DOCSLIB.ORG

Production Grammars for the Kinship Terminologies of Burmese and Several Indonesian Languages

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Production Grammars for the Kinship Terminologies of Burmese and Several Indonesian Languages Production Grammars for the Kinship Terminologies of Burmese and several Indonesian Languages Blair D. Palmer, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McGill University, Montreal A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Çtudies and Research in partial fufilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Science. @Blair Palmer, 1997. National Library Bibliothèque nationale I*m of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services sem-ces bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington OttawaON KIAON4 Ottawa ON KI A ON4 Canada Canada Yaur dle Votre relérena, The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, disûï'bute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thése sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thése ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or othemise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Abstract Previously7 J. Lambek et al. have used Production Grammars to study the kinship terminology of English, Hindi, Sanskrit and Malagasy. This technique is applied here to the kinship terrninology of Burmese and four closely related Indonesian langu~ges:Indonesian, Javanese, Madurese and Sundanese. The production gram- mars are rhen compared: noting difTerences between Burmese and the others, and differences within the group of Indonesian languages. Particular attention is paid to the reduction rules, as they are indicative of the structure of the grarnmar. It was found that although differing in the structure of its kinship descriptions, Burmese is quite sirnilar to the Indonesian languages on the Ievel of reduction rules. A com- puter program was used to check the grammars and to generate sample deriwtions. Finally, kinship data is included for four other Indonesian languages. Resumé .J. Lambek et al. ont déjà utilisé des <<grammaires de production> > pour analyser les termes de parenté en anglais, hindi, sanskrit et malgache. Leur technique est appliquée ici am termes de parenté en birman et en quatre langues indonésiennes: l'indonésien, le javanais: le madurais, et le sundanais. Les différences entre le birman et les autres seront étudiées, ainsi que les différences à même le groupe des langues indonésiennes. En particulier. les règles de réduction, qui sont indicatives de la structure de la grammaire, seront étudiées. Il fut découvert, bien qu'il y ait des différences dans la structure des <<descriptions de parenté>>, que le birman est très similaire aulangues indonésiennes au niveau des règles de réduction. Un program d'ordinateur a été utilisé pour vérifier les gramnaires et pour engendrer des exemples de dérivation. Enfin, des termes de parenté en quatre autres langues indonésiennes sont inclus. Acknowledgement s 1 would like to thank my language informants for generousiy spending their time nith me, including those people who helped me mith languages not appearing in this thesis. My time in Indonesia was enhanced by the cooperation, assistance and friendship of Pal; Inyo Fernandez, Pak Sutarjo! and Pak:'ll. Sutjijana at Lniversi tas Gadjah Mada: Yogyakarta. I am grateful to the support of the National Science and Engineering Research Council for financing my studies. Thanks to Leonard and Nicolas for being stimulating and supportive in the office. 1 wish to thank my thesis supervisor Jim Lambek, without whorn none of this would have happened. To Mother, Dad, Dean, Luke and Lise. You are the rock that 1 lash rnyself to, even if the rope is long. Thanks for al1 the encouragement and love. To Sinta, thanks for being in my Me. Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 The languages .............................. 1 1.2 Relations ................................. 3- 1.3 Production Grammars ......................... 4 2 Burmese 8 2.1 Kinship Data .............................. S 2.2 The Consanguineous Productions ................... 9 2.2.1 StructureRules ......................... 9 2.2.2 Reduction Rules ........................ 9 2.2.3 Word -4ssignments ....................... 11 2 .2.4 Morphological Rules ...................... 11 2.3 TheAffinalProductions ........................ 1'2 2.3.1 StructureRules ......................... 12 2.3.2 Reduction Rtrles ........................ 13 2.3 -3 Word Assignments ....................... 13 2 .3.4 N~orphologicalRules ...................... 14 2.4 Discussion of Consanguineous Productions .............. 14 2.4.1 StructureRules ......................... 