Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T14:29:23.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inalienable possession and personhood in a Q'eqchi'-Mayan community

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2007

PAUL KOCKELMAN
PAUL KOCKELMAN
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Barnard College, Columbia University, 3009 Broadway, New York, NY, 10027-6598, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This essay interprets the relation between inalienable possessions and personhood among speakers of Q'eqchi'-Maya living in the cloud forests of Guatemala. In the broadest sense, inalienable possessions are things that are inherently possessed by human beings, such as arms and legs, mothers and fathers, hearts and names. The relation between inalienable possessions and human possessors is analyzed across a variety of domains, ranging from grammatical categories and discursive practices to illness cures and life-cycle rituals. While this relation is figured differently in each domain, a strong resonance between such relations is shown to exist across such domains. For example, the gain and loss of inalienable possessions is related to the expansion and contraction of personhood. This resonance is used as a means to interpret Q'eqchi' understandings of personhood in relation to classic ideas from William James and Marcel Mauss: on the one hand, a role-enabled and role-enabling nexus of value-directed reflexive capabilities; and on the other hand, the material, social, and semiotic site in which this nexus is revealed.This essay was presented to the anthropology departments of Case Western University and Barnard College, the Mesoamerica Workshop at SUNY Albany, and workshops on linguistic anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Chicago. It has greatly benefited from discussions with participants in these forums, especially Asif Agha, Anya Bernstein, Thomas Chordas, Courtney Handman, Walter Little, Elizabeth Povinelli, Lesley Sharp, Michael Silverstein, and Greg Urban. Above all, a course I took from John Lucy, entitled “The Self,” was fundamental to the topic choice and theoretical framing.

