We can now examine the relationship between the age class system and the other systems that, through their interaction, constitute the social structure. Such an examination should help us discover the ethnemic significance of the age class system. Indeed, I refer to every component element of the social structure as an ethneme, whereas by ethnemic significance I mean the relationship that binds the structural elements together within the confines of a particular cultural and social formation.

A few observations may be helpful here in developing a useful perspective on this problem. First, it must be noted that age class systems, regardless of the ethnographic model to which they correspond, cannot be dissociated from the other ethnemes, which through their joint action form the social structure.

Secondly, it should be recognized that the behavior of individuals and groups is predominantly oriented by the age class system only in those societies where this system constitutes the primary and characteristic element of the social structure. However, even in such cases, social behavior is also influenced by relationship to other ethnemes, such as kinship and territory. The way in which social behavior is influenced by the relationship to such different kinds of ethnemes, each of which interacts with each other, constitutes an important theoretical issue itself.

It must be emphasized that the relation among ethnemes is dynamic, not static, and hence subject to change and transformation.