Chapter 10 Politics and Leadership: Life without Chiefs

Ana Ontaneda
March 4, 2009
ANT 1001/ TV24A Gaunt

Politics and Leadership: Life without Chiefs

It's interesting to know that "for about 98 percent of our existence as species our ancestors lived in small, largely nomadic hunting-and-gathering bands containing about 30 to 50 people apiece (Harris 96)." In the past, people did not have presidents, monarchies, nor police offers to provide justice and ruling. Bands were able to know everybody else intimately because they were very small. As mentioned by Harris, reciprocity prevailed within the bands because people had to be generous. Members of bands would not say thank you to others because thank you was an expression implying that one did not expect such a generous deed. This is why the !Kung Bushmen treated Richard Lee the way they did. Band members are accustomed to sharing and "giving and taking." It is expected to receive, in their case.

Although life used to exist without a justice system, people would still be punished for freeloading or taking more than what is being given. Such behavior was eventually punished (Harris 99). Redistribution was essential in bands and villages. Douglas Oliver conducted an anthropological study of the Siuai, village people who lived on the South Pacific Island of Bougainville (Harris 100). The "big men" were known as mumis, and the mumi's job was to give away a feast and in return receive appreciation and support from his guests.

Bibliography
Harris, Marvin. “Life without Chiefs.” Conformity and Conflict: Reading to Accompany Miller, Cultural Anthropology, 4 ed., ed. Spradley and McCurdy. Pearson, 2008, Chapter 10

The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis: Worlds Shaped by Words

Ana Ontaneda
February 26, 2009
Anthropology 1001/TV24A

Benjamin Lee Whorf claimed language, "may be shaped by the world, but in turn shapes the world." David S. Thomson mentions how Whorf studied various languages but ended up studying the structure and lexicon of the Hopi Indians in Arizona. Whorf was also influenced by a cultural anthropologist and linguist, Edward Sapir and together they formed what is now known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. The most clear definition of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is that "we dissect nature along lines laid down by our native language (Thomson 115)." Whorf later discovered that to the Hopi, the past and future were just abstractions. There was no such word for past, present or future in their language. Therefore they did not think of postponing things until two days later. They just stopped when they wanted to and started when they wanted to. This is contrary to more developed language such as English. There is a past, present, and future in english, as well as other fancy forms of verb tenses. This is why we are able to postpone things or create a deadline for projects. Had we not known that there is a "future" we would probably not have deadlines, nor calendars. I have once experienced a young girl trying to explain to her mother something I had once told her in English. The girl was Chinese and I could tell that the young girl could not fully explain it to her mother without including similar vocabularies, or explanations that were not a translation of what I said but resembled it. Another example of why we can only perceive what our language allows us to perceive is when you're asked to name shades of blue. Unless you were an artist or a painter, many people would probably only recite navy, baby blue, dark blue or light blue. Artists are more exposed to different variations of blue than we would be. Therefore we can't perceive their language and only those who have the same perception can.

Bibliography
Thomson, David S. “The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis: Worlds Shaped by Words.” Conformity and Conflict: Reading to Accompany Miller, Cultural Anthropology, 4 ed., ed. Spradley and McCurdy. Pearson, 2008, Chapter 12.