Difference between revisions of "Culture Based Classifications"

From edegan.com
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Ed
imported>Ed
Line 6: Line 6:
 
#[[UN GeoRegion Codes | UN GeoRegions]]
 
#[[UN GeoRegion Codes | UN GeoRegions]]
 
#[[Ethnologue Classification]] - A language development based aggregation
 
#[[Ethnologue Classification]] - A language development based aggregation
#[[US Census Ethnicities]]
+
#[[US Census | US Census Ethnic Origin]]
  
 
==Custom Classifications==
 
==Custom Classifications==
  
For the purpose of economic analysis it is not necessary to know which country an individuals name has its roots in; broad areas of origin are sufficient. Areas that are of particular interest (excluding the U.S.) might include:
+
For the purpose of economic analysis it is often not necessary to know which country an individual's name has its roots in; broad areas of origin are usually sufficient. Areas that are of particular interest (excluding the U.S.) might include:
 
#Western European (including the colonies, particularly Australia, New Zealand, and Canada)
 
#Western European (including the colonies, particularly Australia, New Zealand, and Canada)
 
#Scandinavian
 
#Scandinavian

Revision as of 18:33, 14 July 2009

There are many possible 'culture' based classes that one might want to use. At the finest grained level (and in the most ambitious case), one might want to predict actual countries of origin ( standardized country names are provided by the United Nations). At all more course-grained levels, countries must be aggregated into meaningful units.

Three commonly used (and meaningful) aggregations are:

  1. UN GeoRegions
  2. Ethnologue Classification - A language development based aggregation
  3. US Census Ethnic Origin

Custom Classifications

For the purpose of economic analysis it is often not necessary to know which country an individual's name has its roots in; broad areas of origin are usually sufficient. Areas that are of particular interest (excluding the U.S.) might include:

  1. Western European (including the colonies, particularly Australia, New Zealand, and Canada)
  2. Scandinavian
  3. Slavic
  4. Hispanic/Latin
  5. Chinese (including Chinese 'dependencies')
  6. Arab (Muslim)
  7. Israel (Jewish)
  8. African
  9. India/Pakistan
  10. Korean
  11. Japanese
  12. Other Asia-Pacific (Phillipines, Vietnam...)

We are aware that this list is not "politically correct", but we are not making statements regarding the intrinsic worth of individuals from these areas, or stereotyping these areas, etc. We are merely looking for units that would exhibit greater 'cultural' homogeneity within the area than across areas, and that are identifiable using names data.

Other Classifications

One other potentially useful classification of names is based on differences in writing systems. The following is a loose list of the major writing systems of the world:

  • Latin (alphabetic)
  • Cyrillic (alphabetic)
  • Hangul (featural alphabetic)
  • Other alphabets
  • Arabic (abjad)
  • Other abjads
  • Devanagari (abugida)
  • Other abugidas
  • Syllabaries
  • Chinese characters (logographic)