Apologies for talking over the head of common man, morphology was a word used frequently in a previous job. I could put in a link of course but look it up if anyone's interested, you never know you might learn something. Try Vladimir Propp and the Morphology of the Folk Tale for starters.
my question is about trying to take a definition from the notional and romanticised to something that'll hold water. If change is fundamental to 1954 there must be a unit of it, or we're dealing with an abstraction and all the subjectivity and confusion it brings. I'm trying to draw out what the least number of lyrical or notational morphs are required to denote folk, so that rather than, say, folk policemen (I prefer vigilante) making it up as they go along to put the rest of us in our place, those of us not in on the joke can see if '54 is said romantic abstraction or something more tangible.