Comparing Cultures and Comparing Processes

Diachronic Methods in Cross-Cultural Anthropology

Bibliographic Data

ID7738457
AuthorsStephen Chrisomali (0000-0003-3636-7683, University of Toronto, corresponding author), Stephen Chrisomalis (University of Toronto)
Year2006
Volume40
Issue4
Pages377-404
Publication date2006-11-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueCross-Cultural Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1069-3971 • E-ISSN: 1552-3578
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/1069397106287926
OpenAlexW2021656861
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited77

If cross-cultural researchers hope to contribute to cultural evolutionary theory, methods must be developed to describe and explain cultural processes. The distinction made by Boas between historical and comparative methods limited scholarly interest in the analysis of patterned historical change. Numerous techniques have been developed to draw diachronic inferences from synchronic ethnographic data, with varying degrees of success. The use of archaeological and historical data to draw diachronic inferences similarly has had mixed results but requires fewer assumptions and allows a more direct comparison of cultural change. Shifting the unit of analysis from the culture to the event allows events to be compared with one another. A case study from the evolution of numerical notation systems shows the potential of rigorous diachronic methodologies to complement synchronic ones. Although synchronic analysis is highly useful for studying correlations between traits, diachronic analysis is far better for analyzing processes of change

Biology · Comparative method · Complement (music · Cultural anthropology · Epistemology · Ethnography · Linguistics · Notation · Sociology · Anthropology · Archaeology and ancient environmental studies · History · Language and cultural evolution · Philosophy

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub