Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 - Goodenough Ward. Describing A Culture

    Uploaded by

    Betsabe
    7 views9 pages

    Original Title

    4 -Goodenough Ward. Describing a Culture

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views9 pages

    4 - Goodenough Ward. Describing A Culture

    Uploaded by

    Betsabe

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 9
    THE LEWIS HENRY MORGAN LECTURES/196S Description and Comparison in Cultural Anthropology WARD H. GOODENOUGH, Unterty of omnia 104 Deseription and Comparison in Cultural Anthropology enovgh 19560). We each took « hoase-by-house census, making 2 complet recotd of every maid couple's domestic locaton, but four eoaclusions regarding the siatsical pattern of arrangement Alferd. We could not agree on the hind of residence euch Trukese couple was in, even though we were using te same set of an- thropologea terms oa whose defniton in te abtract we apr quite well The cane of our dierence was ou diferent conceptions ‘ofthe objets of residential choice asthe Trakese perceived them. ‘Our diferent caltres for Truk led to dierent picazes of the pe ‘aling socal structure. To start with the abject of choice as the ‘Trukese perceive them, os they are defined by the standards of | Trokee cult, rel in diferent strectae from one aeived at by projecting on them an exoneous conception oftheir clare, the ceatoories of one's own folk ele, or the extgoces af ones ova professional antropologcal eulare ‘May problems ia sathopology fequte the use of concepts that face not 2 part of the ealmye of the people under study, as Ford (1966) as reminded us. But problems such a the one with whieh ‘Fischer and I were coacerped do requ ws #0 EnOW th concep ‘with Which they Weck, insofar as its possible to know thers, When fever ne wish to know what people are doing and why, or what they ae key todo, we must know what phenomena they se, for fete ate the phenomena fo which they respond, And wo mast [know what they belleve to be the relations among these phenomeas sd what they pereive as the possible courses of ation for deling With them. Such knowledge i crucial 1 an understanding of their jral ordering of social relations, including the things I ave-been discussing in thes lectures. A mjor problem for anthropology, then, i how to deste other people's euiures—thir standards for perceiving believing, eral sing, and acing. “The problem i not unlike dosrbing a game, avery complicated ‘one. There are th dierent categories of person, which correspond {to the dierent plore on the board or to soverl osions onthe ‘am, There ae the diferent catgories of objet, both natural and ‘manuietured, which bound end define the universe or plying felt | f Genera and Patadar 10s ‘ofthe game, Within the restctions imposed by thee bounds snd by the phyical eomstation ofthe players, there ae additonal r= fiedoos onthe moves that auy ode category of pezson can make In elation fo each category of object and each other category of pets. Thus restrictions sue the sles of th game. The gume has 5S agreed-upon objectives: wealth, honor, many sltetie grand- Children, power, whatever eis that i public accepted as indicative ff persoea allment, success, or the good ie. The game is com- Pleated, moreover in tat thee are many lesser aanes within {ome of which are requeed fr all partcipnss and others of which se optional. T need not go on filing out the analogy. Itbas been drawn befor. Indeed, a game is nothing but ¢ mialstue and highly formalized culre® "The poat ofthe analogy this. Suppose you have come 0 the ‘nia Sates from England with the object of describing the game of American footall to your fellow Englishmen. To describe in the languape of rugby isnot going to be aliogsther satisfactory — ven though tbe two games se related, To descibe it ia the Fanguage of miltary maneuver and physical combat wil alo be ‘Smevwhat mbleading Ta either ease te English reading audience vould get some rough idea of American fotbll, bt at best Mould bo «carcetur ofthe game se Americans know i, We are ‘tema with such carsies, The prolom of eaepraphy I tow to describe the culture af another poole for an audience that 'S unfair with it go thatthe description not a earentre bat Dresens oc of sundars tat saitaconly represent what One neds to know to play the game acceptably by the standards of those who already know how to play ito i no to play i #0 understand it aswell ws hose who know bow wo pay it undecsand ‘tan in terms that permit discussing it knowledgeably with them. ‘AS [said in he fist chapter, I conceive of the problem 38 no

    You might also like