Revisiting Americanist Arguments and Rethinking Scale in Linguistic Anthropology

Abstract

The concept of "scales of space and time" (Lemke 2000) has been tremendously influential in linguistic anthropology and related fields, and scalar approaches have proved useful for illuminating connections between what used to be called "micro" and "macro" phenomena. This paper disrupts "rhetorics of discontinuity" (Darnell 2001) in present-day work, arguing that many of the ideas in contemporary work on scales were already implicit in early Americanist anthropology. Through renewed engagement with the debate among the Boasians A.L. Kroeber, Edward Sapir, and Ruth Benedict on questions of individuality, culture, and social action, we can rethink "scale" and bring forth both the useful and problematic aspects of scale as a heuristic. I argue that linguistic anthropologists' reliance on scalar metaphors should be examined carefully, since the apparent scalability or nonscalability of talk and social action is, itself, a cultural phenomenon that emerges from decisions to scale our analytic vision in particular ways. Revisiting Americanist arguments about the nature of culture reveals some of the limitations of "scale," as currently conceived, but also suggests that scalar analysis might be fruitfully integrated with linguistic anthropological understandings of agency, visa -vis voice, and temporality. [scales, scalar analysis, temporality, agency, history of anthropology] S calar analyses, or those that seek to attend simultaneously to phenomena unfolding on different spatial and temporal "scales," have become increasingly prevalent in sociocultural studies of language. The concept of "scales of space and time" (Lemke 2000) has been influential in linguistic anthropology and sociolinguistics (e.g.

“No One is Poor in Himachal”: Cultivating Stateless Agency in an Indian Village Assembly

“…Establishing scalar categories entails processes of collectivization, as disparate speakers or interpretations are rendered into legible units, as well as erasure (Irvine and Gal 2000), as individual contexts and speakers are subsumed. This process has direct implications for agency, as the ability to attach a sign or interpretation to a broader context that transcends individuals and erases forms of difference becomes a resource for indexing authoritativeness and legitimacy (O’Connor 2020).…”

Nonscalability of “citizen science” in post-Fukushima Japan: Unpacking articulations of citizen radiation measuring organizations

“…By juxtaposing this concept with scalability, understood as expansion “without changing the framework of knowledge or action” (Tsing, 2012: 509), Tsing accentuates the intricate entanglements which constitute and inform ways of being. Employing Tsing’s theory of nonscalability, researchers in the field of anthropology and STS (see, for example, O’Connor, 2020; Warin and Martin, 2018; Yoshida, 2020) have explored heterogeneity and examined practices of scaling in various contexts, including linguistics, technoscience, and ecologies.…”