群婚制与性规范——对婚家悖论的另外一种解释路径  

Communal Marriage and Sexual Norms--Another Explaining Path for Marriage Paradox

作　　者：王宏宇[1] WANG Hong-yu

机构地区：[1]中央民族大学民族学与社会学学院,北京100081

出　　处：《青海民族研究》2020年第4期103-111,共9页Qinghai Journal of Ethnology

摘　　要：有关群婚制是否存在的两种观点分别以摩尔根、霍威特和韦斯特马克、马林诺夫斯基为代表,其大多讨论立足于澳洲规范婚姻社会的民族志材料。通过重新梳理霍威特、斯宾塞等人提供的澳洲民族志材料,再次从经验上确证群婚制的事实性存在并指出其被外婚制严格限制并有明确的性规范,对马氏一派予以驳斥并指出群婚而非个体婚、群体而非个体关系是部落社会得以组织维系和发展的根本关系范畴;与此同时群婚制状态下家庭和婚姻的分离提供了婚家悖论的另外一种解决路径,指出婚姻和家庭有其各自的起源和发展脉络,并推动思考家庭形态单一性、家庭伦理与婚姻形式多样性的关系。The two views on the existence of group marriage,represented by H.Morgan,A.Howitt and E.Westermarck,B.Malinowski respectively,are mostly discussed basing on the ethnographic materials about the standard marriage society in Australia.By reanalyzing the ethnographic materials provided by Howitt,Spencer and others,we can confirm the factual existence of group marriage once again empirically and point out that it is strictly restricted to the rules of exogamy and clear sexual norms,and refute the Malinowski school and point out that the group marriage rather than the individual marriage,the group rather than individual relationship is the fundamental relationship category for the organization,maintenance and development of tribal society.At the same time,the separation of family and marriage in the state of group marriage provides a solution to the marriage/family paradox,and points out that At the same time,the separation of family and marriage under group marriage provides a solution to the paradox of marriage and family,points out that marriage and family have their own origins and development,and promotes the consideration of the relationship between the single family form,family ethics and the diversity of marriage forms.

关 键 词：群婚制 性规范 外婚制 群体关系 

分 类 号：C95[社会学—民族学]