Claims to Purity in Theory and Culture: Pitfalls and Promises Author: Viranjini Munasinghe
I came across this paper while researching the acculturation of South Asian communities in North America. While this paper by Professor Viranjini Munasinghe of Cornell University covers a different topic creolization, I feel there are similarities and an attempt is to learn from patterns assuming there are. While I understand some of what is presented, there is a lot I don't understand and at the same time, I find the topic intriguing.
This paper is a critique of a critique of original research by the author. Munasinghe frames her views and peers' views as relatively close on the fundamentals and at the same time emphasized that her basis of the research is beyond superficial cultural blending and also covers the influence and impact due to political, economic, and power relations. (Note here that Creolization is the process through which creole languages and cultures emerge (ref) and a Culturalist is someone who focuses on the importance of culture in determining behavior (ref))
Further, according to the author, there is a dialectical tension between acculturation and interculturation that produces the "Caribbean genius" of "creative ambivalence" and that that economic and political aspects accompanying international migration as part of globalization need to be considered while attempting to understand acculturation
The author states “ the main thrust of my argument is that creolization theory needs to be conceptually refined (and the first step toward such refinement requires an acknowledgment of its schizophrenic character) for it to have general applicability as a theory of culture change”
And also suggests that global use of creolization as a pattern may be more than just linguistic models but cultural models as well
Reference:
Viranjini Munasinghe (2006). Claims to Purity in Theory and Culture: Pitfalls and Promises