Despite the long history of kinship studies, we still lack agreed theories capable of explaining the connection between terminological systems and kinship practice. This article argues for a cognitive approach centering on two distinct but complementary aspects of identity. It is argued that patterns of shared identity are implied by terminology and combine with other factors to motivate practice—in a feedback loop which transmits influences between terminological systems and political and economic institutions. The argument is illustrated by statistical and historical analyses of an aspect of European kinship.
AndersonR. (1963). Changing kinship in Europe. Kroeber Anthropological Society, 28, 1-47.
2.
AugustinsG. (1989). Comment se perpétuer? Devenir des lignées et destins des patrimoines dans les paysanneries européennes. [How can one perpetuate oneself? The formation of lineages and the inheritance of property in European peasant societies]. Nanterre, France: Société d’ethnologie.
3.
BamfordS.LeachJ. (Eds.). (2009). Kinship and beyond: The genealogical method reconsidered. New York, NY: Berghahn Books.
4.
BarnesR. (2012). Omaha and “Omaha.” In TrautmannT.WhiteleyP. (Eds.), Crow-Omaha: New light on a classic problem of kinship analysis (pp. 69-82). Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
5.
BarryL. (2008). La parenté. [Kinship]. Paris, France: Gallimard.
6.
BischoffJ. (2016). Verwandschaftsterminolgie und soziale Praxis in der Neuzeit [Kinship terminology and social practice in the modern epoch] (Master’s thesis). Philosophische Fakultät I, Martin-Luther Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Germany.
7.
EhmerJ. (2009). House and the stem family in Austria. In Fauve-ChamouxA.OchiaiE. (Eds.), The stem family in Eurasian perspective: Revisiting house societies, 17th-20th centuries (pp. 103-131). Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
8.
FestingerL. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
9.
FortesM. (2006). Kinship and the social order: The legacy of Lewis Henry Morgan. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. (Original work published 1969)
10.
GoodyJ. (1976). Production and reproduction: A comparative study of the domestic domain. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11.
GoodyJ. (1983). The development of the family and marriage in Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12.
GranditsH. (2010). Introduction: The reshaping of family and kin relations in European welfare systems. In GranditsH. (Ed.), Family, Kinship and State in Contemporary Europe: Vol. 1. The century of welfare: Eight countries (pp. 23-46). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
13.
GruberS.HeadyP. (2010a). Domestic help. In HeadyP.KohliM. (Eds.), Family, Kinship and State in Contemporary Europe: Vol. 3. Perspectives on theory and policy (pp. 83-125). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
14.
GruberS.HeadyP. (2010b). Kinship in transformation—Measures and models. In GranditsH. (Ed.), Family, Kinship and State in Contemporary Europe: Vol. 1. The century of welfare: Eight countries (pp. 363-390). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
15.
GruberS.HeadyP. (2010c). Structural help. In HeadyP.KohliM. (Eds.), Family, Kinship and State in Contemporary Europe: Vol. 3. Perspectives on theory and policy (pp. 127-158). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
16.
HageP.HararyF. (1983). Structural models in anthropology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17.
HeadyP. (2010). Introduction: Care, kinship and community—The view from below. In HeadyP.SchweitzerP. (Eds.), Family, Kinship and State in Contemporary Europe: Vol. 2. The view from below: Nineteen localities (pp. 13-59). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
18.
HeadyP. (2013). Implicit formality: Keesing’s challenge and its significance for European kinship. Structure and Dynamics, 61(1). Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5rx0p0kg
19.
HeadyP.GruberS.OuZ. (2010). Family, kindred and marriage. In HeadyP.KohliM. (Eds.), Family, Kinship and State in Contemporary Europe: Vol. 3. Perspectives on theory and policy (pp. 31-69). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
20.
HeadyP.KohliM. (Eds.). (2010). Family, Kinship and State in Contemporary Europe: Vol. 3. Perspectives on theory and policy. Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
21.
HeiderF. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organisation. Journal of Psychology, 21, 107-112.
22.
KayP. (1975). The generative analysis of kinship semantics: A reanalysis of the Seneca data. Foundations of Language, 13, 201-214.
23.
KellyR. (1974). Etoro social structure: A study in structural contradiction. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
24.
