本研究聚焦於排灣族老七佳（tjuvecekadan）石板屋聚落，探討聚落中不同使用狀態家屋之空間延續、行為痕跡與物質文化堆積，進而分析文化性轉換（c- transform）如何在實際脈絡中被觀察、理解與詮釋。論文核心關注於：當前考古學者該如何透過遺留的物質與空間配置，詮釋人類過去的行為系統？此一問題牽涉到考古資料如何經由人為行為被改造、遺留與轉換，以及研究者如何處理來自行為與時間疊加所形成的複雜脈絡。
為此，研究採取民族考古學與行為考古學相結合的方法論，透過對老七佳聚落中七間代表性家屋，包含持續使用型、頻繁使用型、間歇使用型、低頻使用型與廢棄使用型等，加以研究。每一戶家屋之研究皆包括三大面向：其一，家屋生命史，藉由家主口述訪談與回憶資料，重建家屋的建造歷程、使用脈絡與返屋行動；其二，空間配置與轉變，記錄家屋空間的使用功能、神聖區位的保存與轉化，以及建材與修建方式的異同；其三，物質文化與堆積狀態，透過對室內外遺物類型、數量與分布之記錄與統計，以此推測空間使用強度與行為頻率，並對清理行動、儀式遺留、棄置方式等行為進行文化詮釋。
研究發現不同家屋類型雖在空間完整性與使用頻率上呈現差異，但皆可觀察到神聖空間在文化行動中的特殊意義與持續性，且其保存程度並不完全取決於物理結構的完整，而與家主對祖靈信仰與文化責任的認知與實踐密切相關。本研究亦指出，在表面上看似雜亂或廢棄的空間中，實則蘊藏著多層次的文化意義與行為選擇，例如清理頻率、堆積模式等，皆可作為解讀過去人類行為與社會秩序的關鍵證據。
此外，本文進一步論證文化性行為，所導致形成過程中的轉變現象，並不應被視為解釋的障礙。透過還原行為與物質之間的連結，研究者得以釐清考古脈絡中的意圖與非意圖性堆積之差異，並辨識出具有文化選擇意義的行為邏輯。本研究嘗試擴展遺址形成過程理論的應用層面，並提出一種將空間、記憶與物質三者交織納入考古詮釋的觀點。透過結合民族考古學與考古實證分析，初步展示民族知識與考古資料之間的互補可能性。

This study investigates the dynamics of Paiwan houses in tjuvecekadan, focusing on spatial continuity, behavioral traces, and artifact assemblages within domestic spaces of varying usage states. The central research question asks how archaeologists can interpret past human behavioral systems through material residues and spatial arrangements that have been shaped and transformed across time. The analysis emphasizes how archaeological contexts are continuously modified by human actions, cultural responsibilities, and ritual practices, thereby complicating straightforward reconstructions of the past.

江芝華 2008〈考古學的家屋社會研究〉，《考古人類學刊》68：109-136。
杜美慧 2006《遺址形成過程之探究——以排灣族舊社Saqacengalj遺址為例》。台北：國立臺灣大學人類學系碩士論文。
李靜宜 1994《排灣族舊來義社住屋的復原與意義初探》，臺中：東海大學建築研究所。
林文傑 2018《排灣族聚落的建構：以屏東縣春日鄉七佳社為例》。台南：國立成功大學考古學研究所碩士論文。
郭立新、姚崇新 2009《民族考古學實踐》。長沙：岳麓書社（David and Kramer，2009）
趙金勇 2016〈八里下罟坑遺址之形成過程探微〉。《田野考古》18（2）：37–70。
陳玉美 1995〈夫妻、家屋與聚落：蘭嶼雅美族的空間觀念〉，黃應貴主編，《空間、力與社會》。臺北：中央研究院民族研究所，頁133-166。
陳枝烈 2012〈會說故事的手--排灣族佳興部落貴族女性紋手之研究〉。《台灣原住民族研究學報》2：2。2012.06[民101.06]：125-147。
陳維鈞 2000〈考古遺址形成過程研究——理論與應用〉。《考古人類學刊》，55：49–63。
簡瑞宏 1995《排灣族原住民居住空間構成之研究——以屏東縣七佳聚落為例》，台中：逢甲大學建築及都市計畫研究所碩士論文。
Ascher, R. 1968 Time’s arrow and the archaeology of a contemporary community. Settlement Archaeology, 43–52.
