Anthropological work in Guatemala is seen in terms of two traditions according to whether local or foreign researchers are involved. For exposition purposes and historical reasons, the little tradition is reviewed with reference to Sol Tax's work. Three topics are discussed: (1) definitions and conceptions about the people and their culture, (2) social units, and (3) change. The author's own work is also included in this review. Thus the article is both a systematization of the author's ideas and a search for the essential characteristics of Guatemalan anthropological thought. Tax's conception of Indian population is contrasted with a variety of subjective and social-relational conceptions held by Guatemalan scholars. By upgrading the level of inquiry and relying on the linguistic uses of the term "Indian," the author attempts to work out a synthesis of the subjective and objective approaches and, to some extent, the cultural-descriptive and social-relational conceptions. This is done by pointing out the referential properties of the terms "Indian" and "Ladino" and by a preliminary analysis of referential structures. The positions to which personal pronouns refer are an example of a referential structure. Self-studies imply certain methodological problems of their own which could be partially resolved by describing social events at the level of "formulation of the participants' formulation of the social reality" (f[fr]). This bears on the conception of social unit. Cultural homogeneity, geographical delimitation, and even functional interdependence become of secondary importance. The feasibility of constructing a structure of meaning which defines the terms and accounts for the differences of participants' views and at the same time facilitates the understanding of social structures, organization, and change is of greater importance. The concept of social configuration is derived from the concepts of analytical structure of meaning and referential structure and is compared with "social units" in the big tradition. A summary review on change also reveals a preoccupation with subjective features on the part of local authors.