Symbolic and Interpretive Anthropology

 Symbolic and Interpretive Anthropology is the study of symbols in their social and cultural context, which was brought about in the 1960s and progressed through the 1970s. These symbols are generally publically shared and recognized by many and could be words, customs, or rituals. Symbolic Anthropologists describe and interpret symbolic meaning in emic terms meaning that they interpret the symbols in the context of the culture that they are studying. A symbolic anthropologist believes that culture can be found in the public performance of symbolic systems and that there is generally a response to these symbols. Symbolic Anthropology was created in contrast to structuralism.12

          Symbolic and Interpretive Anthropology states that symbols are learned and shared. This means that most symbols can be recognized by the people in that culture and often by people in other cultures. It also states that symbols are vehicles of culture, meaning they hold cultural meaning and significance. Symbols also transmit meaning and communicate ways that people should view the world and feel about the world. 

          Clifford Geertz (1926-2006) the main key figure of Interpretive Anthropology, was considered to be the world’s most influential anthropologist of the second half of the 21stcentury.3Geertz argues in Symbolic and Interpretive Anthropology that "culture is not a model inside people's heads but rather is embodied in public symbols and actions".4 Geertz also focuses on the meaning of the symbols: "Believing, with Max Weber, that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun, I take cultures to be those webs, the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science in search of law but an interpretive one in search of meaning"

Victor Turner is the main key figure of Symbolic Anthropology who "approached symbolic analysis from a different angle".8 Turner "examined symbols as mechanisms for the maintenance of society"9 vs Geertz who looks at cultural symbols in order to see a worldview of a society. Turner did not follow Geertz's thick description, instead "he believed that the interpretation of ritual symbols could be derived from three classes of data: (1) external form and observable characteristics, (2) the interpretations of specialists and laymen within the society and (3) deduction from specific contexts by the anthropologist".10 This is seen to be a combination of both emic and etic descriptions.

          Turner believed "Ritual symbols were the primary tools through which social order was renewed"11 which is similar to what Clifford Geertz's student Sherry Ortner then went on to study. Ortner was also a very big contributor to Symbolic and Interpretive Anthropology with her first book, Sherpa Through Their Rituals published in 1978. In this book Ortner maps out a few rites which are related to the field of Symbolic and Interpretive anthropology. The first of these rites is the rite of atonement which is a rite used to bring back together the family and the symbols of the family after someone or thing has been hindered by sin. The second rite is the rite of exorcism which is a right that takes are persons from poverty, meaning they have no value in their life currently and are unaffiliated with the community, and resores them to wealth, meaning they are being brought back into the community. The third and final rite is the rite of hospitality which is a rite that incorporated symbols of power, authority and order into how you would treat someone if they were to come to your home or present themselves to you . Ortner's concluding point that she presented in her book was, "the symbols of rituals lead us toward discovery of structural conflict, contradiction, and stress in the wider social and cultural world".These rites are specifically important within Symbolic and Interpretive anthropology because all rites are designed to fix something or to make sure something stays the same.

Case Studies- Research Method - Advantages and Disadvantages

As a research method deployed within social and behavioural scientific research, the case study is utilised in order to gain an in-depth contextualised examination of social interaction within a single social setting; this may be within anorganisation or focused on the playing-out of a specific social process (Yin:1994).These studies generally utilise several data collection methods for example, observation, interview and documentary analysis. Case study research is exploratory in nature, and is typically used to generate models and hypothesis of the process under investigation in a specific context, which can then be tested through larger scale quantitative surveys. It is not possible to generalise about the wider social situation directly from the findings of a single case study.

Case studies as utilised within policy analysis would typically study the micro-workings of large scale organisations, for example an in-depth observation of staff in a single health care unit in order to understand how public health policies are implemented at ground level. They are also used by clinicians in order to gain a detailed understanding of a disease process in context outside the laboratory, or by medical anthropologist's engaged in biographical research in order to gain a personal narrative of the experience of living with a chronic illness over time.

Advantages 
 The most important advantage of using a case study is that it simplifies complex concepts.
 Case studies expose the participants to real life situations which otherwise is difficult.
 It truly helps in adding value to the Participants through discussion on concrete subjects.
 It improves -analytical thinking, communication, developing tolerance for different views on the same subject, ability to defend one’s own point of view with logic and enhances team work of the participants making them efficient over time.
 The many solutions which come out of the case act as ready reference when participants face similar problems at work place.

Disadvantages 
 It might be difficult to find an appropriate case study to suit to all subjects.
 Case studies contain the study of observations and perception of one person. There are chances that the person presenting the case study may completely present it in one manner missing other aspects completely.  Managing time is a criterion in a training program. Case studies generally consume more time when compared to other instruments. For shorter duration programs case studies may not be the best medium.
 Since there is no one right answer, the problem arises in validation of the solutions because there are more than one way to look at things.
 Its best suited to advanced training programs when compared to basic level training programs and a certain level of maturity of participants is required as they have to participate in the case discussion.

