Anthropology 2025 Paper I 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Write short notes

Q1

Write notes on the following in 150 words each: (a) Mendelian and non-Mendelian traits. (10 marks) (b) Theoretical significance of Purum kinship-system. (10 marks) (c) Osteodontokeratik culture and its makers. (10 marks) (d) Smell as a signal among non-human primates. (10 marks) (e) Culture and embodiment. (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित प्रत्येक पर लगभग 150 शब्दों में टिप्पणी लिखिए : (a) मेंडलीय तथा गैर-मेंडलीय तत्त्व । (10 अंक) (b) पुरुम नातेदारी प्रणाली का सैद्धांतिक महत्व । (10 अंक) (c) अस्थिदंतशृंग संस्कृति और इसके निर्माता । (10 अंक) (d) गैर-मानव प्राइमेट्स में संकेतक रूप में गंध । (10 अंक) (e) संस्कृति तथा अवतारणा । (10 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 Anthropology questions

Directive word: Write short notes

This question asks you to write short notes. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Write short notes demands concise, information-dense responses for each sub-part with precise terminology. Allocate ~30 words/2 minutes per sub-part (equal marks distribution). Structure each note with: definition → key features → example/theorist → significance. No introduction or conclusion needed across parts; maximize content density within 150 words each.

Key points expected

(a) Mendelian traits: dominance, segregation, independent assortment with examples (blood groups, attached earlobes); non-Mendelian: polygenic inheritance, mitochondrial DNA, genomic imprinting, epistasis
(b) Purum kinship: Das's study of Manipur, marriage rules with Maka and Chaka, alliance theory vs. descent theory debate, Levi-Strauss's elementary structures
(c) Osteodontokeratic culture: Raymond Dart's term for Australopithecine tool use, bone-tooth-horn implements, Makapansgat evidence, debate with Leakey over true tool-making
(d) Smell in primates: sternal glands in lemurs, brachial gland in slow lorises, territorial marking, reproductive signaling, predator avoidance, reduced olfaction in haplorhines vs. strepsirrhines
(e) Embodiment: Mauss's techniques of the body, Bourdieu's habitus, Csordas's paradigm, phenomenological approach, Indian examples: yoga, classical dance forms as embodied culture

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Concept correctness	20%	10	Accurately defines Mendelian laws and non-Mendelian exceptions; correctly identifies Purum as Das's study; names Dart and Australopithecus for osteodontokeratic; distinguishes strepsirrhine/haplorhine olfactory differences; uses Mauss-Bourdieu-Csordas correctly for embodiment	Basic definitions correct but conflates some terms (e.g., mixes mitochondrial with Mendelian); vague on Dart's critics; general primate smell description without taxonomic specificity; mentions embodiment without theorist attribution	Fundamental errors: states Mendelian traits are all genetic; confuses Purum with Nuer; attributes osteodontokeratic to Homo erectus; describes vision instead of smell; equates embodiment with physical fitness
Theoretical framing	20%	10	For (b) explicitly contrasts alliance and descent theories; for (e) situates embodiment in phenomenological anthropology; for (c) references the Dart-Leakey debate; connects (a) to modern genomics; for (d) links to sexual selection theory	Mentions Levi-Strauss or Bourdieu by name without explaining theoretical stakes; notes Dart's claim without debate context; lists smell functions without evolutionary framework	No theoretical context; purely descriptive lists; misses that Purum kinship was pivotal for alliance theory; treats embodiment as purely biological
Ethnographic / Indian examples	20%	10	For (b) specifies Manipur location and Maka/Chaka distinction; for (e) cites Indian classical dance (Bharatanatyam/Kathak) or yoga as embodied practice; for (a) uses Indian population genetics (sickle cell, lactose tolerance); mentions Indian primates (lion-tailed macaque, loris) for (d)	Generic 'Indian tribes' for Purum without specificity; mentions 'yoga' without anthropological framing; no Indian primate examples; Western examples for Mendelian traits	No Indian examples; or incorrect attribution (e.g., Purum in Nagaland); entirely Euro-American ethnography; misses opportunity for South Asian relevance
Comparative analysis	20%	10	For (a) contrasts monogenic vs. polygenic with clear distinction; for (b) compares Purum with Kariera or other alliance systems; for (c) contrasts with Oldowan tools; for (d) compares strepsirrhine reliance on smell vs. haplorhine visual dominance; for (e) contrasts embodiment with cognitive approaches	Simple juxtaposition without analytical depth; lists differences without explaining significance; misses comparative opportunities within word limit	No comparison attempted; treats each note in isolation; fails to contrast Mendelian/non-Mendelian or primate sensory modalities
Conclusion & applied angle	20%	10	Each 150-word note ends with 1-2 sentences on significance: (a) medical genetics applications; (b) critique of structuralism or modern kinship studies; (c) re-evaluation of hominin cognition; (d) conservation implications of scent marking; (e) relevance to disability studies or performance anthropology	Brief trailing statement without clear significance; generic 'important for anthropology' closing; abrupt ending without synthesis	No concluding element; ends mid-description; or adds irrelevant material beyond scope; exceeds word limit with unfocused conclusion

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →