Archaeologica.org

The Hohokam inhabited the Valley between A.D. 1 and A.D. 1450 and perhaps are best known for the sophisticated canals that settlers later used for irrigation.

This is from today's Archeological News.
See link below.

When does a sophisticated system of canals emerge from "a lot of irrigation ditches."
It's a pet peeve of mine, this overuse of the word "sophisticated." It seems to be applied to ancient, prehistoric, or historical tribal cultures to imply that the people were/are really quite accomplished,, not as "primitive" as some people might think.
It is used to describe healing practices, social organizations,
crafts, calendars, and just about everything else.
But what does the word really mean in describing the achievements
of various civilizations? Is there a gradient from crude....to mediocre...
to sophisticated? How many levels of complexity are required for
sophistication to exist?
http://www.azcentral.com/community/temp ... e0418.html

It's an interesting question, Stan, one that I'll have to think about and get back to you.

However, just for a moment think about what would happen if some of us "sophisticated, 21st century people" were dropped into the Hohokam's villages 600 years ago? We'd probably all be dead in a month.

I think most times when they use the word sophisticated they should amend it to "relatively sophisticated", as compared with their contemporaries. The english language is butchered on a regular basis these days. It use to drive me nuts, but with the net I've gotten use to terrible spelling and grammar.

Yes, I agree. The early European colonists needed the Indians' help to survive.

The "S" word is mostly used by journalists or publicists in press releases, not so much by scholars. And I think it is intended as a value judgement, not an objective description.

I always revert to the example of the Eskimos...very highly specialized, creative and wise in their world. Both the women and the men.

Another example from the 17th century, I think, is the Compleat
Angler by Izaak Walton.
He set down the lore of British fishing at that time,which most of us could not even guess at without his book.
He tells what kind of live bait to use to catch each species of fish, when and where to collect it, how to clean it and feed it and keep it alive until ready to use. This is the kind of wonderful information that is often lost written by not being written down. Yet he believed in the spontaneous
generation of certain species of fish.

Judging from the etymology, it is most probably just a case of a journalist using an incorrect word.

Latin sophisticus sophistic, from Greek sophistikos, from sophistEs sophist
1 : to alter deceptively; especially : ADULTERATE
2 : to deprive of genuineness, naturalness, or simplicity; especially : to deprive of naïveté and make worldly-wise : DISILLUSION
3 : to make complicated or complex

So, in the current instance, in order to tell if an irrigation system were sophisticated under definition #3, they would also have to have an example of a primitive irrigation system for comparison.

So, in the current instance, in order to tell if an irrigation system were sophisticated under definition #3, they would also have to have an example of a primitive irrigation system for comparison.

Exactly.

Unless the journalists mean the second definition...
the adjective, sophisticated, ( to paraphrase): "deprived of naïveté and made worldly-wise : DISILLUSIONed ".
Applied to the PEOPLE who produced the canals, meaning people who
were not naive, but worldly -wise (educated).

No question, for example that (in this sense), the scholar/astronomer caste who produced the heiroglyphs, calendars, and architecture of MesoAmerica were sophisticated, as were their works.

Well, I reckon that answers that question then.

Well, I reckon that answers that question then.

But I wonder why the writers feel the necessity of using that word?
I think it may be a form of political correctness.

(If you can't say something nice, don't say anything!)

Other overused terms are: "highly-developed" and
"advanced."

They are and have been applied indiscriminately to the Bosnian "things", cranial capacity, hunting techniques, dinosaurs, alien spacecraft,..

I'll shut up about this....just wanted to point it out.

I think it's a form of reverse snobbery, along the lines of 'this was made centuries ago when people weren't as clever as us; isn't it sophisticated...considering....

Writers like to use big, cool sounding words. It sometimes seems that certain words come "into fashion" so to speak. Trends in grammar and word usage develope. You'll see certain phrases used a lot sometimes too. Writers tend to copy one another. They hear a word or phrase that sounds cool and when they are at a loss they'll use words they heard from someone else instead of thinking of their own way to say it. Like right there I was searching for a big word to use instead of "say", but I caught myself and didn't because that's what we're bitchin' about. Other than that I don't have anything else to add. I talked a lot and didn't say much. That's also common.

I think it's a form of reverse snobbery, along the lines of 'this was made centuries ago when people weren't as clever as us; isn't it sophisticated...considering...

Right! Condescension.

But when someone reads it without thinking...the find seems "important." (another ambiguous and over-used term).

In some ways, the more stuff we dig up, the less important it is....there is so much of it. I raised the issue a few months ago of what if we could dig up everything....
We would have to displace entire cities and perhaps build another planet-sized museum to keep everything in!
Every fossil, every ruin, every skeleton!!!