Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Problematic in the first instance is the separation of "language" and "nonlan- guage" such that
these can be then "related" one to another. The notion of the "linguistic" versus the
"nonlinguistic" eludes contemporary cultural anthro- pologists. Bloch, for instance, argues that
what is most important about cultural knowledge cannot be represented in what he takes to
be the terms appropriate to the discussion of language-such as "rules."
Bloch is appar- ently unaware that contemporary linguistics conceptualizes speech production
as the exemplar par excellence of "embodied," "expert" knowledge (also see 208). In this the
discipline returns to a position advocated by Sapir for whom the tacit, "aesthetic" quality of
the form-feeling of actors for their culture meant precisely that pattern in culture was like
pattern in language. There is no prima facie way to identify certain behaviors-or better, certain
forms of social action-as linguistic and others as cultural.
The entire intricate calibration is undertaken by the ethnogra- pher in the field, often in an
intuitive way. The process finally yields a report (usually) in the ethnographer's native
language. So language, culture, and meaning have inextricably contaminated each other in the
course of doing ethnography.
b) de manera profunda
c) de manera deductiva
d) de manera inductiva
7) Qué quiere decir la afirmación “El idioma, la cultura y el significado se han contaminado
inextricablemente unos a otros en el curso de la etnografía”.