Diffusion - l 13 DIFFUSION food selection than symbolic...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: l 13 DIFFUSION food selection than symbolic qualities that mostly affect food consumption by indi- viduals experiencing physiological stress (illness, pregnancy), where food is medicine. Diets are usually reported in terms of core (staple or superfoods), secondary- core, and peripheral foods, as they describe patterning in food items, recipes, meal for— mats, or meal cycles (Goode 1989). Typi— cal cuisines may value segregation (as in Jewish dietary separation of milk and meat) or combinations (as in Italian meal formats of pasta and sauce) (see COOKING). Ethnic groups may also “mark” their HEW cultural setting with familiar traditional flavors and textures, and continue to eat customary foods particularly on ritual occasions. People obtain food through food produc— tion, market exchange, foraging, or gifts (DeWalt 1983). An analysis of the dietary structure in rural settings provides an indi~ cator of normal times vs. times of stress. It is generally measured by examining the ra— tio of grains or starches to leaf- or protein- based relishes and condiments. In times of HUNGER, people cut back on the number and contents of meals according to the availability of staple and other foods. In the past, disadvantaged individuals or commu- nities increased their FORAGING during lean times as a way to survive, but that resource base has been shrinking around the world. Increasingly, such households rely on sup— port from beyond the local community: re- mittances from migrant members to assist purchases of market sources of food, government relief programs, or some other social-security mechanism. The timing and patterning of ritual exchanges may also help equitably stretch and spread meager supplies. Time allocation of the food providers and consumers is a factor in food selection in every Culture. In INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES both school and work schedules are trans~ forming the “family meal” and the types of foods consumed commensally, and also contributing to the demand for “junk” snack foods of low nutritional value. Additional nutritional concerns include the impacts of urbanization, agricultural com— mercialization, and expansion of the inter- national food trade, all of which have caused a reduction in food self-Sufficiency. Cash-cropping schemes in particular have been shown to worsen nutritional situa- tions where the diversity and quantity of nutritious home-produced foods are reduced without a consequent increase in reliable income that would allow the house- hold to sustain good nutrition throughout the year. Whether households and indi- viduals are nutritionally better off when they diversify their diets through cash pur- chases or other sources depends on the extent to which purchased or other foods that replace home-produced items are adequate nutritional substitutes. Cash employment, as in the Brazilian production of sisal instead of food gardens, reduced incomes and household food availability for women and children (D. Gross 81 Underwood 1971). In addition, women’s work can compete for time with food preparation. The final message from dietary studies is to the consumer: eat responsibly to avoid the diseases of civilization that often accompany shifts to a modern diet and an underactive life style. EM further reading Arnott 1975; M. Douglas 1984; Farb & Armelagos 1980; I. Goody 1982; Jerome et a1. 1980, Robson 1980 difi'usion, difi'usionism is the trans- mission of elements from one culture to another. Such elements are transmitted by agents using identifiable media and are subject to different barrier or filter efiects. It is one of the processes of ACCULTURA- TION but may lack the close contact between peoples that acculturation presup- poses. Diffusionism refers to any learned hypothesis that posits an exogenous origin for most elements of a specific culture or cultural subset. An example is the proposi- tion advanced by some nineteenth-century folklorists that most popular European story frames had been transmitted to Eu- rope by Gypsies from India. The notion, however, that cultural evolutionists of the nineteenth century denied the significance of diffusiOn is not correct. Robert LDWLE in particular overemphasized the association of diffusion and historieism, independent invention, and evolutionism (Harris 1968: 173—6). The fallacy here is that evolution- ists promoted independent invention not to defeat diffusionism but to demonstrate the PSYCHIC UNITY 0F MANKIND. Stimulus diffusion is a concept elabo- rated by A. L. KROEBER to describe the reinvention of an element transmitted across a social or cultural barrier to bring it into congruence with the values of the re- cipient culture. Popular diffusionism is the attribution, typically false or distorted, of certain cultural elements to foreign cul— tures, especially antecedent ones, such as the attribution by contemporary Europeans of anything old-looking to the Romans or Celts. Recent diffusion research in anthropol- ogy, sociology, and geography has focused on the pattern of diffusion, producing convergent results. As far back as the end of the nineteenth century, Gabriel de Tarde (1903) noted that the rate at which innova— tions are adopted. tends to follow an S-shaped curve. The curve is now conven- tionally divided into discrete phases associated with adopter categories (innova— tors, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards), which have been used as ideal types to explain a range of behaviors with respect to innovation. TG further reading Rogers 1995 diglossia is a term in LINGUISTICS and SOCIOLINGUISTICS that characterizes soci— eties in which two distinct varieties of the same LANGUAGE are used in different do- mains, generally one for written purposes and the other for oral interactions. The two varieties exhibit differences on every level of linguistic structure. Diglossia is to be distinguished from cases where a standard Variety coexists with one or more regional and social DIALECTS, because in a diglossic setting, the superposed variety has to be learned formally by everyone, and no one in the community uses it as an Ordinary medium of conversation. On the same ba— sis, it is to be distinguished from societal bilingualism where (for some sectors of the population) the superposed language is their native language. Of particular interest to linguists is the impact of diglossia on language variation and change. In his classic article, C. Ferguson (1959: DIGLO 551A 1 l 9 336) defined diglossia {from the French diglossia) as a relatively stable language situation in which, in addition to the primary dialects of the language (which may include a standard or regional standards), there is a very divergent, highly codified (often grammatically more complex) su— perposed variety, the vehicle of a large and re- spected body of written literature, either of an earlier period or in another speech community, which is learned largely by formal education and is used for most written purposes but is not used by any sector of the community for ordinary conversation. Using language situations from Egypt, Haiti, Greece, and German~speaking Switzerland, in every case he found that there are local terms for both varieties, which Ferguson labeled “High” and “Low.” “Diglossia” was first used in the 18805 to characterize the coexistence in Greece of the linguistic varieties Katharevousa (“pu— ristic”) and Dhimotiki (“common, collo- quial”) (Mackey 1993). Marcais (1930) was the first to apply the term to Arabic to describe the written Arabic and spoken Arabic that coexist in the Arab world. Ac— cording to Marcais (p. 901-), written Arabic is used in literary and scientific publica- tions, in the press, judiciary system, private letters, and anything else that was written. Spoken Arabic, by contrast, is the language of conversation in all domains, whether “popular” or “cultivated.” Fishman extended the application to any sociolinguistic setting in which two or more languages, dialects, registers, or any “func— tionally differentiated language varieties of whatever kind" are employed (1972: 92.) and argued that diglossia is the “societal normification” of bilingualism (1967: 37). Thus, diglossia has come to signify func- tional differentiation of language use re- gardless of the conditions under which the superposed variety is acquired. Such an ex— tension of the term accounts in part for the tremendous outpouring of publications on the topic from 1960 to the present (A. Hudson 1992). Another recent bibliogra— phy on the subject (M. Fernandez 1993) contains works in several languages on some 175 language situations around the world. ...
View Full Document

Page1 / 2

Diffusion - l 13 DIFFUSION food selection than symbolic...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online