Binford, L. R 1962 An archaeological perspective. Seminar Press.
Binford, L. R 1981 Behavioral archaeology and the “Pompeii premise”. Journal of Anthropological Research, 37(3), 195–208.
Cameron, C. M., & Tomka, S. A 1993 The abandonment of settlements and regions: Ethnoarchaeological and archaeological approaches. Cambridge University Press.
Collins, M. B 1975 Sources of bias in processual data: An appraisal. In Sampling in archaeology (pp.26–32).
Cowgill, G. L 1975 A selection of samplers: Comments on archaeo-statistics. In Sampling in archaeology (pp. 258–274).
Efstratiou, N 2007 Neolithic households in Greece: The contribution of ethnoarchaeology. British School at Athens Studies, 13, 29–35.
Fewkes, J. W 1900 Pueblo ruins near Flagstaff, Arizona: A preliminary notice. American Anthropologist, 2(3), 422–450.
Fritz, J. M., & Plog, F. T 1970 The nature of archaeological explanation. American Antiquity, 35(4), 405–412.
Hodder, I. 1991 Interpretive archaeology and its role. American Antiquity, 56(1), 7–18.
Hodder, I. 2012 Archaeological theory today. Polity Press.
Joyce, A. A., & Johannessen, S. 1993 Abandonment and the production of archaeological variability at domestic sites. In Cameron, C. M., & Tomka, S. A. (Eds.)The abandonment of settlements and regions (pp. 138–153). Cambridge University Press.
Kramer, C. 2001 Ethnoarchaeology in action. Cambridge University Press.
LaMotta, V. M., & Schiffer, M. B. 2013 Formation processes of house floor assemblages. In P. M. Allison (Ed.), The archaeology of household activities (pp. 19–29). Routledge.
Lange, F. W., & Rydberg, C. R. 1972 Abandonment and post-abandonment behavior at a rural Central American house-site. American Antiquity, 37(3), 419–432.
Martin, A. 1983 Ethnoarchaeology in Africa. In I. Hodder (Ed.), Archaeological Hammers and Theories (pp. 164–168). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Ogundele, S. O. (2005). Ethnoarchaeology of domestic space and spatial behaviour among the Tiv and Ungwai of Central Nigeria. African Archaeological Review, 22, 25–54.
Martin, P. S., & Plog, F. 1973 The archaeology of Arizona: A study of the Southwest region. American Museum of Natural History.
Rathje, W., & Murphy, C. 1992 Five major myths about garbage, and why they're wrong. Smithsonian, 23(4), 113–122.
Reid, J. J., Schiffer, M. B., & Rathje, W. L. 1975 Behavioral archaeology: Four strategies. American Anthropologist, 77(4), 864–869.
Renfrew, C., & Bahn, P. G. 1994 Archaeology: Theories, methods and practice. Thames and Hudson.
Schiffer, M. B. 1972 Archaeological context and systemic context. American Antiquity, 37(2), 156–165.
Schiffer, M. B. 1976 Behavioral archaeology: Principles and practice. New York: Academic Press.
Schiffer, M. B. 983 Toward the identification of formation processes. American Antiquity, 48(4), 675–706.
Schiffer, M. B. 1987 Formation Processes of the archaeological record. University of New Mexico Press.
Schiffer, M. B. 1996 Some relationships between behavioral and evolutionary archaeologies. American Antiquity, 61(4), 643–662.
Schiffer, M. B. 2011 A behavioral archaeologist responds. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 18(4), 336–348.
Shahack-Gross, R.2017 Archaeological formation theory and geoarchaeology: State-of-the-art in 2016. Journal of Archaeological Science, 79, 36–43.
Stanislawski, M. B. 1973 Ethnoarchaeology and settlement archaeology. Ethnohistory, 20(4), 375–392.
Stiles, D. 1977 Ethnoarchaeology: A discussion of methods and applications. Man, 12(1), 87–103.
Sullivan, A. P., Dibble, W. F., & Smith, C. 2014 Site formation processes. In Springer Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology (pp.6687–6701). New York: Springer.
Trigger, B. G. 1993Artifacts and human behavior. In P. B. Drooker (Ed.), Household Archaeology.Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Wilk, R. R., & Rathje, W. L. 1982 Household archaeology. American Behavioral Scientist, 25(6), 617–639.