LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: �ditions de l'EHESS
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: QA, GN
French: \ud D’un point de vue conceptuel, les systèmes de parenté reposent sur des modes de représentation culturelle que nous appelons terminologies de parenté et à partir desquelles les limites, la forme et la structure des principes d’organisation sociale sont culturellement élaborés. Contrairement à ce que les anthropologues tiennent depuis longtemps pour acquis, une terminologie n’est pas forcément inhérente aux relations généalogiques, ces dernières découlant de la logique structurelle de la terminologie de parenté. La structure de la terminologie, représentée sous une forme algébrique, peut être produite à partir des principaux termes de parenté, suivant un principe supposé universel de structures terminologiques de la parenté. Les terminologies diffèrent, sur le plan culturel, selon les principales expressions et équations utilisées pour les élaborer. Cela implique un changement de paradigme qui nous ferait passer de la généalogie considérée comme fondement essentiel des relations de parenté à un modèle dans lequel la parenté intégrerait à la fois des termes de parenté propres à un système de représentations culturellement constitué auquel nous nous référons dans la terminologie de parenté, et une dimension généalogique élaborée de manière récursive en utilisant les relations parents/enfants. Ces deux domaines sont fondés sur un espace familial comprenant les positions de parents/enfants, conjoints, germains. \ud \ud English: \ud Kinship systems are conceptually grounded in culturally formulated idea-systems we refer to as kinship terminologies and through which the boundaries, form and structure of human social systems are culturally constituted. A terminology, contrary to a long-standing assumption in anthropology, is not based on a prior categorization of genealogical relations, as the latter is derived from the structural logic of the kinship terminology. The terminology structure, formally represented as an algebraic structure, can be generated from primary kin terms in accordance with a hypothesized universal theory of kinship terminology structures. Terminologies differ culturally according to the primary terms and equations used for generating them. This requires a paradigm shift from the received view of genealogy as the primary basis for kin relations to a new paradigm in which kinship incorporates both a kin term space expressed through a culturally constituted idea-system we refer to as a kinship terminology and a genealogical space constructed recursively using parent-child relations. Both of these spaces are grounded in a family space composed of parent-child, spouse and sibling positions.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Allen, N. J. 1989. The evolution of kinship terminologies. Lingua 77:172-185.
    • Allen, N. J. 2008. "Tetradic theory and the origin of human kinship systems," in Early human kinship: From sex to social reproduction. Edited by N. J. Allen, H. Callan, R. Dunbar, and W. James, pp. 96-112. Oxford: B lackwell Publishing.
    • Barnes, J. A. 1964. Discussion: Physical and social facts in anthropology. Philosophy of Science 31:294-297.
    • Bellah, R. N., R. Marsden, W. M. Sullivan, A. Swidler, and S. M. Tipton. 1991. The good society. New York: Vintage Books.
    • Bennardo, G., and D. Read. 2007. Cognition, algebra, and culture in the Tongan kinship terminology. Journal of Cognition and Culture 7:49-88.
    • Burridge, K. O. L. 1959/60. Siblings in Tangu. Oceania 30:127-154.
    • Chapais B. 2008. Primeval kinship: How pair-bonding gave birth to human society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    • D'Andrade, R. 2003. Why not cheer? Journal of Cognition and Culture 4:310-314.
    • Durkheim, E. 1898. Review of Ernest Grosse, Die Formen der Familie und die Formen der Wirthschaft, Fribourg-en-Brisgau: Mohr. AnnŽe sociologique 1:319-332.
    • Read, D. 2006. Kinship Algebra Expert System (KAES): A software implementation of a cultural theory Social Science Computer Review 24:43-67.
    • Read, D. 2007. Kinship theory: A paradigm shift. Ethnology 46:329-364.
    • Read, D., D. Lane, and S. van der Leeuw. 2009. "The innovation innovation," in Complexity perspectives in innovation and social change. Edited by D. Lane, D. Pumain, S. van der Leeuw, and G. West, pp. 43-84. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
    • Read, D., and F. K. Lehman (Chit Hlaing). 2005. The Read-Lehman letters on kinship mathematics. Mathematical Anthropology and Cultural Theory 1:1-5.
    • Read, D. 2010a. The algebraic logic of kinship terminology structure. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33:399-400.
    • Read, D. 2010b. "From experiential-based to relational-based forms of social organization: A major transition in the evolution of Homo sapiens," in Social brain, distributed mind. Edited by R. Dunbar, C. Gamble, and J. Gowlett, pp. 199-230. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Read, D. 2010c. The generative logic of Dravidian language terminologies. Mathematical Anthropology and Culture Theory 3.
    • Read, D. 2012. How culture makes us human: Primate evolution and the formation of human societies Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
    • Read, D. W., and C. Behrens. 1990. An expert system for the algebraic analysis of kinship terminologies. Journal of Quantitative Anthropology 2:353-393.
    • Rivers, W. H. R. 1924. Social organization. New York: Knopf.
    • Sahlins, M. 1962. Moala: Culture and nature on a Fijian island. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
    • Scheffler, H. W., and F. Lounsbury. 1971. A study in structural semantics: The Siriono kinship system. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
    • Schieffelin, E. L. 1976. The sorrow of the lonely and the burning of the dancers. New York: St. Martin's Press.
    • Thomas, N. W. 1906. Kinship organizations and group marriage in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article