The Punjabi Kinship Terminology as a Semantic System¹

Abstract

Analysis o f kinship terminologies as semantic systems has been imbedded in t w o opposing theoretical frameworks, a "componential" framework that connects terminological sets to "biology" but divorces them from social structure, and a structuralist framework that integrates terms with structure but divorces them f r o m biology. It is suggested that both difficulties are generated by considerations internal t o the theories but exogenous t o kinship terminologies as semantic systems. A simple operational elicitation procedure is presented that avoids assumptions not directly related to a clear conception o f a semantic system. On the basis o f the Puniabi terminology, a simple reformulation o f the relationship between structures, terminologies, and "biology" is offered.

Cognition, Algebra, and Culture in the Tongan Kinship Terminology

“…Th e structural form of a kinship terminology can be expressed visually by constructing a kin term map (Leaf 1971; modified by Read [Read and Behrens 1990]; see Figure 2 below for an example using the male terms of the TKT) based on referential usage of kin terms as described in ethnographic observations about kin calculations, such as the comment made by Marshall Sahlins: ". .…”

From behavior to culture: An assessment of cultural evolution and a new synthesis

“…We can express informant information about the way kin terms are linked as symbols in the form of a kin term map ( [69], subsequently modified by Read [67]). A kin term map provides a way to display the structural relationships among kin terms elicited from informants by focusing on taking products with a few, core kin terms.…”

Gifts and affines in north India

“…The terminology used by Hindus in this region has been described elsewhere in detail (Vatuk 1969b(Vatuk , 1972b; see also Dumont 1962Dumont , 1966Leaf 1971Leaf , 1972, and will therefore be described here only in general terms. Special attention will be given only to those features of the terminology that are directly relevant to Gaur concepts about the nature of affinity and the bride-giver./bride-taker relationship.…”

“…A similar process of extension enables the inclusion of the siblings, siblings' spouses, and so on, of one's first ascending generation collaterals in the terminological universe. The details of this procedure differ for cross and parallel relatives and for patrilateral and matrilateral relatives, respectively; however it will not be necessary to explain these differences here (see Leaf 1971Leaf , 1972Tiemann 1970;Vatuk 1972b). It isimportant to note that matrilateral 'uncle' and 'aunt' terms are applied to persons of that generation related to ego through his FBW, in application of the principle that spouses of same-sex siblings are quasi-siblings of one another.…”