Sociality, temporality and locality in a contemporary Inuit community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mauss (1906) suggested that, as a principle of Inuit society, the seasonal societal dichotomy takes shape in movements of population concentration and dispersal into small family groups following the annual migration of game. He argued that these movements and the various social modes thus created inseparably connect temporal, spatial, social, moral, legal, and spiritual dimensions in the construction of Inuit nomadic society. In the mid 20 th century, the mass and density of Inuit settlement population changed drastically. Inuit groups moved to permanent settlements that were developed and structurally based on Western models of sedentary community life. Under these changed social and physical conditions, does movement and seasonal variations in group composition, and in ways of life, continue to be a central component of Inuit society? Ethnographic evidence from Qikiqtarjuaq (Nunavut) suggests that Inuit integrate modern ways of life into a nomadic lifestyle thus creating, in analogy to Mauss’s model, a continuation of variation in lifestyles and values depending on contexts. This article aims to substantiate and elaborate on this claim of continuity. It makes use of Mauss’s model as a heuristic lens for studying social change in respect to the association of practices and perceptions of seasonal movement in present day Inuit society; thus asking the question: are seasonally varying social modes and associated values part of today’s Inuit community constitution?
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".