This paper reinterprets core issues in economic anthropology by exploring transfers as a theoretical resource. After describing deliberate usage of the term “transfer” in anthropology and economics, transfers are defined as movements of economic matter, while transactions are the forms arising from their configuration. Transactional categories such as Maussian gift exchange or market exchange become second-order reifications. Examining the politics of creating and sustaining transactional categories by first looking at the elementary transfers out of which they are constructed places “one-way transfers” of wealth on the same conceptual plane as reciprocal and market transactions, instead of being a derivative or a remainder of either or both. Gifts and gambling are considered as examples. Gambling and “pure gifts” are one-way transfers engineered to possess only one component transfer, and Maussian gifts explicitly connect transfers together in a particular politics. Anthropological literature that employs an incipient version of the transfer strategy is detailed, demonstrating its nascent explanatory promise. The article concludes by suggesting renewed engagement with contemporary economics on the basis of transfers.

中文翻译：

---

转移

本文通过探索作为理论资源的转移，重新解释经济人类学的核心问题。在描述了人类学和经济学中故意使用“转移”一词后，转移被定义为经济物质的运动，而交易是由它们的配置产生的形式。Maussian 礼品交换或市场交换等交易类别成为二阶具体化。通过首先查看构建它们的基本转移来检查创建和维持交易类别的政治将财富的“单向转移”置于与互惠和市场交易相同的概念平面上，而不是作为衍生品或剩余物之一或两者。礼物和赌博被视为例子。赌博和“纯礼物”是单向转账，设计为只拥有一个组成部分的转账，而莫斯礼物明确地将特定政治中的转账联系在一起。采用迁移策略初期版本的人类学文献很详细，展示了其新生的解释前景。文章最后建议在转移的基础上重新参与当代经济学。