ABSTRACT
This chapter continues the argument against those who see the presence or absence of literacy as, in itself, a determining factor in culture. I show how the introduction of literacy in Madagascar has merely meant that a new and better tool became available, but that it was used to do the same things as oratory and other specialised language uses had done before. The chapter goes on to criticise the literacy thesis in a different way. Making use of fieldwork in Japan, it shows how the relationship of spoken language, writing, and thought are different with different types of writing systems. This makes impossible any broad generalisations about “literacy” in general.
