Formality and Informality in Communicative Events

Judith T. Irvine

American Anthropologist · 1979 · 385 citations · 18 references

Concepts

TL;DR

The study investigates the analytical value of the concept of formality in social‑cultural anthropology and how separating its dimensions aids comparison of social occasions by communicational structure. The authors compare political meetings among the Wolof of Senegal, the Mursi of Ethiopia, and the Ilongots of the Philippines. Literature review shows that formality comprises multiple, non‑correlated dimensions, and that it can function as tradition, coercive power, creativity, and change in communicative events. Keywords: formality, political meetings, ethnography of communication, sociolinguistics, situational analysis.

Abstract

This paper examines the analytical utility of the concept of “formality” in social‐cultural anthropology, particularly the ethnography of communication. A survey of literature indicates that “formality” actually incorporates several distinct descriptive dimensions that do not necessarily correlate. Separating these dimensions facilitates the comparison of social occasions, viewed in terms of their communicational structure. The occasions compared here are political meetings among Wolof (Senegal), Mursi (Ethiopia), and Ilongots (Philippines). It is suggested that formality in communicative events can serve not only the force of tradition or the coercive power of a political establishment, but also creativity and change. [formality, political meetings, ethnography of communication, sociolinguistics, situational analysis]

References

18