In this article, the authors describe three research tools that have been prepared to store, visualize, and analyze data in and from the field. These tools are intended to be used for a research that investigates a hypothesized cultural model in Tonga, Polynesia. The three tools are (1) the Digitized Tonga database, (2) the interactive 3-D display of the island of Vava’u and the village of Houma, and (3) the Synchronized Media and Visualization Analysis Tool (SMVAT). A detailed description of the genesis of the tools is provided. Two brief examples illustrate how these tools can be used and the types of innovative analyses they allow.
Bennardo, G. 1996. A computational approach to spatial cognition: Representing spatial relationships in Tongan language and culture. Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois, Urbana.
2.
Bennardo, G.1999. The conceptual content of Tongan directionals: Mental representations of space in Tongan. Rongorongo Studies9 (2): 39–61.
3.
Bennardo, G.2000. Language and space in Tonga: “The front of the house is where the chief sits!”Anthropological Linguistics42 (4): 499–544.
4.
Bennardo, G., and K. Schultz. 2003. Constructing the 3-D world of speech events: The “Digitized Tonga” database project. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology13 (1): 98–119.
5.
Bernard, H. R., P. D. Killworth, and L. Sailer. (1980). Informant accuracy in social network data IV: A comparison of clique-level in behavioral and cognitive network data. Social Science Research11:30–66.
6.
Bernard, H. R., P. D. Killworth, and L. Sailer. 1982. Informant accuracy in social network data V: An experimental attempt to predict actual communication from recall data. Social Networks2:191–218.
7.
Borgatti, S. P., M. G. Everett, and L. C. Freeman. 2002. UCINET 5.0 Version 1.00. Natick, MA: Analytic Technologies.
8.
Burkett, T. L. 1998. Co-sponsorship in the United States Senate: A network analysis of Senate communication and leadership, 1973–1990. Ph.D. diss., University of South Carolina, Columbia.
9.
Cognitive Anthropology Research Group. 1992. Manual for the Space Stimuli Kit 1.1. Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Max-Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
10.
Chomsky, N.1972. Language and mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Javonovich.
11.
Chomsky, N.1986. Knowledge of language. New York: Praeger.
12.
Chomsky, N.1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13.
D’Andrade, Roy G.1989. Cultural cognition. In Foundations of cognitive science, edited by M. I. Posner, 795–830. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14.
Duranti, A.1997. Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15.
Duranti, A., and C. Goodwin, eds. 1992. Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Fodor, J.1983. Modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
Freeman, L. C., and A. K. Romney. 1987. Words, deeds, and social structure: A preliminary study of the reliability of informants. Human Organization46:330–334.
18.
Gifford, E. W.1929. Tongan society. Honolulu, HI: Bernice P. Bishop Museum.
19.
Hirschfeld, L. A., and S. A. Gelman, eds. 1994. Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20.
Jackendoff, R.1997. The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21.
Johnson-Laird, and R. M. Byrne. 1991. Deduction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22.
Keesing, R.1987. Models, “folk” and “cultural”: Paradigms regained? In Cultural models in language and thought, edited by Dorothy Holland and Naomi Quinn, 369–393. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Kronenfeld, D.1996. Plastic glasses and church fathers. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
24.
Kronenfeld, D. 2002. The functions of different cognitive structures and their effects on structure. Paper presented in the session Cultural Structures and Distributed Cognition: Ethnographic Cases for Potential Formalization, organized by Dwight Read and David Kronenfeld, at the 1st meeting of the Society for Anthropological Sciences, New Orleans, November 22.
25.
Lehman, F. K. 2000. Cultural models (and schemata) and generative knowledge domains: How are they related? Paper presented in the invited session Cultural Models and Schema Theory: Present Issues and Future Development, organized by David Kronenfeld, Victor DeMunck, and Robert Schrauf, for the 99th annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association, San Francisco, November 19. Electronic posting at http://real.anthropology.ac.uk.
26.
Levinson, S. C.1992. Primer for the field investigation of spatial description and conception. Pragmatics2 (1): 5–47.
27.
Levinson, S. C.2003. Space in language and cognition: Explorationsin cognitive diversity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
28.
Sperber, D.1996. Explaining culture: A naturalistic approach. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
29.
Talmy, L.2000a. Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1, Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30.
Talmy, L.2000b. Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 2, Typology and process in concept structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31.
Wellman, B., and S. Wortley. 1990. Different strokes from different folks: Community ties and social support. American Journal of Sociology96:558–688.