Keywords

inalienable possessionmoral personhoodempathyintentionalityMarcel MaussvaluecirculationQ'eqchi'-Maya
Type
Research Article
Information
Language in Society , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , July 2007 , pp. 343 - 369
Copyright
© 2007 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adams, Richard N., & Rubel, Arthur J. (1967). Sickness and social relations. In Manning Nash (ed.), Social anthropology. HMAI, vol. 6, 125–50. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Agamben, Georgio (1995). Homo sacer: Sovereign power and bare life. D. Heller-Roazen (trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Agha, Asif (1995). Process and personality. Semiotica 107(1):125–46.Google Scholar
Agha, Asif (1998). Stereotypes and registers of honorific language. Language in Society 27(2):151–93.Google Scholar
Agha, Asif (2003). The social life of cultural value. Language and Communication 23:231–73.Google Scholar
Allen, N. J. (1985). The category of the person in Mauss. In M. Carrithers, S. Collins, & S. Lukes (eds.), The category of the person: Anthropology, philosophy, history, 26–45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Aristotle (2001). Politics (Book 1). In Richard McKeon (ed.), The basic works of Aristotle, 1210–1233. New York: Modern Library.
Austin, John (1955). How to do things with words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Brandom, Robert (1994). Making it explicit: Reasoning, representing, and discursive commitment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chappel, Hilary, & McGregor, William (eds.) (1996). The grammar of inalienability: A typological perspective on body part terms and the part-whole relation. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef
Conklin, Beth, & Morgan, Lynn M. (1996). Babies, bodies, and the production of personhood in North America and a native Amazonian society. Ethos 24:657–94.Google Scholar
DuBois, Jack W. (1980). Beyond definiteness: Trace of identity in discourse. In Wallace Chafe (ed.), The pear stories, 203–74. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Estrada Monroy, Austín (1990). Vida esotérica Maya-K'ekchí. Guatemala: Edición Cultural.
Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1969). The Nuer: A description of the modes of livelihood and political institutions of a Nilotic people. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ewing, Katherine (1990). The illusion of wholeness: Culture, self, and the experience of inconsistency. Ethos 18:251–78.Google Scholar
Gillen, Jack (1948). Magical fright. Psychiatry 11:387–400.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. (1980). Universals of kinship terminology: Their nature and the problem of their explanation. In Jacques Maquet (ed.), On linguistic anthropology: Essays in honor of Harry Hoijer, 9–32. Malibu, CA: Undena.
Haiman, John (1985). Natural syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heidegger, Martin (1988). The basic problems of phenomenology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Holland, Douglas (1992). Cross-cultural differences in the self. Journal of Anthropological Research 48:283–300.Google Scholar
James, William (1893). The principles of psychology. New York: Holt.
Kockelman, Paul (2002). Stance and subjectivity among the Q'eqchi'-Maya: Minding language and measuring labor under neoliberal globalization. Dissertation, University of Chicago.
Kockelman, Paul (2003a). The interclausal relations hierarchy in Q'eqchi'-Maya. International Journal of American Linguistics 69:25–48.Google Scholar
Kockelman, Paul (2003b). The meaning of interjections in Q'eqchi'-Maya: From emotive reaction to social and discursive action. Current Anthropology 44(4):467–90.Google Scholar
Kockelman, Paul (2004). Stance and subjectivity. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 14:127–50.Google Scholar
Kockelman, Paul (2005). The semiotic stance. Semiotica 1(4):233–304.Google Scholar
Kockelman, Paul (2006a). Representations of the world: Memories, perceptions, beliefs, intentions, and plans. Semiotica 162(1):72–125.Google Scholar
Kockelman, Paul (2006b). A semiotic ontology of the commodity. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 16(1):76–102.Google Scholar
Kockelman, Paul (2006c). Residence in the world: Affordances, instruments, actions, roles, and identities. Semiotica 162(1):19–71.Google Scholar
Kockelman, Paul (2007a). Agency: The relation between meaning, power, and knowledge. Current Anthropology (in press).Google Scholar
Kockelman, Paul (2007b). From status to contract revisited: A theory of temporality, circulation, and subjectivity. Anthropological Theory 7(2):151–76.Google Scholar
Lamb, Sarah (1997). The making and unmaking of persons: Notes on aging and gender in North India. Ethos 25:279–302.Google Scholar
Levy, Robert I. (1973). Tahitians: Mind and experience in the Society Islands. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Maine, Henry Sumner (2002). Ancient law. New Brunswick: Transaction.
Mauss, Marcel (1954). The gift. I. Cunnison (trans.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Mauss, Marcel (1979). A category of the human mind: The notion of person, the notion of ‘self’. Ben Brewster (trans.). In Sociology and Psychology: Essays by Marcel Mauss, 57–94. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Nichols, Johanna (1992). Linguistic diversity in space and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRef
O'Nell, Charles, & Selby, Henry (1968). Sex differences in the incidence of susto in two Zapotec pueblos: An analysis of the relationships between sex role expectations and a folk illness. Ethnology 7:95–105.Google Scholar
Sahlins, Marshall (1972). On the sociology of primitive trade. In Stone age economics, 185–230. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Shweder, Richard, & Bourne, Edmund (1984). Does the concept of person vary cross-culturally? In Richard Shweder & Robert LeVine (eds.), Culture theory: Essays on mind, self, and emotion, 158–99. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Silverstein, Michael (1995). Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description. In Ben G. Blount (ed.) Language, culture, and society: A book of readings, 187–221. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
Spiro, Melford (1993). Is the Western conception of the self “peculiar” with the context of the world's cultures? Ethos 21:107–53.Google Scholar
Stewart, Stephen O. (1980). Gramática Kekchí. Guatemala: Editorial Académica Centro Americana.
Taylor, Charles (1985a). Human agency and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, Charles (1985b). The person. In M. Carrithers, S. Collins, & S. Lukes (eds.), The category of the person: Anthropology, philosophy, history, 257–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tomasello, Michael (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Turner, Terrence (1980). The social skin. In J. Cherfas & R. Lewin (eds.), Not work alone, 112–40. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Weiner, Annette B. (1985). Inalienable wealth. American Ethnologist 12:52–65.Google Scholar
Weiner, Annette B. (1992). Inalienable possessions. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRef
Wilson, Richard (1995). Maya resurgence in Guatemala. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.