American Anthropology - Essay Example

? Cultural Anthropology Three principal outlooks have dominated American anthropology for the last hundred years: cross-cultural comparison of groups (focus on human groups), breadth (focus on a broad spectrum of space and time) and holistic systems (focus on the human experience in terms of holistic integrated systems) (Smith, 2010). The concept of culture is important and deep-seated in anthropology (Howe, 2004); cultural anthropology, one of four disciplines of American anthropology and also known as social anthropology, sociocultural anthropology and ethnology (‘Cultural Anthropology/Introduction’ n.d.), is concerned with all aspects of human cultures including religion, economic patterns, marriage and kinship systems, and social and political institutions (‘Cultural Anthropology/Introduction’ n.d.). The other three disciplines are archeology, bioanthropology and linguistics; anthropological concerns however very often intersect varying spheres. Of particular interest to me are the aspects of language and kinship and descent, which thus cuts across linguistic and cultural anthropology. Linguistic anthropology focuses on how human languages are made and revived, and how they work, change and die (‘Cultural Anthropology/Introduction, n.d.); concern is with understanding language in terms of the historical, cultural and biological milieu in which it develops (‘Cultural Anthropology/Introduction, n.d.), and the linguistic features by which people communicate, including verbal and non-verbal features (‘Cultural Anthropology/Introduction, n.d; O’Neil). The study of language in relation to culture by American anthropologists has come from differing fields of practice (Duranti, 2003), and that to understand these differing viewpoints we need to single out and relate three “consecutive but coexisting” (Darnell, 2003) (cited in Duranti, 2003, p.336) historical paradigms, defined by Duranti (2003, p.324) as “clusters of properties established on the basis of explicit statements and interpretative practices in the study of language”. The first paradigm viewed language as culture and was concerned with describing languages and making comparisons between languages; it considered the grammar and vocabulary of language as rule governed structures representing unintentional and random relations with reality (Duranti, 2003, p.326). The second paradigm considered language as both impacting on and impacted by culture, and was concerned with studying language as used by different speakers in different situations; in other words the paradigm focused on language and its environment (Duranti, 2003, p.329-330). The third paradigm was concerned with the interaction of language and documenting and analyzing the way it is reproduced and transformed, both in terms of the moment in time and place (Duranti, 2003, P.333). Linguistic anthropology today has thus realized that in order to understand what it means to study language as culture, focus must be on methodology, theory and history as it relates to linguistics and language. Cultural anthropology as pertaining to kinship pertains to the relationships between people as defined by culture (O’Neil, 2006), either by marriage (affinal relatives) or descent (consanguinal relatives) Morgan (1871), and is fundamental in social organization, interaction, motivation and attitudes of any given community (O’Neil, 2006); in other words the study of kinship is concerned with both general and unique characteristics of the social life of humankind (Singarimbun, 1975). Kinship is determined in different ways within different societies but relate to two underlying principles of descent – unilineal and cognatic (O’Neil, 2006). Societies that are concerned with unilineal descent trace either their father’s (patrilineal) or their mother’s (matrilineal) group; those concerned with both their matrilineal and patrilineal descent are said to be concerned with cognative descent. Cognative traces can involve any of four variations including bilineal (matrilineal and patrilineal), ambilineal (both recognized, but individuals can choose which one they accept), parallel (females follow their matrilineal descent and males follow their patrilineal descent groups) and bilateral (descent is traced from all biological ancestors) (O’Neil, 2006). According to O’Neil (2006) there are six discrete systems in the world used to name kin: Sudanese, Omaha, Hawaiian, Eskimo, Iroquois, and Crow; all however may incorporate differences based on culture. The notion of kinship as central to anthropology was initiated by Morgan back in the 1980s (Paula, Rosman & Rosman, 2003) in his studies of Iroquois and other American Indian cultures; other famous anthropologists concerned with kinship include Malinowski (1915) (cited in Voelker, 2007), Levi-Strauss (1949), (cited in New World Encyclopedia), Kroeber (1936) and Murdoch (1936). In light of my preponderance for American history, particularly in reference to American Indians, my prior readings and research have led me to a further interest in Australian Aboriginals, who have undergone very similar histories in terms of colonization, resettlement and adversities imposed by white cultures, as the American Indians. Studying anthropology has given me the opportunity of spending more time in researching both their kinship systems and their language. It is realized that undertaking a comparison of both areas may prove too large a task for one program of study, so I have chosen to focus on a comparison of kinship systems but to also incorporate one aspect of language, that pertaining to kinship terms. In order to narrow the research even further one specific community of American Indians and one particular community of Aboriginal Australians have been selected. The Warlpiri group who live on the edge of the Tanami desert in central Australia and the Navajo Indians who live in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Colorado in America. People, including myself tend to allow conceptual, situational, personal biases to impact on our understandings and judgments of other people (Smith, 2010), but by exploring other cultures their diversity and their systems, we can widen our horizons and put some perspective on our own values; at the same time by helping to raise awareness of the numerous societies and their differing value systems we can help against discrimination. My intended comparison between the kinship systems and the language used to describe and talk about those systems within the Warlpiri people of Australia and the Navajo people of America will help to do just that. References Claude Levi-Strauss. (2010, June 19). New World Encyclopedia. Retrieved 00:52, January 31, 2011 from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Claude_L%C3%A9vi-Strauss?oldid=947346. Cultural Anthropology/Introduction. (n.d.) Retrieved January 30, 2011 from Wikibooks: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cultural_Anthropology/Introduction Duranti, A. (2003). Language as Culture in US Anthropology: Three Paradigms. Current Anthroppology, 44 (3), 323-347. Kroeber, A.L. (1936) Discussion and Corresponding Kinship and History, American Anthroplogist, 38 (2), 338-341. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/aa.1936.38.2.02a00270/pdf Morgan, L.H. (1871) Ancient Society. Foreword by Elizabeth Tooker, Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Murdoch, G.P. (1936). The Witoto Kinship System. American Anthropologist, 33 (3), 525-527. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/aa.1936.38.3.02a00350/abstract O’Neil, D. (2006). Kinship: An Introduction to Descent Systems and Family organization. Tutorial, Behavioral Sciences Department, Palomar College, San Marcos, California. Retrieved from http://anthro.palomar.edu/kinship/default.htm Paula, G., Rosman, R. & Rosman, A. (2003). Translating Cultures: Perspectives on Translation and Anthropology. New York: Berg. Singarimbun, M. (1975). Kinship, Descent, and Alliance among the Karo Batak. London, England: University of California Press. Smith, C. (2010). Core Concepts. Lecture Notes for Anthropology 2: Introduction to Anthropology: Cultural Anthropology, Cabrillo College. Retrieved from http://arana.cabrillo.edu/~crsmith/anth2.html Voelker, M.L. (2007). Bronislaw Malinowski: 1884-1942. Minnesota State University, Makata. Retrieved from http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/information/biography/klmno/malinowski_bronislaw.html Read More