The advantages far outweigh the disadvantages as the case study approach provides for experiential learning and is a great tool in stimulating learning in training programs.

Data Collection Tools in Research

What is Data, explain type of sources to collect data and information?

Ans: Data is a collection of facts, such as values or measurements. It can be numbers, words, measurements, observations or even just descriptions of things.  Data can be qualitative (descriptive information) or quantitative (numerical information).

Data is typically the results of measurements and can be visualized using graphs or images. Raw data, i.e., unprocessed data, refers to a collection of numbers, characters; data processing commonly occurs by stages, and the "processed data" from one stage may be considered the "raw data" of the next. Field data refers to raw data collected in an uncontrolled in situ environment. Experimental data refers to data generated within the context of a scientific investigation by observation and recording.

Type of sources to collect data and information:

Difference between Schedule and Questionnaire.

S.No	Questionnaire	Schedule
1.	Questionnaire is generally sent through mail to informants to be answered as specified in a covering letter, but otherwise without further assistance from the sender.	A schedule is generally filled by the research worker or enumerator, who can interpret the questions when necessary.
2.	Data collection is cheap and economical as the money is spent in preparation of questionnaire and in mailing the same to respondents.	Data collection is more expensive as money is spent on enumerators and in imparting trainings to them. Money is also  spent in preparing schedules.
3.	Non response is usually high as many people do not respond and many return the questionnaire without answering all questions. Bias due to non response often remains indeterminate.	Non response is very low because this is filled by enumerators who are able to get answers to all questions. But even in this their remains the danger of interviewer bias and cheating.

Compare Method and Methodology in Research

Method is the "practical" application of doing something.  In the Social Sciences to accumulate data, research might be conducted through interviews, surveys, or Focus Groups for example.Research methods are the tools, techniques or processes that we use in our research. These might be, for example, surveys, interviews, Photovoice, or participant observation. Methods and how they are used are shaped by methodology.

Methodology is the "theoretical" and "ideological"  application of these methods. Methodology is the study of how research is done, how we find out about things, and how knowledge is gained. In other words, methodology is about the principles that guide our research practices. Methodology therefore explains why we’re using certain methods or tools in our research.

 An interview for example is not a value free judgement, it is informed by the researcher's ideas (theory) and perspectives (ideology).  If you are a Marxist, you will begin your research from a different perspective and with different ideas than a Liberal or Conservative researcher; the "practical" application of the chosen method, will therefore also differ, as you will often be looking for different answers to the similar questions.  Methodology must come before method, i.e. You must have a theoretical and ideological approach before you can choose which method to employ in your research, this is Deductivism (putting your socks on before your shoes), if you do the opposite you are engaged in Inductivism (putting your socks on after your shoes)

Why is Ethnographic Research conducted?

Suppose you were given five (5) minutes to think about and write down three to four problems facing America today. What would you record? Anthropologist Aaron Podolefsk (2004) often asks this question of his students at the University of Northern Iowa and he finds that many of the issues that the students consider problems facing America are social problems, issues that requires change in social behavior or social policy. The question asked by Podolefsky attempts to go below the surface of the responses presented, for example AIDS, unemployment, gender, and the global economy, to understand the origin of the perceived problems.

Ethnographic research, in much the same way, gets below the surface and challenges assumptions made regarding a variety of topics. In challenging basic assumptions, doing ethnographic research is like peeling an onion. As you peel back the layers of an onion, you discover there is yet more to be seen.

How does ethnographic research challenge assumptions? It describes a specific group of people and their interactions with each other and those not part of the group. Ethnographic research is conducted to contest and/or sustain stereotypes of particular groups by telling the stories of the lived experiences of individuals. This type of research is also helpful in addressing stereotypes that are embedded within a society such as ideas about people based on their racial background, gender, or how much money they make. “Poor people are lazy” is an example of a stereotype. These kinds of ideas affect the way in which poor people may be treated by others, laws that may be passed, and housing availability. Therefore they are ideologies, or ways of thinking, with great power. Ethnographic research may be done to challenge or “contest” the truth of such ideas. Note, however, that these experiences occur within time and space. As such, they are constantly changing. Thus, history and context (interrelated issues, settings, environment and social relationships) play important roles in the lives of individuals in determining the webs of significance.

Ethnographic research is also done in an attempt to discover patterns in human behavior. Those engaging in ethnographic research are looking at society and cultures as integrated systems with interrelationships existing between communities and structures within and around them. In doing research that is detailed, descriptive and interpretive, ethnographers are better able to “see” the community through the eyes of those who live in the community. Ethnographers understand the danger in looking too closely at the part and not the whole.

As visitors to the national parks or Park employees, it is important to note that each individual, each group of people, have vested interest in national park sites. Their interest and interpretation of park and park histories are often influenced by past histories and meanings associated with both tangible and intangible resources. With the aid of ethnographic research, the importance of these interpretations and practices associated with the national parks can be better understood.

Ethnography vs Ethnology

• Ethnography
  • Direct fieldwork that leads to a description of a modern culture
  • Descriptive
  • Single views of culture or subculture
• Ethnology
  • Study of cultures and how they differ from each other or how they are similar to each other or both.
  • Always comparative in nature
  • General views across cultures and subcultures
  • Will use the direct fieldwork information/data of ethnographers

Four Imitation Hypotheses: Origin of Language

1. DING-DONG: The “ding-dong” hypothesis bases the origins of language on onomatopoeia. This idea states that language began when humans started naming objects after a relevant sound that was already involved in their everyday life. Examples include words such as “boom,” “crash,” and “oink.”

These represent the sounds of certain objects, but it is unclear how to provide onomatopoeia for silent objects such as a rock. It also does not consider abstract ideas like love or justice, as there are no sounds for these words. Also, this hypothesis does not supply words for grammar or abstract items in the English language, so it is not hard to imagine that these types of words are unusual and rare in most languages. Onomatopoeia is such a small part of linguistics and varies greatly from language to language.  Because of these limitations it is considered a limited hypothesis.

2. POOH-POOH: The basis for the “pooh-pooh” hypothesis holds true to the involuntary nature of human speech. Through emotional response, language and speech would have developed in tandem with human interaction and primitive emotional reactions. Such sounds as “wa wa wa” or “ha ha ha,” commonly used to denoted crying or pain and happiness or laughter, respectively, would then develop into a more unique and case-specific series of sounds in association with other emotions and interactions (Vadja).

The problem with this hypothesis, however, is that exclamations, such as the emotional responses that one might associate with these “pooh-pooh” phrases, are in fact dependent on language instead of a basis through which language can be created. For instance, the essence of emotional response for pain is “ouch” in English, “oi” in Russian and “eee” in Cherokee (Vadja). If there was a generalized emotional response that all people made independently of each other, then perhaps there would be some legitimacy to the argument. But those noises that we all do make based on the stimuli of sneezes or hiccups cannot demonstrate a common linguistic nature between peoples.

3. BOW-WOW: The “bow wow” hypothesis is the most popular but perhaps the most far-fetched hypothesis of them all. Basically, it is the idea that human language and vocabulary originated as a form of imitation. It is said that language came from the imitation of animal sounds.

The problem that arises in this hypothesis is that a lot of words that describe animal sounds in different languages are similiar. For instance, in English a pig makes the sound “oink-oink.” In Russian the sound is translated as “hyru-hyru” and in Chinese the sound is translated as “oh-ee-oh-ee.” As one can see, these words represent the sound of a single animal in different languages. The sound and pronunciation of these words are not similar. The overall idea is that one’s language determines how one interprets a sound, and since we have may languages, one cannot prove that human vocabulary comes from them.

4. TA-TA: As commonly seen in primates, hand gestures and body movement are important aspects of interaction and cooperation within societies. Originally hypothesized by Charles Darwin, though not necessarily supported by him, the “ta-ta” hypothesis states that language and the development of sound was generated to support the hand gestures and movements of the individual. So as to better demonstrate the meaning behind the gestures, these sounds progressed into more and more distinct words or combinations of sounds inevitably leading to speech patterns.

Although plausible like many of the other hypothesis, the cultural roots of varying hand gestures suggests that this is most likely not the reason behind language. Where in some places nodding means “yes,” in others nodding means the opposite. Such distinct cultural differences implies that this is not a sound hypothesis.

The Origin of Language

How did this language instinct in humans originate? And how did the first language come into being?

      Concerning the origin of the first language, there are two main hypotheses, or beliefs.  Neither can be proven or disproved given present knowledge.

1) Belief in divine creation.  Many societies throughout history believed that language is the gift of the gods to humans.  The most familiar is found in Genesis 2:20, which tells us that Adam gave names to all living creatures.  This belief predicates that humans were created from the start with an innate capacity to use language.

