民居類型之屬類分析－以臺閩三合院為例

A Taxonomical Analysis of Type-By the Cases of San-He-Yuan in Taiwan and Fujian

10.6377/JA.200603.0051

王韡儒(Wei-Ju Wang)

屬類分析 ； 起始概念 ； 生產規則 ； Taxonomical analysis ； genesis principle ； generation rule

建築學報

55期（2006 / 03 / 01）

51 - 68

繁體中文

基於先前對類型的研究，本文描述了一種建構於「起始概念」觀點下對民居類型研究的新方法。此一理論為：不同的類型之民居根源於不同之「起始概念」，而「起始概念」則透過稱之為「屬類分析」之方法而獲得。依據上述之法則，得以超越表相之類似而充分的區別兩種看似相同但實為相異類型之案例，此「起始概念」為一生產規則，其起始於細微差異的空間關係，而終形成明顯相異之類型。 為論證此理論與方法，本文以台灣及福建U形合院，即普遍所稱之三合院為研究對象。在此屬類關係之推演中，顯示三項發現可與移民遷徙等社會文化課題對話：首先，台灣各類型之三合院多數難以在其原鄉發現；其二，台灣以幾何分類所泛指之三合院實屬於不同「起始概念」下之類型案例，實為新類型，而與其原鄉類型之關連可以僅存在「起始概念」的遺傳而非僅為複製移植；其三，在此對台灣三合院的研究中顯示，其遷徙地環境條件的同化是促使類型演化的一項重要的外在力量。因此，將據此以瞭解類型傳播的過程中存在之演化機制與文化關連性。

Based on previous typological studies, this paper describes a new approach dwelling on the idea of ”genesis principle”. The theory speculates that different types are the results of applying different genesis principles which can be found through the methodology called ”taxonomical analysis”. It is due to these principles that we can observe beyond surface similarities and sufficiently classify two look-alike cases into different types. The genesis principle is construed as a generation rule by which a slightly different spatial relation at the beginning will end up with significant discrepancy as consequence. To demonstrate the theory and method, the U-shape enclosure house, also generically categorized as ”San-He-Yuan”, is chosen to be the object of study. Cases are widely selected and tested from Taiwan and Fujian. There are three findings concerning cultural and social issues concluded: the first, Taiwan San-He-Yuan can hardly be found in its original home land in Fujian. Second, The genesis principle applied to Taiwan San-He-Yuan is quite different from that of Fujian counterpart. In this sense, it is a new type rather than a transplanted copy. Finally, assimilation to the local conditions is one of the major forces that contribute to the typological evolution which is remarkably evident in this study of Taiwan San-He Yuan.