KohliM.AlbertiniM.KünemundH. (2010). Linkages among adult family generations: Evidence from comparative survey research. In HeadyP.KohliM. (Eds.), Family, Kinship and State in Contemporary Europe: Vol. 3. Perspectives on theory and policy (pp. 225-248). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
25.
KronenfeldD. (2009). Fanti kinship and the analysis of kinship terminologies. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
26.
Lévi-StraussC. (1969). The elementary structures of kinship (Rev. ed.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
27.
LorrainF.WhiteH. (1971). Structural equivalence of individuals in social networks. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 1, 49-80.
28.
LounsburyF. (1964). A formal account of Crow- and Omaha-type kinship terminologies. In GoodenoughW. (Ed.), Explorations in cultural anthropology (pp. 351-393). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
29.
MilliganG.KieserC.SchneggM.BirçanT.OuZ.GruberS.HeadyP. (2015). Kinship Network Questionnaire (KNQ) and associated systems: Quantitative methodology of the KASS (Kinship and Social Security) project. Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences: GESIS Datorium. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.7802/83
30.
MitterauerM. (2003). European kinship systems and household structures medieval origins. In GranditsH.HeadyP. (Eds.), Distinct inheritances: Property, family and community in a changing Europe (pp. 35-51). Münster, Germany: LIT Verlag.
31.
MitterauerM. (2010). Why Europe? The medieval origins of its special path. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32.
MorganL. (1985). Ancient society, or researches in the lines of human progress from savagery through barbarism to civilisation (Reprinted with forward by TookerE.). Tucson: University of Arizona Press. (Original work published 1877)
33.
MorganL. (1999). Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family (with an introduction by TookerE.). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. (Original work published 1870)
34.
MurdockG. (1949). Social structure. New York: The Free Press.
35.
MurphyM. (2008). Variations in kinship networks across geographic and social space. Population and Development Review, 34, 19-49.
36.
NeedhamR. (1983). Structure and sentiment: A test case in social anthropology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1962)
37.
ParkJ.SchallerM. (2005). Does attitude similarity serve as a heuristic cue for kinship? Evidence of an implicit cognitive association. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 158-170.
38.
ParkinR. (2015). Indo-European kinship terminologies in Europe: Trajectories of change. Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford, 7, 205-233.
39.
ReadD. (2001). What is kinship? In FeinbergR.OttenheimerM. (Eds.), The cultural analysis of kinship: The legacy of David M. Schneider (pp. 78-117). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
40.
ReadD.FischerM.LehmanF. (2014). The cultural grounding of kinship: A paradigm shift. L’homme, 210, 63-90.
41.
ReherD. (1998). Family ties in Western Europe: Persistent contrasts. Population and Development Review, 24, 203-234.
42.
SahlinsM. (2012). What kinship is—and is not. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
43.
SchefflerH. (1972). Systems of kin classification: A structural typology. In ReiningP. (Ed.), Kinship studies in the Morgan centennial year (pp. 113-133). Washington, DC: The Anthropological Society of Washington.
44.
SchleeG.HeadyP. (2010). Terminology and practice: European kinship in a world-wide perspective. In HeadyP.KohliM. (Eds.), Family, Kinship and State in Contemporary Europe: Vol. 3. Perspectives on theory and policy (pp. 357-384). Frankfurt, Germany: Campus.
45.
SzoltysekM.KlüsenerS.PoniatR.GruberS. (2017). The patriarchy index: A new measure of gender and generational inequalities in the past. Cross-Cultural Research, 51, 228–262.
46.
TrautmannT. (1995). Dravidian kinship. New Delhi, India: Vistaar Publications. (Original work published 1981)
47.
TrautmannT. (2001). The whole history of kinship terminology in three chapters. Anthropological Theory, 1, 268-287.
48.
Viveiros de CastroE. (1998). Cosmological deixis and Amerindian perspectivism. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 4, 469-488.
49.
Viveiros de CastroE. (2009). The gift and the given: Three nano-essays on kinship and magic. In BamfordS.LeachJ. (Eds.), Kinship and beyond: The genealogical method reconsidered (pp. 237-268). New York, NY: Berghahn Books.
