Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T06:08:17.183Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intentionality, Symbolic Pragmatics, and Material Culture: Revisiting Binford’s View of the Old Copper Complex

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

A. Martin Byers
A. Martin Byers*
Affiliation:
Department of Social and Cultural Sciences, Vanier College, 821 Blvd. Ste. Croix, Montreal, Quebec, CANADAH4L 3X9, and Department of Anthropology, 855 Sherbrooke Street West, McGill University Montreal, Quebec, CANADAH3A 2T7
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I examine how a cognitive archaeology may best be advanced by focusing on Intentionality, the mental property that acts as the causal interface in the human-world interaction. I call this approach symbolic pragmatics. The argument is that, through style as the symbolic medium, material culture is endowed by its users with a form of derived Intentionality that is expressively imposed on it in the moment of usage. The central heuristic is the notion of the legal warrant as a pragmatic symbol that transforms behavioral interventions into the types of social activities (intended) they are. In the same way, material cultural style symbolically endows its users with pragmatic or action-constitutive powers that transform their material interventions into the social activities they (intend) are. I apply the warranting model to interpreting the Old Copper Culture Complex, arguing that its copper/stone duality manifests a structuring of the material activities of this society into two complementary water and land ecological spheres.

Résumé

Résumé

Examino cómo una arqueología cognitiva puede ser avanzada al enfocarse en la Intencionalidad, aquella propiedad mental que actúa como la interfuse causal en la interactión entre el ser humano y el mundo. Este enfoque aquí se denomina pragmatismo simbólico. Arguyo que, a través del estilo como medio simbólico, quienes usan la cultura material la imbuyen con una forma de Intencionalidad derivada, la cual se impone expresivamente al momenta de uso. Ea heurística central es la notión de una garantía legal como símbolo pragmático que transforma intervenciones conductuales en los tipos de actividades sociales (intencionales) que ellas son. Del mismo modo, el estilo de la cultura material simbolicamente otorga a sus usuarios poderes pragmáticos o poderes constitutivos-activos que transforman sus intervenciones materiales en las actividades sociales (intencionales) que ellas son. Aplico el modelo de garantía en la interpretatión del Complejo de la Cultura “Old Copper” arguyendo que su dualidad cobre/piedra manifiesta una estructuración de actividades materiales de esa sociedad en dos esferas ecológicas complementarias-agua y tierra.

Type
Articles
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 64 , Issue 2 , April 1999 , pp. 265 - 287
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1999

