[Xmca-l] Re: anachronism

Mon Sep 17 09:47:07 PDT 2018

Hi Andy,

"Gaffe" may very well be the word that you want, if  you want a single word. A gaffe is a SOCIAL blunder.  Rather than say "cultural faux pas" you could say "cultural gaffe" just as well. That you must put "cultural" in front of "faux pas" means "faux pas" doesn't do the job you intend, wouldn't you say?

"Faux pas" literally means "false step" so if you want it to be English then say "false step," or "cultural false step." Still not quite effective, is it.

Also, what you've brought up pertains to a point of view. Do you mean to look from the cultural standpoint of those who are offended? or from those who offend? Or from a more neutral standpoint?

Also, "solecism" doesn't mean "un-cultured". One of the definitions is a mistake in the context of etiquette. Etiquette is a cultural construct. Solecism means an error but a particular kind of error. It seems to be what you are talking about. It just doesn't refer to "culture" in the way that you want, perhaps because "etiquette" is the defining concept standing between "solecism" and "culture."

"Etiquette" has a color of class and has to do with manners, and I suppose that anthropologists don't breezily throw around the word "etiquette" when analyzing their own gaffes while studying a culture in the field. Or maybe they do?

I'm not sure why you would be against the use of "solecism."

(I might point out that "etiquette" is also a French word, and French has been called the language of diplomacy, maybe this is an indication why. Those French, why have a word for everything!!!)

Additionally, as seen here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solecism

there is a beneficial aspect to this word because it is also used in terms of grammar, from where it derives from the Greek. I support the word because what you are talking about is "cultural grammar" and what do you call it when someone pushes an incorrect usage into a cultural context. Seems descriptive and less loaded.

It's more likely that we are just not used to using such a word, because if we live in a hegemonic culture and we are not in a minority, we are comfortable making solecisms with impunity and never have to give pause for self-reflection when we have made a gaffe.

I actually like the word "gaffe," because it is also neutral and sounds more like an everyday word; it is accessible, as in "Who hasn't ever made a gaffe?" rather than "Who hasn't ever made a solecism?"

I'd suggest "solecism" as the scientific counterpart to an everyday "gaffe."

Kind regards,

Annalisa

________________________________
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org>
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2018 3:48:45 AM
To: xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: anachronism

Yes, that's right, Huw, so "solecism" and "wild" mean "un-cultured," not "other-cultured." Of course, the unsophisticated native easily mistakes the other-cultured as being un-cultured.

"Cultural faux pas" actually carries the implication that the relevant act belongs to another culture. So it is the right term, except it requires 3 words, two of them French, so it is in a sense itself a cultural faux pas. But non-self-referential words are a problem.

Andy

________________________________
Andy Blunden
http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
On 17/09/2018 7:41 PM, Huw Lloyd wrote:
Andy,

I think you mean "from a different culture" rather than "out(side) of a culture". So anachronism refer in this context to an utterance that is from a different time (and culture) applied to the contemporary. So I think the sense that you are looking for is "projection", or "cultural projection".

Huw

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 at 06:33, Andy Blunden <<mailto:andyb@marxists.org>andyb@marxists.org<mailto:andyb@marxists.org>> wrote:

Yes, I mean it in the sense Boas meant when he first used it in the plural - "cultures".

I liked Helena's observation, of all the words we have for people who don't belong to the relevant culture, but I mean a word to describe ideas, claims, beliefs which are "blind" to the incongruity of the idea with the relevant cultural context. This is often a kind of anachronism, but not always. The lack of a word arose in a controversy here in Oz when US cultural norms were used to judge an action in an Oz cultural context. ... That drew my attention to the lack of a word, but I don't want to discuss the issue itself on this list.

Andy

________________________________
Andy Blunden
http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
On 16/09/2018 3:21 PM, Greg Thompson wrote:
Andy,
Yes, it might depend on what you mean by "culture". No need to get into the battles over the word as anthropology has over the past 30 years but it would be worth knowing what you mean.

For example, David's reference to Vygotsky's very fashionable (yes, at that time...) term "primitive" relies on a rather old fashioned meaning of culture as "refinement" and "development." Thus E. B. Tylor's title Primitive Culture was anachronistic (in the sense of an idea before its time) because, on this common understanding of these terms, "primitive culture" was an oxymoron.

I assume that you mean culture in the sense that anthropologists use it today (or, I should say, as they used to use it not so long ago). Is that right?

-greg

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 8:40 PM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org<mailto:andyb@marxists.org>> wrote:

Everyone knows what "anachronism" means. "Out of time" so to speak.

Is there a word for "out of culture"?

Andy

--
________________________________
Andy Blunden
http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm

--
Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Anthropology
880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu<http://greg.a.thompson.byu.edu>
http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20180917/5215f5a7/attachment.html 