1. Hall, Robert de Zouche(1972).A Bibliography On Vernacular Architecture.
2. Harbraken, N. John(1988).type as a social agreement, Biannual Asian Congress of Architecture.MIT:Cambridge.
3. Harbraken, N. John(1988).type as a social agreement, Biannual Asian Congress of Architecture.Cambridge:MIT.
4. Harbraken, N. John(1988).type as a social agreement
5. Hillier, Bill and Hanson, Julienne(1984).The Social Logic of Space
6. Hillier, Bill,Hanson, Julienne(1984).The Social Logic of Space.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
7. Knapp, Ronald G.(1989).China`s Vernacular Architecture: House Form And Culture.
8. Knapp, Ronald G.(1989).China c Vernacular Architecture: House Form And Culture
9. Lawrence, Roderick J.(1994).Type as Analytical Tool: Reinterpretation and Application.Ordering Space-Types in Architecture and Design.
10. Lawrence, Roderick J.(1994).Type as Analytical Tool: Reinterpretation and Application.Ordering Space- Types in Architecture and Design,253-270.
11. Liu, Dun-Zhen(1983).A Summary on Chiese Houses.
12. Liu, Zhi-Ping(2001).The Publish Of Artist.Taipei:
13. March, Lionel,Stiny, George(1985).Spatial Systems in Architecture and Design: Some History And Logic.Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design.
14. Quatremere de Quincy(1825).Type.
15. Quatremere de Quincy(1825).Type.
16. Su, Zhi-Feng(1999).Internal Logical of Special Morphology.Architectural Dimension: A Bulletin Of Design And Theory.
17. Vidler, Anthony(1976).The Third Typology.Oppositions 7
18. Vidler, Anthony(1977).The Idea of Type.Oppositions 8.
19. Vidler, Anthony(1976).The Third Typology.Oppositions 7.
20. Vidler, Anthony(1977).The Idea of Type.Oppositions 8.
21. Vidler, Anthony(1977).The Idea of Type.Oppositions 8
22. Vidler, Anthony(1976).The Third Typology.Oppositions 7.
23. Wang, Gi-Jun(1993).Chinese Traditional Dwelling Architecture.
24. Wang, M.H.(1991).Environmental Understanding: Design with Implicitly.
25. Wang, M.H.(1991).Environmental Understanding: Design with Implicitly.EDRA22 Conference.
26. Wang, Ming-Heng,Huang, Yan-Ming,Wang, Wei-Ju(2003).Typological Study by Evolutionary Methodology and Connection Hypothesis.Taipei:National Science Council.
27. Wang, Ming-Heng,Wang, Wei-Ju(2002).The Evolution Theory of House Types in Taiwan-Fujian Area.Taipei:National Science Council.
28. Wang, Wei-Ju(2004).The New Directions of Typological Study.The 16t Th Conference of Architecture Institute Of Republic Of China,Taipei:
29. 王其鈞(1993)。中國傳統民居建築。
30. 王其鈞(1993)。中國傳統民居建築。臺北:南天書局。
31. 王明荷、王譁儒(2002)。閩臺民居類型形式演化理論試探。國科會專案研究計畫
32. 王明蓄、王譁儒(2002)。閩臺民居類型形式演化理論試探
33. 王明蓄、黃衍明、王韓儒(2003)。類型之演化方法論與關連假說
34. 王明蓄、賴佳宏(1997)。台南縣楠西鄉鹿陶洋江家古厝傳統建築空間美化計畫規劃報告書
35. 王明蔔、黃衍明、王樺儒(2003)。類型之演化方法論與關連假說。國科會專案研究計畫
36. 王明蘅、王韓儒(2002)。閩臺民居類型形式演化理論試探。
37. 王明蘅、黃衍明、王韓儒(2003)。類型之演化方法論與關連假說。
38. 王譁儒(2004)。類型研究的新面向。中華民國建築學會第十六屆建築研究成果發表會論文集
39. 王譁儒(2004)。類型研究的新面向。中華民國建築學會第十六屆建築研究成果發表會論文集，臺北:
40. 高診明(1989)。福建民居。台北:明文書局。
41. 張至正(1997)。泉州傳統民居形式初探。碩士論文
42. 陳進傳(1996)。宜蘭縣傳統竹圍測繪專輯
43. 曾彩金(2001)。六堆客家社會文化發展與變遷之研究_建築篇。六堆文化教育基金會
44. 黃漢民(1989)。漢聲雜誌_台灣的漳州人專輯，73。
45. 楊耀林、黃崇岳(2001)。南粵客家圍
46. 劉致平(2001)。中國居住建築簡史。
47. 劉致平(2001)。中國居住建築簡史
48. 劉敦楨(1983)。中國住宅概說。臺北:明文書局。
49. 劉敦楨(1983)。中國住宅概說
50. 賴志彰(1997)。跨越時空的地域性次文化展現：彰化八卦山山腳路的民居生活
51. 賴志彰(1993)。台中縣建築發展民宅篇
52. 蘇智峰(1999)。空間形態之內在組構邏輯space syntax之介紹。建築向度，43-53。

1. 王韡儒、王明蘅(2008)。類型基因譜：關於民居類型演化的方法性試探。建築學報，66，79-96。