ES Probes 1
(§
1). The notion of culture, as understood in the contemporary register of the social and
behavioral disciplines,
is a conceptual reification that implies such other notions as the social group,
membership of the individual in
the social group, regulative systems governing constitututive exchanges of
participants' dealings with each
other, record keeping activities, relationship, discourse, productions,
evaluations, change. These implied
notions in turn imply others. For instance, the notion of record keeping activities implies such further notions as
social history, biographical record, legal evidence, scientific investigation, and the Day of Judgment, reputation
information retrieval, and so on. And each of these in turn imply others. Thus, starting with the notion culture, we
can build a structural grid or arrangement of all the notions that it iMDlies. conceptual taxonomy. A labeled grid
of this sort is called a conceptual taxonomy.
(§ 2. )An ethnosemantic probe ( Es-Probe) is an analytic procedure for the derivation of a conceptual
taxonomy in a particular topic domain The procedure is mechanical and yields solutions that are recognizable
as standard and practical. clarifying , and liberating. For this reason, ES-Probes tend to be clarifying and
liberatingThese beneficial attributes of ES-Probes make them directly usable as forms of instruction,
explication, under standing, psychotherapy, counseling, guidance, as well as self-elucidation. The best
evidence for these claims lies in their direct valida tion by the user. An Es-Probe is a tool of investigation in
situations where clarification and understanding are of direct concern.
(§3.) The conceptual taxonomy derived as the outcome of the ES-Probe is an ethnosemantic outline
(Es-Outline). Es-Outlines are formal objects in ethnosemantics and function as derivation paths for the
generation of topic focus, topicalization, discourse (see Notes on Ethnosemantics) . ES-Outlines are
mathematical systems describable in the conceptual register of geometry and algebra (see Notes on the
Dialectics of Ethnosematics. A formal characterization of ES-Probes relates to the rationale of the
ethnosemantic notation system (see Notes on ESNOSYS), and will be described following some practical illustrations.
(§ 4). The following six operationalprocedures fully specify the derivation of an ES-Probe:
Step A. Select aparticular configuration of labeled topical entities. These constitute Anchor Concepts and define the topicdomain of the ES-Probe
Step B. Derive the Conceptualizations by connecting the anchor concepts two at a time and specifying a The number of conceptualizations is an exact mathematical function of the connectivity of theconfiguration of anchor points.
Step C. Derive the ethnosemantic coordinate markers (ES-Coordinates) for each conceptualization,
Step D. Derive the 8 ethnosemantic directions of each coordinate system (ES-Directions).
Step E. Derive all dyadic interactions between pairs of conceptualizations
Step F. Derive all multiple relations between combinations of ES-Directions for all dyadic interactions.
(§ 5). This completes the conceptual taxonomy of the particular ES-Probe We will now present specific
illustrations for these six operations., Step A, the selection of the topic domain for an ES-Probe is usually
made by reference to some relevant external consideration. In principle, since topic domain is formally
designated as the configuration of anchor points, any selection (whether thought of as "natural", or "random", or
''arbitrary" or "subjective") , or any configuration whatsoever will thus define topic domain, particularly (i.e., in
terms of the particular set one "happens to start with" and the the structure derived therefrom).
The simplest arrangement of anchor points is that of two labeled
entities connected by a line:
(----------------------------------------------------------------)
Mother
Child
(-----------------------------------------------------------------------------)
Golf
Truth
(------------------------------------------------------------------------------)
The Watergate Incident
Impeachment
(-------------------------------------------------------------------------------)
Julius Caesar (Shakespeare)
John Smith( who lives at XXX
a Boulevard in Middletown)
The next arrangement possible in 2-D is that of the triangular arrangement of three anchor points:
Two-dimensional arrangements of increasing connectivity can be specified as departing point for the
probe. Note, however, that number of labeled entries to be derived increases at a geometric rate and is given
by the expression:
Connectivity =[N-1]:
where N is the number of labaled points in the arrangement. Thus, for a triangle, the connectivity is 3[2+1].
For a quadrangle it is 6 [3 + 2 + 1] For a star arrangement of 10 points,connectivity is 45 [9 + 8 + 7....+1]
The connectivity of the topic domain (as defined by the number of labeled anchor points in an
arrangement) is a direct index of the magnitude ofthe ES-Probe. Since we are treating the probe
as an exhaustive expression of conceptual interconnectivity in an ethnosemantic topical domain, each
intersecting operation generates a geometric accumulation.