14 2.4.2 ReductionRules ........................ 16 2.4.3 Word .A ssignments ....................... 16 2.4.4 Morphological Rules ...................... 16 2.5 Discussion of Affinal Productions ................... 17 2.5.1 Structure Rules ......................... 1'7 2-52 Reduction Rules ........................ 15 3-53 Word Assignments ....................... 19 2 5.4 kf orphological Rules ...................... 19 2.6 Cousin Terms .............................. 20 2.7 Esamples ................................ -1,, -7 3 Indonesian 28 3.1 Kinship Data .... .......................... 2S 3.2 The Consanguineous Productions ................ .. 25 3.2.1 Structure Rules ......................... 25 3-22 Reduction Rules ........................ 30 3.2.3 Word Assignments ....................... 30 3-2 -4 kf orphological Rules ...................... 31 3.3 S teprelation Productions ........................ 31 3.4 The Affinal Productions ........................ 31 3.4.1 StructureRules ......................... 31 3.4.2 Reduction Rules ........................ 32 3.4.3 Word Assignments ............. .. ........ 32 3.4.4 Morphological Rules ...................... 33 3.5 Discussion of Consanguineous Productions .............. 33 3 StructureRules ......................... 33 3.5.2 Reduction Rules ........................ 34 3-53 Word Assignments ....................... 35 3.5 -4 Morphological Rules ...................... 36 3.6 Discussion of S teprelation Productions ................ 36 3.7 Discussion of -4ffinal Productions ................... 37 3.7.1 StructureRules ......................... 37 3.7.2 Reduction Rules ........................ 37 3.7.3 Word Assignments ....................... 35 3.7.4 lv/lorphological RuIes ....... .. ............. 39 3.5 Esamples ................................ 39 4 Javanese 43 4.1 Kinship Data .............................. 43 4.2 The Consanguineous Productions ................... 44 4.2.1 StructureRules ......................... 44 4-22 Reduction Rules ........................ 44 4.2 -3 Word -4ssignments ....................... 44 4.2.4 Morphological Rules ...................... 48 4.3 Steprelation Productions ........................ 49 4.4 The Affinal Productions ........................ 49 4.4.1 StructureRules ......................... 49 4-43 Reduction Rules ........................ 49 4.4.3 Word Assignments ....................... SO 4.4.4 k1orphoIogical Rules ...................... 50 4.5 Discussion of Consanguineous Productions .............. 51 4.5.1 Structure Rules ......................... 51 4.5.2 Reduction Ruies ........................ 52 4.5.3 Word Assignments ....................... 53 4.5.4 h4orphological RuIes ...................... 54 - - 4.6 Discussion of Steprelation Productions ................ ;> .3 4.7 Discussion of Affinal Productions ................... 56 4.7.1 StructureRules ......................... 56 -- 4.7.2 Reduction Rules ........................ a I 4.7.3 Word Assignments ....................... 58 4.7.4 Morphological Rules ...................... 58 4.8 Esarnples ................................ 59 5 Madurese 64 5.1 Kinship Data .............................. 64 5.2 The Consanguineous Productions ................... 64 52.1 Structure Rules ......................... 64 5.2.2 Reduction Rules ........................ 66 3.2.3 Word Assignments ....................... 66 3.2.4 h/lorphological Rules ...................... 61 Steprelation Productions ................... .. ... 68 The -Affinal Productions ........................ 6S 5.4.1 StructureRules ......................... 6s 5-42 Reduction Rules ........................ 69 5.4.3 Word Assigcments ....................... 69 5 .4.4 MorphoIogical Rules ...................... 70 Discussion of Consanguineous Productions .............. 70 1 StructureRules ......................... 70 5.5 -2 Reduction Rules ........................ 71 5 -5-3 Word Assignments ....................... -12 5.5.4 Morphological Rules ................... .. 73 Discussion of Steprelation Productions ................ 73 Discussion of Affinal Productions ................... 74 5-71 StructureRules ......................... 74 5.7.2 Reduction Rules ........................ 74 -- 5 .?.3 Word -4ssignments ....................... Ia -- 5.7.4 ?LforphologicalRuIes ...................... Ia Esâmples ................................ 76 6 Sundanese 80 6 Kinship Data .............................. SO 6.2 The Consanguineous Productions ................... 80 6.2.1 StructureRules ......................... SO 6-32 Reduction Rules ........................ 52 6.2.3 Word
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Relations in Categories
