e-journal
The narrative and its place in the new accounting history: the rise of the counternarrative
considerable consternation amongst the more traditional of their colleagues because of the way they have questioned many of the cherished beliefs,achievements, practices and the value of previously sanctioned accounts of accounting history. Some traditional accounting historians have therefore felt
they are being goaded and ridiculed by what they see as an intolerant aberration of “real” accounting history (Tyson, 1993, 1995). This has encouraged some authors to seek an urgent rapprochement between various paradigms of accounting history before the perceived differences become prohibitive (Carnegie and Napier, 1996; Fleischman et al., 1996a; Funnell, 1996;Merino and Mayper, 1993, pp. 241,257,262; Stewart, 1992)[1]. Until now the emerging disagreements between the new and traditional accounting historians have converged on the subject matter and representational faithfulness of accounting history[2]. Throughout these debates there seems to have been an implied acceptance of the means used to communicate the results of research endeavours; an agreement that the writing methods of history will suit all
purposes in accounting history equally well.
Tidak ada salinan data
Tidak tersedia versi lain