H. Nassaj; M. Soltani
Abstract
Upheavals which occurred in western architecture in terms of different buildings, external and internal facades, decorations and garnitures, public and private spaces, materialfrom the ancient until the end of the 20th century, represent the undeniable role of politics and political thoughts in these ...
Read More
Upheavals which occurred in western architecture in terms of different buildings, external and internal facades, decorations and garnitures, public and private spaces, materialfrom the ancient until the end of the 20th century, represent the undeniable role of politics and political thoughts in these upheavals and dynamics. Accordingly, the effects of politics can be observed at different levels including the instrumental use of owners of political, economic, and religious power from architecture for expressing and representing their own power via constructing outstanding buildings such as palaces, temples, triumphal arches, and churches. In addition, the advent of new forms of public spaces, the appearance of buildings for public offerings such as exhibitions and museums and the separation of public and private spaces have been offerings of enlightenment and humanism, liberalism, and capitalism. Due to the direct intervention of governments in the domain construction because of damages caused by wars of the first half of the 20th century, more emphasis have been put on the function of buildings as spaces and places of occurring modern life and homogenous architectural style was prescribed for realizing a comprehensive international identity. At last, with the collapse of metanarrative of modernism and rise of postmodernism, pluralism, decentralization, infinity of senses, the rejection of hierarchy and flexibility in architecture of the late 20th century can be observed and investigated. Therefore, the present study is to investigate the relationship between politics and architecture in the framework of interdisciplinary studies.
Interdisciplinary
N. Fazeli; F. Koushki
Abstract
The fundamental change in language research, which started with Saussure in the early twentieth century and led to the establishment of modern linguistics, restricted the said research within the so-called central part of language, i. e., the language system, without taking into consideration anything ...
Read More
The fundamental change in language research, which started with Saussure in the early twentieth century and led to the establishment of modern linguistics, restricted the said research within the so-called central part of language, i. e., the language system, without taking into consideration anything that was conceived as external to language as an autonomous system. In terms of its clearly-defined theoretical structure and subject, modern linguistics once again became an influential leading discipline in the humanities and social sciences. It achieved a great deal, but its achievements took place at the cost of isolating language from its environment and excluding the user of language and the context in which language is used from the scope of linguistic analysis. Although this stance has long been criticized by scholars who prefer to see language within a more extended context, it has generally been ignored by mainstream linguists who dominate linguistic circles. However, in the last few decades of the twentieth century, significant changes have taken place in linguistic studies. These changes have brought about a new era, the era of ″post-modern linguistics″, in which the theoretical foundations of modern linguistics are problematized and the way language is viewed and investigated is profoundly renewed. This article is written in a narrative form describing the linguistic change from modernism to postmodernism and in the course of this review it will become clear in which research perspective the two main linguistics directions (theoretical and applied) are located: disciplinary interdisciplinary and transdisiplinary? In other words what is the object of linguistics research?
Reza Akbarinoori; Raziyeh Mosavikhorshidi; Mohammadreza Golaij
Abstract
From the late 1960s, a fundamental shift took place from Modernism to Post-Modernism in art and aesthetic fields: "post-modernism as a movement against the simple functional art and design styles of modernism".Some described this movement as a "conservative reaction of modernism to itself". Basically, ...
Read More
From the late 1960s, a fundamental shift took place from Modernism to Post-Modernism in art and aesthetic fields: "post-modernism as a movement against the simple functional art and design styles of modernism".Some described this movement as a "conservative reaction of modernism to itself". Basically, post-modernism as a "part of modernism" is considered as an outcome and result of modernism which stood against modernistic beliefs and thoughts.From the fundamental tenets of post-modernism which shape its other branches, one can mention to: belief in difference, diversity and pluralism, criticism of common scientific methods and rationalism, negation of any meta-narrative and any all-encompassing universal theory. Post-modernism, as to other fields of social science, has also affected urban planning from the late 1980s and caused change in the commonly applied views, processes, results, principles and methods and, in short, in the thinking and practice of planning. Post-modernist planning is depicted as a severance from modernist intellectual tradition. Such a view insists on two significant distinctions between modernist paradigm of urban planning and post-modernist paradigm: first, epistemological basis of planning, and, second, application of normative values and theory in planning. Today, post-modernist approach is prevailing in all levels of plans, even unconsciously, and often as a part of them, and forms their strategic visions, goals, priorities and their outlines. The present research aims to examine post-modernist approach in planning from different aspects.