    Relations in Categories Stefan Milius A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Graduate Program in Mathematics and Statistics York University Toronto, Ontario June 15, 2000 Abstract This thesis investigates relations over a category C relative to an (E; M)-factori- zation system of C. In order to establish the 2-category Rel(C) of relations over C in the first part we discuss sufficient conditions for the associativity of horizontal composition of relations, and we investigate special classes of morphisms in Rel(C). Attention is particularly devoted to the notion of mapping as defined by Lawvere. We give a significantly simplified proof for the main result of Pavlovi´c,namely that C Map(Rel(C)) if and only if E RegEpi(C). This part also contains a proof' that the category Map(Rel(C))⊆ is finitely complete, and we present the results obtained by Kelly, some of them generalized, i. e., without the restrictive assumption that M Mono(C). The next part deals with factorization⊆ systems in Rel(C). The fact that each set-relation has a canonical image factorization is generalized and shown to yield an (E¯; M¯ )-factorization system in Rel(C) in case M Mono(C). The setting without this condition is studied, as well. We propose a⊆ weaker notion of factorization system for a 2-category, where the commutativity in the universal property of an (E; M)-factorization system is replaced by coherent 2-cells. In the last part certain limits and colimits in Rel(C) are investigated.
    [Show full text]
  • Grandmothers Matter
    Grandmothers Matter: Some surprisingly controversial theories of human longevity Introduction Moses Carr >> Sound of rolling tongue Wanda Carey >> laughs Mariel: Welcome to Distillations, I’m Mariel Carr. Rigo: And I’m Rigo Hernandez. Mariel: And we’re your producers! We’re usually on the other side of the microphones. Rigo: But this episode got personal for us. Wanda >> Baby, baby, baby… Mariel: That’s my mother-in-law Wanda and my one-year-old son Moses. Wanda moved to Philadelphia from North Carolina for ten months this past year so she could take care of Moses while my husband and I were at work. Rigo: And my mom has been taking care of my niece and nephew in San Diego for 14 years. She lives with my sister and her kids. Mariel: We’ve heard of a lot of arrangements like the ones our families have: grandma retires and takes care of the grandkids. Rigo: And it turns out that across cultures and throughout the world scenes like these are taking place. Mariel: And it’s not a recent phenomenon either. It goes back a really long time. In fact, grandmothers might be the key to human evolution! Rigo: Meaning they’re the ones that gave us our long lifespans, and made us the unique creatures that we are. Wanda >> I’m gonna get you! That’s right! Mariel: A one-year-old human is basically helpless. We’re special like that. Moses can’t feed or dress himself and he’s only just starting to walk. Gravity has just become a thing for him.
    [Show full text]
  • What Are Kinship Terminologies, and Why Do We Care?: a Computational Approach To
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Kent Academic Repository What are Kinship Terminologies, and Why do we Care?: A Computational Approach to Analysing Symbolic Domains Dwight Read, UCLA Murray Leaf, University of Texas, Dallas Michael Fischer, University of Kent, Canterbury, Corresponding Author, [email protected] Abstract Kinship is a fundamental feature and basis of human societies. We describe a set of computat ional tools and services, the Kinship Algebra Modeler, and the logic that underlies these. Thes e were developed to improve how we understand both the fundamental facts of kinship, and h ow people use kinship as a resource in their lives. Mathematical formalism applied to cultural concepts is more than an exercise in model building, as it provides a way to represent and exp lore logical consistency and implications. The logic underlying kinship is explored here thro ugh the kin term computations made by users of a terminology when computing the kinship r elation one person has to another by referring to a third person for whom each has a kin term relationship. Kinship Algebra Modeler provides a set of tools, services and an architecture to explore kinship terminologies and their properties in an accessible manner. Keywords Kinship, Algebra, Semantic Domains, Kinship Terminology, Theory Building 1 1. Introduction The Kinship Algebra Modeller (KAM) is a suite of open source software tools and services u nder development to support the elicitation and analysis of kinship terminologies, building al gebraic models of the relations structuring terminologies, and instantiating these models in lar ger contexts to better understand how people pragmatically interpret and employ the logic of kinship relations as a resource in their individual and collective lives.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Traumatic Injury in Historic African and African American Populations
