I consider the influence of the language used in anthropological analysis (the metalanguage). If in principle there are at least as many anthropologies as there are languages, then we must allow the possibility of seven thousand or so more or less incommensurable anthropologies. However, incommensurability need not follow: not only can sparse theory aid comparison but it can also help establish partial (incomplete) commensurability. The parsimony of sparse theory allows for clarity even when dealing with vague ideas. If to achieve this some fashionable terms of analysis have to avoided, this is a price worth paying. In sum: we should all say less more clearly.

中文翻译：

---

稀疏性的论据

我考虑了人类学分析中使用的语言（元语言）的影响。如果原则上人类学的数量至少与语言的数量一样多，那么我们必须承认有七千种或多或少无法比较的人类学的可能性。然而，不可通约性不一定遵循：稀疏理论不仅可以帮助比较，而且还可以帮助建立部分（不完整）的可通约性。即使在处理模糊的想法时，稀疏理论的简约性也允许清晰。如果要实现这一点，必须避免一些时髦的分析术语，这是值得付出的代价。总而言之：我们都应该少说多清楚。