The challenges of managing diverse digital forms (sound and video files, images, text - marked up and otherwise) are obvious! I may get back to you on these issues later, if that's okay?
2) Re the logic of the argument: The case for cognitive modeling, a.k.a., assumption of hidden programming concealed with the human black box, flips the argument that Kemp advances. If A and B responding in the same way to the same situation is evidence of shared meaning, the frequently observed fact that A and B, who are in all visible respects identical, respond differently to the same situation, implies the existence of an invisible difference between them. Whether that difference is best described in language derived from computer programming, hydraulic metaphors a la Freud, deep structures a la Chomsky, or neurochemistry remains, however, unresolved. Noting that there must be some invisible difference does not constitute a set of useful assumptions about what that difference comprises.
Point well taken. But there is a further difficulty, which, I concede, is more a private suspicion about the usefulness of applying Quine in anthropology rather than a probable explanation as to why anthropologists in general have turned off or never tuned into Quinean theory. It relates to his doctrine of interpretation.