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2005 Patterns of Traumatic Injury in Historic African and African American Populations Christina Nicole Brooks University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Brooks, Christina Nicole, "Patterns of Traumatic Injury in Historic African and African American Populations. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2005. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/1801 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Christina Nicole Brooks entitled "Patterns of Traumatic Injury in Historic African and African American Populations." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in Anthropology. Murray K Marks, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Andrew Kramer, George White Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Christina Nicole Benton Brooks entitled “Patterns of Traumatic Injury in Historic African and African American Populations.” I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in Anthropology.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundations of Relations and Kleene Algebra
    Introduction Foundations of Relations and Kleene Algebra Aim: cover the basics about relations and Kleene algebras within the framework of universal algebra Peter Jipsen This is a tutorial Slides give precise definitions, lots of statements Decide which statements are true (can be improved) Chapman University which are false (and perhaps how they can be fixed) [Hint: a list of pages with false statements is at the end] September 4, 2006 Peter Jipsen (Chapman University) Relation algebras and Kleene algebra September 4, 2006 1 / 84 Peter Jipsen (Chapman University) Relation algebras and Kleene algebra September 4, 2006 2 / 84 Prerequisites Algebraic properties of set operation Knowledge of sets, union, intersection, complementation Some basic first-order logic Let U be a set, and P(U)= {X : X ⊆ U} the powerset of U Basic discrete math (e.g. function notation) P(U) is an algebra with operations union ∪, intersection ∩, These notes take an algebraic perspective complementation X − = U \ X Satisfies many identities: e.g. X ∪ Y = Y ∪ X for all X , Y ∈ P(U) Conventions: How can we describe the set of all identities that hold? Minimize distinction between concrete and abstract notation x, y, z, x1,... variables (implicitly universally quantified) Can we decide if a particular identity holds in all powerset algebras? X , Y , Z, X1,... set variables (implicitly universally quantified) These are questions about the equational theory of these algebras f , g, h, f1,... function variables We will consider similar questions about several other types of algebras, a, b, c, a1,... constants in particular relation algebras and Kleene algebras i, j, k, i1,..
    [Show full text]
  • Typology of Signed Languages: Differentiation Through Kinship Terminology Erin Wilkinson
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of New Mexico University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Linguistics ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 7-1-2009 Typology of Signed Languages: Differentiation through Kinship Terminology Erin Wilkinson Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds Recommended Citation Wilkinson, Erin. "Typology of Signed Languages: Differentiation through Kinship Terminology." (2009). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds/40 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Linguistics ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TYPOLOGY OF SIGNED LANGUAGES: DIFFERENTIATION THROUGH KINSHIP TERMINOLOGY BY ERIN LAINE WILKINSON B.A., Language Studies, Wellesley College, 1999 M.A., Linguistics, Gallaudet University, 2001 DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Linguistics The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico August, 2009 ©2009, Erin Laine Wilkinson ALL RIGHTS RESERVED iii DEDICATION To my mother iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many thanks to Barbara Pennacchi for kick starting me on my dissertation by giving me a room at her house, cooking me dinner, and making Italian coffee in Rome during November 2007. Your endless support, patience, and thoughtful discussions are gratefully taken into my heart, and I truly appreciate what you have done for me. I heartily acknowledge Dr. William Croft, my advisor, for continuing to encourage me through the long number of months writing and rewriting these chapters.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender, Language, and Wills Karen J
