Anthropologically, the term 'tribe' has been denigrated due to violence, as Logan, King and Fischer-Wright (2008) note with respect to '[t]ribalism' (emphasis in text, p. 24). If, collectively, we are avoiding the violent ambiguation of the terms associated with tribe, then CoP's should not have attributes or contributions etc. Different language should be used, else we ignore the violent association and continue to use the existing language.
Reference
Logan, D., King, J., & Fischer-Wright, H. (2008). Tribal leadership: Leveraging natural groups to build a thriving organization. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
Since 1960 the terms tribe, folk, primitive etc. have been flagged as white racist jargon in anthropology and Vine Deloria has been identified as racist. Any form of the word tribe is to be avoided at all cost and removed from ones thought process and research. just because a community doesn't reflect racist European notions of what community is does not make it any less one. A simple JSTOR search will reveal how long this attitude has existed. Here is just one.
The Man Who Forced Anthropologists to Respect Native Cultures
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/print/2013/08/12/man-who-forced-anthropologists-respect-native-cultures
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/print/2013/08/12/man-who-forced-anthropologists-respect-native-cultures
Thank you for your response A.L.T.
I would argue that simply using the term "white" in reference to a population is in-kind with racist jargon that should be removed from the contemporary language. When race is designated e.g. on an application it serves to perpetuate the notion of race and racism - the slippery-slope argument is duly noted. Sans historical significance what damage can a grouping of letters perform? Incidentally, I have a rich heritage inclusive of Chippewa. The whole of the matter is likely reduced to a sentiment in-kind with Postman, and Weingartner's (1966) statement about the naming of things. We name these things and that is what they necessarily become - for that context.
Reference
Postman, N., and Weingartner, C. (1966). Linguistics: A revolution in teaching. New York, NY: Dell Publishing Co., Inc.
I think the word has a life of its own and may not go away even if it's not used in academia. It might be anthropology's fault that it was initially connoted with primitivity, exotica, and backwardness. It might also be slightly redemptive now that it's being associated with Wall Street, lab scientists, and underground cultures like EDM (or Burning Man). What other word could be used? Is continuing to use 'tribal' in current contexts a way to take back and usurp it's powerful, patriarchal imagery?
-See Karen Ho's Liquidated
-Mafeje 1976. The Problem of Anthropology in Historical Perspective
-Adesina 2008. Archie Mafeje and the pursuit of endogeny against alterity and extroversion
-Spencer and Walby 2013. Neo-tribalism, epistemic cultures, and the emotions of scientific knowledge construction
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Language