Dominant group/Terminology

“[T]he main goal of terminology is not to represent concepts in order to manipulate them (as in artificial intelligence) but to define a common vocabulary we hope is consensual.”[1] Bold added.

Terminology: Ding (tripod) in ancient times was considered a symbol of social status and power “to make clear the difference between the noble and the humble, the dominant and the subordinate”. Credit: David Schroeter.

It should be possible to take an apparent term, especially a likely technical or scientific term, and locate its domain, etymology, lexicography, and pragmatics. This may be possible with dominant group.

Terminology edit

It should be possible to take an apparent term and locate its domain, etymology, lexicography, and pragmatics.

Dominant group edit

  1. Accident hypothesis: dominant group is an accident of whatever processes are operating.
  2. Artifact hypothesis: dominant group may be an artifact of human endeavor or may have preceded humanity.
  3. Association hypothesis: dominant group is associated in some way with the original research.
  4. Bad group hypothesis: dominant group is the group that engages in discrimination, abuse, punishment, and additional criminal activity against other groups. It often has an unfair advantage and uses it to express monopolistic practices.
  5. Control group hypothesis: there is a control group that can be used to study dominant group.
  6. Entity hypothesis: dominant group is an entity within each field where a primary author of original research uses the term.
  7. Evolution hypothesis: dominant group is a product of evolutionary processes, such groups are the evolutionary process, produce evolutionary processes, or are independent of evolutionary processes.
  8. Identifier hypothesis: dominant group is an identifier used by primary source authors of original research to identify an observation in the process of analysis.
  9. Importance hypothesis: dominant group signifies original research results that usually need to be explained by theory and interpretation of experiments.
  10. Indicator hypothesis: dominant group may be an indicator of something as yet not understood by the primary author of original research.
  11. Influence hypothesis: dominant group is included in a primary source article containing original research to indicate influence or an influential phenomenon.
  12. Interest hypothesis: dominant group is a theoretical entity used by scholarly authors of primary sources for phenomena of interest.
  13. Metadefinition hypothesis: all uses of dominant group by all primary source authors of original research are included in the metadefinition for dominant group.
  14. Null hypothesis: there is no significant or special meaning of dominant group in any sentence or figure caption in any refereed journal article.
  15. Object hypothesis: dominant group is an object within each field where a primary author of original research uses the term.
  16. Obvious hypothesis: the only meaning of dominant group is the one found in Mosby's Medical Dictionary.
  17. Original research hypothesis: dominant group is included in a primary source article by the author to indicate that the article contains original research.
  18. Primordial hypothesis: dominant group is a primordial concept inherent to humans such that every language or other form of communication no matter how old or whether extinct, on the verge of extinction, or not, has at least a synonym for dominant group.
  19. Purpose hypothesis: dominant group is written into articles by authors for a purpose.
  20. Regional hypothesis: dominant group, when it occurs, is only a manifestation of the limitations within a region. Variation of those limitations may result in the loss of a dominant group with the eventual appearance of a new one or none at all.
  21. Source hypothesis: dominant group is a source within each field where a primary author of original research uses the term.
  22. Term hypothesis: dominant group is a significant term that may require a 'rigorous definition' or application and verification of an empirical definition.

Examples from primary sources are to be used to prove or disprove each hypothesis. These can be collected per subject or in general.

Linguistics edit

This script was found on the temple walls of Tanjore Bragadeeshwara. It is very different from the present Tamil script. Credit: Symphoney Symphoney.

Linguistics is the scientific study of human language.[2][3][4][5] Linguistics can be broadly broken into three categories or subfields of study: language form, language meaning, and language in context.”[6]

Vocabulary edit

"What is reason for one man is rationalization for another. The variable is the accepted vocabulary of motives, the ultimates of discourse, of each man's dominant group about whose opinion he cares."[7]

Theoretical terminology edit

Def. a doctrine of words or phrases, "especially one from a specialised area of knowledge"[8].[9] is called terminology.

Def. "words which are not found in a dictionary",[10] are called out-of-vocabulary words.

“The discipline of terminology consists primarily of the following aspects:

  • analysing the concepts and concept structures used in a field or domain of activity
  • identifying the terms assigned to the concepts
  • in the case of bilingual or multilingual terminology, establishing correspondences between terms in the various languages
  • compiling the terminology, on paper or in databases
  • managing terminology databases
  • creating new terms, as required”[11].

