Folk-lore: Focusing on the Controversy in Folklore 1969 「重出立証法に対するコメント」(Comments Concerning the Method of Proof by Re-citation)『日 Studies in the United States)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore 本民俗学会報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 60: 6-7. Society Japan) 236: 20-48. Ushijima, Iwao and Takenori Noguchi 牛島巌・野口武徳 Yamada, Shinya 山田慎也 1967 「沖縄本島東部島嶼社会の門中と祭祀組織―与那城村宮城島における事例を中心として―」 1995 「葬制の変化と地域社会―和歌山県東牟婁郡古座町の事例を通して―」(Changes in Funeral (Munchū Kin Groups and Ritual Organization in the Society of the Eastern Islets off the Main Rites and Local Community: A case of Kozachō in Wakayama Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Island of Okinawa: Focusing on Cases from Yonashiro Village, Miyagi Island)『日本民俗学会 Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 203: 23-59. 報』(Nihon Minzokugaku-Kaihō, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 50: 13-30. 1996 「死を受容させるもの―輿から祭壇へ―」(How To Accept Death?: From Bier to Funeral Veldkamp, Elemer フェルトカンプ・エルメル Altar)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 207: 29- 2011 「科学技術とフォークロア―『たまごっち』の生と死に対する文化的反応―」(Scientific 57. Technology and Folklore: the Cultural Reaction to Life and Death of Tamagotchi)『日本民俗学』 2003 「葬儀とフォ-クロリズム」(Funeral Rites and Folklorism)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 265: 30-56. The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 137-146. Wakamori, Tarō 和歌森太郎 Yamaguchi, Asatarō 山口麻太郎 1949 「民俗学の方法について」(On the Methods of Folklore Studies)『民間伝承』(Folk Tradition) 1977 「民俗誌私論」(On Ethnography)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the 132: 2-9. Folklore Society Japan) 113: 22-27. 1951 「民俗学の性格について」(On the Character of Folklore Studies)『民間伝承』(Folk Tradition) Yamaji, Katsuhiko 山路勝彦 159: 34-37. 1971 「＜門中＞と＜家＞に関する覚書」(Preliminary Report on Munchū Kin Groups and Ie Wang, Xiaokui 王暁葵 Households)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 78: 2009 「人類学化と「非物質文化遺産保護」―現代中国民俗学研究について―」(Anthropology and 44-51. “Non-material Cultural Heritage Protection”: On Contemporary Chinese Folklore Studies Yamamoto, Shino 山本志乃 Research)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 259: 2010 「市稼ぎの生活誌―農家日記にみる定期市出店者の生活戦略―」(A Report on the Life of 111-137. Urban Migrant Workers: Life Strategies of Regular Migrant Workers from Farming Villages Watabe, Keiichi 渡部圭一 to Cities, as Seen from Their Diaries)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the 2013 「周縁の史料学の可能性」(The Possibilities of the Documentary Study of Peripheries)『日本民 Folklore Society Japan) 264: 1-30. 俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 275: 58-72. Yanagita, Kunio 柳田國男 Watanabe, Yoshio 渡邊欣雄 1930 『蝸牛考』(Considering Cochlea) 東京：刀江書院 (Tokyo: Tōkōshoin). 1970 「機能契機にみるムラ構成とその変化―千葉県安房郡旧平群村の事例―」(Structure of a 1931 『明治大正史』(Meiji Taishō Shi Meiji and Taishō History) 4, 世相篇 (Sesōhen) 東京：朝日新聞社 Village Organization and Change as Seen in Function-Opportunities: The Case of in Awa (Tokyo: Asahisinbunsha). District, Chiba Prefecture)『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore 1934 『民間伝承論』(Folk Tradition Studies) 東京：共立社 (Tokyo: Kyōritsusha). Society Japan) 72: 7-19. 1935 『郷土生活の研究法』(Hometown Life Research Methods) 東京：刀江書院 (Tokyo: Tōkōshoin). 1971a 「沖縄北部農村の門中組織― 大宜味村字田港の事例― 」 (The Munchū Kin Group 1939a 『国語の将来』(Kokugo no Shōrai The Future of the National Language) 大阪：創元社 (Osaka: Organization of Farming Villages in Northern Okinawa Island: The Case of Taminato, Ogimi) Sōgensha). 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 74: 16-20. 1939b 『孤猿随筆』(Koen Zuihitsu Fox and Monkey Essays) 大阪：創元社 (Osaka: Sōgensha). 1971b 「沖縄の世界観についての一考察―東村字平良を中心として―」(A Study of Okinawan 1939c 『木綿以前の事』(Momen Izen no Koto Regarding before Cotton) 大阪：創元社 (Osaka: Cosmology: Centering on Taira, Higashi Village) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Sōgensha). Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 74: 10-30. 1940 『野草雑記・野鳥雑記』(Yasō Zakki, Yachō Zakki Remarks on Wild Plants and Birds) 京都：甲鳥 Yagi, Tōru 八木透 書林 (Kyoto: Kōchō Shoin). 1996 「家・女性・墓―女性たちにとっての故郷― 」 (Homes ・ Women ・ Graves: Furusato 1942 『小さき者の声』(Chīsaki Mono no Koe Voice of the Little Ones) 東京：三国書房 (Tokyo: 220 Takanori Shimamura

Sangoku Shobō). 1947 『氏神と氏子』(Ujigami to Ujiko Local Shrines and Parishioners) 東京：小山書店(Tokyo: Koyama Shoten). 1953 『不幸なる芸術』(Fukō naru Geijutsu The Unhappy Art) 東京：筑摩書房 (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō). Yano, Keiichi 矢野敬一 1997 「『ふるさとの味』の形成に見る家族の戦後―菖蒲の節句の行事食・笹団子の名産品化を通し て―」(The Postwar Period of the Family as Seen in the Evolution of “Hometown Taste”: The Iris Festival’s Ritual Food and Changes in its Speciality, the Sasa-Dango)『日本民俗学』 (Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 209: 1-32. 2003 「ノスタルジー／フォークロリズム／ナショナリズム―写真家・童画家・熊谷元一の作品の受 容をめぐって―」(Nostalgia, Folklorism and Nationalism: In Connection with the Works of the Photographer and Painter for Children, Motoichi Kumagai) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 236: 147-154. Yasui, Manami 安井眞奈美 1997 「「ふるさと」研究の分析視角」(The Analytical Vision of Furusato [Hometown] Research)『日 本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 209: 66-88. Yukawa, Yōji 湯川洋司 1998 「伝承母体論とムラの現在」(The Theory of the Traditional Unit of Folkways and the Village) 『日本民俗学』(Nihon Minzokugaku, The Bulletin of the Folklore Society Japan) 216: 15-25.