近年來由於環境變遷與自然災害以及族裔文化認同等迫切性的議題，相關聚落之觀察與記錄研究因而越來廣泛被關注以及探討。大部份研究方式皆以敘事性的文本輔以歷史圖資亦或是影像資料等媒材作為記錄保存。然而，藉由上述應用將使建築之空間記錄留於表象的描繪而非深入暸解聚落組成的組織與意義，同時，缺乏針對時間因素以及場所記憶(Place Memory)等抽象概念的描述與定義，終將難以呈現以及論述聚落樣貌的完整性(Integrity)。

鑑於理論詮釋下之建築領域應用的重要性，本論文之研究企圖透過場所(Place)、空間(Space)以及時間(Time)等組成建築與環境基本的元素或介面，探討此三種因素存在於聚落之中的目的以及關聯，並利用時間之尺度(Scale)的差異性作為解釋聚落之歷史、棲息者以及產業變化的條件，描述棲息者之活動領域(Domain)隨之時間因素的改變而重新定義。希望助於閱讀者藉以更直觀角度瞭解聚落空間型構的本質，理解環境之場所營造(Place Making)完整的架構與重要性。

本論文之研究對象以座落於高雄市杉林區集來里山區的枋寮聚落為例，亦稱為金興社區，並與相近不遠的原鄉小林聚落同屬西拉雅族之大武壟系。儘管社區遭受莫拉克風災影響，村落之中仍維持約六十戶的住所單元，當中僅存二十戶的常住居民，然而，風災伴隨實質的產業以及環境變遷正迫使枋寮聚落面臨生活模式與文化傳承等轉變以及考驗。

因此，本論文之研究方法除了利用建築理論之抽象概念的論述依據之外，另一方面透過實地田野調查與空間測繪，並藉由與民訪談從而記錄以及探討聚落住戶的空間型態(Space Modality)與生活模式(Occupancy Schedule)。與此同時，比對原鄉小林、日光小林以及枋寮聚落之場所空間的普遍性與特殊性，解釋枋寮聚落之記憶根源為平埔以及漢人等二個文化向度的交織與疊合，同時，時間為決定以及影響枋寮聚落之場所構成的主要原因。

Environmental changes and natural disasters are becoming prevailing in the recent years, an imperative issue nowadays. Observations and studies regarding settlement are being widely concerned with lasting investigation on the topic. Most of the research are being analysed by means of literary narrative, while being facilitated with historical lithographs and photographs as the media to work on spatial documentation. However, with this methodology, the spatial documentation is superficially illustrated instead of being a thorough understanding regarding the causes and elements on how the settlement being composed, at the same time, afflicted by inadequate definition and illustration of abstract concept, namely, temporal factor and place memory. Ultimately, this has hindered the manifestation of the environmental features as a whole of a settlement.

As theoretical interpretation is crucial in architectural field. Through three basic elements that made up built environment, Place, Space, and Time, this study is intended to investigate the corresponding results and connections of the a fore mentioned elements on a settlement. At the same time, adopting the variation of time in scale to narrate the factors of changing history, dwellers and industry, of the settlement. Subsequently, illustrating the changing with time then being redefined living domain of dwellers. It is hoped that through this illustration of concepts will assist the readers in understanding the essence of spatial organization in the settlement from a more intuitive perspective, while understanding the importance and thorough organization of place making in the surroundings.

This study investigated Fengliu settlement, also known as Jinshing community, located in the mountain of Shanlin district, Kaoshiung City. Jinshing village and the nearby Xiaolin village are both owed their roots to the Dawulong clan of ethnic Siraya. Being severely ravaged by typhoon Morakot, there are only around 20 out of 60 remaining households, still living in village. The village has been confronting the abrupt changes in local industry and environment after the disaster, as well as dilemma regarding the continuation of their inherited lifestyle and culture.

Hence, this study investigated and recorded space modality along with living pattern in Fengliu settlement through field survey, physical measurement and conducting opinion poll. On the other hands, defining abstract concepts, banked on theoretical ground, then, clearly illustrating the inherent meanings regarding “veins” or organising pattern of Fenhliu settlement by mapping spatial aspect on temporal aspect. Eventually, temporal aspect as the main factor that has been affecting and dominating the composition of the settlement explained.

【英文書目】
01. Koolhaas, R. “Delirious New York”. New York: The Monacelli Press. 1994. Print.
02. Lynch, K. “The Image of the City”. MA: M.I.T. Press. 1960. Print.
03. Corner, J. & Maclean, A. S. “Taking Measures Across the American Landscape”. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 1996. Print.
04. Harris, S. & Berke, D. “Architecture of the Everyday”. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 1997. Print.
05. Rodofsky, B. “Architecture without Architects”. New York: Museum of Modern Art Press. 1964. Print.
06. Atkin T. & Rykwet J. “Structure & Meaning in Human Settlements”. PA: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology Press. 2005. Print.
07. Maki, F. “Investigations in Collective Form”. St. Louis: School of Architecture, Washington University Press. 1964. Print.
08. Hayden, D. “The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History”. MA: M.I.T. Press. 1997. Print.
09. Casey, E. S. “Remembering: A Phenomenological Study”. IN: Indiana University Press. 1987. Print.
10. Joslyn Art Museum, Sheldon Memorial Art Gallery. “A Sense of Place: The Artist and the American Land”. NE: Joslyn Art Museum Press. 1973. Print.
11. Craycroft, R. & Fazio, M. W. “Change and Tradition in the American Small Town”. MS: University of Mississippi Press. 1983. Print.
【中文書目】
12. 黃茗詩、林于婷譯(2011)。⟪聚落的100則啟示⟫ (初版)。台北市：大家出版社。(Hiroshi Hara, 1998)
【期刊論文】
13. Edward Relph (1976) “Place and Placelessness”. In P. Hubbard, R. Kitchen, & G. Vallentine (eds) Key Texts in Human Geography, pp. 43-51. London: Sage.
14. Christian Norberg-Schulz (1976) “The Phenomenon of Place”. From Architectural Association Quarterly.
15. Henri Lefebvre & Christine Levich (1987) “The Everyday and Everydayness”. Yale French Studies, No. 73, Everyday Life, pp. 7-11.
16. Todd O. Sparks (2011) “Rooted in Place: The Role of Design in Small-Town Identity”. Master’s Thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
【學位論文】
17. 王昱新(2004)。⟪蚵寮聚落之空間構成分析⟫。國立成功大學建築學系碩士論文，高雄市。
18. 王嘉澤(2006)。⟪安平傳統聚落場所性之探討⟫。國立成功大學建築學系碩士論文，高雄市。
19. 傅新昀(2007)。⟪高雄縣茄萣聚落之空間構成研究⟫。國立成功大學建築學系碩士論文，高雄市。
20. 張瑜珊(2007)。⟪高雄新厝仔之聚落空間構成與民宅型式研究⟫。國立成功大學建築學系碩士論文，高雄市。
21. 黃英婷(2008)。⟪小林村聚落及住屋空間之變遷與重建⟫。國立台灣科技大學建築研究所碩士論文，台北市。
【網頁媒材】
22. 鯤鯷工作室，四社番考，http://blog.xuite.net/ccy1217/Formosa/62937572-四社番考，2012。
23. 國土測繪圖資服務雲，歷史圖資，http://maps.nlsc.gov.tw，2015。