▁different ▁tribes ; ▁for ▁that ▁matter , ▁so ▁are ▁the ▁criteria ▁for ▁distingu ishing ▁the ▁groups . ▁Nor ▁will ▁it ▁do ▁to ▁say ▁that ▁div iding - in - two ▁is ▁a ▁universal ▁need ▁of ▁organizations , ▁because ▁there ▁are ▁a ▁lot ▁of ▁tribes ▁that ▁th rive ▁without ▁it . ▁ ▁For ▁Lé vi - St ra uss , ▁the ▁methods ▁of ▁lingu istics ▁became ▁a ▁model ▁for ▁all ▁his ▁earlier ▁exam in ations ▁of ▁society . ▁His ▁analog ies ▁usually ▁are ▁from ▁ph on ology ▁( though ▁also ▁later ▁from ▁music , ▁mathematics , ▁cha os ▁theory , ▁cy ber net ics , ▁and ▁so ▁on ). ▁" A ▁really ▁scientific ▁analysis ▁must ▁be ▁real , ▁simpl ifying , ▁and ▁explan atory ," ▁he ▁writes . ▁Ph on em ic ▁analysis ▁reve als ▁features ▁that ▁are ▁real , ▁in ▁the ▁sense ▁that ▁users ▁of ▁the ▁language ▁can ▁recognize ▁and ▁respond ▁to ▁them . ▁At ▁the ▁same ▁time , ▁a ▁ph on eme ▁is ▁an ▁abstra ction ▁from ▁language – not ▁a ▁sound , ▁but ▁a ▁category ▁of ▁sound ▁defined ▁by ▁the ▁way ▁it ▁is ▁distinguished ▁from ▁other ▁categories ▁through ▁rules ▁unique ▁to ▁the ▁language . ▁The ▁entire ▁sound - structure ▁of ▁a ▁language ▁may ▁be ▁generated ▁from ▁a ▁relatively ▁small ▁number ▁of ▁rules . ▁ ▁In ▁the ▁study ▁of ▁the ▁kin ship ▁systems ▁that ▁first ▁concerned ▁him , ▁this ▁ideal ▁of ▁explanation ▁allowed ▁a ▁compreh ensive ▁organization ▁of ▁data ▁that ▁partly ▁had ▁been ▁ordered ▁by ▁other ▁research ers . ▁The ▁overall ▁goal