[ 摘要 ]
本文旨在以屏東縣瑪家鄉瑪家村部落為例，探討一傳統排灣族原住民部落在歷史社會變遷下，其營造機制及空間形式的改變歷程。在研究方法上，本研究主要是在於經驗性的現象分析，亦即是由現實的情境中，對於研究對象的空間形式進行分析。以了解部落於特定時期之社會狀況及技術所產生不同的空間形式。
以往的原住民相關建築研究取向關心的是形式的表現，而忽略奠基於形式內所隱函的本質，以及其所關乎的營造之環境條件。面對這樣的擬旨，本文意圖澄明的是，即使部落已被納入平地經濟體系的生活條件中，但部落並非處於完全被支配的狀態。
本研究嚐試透過部落不同時期之營造機制的分析，重構部落空間營造實踐的歷程，藉以呈現瑪家部落的空間形式變遷的面貌。以瞭解部落空間形式在不同時期社會脈絡下的因應模式及變遷過程，以及考察聚落空間背後深刻的人文意涵。
總結對於由瑪家部落原住民家屋營建機制的分析可發現，平地的營建體系雖然主導著部落的營建形式，但在生活形式上，部落並非完全的被支配著，而是在適應新生活的過程中，傳統的生活型態亦被隱含與現實生活之中，並且在兩者之間尋找到了一個平衡點。
[ 英文摘要 ]
With Makazayazaya in Pingtung County as an example, the theme of this article was to discuss the change process of construction mechanism and spatial form of the traditional Paiwan indigenous tribe in the historical and societal transition. As to the approach, this study was conducted mainly with the empirical phenomenon analysis; i.e., analyzing the spatial forms of the study objects’ surroundings to understand different spatial forms caused by the situation and the technology of the society during specific times.
In past, the orientation of relevant architectural researches had been about form performance and had a neglect of the implied nature, based on the form, and the relevant condition of the construction environment. In contrast to those themes, this article was intended to verify that the tribe, even combined in the living condition of the lowland economic system, was not fully overwhelmed. Probably, factors affecting the transition of the house spatial form were of inevitability and contingency, but not absolute inevitability and contingency. Though the tribe was somewhat limited with the economic factor mainly, it was found that the mythology or taboo consciousness contained in the tribe’s traditional societal culture had been affecting the contemporary concept in house use distinctly or indistinctly.
The current investigation was in an attempt to restructure the space construction realization process of the tribe by analyzing the construction mechanisms of different periods, so that to present the appearance of Makazayazaya’s spatial form in transition, understand the responding mode and the transition process of the tribe’s spatial form in the social contexts during varied periods, and survey the profound cultural implications behind the community space.
It was concluded with analyses of the construction mechanism of Makazayazaya indigenes’ houses that the economic factor had changed the way they used space and made them closer to the so-called lowland life style. But as shown in some traces of life, their traditional life style has not disappeared along with the economic factor. Though the lowland construction system dominated the tribe’s construction form, the tribe was not dominated completely in respect of the life style. Instead, the traditional life style was hidden in real life in the adapting process to the new life style and there was a balance achieved between both the traditional and the new. In observing the transition in Makazayazaya’s space and societal culture, there indicated the alteration, of the traditional indigenous community life style, made to adapt to the so-called lowland life.