Anthropologists often time specialize in one of the four
anthropological subfields, but most typically receive a holistic
(comprehensive) education as their base in their undergraduate degree
programs. There is a push from there for
specialization, which is odd given the importance and emphasis of the holistic
nature of anthropology. Today, many
anthropologists are returning to their roots and embracing interdisciplinary
research, most often combing two of the subfields into one (e.g. bioarchaeology,
biocultural, etc.) This blog post will
address one such combination: linguistic anthropology and archaeology.
Linguistic
anthropology is the study of language, whereas archaeology
is the study of past cultures. Both subfields
focus on very different aspects of understanding what it means to be human, but
they are complementary as they both focus on aspects of the human past,
specifically through historical linguistics and the very nature of archaeological
research. Therefore, there has been some
push among anthropological scholars to unite these two subdisciplines for the
purposes of enriching the study of the past.
Several archaeological-linguistic studies have been completed since the
1970s, although the majority have focused on using linguistic and archaeological
studies to understand the origins of modern ethnic groups. There have been additional studies, though,
that have taken different approaches. One
such study among Scandinavian groups used linguistics to understand and
interpret archaeological sites. Through
the study of myths concerning manhood scholars were able to make sense of specific
archaeological sites that contained a number of sacrificed dogs and
wolves. Without this linguistic evidence
the archaeologists were at a loss of why these sites existed, so the inclusion
of the linguistic evidence helped them better interpret the past. Other studies have followed this same course
of study by using linguistic evidence to understand aspects of the past that
may no longer be recoverable.
Unfortunately, very few anthropological scholars (be they
archaeologists or linguists) actually embark on this unified research. Part of this is the push to keep the subdisciplines
separate, which discourages such collaboration and prevents an individual to partake
in this research on their own since one individual may not have the skills from
multiple disciplines. These problems are
easily overcome, but additional problems are not. The biggest issue is that the languages spoken
today are most likely not the same or similar to those spoken in the past,
meaning there are limitations on how much modern language can be used to
interpret the past. Related to this there
are also issues of changing values, so the values of today may not be the same
as the past, further complicating interpretations of the past. Furthermore, linguistic studies may not be
feasibly used for groups that had and currently have no written language.
On a positive note where there is a will there is a
way. While combined archaeological and
linguistic studies may not be feasible in all cases there is evidence that the
ones that have been conducted have been successful. This demonstrates the utility in such studies,
and as the will among anthropologists grows there should be an increase in the
number of these studies occurring. The
outcome of this is further enriched understandings of what it means to be human,
which fulfills the ultimate goals of anthropological study.
References
Blench, R. 2006. Archaeology and Language: Methods and
Issues, in A Companion to Archaeology (ed J. Bintliff), Blackwell Publishing,
Malden, MA, USA.
Powell, E. A. 2013.
“Wolf Rites of Winter.” Archaeology Magazine. September/October.
Saarikivi, J. and M. Lavento. 2009. “Linguistics
and Archaeology: A Critical View of an Interdisciplinary Approach with
Reference to the Prehistory of Northern Scandinavia.” Networks,
Interaction and Emerging Identities in Fennoscandia and Beyond 13-16: 177-216.
Teofilo. 2012. “The
Roles of Linguistics and Archaeology.”
Gambler’s House: Chaco Canyon, Its World, and Ours.
Wencel, M. 2011. “Making Archaeology Speak-Archaeology and
Linguistics.” Popular Archaeology 3.