Consider: a topic domain specified by 4 anchor points yields 15 dyadic interactions (Step E). The
hexagon configuration, with six points, yields 15 conceptualizations and 105 dyadic interactions.
An arrangement of 16 anchor points yields 120 conceptualizations and 43,336 dyadic interactions.
It should be noted that the labeling operation in ES-Outlines employs the standardized procedures of
ordinary practical labeling as used in the everyday practices of participants in some particular membership
group. Lexicographic taxonomies (such as Roget's Thesaurus) reconstrcut "topic domains" by labeling
intersections in terms keyed to standard dictionary entries. These are examples of specialized or artificial
creations of topic domains, the kind that has a social membership relevance keyed to formal education (the
curriculum, the sciences, the disciplines, the areas of knowledge ES-Probes of Standard Topic Domains are
useful for instructional purposes where, because of the unintended haphazard or loosely organized presentation
of the materials, clarification of positional interconnections of new terminology is desirable. In such cases, the
number of departing anchor points will usually not exceed the cubic arrangement of 8 anchor points (which
yields a fully specified topic domain of 20,120 Standard Terms --- surely enough for any existing contemporary
scholarly discipline).
ES-Probes that are clarifying of relationships that exist in C) a situation or event, and thus increase
understanding of it, do not restrict the labeling of intersections in terms of pre-established "keyed" Standard
Terms, and use the ordinary competence of partici- pant membership for labeling in everyday ordinary practical
dealings. Thus, ethnosemantic "labeling" labels topics, or topic domains, these being natural products of
standardized interactions (dealings, transactions, conversations, discourse)
Since topic domains are naturally occuring cultural entities, their connectivity, magnitude and identity are
empirical parameters whose specification requires empirical investigation. ES-Probes are, therefore, formal
mathematical procedures for the empirical investigation of naturally occurring topic domains in the interactions
of participants in a membership group. We have not been able to find a rationale for assessing the "upper
limit" of topic domains in terms of their size, organizational complexity, or "value'. No doubt this will become a
central issue in ethnosemantics as the empirical investigation of naturally occurring topic domains accumulates
a sufficiently informative body of evidence as to the unnatural characteristics.
(§ 6. ) Topic Domains are the formal ethnosemantic objects that underlie the derivation of Assertions, and
further, Arguments. Since, Assertions and Arguments are formal components of event, episode, transaction,
discourse (see Notes on the Dialectics of Ethnosemantics), it can be anticipated that topic domains
characterize the essential features of all substantive and thematic reifications of social life. A specification of
ES-Outlines that are recognized by a particular membership configuration as "standard" (viz., dealt with in
standardized manner as revealed through the empirical observation of members' practices) sufficiently
characterize the particular identity of a "cultural group". Therefore, ES-Outlines are informative about special
situations where the interacting participants identify their belongingness to different particular membership
groups (c.f. "cross-cultural',' ethnic minority', "standard dialect' -- these being labels for topical domains
recognized by the current membership of psychologists, educators, linguists, language teachers). In such
situations, ES-Probes generated by informants who are also membership participants may serve as a
fully-specified contrastive description of two different particular ethnic groups, as represented by the
performance of the participants involved in the cross-ethnic interaction.
(§ 7.) The above discussion examined some of the issues involved in the selection of the departing
configuration for the ES-Probe (Step A) and consequences thereof. Step B involves the derivation of
conceptualizations using the " Method of Triangular Resolution of Contention Points" in the following manner:
With this arrangement, there are 6 conceptualizations to be derived:
A.(1-2): Adequacy
B.(1-3): Value Orientation
C.(1-4): Discussion
D.(2-4): Validation
E.(2-4): Policy
F (3-4): Consensus
The labeling of a new point in a connected configuration of anchor points resolving a contention point created
by connecting two anchor concepts. The immediate,evocative resolution of a contention point is a naturally
occurring discourse event that is operationally dependent on the evocative discourse mechanisms of register
(see Notes on Discourse Mechanisms) Register mechanisms allow the derivation of Assertions an Arguments
(e.g. in discourse) as various transformationally specified functions of topic domain configuration.
Therefore, particular resolutions selected for contention points (as in the examplesgiven here) are marked
as individual pro ductions of participants. They are thus indicative of personal-individual variations in
conceptual organization and functioning. Thus, the contrastive analysis of particular resolutions derived by
particular participants allows the characterization of individual understanding Similarly, the combinational
analysis of sets of such resolutions by different participants allows the characterization of variants standard
understanding through the specification of invariants.
