A Worldwide Evolutionary Classification of Cultures by Subsistence Systems [and Comments and Reply]

Lomax, Alan; Arensberg, Conrad M.; Berleant-Schiller, Riva; Dole, Gertrude E.; Hippler, Arthur E.; Jensen, Knud-Erik; Makofsky, Abraham; Sherratt, Andrew; Sorenson, John L.; Turyahikayo-Rugyema, B.

doi:10.1086/201975

Cited by 54 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These are interesting and important areas from a cultural classification perspective [33, 67], but these domains are not representative of the entire lexicon. The highly diverging results for the lexemes pertaining to the environment, such as terms for wild animals (e.g., bison, wild boar, wolf ), in contrast to related domestic animals (e.g., cow, pig, dog ), indicates that the borrowability variation in some domains is very complex.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The causality of borrowing: Lexical loans in Eurasian languages

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All languages borrow words from other languages. Some languages are more prone to borrowing, while others borrow less, and different domains of the vocabulary are unequally susceptible to borrowing. Languages typically borrow words when a new concept is introduced, but languages may also borrow a new word for an already existing concept. Linguists describe two causalities for borrowing: need, i.e., the internal pressure of borrowing a new term for a concept in the language, and prestige, i.e., the external pressure of borrowing a term from a more prestigious language. We investigate lexical loans in a dataset of 104 concepts in 115 Eurasian languages from 7 families occupying a coherent contact area of the Eurasian landmass, of which Indo-European languages from various periods constitute a majority. We use a cognacy-coded dataset, which identifies loan events including a source and a target language. To avoid loans for newly introduced concepts in languages, we use a list of lexical concepts that have been in use at least since the Chalcolithic (4000–3000 BCE). We observe that the rates of borrowing are highly variable among concepts, lexical domains, languages, language families, and time periods. We compare our results to those of a global sample and observe that our rates are generally lower, but that the rates between the samples are significantly correlated. To test the causality of borrowing, we use two different ranks. Firstly, to test need, we use a cultural ranking of concepts by their mobility (of nature items) or their labour intensity and “distance-from-hearth” (of culture items). Secondly, to test prestige, we use a power ranking of languages by their socio-cultural status. We conclude that the borrowability of concepts increases with increasing mobility (nature), and with increased labour intensity and “distance-from-hearth” (culture). We also conclude that language prestige is not correlated with borrowability in general (all languages borrow, independently of prestige), but prestige predicts the directionality of borrowing, from a more prestigious language to a less prestigious one. The process is not constant over time, with a larger inequality during the ancient and modern periods, but this result may depend on the status of the data (non-prestigious languages often remain unattested). In conclusion, we observe that need and prestige compete as causes of lexical borrowing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The causality of borrowing: Lexical loans in Eurasian languages

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, both models stress growing complexity and keep as significant only the changes that have permitted the passage of one stage to another. Further refinements of the model, like Carneiro's (1970) and Lomax and Arensberg's (1977), do not find a very sympathetic ear in Claessen. However, he agrees that they led to a better formula for classification but noted that they did not advance our understanding of the problem of evolution.…”

mentioning

confidence: 79%

Straight Arrow or Fireworks Efflorescence? Evolutionism in Today's Cultural Anthropology

Müller¹

2002

Reviews in Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Šios teorijos atstovai buvo įsitikinę, kad pasirodžius naujoms "civilizuotoms" šokio formoms senesnės formos gali išlikti tarsi "sustingusios" ir nepaveiktos kitų kultūrų įtakos (ryškiausias šios krypties atstovas Alan Lomax, plačiau žr. [22][23][24]. Buvo stengiamasi surasti bent dvi vietas su analogiškomis kultūromis siekiant jas palyginti, kad būtų galima nustatyti bendrus šokių ypatumus.…”

Section: šOkis Jo Laikas Palyginimaiunclassified

Choreografinio folkloro tyrimai užsienyje ir Lietuvoje: metodologiniai aspektai

Urbanavičienė

2015

Tradicija Ir Dabartis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anotacija. Pastaraisiais dešimtmečiais tarptautiniuose šokio tyrimuose įsitvir-tinusios naujos nuostatos skatina kritiškai peržiūrėti lietuvių choreografinio folkloro tyrinėjimus ir įvertinti juos tarptautiniame kontekste -lyginant su šokio antropologijos, šokio etnologijos ir šokio folkloristikos (arba etnochoreologijos) pasiekimais. Lietuvių choreografinio folkloro tyrimai prisišlieja prie Europos šokio folkloristikos mokyklos (labiausiai atitinka jos 1960-1980 m. laikotarpį), daugiausia dėmesio tenka klasifikavimui, struktūrinei analizei, regioninių ypatumų nustatymui, todėl šokis dažniausiai tyrinėjamas kaip atskiras objektas. Kai kuriuose pastarųjų metų darbuose pastebimi ir antropologiniai aspektaidaugiau dėmesio skiriama kontekstui fiksuoti, pateikėjų požiūriui, sąvokoms ir terminijai išsiaiškinti (emic aspektas), taikomi semantinės struktūralistinės analizės metodai, nagrinėjamos šokio funkcijos, prasmės, improvizacijos ir stiliaus, šokio judesio terapijos temos. Lietuvių choreografinio folkloro tyrimus gerokai apsunkina tai, kad sunyko gyvosios tradicijos tęstinumas, o archyvinė etnochoreografijos medžiaga sukaupta nekokybiškai, neatitinka nei šokio folkloristikos, nei šokio antropologijos reikalavimų. Taip pat abejonių kelia dabartinė lietuvių choreografinio folkloro klasifikacija, sudaryta neatsižvelgus į liaudyje gyvavusią terminiją ir vietos tradicijas, remiantis vien etic aspektu -tyrinėtojų požiūriu bei susikurtomis prielaidomis. Pagrindiniai žodžiai: choreografinis folkloras, metodologija, šokio antropologija, šokio folkloristika, etnochoreologija, lauko tyrimai, funkcija, kontekstas, stebėjimas dalyvaujant, tiesioginis stebėjimas, emic ir etic aspektai, evoliucionizmas, klasifikavimas, struktūrinė analizė, semiotika, struktūralizmas.Abstract. Entrenched new provisions in the international dance studies over past few decades suggest a critical review of the investigations of choreographic folklore in Lithuania by integrating the comparison of the foreign achievements in dance anthropology, dance ethnology, and dance folkloristics (or ethnochoreology). The Lithuanian choreographic folklore research has been largely consistent with the European school of dance folkloristics (especially between the periods of 1960-1980) because its main focus lies on classification, structural analysis, and the determination of the regional features. Moreover, dance is mostly studied as a separate object. Several anthropological aspects have been observed in a few recent studies. There has been more emphasis put on to the context, the amplification of approaches, concepts, and terminology (the emic aspect). The methods of semantic structural analysis have been put into practice, and more investigation completed on the themes of dance function, sense, style and improvisation, and dance movement therapy. The research of Lithuanian choreographic folklore has been greatly complicated by the fact that the continuation of living tradition has declined. Besides that, the archival material of ethnochoreography has been coll...

show abstract

A Worldwide Evolutionary Classification of Cultures by Subsistence Systems [and Comments and Reply]

Cited by 54 publications

References 0 publications

The causality of borrowing: Lexical loans in Eurasian languages

The causality of borrowing: Lexical loans in Eurasian languages

Straight Arrow or Fireworks Efflorescence? Evolutionism in Today's Cultural Anthropology

Choreografinio folkloro tyrimai užsienyje ir Lietuvoje: metodologiniai aspektai

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About