    Marquette Law Review Volume 98 Article 3 Issue 4 Summer 2015 Not Your Mother's Will: Gender, Language, and Wills Karen J. Sneddon Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr Part of the Estates and Trusts Commons, and the Law and Gender Commons Repository Citation Karen J. Sneddon, Not Your Mother's Will: Gender, Language, and Wills, 98 Marq. L. Rev. 1535 (2015). Available at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/mulr/vol98/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marquette Law Review by an authorized administrator of Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MARQUETTE LAW REVIEW Volume 98 Summer 2015 Number 4 NOT YOUR MOTHER’S WILL: GENDER, LANGUAGE, AND WILLS KAREN J. SNEDDON* “Boys will be boys, but girls must be young ladies” is an echoing patriarchal refrain from the past. Formal equality has not produced equality in all areas, as demonstrated by the continuing wage gap. Gender bias lingers and can be identified in language. This Article focuses on Wills, one of the oldest forms of legal documents, to explore the intersection of gender and language. With conceptual antecedents in pre-history, written Wills found in Ancient Egyptian tombs embody the core characteristics of modern Wills. The past endows the drafting and implementation of Wills with a wealth of traditions and experiences. The past, however, also entombs patriarchal notions inappropriate in Wills of today. This Article explores the language of the Will to parse the historical choices that remain relevant choices for today and the vestiges of a patriarchal past that should be avoided.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Relations
    CHAPTER 7 Introduction to Relations 1. Relations and Their Properties 1.1. Definition of a Relation. Definition:A binary relation from a set A to a set B is a subset R ⊆ A × B: If (a; b) 2 R we say a is related to b by R. A is the domain of R, and B is the codomain of R. If A = B, R is called a binary relation on the set A. Notation: • If (a; b) 2 R, then we write aRb. • If (a; b) 62 R, then we write aR6 b. Discussion Notice that a relation is simply a subset of A × B. If (a; b) 2 R, where R is some relation from A to B, we think of a as being assigned to b. In these senses students often associate relations with functions. In fact, a function is a special case of a relation as you will see in Example 1.2.4. Be warned, however, that a relation may differ from a function in two possible ways. If R is an arbitrary relation from A to B, then • it is possible to have both (a; b) 2 R and (a; b0) 2 R, where b0 6= b; that is, an element in A could be related to any number of elements of B; or • it is possible to have some element a in A that is not related to any element in B at all. 204 1. RELATIONS AND THEIR PROPERTIES 205 Often the relations in our examples do have special properties, but be careful not to assume that a given relation must have any of these properties.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dobe Ju/'Hoansi
    Lee Case Studies Janice E. Stockard and From the Field to the Classroom Dobe Ju/’hoansi The in Cultural Anthropology George Spindler, Series Editors Case Studies in Cultural Anthropology Series Editors: Janice E. Stockard and George Spindler The Dobe Ju/’hoansi Fourth Edition Geographically and topically diverse, the Case The Dobe Ju/’hoansi, 4th Edition, Studies in Cultural Anthropology series has Richard B. Lee Richard B. Lee enriched the study of cultural anthropology ISBN-13: 978-1-111-82877-6 and the social sciences for countless Shadowed Lives: Undocumented Immigrants in undergraduate and graduate students. More American Society than 200 ethnographies have been published , 3rd Edition, Leo R. Chavez through the years, many of which have ISBN-13: 978-1-133-58845-0 become classics in the field. And as the world continues to evolve into a global community, CourseReader for Cultural Anthropology the more recent studies in the series provide CourseReader: Cultural Anthropology allows not only readable, informative ethnographic you to create a fully customized online treatments of the world’s cultures but also reader in minutes. Access a rich collection discussions of their interactions and the of thousands of primary and secondary consequent changes that ensue. sources, readings, and audio and video selections from multiple disciplines. You A partial listing of series titles follows. For have the freedom to assign and customize more information on the series and to access individualized content at an affordable price. a wide range of anthropology resources, CourseReader: Cultural Anthropology is the visit us on the web at www.cengage.com/ perfect complement to any class.