(§ 8.) Step C involves the derivation of ES-Coordinates for each of the derived conceptualizations. Thus:
(i) for the line arrangement:
(----------------------------------------------)
Mother
Child
Conceptualization: (resolutions)
A.(1-2): Parenthood
ES-Coordinates:
|
Relevant
|
Role
|
Expectancies
|-------------------------------------
Role Relevant Displays
(ii) For the triangular arrangement:
The Watergate Incident
Conceptualizations:
(resolutions)
A. (1-2): The American Constitution
B. (1-3): Corruption of Public Officials
C. (2-3): Personal Respnosibility
ES-Coordinates:
Derive from the ES-Coordinates just illustrated:
A. Adequacy: The notion of Adequacy, seen as the resolution between "Establishing Criteria" and
"Re-evaluation of Criteria", is specified as the set of coordinate directions defined by "Percieved Relevance"
(of criteria established) and "Judged Responsiveness" (of the re-evaluation process). The ES-Coordinate
system allows the derivation of 8 possible directions (Step D)
1. Participation
5. Stability
2. Apathy
6. Breakdown
3. Efficiency
7. Rebellion
4. Inefficiency
8. Repression
Similarly, the 8 directions of each of the remaining 5 conceptualizations are derived by the same iterative
process. We shall illustrate again with C. Discussion:
C. Discussion 
C 1 - Availability
C 2 - Pre-occupation
C 3 - Animosity
C 4 - Amiability
C 5 - Contact
C 6 - Isolation
C 7 - Agreement
C 8 - Exploitation
The EX-Coordinates for Adequacy allow the derivation of the 8 possible directions:
A1: "Participation" is the label for direction 1, viz. "an increase in perceived relevance of criteria established, but without change in judged responsiveness of the re-evaluation process".
A2: "Apathy" is the label for the direction defined as "a decrease in perceived relevance of criteria established, but without change in the judged responsiveness of the re-evaluation process".
Note that A1 and A2 are obverse directions of the notion Adequacy (of procedures relating establishing and re-evaluation of criteria). This is reflected by the felt antonomy between "participation" and "apathy".
A3 and A4: "Efficiency" and "Inefficiency" defined as an increase (3) or decrease (4) in judged responsiveness, but without a change in perceived relevance.
A5 and A6: "Stability" and "Breakdown" specified as an increase or a decrease in both parameters simultaneously.
A7 and A8: "Rebellion" and "Repression" specified as inverse functions between the two parameters.
(§ 9. ) Step E involves the derivation of all dyadic interactions between conceptualizations. To continue with the foregoing illustration, we have:
Anchor Concepts : quadrangular arrangement in two dimensions:
1. Establishment )
2. Re-evaluation )
3. Description )
of Criteria
4. Adoption
)
Conceptualizations:
(1-2) A. -Adequacy
(1-3) B. -Value Orientation
(1-4) C. -Discussion
(2-3) D. -Validation
(2-4) E. -Policy
(3-4) F. - Concensus
ES-Coordinates and Directions
(1-2) A. Adequacy expressed as a function of Perceived Relevance (vertical axis0 and Judged Responsiveness (horizontal axis). The 8 ES-Directions specified by this coordinate system:
A1-Participation
A2-Apathy
A3-Efficiency
A4-Inefficiency
A5-Stability
A6-Breakdown
A7-Rebellion
A8-Repression
(1-4). C. Discussion expressed as a function of Cooperative Orientation and Competitive Orientation:
C1- Availability
C2- Preoccupation
C3- Animosity
C4- Amiability
C5- Contact
C6- Isolation
C7- Agreement
C8- Exploitation
The final two steps (Steps E-F) in the ES-Probe consists of the operation of deriving the dyadic interactions of conceptualization and their interconnected Arguments. In the example we are following, we have worked out the 8 directions for 2 conceptualizations, so that we can illustrate the last step. We thus have:
Step E: Dyadic Interaction between:
A- Adequacy
C- Discussion
This allows the derivation of the Argument, which is the fourth level of ethnosemantic functioning (One was: labeling Anchor Concepts;
Two: Labeling Conceptualizations; Three: Labeling ES-Coordinates):
A+ C =
Interpersonal Climate 