TL;DRAbstract
In an earlier paper (Barnard 1981), I compared the kinship systems of four well-known Bushman groups. I shall re-examine these same systems here, with a view towards uncovering the underlying structures which are implicit in the data. In the final section, I shall look again at the relationship terminology structure of the Eastern ≠ Hoã, in the light of the comparisons drawn between the other Khoisan systems. My method of comparison is deliberately both intuitive and formal, and as such may put off radicals on both sides – zealous formalists and passionate interpretivists, alike. Its advantage is that it does help to elucidate structures which are otherwise only partly known.
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
In an earlier paper (Barnard 1981), I compared the kinship systems of four well-known Bushman groups. I shall re-examine these same systems here, with a view towards uncovering the underlying structures which are implicit in the data. In the final section, I shall look again at the relationship terminology structure of the Eastern ≠ Hoã, in the light of the comparisons drawn between the other Khoisan systems. My method of comparison is deliberately both intuitive and formal, and as such may put off radicals on both sides – zealous formalists and passionate interpretivists, alike. Its advantage is that it does help to elucidate structures which are otherwise only partly known.
Keywords
Chat
Click to start Chat