Viewing page 1 of 41

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Transcription: [00:00:00]

{SPEAKER name="Shirley Gorenstein"}

What I've been thinking about is your last sentence and that had to do with this explanation and the use of an evolutionist framework, a diffusionist framework and what you called 'invention'. You said all of these are complementary.
[00:00:20]

{SPEAKER name="Gordon Ekholm"} [[?]]
I think they're complementary in every instance. Perhaps in every situation of cultural change there's a combination of the two. We borrow, and whatever we borrow is of course adapted to the borrowing culture. The attitudes and abilities, technical knowledge that the borrower has goes to make up something somewhat different from what they're borrowing from.
[00:00:58]

{SPEAKER name="Shirley Gorenstein"}
But there's another problem and that is that other people see a kind of relative importance in these three elements and that was something that I wanted to ask you about. They said that what was basic would develop indigenously, that is what they call the basic structure of society develops indigenously, and that what is diffused is essentially peripheral, it has to do with substance or with content but not with structure.
[00:01:30]


{SPEAKER name="Gordon Ekholm"}
Well, I think perhaps structure is more sort of basic to an individual culture or an individual civilization: certainly, for instance, matters of general style of a culture continue to exist even though that culture is borrowing ideas from another culture. One of the basic things about the American Indian civilizations

Transcription Notes:
Assuming this is Gordon Ekholm, not William Sturtevant?