Catálogo de publicaciones - revistas

<jats:p> This review offers new perspectives on the anthropology of injuries and wounds. It maps how theories, methods, and ethnographic sensibilities converge on wounds, on the act of wounding, and on the wounded as instructive objects. The review assesses how anthropologists understand social forces to cause wounds and how they accord wounds the power to generate meaning about sociality. Organized across two themes, “breach” and “repair,” the review tests concepts of embodiment across clinical boundaries, manifestations of harm, and formations of justice. It examines how anthropological thought connects to wound culture and assesses links between embodiment and politics that develop in the domains of critical theory and medical anthropology. Ultimately, it aims to shed light on the connections between body politics and ethnography and to ask what wounds might generate as an anthropological concern. </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>

<jats:p> Speaker attitudes, ascriptions, qualia, and other forms of overt aesthetic commentary function as constraints on language and culture and are central to sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology. Despite the importance of aesthetics, sociolinguists studying variation and change have largely shied away from the topic. This review suggests that covert aesthetic evaluations play a role in variation and change. We draw on non-Western approaches to aesthetics ( rasa and “everyday aesthetics”) that emphasize the interplay between receiver and the aesthetic stimulus. We present two case studies. One, from fieldwork on Nkep (an Oceanic language spoken in Vanuatu), draws attention to the way aesthetic factors seem to slow language change. The other, from fieldwork on Spanish in California, shows how aesthetic evaluations of linguistic features facilitate the transfer of variation in a situation of language contact. </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>

<jats:p> In this article, we suggest that in starting from dialogical, interactive studies of human discourse, we can uncover properties of cooperation that have otherwise been missed or have remained underappreciated by scholars trying to account for cooperation from an evolutionary point of view or from the point of view of its mental representation (i.e., by means of collective intentions or goals). Before uncovering these properties, we argue that a distinction must be drawn between intersubjectivity, understood as an ever-present empathic sensitivity to others, and intersubjective attunement, the process of adjusting one's actions to the ever-changing contextual conditions of interaction. It is by attending to intersubjective attunement that cooperative activities are shown to be inherently vulnerable to breach, failure, and all kinds of interactional glitches, while also being open to modifications, e.g., repairs, that allow for their successful completion. Unpacking these conditions for cooperation allows us to reveal five general properties that guide its semiotic constitution, namely, sensorial access, distributed intentionality, fluctuation of attention, improvisation, and negotiable role ascription. Attention to the semiotics of cooperation across communities and within particular activities can add a sixth general property, namely, variability in how and the extent to which cooperation is acknowledged. We introduce the term cryptocooperation to describe joint activities where the cooperative role by certain participants is underrecognized and thereby remains hidden. </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>

<jats:p> Anthropology, especially biological anthropology, owes its origins to the scientific study of human racial differences. That dark history is well-acknowledged and, when it is taught, usually begins with the racism of early figures, such as Johann Friedrich Blumenbach or, more recently, Ernest Hooton, and exonerates itself through a turn toward antiracist scholars such as Frank Livingstone and Franz Boas. Rarely, if ever, is this origin story critically appraised. This article aims to complicate the origin story of biological anthropology by examining how colonial subjects were involved in the development, testing, and refinement of racial theory, and thus of biological anthropology itself. Taking India as an example, I trace how Indians and the caste system were first the subjects and eventually the interlocutors of racial scientific theory and testing. This reorientation, I argue, is important for developing a more expansive and accurate version of the discipline's history and also for shining a light on its relevance to contemporary global racial conflict. </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>

<jats:p> The COVID-19 pandemic is extraordinary, but many ordinary events have contributed to its becoming and persistence. Here, we argue that the emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, which has radically altered day-to-day life for people across the globe, was an inevitability of contemporary human ecology, presaged by spillovers past. We show the ways in which the emergence of this virus reiterates other infectious disease crises, from its origin via habitat encroachment and animal use by humans to its evolution of troublesome features, and we spotlight a long-running crisis of inequitable infectious disease incidence and death. We conclude by describing aspects of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic that present opportunities for disease control: spaces for intervention in infection and recovery that reduce transmission and impact. There are no more “before times”; therefore, we encourage embracing a future using old mitigation tactics and government support for ongoing disease control. </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>

