MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1642460702 · doi:10.7202/017565ar

“A privileged field of study”: Marcel Mauss and structural anthropology in Leiden

2008· article· en· W1642460702 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jarich Oosten

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes/Inuit/Studies · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPacific and Southeast Asian Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthropologyField (mathematics)ArchipelagoMythologySociologyIndonesianHistoryEpistemologyPhilosophyClassicsLinguisticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structural anthropology in Leiden was very much inspired by Mauss and the Année sociologique group. This paper focuses on the development of the “field of anthropological study” (FAS) that played an important role in the history of the structuralist movement in Leiden. Its definition was derived from the famous essay Seasonal Variations of the Eskimo by Mauss. J.P.B. de Josselin de Jong and P.E. de Josselin de Jong developed it into a conceptual tool for the comparative study of the Indonesian archipelago. In the early 1980s, the method was applied to the anthropological study of South Africa and to the comparative study of Indo-European mythology. Since 1986, it was also applied to solve core issues in the comparative study of Inuit culture. The FAS approach does not look primarily for similarities and generalisation, but for homologies, variations and transformations. In this respect, it corresponds to the valorisation of cultural differences by Inuit themselves. More than 100 years after it was developed by Mauss to explain the morphology of Inuit societies, the field of anthropological study still proves to be as rich and rewarding as ever.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes/Inuit/StudiesSame topicPacific and Southeast Asian StudiesFrench-language works237,207