Separating the dead: the ritual transformation of affinal exchange in central Flores
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In central Flores, local people represent obligatory exchanges of objects at funerals as signalling a cessation of relations between affinally related groups, thus contradicting a well‐established local principle whereby affinal relationships transcend the lives of individual participants. Illuminating this contrast is a mortuary context that comprises rites emphasizing separation and a particularly negative view of the dead to the exclusion of a more positive representation of relations between the dead and the living expressed in religious ideology. However, as a purely ethnographic analysis cannot actually resolve the contradiction, consideration is given to cognitivist perspectives, and especially approaches focusing on counterintuitive features of ritual and religious representations that contradict ordinary understandings of things. Résumé Les populations du centre de l'île de Florès représentent les échanges obligatoires d'objets lors des funérailles comme le signal de cessation de relations entre des groupes liés par affinité, en contradiction avec un principe local bien établi selon lequel les relations d'affinité survivent aux personnes concernées. Cette opposition est éclairée par un contexte mortuaire comprenant des rites qui mettent l'accent sur la séparation et sur une vision singulièrement négative des morts, excluant la représentation plus positive des liens entre les morts et les vivants qu'exprimerait l'idéologie religieuse. Une analyse purement ethnographique ne suffit cependant pas à résoudre cette contradiction, et il faut donc recourir à une perspective cognitiviste, et en particulier à des approches axées sur les aspects apparemment contre‐intuitifs du rituel et sur les représentations religieuses qui contredisent l'entendement habituel des choses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".