Co-cultures edit

"The term co-culture is embraced over other terminology to signify the notion that no one culture in our society is inherently superior (but may be dominant) over other co-existing cultures. ... In its most general form, co-cultural communication refers to interactions among underrepresented and dominant group members."[12]

Diversity edit

"Not only does confusion and ambiguity in terminology make it difficult for writers to build on previous work, but with this topic perhaps more so than others, they might also give rise to interpretations which can then be used to undermine the value or support of the work. ... A common element in the study is that members of outgroups tend to experience less favorable fit and outcomes than members of the dominant group."[13]

Folk edit

"Folk terminology is revealing in this regard. ... Some of the same connotations are found in “Uncle Tom,” but this refers to one who acts as the dominant group wants him to act rather than as a member of the dominant group."[14]

Marginality edit

"In conclusion the authors state: 'The greatest incidence of marginal personality characteristics occurs in those individuals who are inclined to identify with the dominant group, but encounter a relatively impermeable barrier' (Kerckoff and McCormick, 1955). It should be noted that Dickie-Clark, mentioned before as the proponent of the strictly sociological theory of marginality, pursues the same idea except that he uses a different terminology."[15]

Medicine edit

"The power base of the dominant group is reinforced and the passivity of the recipients is maintained (Leap, 1992). The use of medical terminology by midwives and obstetricians can exclude women and their families from participating in any real way in decisions about their care, if terms are not explained and discussions conducted using common language which the lay person can understand (Hewison, 1995; Markus, 1997"[16].

Races edit

"[T]he large numbers of miners arriving from the US during the Gold Rush of 1849 clashed with the Mexicans who had been living for generations in California, and the dominant group (the Forty Niners), prepared by their readings of the early "Yankee" accounts of the native 'people," quickly saw these former citizens of Mexico in terms of race."[17]

"This continued with the colour-bound 1991 Census categories, the heavy emphasis on race being constructed by Isajiw (1993) as an attempt 'to enforce the external boundaries given by the dominant group … done in the name of combatting discrimination and prejudice'."[18]

Hypotheses edit

  1. Dominant group is an accepted two-word term.

See also edit

References edit

  1. Christophe Roche; Marie Calberg-Challot; Luc Damas; Philippe Rouard (October 2009). Herold, A., Hicks, A., Rigau, G., & Laparra, E.. ed. Ontoterminology: A new paradigm for terminology, In: International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development. Madeira, Portugal. Retrieved 2012-03-21. 
  2. Adrian Akmajian; ‎Richard A. Demers; ‎Ann K. Farmer. Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication. ISBN 0-262-51370-6. 
  3. André Martinet; Tr. Elisabeth Palmer (1960). Elements of General Linguistics. London: Faber. p. 15. 
  4. Michael A.  K. Halliday, Jonathan Webster (2006). On Language and Linguistics. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. vii. ISBN 0-8264-8824-2. 
  5. Joseph Greenberg (1948). "Linguistics and ethnology". Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 4: 140–7. 
  6. "Linguistics". San Francisco, California: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. June 18, 2012. Retrieved 2012-06-19.
  7. C. Wright Mills (December 1940). "Situated actions and vocabularies of motive". American Sociological Review 5 (6): 904-13. Retrieved 2016-02-06. 
  8. Timwi (16 May 2004). "term". San Francisco, California: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Retrieved 2016-02-06. {{cite web}}: |author= has generic name (help)
  9. Poccil (20 October 2004). "terminology". San Francisco, California: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Retrieved 2016-02-06. {{cite web}}: |author= has generic name (help)
  10. Youngja Park; Roy J Byrd; Branimir Boguraev (2002). Automatic Glossary Extraction: Beyond Terminology Identification, In: "Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics". Morristown, New Jersey. pp. 772-8. Retrieved 2012-03-05. 
  11. "Terminology". San Francisco, California: Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. July 25, 2012. Retrieved 2012-09-19.
  12. Mark P. Orbe (February 1998). "From The Standpoint (s) of Traditionally Muted Groups: Explicating A Co‐cuItural Communication Theoretical Model". Communication Theory 8 (1): 1-26. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1998.tb00209.x. Retrieved 2012-04-16. 
  13. Taylor Cox (1994). "A Comment on the Language of Diversity". Organization 1 (1): 51-8. doi:10.1177/135050849400100109. Retrieved 2012-04-16. 
  14. Gerald D. Berreman (April 1964). "Aleut Reference Group Alienation, Mobility, and Acculturation". American Anthropologist 66 (2): 231-50. doi:10.1525/aa.1964.66.2.02a00010. Retrieved 2012-04-16. 
  15. Ruth Johnston (August 1976). "The Concept of the "Marginal Man" : A Refinement of the Term". Journal of Sociology 12 (2): 145-7. doi:10.1177/144078337601200212. Retrieved 2012-04-16. 
  16. Fran Carboon (December 1999). "Language power and change". Australian College of Midwives Incorporated Journal 12 (4): 19-22. doi:10.1016/S1031-170X(99)80027-0. Retrieved 2012-04-16. 
  17. David E. Hayes-Bautista; Jorge Chapa (January 1987). "Latino Terminology: Conceptual Bases for Standardized Terminology". American Journal of Public Health 77 (1): 61-8. doi:10.2105/AJPH.77.1.61. Retrieved 2012-10-31. 
  18. Peter J. Aspinall (November 2002). "Collective Terminology to Describe the Minority Ethnic Population The Persistence of Confusion and Ambiguity in Usage". Sociology 36 (4): 803-16. doi:10.1177/003803850203600401. Retrieved 2012-10-31. 

Further reading edit

External links edit

{{Dominant group}}{{Linguistics resources}}