“A privileged field of study”: Marcel Mauss and structural anthropology in Leiden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structural anthropology in Leiden was very much inspired by Mauss and theAnnée sociologiquegroup. 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 essaySeasonal Variations of the Eskimoby 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".