<jats:p> Discussions of boundaries have enjoyed a renaissance in anthropological archaeology of recent years, especially as conversations surrounding forced migration and border walls look toward the material record for clarification about what borders are and what they do. Since 1995, when the Annual Review of Anthropology last addressed a similar issue, numerous methodological and conceptual changes in the field have led to a large proliferation in the literature. A brief Google Scholar search of the words “archaeology,” “boundaries,” and “work” between 1995 and the present produces 365,000 results and makes one point clear: Archaeologists have had a lot to say about the topic. By framing this review around the work of boundaries, I signal two trends in the field of archaeology with conceptual and methodological implications. The first trend is the increased centrality of materiality as a theoretical register as new questions relating to object agency, human/nonhuman boundaries, and new models of environmental archaeology have populated the literature. In such climates it is important to focus on boundaries as a kind of assemblage of actants that takes on agencies beyond notions of territory. Associated border, crossing, transnational, and refuge assemblages are discussed. The second trend is the increased attention to boundary work in archaeology. Whether it is in the form of postcolonial/decolonizing archaeologies, new materialities/symmetrical archaeologies, or contemporary archaeologies, there has been increased pushback against attempts to define anthropological archaeology along processual lines. In this article I review one thread of that literature, critical cartographies, and how they have used the archaeological record to develop radical renditions of political space where boundaries are involved. I focus on scholarship surrounding the relatively recent past (ca. 1200 CE to the present). </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>

<jats:p> The twenty-first century has witnessed a surge of scholarship at the sometimes-perilously sharp edge of anthropology and Native American and Indigenous studies. This review sets forth from a disciplinary conjuncture of the early 2000s, when anthropology newly engaged with the topic of sovereignty, which had long been the focus of American Indian studies, and when the long-standing anthropological interest in colonialism was reshaped by Indigenous studies attention to the distinctive form labeled settler colonialism. Scholars working at this edge address political relationality as both concept and methodology. Anthropologists, in turn, have contributed to Indigenous studies a commitment to territorially grounded and community-based research and theory building. After outlining the conjuncture and its methodological entailments, the review turns to two directions in scholarship: reinvigorated ethnographic research on environment and on culture and economy. It concludes with reflection on the implications of this conjuncture for anthropological epistemology and disciplinary formation. </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>

<jats:p> This review provides an overview of the anthropology of love and some of the main bodies of ethnographic work and theoretical debates around studies of love. It surveys specific studies that make the politics of intimacy and love central to their analysis and that seek to make theoretical sense of its meaning and broader significance. This discussion is followed by work that draws together an example of the politicization of love in the shape of a claim around “love jihad,” which has dominated recent discussions of love in India and has begun to receive anthropological attention. In conclusion, the review argues that the politics of love will need to account for the meanings, constraints, and everyday vulnerabilities through which intimate lives become entangled with and illuminate political projects of every scale. </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>

<jats:p> Since the appearance of Derrida's Specters of Marx: The State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning and the New International in 1994, there has been an outpouring of writing in cultural studies around the themes of hauntology and spectralities. This article asks broadly whether a form of hauntology has emerged within anthropology; if so, when and how it has appeared; and what constitutes such a field as distinctive. This article asks what comprises being haunted as a specific affective state within anthropological writing, what theory of the subject is assumed by such writings, and what distinguishes ethnographic analyses that do not dismiss the presence of ghosts as simply cultural beliefs or literary fictions, as is common in cultural studies. It reviews the literature on the haunting remains of traumatic violence, examines writing that juxtaposes hauntological and ontological theorizing, describes the appearance of an incipient hauntological voice within ethnographic writing, and concludes with a discussion of the emergence of a hauntological ethics. </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>

<jats:p> The original hygiene hypothesis proposed that certain diseases derive from low levels of early-life microbial exposure. Since then, the hypothesis has been applied to numerous inflammatory, autoimmune, and allergic conditions. The changes in hygiene linked to these diseases include numerous changes in biotic exposure and lifestyle. To this end, some scholars have called for abandonment of the term or have suggested alternate labels, e.g., the old friends hypothesis. However, neither of these terms encompasses the complexity of plasticity in immune response and host–parasite/commensal interactions that influence these conditions. Here, I review this complexity, with particular regard to the factors affecting immunological strategies, the development of tolerance, immune dysfunction, and ecological interactions among organisms. I discuss the biotic factors that affect immune plasticity and how these interact with abiotic factors such as nutrition, as well as how transgenerational exposures may affect immune plasticity. Finally, I review the general features of diseases linked to biotic exposures. </jats:p><jats:p> Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates. </jats:p>