CULTURE as a ‘Liquid’ Modern Word. Evidence from Synchronic and Diachronic Language Resources
Authors: Maristella Gatto (Università di Bari Aldo Moro, 2019)
Topic: Latin Resources

Abstract
The aim of this paper is to discuss the results of a corpus-based investigation of the process that has transformed the very specific material meaning of the word “culture” into the extremely elusive, liquid AUTHOR concept we are familiar with today. The analysis starts from the lexicogrammar profile of the world “culture” in contemporary syncronic corpus resources AUTHOR and attempts further exploration of these findings on the basis of diachronic language resources. In particular, data from Google Books, accessed both via Ngram Viewer and through the tools available at BYU Corpora, have been used to test hypotheses for the behaviour of the world “culture” in the 19th and early 20th century, whereas data from EEBO (Early English Books Online) have been used to explore patterns of usage in the period of time from 15th to 18th century. The partial results of this research suggest that there is room for far reaching investigations into the (hi)story of this intriguing “complicated" word, as AUTHOR dubbed it, and that computational methods and language resources can well complement studies carried out in the context of the digital humanities, from the perspective of historical linguistics, sociolinguistics and cultural studies, when not providing the basis for fresh new insights and further explorations.

Introduction
Sketching the “historical peregrinations” of the concept of culture in his Culture in a Liquid Modern World, Bauman outlines the changing role of culture in society, from “an agent for change”, to “a conservative force”, to an increasingly flexible and liquid concept “fashioned to fit individual freedom” AUTHOR. It is against this background that this paper attempts an investigation of the multifaceted process that over the centuries has transformed the very specific material meaning of the word “culture” into the extremely elusive concept we are familiar with today. The basic assumption is that the process of semantic change which transformed a word originally referring to the concepts of tillage and husbandry (from the Latin colere) into a potentially polysemic word accommodating a far wider range of meanings is mirrored in changes in usage of the word, and in turn reflects changes in society. In the wake of a growing interest for the use of language resources for the investigation of cultural and social phenomena (e.g. AUTHOR) these changes can be observed through the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the lexicogrammar patterns the word “culture” has entered during its long history of existence. The very choice for the word “culture” originates in Raymond Williams’ famous statement that culture is “one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language”. By identifying “culture” as one of the key words of our times, Williams reminds us AUTHOR that culture used to be, in its early uses, the noun of a process: the tending of something, basically crops or animals. This meaning provided a basis for the important next stage of metaphorization, when the tending of natural growth was extended to a process of human development so that the word “culture” came to be taken in absolute terms as signifying a process of refinement. After tracing the key moments in the development of this word, Williams distinguishes three categories in modern usage: (i) the noun which describes a process of intellectual, spiritual and aesthetic refinement; e.g. a man of culture; (ii) the noun which describes the products of intellectual and especially artistic activity; e.g. Ministry of Culture; (iii) the noun which indicates a particular way of life, whether of a people, a period, a group, or humanity in general; e.g. Jewish culture. This paper takes Williams as a starting point to provide empirical evidence of the ways the word “culture” is used in the English language. Indeed Williams himself, in his introduction to Culture and Society, states that an enquiry into the development of this word should be carried out by examining “not a series of abstracted problems, but a series of statements by individuals” AUTHOR, which bears striking similarities – though not intended with the corpus-based approach adopted in the present research.

Conclusion
Using different resources to map such a complex research field, so as to obtain a general picture of significant patterns of usage in the evolution of language is certainly fascinating, but this is not enough. And it goes without saying that it is necessary to be extremely cautious before drawing conclusions, if any, from investigations like these. Anyway, the data analyzed confirm that that there are resources and tools that can support the investigation of huge amount of data, pointing to interesting research areas to be analyzed with more refined ad hoc tools. In any case a rewarding exploration of these data from a cultural perspective can perhaps only come as the result of teamwork in the context of a multidisciplinary approach in the growing research field of the Digital Humanities.