      It can't be proven that language is as old as humans, but it is definitely true that language and human society are inseparable.  Wherever humans exist language exists.  Every stone age tribe ever encountered has a language equal to English, Latin, or Greek in terms of its expressive potential and grammatical complexity.  Technologies may be complex or simple, but language is always complex. Charles Darwin noted this fact when he stated that as far as concerns language, "Shakespeare walks with the Macedonian swineherd, and Plato with the wild savage of Assam." In fact, it sometimes seems that languages spoken by preindustrial societies are much more complex grammatically than languages such as English (example: English has about seven tense forms and three noun genders; Kivunjo, a Bantu language spoken on the slopes of Mount Kilimanjaro, has 14 tenses and about 20 noun classes.) There are no primitive languages, nor are any known to have existed in the past--even among the most remote tribes of stone age hunter-gatherers.

NATURE OF LANGUAGE

1.       Language is learnt: Learning of language is not an automatic process. Of course, it is a behaviour but it is not type of behaviour like walking and crawling that comes to child in natural way. Language by imitation and practice. Language is not possible without effort.

2.      Language is related to the culture of society: Every language is related to culture of society to which it belongs. The culture of the people naturally influences the language. Every language is the product of society. We cannot separate language from the culture in which that language exists. It has meaning only in relation to that society and culture.

3.      Language is species specific: Language is species specific. Only human beings have got the gift of language. Of course, the other species do communicate but only human beings can make use of language.

4.      Language is species uniformed: Language is species uniformed. All human children are capable of acquiring any language natively if they are provided the right kind of environment.

5.      Language is a system: Each language is a unique system. The system of language consists of sounds, structures and vocabulary. A person who wants to learn a new language will have to learn new sounds, new structures and new vocabulary. The sound system of language differs from language to language depending upon the culture to which a language belongs. Each language has its own system of vocabulary. Thus each language is systematic.

6.      Language is a system of systems: Each language is a system of systems. There are phonological and grammatical systems in all languages. There are several sub systems with in a language. The phonology of a language forms its own system as the various sounds function in a systematic way.

7.      Language is a system of symbols: Each language works through symbols. Different words used in a language are the symbols. They stand for certain things. The language will function well if its symbols are known both to the speaker and the person for whom they are being used.

For example the world cup has three sounds (K, Л, P) It is a symbol of English because a meaning is attached to it. But if we take the same three sounds like, K, Л, P they do form Puc, but that is not a symbol of English language as no meaning is attached to it.

8.      Symbols of language are vocal: Different symbols are used in a single language. These symbols are vocal. A language system does not exist in a vacuum. It is primary used in speech. Only speech provides all essential signals of a language. There are other kinds of symbols which cannot be called vocal symbols. For example, gestures and signal flags are visual symbols and ringing of the bells and beating of a drum are auditory symbols. They do not form any language. In language the sounds are produced through vocal organs. Reading and writing are no doubt important. But speech is the basic form of language. A language without speech is unthinkable.

9.      Language is a skill subject: Learning of a language is a skill subject. It is skill like swimming and cycling. We can not learn swimming or cycling just by studying rules. We can learn it by practice. In the same way, we can learn a language y constant practice of that language. So a lot of repetition for major linguistic skills like listening, speaking, reading and writing is required.

10.    Language is for communication: Language is the best means of communication and self expressions. Human beings express their ideas, thoughts, feelings and emotions through language. In this way language is a means to connect past present and future.

11.     Governed by a particular set of rules: Each language is governed by a particular set or rules. 

          Subject                 Object                   Verb

12.    Symbols of language are Arbitrary: Here by arbitrary symbols we meant that there is no visual relationship between the language item and the object for which it stands. A man is called man traditionally. There is no visual similarity between the symbol ‘man’ and the actual man. We have not named it so on the basis of some logic or scientific principles. In English we say man, in ‘Hindi’ we say ‘manauYya’ and in Punjabi we say ‘___________’. None of them is better than the other. In fact, we call a man ‘man’ because people have agreed to use it in that sense.

13.    Language is unique: Each language is unique because it has its own style of functioning. The sounds, vocabulary and structures of every language have their own specialty.

Compare Foragers and Collectors found in Primitive Societies

Lewis Binford also made a distinction between collectors and foragers, which is also a continuum instead of a dichotomy. Foragers are more mobile, often living in areas where all necessary resources can be found within a small radius of any campsite they go to. When they are done foraging at one site, the entire camp will move a short distance to the next one.

Collectors, on the other hand, are found in places where positioning the camp close to one resource will increase the distance from another resource. Thus, collectors must send teams off to hunt the other resource (usually migratory herds of animals) and send it back. For collectors, adapting to seasonal and spatial variability is crucial, so storage is much more important. Collectors move less, and when they do move, they move greater distances. There's a whole set of vocabulary associated with optimal strategies of gathering food, as well as the different kinds of sites that foragers and collectors leave behind as their archaeological footprint. In general, collectors will live in higher latitudes and foragers closer to the Equator, but the distribution relies more on the distribution of resources and patterns of symbolism in culture than a simple latitudinal cline.