    [Show full text]
  • The Algebraic Theory of Semigroups the Algebraic Theory of Semigroups
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/surv/007.1 The Algebraic Theory of Semigroups The Algebraic Theory of Semigroups A. H. Clifford G. B. Preston American Mathematical Society Providence, Rhode Island 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 20-XX. International Standard Serial Number 0076-5376 International Standard Book Number 0-8218-0271-2 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 61-15686 Copying and reprinting. Material in this book may be reproduced by any means for educational and scientific purposes without fee or permission with the exception of reproduction by services that collect fees for delivery of documents and provided that the customary acknowledgment of the source is given. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, or for resale. Requests for permission for commercial use of material should be addressed to the Assistant to the Publisher, American Mathematical Society, P. O. Box 6248, Providence, Rhode Island 02940-6248. Requests can also be made by e-mail to reprint-permissionQams.org. Excluded from these provisions is material in articles for which the author holds copyright. In such cases, requests for permission to use or reprint should be addressed directly to the author(s). (Copyright ownership is indicated in the notice in the lower right-hand corner of the first page of each article.) © Copyright 1961 by the American Mathematical Society. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Second Edition, 1964 Reprinted with corrections, 1977. The American Mathematical Society retains all rights except those granted to the United States Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Language and Culture. Work Papers of SIL-AAB, Series B, Volume 8. INSTITUTION Summer Inst
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 282 426 FL 016 724 AUTHOR Hargrave, Susanne, Ed. TITLE Language and Culture. Work Papers of SIL-AAB, Series B, Volume 8. INSTITUTION Summer Inst. of Linguistics, Darwin (Australia). Australian Aborigines Branch. REPORT NO ISBN-0-86892-252-8 PUB DATE Dec 82 NOTE 242p. PUB TYPE Collected Works - General (020)-- Reports - Research/Technical (143) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC10 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Children; Color; Comparative Analysis; Concept Formation; Creoles; *Cultural Context; Cultural Traits; Ethnic Groups; Females; Foreign Countries; *Indigenous Populations; *Kinship; Language Research; Lexicology; Linguistic Theory; Literacy; *Mathematical Concepts; Social Values; Sociocultural Patterns; Structural Analysis (Linguistics); Uncommonly Taught Languages; *Vocabulary IDENTIFIERS *Aboriginal People; Anindilyakwa; *Australia;Yanyuwa Possessives ABSTRACT Six Papers on the relationship of language and culture in the Australian Aboriginal contextare presented. "Some Thoughts on Yanyuwa Language and Culture" byJean Kirton gives an overview of some language-culture relationships and examinesseven kinds of possession in one language. "Nyangumarta Kinship:A Woman's Viewpoint" by Helen Geytenbeck outlines kinship and itsterminology as learned by a field linguist for her work with thisgroup. In "A Description of the Mathematical Concepts of Groote Hylandt Aborigines," Judith Stokes describesan Anindilyakwa mathematical language in its cultural context, refuting popular-generalizations about the limited counting ability of the Aboriginal people."Facts and Fallacies of Aboriginal Number Systems" by John Harriscriticizes anthropologists' and linguists' neglect of and bias concerning existing data about the mathematics of Aboriginalgroups. In "Aboriginal Mathematical Concepts: A Cultural and Linguistic Explanation for Some of the Problems," BarbaraSayers suggests that the mathematical problems of some Aboriginal schoolchildrenare real, but have a cultural rather than linguistic basis.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Jul 2019 Span Composition Using Fake Pullbacks
    Span composition using fake pullbacks Ross Street ∗ Centre of Australian Category Theory Macquarie University, NSW 2109 Australia <[email protected]> July 8, 2019 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 18B10, 18D05 Key words and phrases: span; partial map; factorization system. Abstract The construction of a category of spans can be made in some categories C which do not have pullbacks in the traditional sense. The PROP for monoids is a good example of such a C . The 2012 book concerning homological algebra by Marco Grandis gives the proof of associativity of relations in a Puppe-exact category based on a 1967 paper of M.Š. Calenko. The proof here is a restructuring of that proof in the spirit of the first sentence of this Abstract. We observe that these relations are spans of EM-spans and that EM-spans admit fake pullbacks so that spans of EM-spans compose. Our setting is more general than Puppe-exact categories. Contents 1 Suitable factorization systems 2 arXiv:1907.02695v1 [math.CT] 5 Jul 2019 2 The bicategory of EM-spans 4 3 Relations as spans of spans 5 4 A fake pullback construction 6 5 An abstraction 7 ∗The author gratefully acknowledges the support of Australian Research Council Dis- covery Grant DP160101519. 1 Introduction The construction of a category of spans can be made in some categories C not having pullbacks in the traditional sense, only having some form of fake pullback. The PROP for monoids is a good example of such a C ; it has a forgetful functor to the category of finite sets which takes fake pullbacks to genuine pullbacks.
    [Show full text]