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 Cited

Austin, J. L. 1962 How to do Things with Words. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Baerreis, D. A., Daifuku, H., and Lunsted, J. E. 1954 The Burial Complex of the Reigh Site. The Wisconsin Archaeologist 35: 1–36.Google Scholar
Bhaskar, R. 1978 ARealistTheory of Science. Humanities Press, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Bhaskar, R. 1979 The Possibility of Naturalism. Harvester Press, Brighton.Google Scholar
Binford, L. R. 1962 Archaeology as Anthropology. American Antiquity 28: 217–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binford, L. R. 1989 Sty les of Sty le. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 8: 51–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1994 Language and Symbolic Power. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Brumfiel, E. M. 1994 Introduction. In Factional Competition and Political Development in the New World, edited by Brumfiel, E. M. and Fox, J.W. pp. 3–14. Cambridge University Press, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burling, R. 1993 Primate Calls, Human Language, and Nonverbal Communication. Current Anthropology 34: 25–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, A. M. 1991 Structure, Meaning, Action and Things: The Duality of Material Cultural Mediation. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 21(1): 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, A. M. 1992 The Action-Constitutive Theory of Monuments: A Strong Pragmatist Version. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 22(4): 403–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, A. M. 1994 Symboling Behavior and the Middle-Upper Palaeolithic Transition: A Theoretical and Methodological Critique. Current Anthropology 35: 369–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, W. M. 1948 A Study of the Glacial Kame Culture in Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana. Occasional Contributions No. 12. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, M. 1966 Purity and Danger. Praeger, New York.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. 1970 Natural Symbols. Barrie and Jenkins, London.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. 1975 Implicit Meanings: Essays in Anthropology. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. 1982 Primitive Rationing. In” the Active Voice, edited by Douglas, M., pp. 57–81. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. 1976 New Rules of Sociological Method. Hutchinson, London.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. 1979 Central Problems in Social Theory. Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. 1981 A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism. Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. 1984 The Constitution of Society. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Hall, R. L. 1997 An Archaeology of the Soul: North American Indian Belief and Ritual. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. 1982 Symbols in Action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. 1991 Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology. 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press, London.Google Scholar
Hoebel, E. A. 1978 The Cheyennes. 2nd edition.Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York.Google Scholar
Ingold, I. 1987 The Appropriation of Nature: Essays on Human Ecology and Social Relations. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City.Google Scholar
Mason, R. J. 1981 Great Lakes Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
McGhee, R. 1977 Ivory for the Sea Woman: The Symbolic Attributes of a Prehistoric Technology. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 1: 141–149.Google Scholar
McHugh, W. P. 1973 New Archaeology and the Old Copper Culture. Wisconsin Archaeologist 54: 70–83.Google Scholar
Penman, J. T. 1977 The Old Copper Culture: An Analysis of Old Copper Artifacts. Wisconsin Archaeologist 58: 3–23.Google Scholar
Quimby, G. I. 1957 An Old Copper Site at Menominee, Michigan. The Wisconsin Archaeologist 38: 37–41.Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. 1994 Towards a Cognitive Archaeology. In The Ancient Mind: Elements of Cognitive Archaeology, edited by Renfrew, C. and B, E.. W. Zubrow, pp.3-12. Cambridge University Press, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritzenthaler, R. E. 1956 Reigh Site Report-Number 3. The Wisconsin Archaeologist 37: 97–129.Google Scholar
Ritzenthaler, R. E., and Wittry, W. L. 1952 The Oconto Site—An Old Copper Manifestation. The Wisconsin Archaeologist 33: 199–222.Google Scholar
Sackett, J. R. 1982 Approaches to Style in Lithic Archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1: 59–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sackett, J. R. 1985 Style and Ethnicity in the Kalahari: A Reply to Wiessner. American Antiquity 50: 154–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sackett, J. R. 1986a Style, Function and Assemblage Variability: A Reply to Binford. American Antiquity 51: 628–634.Google Scholar
Sackett, J. R. 1986b Isochrestism and Style: A Clarification. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5: 266–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. 1987 Social Theory and Archaeology. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. 1990 Re-Constructing Archaeology: Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press, London.Google Scholar
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. 1992 Experiencing the Past: On the Character of Archaeology. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. 1969 Speech Acts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. R. 1979 Expression and Meaning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. R. 1983 Intentionahty. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. 1995 The Construction of Social Reality. The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. 1985 Theories of Meaning. In Human Agency and Language by C. Taylor, pp. 248–292. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, I., and Tilley, C. 1993 The Axe and the Torso: Symbolic Structures in the Neolithic of Brittany. In Interpretative Archaeology, edited by Tilley, C., pp.225-324. University College London Series. Berg, Oxford.Google Scholar
Tilley, C. (editor) 1993 Introduction. In Interpretative Archaeology, pp. 1–27. University College London Series. Berg, Oxford.Google Scholar
Wiessner, P. 1983 Style and Social Information in Kalahari San Projectile Points. American Antiquity 48: 253–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiessner, P. 1985 Style or Isochrestic Variation? A Reply to Sackett. American Antiquity 50: 160–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiessner, P. 1989 Style and the Changing Relations between the Individual and Society. In The Meanings of Things, edited by Hodder, I., pp. 56–63. Unwin Hyman, London.Google Scholar
Wiessner, P. 1990 Is There a Unity to Style? In The Use of Style in Archaeology, edited by M. W Conkey and Hastorf, C.A., pp. 105–112. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Wittry, W. L. 1951 A Preliminary Study of the Old Copper Complex. The Wisconsin Archaeologist 32: 1–18.Google Scholar
Wittry, W. L., and Ritzenthaler, R. E. 1956 The Old Copper Complex: An Archaic Manifestation in Wisconsin. American Antiquity 21: 244—254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar